Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Charm and  Decays Results from Babar and Belle Jens Sören Lange (University of Giessen) 43 th Rencontres de Moriond QCD and High Energy Interactions La.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Charm and  Decays Results from Babar and Belle Jens Sören Lange (University of Giessen) 43 th Rencontres de Moriond QCD and High Energy Interactions La."— Presentation transcript:

1 Charm and  Decays Results from Babar and Belle Jens Sören Lange (University of Giessen) 43 th Rencontres de Moriond QCD and High Energy Interactions La Thuile. March 9, 2008

2 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 2 Outline Charm Decays ● D sJ decays into D*K: D s1 (2536) into DK: D sJ (2700), D sJ (2860) ● D s + !  + , f Ds ● Charmed baryons,  c Charm Decays ● D sJ decays into D*K: D s1 (2536) into DK: D sJ (2700), D sJ (2860) ● D s + !  + , f Ds ● Charmed baryons,  c  Decays ● Hadronic  decays with  in final state ● Hadronic  decays with  in final state  Decays ● Hadronic  decays with  in final state ● Hadronic  decays with  in final state

3 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 3 Nucl. Instr. Meth. A479(2002)1 Integrated Luminosity fb –1 Nucl. Instr. Meth. A479(2002)1 Integrated Luminosity fb –1 Nucl. Instr. Meth A479(2002)117 Integrated Luminosity fb –1

4 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 4 Charm Production at B Factories ● from B decays ~99% of all B mesons decay into charm final states ● in continuum cross section (~1.2 nb) is as high as B meson cross section (~1.1 nb) D+D+ D–D– D+D+ D–D–

5 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 5 A brief history of D sJ states Babar observed D s0 *+ (2317)D s +  o Phys. Rev. Lett. 90(2003) Cleo observed D s1 + (2460)D s + * o Phys. Rev. D 68(2003) D s in final state > most probable assignment [c s] L=1 states ~100 MeV too low compared to early quark models Godfrey, Isgur, PRD 32(1985)189 Properties of other states in D s system? Babar observed D s0 *+ (2317)D s +  o Phys. Rev. Lett. 90(2003) Cleo observed D s1 + (2460)D s + * o Phys. Rev. D 68(2003) D s in final state > most probable assignment [c s] L=1 states ~100 MeV too low compared to early quark models Godfrey, Isgur, PRD 32(1985)189 Properties of other states in D s system?

6 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 6 [c  s] multiplets There are two 1 + states, mass difference  m ' 76 MeV ! investigation of mixing There are two 1 + states, mass difference  m ' 76 MeV ! investigation of mixing spin-orbittensor spin-spin L = 2 ….. j q = s q + L, J = j q + s Q L = 0 j q = 1/ Ds* Ds* Ds Ds mix? JPJP D*K threshold D K threshold D s0 (2317) D s1 (2460) D s1 (2536) D sJ (2573) j q = 3/2 j q = 1/2 L = 1

7 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 7 D sJ decays D sJ + 00 Ds+Ds+ D0D0 K+K+

8 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 8 D sJ Decays into D*K D s1 (2536) D sJ Decays into D*K D s1 (2536) Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

9 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 9 1 st Observation of D s1 (2536) in B Decays ● B ! D ( * ) D ( * ) K at Babar 347 fb –1, PRD-RC 77(2008) D s1 (2536) + ! D* + K s 0, D* 0 K + ● Analysis of D s1 (2536) helicity for quantum number confirmation ● J P =1+ in pure S-wave would be flat ● J P =1– in pure P-wave and J P =1+ with S/D-wave admixture fit both well (  2 /n.d.f.=9.6/9 vs. 9.3/9) ● B ! D ( * ) D ( * ) K at Babar 347 fb –1, PRD-RC 77(2008) D s1 (2536) + ! D* + K s 0, D* 0 K + ● Analysis of D s1 (2536) helicity for quantum number confirmation ● J P =1+ in pure S-wave would be flat ● J P =1– in pure P-wave and J P =1+ with S/D-wave admixture fit both well (  2 /n.d.f.=9.6/9 vs. 9.3/9) ,– disfavoured PDG 2007 Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

