Hadronic Physics and Exotics

Hanna Mahlke Cornell University EPS/HEP2007 July 19-25, 2007 Manchester, England Hadrons come in many Insight into what holds different shapes and sizes hadrons together ⇒ access to different ⇒ access to the strong force manifestations of the strong force

Hadron spectroscopy and decay as a study ground for QCD

Compare expected system of states (mesons, baryons, New observations just as glueballs, …) against important as comprehensive observations surveys – and planning for the unexpected, too! Observables: masses, widths, decay dynamics

Unless a heavy-system decay, this is non-perturbative QCD.

2 3-step program to make headway on Route QCD

Example: (1) FIND Search for the expected A new state is seen Observe the unexpected

Systematically probe properties: Study production and decay in different and (2) SORT Confirmation in similar production Cross-check and decay scenarios Anti-checks

Categorize within the framework Assign a place in (3) 9 Perform precision studies the system of states Deviations from expectation? Leaving out (2) gets you a ticket! Back to (1)!

This talk: Examples from all three categories.

3 General goal: Q=c,b Explore QCD phenomena at different scales q=u,d,s Overview ψ(2S) width Two heavy quarks J/ψ, χcJ decay to light q Q Q B decay to charmonium States above DD threshold Charmonium-like states

One heavy quark Q q

Zero heavy quarks q q

This talk: mostly mesons, but many new results on baryons as well. See list of topics at the end. 4 Notation: n2S+1L ↑↓ ↑↑ ↑↓ ↑↑ ↑↓ ↑↑ →→→J L=0 L=1 L=2 (QQ) States J=L+S 3 43S n= 2m 1 2 Study system of states, governed B n= by underlying binding force: strong force. Charmonium and bottomonium n=1 very similar. (bb): less relativistic 2mD (cc): more data available ψ, ϒ ? Masses ? Widths χQ ? Production and decay dynamics ηQ

Partly discovery, partly hQ precision measurements J/ψ: 3.10 GeV ϒ(1S): 9.46 GeV This summer – mostly Δ (13S ,23S ) ~ 600 MeV charmonium results. 1 1 5 ψ(2S) width measurements E835 E835 (pp): BES scan: ψ(2S)→… beam energy spread E835, hep-ex/0703012

hadrons BES, PLB550,24(2002) is ~ψ(2S) width, can directly observe the FWHM is 0.4-0.5 MeV! line shape + − π π J/ψ BES (e+e-): beam energy spread is O(MeV), can μ+μ− measure width ECM (GeV) 4MeV through effect on observed cross- E835, pp → e+e-(X): sections 4MeV ECM (GeV) directly

Γtotal: Different methods, different channels, E385 through J/ψ consistent results BES 02

6 + - 0 0 Survey of four-body decays χcJ → h h h π Resonant substructure is π+π-π0π0 K+K-π0π0 important for 4π and KKππ, (ρππ or K*Kπ or KKρ or ...) Branching fractions and contributions from 0 0 ppπ π K+K-ηπ0 intermediate resonances determined Isospin relations: ρ+π−π0 = ρ0π+π− ? 9

± ± 0 K*Kπ modes: 9 K π KSπ Clear signals seen Expect 1:2 M(4hadrons) (GeV/c2)

see talk by D. Cassel at this conference

7 K*(892) 10.6k events Observation of a broad 1– * K (1410) + - 0 X(1580) resonance in J/ψ→K K π

97 (2006) 142002 97 (2006) K*(892) Fit result Phys. Rev. Lett. Phys. Rev. and talk by J. Chen at this conference

