Arxiv:2102.03694V2 [Hep-Ph]

Home , Bound state, Quarkonium

arXiv:2102.03694v2 [hep-ph] 12 May 2021 eiet[ periment ∗ dif- with out carried been have states meson [ bottom-strange decays weak and [ decays strong e reconstruction good a cross with production together huge beauty, its of to observed sections due be experiments to LHCb expected future are in mesons bottom-strange and Table tom in bottom-strang and collected bottom is excited mesons the about information tal the of erties resonances higher four 2015, In narrow excited orbitally low-lying two 2007, In et [ ments HbClaoainosre w structures two observed Collaboration LHCb and iny estl rge ceeada xeln momentum [ excellent resolution an mass and and scheme trigger versatile ciency, n erltr[ later year one inwe hycridotpeiemaueet fteprop- the of the measurements of precise erties out carried they when tion bevdi the in observed eeosre nthe in observed were eotdb h D olbrto n20 [ 2007 in Collaboration CDF the by reported bevtoso h otmadbto-tag eos[ mesons bottom-strange and bottom the of observations B B B B al [email protected] mail: 1 (5970) ∗ sJ s 2 nter,mn hoeia tde ftemse [ masses the of studies theoretical many theory, In ic 07 infiatpors a enmd nthe in made been has progress significant 2007, Since (5721) )KyLbrtr fLwDmninlQatmSrcue an Structures Quantum Low-Dimensional of Laboratory Key 3) 54) stefis rial excited orbitally first the as (5840), 61)i the in (6114) B ∗ s oad salsiga abundant an establishing Towards 2 5 54)wr ofimdb h 0adLC experi- LHCb and D0 the by confirmed were (5840) 0 , , 0 + 6 , + 2 .I 03 w ihrresonances higher two 2013, In ]. bandb h D olbrto.Rcnl,the Recently, Collaboration. CDF the by obtained ,adwr ofimdb h D experiment CDF the by confirmed were and ], B )Snrei noainCne o unu E Quantum for Center Innovation Synergetic 2) and B sinda h 1 the as assigned nrcn er.I sfudta i the (i) that found is It years. recent in togadrdaiedcypoete fthe of properties decay radiative and strong norgo ecitoso h asaddcypoete for properties decay and mass the of descriptions good our on arwsrcueaon 04MVosre nthe in observed MeV 6064 around structure narrow the 1 hyaems ieyt eosre nterdmnn ea ch decay numbers: PACS dominant their in observed be to likely most are they tutr bevda Hbmyb xlie ihtemxdst mixed the with explained be may LHCb at observed structure B B B 1 (5721) 3 J ( 2 ∗ s 24 D (1 | tmltdb h xiigpors neprmns ecarr we experiments, in progress exciting the by Stimulated (5747), 3 (5960) B D S B B .Tersrneanalogues, strange Their ]. 1 B π D – sJ + tt.Ms ftemsig1 missing the of Most state. 2 ∗ 43 2 ′ i nlsae yteCFClaoain[ Collaboration CDF the by states final .INTRODUCTION I. 23 60)rsnnedcyn into decaying resonance (6109) K (5747) with ) L 10 i 2 via ) 0 ,rdaiedcy [ decays radiative ], B − , , 0 + B π , ]. assetu [ spectrum mass + 45 and s 1 nlsae yteLC Collabora- LHCb the by states final 53)and (5830) ttsaecnitn ihtoeof those with consistent are states )Dprmn fPyis ua omlUiest,Changsh University, Normal Hunan Physics, of Department 1) J , 0 3 P , + S 46 B 3 = 1 D I 2 ∗ eeosre yteD ex- D0 the by observed were -1 oeadmr xie bot- excited more and More . o h xie otmand bottom excited the for ] (5747) 3 2 3 − B tt nthe in state D lhuhi ste1 the as it although , J 1 (5840) B iig rtepure the or mixing, ∗ s 0 2 , 54) egv ur oe lsicto o h ihmass high the for classification model quark a give we (5840), + B 9 tts[ states s .Mr experimen- More ]. 23 0 eos eealso were mesons, , + B 4 P iL,R-u i inHiZhong Xian-Hui Ni, Ru-Hui Li, Qi , .The ]. B and ,1 -, eo aiy lhuhi sapr 2 pure a as it although family, meson 26 (5970) B B 8 D – s sJ B 1 .Teprop- The ]. B 29 ,ad2 and -, ∗ 53)and (5830) 66)and (6064) + B J B B B K (5960) , 3 J s 54)rsnnemyb xlie stelwms ie state mixed mass low the as explained be may resonance (5840) D 0 − 42 11 1 B mesons and , n aosteasgmn ftehg as1 mass high the of assignment the favors and , (5830) + 3 B and ff – – tt antb xldd i)Terltvl broader relatively The (iv) excluded. be cannot state were (2 S csadApiain SCE) hnsa408,hn and 410081,China Changsha (SICQEA), Applications and ects 44 29 -wave ffi 3 7 1 0 S B B , ], ], ]. ]. unu oto fMnsr fEuain hnsa410081 Changsha Education, of Ministry of Control Quantum d + e - 1 s B s tt,or state, ) msnsae pt h eodobtlecttos Based excitations. orbital second the to up states -meson + pcrmu otescn ria excitations orbital second the to up spectrum K B − and - etwt hs rdcin nRf.[ Refs. in predictions those with ment e and GeV h uhr ute rdce hta h ate of partner the as assignment that this predicted on further Based authors model. the quark chiral a within erties ob the be to oetbiha abundant an establish to h asadwdho the of width and mass the rttoswt h ailyectdstate excited radially the with pretations hudb etoe htteeaen icsin bu the about It discussions no predictions. structures are observed model there recently that quark mentioned with be consistent should are width and hti e.[ Ref. in that rwt h eodobtlyexcited orbitally second the with or u td ycryn u obndaayi ftemasses the of analysis combined a out carrying by study our ( orbital second tts fqakmdl.Wiefrtenwyosre res- observed newly the for While onances models. quark of states) tt [ state eetmtos o h eletbihdstates established well the For methods. ferent aini o la.Teeaesm hoeia interpreta- theoretical some observed classifi- are newly There model the quark of clear. their tions not models, is quark cation various in tions n 1 and n otmsrnemsnsuycnb on nterecent the in found bottom be the [ can of work review study status meson the bottom-strange about and information More literature. lsiyte stefis ria xiain ie h 1 the (i.e. excitations orbital first the as them classify hyhv enrpre yteCFadLC experiments. the the LHCb since literature, and CDF properties, the the decay In by strong reported been and have masses they predicted the on B B B B assetu tLC a emil asdby caused mainly be may LHCb at spectrum mass (1 2 ∗ sJ sJ h xeietlpors rvdsu odopportunities good us provides progress experimental The (5747), 66)t ethe be to (6064) 61) lhuhte r odcniae fte2 the of candidates good are they although (6114), neswt agrdt apea LHCb. at sample data larger a with annels 3 B D B h o-yn eletbihdstates well-established low-lying the ate u obndaayi ftemse,and masses, the of analysis combined a out y B (2 D 40 s 3 (2 msnsae aearltvl arwwidth, narrow relatively a have states -meson [ ) wv ttsacrigt h assetu predic- spectrum mass the to according states -wave 1 / .Wiefrteresonance the for While ]. S B 1 structures S Γ B s 27 0 ( B 0 [ ) (1 | .(i The (ii) ). D S ≃ s , 3 47 1 3 S 48 27 53)and (5830) 31 0MV epciey hc r loi agree- in also are which respectively, MeV, 30 D i 1 ,orgopasge the assigned group our ], H L ]. 3 , ∗ or ] tt antb xldd ii The (iii) excluded. be cannot state i 2 via ) tt yaayigtesrn ea prop- decay strong the analyzing by state ) 28 101 China 410081, a = B , B J )ecttos nti okw deepen we work this In excitations. 2) B 39 (5840) B B s 3 (1 (1 J J S 57)rsnnemybe may resonance (5970) ,the ], 54)rsnnei xlie with explained is resonance (5840) B 3 3 1 -1 D D B B and ∗ s 1 3 3 s 2 0 D [ ) (1 tt,bt h esrdmass measured the both state, ) eoacsobserved resonances B 54) hr r opzlsto puzzles no are there (5840), , D + B 1 sJ B 3 , wv ie state mixed -wave 28 B J iig rapure a or mixing, D 66)and (6064) (2 54)and (5840) B s 3 .I hudb mentioned be should It ]. msnsetu pt the to up spectrum -meson 3 (5970) tt ih be might state ) B S B msnsae [ states -meson 1 27 J [ ) 57) hr r inter- are there (5970), B B , sJ 1 B 31 (5721), 28 B 0 (6114) (2 , + J ,o the or ], .I sinn the assigning If ]. , 57)resonance (5970) 3 B S B B sJ 1 J sJ [ ) 57)based (5970) 61)i the in (6114) 66) and (6064), 15 B M B 29 China , , B 1 J 25 P (5970), (5721), either ] ≃ (1 -wave , 3 6 39 D . 07 1 S ], ) , 2

