1 / 50

New Particles from Belle

New Particles from Belle. S. L. Olsen ( U. of Hawaii). GHP 2004 Fermilab, October, 2004. B-factory bonuses:. new insights/puzzles in charm/charmonium spectroscopy. B  K K s Kp. h c ’. B  K p + p - J/ y. X(3872). M(K s K p ). M( p + p - J/ y). e + e -  J/ y cc. B  K w J/ y.

ronny
Download Presentation

New Particles from Belle

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. New Particles from Belle S. L. Olsen (U. of Hawaii) GHP 2004 Fermilab, October, 2004

  2. B-factory bonuses: new insights/puzzles in charm/charmonium spectroscopy BK KsKp hc’ BKp+p-J/y X(3872) M(KsKp) M(p+p-J/y) e+e-J/y cc BKwJ/y ?? hc ‘ cc0 ?? hc J/y recoil mass M(wJ/y)

  3. bccs is a dominant process CKM favored J/y, y’, hc, cc1,… c Vcb c b W- Brs~10-2 (inclusive) cosqC s B mesons are a good source for charm charmonium and other cc states

  4. KEKBis a good source of Bs >900pb-1/day (~1M BBs/day) 1.2x1034/cm2/s

  5. Kinematic variables for the (4S) BK hc Ecm/2 KSKp e- e+ B B ϒ(4S) Ecm/2 DE CM energy difference: BK hc KSKp Beam-constrained mass: Mbc

  6. 1st Observation of the hc

  7. BK (KSK±pŦ)Mbc for 40 MeV M(KSKp) slices 3640 MeV BK hc’ 42fb-1 KSKp BK hc 3000 MeV KSKp

  8. Fit each bin … 3.55 GeV • Nevt = 45.3 ± 12.6 Mhc’ = 3653 ± 10 MeV • Ghc’ = 33 ± 22 MeV hc’: 3.60 GeV 3.65 GeV 3.70 GeV 3.75 GeV Mbc DE … • Nevt = 90.5 ± 14.9 Mhc = 2978 ± 5MeV • Ghc = 33 ± 16 MeV hc: M(KSKp)

  9. Subsequent measurementsconfirm higher mass value ggKSKp ggKSKp 3642 MeV BaBar (preliminary) CLEO hep-ex/0306060 e+e-J/yX 3630 MeV 3633 MeV elle hc hc ‘ Mx

  10. hc’: current status DM(1S) = MJ/y– Mhc = 117±1 MeVDM(2S) = 49 ± 4 MeV smaller Mavg =3637±4 MeV (Crystal Ball excluded)

  11. The X(3872) with 253 fb-1

  12. B±K±p+p-J/y (275M (4S)BB decays) Nev = 48.6 ± 7.8 M = 3872.4 ± 0.7 MeV (width consistent with resol) Mbc for 5 MeV M(ppJ/y) bins

  13. Now M(p+p-) is really r-like background estimated from Mbc-DE sidebands

  14. Confirmed by CDF & D0 CDF D0 X(3872) X(3872) PRL 93, 262001(2003) hep-ex/031202 hep-ex/0405004

  15. also seen by BaBar 3.5 σ effect hep-ex/0406022 M=3873.4 ± 1.4 MeV B(BKX)B(Xp+p-J/y) = (1.28± 0.24) x 10-5 Belle (1.3± 0.3) x 10-5

  16. X(3872) Mass D+D*- threshold (Plot from Soon Yun Jun’s FPCP04 CDF hot topics talk)

  17. Charmonium possibilities cc level spectrum hc” cc1’ y2 y3 hc’ 3872 MeV MD+ MD* hc2 y” hc’ 2MD y’ hc cc2 cc1 cc0 J/y hc

  18. p+p-J/ydecays violate isospin M too low; G too small angular dist’n rules out 1+- M too low; G(gJ/y) too small G(gcc1) too small; mpp wrong pp hc should dominate ppJ/y G( gcc2 & DD) too small; mpp wrong No obvious cc candidates for X(3872) hc” hc’ cc1’ y2 hc2 y3

