Stephen OlsenU. of Hawai’i

&高能所 北京

YZ

e oticX Mesons

Sookyung Choi Scientist of the monthAug 2004, Korea

Constituent Quark Model(CQM)

(& 6 antiquarks)

Mesons: q q

c: c+2/3

c: C-2/3

+ : s-1/3

s+1/3

s+1/3

c-2/3

u-2/3

b+1//3

u+2/3

- : b-1/3

S=1/3

b+1/3

t-2/3c+2/3

b-1/3

t+2/3

6 quarks

Baryons: qqq

u-2/3

d+1/3 s+1/3

u+2/3

d-1/3 s-1/3

Gell-Mann

Zweig

Fabulously successful

mesons qq

Are there other color-singlet arrangements?

Pentaquarks:e.g. an S=+1 baryon

(only anti-s quark has S=+1)

Glueballs:gluon-gluon color singlet states

Multi-quark mesons:

qq-gluon hybrid mesons

u cuc

c c

ud

usd

Non-quark model states expected in QCD

Our approach:look for non-qq mesons

c c

u cuc

4 (& 6) quark states

“hybrid” qq-gluon states

u u

uud

d

Beijing Spectrometer (BES)

J/ pp

C-2//3

c+2/3

u+2/3

u-2/3

d-1/3u+2/3

d+1/3

u-2/3

p

p

J/ pp

This is the cpp

What is this???

M(pp) GeV

J.Z. Bai et. al (BES). PRL 91, 022001 (2003)

Fit the M(pp) distribution

Best fit to this peakis a resonance withpeak mass below thepp mass threshold

M=1835 MeV no know 100MeV resonance

A pp bound state (baryonium)?

p n p p

deuteron:

loosely bound 3-q 3-

q color singlets with Md = 2mp-

baryonium:

loosely bound

3-q 3-q color singlets with Mb = 2mp-

?

attractive nuclear force attractive force?

There is lots & lots of literature about this possibility

Expectation for pp bound state meson

mp +mp

Above threshold

Xpp ~100%

below-threshold p

and p annihilate to

mesons

I=0, JPC=0-+ init. state:pp ’ is common

Look in J/ ’

M(’)

M=1833 MeV 70MeV

mp+mp

X(1835): “6-quark” meson?

3 quarks+

3 antiquarks

•Need to confirm JPC of the ’ peak is 0-+

•Need to find it in other common 0-+ pp annihilation channels

jobs for BESIII

uu

u

ud

d

Charmonium is of particular interest

because it is an especially good system

to use to search for non-qq mesons

a cc meson has to fit into one of these slots:

If it doesn’t, it is a good candidate for a non qq meson

B-factories produce lots of cc pairs

0-+, 1- - or 1++

0-+, 0++, 2++

C =+ states

1- - only

Lots new on the “XYZ” particles

• X(3872)– J/ in BKJ/

• Z(3930)– DD in DD

• Y(3940)– J/ in BK J/

• X(3940)– e+e- J/X & e+e- J/ DD*

• Y(4260)– J/ in e+e- J/

• Y(4325)– +-’ in e+e-+-’

Y(4008)?

Y(4250)

Y(4370)

Y(4660)

X(3880)DD- e+e- J/ DD

X(4160)D*D*- e+e- J/ D*D*

Z+(4430)+ - BK+’

New Belle/BaBar results:(Summer 2007)

Status spring 2007:

confirmed by BaBar

updated by Belle

I’ll concentrate on recent results.

X(3872)

S-K Choi, SL Olsen et al,

X(3872) properties (PDG2007)

MD0 + MD*0 = 3.871.8 ± 0.4

MeV

M() looks like

2/dof = 43/39 (CL=28%)

kinematiclimit≈m

PRL 96 102002

CDFBelle

• Belle & CDF: JPC = 1++ most likely

What’s new with the X(3872)?

BaBar confirms Belle’s DD threshold enhancement

Mass is 3.8±1.2 MeV above WAvg X(3872)J/ mass;

(~3is this significant?

Both groups see a high mass value

Belle’s BKSX & BK±X comparison

M = 0.22 ± 0.90 ± 0.27 MeV

KS mode K± mode

“molecular” modelspredicted this to be <<1(Braaten et al PRD 71 074005)

“diquark-antidiquark” modelspredicted this to be 8±3 MeV

(Maiani et al PRD 71 014028)

Confirms an earlier BaBar result

Is there a cc slot for the X(3872)?

3872 rJ/ too small

r(J/) too big

1++(c1’)

cJ/ ispin forbidden D0D00 @ thresh.suppressed BKcc(J=2) suppressed

2-+(c2)

Y(3940) in BK J/

M≈3940 ± 11 MeV≈ 92 ± 24 MeV

Belle PRL94, 182002 (2005)

M(J/) MeVM2(K) GeV2

M2(

J

) G

eV2

S-K Choi, SL Olsen et al,

Y(3940) properties

Belle PRL94, 182002 (2005)

M(J/) MeV

(Y3940 J/ > 7 MeV (an SUF(3) violating decay)

~

this is 103 x (’ J/ (another SUF(3) violating decay)

if the Z(3930) is the c2’the Y(3940) mass is toohigh for it to be the c1’

Confirmed by BaBar this summer

B±K±J/ B±K±J/

B0KSJ/

M2(K)

J)

ratio

Some discrepancy in M & ; general features agree

G.CibinettoEPS-2007

Is there a cc slot for Y(3940) ?

Can M(c1’)>M(c2’)?c1’

Mass is lowc”

“ “ “ “c0

’

39403931

For any charmonium assignment, [Y(3940) J/ is too large.

