arxiv: v1 [hep-ph] 19 Nov 2012

Transcription

1 Evidence for a narrow D 0 state in K η near threshold Bo-Chao Liu 1,, and Ju-Jun Xie,, 1 Deartment of Alied Physics, Xi an Jiaotong University, Xi an, Shanxi , China Theoretical Physics Center for Science Facilities, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing , China Deartment of Physics, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan , China arxiv: v1 [he-h] 19 Nov 01 Recently, we reorted a theoretical study on the K η reaction near threshold by using an effective Lagrangian aroach. It was found that the descrition of angular distribution data measured by the Crystal Ball Collaboration needs a D 0 resonance with mass M = ± 0.5 MeV and total decay width Γ = 1.5 ±0.5 MeV, which is not the conventional (1690) or other state listed in the Particle Data Grou book. In the resent work, we study the olarization in the K η reaction within the same framework. The results show that the existence of this narrow D 0 state is also comatible with current olarization data and that the more accurate olarization data at = 75MeV can offer further evidence for the existence of this resonance. Furthermore, the role of the (1690) resonance in this reaction is also discussed. PACS numbers: I. INTRODUCTION Understanding KN interactions in the low-energy region is a very imortant art of the study of the behavior of quantum chromodynamics(qcd) in the nonerturbative regime. Because the excitation of hyeron resonances usually dominates in relevant rocesses, it offers a good basis to study the roerties of hyeron resonances, esecially for hyeron resonance with S = 1. In fact, u to now most of the knowledge of hyeron resonances is from the analysis of KN interactions [1]. Even though we have studied the KN interactions for a long time, the large uncertainties of the arameters of hyeron resonances in the Particle Data Grou (PDG) book indicate that the status of our knowledge on these resonances is still not satisfying. This is artly because of the comlications of the non-erturbative character of QCD in the low-energy regime and artly because of the oor quality of the available exerimental data. In the ast ten years, some new exerimental data on K scattering with much higher accuracy than before were reorted by the Crystal Ball Collaboration [, ]. With these new data, from theoretical analysis, it is ossible to refine our knowledge on the hyeron resonances and to better understand the mechanism of relevant reactions. Some work along this way has already been done[4 9]. Among various KN inelastic reactions, the reaction K η is articularly interesting and imortant. Due to isosin conversation, the Σ resonances do not contribute in this reaction, which makes this reaction a good lace to study the roertiesofresonances. On the other hand, our current knowledge of the coulings of resonances with the η channel is still very oor. Besides the (1670) resonance, the coulings of Electronic address: liubc@xjtu.edu.cn Electronic address: xiejujun@mail.ihe.ac.cn other resonances with the η channel are only oorly known or unknown. Some further studies on this reaction are obviously still needed. In our revious work [9], we analyzed the new data reorted by the Crystal Ball Collaboration for the K η reaction [] within an effective Lagrangian aroach. It is found that by including the background and (1670) resonance the total cross section data can be well reroduced. However, the bowl structure aearing in the differential cross section data cannot be exlained. We showed that the differential cross section data favor a D 0 resonance with very narrow width, which is not the conventional (1690) resonance or other states listed by the PDG [1]. As mentioned in Ref. [9], the current exerimental data still have systematic uncertainties, esecially when we look at the angular distribution data obtained from two different ways of identifying the final η meson(see Fig.0 of Ref.[]). For better understanding of the origin of the higher artial wave contributions, we suggest our exerimental colleagues remeasure the angular distribution data. On the theoretical side, it is also imortant to find some other way or criterion to check for the existence of this narrow D 0 resonance. In the resent work, we give redictions of the olarization in the K η reaction by using the arameters determined from the fitting to differential cross section data in our revious work [9]. On the other hand, since the conventional (1690) resonance may also contribute to this reaction in rincile, we also give some further discussion about the role of the (1690) resonance in this reaction. The resent work can be treated as a further test of our revious results [9] and offer some new criterion to verify the existence of this narrow D 0 resonance. The aer is organized as follows. In the next section, we resent the ingredients and formalism used for the resent calculation, while the results with some discussion are given in Sec. III. Then, a short summary is given in the last section.