C-parity cons: X should have JPC =1--, 3--, … 1-- component PWA results: ¾ Need K*(892), K*(1410), ρ(1700), X, non-res. J/ψ→π+π-π0 using rho excitations to describe signal doesn’t work ¾Big destructive interference among X, ρ(1700) and phase space Further check: K K+/-π-/+ (“hole” in the middle of the Dalitz plot) S ¾ 1– is much better than 3— Width(X) » 98 49 ++ 98 11 ++ 32 2 width(ρ(1450), ρ(1700)): ¾ Pole position of X 55 −− 91 − 12 −− 67 )i(409)(1576 MeV/c 0 + - +2.7 −4 ¾Br (J/ψ → π X,X )KK −3.6 ×±=→ 10)0.6(8.5 4-quark state? 8 BABAR-CONF-07/001, SLAC-PUB-12665 + − + - 0 γη S. Tosi, talk at this conference KSK π ,K K π c Production: B →ηc K(*), hc K(*) Goal: insight into production B0→(KKπ) K*0 + + mechanisms of B ⇒ cc, B →(γKKπ) K comparison btw different cc h η c b→ccs produces c J/ψ ηc, J/ψ (B~0.1%) and χc1 B~0.03-0.05% (and excitations) but not hc,χc0, χc2, need other mechanism

Prediction: hc,χc0, χc2 + K(*) as copious as χc1 + K(*) -4 Godwin et al., B0→(γKKπ) K*0 χc0 + K(*) ~ 10 9 PRD 51, 1125 m(KKπ(γ)) spectra after (1995) -5 subtraction of background hc χc2, hc + K(*): UL ~ 10 8 BaBar preliminary Uncertainty reduced by 0 -4 ηcK* (6.1 ±0.8 ± 0.8 ± 0.9) ×10 50% h K+ × c <5.2 -5 Confirms h confirms ×10 c h →ηγ Belle c c suppression *0 hcK × First limit <2.41 ×10-4 in B decays 9 hc→ηcγ Observed & Predicted States production of hadrons in e+e- scatt.

States not accessible in e+e- can be reached through transitions, in pp, or in DD γγ production – threshold a systematic approach to identify the missing states is needed.

Mass of charmonium states (GeV)

10 Re-analysis of BES R data and extraction of charmonium resonance parameters

[*] BES, arXiv:0705.4500 [hep-ex], subm to PLB Resonance properties:

Rres=RBW+Rint

Center-of-mass energy, GeV Substantial difference between fits with or without interference!

Resonance Interference shapes term 11 Contributions to the inclusive hadronic NEW DD cross-section at 4-5GeV Consistent with BaBar DD + 2× D*D* + 2× DD* + 2× DDπ = hep-ex/0607083 R

D*D*

Belle PRL 98, 092001 (2007) DD* at this conference NEW DDπ, talk not D(2010,2007) Center-of-mass energy, GeV CLEO preliminary, 60 pb-1 scan Cross section (nb) P. Pakhlov, P. Pakhlov,

M(DD/D*D*/DD*/DDπ) GeV What else is there: * charmonium production in the continuum,O(pb)

* Ds production * other DDnπ rates (non-resonant) 12 * Charm baryons Center-of-mass energy, GeV P. Pakhlov, talk at this conference Resonant structure in ψ(4415)→DDπ M(D0π+) vs M(D-π+) from ψ(4415) region D2*(2460) (D(2010,2007) vetoed) * Clear D 2(2460) signals Positive interference * Non D 2(2460) contribution smooth 1st exclusive decay mode of ψ(4415) ψ(4415) 673fb-1 DD* (2460) D2*(2460) M =4411± 7± 3 MeV 2 Γ = 77±20±12 MeV tot ~14σ Nev= 109±25±11 Consistent with * BES, hep-ex/0705.4500, DDπ not DD 2(2460) PDG06, Barnes at.al

PRD72,054026 (2005) Number of events

M(D0D-π+) GeV/c2

+ - * * σ(e e →ψ(4415))×Br(ψ(4415)→DD 2(2460))×Br(D 2(2460) →Dπ)=(0.74±0.17±0.07)nb

* Br(ψ(4415) → D(Dπ)non D2(2460))/Br(ψ(4415) →DD 2(2460))<0.213 Above DD threshold: Observed & Predicted States