+,0 +,0 TABLE I: Summary of the experimental information for the excited B- and Bs-meson states. The date for the B1(5721) , B2(5747) , 0 0 Bs1(5830) , and Bs2(5840) resonances are adopted the average values of the Review of Particle Physics (RPP) of Particle Data Group (PDG) [1]. The N and UN stand for the natural spin parity P = ( 1)J and unnatural spin parity P = ( 1)J . − − − Resonance JP Mass (MeV) Width (MeV) Observed channel Experiment 0 + + B1(5721) 1 5726.1 1.3 27.5 3.4 B∗ π− D0 [2],CDF [3],LHCb [8] + + ±+2.5 ± 0 + B1(5721) 1 5725.9 2.7 31 6 B∗ π D0 [2],CDF [3],LHCb [8] 0 + − ± + + B2(5747) 2 5739.5 0.7 24.2 1.7 B π−,B∗ π− D0 [2],CDF [3],LHCb [8] + + ± ± + + B2(5747) 2 5737.2 0.7 20 5 B π−,B∗ π− D0 [2],CDF [3],LHCb [8] + ± +30± 0 + 0 + BJ(5970) ? 5961 17 60 20 40 B π [or B∗ π ] CDF[7] 0 ± +−30 ± + + BJ(5970) ? 5978 17 70 20 30 B π− [or B∗ π−] CDF[7] + ± − ± 0 + Case A BJ(5960) UN 5964.9 6.8 63.0 31.7 B∗ π LHCb [8] 0 ± ± + BJ(5960) UN 5969.2 8.2 82.3 17.1 B∗ π− LHCb [8] + ± ± 0 + BJ(5840) UN 5850.3 26.6 224.4 103.7 B∗ π LHCb [8] 0 ± ± + BJ(5840) UN 5862.9 11.9 127.4 50.9 B∗ π− LHCb [8] + ± ± 0 + Case B BJ(5960) UN 6010.6 7.1 61.4 31.7 B∗ π LHCb [8] 0 ± ± + BJ(5960) UN 6015.9 9.2 81.6 19.3 B∗ π− LHCb [8] + ± ± 0 + 0 + BJ(5840) N 5874.5 39.6 214.6 106.5 B∗ π , B π ? LHCb[8] 0 ± ± + + BJ(5840) N 5889.7 29.1 107.0 53.8 B∗ π−, B π−? LHCb[8] + ± ± 0 + 0 + Case C BJ(5960) N 5966.4 7.2 60.8 31.2 B∗ π , B π ? LHCb[8] 0 ± ± + + BJ(5960) N 5993.6 11.7 55.9 16.0 B∗ π−, B π−? LHCb[8] + ± ± 0 + BJ(5840) UN 5889.3 29.3 229.3 104.7 B∗ π LHCb [8] 0 ± ± + BJ(5840) UN 5907.8 13.0 119.4 51.4 B∗ π− LHCb [8] 0 + ± ± + 0 0 Bs1(5830) 1 5828.70 0.20 0.5 0.3 0.3 B∗ K−, B∗ K CDF [4],D0 [6], LHCb [5] 0 + ± ± ± Bs2(5840) 2 5839.86 0.12 1.49 0.27 B∗K, BK CDF [4], D0 [6],LHCb [5] 0 ± ± + BsJ(6064) ? 6063.5 2.0 26 4 4 B K− LHCb [9] 0 ± ± ± + [or BsJ (6109) ] ? [or 6108.8 1.8] [or 22 5 4] [or B∗ K−] LHCb[9] 0 ± ± ± + BsJ(6114) ? 6114 8 66 18 21 B K− LHCb [9] 0 ± ± ± + [or B (6158) ] ? [or 6158 9] [or 72 18 25] [or B∗ K−] LHCb[9] sJ ± ± ± and decay properties of the B and B -meson states up to the s TABLE II: The parameters of the nonrelativistic potential model. L = 2 excitations. First, we calculate the mass spectrum of B and Bs mesons within a nonrelativistic potential model. BBs With this model the masses for the observed B and Bs-meson mb (GeV) 4.852 4.852 m (GeV) 0.450 states can be described successfully. Then, with the avail- u,d ··· able wave functions from the potential model, we calculate ms (GeV) 0.600 α 0.564··· 0.550 the OZI-allowed two-body strong decays of the excited B and σ (GeV) 0.98 1.06 Bs mesons with a chiral quark model [49–52]. This model b (GeV2) 0.120 0.120 has been successfully applied to describe the strong decays of C (GeV) 0.2537 0.2318 0 − − the heavy-light mesons and baryons [24, 47, 53–64]. To pro- rc (fm ) 0.337 0.292 vide more knowledge for the excited B and Bs meson states, we also evaluate the their electromagnetic (EM) transitions within a nonrelativistic constituent quark model [50–52, 65– 71]. This model has also been successfully applied to describe II. MASS SPECTRUM the radiative decays of baryon states [60–64, 72, 73] and meson systems [74–78]. Based on our good descriptions of the To describe the bottom and bottom-strange meson spec- mass and decay properties for the low-lying well-established tra, we adopt a nonrelativistic linear potential model. In this 0,+ 0,+ states B1(5721) , B2∗(5747) , Bs1(5830) and B∗s2(5840), we model, the effective potential is adopted as [79–82] give our quark model classifications of the high mass res- 0,+ 0,+ onances/structures BJ(5840) , B(5970) , BsJ(6064), and V(r) = V0(r) + Vsd(r), (1) BsJ(6114). Finally, according to our assignments for the newly observed resonances, we attempt to predict the proper- where ties of the missing resonances, which may be useful for future 4 αs investigations in experiments. V0(r) = + br + C0 (2) −3 r This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, the mass includes the standard color Coulomb interaction and linear spectrum is calculated within a non-relativistic linear potential confinement, and zero point energy C0. The spin-dependent model. In Sec. III, a brief review of the chiral quark model is part Vsd(r) can be expressed as [81–83] given. The numerical results are presented and discussed in Sec. IV. Finally, a summary is given in Sec. V. Vsd(r) = HS S + HT + HLS , (3) 3