10 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 10 Observation of D s1 (2536) → D + π – K + hep-ex/ PRD 77(2008) ● Formerly known decay modes of D s1 (2536) ! D* + K s ! D* 0 K + ! D s  +  – ● Belle e + e - → D s1 (2536)X 462 fb -1 D s1 (2536) → D +  – K + 3-body 1 st observation D s1 (2536) → D* + K s 2-body used for partial wave analysis ● Formerly known decay modes of D s1 (2536) ! D* + K s ! D* 0 K + ! D s  +  – ● Belle e + e - → D s1 (2536)X 462 fb -1 D s1 (2536) → D +  – K + 3-body 1 st observation D s1 (2536) → D* + K s 2-body used for partial wave analysis 2-body 3-body Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

11 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 11 Partial Wave Analysis D s1 (2536) → D* + K 0 s ● Mixing of j q =1/2 and j q =3/2 states ● HQET prediction for P-wave cs states: 1 + (j q =3/2) → D*K should be pure D-wave decay 1 + (j q =1/2) → D*K should be pure S-wave decay ● If HQET not exact: mixing of S/D waves possible (by LS interaction) ● Mixing of j q =1/2 and j q =3/2 states ● HQET prediction for P-wave cs states: 1 + (j q =3/2) → D*K should be pure D-wave decay 1 + (j q =1/2) → D*K should be pure S-wave decay ● If HQET not exact: mixing of S/D waves possible (by LS interaction) Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

12 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 12 Partial Wave Analysis D s1 (2536) → D* + K 0 s Partial Wave Analysis D s1 (2536) → D* + K 0 s ● Helicity formalism ● Fit results (syst. errors): ● S-wave dominates in D s1 (2536) → D * K (72  3  1)% might contradict HQET (c quark is not infinitely heavy) note: D-wave might be suppressed by centrifugal barrier ● D s1 (2460) and D s1 (2536) mix ● Helicity formalism ● Fit results (syst. errors): ● S-wave dominates in D s1 (2536) → D * K (72  3  1)% might contradict HQET (c quark is not infinitely heavy) note: D-wave might be suppressed by centrifugal barrier ● D s1 (2460) and D s1 (2536) mix Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c hep-ex/ PRD 77(2008) dim analysis projections shown

13 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 13 D sJ Decays into DK D sJ (2700), D sJ (2860) D sJ Decays into DK D sJ (2700), D sJ (2860) Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

14 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 14 D sJ (2700) ● Belle, 414 fb -1 ● D sJ (2700) dominating resonance in this B decay ● Belle, 414 fb -1 ● D sJ (2700) dominating resonance in this B decay New D sJ meson in B + →  D 0 D 0 K + arXiv: Phys. Rev. Lett. 100(2008) M(D 0 D 0 ) >3.85 GeV Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c (4160) reflection

15 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 15 ● Helicity angle distribution ● J=1 preferred ● 1 → 0 – 0 – decay implies L=1 ! negative parity ● D sJ (2700) J P =1 – state could be: ● radial excitation 2 3 S 1 predicted by potential models at m~2720 GeV Close, Swanson, PLB 647(2007)159 ● chiral doublet state 1 – to 1 + D s1 (2536) predicted from chiral symmetry at m=2721±10 MeV Nowak, Rho, Zahed, Acta Phys. Polon. B35, 2377 (2004) ● Helicity angle distribution ● J=1 preferred ● 1 → 0 – 0 – decay implies L=1 ! negative parity ● D sJ (2700) J P =1 – state could be: ● radial excitation 2 3 S 1 predicted by potential models at m~2720 GeV Close, Swanson, PLB 647(2007)159 ● chiral doublet state 1 – to 1 + D s1 (2536) predicted from chiral symmetry at m=2721±10 MeV Nowak, Rho, Zahed, Acta Phys. Polon. B35, 2377 (2004) Quantum numbers of D sJ (2700) → D 0 K + J=0  2 /ndf=112/5 J=1  2 /ndf= 11/5 J=2  2 /ndf=146/5 D0D0 K+K+ Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