  19. Look at BK p+p-p0 J/y

  20. BK w J/y wp+p-p0 M(J/yp+p-p0) BK X(3872); XJ/yp+p-p0? M(p+p-p0)

  21. 1: look at BK w J/yDalitz Plot Mbc cut here M2(J/yw) DE BK* J/y Kw Mp+p-p0 M2(Kw)

  22. Slice into 40 MeV-wide M(w J/y) bins Large deviation from phase-space Fit

  23. Slice into 40 MeV-wide M(w J/y) bins Adding a BW helps Fit M≈3940 ± 11 MeV G≈ 92 ± 24 MeV

  24. M(Kw) for the signal region 3880 <M(wJ/y)<3900 MeV No peaking In M(Kw) M(Kw) (GeV)

  25. Look back at the p+p-p0 masses Very clear w signal 28w’s 76w’s 20w’s 26w’s

  26. What is it? • Charmonium? • Conventional wisdom: wJ/y should not be a discovery mode for a cc state with mass above DD & DD* threshold! • Some kind of w-J/y threshold interaction? • the J/y is not surrounded by brown muck; can it act like an ordinary hadron? • cc-gluon hybrid? • Predicted by lattice QCD, including states with large hadron+cc widths, but the masses are predicted to be 4.3 ~ 4.4 GeV w J/y

  27. Evidence for X3872K p+p-p0 J/y

  28. M(p+p-p0J/y) vs M(p+p-p0) revisited M(J/yp+p-p0) look along here BK X(3872) J/yp+p-p0 M(p+p-p0)

  29. M(3p J/y) = MX(3872)± 16.5 MeV (±3 s) Look at 25 MeV-wide M(p+p-p0) mass bins DE Mbc

  30. B-meson yields vs M(p+p-p0) 12.4 ± 4.2 evts

  31. “Sidebands” BKwJ/y Non-resonant or “peaking bkgd sidebands Overlap region

  32. Cross-talk from BKwJ/y enhancement?  f dm = 0.75 ±0.14 evts Check : signal yield for M(3p J/y)= M X(3872) +1s/–3s (no overlap with w band) 12.4 evts  11.5 evts (expect 11.0 for no X-talk)

  33. Other sidebands(no significant signals) 4.3 ±6.2 evts Non-res bkd in signal bin = 1.3 ± 1.0 evts 6.4 ± 5.6 evts Area of I and III each = 4x Area of signal bin

  34. M(K3p) for signal bin

  35. Branching fraction 0.188 12.4 ± 4.2 Br(Xp+p-p0 J/y) Br(Xp+p-J/y) Nev(p+p-p0 J/y) e(2pJ/y) Nev(p+p-J/y)e(3pJ/y) = 62.6 ± 8.3 0.036 = 1.1 ± 0.4 (stat) ± 0.3 (syst) Accept:ance: 10% Xtalk/Bkgnd: -20% Xp+p-p0 J/y: +25% M(3p)<750 MeV significance ≈ 4s

  36. Consistent with sub-threshold X(3872)w* J/y • Mw + MJ/y = 3879 MeV (7 MeV above 3872) • Xw J/y occur via virtual w’s, 3p masses cluster at the kinematic limit. • G(Xp+p-p0J/y)/G(Xp+p- J/y) = 1.1±0.4 ± 0.3 • In agreement with Swanson’s DD* bound-state model for the X(3872)[PLB 588,189 (2004)] • Smoking gun for qqqq interpretation of X(3872)? - - -

  37. continuum e+e-J/y (cc) with 287 fb-1 Details in Tom Ziegler’s talk in session B3 Sunday, Snakepit 5:08PM

  38. 2002 2003 L=101 fb-1 L=155 fb-1 - • e+e-J/y (cc) > e+e-J/yglue • s(e+e-J/yhc) > 10x theory • evidence for hc’ • ggJ/y J/y negligible • confirm hc’ 2004 287 fb -1 ‘ hc hc cc0 non-zero continuum below DD threshold 4th peak!!