TABLE III: The predicted bottom meson masses (MeV) compared with the data and some other model predictions. The mixing angle of 3 1 3 1 NR R 1 P1 1 P1 and 1 D2 1 D2 obtained in present work are θ1P = 35.2◦, and θ1D = 39.5◦. In the table, βeff and βeff stand for the effective− harmonic oscillator− parameters (GeV) of our nonrelativistic− quark model calculations− and those with the relativized quark model C calculations [26], respectively, while βeff stands for our results including relativistic corrections of the length contraction effects. P NR C R State J βeff βeff βeff [26] Ours KDR[13] EFG[14] LPW[27] LL[15] GI[26] AMS[28] PE[24] Exp. [1] 1 B(1 S 0) 0− 0.444 0.628 0.580 5279(fitted) 5287 5280 5280 5273 5312 5268 5279 5280 3 B(1 S 1) 1− 0.418 0.575 0.542 5325(fitted) 5323 5326 5329 5329 5371 5329 5324 5325 3 + B(1 P0) 0 0.367 0.525 0.536 5722 5730 5749 5683 5776 5756 5704 5706 + ··· B(1P1) 1 0.348 0.487 0.511 5716 5733 5723 5729 5719 5784 5739 5700 5698 + B(1P1′ ) 1 0.348 0.487 0.499 5753(fitted) 5752 5744 5754 5837 5777 5755 5742 5726 3 + B(1 P2) 2 0.334 0.460 0.472 5727(fitted) 5740 5741 5768 5739 5797 5769 5714 5740 1 B(2 S 0) 0− 0.327 0.472 0.477 5876 5926 5890 5910 5957 5904 5877 5886 5863 3 B(2 S 1) 1− 0.320 0.458 0.468 5899 5947 5906 5939 5997 5933 5905 5920 3 ··· B(1 D ) 1− 0.316 0.453 0.488 6056 6016 6119 6095 6143 6110 6022 6025 1 ··· B(1D ) 2− 0.312 0.445 0.463 5973 6031 6103 6004 5993 6095 6026 5985 2 ··· B(1D2′ ) 2− 0.312 0.445 0.469 6067 6065 6121 6113 6165 6124 6031 6037 3 ··· B(1 D3) 3− 0.312 0.445 0.444 5979 6016 6091 6014 6004 6106 6031 5993 5971