16 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 16 D sJ (2860) and D sJ (2700) at Babar and Belle ● Babar, 240 fb –1 in e + e – continuum PRL 97(2006) ● evidence for a new D sJ state m=2856.6±1.5±5.0 MeV =48±7±10 MeV ● Babar observes 3 structures ● D s2 (2573)+ ● a broad structure peaking around 2.7 GeV ! D sJ (2700)? ● D sJ (2860) ! not seen in Belle data probably in B decays suppressed by high spin? ● Babar, 240 fb –1 in e + e – continuum PRL 97(2006) ● evidence for a new D sJ state m=2856.6±1.5±5.0 MeV =48±7±10 MeV ● Babar observes 3 structures ● D s2 (2573)+ ● a broad structure peaking around 2.7 GeV ! D sJ (2700)? ● D sJ (2860) ! not seen in Belle data probably in B decays suppressed by high spin? Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c D s2 (2573) D sJ (2700)? D sJ (2860) D sJ (2700)? D sJ (2860)

17 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 17 D s + !  +  Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c ● Pure leptonic decay, mediated by single W boson ● Br measurement allows determination of f Ds ● Pure leptonic decay, mediated by single W boson ● Br measurement allows determination of f Ds '1'1

18 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 18 D s + !  +  ● Babar, fb –1 PRL 98(2007) § 55 events ● Belle, 548 fb -1 arXiv: subm. to Phys. Rev. Lett. 169 § 16 § 8 events ● Signal peaks in M()–M()=143.5 MeV or m recoil (DKX)=m =0 ● Background shape D s + ! e +  suppressed by factor (m  /m e ) 2 ~10 5 ● Babar, fb –1 PRL 98(2007) § 55 events ● Belle, 548 fb -1 arXiv: subm. to Phys. Rev. Lett. 169 § 16 § 8 events ● Signal peaks in M()–M()=143.5 MeV or m recoil (DKX)=m =0 ● Background shape D s + ! e +  suppressed by factor (m  /m e ) 2 ~10 5 Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

19 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 19 D s + !  +  and f Ds ● Comparison to theory see Rosner, Stone, arXiv: ● recent Lattice QCD calculation Phys. Rev. Lett. 100(2008) f Ds =241 § 3 MeV a=0.09 fm, grid 28 3 x 96, incl. sea quarks ● indication for new physics? ● Comparison to theory see Rosner, Stone, arXiv: ● recent Lattice QCD calculation Phys. Rev. Lett. 100(2008) f Ds =241 § 3 MeV a=0.09 fm, grid 28 3 x 96, incl. sea quarks ● indication for new physics? Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

20 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 20 Charmed Baryons: Studies of the  c system Charmed Baryons: Studies of the  c system  c  c  c  c Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

21 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 21 A brief history of  c charmed baryons ●  c + K –  + final state is used for searches of double charm baryon ground states (ccq) weak decays ● However, Belle observed two new states  c (2980) +,0 !  c + K s 0  –  c (3077) +,0 !  c + K s 0  ● These are strong decays ● Why is this surprising? formerly only known decays  c * !  c  or  c  ● Here, the strange and the charm quark are observed in different hadrons ●  c + K –  + final state is used for searches of double charm baryon ground states (ccq) weak decays ● However, Belle observed two new states  c (2980) +,0 !  c + K s 0  –  c (3077) +,0 !  c + K s 0  ● These are strong decays ● Why is this surprising? formerly only known decays  c * !  c  or  c  ● Here, the strange and the charm quark are observed in different hadrons Belle, hep-ex/ Phys.Rev.Lett. 97(2006) Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