X(4350) Y(4260) in ISR and e+e-

X(3940)→D*D in cc J/ψ, χ (Belle) Y(3940) in B→ ωJ/ψ c2’ BaBar: Talk by G. Cibinetto X(3872) CLEO: PRL 98, 092002 (2007) Many charmonium-like states found, most could not be identified with a charmonium state (or have been ruled out as conventional cc state) in order to claim new cc state, need to “prove” quantum numbers – angular distributions, decay modes, … Need systematic approach from several fronts 14 + - Reminder: J/ψ,ψ(2S)π π States Y(4260)→J/ψ π+π - seen in ISR Initial state radiation: by BaBar, e+ ππcc e-

Simplest fit Quantities of interest: CLEO, to peak Mass uses single

Breit- 2005/2006 Width Wigner Decay BR’s to different final Belle: shape, states and ratios multiple reonances M(ππ) distribution possible

J/ψ π+π-, Direct production at 3770, 4040, J/ψ π0π0, 4160, 4260 MeV: J/ψ K+K-, e+ ππcc e- and more CLEO PRL 96, 162003 (2006) 15 Belle arXiv:0707.2541v1, subm to PRL J/ψ+π+π- in Initial State Radiation 550/fb Quantities of interest:

+72 mass, width, coupling ±= −28 MeV404008M +87 Γ ±= −79 MeV44226 New fit to improve low-side description: two overlapping resonances and

+17 constructive / destructive interference ±= −26 MeV124247M +8 Γ ±= −10 MeV19108

Earlier results, single BW fit: Refs see end of talk Mass, MeV Width, MeV +8 BaBar 4259 -10 88±23 2 solutions reproduce CLEO 4284±17 73+39 the data (same m,Γ), but -25 B(Y(4260)→ππJ/ψ) ×Γ Belle old 4295 +14 133±26 ee -10 a factor of 3.5 apart! 16 Belle new 4263±6(st) 126±18(st) Belle arXiv:0707.2541v1, subm to PRL + - Fit input: assume two overlapping resonances (cont’d) J/ψ+π π in ⇒ 2 solutions reproduce the data (same m,Γ) Initial State Radiation B(Y(4260)→ππJ/ψ) ×Γee a factor of 3.5 apart! below 4.2-4.4 GeV above

+72 ±= −28 MeV404008M +87 Γ ±= −79 MeV44226

+17 ±= −26 MeV124247M +8 Γ ±= −10 MeV19108 BaBar ISR PRL 95, 142001 (2005) MC: Belle, BaBar: 3body phase space CLEO M(ππ) distribution direct CLEO: like PRL 96, 162003 (2006) distinctly different for ψ(2S)→ππJ/ψ Y(4260) signal region than for sidebands

M(ππ) (GeV) 17 + - ψ(2S)+π π in e+ ππcc e- Initial State Radiation ee→Y(4350)γ = ± ± 9MeV94361M Γ ±±= MeV155147 = ±114664M ± 5 MeV 22 22 Γ 1584 ±±= 3 MeV 10 10 5 5.8σ Events / 50MeV/cEvents / 50MeV/c Events / 50MeV/cEvents / 50MeV/c consistent 0 4 4.5 5 5 2 m(2( π + π -)J/ ψ) (GeV/c ) NEW

0 45678 m(2( π+π-)J/ ψ) (GeV/c 2 ) Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 212001 (2007)

18 Obtain J/ψ+D(*)D(*) + - (*) (*) samples through e e → J/ψ D D kinematic separation, c c D(*) (inferred, not rec’d) look at m(D(*)D(*)) J/ψ after background c reconstruct D or D* subtraction: Recoi c M = 3942 ±6 MeV l mass ing’s meth t Γtot =37 ±12 MeV So it’s no 3.8 σ , but here Nev= 52 ±11 40) X(39 -1 0) 693fb (394 J/ψ D: X ill is st e, DD* D*D* ther DD 6.0σ

M(DD) M(DD*) 0) (416 5.5 σ X : J/ψ D*: 940) claim X(3 new D*D* oss- ate Cr eck Number of events Number st ch D*D Number of events