TABLE IV: The predicted bottom-strange meson masses (MeV) compared with the data and some other model predictions. The mixing angle 3 1 3 1 NR R of 1 P1 1 P1 and 1 D2 1 D2 obtained in present work are θ1P = 39.6◦, and θ1D = 39.9◦. In the table, βeff and βeff stand for the eﬀective harmonic− oscillator parameters− (GeV) obtained from our nonrelativistic− quark model− calculations and those with the relativized quark model C calculations [26], respectively, while βeff stands for our results including relativistic corrections of the length contraction eﬀects.

P NR C R State J βeff βeff βeff [26] Ours KDR[13] EFG[14] ZVR[12] LPW[27] AMS[28] GI[26] PE[24] Exp. 1 Bs(1 S 0) 0− 0.507 0.681 0.636 5367(fitted) 5367 5372 5370 5362 5377 5394 5373 5367 [1] 3 Bs(1 S 1) 1− 0.475 0.621 0.595 5415(fitted) 5413 5414 5430 5413 5422 5450 5421 5416 [1] 1 Bs(2 S 0) 0− 0.363 0.490 0.508 5944 6003 5976 5930 5977 5929 5984 5985 3 ··· Bs(2 S 1) 1− 0.356 0.465 0.497 5966 6029 5992 5970 6003 5949 6012 6019 3 + ··· Bs(1 P0) 0 0.408 0.549 0.563 5788 5812 5833 5750 5756 5770 5831 5804 + ··· Bs(1P1) 1 0.387 0.509 0.538 5810 5828 5831 5790 5801 5801 5857 5805 + ··· Bs(1P1′ ) 1 0.387 0.509 0.528 5821(fitted) 5842 5865 5800 5836 5803 5861 5842 5829 [1] 3 + Bs(1 P2) 2 0.369 0.477 0.504 5821(fitted) 5840 5842 5820 5851 5822 5876 5820 5840 [1] 3 Bs(1 D1) 1− 0.351 0.472 0.504 6101 6119 6209 6070 6142 6057 6182 6127 6114 [9] B (1D ) 2− 0.344 0.459 0.487 6061 6128 6189 6070 6087 6059 6169 6095 s 2 ··· Bs(1D2′ ) 2− 0.344 0.459 0.482 6113 6157 6218 6080 6159 6064 6196 6140 6109 [9] 3 Bs(1 D3) 3− 0.340 0.451 0.467 6067 6172 6191 6080 6096 6063 6179 6103 6064 [9]

where with

32πα S+ L 1 1 4 αs b 8αs s ˜ H = + + , HS S = δσ(r)Sq Sq¯ (4) sym · 2 2 3 3 (7) 9m m · 2 2m 2m  3 r − r ! 3mqmq¯r  q q¯  q¯ q      S L  1 1  4 αs b  H = − . is the spin-spin contact hyperfine potential. Here, we take anti · 2 2 3 (8) 2 2 2 2m − 2m  3 r − r ! ˜ 3 σ r  q q¯  δσ(r) = (σ/ √π) e− as suggested in Ref. [79]. The ten-     sor potential HT is adopted as In these equations, L is the relative orbital angular momentum of the qq¯ system; Sq and Sq¯ are the spins of the quark q and 4 α 1 H = s S , antiquarkq ¯, respectively, and S Sq Sq¯; mq and mq¯ are the T 3 T (5) ± ≡ ± 3 mqmq¯ r masses of quark q and antiquarkq ¯, respectively; αs is the run- ning coupling constant of QCD; and r is the distance between 3S rS r the quark q and antiquarkq ¯. The six parameters in the above q· q¯· with S T = r2 Sq Sq¯ . − · potentials (αs, b, σ, mq, mq¯, C0) are determined by fitting the The spin-orbit interaction HLS can be decomposed into mass spectrum. symmetric part Hsym and antisymmetric part Hanti: It should be emphasized that when mq , mq¯, the antisymmetric part of the spin-orbit potential, Hanti, can cause a con- 3 HLS = Hsym + Hanti, (6) figuration mixing between spin triplet n LJ and spin singlet 4

1 n LJ. Thus, the physical states nLJ and nL′J are expressed as

1 1.25 3

nLJ cos θnL sin θnL n LJ radial wave f unction of B(1 P ) = 3 . (9) 0 nL′J ! sin θnL cos θnL ! n LJ ! − W ithout corrections of H'

1.00

W ith corrections of H' where J = L = 1, 2, 3 , and the θnL is the mixing angle. In ··· this work nL′J corresponds to the higher mass mixed state as ) 0.75 often adopted in the literature. -1/2