22 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 22 Evidence for two new  c states ● Babar 384 fb-1 Phys. Rev. D 77(2008) ● Confirmation of  c (2980) and  c (3077) ● Final state  c K  but require  invariant mass ● Evidence for two new states  c (3055) + !  c (2455) ++ K – 6.4 (J P =1/2 + ) and  c (3122) + !  c (2520) ++ K – 3.6 (J P =3/2 + ) ● A new Puzzle why decay into  c (isospin=1) K? usc ! uucus ● Babar 384 fb-1 Phys. Rev. D 77(2008) ● Confirmation of  c (2980) and  c (3077) ● Final state  c K  but require  invariant mass ● Evidence for two new states  c (3055) + !  c (2455) ++ K – 6.4 (J P =1/2 + ) and  c (3122) + !  c (2520) ++ K – 3.6 (J P =3/2 + ) ● A new Puzzle why decay into  c (isospin=1) K? usc ! uucus Cut on  c (2455) Cut on  c (2520) Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c  c (2980)  c (3077)  c (3055)  c (3122)

23 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 23 Excited  c Transistions ● Belle, 414 fb -1, hep-ex/ subm. to Phys. Lett. B ● Is the  c (2980) the first positive parity excitation of the  c ? (mass could be high enough) ● Or higher radial (n ¸ 2) excitation? ● New decay mode observed  c * (2980) !  c * (2645)  ● Single  transitions give hints for quantum number assignment e.g.  c (2815)(3/2 – ) !  c  is forbidden  c (2815)(3/2 – ) !  c (2645)  !  c   seen by Cleo ● This decay mode (assume S-wave) is predicted dominant for  c1 (½+) ● Belle, 414 fb -1, hep-ex/ subm. to Phys. Lett. B ● Is the  c (2980) the first positive parity excitation of the  c ? (mass could be high enough) ● Or higher radial (n ¸ 2) excitation? ● New decay mode observed  c * (2980) !  c * (2645)  ● Single  transitions give hints for quantum number assignment e.g.  c (2815)(3/2 – ) !  c  is forbidden  c (2815)(3/2 – ) !  c (2645)  !  c   seen by Cleo ● This decay mode (assume S-wave) is predicted dominant for  c1 (½+) Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c  c (2815)  c (2980)

24 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 24 Indication of another  c state ● BABAR PRD-RC 77, (2008) 210 fb -1 in B decays B – ! [K –  c + ]  c – Dalitz analysis ●  c (2930) ? ● Predicted density of states in this mass region is high ●  c (2930) ? ● Predicted density of states in this mass region is high Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

25 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 25 Hadronic Tau Decays Hadronic  Decays with  Hadronic  Decays with 

26 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 26  Decays with  final state ● Belle, hep-ex/ fb -1, 446x10 6  +  – Uncertainties on Br‘s improved by factor 4-6 ● 3 pseudoscalar meson case: Wess-Zumino term might increase Br by factor ¸ 10  – ! K –  0   Br = (4.7 § 1.1 § 0.4) x 10 –5  – !  –  0   Br = (1.39 § 0.03 § 0.07) x 10 –3 ●  – !  –  0   also breaks G parity ! suppressed by factor ~(m d – m u ) 2 ● Ongoing work (requires separation of resonant and non-resonant part) ● Belle, hep-ex/ fb -1, 446x10 6  +  – Uncertainties on Br‘s improved by factor 4-6 ● 3 pseudoscalar meson case: Wess-Zumino term might increase Br by factor ¸ 10  – ! K –  0   Br = (4.7 § 1.1 § 0.4) x 10 –5  – !  –  0   Br = (1.39 § 0.03 § 0.07) x 10 –3 ●  – !  –  0   also breaks G parity ! suppressed by factor ~(m d – m u ) 2 ● Ongoing work (requires separation of resonant and non-resonant part) Hadronic  Decays with  Hadronic  Decays with 