M(D*D*) M(D*D) +25 M = 4156 - 20 ±15MeV +111 P. Pakhlov, Γtot = 37 -61 ±21MeV talk at this conference, 19 N = 24 +12 ev -8 G. Cibinetto, talk at this conference Confirmation of Y(3940) (B→KωJ/ψ) Belle PRL 94, 182002 (2005), 253/fb, >8σ π+π-π0 Unexplained state; mass and width compatible with radially excited P-wave cc state, but decay to hidden charm

B±→YK±

M=3943±11±13 MeV Γ=87±22±26 MeV preliminary 0 B →YKS New result, based on 350 fb-1:

B0/B± Belle’s evidence for B→YK, Y→J/ψω confirmed ¾ ~30MeV lower mass than Belle’s Isospin cons. ¾ Narrower width M(J/ψ ω) (GeV) ¾Preliminary BF estimate similar to Belle’s (~10-5) 20 General goal: Q=c,b Explore QCD phenomena at different scales q=u,d,s Overview ψ(2S) width Two heavy quarks J/ψ, χcJ decay to light q Q Q B decay to charmonium States above DD threshold Charmonium-like states

One heavy quark D (2536)+→D*+K0 Q q s1 S Ξc(3077), Ξc(3123)

Zero heavy quarks q q

This talk: mostly mesons, but many new results on baryons as well. See list of topics at the end. 21 + *+ 0 V. Balagura, Partial Wave Analysis of Ds1(2536) →D K S this conference

+ - M=2534.85±0.02±0.40 MeV 2 e e continuum Γ=1.03±0.05±0.12 MeV xP>0.8 N/0.3 MeV/c D BaBar, hep-ex/0607084 400 S -w -w a 5673±81 a ve ve events 200

D*K * M(D KS) 0 2500 2510 2520 2530 2540 2550 2560 *+ 0 2 M(D KS) MeV/c

+ Ds1(2536) : j=3/2 with small admixture of j=1/2 Energy release is small 0.08 → D-wave decay to D*KS is suppressed projections → j=1/2 can be visible 0.06 3-D fit results 0.04

S-wave 0.02 dominates 0 π/2 π 0 -1 0 1 -1 0 1 ρ00 – longitudinal polarization cosαβ cosγ χ2 difference between points and projected fit results corresponds to prob. 60% T. Schroeder, talk at this conference Excited charm-strange baryons + - - + - - + - - + Search: cs baryons →Λc + KS, K , K π , KSπ , KSπ π ,K π π Data 384 fb-1 preliminary

Ξ (2980)+ + a) c Ξc(3077) + Ξc(3055) +K ++ (2455) c Σ

+ ) Ξc(3123) Σ b) + Ξc(3077) )=m( +

π ++ + only observed in K intermediate decays –

c Σ +K c Λ ++ c and s split up.

Further results: (2520)

c + +,0

Σ confirmation of Ξc(2980) , Ξc(3077) via cut on m( + Ξc(2980) mass and width measurements improved M(Λ +K-π+) (GeV) c 23 General goal: Q=c,b Explore QCD phenomena at different scales q=u,d,s Overview ψ(2S) width Two heavy quarks J/ψ, χcJ decay to light q Q Q B decay to charmonium States above DD threshold Charmonium-like states

One heavy quark D (2536)+→D*+K0 Q q s1 S Ξc(3077), Ξc(3123) e tiv ba tur er a0,f0(980) -p on η,η’ mixing and glue in η’ N D Zero heavy quarks QC η mass q q η(’) decay K+-→ π+π−e+-ν, π+−π0π0, π±π0γ This talk: mostly mesons, but many new results on baryons as well. See list of topics at the end. 24 KLOE KLOE φ → π0π0γ Goal: Understand low-mass dimeson behavior; here: ππ,KK. Context: Low-mass broad ππ, Kπ systems are “everywhere”: The Dalitz plot: )

π+K/π scattering, K decay, D decay, … 2 ωπ0 “σ,κ” (low-mass ππ/Kπ S-wave), 0 (GeV a (980)→ηπ , 2 0 )