In this work, we solve the radial Schr¨odinger equation by (fm using the three-point diﬀerence central method [84] from cen- (r) 0.50 tral (r = 0) towards outside (r ) point by point. This → ∞ method was successfully to deal with the spectroscopies of 0.25 cc¯, bb¯, bc¯ and ss¯ [76–78, 85, 86]. To overcome the singular 3

behavior of 1/r in the spin-dependent potentials, following 0.00 the method of our previous works [76–78, 85, 86], we intro- 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 duce a cutoff distance rc in the calculation. Within a small r (fm) 3 3 range r (0, rc),welet 1/r = 1/rc . By introducing the cutoff 3 ∈ FIG. 1: The radial wave function ψ(r) of the B(1 P0) state. The solid distance rc, we can nonperturbatively include the corrections 3 and dashed lines stand for the wave functions with and without cor- from these spin-dependent potentials containing 1/r to both 3 rections from the perturbation term H′ containing 1/r , respectively. the mass and wave functionof a meson state, which are crucial for our predicting the decay properties. The model parameters adopted in this work are listed in Ta- ble II. To be consistent with our previous study [64, 78, 85, main part of the Hamiltonian without singular 1/r3 term con- 86], the bottom quark mass mb, the light up or down quark tributions, i.e., mass mu/d, the strange quark mass ms are taken from the deter- 2 minations, i.e., m = 4.852 GeV, m = 0.45 GeV, m = 0.60 P 32παs b u/d s H0 = + V0(r) + δ˜σ(r) Sq Sq¯ GeV. The other four parameters (αs, b, σ, C0) for the bottom 2µ 9mqmq¯ h · i meson sector, they are determined by fitting the masses of S+ L 1 1 b + h · i + , (10) the well established states B(5279), B∗(5325), B1(5721) and  2 2   2 2mq¯ 2mq − r ! B∗(5747), while for the bottom-strange meson sector, they are    2    determined by fitting the masses of the well established states P2    where 2µ is the kinetic energy term with a reduced mass µ = Bs(5367), B∗s(5415), Bs1(5830) and B∗s2(5840). It should be C mqmq¯/(mq + mq¯); while H′ is the perturbation part containing pointed out that the zero-point-energyparameter 0 is taken to 3 be zero for the cc¯, bb¯, bc¯ heavy quarkonium systems in the lit- 1/r terms, i.e., erature [76–78, 85]. For these heavy quarkoniumsystems, the S+ L 1 1 4 αs 8αs zero point energy can be absorbed into the constituent quark H′ = h · i + + 2  2 2  3 3 3  masses because it only affects the heavy quark masses slightly. 2mq¯ 2mq r ! 3mqmq¯r    However, if the zero point energy is absorbed into the meson 4 α 1   + s    3 S T . (11) systems containing light quarks, it can significantly change 3 mqmq¯ r h i the light constituent quark masses, which play an important 3 role in the spin-dependent potentials. Thus, to obtain a good For a 1 P0 state, one can easily obtain the matrix elements description of both the masses and the hyperfine/fine splittings Sq Sq = 1/4, S+ L = 2, and S T = 1 by us- h · ¯i h · i − h i − for the meson systems containing light quarks, a zero-point- ing the relations Sq Sq¯ = S (S + 1)/2 3/4, S+ L = h · i − h · i2 energy parameter C0 is usually adopted in the calculations. [J(J + 1) L(L + 1) S (S + 1)]/2, and S T = [6 S+ L + − 2 2 − h i − h · i Finally, we need determine the cutoff distance rc in our cal- 3 S+ L 2L S+ ]/[2(2L 1)(2L + 3)]. By solving the ra- 3 h · i− − (0) (0) culations. It is found that the masses of the 1 P0 states are dial Schrödinger equation of H0ψ (r) = E0ψ (r) with the more sensitive to the cutoff distance rc. The reason is that the three-point difference central method, we work out the eigen 3 3 3 singular terms of 1/r in the spin-dependent potentials have energies E0 = 508, 415 MeV for the B(1 P0) and Bs(1 P0) 3 (0) more effects on the mass of the 1 P0 state due to its rela- states as well as their zero order radial wave functions ψ (r). tively larger factors of S+ L and S T than the other ex- Using these zero order wave functions, we further work out h · i h i (0) (0) cited meson states. Thus, in the present work, we determine the perturbation energies ψ (r) H′ ψ (r) = 88, 79 MeV 3 3 3 3h | | i − − the rc by fitting the masses of the B(1 P0) and Bs(1 P0) states. for the B(1 P0) and Bs(1 P0) states, respectively. Finally, with (0) (0) Note that when the other parameters are well determined, the the relation M = mq + mq¯ + E0 + ψ (r) H′ ψ (r) we predict 3 h | 3| i 3 masses of these 1 P0 states can be reliably worked out with the masses 5722 and 5788 MeV for B(1 P0) and Bs(1 P0), the perturbation method without introducing the cutoff dis- respectively. These masses calculated with the perturbation tance rc, although the wave functions obtain no corrections method are in good agreementwith the predictionsin the liter- 3 from the spin-dependent potentials containing 1/r . To cal- ature [12–14, 24, 28]. Within a small range r (0, rc), letting 3 3 3 3 ∈ culate the masses of the B(1 P0) and Bs(1 P0) states with the 1/r = 1/rc in the perturbation Hamiltonian H′, we solve the perturbation method, we let H = H0 + H′, where H0 is the radial Schrödinger equation (H0 + H′)ψ(r) = Eψ(r) with the 5

6300 6300

B spectrum B spectrum

6200 6200

B (6114) 6113

6100

6067 6100 6067

6056 6061

B (6109) 6101

5979 5973 6000 B (5970) 6000

5966 J

5944

5899

5876 5900 B (5840) 5900

5810

5788

5800 5800 5821 5821

5753

5722 Mass (MeV) Mass

5716

5727

5700 5700

5600 5600

5500 5500

5415

5400

5400 5367

5325

5279

5300 5300

- - + P + + + - - - - P - - + + + + - - - - 1 0 1 0 1 2 1 2 2 3 J 1 J 0 1 0 1 2 1 2 2 3

1 2S+1 3 3 1 3 3 3 2S+1 3 3 3 3 3 S L P S P' D' P P D D S D P L S P' D' 0 P P D D D 1 J 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 J 0 2 2 1 3