27 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 27  peak in   K    K    K - K + K - K-K+K-K-K+K- ● BABAR 342 fb –1 Phys.Rev.Lett.100(2008) ●  – ! K + K – K –  ● Cabbibo suppressed (V us ~0.2) ● Resonant  is saturating ! excluding , upper limit Br < 2.5 x 10 –6 ● consistent with Belle Phys. Lett B643(2006)5 ● BABAR 342 fb –1 Phys.Rev.Lett.100(2008) ●  – ! K + K – K –  ● Cabbibo suppressed (V us ~0.2) ● Resonant  is saturating ! excluding , upper limit Br < 2.5 x 10 –6 ● consistent with Belle Phys. Lett B643(2006)5  Decays with  final state Hadronic  Decays with  Hadronic  Decays with 

28 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 28  peak in   K    K    K - K + K -  ● BABAR 342 fb –1 Phys.Rev.Lett.100(2008) ● First measurement of  – ! K + K –  –  Br = (3.42 § 0.55 § 0.25) x ● OZI suppressed ● BABAR 342 fb –1 Phys.Rev.Lett.100(2008) ● First measurement of  – ! K + K –  –  Br = (3.42 § 0.55 § 0.25) x ● OZI suppressed  Decays with  final state –– Hadronic  Decays with  Hadronic  Decays with 

29 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 29 Summary ● Results from Belle and Babar presented for D s1 (2536), D sJ (2700), D sJ (2860),  c **, D s !  , f Ds Hadronic  decays with  and  final states Thank you for your attention.

30 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 30 Backup Slides

31 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 31

32 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 32 D s + !  +  analysis technique ● Analysis technique: ● full reconstruction e + e – ! Ds* D ,0 K ,0 X where X=n and · 1 ● Tag side: DK, with D ! K n, n=1,2,3 ● Signal side: D s * ! D s  (reconstructed in the recoil against DKX) ● In the D s sample ● Require 1  ● Use D s ! e e as background shape (expected Br factor ~10 5 smaller) ● Analysis technique: ● full reconstruction e + e – ! Ds* D ,0 K ,0 X where X=n and · 1 ● Tag side: DK, with D ! K n, n=1,2,3 ● Signal side: D s * ! D s  (reconstructed in the recoil against DKX) ● In the D s sample ● Require 1  ● Use D s ! e e as background shape (expected Br factor ~10 5 smaller) § 1490 inclusive D s decays

33 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 33 D s + !  +  Reconstruction Method Lauranz Widhalm, HEPHY

34 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 34 D s + !  , Comparison of Analyses Belle Efficiency depends strongly on number of pions p*(D)>2.0 GeV/c p*(D s )>3.0 GeV/c p*(K) 150 MeV Mass-constrained vertex fit for D s * and D s Belle Efficiency depends strongly on number of pions p*(D)>2.0 GeV/c p*(D s )>3.0 GeV/c p*(K) 150 MeV Mass-constrained vertex fit for D s * and D s Babar ● Efficiency cancels in partial width ratio (D s + !  +  )/ (D s + !  + ) ● p*( + )>1.2 GeV/c ● * >38 o ● |p(D s *+ )| cut ● E*  >115 MeV ● cos( ,D )<0.9 ● E miss * cut Babar ● Efficiency cancels in partial width ratio (D s + !  +  )/ (D s + !  + ) ● p*( + )>1.2 GeV/c ● * >38 o ● |p(D s *+ )| cut ● E*  >115 MeV ● cos( ,D )<0.9 ● E miss * cut

35 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 35

36 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 36 D s + !  , Comparison of Backgrounds Belle MC studies show Non-D s decays ~18% Leptonic  decays ~7% ( ! ) Semileptonic D s decays ~3.6% with undetected low p hadrons Hadronic D s decays <2% Belle MC studies show Non-D s decays ~18% Leptonic  decays ~7% ( ! ) Semileptonic D s decays ~3.6% with undetected low p hadrons Hadronic D s decays <2% Babar ● e + e – ! f anti-f with no charm or incorrect tag ~42% Leptonic  decays ~26% ( ! ) Pure leptonic D !  or D s !  missing the signal chain ~20% Other backgrounds charged  misidentified as  ~1% incorrectly chosen  candidate ~10% Babar ● e + e – ! f anti-f with no charm or incorrect tag ~42% Leptonic  decays ~26% ( ! ) Pure leptonic D !  or D s !  missing the signal chain ~20% Other backgrounds charged  misidentified as  ~1% incorrectly chosen  candidate ~10%