2 II. INGREDIENTS AND FORMALISM We adot the effective Lagrangian method in describing the reaction K η near threshold. The effective Lagrangian method is an imortant theoretical aroach in studying various rocesses in the resonance region, and it is widely used in artial wave analysis for the roerties of resonances. The main contributions for this reaction come from the t-channel K meson exchange, the u-channel roton exchange, and the s-channel resonance exchange. The corresonding Feynman diagrams are shown in Fig. 1. K K K η K FIG. 1: Feynman diagrams for the reaction K η. The t-channel K meson exchange, u-channel roton exchange, and the s-channel resonance exchange are considered. First, for the t-channel K meson exchange, we take the normally used effective Lagrangians for K Kη and K N coulings as L K Kη = g K Kη(η µ K K µ η)k µ. (1) L K N = g K N ( γ µ K µ κ K N M N σ µν ν K µ) N +H.c.. () where we take κ K N =.4 as used in Refs. [10, 11]. Second, for the u-channel nucleon exchange, the effective Lagrangians for the ηnn and KN coulings are taken as [1] L ηnn = g ηnn Nγ5 Nη, () L KN = g KN Nγ5 K +H.c.. (4) Third, for the intermediate (1670) ( 1 ) resonance contribution in the s-channel, the effective Lagrangians vertices are [1] for the KN 1 L KN 1 L η and η 1 = g KN 1 η K 1 N +H.c., (5) = g 1 η 1 1 η +H.c.. (6) Fourth, for the intermediate resonance (D 0 state) in the s-channel with sin-arity J P =, the effective η Lagrangians are [14] L KN L η m K = f KN K µ µ γ 5 N +H.c., (7) f η = µ η µ γ 5 +H.c.. (8) m η To take into account the internal structure of hadrons and ossible off-shell effects, we introduce form factors in the amlitudes. In the resent work, we adot the following form factors [15 18] F B (q ex,m ex ) = 4 4 +(q ex M ex), (9) for the s and u channels and ( F B (qex,m M ) ex ex) = qex, (10) for the t channel, where q ex and M ex are the fourmomenta and the mass of the exchanged hadron, resectively. For the cutoff arameters, we adot =.0 GeV for the s channel and = 1.5 GeV for the t and u channels. For the roagators with four-momenta q ex, we take[19] G µν K (q ex) = gµν +q µ ex qν ex /m K q ex m K, (11) for K meson exchange, where µ and ν are olarization indices of vector meson K. For the roton roagator, we take G N (q ex ) = q ex +M N qex. (1) M N For the resonance with sin 1/ in the s channel, we take G 1 (q ex ) = q ex +M q ex M +imγ, (1) while for the resonance with sin / in the s channel, we take the roagator as, G µν (q ex ) = ( g µν + γµ γ ν q ex +M q ex M +imγ + γµ q ν ex γ ν q µ ex M + qµ exqex ν ) M,(14) where M and Γ are the mass and width of the corresonding intermediate state, resectively. The differential cross section for K η with the invariantmasssquareds = (+k) (wherekandarethe four-momenta of the K and the roton) in the centerof-mass (c.m.) frame can be exressed as dσ η dω = dσ η πdcosθ = 1 64π s q M, (15) k

3 where θ denotes the angle of the outgoing η relative to beam direction in the c.m. frame. In the above equation, k and q denote the magnitude of the three-momenta of initial and final state in the c.m. frame, resectively. With the effective Lagrangian densities given above, the averaged scattering amlitude squared M, introduced in Eq. (15), can be exressed as M = 1 M r 1,r = 1 Tr[ ( +m )A( +m N )γ 0 A + γ 0], (16) where r 1 and r denote the olarizations of the initial roton and the final, resectively; and and denote the four-momenta of the roton and the, resectively. A is art of the total amlitude, which can be exressed as M = ū r ( ) A u r1 () = ū r ( ) ( A α e iφα) u r1 (),(17) where α denotes the t-channel, u-channel, and various s-channel resonances that contribute to the total amlitude. In henomenological aroaches, the relative hase between the amlitudes is not fixed. In our work, they are introduced as free arameters, i.e. φ α, and we take φ = 0 for the amlitude of the s-channel (1670) exchange. The olarization in the K η reaction can be studied from the decay of πn. For πn, we take the following effective Lagrangian L πn = G F m π N(A Bγ 5 ), (18) where G F denotes the Fermi couling constant, while A and B are effective couling constants, for which we take A = i and B = 1.4 [4] in our calculation. The differential cross section for K η ηπn can be exressed as dσ K η ηπn dωdω = q n M 11 π 4 m Γ s k, (19) where n is the three-momenta of the roduced nucleon in the rest frame, Γ = τ 1 is the decay width, and dω = dcosθ dφ is the shere sace of the outgoing nucleon in the rest frame. The scattering amlitude M is exressed as and M = ū r ( n )G F m π(a Bγ 5 )( +m ) ( A α e iφα) u r1 (), (0) α α M = 1 M M +, (1) r 1,r with r 1 and r the olarizations of the initial roton and the final nucleon, resectively With the above ingredients, the olarization in K η ηπn can be exressed