FIG. 2: The predicted mass spectra of B and Bs mesons. The solid circles stand for the measured masses obtained from the Particle Data Group [1] and the recent LHCb measurements [9].

three-point difference central method again. By reproducing III. STRONG AND RADIATIVE DECAYS 3 3 the masses 5722 and 5788 MeV of the B(1 P0) and Bs(1 P0) states obtained with the perturbation method, we determine A. Models the cutoff distance parameters rc = 0.337 and 0.292 fm for the B and Bs mass spectra, respectively. The corrections of We calculate the strong decays of the bottom and bottom- the perturbation part H′ to the radial wave function ψ(r) can strange mesons with the chiral quark model [49–52]. In ff be convenientlyincluded by introducing the cuto distance rc. this model, the light pseudoscalar mesons, i.e. π, K and η, As an example, in Fig. 1 we plot the radial wave functions of 3 are treated as fundamental states. The low energy quark- the B(1 P0) state with and without the corrections from the 3 pseudoscalar-meson and quark-vector-meson interactions in perturbation part H′ containing 1/r . It is seen that the per- the SU(3) flavor basis are described by the effective La- turbation term H′ has an obvious correction to the radial wave grangian function. 1 µ Hm = ψ¯ jγµγ ψ j~τ ∂ φ~m, (12) With the determined model parameters listed in Table II, by f 5 · solving the radial Schrödinger equation we obtain the masses Xj m of the bottom and bottom-strange meson states, which have where ψ j represents the jth quark field in the hadron, φm is been listed in Tab. III and Tab. IV, respectively. For compar- the pseudoscalar meson field, fm is the pseudoscalar meson ison, some other model predictions in Refs. [12–15, 24, 26– decay constant. The nonrelativistic form of Eq. (12) is given 28] and the data from the Review of Particle Physics (RPP) of by [50–52] Particle Data Group (PDG) [1] are listed in the same table as well. Furthermore, for a clarity, the spectra are also shown in Hm = Aσ j q + hσ j p I jϕm, (13) · · j Fig. 2. It is shown that the BJ(5970) resonance and the struc- Xj h i tures BsJ(6064) and BsJ(6114) newly observed at LHCb can be explained as the 1D-wave states from the point of view of in the center-of-mass system of the initial meson, where we ω ω the mass, while the B (5840) may be a good candidate of the have defined A (1 + m ) and h m . In Eq.(13), J ≡ − E f +M f ≡ 2µq 2S -wave state. q and ωm are the three-vector momentum and energy of the 6

final-state light meson, respectively; p j is the internal momen- where J f z,Jiz and J f z,Jiz correspond to the strong and radia- tum operator of the jth quark in the heavy-light meson rest tive transitionM amplitudes,A respectively. The quantum num- frame; σ j is the spin operator corresponding to the jth quark bers Jiz and J fz stand for the third components of the total of the heavy-light system; and µq is a reduced mass given by angular momenta of the initial and final hadron states, respec- 1/µq = 1/m j + 1/m′j with m j and m′j for the masses of the jth tively. δ as a global parameter accounts for the strength of the quark in the initial and final mesons, respectively. The plane quark-meson couplings. It has been determined in our pre- iq r wave part of the emitted light meson is ϕm = e− · j , and I j vious study of the strong decays of the charmed baryons and is the flavor operator defined for the transitions in the SU(3) heavy-light mesons [55, 56]. Here, we fix its value the same flavor space. The chiral quark model has been successfully ap- as that in Refs. [55, 56], i.e. δ = 0.557. plied to describe the strong decays of the heavy-light mesons and baryons [24, 47, 53–59]. The details of this model can be found in Refs. [55, 56]. It should be mentioned that the chiral B. Parameters quark model is similar to the pseudoscalar emission model in the literature [11, 87, 88]. The nonrelativistic form of quark- In the calculation, the constituent quark masses for the u, d, pseudoscalar-meson interactions expressed in Eq. (13) is sim- and s quarks are taken with mu = md = 450 MeV and ms = ilar to that of the pseudoscalar emission model, except that 600 MeV to be consistent with the spectrum study in Sec. II. ωm ωm the factors A (1 + ) and h in this work have an The decay constants for π, K and η mesons are taken as fπ = ≡− E f +M f ≡ 2µq explicit dependence on the energies of final hadrons. 132 MeV, fK = fη = 160 MeV, respectively. The masses of Meanwhile, to treat the radiative decay of a hadron we the well established hadrons involving in the calculations are apply the constituent quark model [50–52, 65–71]. In this adopted from the PDG [1]. The masses of the missing B- and model, the quark-photon EM coupling at the tree level is Bs-meson states are adopted our determinationsby solving the adopted as Schröinger equation in Sec. II. It shouldbe mentionedthat, we do not directly adoptthe nu- j µ He = e jψ¯ jγ A (k, r j)ψ j, (14) merical wave functions of B- and Bs-meson states calculated − µ Xj by solving the Schröinger equation. For simplicity, we first fit them with a simple harmonic oscillator wave function by re- µ where A represents the photon field with three-momentum k. producing the root-mean-square radius r2 . The obtained e j and r j stand for the charge and coordinateof the constituent h i effective harmonic oscillator parameterspβe f f for the meson quark ψ j, respectively. In the initial-hadron-rest system, in- states are listed in Tab. III and Tab. IV. It is found that the ef- cluding the effects of the binding potential between quarks, fective harmonic oscillator parameters βNR obtained from our the nonrelativistic form of the quark-photon EM coupling can e f f nonrelativistic quark model calculations are obviously smaller be written as [50–52, 65, 68–71] R than the parameters βe f f obtained from the relativized quark e models [26]. It indicates that the relativistic effects of the nr ǫ j σ ǫ ˆ He = e jr j j ( k) ϕγ, (15) length contraction on the wave function may be important. " · − 2m · × # Xj j To take into account the relativistic effects, as that suggested in Ref. [91] we introduce the Lorentz boost factor γ in the where σ stand for the Pauli spin vector for the jth quark. The j spatial wave function, i.e., vector ǫ is the polarization vector of the photon. The plane ik r j wave part of the emitted light meson is ϕγ = e− · . The first ψnlm(r) ψnlm(γr), (18) and second terms in Eq.(15) are responsible for the electric → and magnetic transitions, respectively. The second term in where γ = Mq/Eq. Mq and Eq correspond to the effec- Eq.(15) is the same as that used in Refs. [11, 87–90], while tive mass and energy of the light quark, respectively. Ac- the first term in Eq.(15) is different from (1/m j)p j ǫ of these cording to Ref. [92], the effective mass Mq can be estimated · ff 2 2 works due to the binding potential e ects are included [65]. by Mq = p + m , while the energy Eq is estimated by h i q This model has been successfully applied to describe the ra- 2q diative decays of baryon states [60–64, 72, 73] and meson sys- Eq = p /(2Mq) + Mq. To realize this transformation, we h i βNR tems [74–78]. only need replace e f f in the harmonic oscillator wave func- C NR For a strong decay process, the partial decay width is cal- tion with βe f f = γβe f f . Theeffective harmonic oscillator pa- C culated with [55, 56] rameters βe f f including relativistic corrections of the length 2 contraction are given in Tab. III and Tab. IV as well. It is δ (E f + M f ) q 2 C found that the βe f f values are comparable with those obtained Γm = | | J f z,Jiz , (16) fm ! 4πMi(2Ji + 1) |M | JXf z,Jiz with the relativized quark models [26]. In Refs.[47, 55], the strong decays of the heavy-light meson states are studied with while for a radiative decay process, the partial decay width is the chiral quark model by using the simple harmonic oscil- calculated with [76, 77] lator wave functions with fixed harmonic oscillator parameters β = 468, 466 MeV for the B and Bs spectra, respectively, 2 k 2 M f C 2 which are close to the parameters βe f f determined for the 1P-, Γγ = | | J f z,Jiz , (17) π 2Ji + 1 Mi |A | C JXf z,Jiz 1D-and2S -wave states in present work. The parameters βe f f 7