37 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 37 fDfD ● f D+ =222.6 § –3.4 MeV CLEO for 47 § 7 D + !  +  events Phys. Rev. Lett. 95(2005) ● Lattice f D+ =208 § 4 MeV ● f D+ =222.6 § –3.4 MeV CLEO for 47 § 7 D + !  +  events Phys. Rev. Lett. 95(2005) ● Lattice f D+ =208 § 4 MeV

38 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 38 f B – Lattice QCD vs. Experiment ● Belle Phys.Rev.Lett. 97 (2006) hep-ex/ v3 414 fb -1 ● Br(B - !  – tau ) = ( –0.49 (stat) –0.51 (syst))*10 –4 ● This implies that f B = –0.031 (stat) –0.037 (syst) GeV ● Belle Phys.Rev.Lett. 97 (2006) hep-ex/ v3 414 fb -1 ● Br(B - !  – tau ) = ( –0.49 (stat) –0.51 (syst))*10 –4 ● This implies that f B = –0.031 (stat) –0.037 (syst) GeV ● The B meson decay constant from unquenched lattice QCD HPQCD Collaboration Alan Gray et al. Phys.Rev.Lett. 95(2005) hep-lat/

39 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 39 Status of Charmed Baryons R. Mizuk arXiv:

40 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 40

41 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 41 Charmed Baryon 5/2 States ● Rosner et al. hep-ph/ ●  L ' 300 MeV ● Rosner et al. hep-ph/ ●  L ' 300 MeV 2880 ! D 0 p 2940 ! D 0 p  c (2880) + !  c (2455) 0,++  +,− 5/2+ 5/2- Belle

42 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 42 Possible  transitions in  c system ● hep-ph/ Chen and Chui ● L is orbital momentum of light quark ● hep-ph/ Chen and Chui ● L is orbital momentum of light quark

43 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 43

44 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 44

45 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 45 G. Marchiori, NOW 2006

46 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 46 D** assume heavy quark symmetry m charm  light quark couples to L first then L=1 states are 2 doublets j q =1/2 broad (decay by  S wave) j q =3/2 narrow (decay by  D wave) assume heavy quark symmetry m charm  light quark couples to L first then L=1 states are 2 doublets j q =1/2 broad (decay by  S wave) j q =3/2 narrow (decay by  D wave)

47 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 47 D** BELLE observes the two broad D** (j q =1/2) L=1 states Phys. Rev. D69(2004) Mill. BB masswidth D*0(J=0) 2308  17  15  28 MeV276  21  18  60 MeV D´1(J=1) 2427  26  20  15 MeV  24  70 MeV BELLE observes the two broad D** (j q =1/2) L=1 states Phys. Rev. D69(2004) Mill. BB masswidth D*0(J=0) 2308  17  15  28 MeV276  21  18  60 MeV D´1(J=1) 2427  26  20  15 MeV  24  70 MeV D 2 * can decay to D  and D*  D +  K   +   D *+  D o  + D o  K   + D o  K   +    +

48 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 48 Confirmation of new D sJ States BELLE confirmed both and observed D sJ + (2460)  D s +  Phys. Rev. Lett. 92(2004) seen in both production mechanisms e+e  c  c B decay > important for determination of quantum number BELLE confirmed both and observed D sJ + (2460)  D s +  Phys. Rev. Lett. 92(2004) seen in both production mechanisms e+e  c  c B decay > important for determination of quantum number not Ds* !