EPJ C49 (2007) 473 (2007) EPJ C49 + − 0 0 + - 0 0bar f0(980)→π π ,π π , K K , K K M(πγ Parameters? Nature? f Fit needs φ→σ(500)γ, 0 γ different parametrizations Result 1: tried; p(χ2)~10-4⇒14% Two fit models: An acceptable fit M(ππ)2 (GeV2) K π is obtained with f0 φ both models: Result 2: 2 - π P(χ )(KL)=14% Kaon Loop K K List of couplings π P(χ2)(NS)= 4% for both models

f0 Result 3: φ π 0 0 BR( φ → γf0 →ππ γ ) No Structure γ

+ - 0 -- Also see φ→γf0(980) →γπ π and φ→γa0(980) →γηπ KLOE results25 η/η’ mixing; gluon content in the η’

η signal (no bgd) η’ signal (~10% bgd) B(φ→ η’γ) / B(φ→ ηγ) = -3 (4.77 ±0.09stat. ±0.19syst)×10 Gives insight into η/η’ mixing. Assuming η’=uds only, no |gg>: ϕ =(41.4±0.3±0.7±0.6)o P M(6γ) M(6γ+π+π−) B(φ→ ηγ) =(1.301±0.024)% from PDG B(φ→ η’γ) = (6.20 ± 0.09 ±0.25 ) ×10-5 KLOE stat. syst. PLB648 (2007) 267

Now allow η’ to have |gg>: Mixes η,η’ Mixes gluonium into η’ Use SU(3) relations between modes involving π0,ω,ρ,η,η’ and measured branching ratios

to obtain X,Y,Z(η’) ⇒φG, ϕP

26 PLB648 (2007) 267 η’ gluonium content KLOE Gluonium coefficient: Fit results φ P=(39.7 ± 0.7tot)° 2 2 ° sin φG=Z =0.14 ± 0.04 |φ G| = (22 ± 3) 49% χ2 probability 1% χ2 probability Sin φG 0 Γ()η'→ργ Γ ω → π γ KLOE Rφ 0( ) KLOE Rφ

‘ Γ(η’→γγ)/Γ(π →γγ) Γ η'→γγ Γ π 0 →γγ () ' η ( ) 0 0 η Y Γ(ηΓ 'η→ργ)/Γ(ω→π'→ωγ Γ ω →γ)π γ ()( ) Y

Rφ Γ(η’→ωγ)/Γ(ω→π0γ) imposing Z=0

ϕP ϕP Xη‘ Xη‘

Bands – constraints from input branching fractions (depend on X,Y,Z(η’) ⇒φG, ϕP) 27 Invariant mass of η decay products: γγ CLEO ψ(2S)→ηJ/ψ η Mass

0 3π CLEO: M(η) =547.785 ± 0.017 ± 0.057 MeV arXiv:0707.1810 KLOE: M(η) = 547.822 ± 0.005 ± 0.069 MeV π+π-π0 preliminary

π+π-γ

M(CLEO) – M(PDG06) (MeV)

γγ KLOE φ→γη

28 M(γγ) (MeV) 58M K+ decays η(’) Branching φ η(’) Ratios (1) K- J/ψ η to undetectable final states: η(’) to γγ:

M(φ) η η’

η’ η 1760±49 72±13 UL, absolute: B(η → invisible) ×< 101.65 −3 ~0.1%) Missing momentum η → γγ)B( B()η → invisible' 58M J/ψ, ×< 106.69 −3 ~0.01% B(J/ψ→η(’)φ) = 7.4 (4.0) ×10-4 ()'B → γγη B(φ→K+K-) = 50% Other “invisible” BR measurements: BES PRL 97, 202002 (2006) ϒ(1S): <0.39% (CLEO) PRD 75, 031104 (2007) <0.29% (Belle) PRL 98, 132001 (2007) 29 Important as an input to total width measurements! η branching fractions (2) ℓ+ CLEO-c 27M decays J/ψ η Other ℓ- ψ(2S)