as P = α ( cosθ dσ K η ηπn dωdω dω )/ dσ η dω, () where α is the decay asymmetry arameter with the value of 0.65, while θ is the angle between the outgoing nucleon and the vector V = k q. III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In the following, we resent the theoretical results of a χ fit to the exerimental total and differential cross section data [] with eleven arameters (M (1670), Γ (1670), g (1670) KN g (1670)η, M (D0), Γ (D0), f (D0) KNf (D0)η, g K Ng K Kη, g KN g ηnn, φ (D0), φ K, and φ ), which are not shown in Ref. [9] due to that aer s length limit. The best fitting results for these arameters are shown in Table I. The resultant χ /dof is 0.9(where dof is the degrees of freedom). We show in Fig. the best fitting results for total cross sections by considering the (1670), narrow D 0 resonance, and background contributions. The solid line reresents the full results. The contributions from the (1670), the narrow D 0 resonance, the t-channel diagram, and the u- channel diagram are shown by the dotted, dash-dotted, dashed, and dot-dot-dashed lines, resectively. It was found that the (1670) resonance is needed to interret the stee rise of the total cross sections near thresholdanda(d 0 ) state with massm = ±0.5 MeV and width Γ = 1.5 ± 0.5 MeV is necessary to reroduce the exerimental data of the angular distributions [9]. Because of its very narrow width, this D 0 resonance is obviously not the conventional (1690) resonance (M (1690) = 1690± 5 MeV, Γ (1690) = 60 ± 10 MeV) or other states listed by the PDG. In Fig. we show again our results, for comarison, for the total cross section by including the contribution from the narrow D 0 state with a solid line and the results obtained without the narrow D 0 state with a dashed line. It is clear that the small bum around = 74 MeV can be well reroduced if we include the contributions from the narrow D 0 state. 1 1 At the oint = 74 MeV, the exerimental result is σ = 1.15±0.10 mb, while our model result, by including the narrow D 0 state, is 1.14 ± 5 mb with the error obtained from the errors of the fitted arameters shown in Table I. We find that the agreement between our model and the exerimental result is very good. However, if we did not consider the contribution from this narrow D 0 state, then the theoretical result is 0.99 ± mb, which gives discreancies of about two standard deviations with the exerimental data when the theoretical uncertainties are also taken into account.

4 4 TABLE I: The fitted arameters. Channel/exchanging article Product of couling constants φ α Mass(MeV) Width(MeV) s/ (1670) 0. ± ± ±.7 s/ (D 0) 8.± ± ± ±0.5 t/ K 58.0±7..64± u/ 5. ± ± (mb) 1. (mb) (GeV/c) (GeV/c) FIG. : The best fitting results for total cross sections by considering the (1670), narrow D 0 resonance and background contributions. The solid line reresents the full results. The contributions from the (1670), the narrow D 0 resonance, the t-channel diagram, and the u-channel diagram are shown by the dotted, dash-dotted, dashed, and dot-dot-dashed lines, resectively. To get more clues about the role of the narrow D 0 state in the K η reaction, we calculate the differential cross sections as a function of the momentum of the K meson at the forward angle (cos θ = 0.95). We show our results in Fig. 4 by comaring with the exerimental data taken form Ref. []. The result including the narrow D 0 state is shown by the solid line, while the dashed line stands for the results without including this narrow state. The bum in the differential cross section is more clear than in the total cross section, and this clear bum can be well reroduced by including the contributions from the narrow D 0 state. A. The role of the (1690) It is known that a well-established D 0 resonance [(1690)] may also give contributions to this reaction, and in Ref. [], the authors argued that the bowl structure may be caused by the (1690) resonance. However, it was shown in our revious work [9] that the exerimental data favor a resonance with very narrow width. The main reason for the need of a narrow resonance is because of the bowl structures only aearing in a very FIG. : Total cross section with(solid line)/without(dashed line) contributions from the narrow D 0 state. d d (mb/sr) cos = (GeV/c) FIG. 4: Differential cross sections as a function of the momentum of K at the forward angle (cos θ = 0.95) and the corresonding theoretical results by using the best-fitted arameters with (solid line) and without (dashed line) the narrow resonance. narrowenergy window as we have ointed out in Ref. [9]. Regarding the uncertainties of the current exerimental data, it will be interesting to discuss how well the exerimental data can be exlained by the conventional (1690) state. For this urose, we erform the fitting rocedures with some different strategies. First, we fix