49 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 49 D sJ quantum numbers observation in B decays enables helicity analysis (fixed initial state) J P =0 + J P =1 -

50 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 50 Compare D and D s systems should be similar (except smaller mass splitting j q =1/2  3/2 due to s quark mass) why are the D s j q =1/2 states narrow (and the D states broad) ? isospin violation (from I=0 to I=1) but measured D sJ masses >100 MeV lower than potential model should be similar (except smaller mass splitting j q =1/2  3/2 due to s quark mass) why are the D s j q =1/2 states narrow (and the D states broad) ? isospin violation (from I=0 to I=1) but measured D sJ masses >100 MeV lower than potential model Theory Experiment

51 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 51 Mixing for D s from CLEO ● Exp. knowledge on the mixing: from BF’s ratio of Ds1(2460) radiative decays: D* s γ/D s γ=0.31±0.14 switch from |jq> to |2S+1LJ > basis tan 2 (θ+θ 0 )=0.8±0.4 where tan 2 θ 0 =2 (no-mixing case) ● Exp. knowledge on the mixing: from BF’s ratio of Ds1(2460) radiative decays: D* s γ/D s γ=0.31±0.14 switch from |jq> to |2S+1LJ > basis tan 2 (θ+θ 0 )=0.8±0.4 where tan 2 θ 0 =2 (no-mixing case) θθ0θ0

52 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 52 L. Cremaldi

53 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 53  c Fragmentation ● 1st indication of different fragmentation of charmed mesons (cq) and charmed baryons (cqq) ● Babar PRD 75, (2007) 9.5 fb -1 off-resonance ● Belle Phys. Rev. D73(2006) fb -1 off-resonance ● 1st indication of different fragmentation of charmed mesons (cq) and charmed baryons (cqq) ● Babar PRD 75, (2007) 9.5 fb -1 off-resonance ● Belle Phys. Rev. D73(2006) fb -1 off-resonance

54 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 54 Brief History of D s and D sJ ● Ds(1968), CLEO, 1983 ● Ds*(2112), Mark3, 1987 ● Ds*(2536), ARGUS, 1989 (even before indication in N) ● D sJ + (2317) ! D s + 0 Babar 03, 91 fb –1 Phys.Rev.Lett.90(2003) continuum ● D sJ + (2463) ! D s *(2112)  0 CLEO 03, Phys.Rev. D68(2003) continuum 13.5 fb only ● Ds(1968), CLEO, 1983 ● Ds*(2112), Mark3, 1987 ● Ds*(2536), ARGUS, 1989 (even before indication in N) ● D sJ + (2317) ! D s + 0 Babar 03, 91 fb –1 Phys.Rev.Lett.90(2003) continuum ● D sJ + (2463) ! D s *(2112)  0 CLEO 03, Phys.Rev. D68(2003) continuum 13.5 fb only ● BABAR Phys.Rev.D69:031101,2004 D sJ (2463) ! D s 0  ● Belle Phys.Rev.Lett. 91(2003) in B decays ! helicity study ● Belle 86.9 fb D sJ (2463) + ! D s +  ! D s + + - (OZI suppressed) Phys.Rev.Lett. 92(2004)012002

55 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 55 Partial Wave Analysis of D s1 (2536) → D* + K 0 s Partial Wave Analysis of D s1 (2536) → D* + K 0 s (resonant) hep-ex/ PRD 77(2008) ● Prediction for 1 + state in the helicity formalism ● ρ helicity density matrix angles , ,  ρ 00 longitudinal polarization z=√R Λ exp(iξ)=A 10 /A 00 A 10 =(S+D/√2)/√3 A 00 =(S-√2D)/√3) D/S= √2(z-1)/(1+2z) ● Prediction for 1 + state in the helicity formalism ● ρ helicity density matrix angles , ,  ρ 00 longitudinal polarization z=√R Λ exp(iξ)=A 10 /A 00 A 10 =(S+D/√2)/√3 A 00 =(S-√2D)/√3) D/S= √2(z-1)/(1+2z) Ds1(2536) DsJ(2700) D s !  Charmed Baryons  c

56 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 56 Fit to angular distribution of D s1 (2536) → D* + K 0 s ● f bck : background fraction in M(D* + K s ) signal region: ~9% ● ε(α,β,γ)/ → efficiency correction ● f bck : background fraction in M(D* + K s ) signal region: ~9% ● ε(α,β,γ)/ → efficiency correction