Fully reconstruct five final states: γγ + 3π0 + π+π-π0+ π+π−γ + e+e-γ R(CLEO) / R(Other) 38.5 34.0 22.6 4.0 0.9% Follow PDG procedure: sum of CLEO-c the above five modes is ~ 100% PDG ⇒ build absolute Br’s from ratios Global Fit

CLEO, arXiv:0707.1601

Γ(CLEO) / Γ(PDG06) 30 KLOE arXiv:0707.2355v1 η→π+π−π0 decay dynamics A good understanding of η→3π dynamics can in principle lead to a very accurate Measured matrix element: 6 determination of quark masses: Nobs=(1.377±0.001)×10 71 (2005) πη)3( ∝→Γ A 2 B/S ≈0.3% 1 Sopov, PRDSopov, Amplitude( 017501 u)t,s, ×∝ u)t,M(s, Q2 m − mˆ 22 (*) − 4m3s 2 Q2 = s , u)t,M(s, = π - ) 2 2 2 2 + -π d − mm u lowest order η − mm π Y= π fct(π0) fct( Current Algebra X= Fit result: B. V. Martemyanov, V. S. B. V. Martemyanov, Fit parameters: LOCA: b = a2/4 |A(X,Y)|2= 1+aY+bY2+cX+dX2+eXY+fY3 ⇒ Indicates need with X=fct(π+-π-), Y=fct(π0) for higher order corrections compared to (*)

31 Final state interactions K+/-→ π+/-π0π0 “One-loop” “Two-loop” ± ± π± ± π ± π ± introduces K 0 K 0 K - Prop. π π π π0 dependence 0 = 0 + + 0 π π π π to a0-a2 M M M on a2 in ampl. 0 1 ×103 120 Dalitz plot analysis. Look at M(π0π0): M1 not “cusp” structure at π+π− threshold 110k110 present (due to π+π− Æ π0π0 rescattering) NA48/2 provides a new method to measure 100k100 59.6 M events the ππ scattering lengths: a0 and a2 90k90 (χPT predictions exist) data preliminary 80k80 (a0–a2)m+=0.261±0.006stat.±0.003syst.±0.0013ext. π+π– threshold a2m+= –0.037±0.013stat.±0.009syst.± 0.0018ext. 70k70 Dominated by the theoretical uncertainties, 60 consistent with Ke4 measurement and with 0.0760.07650.076 0.077 0.077 0.0775 0.078 0.0780.0785 0.079 0.0790.0795 0.08 0.08 M2(π0π0), (GeV/c2)2 PLB 619, 50 (2005) 0 0 |a2-a0| from DIRAC (pionium lifetime). M(π π ) (GeV) Experimentally sensitive to higher-order terms in matrix element expansion G. Lamanna, talk at this conference

32 K+-→ π+π−e+-ν (Ke4) results Comparison with other Ke4 results Five independent kinematic variables, expansion in form

2 0 factors with spin-dependent a0 = fct(a0 ) This measurement: coefficients, model- independent determination of coefficients and phase shift btw L=0 and L=1, δ.

δ⇒a0 and a2 via theory a2 • 677500 K+ and K- Ke4 decays NA48/2 (preliminary results on partial statistics) • Ke4 Form factors measured with a precision within 5% to 15% A new level of sensitivity

G. Lamanna, talk at this conference

a0 General goal: Q=c,b Explore QCD phenomena at different scales q=u,d,s Summary ψ(2S) width Two heavy quarks J/ψ, χcJ decay to light q Q Q B decay to charmonium States above DD threshold Charmonium-like states

Many measurements on hadron spectroscopy and decay are arriving – Examples shown of new phenomena, systematic surveys, and precision studies – Especially overwhelming the amount of new unclassified states: Organize!!