1 3 exp exp of the ground states 1 S 0 and 1 S 1 are notably lager than that R1 = 0.71 0.14 0.30 and R2 = 1.0 0.5 0.8[8] and of the excited states, this effect is mainly caused by the strong the predictions± in Refs.± [25, 27, 28, 31–33,±40, 42±]. color Coulomb interaction at the small distance r between two We further study the radiative decay processes of +,0 +,0 quarks. B2∗(5747) B∗ γ. Their partial decay widths are pre- C 1 → The effective parameters βe f f of the ground states B(1 S 0) dicted to be and B (13S ) are crucial for understanding the decay prop- ∗ 1 Γ[B (5747)0 B 0γ] = 51 keV, (21) erties of the excited B and B states because all of the ex- 2∗ ∗ s + → + cited states should decay into these ground states. Consider- Γ[B2∗(5747) B∗ γ] = 146 keV, (22) C → ing the uncertainty of the parameters βe f f of the ground states 1 3 C which are in good agreement with the predictions in Ref. [42], B(1 S 0) and B∗(1 S 1), we properly adjust their βe f f parame- however, notably smaller than the predictions in Refs. [26– ters to more reasonably describe the strong decay propertiesof 29, 43]. The radiative decay branching fractions can reach 0 the well established 1P-wave states B∗(5747) and B∗ (5840). 3 +,0 +,0 2 s2 up to (10− ), thus radiative decays of B2∗(5747) B∗ γ 1 = O → In this work, we determine them to be βB(1 S 0) 0.537 GeV might be observed in future experiments. 1 3 and β 3 = 0.510 GeV for B(1 S ) and B (1 S ), respec- 3 B∗(1 S 1) 0 ∗ 1 In the Bs meson sector, as the 1 P2 state both the mass and tively. There is about a 10% correction to the effective param- width of B∗ (5840) can be well reproducedin the quark model C s2 eters βe f f . as well. Our fitted mass M 5821 MeV and width Γ 1.3 ≃ ≃ With above parameters, our calculated decay properties for MeV are compatible with the measured mass Mexp = 5840 the 1P-, 2S -, and 1D-wave states are listed in Tables V, VI, MeV and width Γexp = (1.49 0.27) MeV. There are two OZI ± and VII, respectively. From Table V, it is found that the de- allowed two-body strong decay channels BK and B∗K. The cay properties of the well-established 1P-wave state can be BK mode governs the decays of B∗s2(5840). The ideal partial successfully described. width ratio between B∗K and BK is fitted to be + Γ[B∗ (5840) B∗ K−] R = s2 → 8.7%, (23) IV. DISCUSSION Γ[B (5840) B+K ] ≈ ∗s2 → − which is in good agreement with the recent LHCb measured A. 1P-wave states one Rexp = (9.3 2.5)% [5] and the predictions in the literature [25, 27–29, ±38]. Two 1P-wave excited B meson states B (5721) and 0 1 Furthermore, it is found that B∗ (5840) has a large decay +,0 s2 B∗(5747) together with their flavor partners Bs1(5830) and 2 rate into B∗sγ, the partial width and branching fraction are pre- 0 B∗s2(5840) in the Bs-meson family have been well-established dicted to be in experiments [1]. However, two resonances with JP = 0+, 3 3 P + 0 0 B(1 P ) and B (1 P ), and two resonances with J = 1 , Γ[B∗ (5840) B∗s γ] 51 keV, (24) 0 s 0 s2 → ≃ B(P1) and Bs(P1), predicted in the quark model are still miss- 0 0 Br[B∗s2(5840) B∗s γ] 3.4%. (25) ing. → ≃ Our predicted radiative partial decay width is consistent with those predictions in Refs. [42, 43]. In the literature, a larger 3 0 0 1. 1 P2 states partial width Γ[B∗s2(5840) B∗s γ] 100 230 keV is pre- 0 → ≃ − 0 dicted [26–28]. The B∗s γ decay channel of B∗s2(5840) may +,0 have good potentials to be observed in future experiments. There are no puzzles to assign the B2∗(5747) and 0 3 B∗s2(5840) resonances to the 1 P2 states in the B and Bs families, respectively. 3 3 2. 1 P0 states In the B meson sector, as the 1 P2 state both the mass and width of B∗(5747) can be resonantly reproduced in the quark 2 3 model. Our fitted mass M 5727 MeV and width Γ 31 The 1 P0 states in the B and Bs families are still missing ≃ ≃ MeV are compatible with the measurements Mexp = 5737 experimentally. In the B meson sector, we predict that the + 3 MeV and width Γexp = (20 5) MeV for B (5747) . This mass of the B(1 P0) state is 5722 MeV, which is consistent ± 2∗ state dominantly decays into Bπ and B∗π channels with com- with those predictions in Refs. [13, 14, 17, 24, 26, 28]. The parable partial widths. The ideal partial width ratios between Bπ channel is the only OZI-allowed two body decay chan- +,0 nel. Taking the estimated mass M = 5722 MeV, we obtain Bπ and B∗π channels for the B2∗(5747) are fitted to be a broad width Γ 290 MeV for the B(13P ) state, which ≃ 0 Γ[B (5747)0 B +π ] is compatible with our previous result Γ 270 MeV pre- 2∗ ∗ − ≃ R1 = → 0.94, (19) dicted with the SHO wave functions in Ref. [55]. The B(13P ) Γ[B (5747)0 B+π ] ≈ 0 2∗ → − state is also predicted to be a broad state with a width of + 0 + Γ[B∗(5747) B∗ π ] 150 250 MeV in the other models [25–27, 29, 31, 41]. R = 2 → 0.93, (20) 2 + 0 + ∼We also− study the radiative decays of B(13P )+,0, our results Γ[B2∗(5747) B π ] ≈ 0 → have been listed in Table V, the predicted partial width for which are also consistent with the recent LHCb measurements Γ[B(13P )+ B +γ] 477 keV is about a factor 3 larger 0 → ∗ ≃ 8