57 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 57 ● b → ccs tree process, i.e. cs → D 0 K + and cc → D 0 D 0 final states ● Signal identification ΔE=E B -E beam cms energy difference M bc = √(E 2 beam -p 2 B ) beam-constrained mass ● S=399±40 for 449MBB events ● Dalitz plot different from 3-body phasespace ● b → ccs tree process, i.e. cs → D 0 K + and cc → D 0 D 0 final states ● Signal identification ΔE=E B -E beam cms energy difference M bc = √(E 2 beam -p 2 B ) beam-constrained mass ● S=399±40 for 449MBB events ● Dalitz plot different from 3-body phasespace New D sJ meson in B + →  D 0 D 0 K + ΔEΔEΔEΔE M bc hep-ex/ (submitted to PRL)  (4160)  (3770) new D sJ

58 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 58 Chiral effective theory with heavy quark symmetry ● Matsuki, Morii, Sudoh Phys.Lett. B659(2008)593, arXiv: ● influenced by earlier work Bardeen et al., Phys.Rev. D68(2003) ● k: quantum number of spinor operator ● might explain lower masses D sJ (2317) and D sJ (2460) ● Matsuki, Morii, Sudoh Phys.Lett. B659(2008)593, arXiv: ● influenced by earlier work Bardeen et al., Phys.Rev. D68(2003) ● k: quantum number of spinor operator ● might explain lower masses D sJ (2317) and D sJ (2460)

59 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 59 Mixing in the D system ● D 1 ’-D 1 mixing angle measured from B → D*ππ Dalitz plot Belle Phys. Rev. D69(2004) fb -1 ● Mixing angle between axialvector 1+ states D 1 ’ and D 1  = (-0.10±0.03±0.02±0.02 rad) ● Note: here one broad and and narrow state (in D s system both 1+ states are narrow) ● D 1 ’-D 1 mixing angle measured from B → D*ππ Dalitz plot Belle Phys. Rev. D69(2004) fb -1 ● Mixing angle between axialvector 1+ states D 1 ’ and D 1  = (-0.10±0.03±0.02±0.02 rad) ● Note: here one broad and and narrow state (in D s system both 1+ states are narrow)

60 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 60 Mass splitting of  c * states (u vs. d quark) Belle, hep-ex/ , subm. to Phys. Lett. B

61 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 61 HOWTO measured an absolute D s Br ? ● Example e+e- ! D s * + D s1 –, hep-ex/ with D s1 – ! anti-D* K ● 2 tags ● Tag #1: full reco of D s1 – and  from D s * ! D s  = proportional to yield of reconstructed anti-D* modes ● Tag #2: full reco of D s *+ through  only (D s * + ! D s + ) and observation of K from D s1 ! anti-D* K proportional to Br of D s + ● Efficiency corrected ratio of the 2 measured signal yields = ratio of well known anti-D* Br and the searched-for Br of D s + ● For efficiency: MC ● Example e+e- ! D s * + D s1 –, hep-ex/ with D s1 – ! anti-D* K ● 2 tags ● Tag #1: full reco of D s1 – and  from D s * ! D s  = proportional to yield of reconstructed anti-D* modes ● Tag #2: full reco of D s *+ through  only (D s * + ! D s + ) and observation of K from D s1 ! anti-D* K proportional to Br of D s + ● Efficiency corrected ratio of the 2 measured signal yields = ratio of well known anti-D* Br and the searched-for Br of D s + ● For efficiency: MC

62 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 62 D sJ Spectroscopy E. Prencipe, MENU2007

63 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 63  Event Selection I

64 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 64  Event Selection II

65 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 65

66 Moriond QCD, March 9, 2008 Charm Decays Tau Decays Sören Lange 66


Download ppt "Charm and  Decays Results from Babar and Belle Jens Sören Lange (University of Giessen) 43 th Rencontres de Moriond QCD and High Energy Interactions La."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google