Many thanks to my colleagues on BaBar, Belle, BES, CLEO, KLOE, NA48, …

35 Many more results Bottomonium: • CLEO bottomonium results: talk by H. Vogel at this conference

• CDF hb search: talk by A. Gessler at this conference Charmonium: • psi(2S) to gamma+light survey: BES, PRL99, 011802 (2007) • psi(2S) multibody survey: CLEO: PRL 95, 062001 (2005) • psi(3770) non-DDbar: CLEO, PRL 96, 032003 (2006), PRD 73, 012002 (2006) BES, C. Jiangchuan, talk at this conference • J/psi to light: BES, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 142002: gamma pipi PWA Y(4260): • BaBar: PRL 95, 142001 (2005), CLEO: PRD 74, 091104(R), Belle “old” prelim: hep-ex/0612006 X(3872): • X(3872) mass: BaBar, G. Cibinetto, talk at this conference • D0 mass: CLEO, PRL 98, 092002 (2007) Charm mesons: • BaBar: T. Schroeder, talk at this conference • Belle: B0bar -> D**+ pi-; (observation of D_0*) hep-ex/0611054 (acc by PRD) Open charm production: • Belle: e+e- -> D(*)D* cross-section (at sqrt(s) from threshold to ~5 GeV), PRL98, 092001 (2007) Baryons:

• Belle, Λc(2880) J^P and Λc(2940) -> Σc π; PRL 98, 262001 (2007) • Belle, Observation of Ξc(2980), Ξc(3077); PRL 97, 162001 (2006) • BaBar: T. Schroeder, talk at this conference

•D0: Λb lifetime, Ξb discovery: E. De La Cruz Burelo, talk at this conference Light scalars: 0 0 0 •KLOE: a0 Æ eta pi , f0 Æ pi pi shown at winter conferences Light resonances: • E. Fadeeva, talk at this conference NA48 36 • Radiative decays: M. Piccini, talk at this conference D. Ozerov, talk at this conference

Pentaquarks

BACKUP χcJ: masses, width, dominant decay modes Charmonium ψ(2S) →γχ reasonably well cJ States measured. Beginning to study substructure. ηc(2S): mass recently remeasured, width a moving target, M1 rates not measured, χc only one decay mode seen hc

hc: Newest member of E835 the family, seen in 0 hc ψ(2S) →π hc →γηc and in pp production, product BR measured. That’s it! ηc(1S): mass and width known to MeV’s, most ψ(2S),J/ψ: accessible in e+e-. urgent project: Masses, total width, dominant M1 transition decay modes well measured. rate J/ψ→γηc ηc ψ Studying BR’s in the range of <0.01%, and substructure. 38 PRL99, 011802 (2007) ψ(2S) →γ+ light hadrons

ψ(2S) to light hadrons, PDG07: BR(ψ(2S) → ggg + γgg) = 1– ππ,η,π0J/ψ– ΣM1,E1 = ~ 20% J/ψ: γgg/ ggg ~6% BR(ψ(2S) →γgg) ~ 1% Where are they? + − + -

BES: survey of γ+n(π π )+ m(K K ) Sum nowherenear1%...

All limits or meas’ts at 10-4..5

The corresponding list for the J/ψ is almost 50 0 + - + - entries long… Also included π +2(π π )[and K K ], rich resonant substructure 39 Study dependence of production rate on center-of-mass energy Open charm Eichten et al, PRD 21, 208 (1980) production in e+e-

CLEO inclusive: Multibody decays (D*Dπ, ...)

Decomposition of this cross- Two-body section? (DD, D*D, …) CLEO preliminary Measure yield of D/D*/DS/… e+e- →hadrons at ~4GeV combinations as function of Ecm

40 CLEO PRL 98, 092002 (2007) D0 mass measurement

PDG: M(D0)=1864.5±0.4MeV – average of LGW, MARK II, NA32 0 – Measured in D → Kπ, Kπππ 319±18evts -1 0 CLEO-c, 281pb , use D →KSφ: 0 – M(D )−M(φ)−M(KS)=347MeV – p(K), p(π) <600MeV range – Cross-check: M(ψ(2S)→ π+π−J/ψ)

+ + π KS φ K π- D0 K-

41 LQCD D+ D mass calculation

1.880 1.860 Ave (OUR FIT): 1866.91 ± 0.13 MeV LQCD arXiv:0706.1726 (hep-lat)

42 η,η': mixing and gluonium

The η , η' mesons wave function can be decomposed in the strangeness non strangeness base.