The 1-- states seen in ISR

’)

e+e- isr Y(4260) at BaBar

233 fb-1

Y(4260)

BaBar PRL95, 142001 (2005)

~50pb

M=4259 8 +2 MeV

= 88 23 +6 MeV -6

-9

fitted values:

Not seen in e+e- hadrons

(Y4260 J/) > 1.6MeV @ 90% CL

X.H. Mo et al, PL B640, 182 (2006)

4260

4260

BES data

~3nb

peakY(4260)+J/pb

Huge by charm

onium

standards

“Y(4260)” at Belle (New) M=4247 12 +17 MeV

= 108 19 ±10 MeV -32

M=4008 40 +114 MeV

= 226 44 ±87 MeV -28

???

C.Z Yuan et al (Belle) arXiv:0707.2541To appear in PRL

M=4259 8 +2 MeV

= 88 23 +6 MeV -6

-9

BaBar values:

Resonance?Thresh effect?…?

No 1-- cc slot for the Y(4260)

42604260

X.H. Mo et al, hep-ex/0603024

Is the Y(4260) a cc-gluon hybrid?

c c

• qq-gluon excitations predicted 30 yrs ago • lowest 1-- cc-gluon mass expected at ~4.3 GeV • relevant open charm threshold is D**D (~4.28 GeV) • (J/) larger than that for normal charmonium • (e+e-) smaller than that for ordinary charmonium

Horn & Mandula PRD 17, 898 (1977)

Banner et al, PRD 56, 7039 (1997); Mei & Luo, IJMPA 18, 15713 (2003)

Isgur, Koloski & Paton PRL 54, 869 (1985)

McNeile, Michael & Pennanen PRD 65, 094505 (2002)

Close & Page NP B443, 233 (1995)

Y(4260) s

eems t

o matc

h all

of these

!!!

DD** thresholds in & “Y(4260)”

4.28-mD

D** spectrum

M(J/) GeV

No obviousdistortions

D1D

D2D

BaBar’s ’ peak at 4325MeV

Nbkg = 3.1 1.0

Nevt = 68 (<5.7 GeV/c2)

2-prob < 5.7 GeV/c2

Y(4260) 6.5 10-3

(4415) 1.2 10-13

Y(4320) 29%

e+e-ISR ’

M=4324 24 MeV

= 172 33 MeV

above all D**D thresholds

S.W.Ye QWG-2006 June 2006

Not Compatible with the Y(4260)

D1D

D2D

298 fb-1 (BaBar) hep-ex/0610057

BaBar PRL 98 252001 (2007)

4325 MeV ’ peak in Belle (new)

M=4324 24 MeV

= 172 33 MeV

548 fb-1

X.L. Wang et al (Belle) arXiv:0707.3699

Two peaks!

M=4664 11 ±5 MeV

= 48 15 ±3 MeV

M=4361 9 ±9 MeV

= 74 15 ±10 MeV

BaBar values

(both relatively narrow)(& both above D**D thresh)

(& neither consistent with 4260)

4260

Latest Newsele

ctric

ally

charg

ed!!

S-K Choi, SL Olsen et al,

Belle, submitted to PRL

M(±’) from BK ±’

M2(K) GeV2

M2(’)

GeV

2

K. Abe et al (Belle) arXiv:0708.1790

K*KK2*K Veto Veto

M(’) GeV

6.5

M = 4433 ±4 ±1 MeV

tot = 45 +17 +30 MeV

Nsig =124 ± 31evts-13 -11

Comments on the Z+(4430)

Not a reflection from the K system~

No significant signal in B KJ/

It has non-zero charge not cc or hybrid

Mass, width & decay pattern similar to Y(4360) & Y(4660)

conclusions• There seems to be a new hadron spectroscopy in the M=3.5~5

GeV region– Maybe more than one– Bodes well for BESIII, Super-B factories & PANDA

• Some states are narrow even though they are far above decay thresholds

– e.g. Y(4660)’ & Z+(4430)’ have large Q but ≈50 MeV

• characterized by large partial widths (Bfs) to hadrons+J/(or ’)

– Br(X(3872)J/) > 4.3% (Isospin=1)– (Y(3940)J/) > 7 MeV (SU(3) octet)– (Y(4260)J/) > 1.6 MeV

• States that decay to ’ not seen decaying to J/ (and vice-versa) – Bf(Y(4660)’) >> Bf(y(4660)J/) same for Y(4360) & Z(4430’– Y(4260) not seen in Y(4260)’

• The new 1-- states are not apparent in the e+e-D(*)D(*) cross sections

• There is no evident transitions at the D**D mass threshold

(mine)

New 1-- states J/

J/

’

some of the states are near thresholds,but this is not a universal feature

DSDS thresholdsDD thresholds

D*D*

DD*

DD

tot

Y(4

660)

Y(4

360)

Y(4

260)

Y(4

008)

None of the 1-- peaksmatch structures in e+e- hadrons

Pakhlova (Belle) PRL 98, 092001 (2007)

Lots of pieces

Y(4360)

Y(4

660)

Y(4260)

Y(4

008)

X(3872)

X(3940

)

X(416

0

)

Z(4430) Y(3940)

Are the

y al

l fro

m the

sam

e pu

zzle

?

謝謝

Actual fit

M=1830.6 ± 6.7 MeV/c2

< 153 MeV/c2 (90% CL)

J/pp in the BES expt

0 0.1 0.2 0.3

2/dof=56/56

fitted peak location