  39. What is the 4th peak? • the reconstruction and selection procedure is the same as before • Extend the fit region • no signal of X(3872) • significant (>4s) peak at M=3940  11 MeV • N=14833 (4.5) • the width is consistent w/ resolution (= 32 MeV) X(3872) hc ‘ hc ‘ cc0 hc What is it? cc0? hc ?? ‘ “

  40. Look at e+e-J/y D(D(*)) • Reconstruct a J/y & a D • use D0K-p+ & D+K-p+p+ • Determine recoil mass

  41. Look at M(DD(*)) 3940 MeV 9.9 ± 3.3 evts (4.5 s) DD* cc0DD* ‘ DD 4.1 ± 2.2 evts (2.1 s) hcDD “

  42. What is this one? • Is it too narrow to be the same as the wJ/y peak at 3940 MeV??? under investigation • We are looking for wJ/y recoiling from a J/y in the continuum • & BK “Y(3940)”; “Y(3940)”DD* • cc0 or hc most likely charmonium states • DD* signal rules against cc0 • Mass is a little low for hc • DM(3S) would be ≈ 100MeV • can DM(3S) > DM(2S)? ‘ “ ‘ “

  43. JP of the DsJ(2317) and DsJ(2457) from BDsJD decays Details in Alexey Drutskoy’s talk in session C1 Monday, 1-West 2:36PM

  44. DsJ(2317) and DsJ(2457) BaBar - DsJ(2317) CLEO DSJ(2317) DsJ(2317) Ds0 DSJ(2317) M(Ds0) DSJ(2457) DsJ(2317) Ds*0 M(Ds0) M(Ds*0) Masses are significantly lower than potential model P-level predictions - speculations about 4-quark, DK-molecule and Dsπ atom, csghybrid…

  45. B  D DsJ(2317) (and DsJ(2457)) J=1 J=1 DsJ(2317)Ds0 DsJ(2460)  Ds*0 J=0 J=2 DsJ(2460)D s  Belle DSJ(2317) DSJ(2317) DsJ(2317) Ds0 DsJ(2460) Ds  DSJ(2457) DSJ(2457) DSJ(2457) DsJ properties are consistent with two lowerst P-level states DsJ(2457) consistent with JP=1+DsJ(2317) consistent with 0+ No Ds0 decay  rules out 0+,1- Flat decay angle distribution Ds decay  rules out 0+,0- No Ds+ - and Ds decays Helicity in BDDsJ(2457) prefer J=1

  46. Summary • hc’ established DM(2S) < DM(1S) (as expected) • G(X(3872)p+p-p0J/y) ≈ G(X(3872) p+p-J/y) • good for molecules; bad for charmonium • Broad near-threshold wJ/y peak at 3940 MeV • too broad for charmonium • too light for cc-glue hybrid? • threshold interaction involving a J/y ? • Narrow(?) peak at 3940 in e+e- J/y X recoils • May be too narrow to be the wJ/y state seen in B decays • seen in DD* (rules out cc0’) • mass too low to be the hc” • DsJ consistent with Jp=0+ for DsJ(2317) • and Jp=1+ for DsJ(2457)

  47. Backup Slides

  48. Other results on the X(3872) - Look for X(3872)gcc2 (gcc2) • - J/y helicity angle dist inconsistent with JPC = 1+- •  rules out X=21P1 (hc’) Mbc Mgcc2 G(Xgcc2) G(Xp+p-J/y) <1.1 - Contrary to expectations for charmonium 3D3 c2=75/9 expect: dN dcosq J/y sin2q X |cosqJ/y|

  49. Other new results on the X(3872), cont’d BK g J/y BKcc1; cc1g J/y 90% CL upper limit: Br(Xg J/y) Br(Xp+p-J/y) <0.4 no X(3872) M(g J/y)-M(J/y) Probably not the cc1’

More Related