Comparing with other decay rates using SU(3) relations:

The gluonium coupling is neglected.

43 γγ η branching ratios, CLEO ℓ+ 0.12 J/ψ momentum, GeV 0.28 -1 cos θ (EHi) +1 0 J/ψ η 3π ℓ- ψ(2S) 27M ψ(2S), B(ψ(2S)→ηJ/ψ) = 3.1%, B(J/ψ→l+l-) = 12%, π+π-π0 Fully reconstruct five final states: γγ + 3π0 + π+π-π0+ π+π−γ + e+e-γ Constrain ℓ+, ℓ- ⇒J/ψ, constrain J/ψ, η products ⇒ψ(2S) π+π−γ Excellent data/MC agreement Measurement of ratios allow cancellation of systematics e+e-γ Follow PDG procedure: sum of the above five modes is ~ 100% 44 ⇒ build absolute Br’s from ratios Results and systematics KLOE

The result is dependent from the knowledge of the sqrt(s). Systematic table err./(tot. err) It is calibrated using the resonance curve of the φ→KS KL. Calorimeter calibration 1% Calorimeter linearity 1 % 2 m(φ) = 1019.483 ± 0.011 ± 0.025 MeV/c Vertex position 1 % CMD-2 Phys. Lett. B578, 285 PR Azimuthal dependence 18 % E Polar dependence 8 % M(π0) = ( 134990 ± 6 ± 30 ) keV LI Dalitz plot cut + corr. 67 % stat syst M M(π0) = ( 134976.6 ± 0.6 ) keV IN ΠΔΓ A RY M(η) = ( 547822 ± 5stat ± 69syst ) keV

NA48 compatibility: 0.24 σ Independent measurement with the η→π+π−π0 decay 2 mode in progress: mη= 547.95 ± 0.15 MeV/c (very preliminary fully in agreement with the γγ channel)

45 KLOE Cusp: two loops π± π± π± ± ± ± π K 0 K 0 K - π π π0 π π π π0 K± = + + 0 +... π0 π0 π+ π0 π π π M M0 M 10 1 2000 Including 2-loops diagrams other terms appear 1800 in the amplitude 1600 Cusp No All the S-wave amplitudes (5 terms) can be 1400 rescattering expressed as linear combination of a0 and a2 1200 The isosping breaking effect is taking in to 1000 Sub- account 800 Leading effect The radiative correction (most relevant near 600 threshold) are still missing 400 Leading A deviation from the no rescattering amplitude 200 effect behaviour appears also above threshold

0.0720 0.073 0.074 0.075 0.076 0.077 0.078 0.079 0.08 0.081 0.082 0.074 0.076 0.078 0.080 M2(π0π0), (GeV/c2)2 Cabibbo,Isidori JHEP 0503 (2005) 21

46 Κ± Æ π±π0γ: First measurement of direct emission contribution NA48/2

IB DE

IB INT DE Sensitive variable: •K±Æ π±π0π0 •K±Æ π±π0γ

* * * * P* = 4-momentum of the K± 2 (PK ⋅Pγ )(Pπ ⋅Pγ ) K P* = 4-momentum of the π± W = 2 π P* = 4-momentum of the γ (mkmπ ) γ

~124K events from 2003 data

Preliminary result:

Frac(DE)0 T*π 80 = (3.35 ± 0.35 ± 0.25)% < < MeV Correlation=-92%

Frac(INT)0

Final result (Phys.Lett.B650:1-8,2007): Preliminary result: BR(Ξ→Λee) = −−88 −6 BR=(1.27±0.14BR=(1.27±0.14stastatt±0.05±0.05syssys)·10)·10 7.7±0.5stat±0.4syst·10 48 α(Ξ→Λee)= −0.8 ± 0.2