5 dσ/dω(mb/sr) =74MeV/c =76MeV/c =78MeV/c =70MeV/c =7MeV/c =74MeV/c =78MeV/c =74MeV/c =746MeV/c =750MeV/c =754MeV/c =758MeV/c =76MeV/c =766MeV/c =770MeV/c cos ϑ FIG. 5: (Color online) The fitting results for angular distributions within Fit I (dashed line) and Fit III (dash-dot-dotted line). The solid line reresents the best fitting results taken from Ref. [9] for comarison. the mass and width of the D 0 state at the central values of the conventional (1690) state as given by the PDG [1] (Fit I), i.e. mass M = 1690 MeV and total decay width Γ = 60 MeV. Noting that the couling of the (1690) with the η is consistent with zero if we take the decay branch ratio from the PDG, here we take it as a free arameter. In this scheme, we have nine free arameters in total. The best fitting results are shown by the dashed line shown in Fig. 5. It is easy to see that the bowl structures cannot be reroduced. The fitting results favor a weak couling of the (1690) with the η channel. This is mainly because the bowl structures only aear in a very narrow energy window. Since the highest c.m. energy of this set of data is around s =1.685 GeV, which is the lower limit of the mass of the (1690) suggested by the PDG, if the (1690) gives significant contributions to the angular distributions, one can exect that with increasing beam momenta the bowl structures shown in angular distributions should become more and more rominent. However, such an exectation is not suorted by the exerimental data. Therefore, we do not think the bowl structure is caused by the conventional (1690). Another interesting thing is to check to what extent the exerimental data can be understood by a D 0 resonance with a normal total decaywidth. We then erform anotherfit byfixing the width ofthe D 0 stateat60mev (Fit II), which is the width of the conventional (1690) resonance suggested by the PDG. In this fit, the best fitting results favor the mass M = ± 11.7 MeV for the D 0 resonance and a small couling with the η channel. The corresonding results for angular distributionsarenotshowninfig.5, becausetheyalmostoverla with the dashed-blue lines which are obtained from Fit I. So, in this fit, the bowl structures cannot be reroduced, either. Furthermore, since the bowl structure shows most sig- This is because in both FitIand FitII, the D 0 contributions are highly suressed with the small couling with the η channel, so the dominant contributions are from the (1670) resonance and background contributions which are similar in these two fits.

6 6 nificantly at =74 MeV, we also check the deendence of the results on the data at this single energy oint. In this scheme, we take the mass and width of the D 0 resonance as free arameters and omit the angular distribution data at =74 MeV in the fit (Fit III). The best fitting results still favor a narrow resonance, i.e., M=1670.±1.6 MeV and Γ=4.5±1.6 MeV. This shows that the needs of a narrow resonance are not only from one single energy measurement but also from the attern of angular distributions in a wide energy region. Obviously, the descrition of angular distributions in this fit (shown by the dash-dot-dotted line in Fig. 5) is better than for Fit I, and also for Fit II. However, the angular distribution data at =74 MeV is not totally reroduced in this fit. We also show again, in Fig. 5 by the solid-red line, the best fitting results taken from Ref. [9] for comarison. B. olarization It is believed that the olarization data can ut more constraints on the theoretical model and offer additional hysical observables to test the models. In Ref. [9], we did not include the olarization data in our fitting because the quality of these data is rather oor. However, it should be meaningful to show the redictions of our fitting results for these observables. Following the formula and ingredients given at the end of Sec. II, we calculate the olarization in the K η ηπn reaction at = 75 and 765 MeV. It should be noted that all the arameters used here are taken from Ref. [9] and there is no free arameter in the resent calculation. The corresonding results are shown by the solid line in Fig. 6. The exerimental data are taken from Ref. []. By looking at Fig. 6, one can find that the redictions of our model can fairly well describe the exerimental data esecially at = 75 MeV, where the narrow D 0 resonance gives a significant contribution. It will also be interesting to check the redictions without the narrow D 0 resonance. By using the arameters shown in Table 1 of Ref. [9], i.e., the best fitting results without the narrow D 0 state, the corresonding olarizations are calculated and shown by the dashed line in Fig. 6. It can be found that without the narrow D 0 resonance the model redictions can also reroduce the data within the large error bars of exerimental data, although the trend of central values of exerimental data are described badly. We also erformed the calculations by taking a normal total decay width Γ = 100 MeV for the D 0 resonance and leaving other arameters unchanged. This calculation is meaningful because the olarization is the ratio of two differential cross sections [see Eq. ()]. The corresonding results are shown by the dotted line in Fig. 6. Besides the redictions of olarization at some discrete energy oints, it will also be interesting to investigate the energy deendence of olarization around P P - - =75MeV cos =765MeV cos FIG. 6: (Color online) The redictions for olarization with (solid line) and without (dashed line) the narrow D 0 resonance. The dotted line reresents the corresonding results by using the normal baryon resonance total decay width Γ = 100 MeV for the D 0 resonance. the momentum = 74 MeV, where the narrow D 0 resonance gives significant contributions. In Fig. 7, we showthecalculatedresultsforolarizationat =7, 74, and 75 MeV, resectively, where the redictions by omitting the contribution from the D 0 resonance at =7 and 75 MeV are also shown for comarison. The main finding is that the trend of olarization versus cos θ is very sensitive to the beam momentum in the energy range around the eak of the D 0 resonance. After omitting the contributions of the D 0 resonance, the results at =7 and 75 MeV are almost flat and overla each other. This indicates that such energy deendence is caused by the narrow D 0 resonance. So exerimental analysis on the energy deendence of olarization may offer further evidence on the existence of this narrow resonance. IV. SUMMARY In this work, we resent some detailed analyses on the reaction mechanism of K η near threshold and studytheolarizationinthek ηreactionbased

7 7 P cos FIG. 7: (Color online) The results for olarization at =7 MeV (dash-dotted line), =74 MeV (solid line) and =75 MeV (dash-dot-dotted line). The dashed and dotted lines reresent the corresonding results by omitting the D 0 state contribution at =7 MeV and =75 MeV resectively. on our revious work [9]. It is found that current data indeed favor a D 0 resonance with very narrow width, which is not the conventional (1690). And the existence of this narrow D 0 state is also comatible with the current olarization data. We also study the role of the conventional (1690) resonance in this reaction, however, the current exerimental data cannot be reroduced by including the conventional (1690) resonance. In theresentwork, wefind that the olarizationare strongly energy deendent around =74 MeV with inclusion the narrow D 0 state. Thus more accurate olarization data around = 74 MeV can be used to verify the existence of this D 0 resonance. We suggest our colleagues remeasure both the differential cross section and olarization data, which should be helful to clarify the existence of this D 0 resonance. Acknowledgments We would like to thank Xian-Hui Zhong, Pu-Ze Gao, and Jia-Jun Wu for useful discussions. We also want to thank Prof. Bing-Song Zou for his valuable suggestions and suort during our stay at the Institute of High Energy Physics. This work is suorted by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants No and No B. C. Liu is also suorted by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. [1] J. Beringer et al., Phys. Rev. D86, (01). [] A. Starostin, et al., Phys. Rev. C64, (001). [] E. Klemt and J.-M. Richard, Rev. Mod. Phys. 8, 1095 (010). [4] P. Z. Gao, B. S. Zou and A. Sibirtsev, Nucl. Phys. A867 (011) 41. [5] D. M. Manley, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 0100 (001). [6] E. Oset, A. Ramos, C. Bennhold, Phys. Lett. B 57, 99 (00). [7] C. Garcia-Recio, J. Nieves, E. Ruiz Arriola and M. J. Vicente Vacas, Phys. Rev. D67, (00). [8] Xian-Hui Zhong, and Qiang Zhao, Phys. Rev. C79, 0450 (009). [9] Bo-Chao Liu and Ju-Jun Xie, Phys. Rev. C85, 0801 (01). [10] V. G. J. Stoks and Th. A. Rijken, Phys. Rev. C59, 009 (1999). [11] Y. Oh and H. Kim, Phys. Rev. C7, 0650 (006). [1] K. Tsushima, A. Sibirtsev and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Lett. B90,9 (1997). [1] B. S. Zou and F. Hussain, Phys. Rev. C 67, (00). [14] Ju-Jun Xie, Bing-Song Zou, and Bo-Chao Liu, Chin. Phys. Lett., 15 (005). [15] F. Q. Wu, B. S. Zou, L.Li and D. V. Bugg, Nucl. Phys. A75 (004) 111. [16] J. J. Xie, B. S. Zou and H. Q. Chiang, Phys. Rev. C77,01506(008). [17] G. PennerandU. Mosel, Phys. Rev.C66, (00); ibid. C 66, 0551 (00); V. Shklyar, H. Lenske and U. Mosel, Phys. Rev. C 7, (005). [18] T. Feuster and U. Mosel, Phys. Rev. C 58, 457 (1998); T. Feuster and U. Mosel, Phys. Rev. C 59, 460 (1999). [19] R. Shyam, Phys. Rev. C 60, 0551 (1999).