TABLE V: Partial and total decay widths (MeV) for 1P-wave bottom and bottom-strange mesons compared with the the data and some recent model predictions. It should be mention that some masses for the initial states adopted in the literature are slightly different. The total widths inside the square brackets are estimated with the mixing angle θ = (55 5)◦. 1P − ± 2S +1 n LJ State Channel Ours XZ [55] SSC[25] LPW[27] GI[26] AMS[28] Γexp [1] 3 + + 0 0 + 1 P0 B0∗(5722) B π + B π 97.5+195.5 141.5 + 3 3 3 B∗ γ 477 10− 325 10− 575 10− Total 293× × 142.08× 0 0 0 + B0∗(5722) B π + B π− 97.5+195.3 272 225 230.43 154 141.5 0 3 3 3 3 B∗ γ 149 10− 116.9 10− 92.7 10− 175 10− Total 292.8× 272 225 230.43× 154× 141.7× 3 + + 0 0 + 1 P2 B2∗(5747) B π + B π 5.3+10.6 9.77 + 0 0 + B∗ π + B∗ π 5.1+9.9 9.79 + 3 3 3 B∗ γ 146 10− 444 10− 761 10− Total 31× 11.71× 20.3× 20 5 0 0 0 + ± B2∗(5747) B π + B π− 5.5+10.8 25 1.9 12.62 6.23 9.77 0 0 + B∗ π + B∗ π− 5.2+10.2 22 1.8 11.89 5.04 9.79 0 3 3 3 3 B∗ γ 51 10− 177.7 10− 126 10− 232 10− Total 32 (fitted)× 47 3.7 24.51× 11.40× 19.8× 24.2 1.7 + + 0 0 + ± 1PB1(5680) B∗ π + B∗ π 46.8+93.9 163 125.53 + 3 B∗ γ 75 10− 300 448 + × 3 3 3 B γ 111 10− 132 10− 415 10− Total 140.9× 163× 126.4× 128 18 0 0 0 + ± B1(5680) B∗ π + B∗ π− 46.8+93.9 219 200 199.4 163 125.53 0 3 3 3 3 B∗ γ 24 10− 53.1 10− 85.5 10− 137 10− 0 × 3 × 3 × 3 × 3 B γ 38 10− 130.2 10− 37.8 10− 127 10− Total 140.8× 219 200 199.4× 163× 125.8× 128 18 + + 0 0 + ± 1P′ B1(5721) B∗ π + B∗ π 13.8+27.4 6.80 15.62 + 3 3 3 B∗ γ 206 10− 300 10− 339 10− + × 3 × 3 × 3 B γ 69 10− 132 10− 448 10− Total 41.4 [24×.5 2.5] 7.27× 16.4× 31 6 0 0 0 + ± ± B1(5721) B∗ π + B∗ π− 13.8+27.4 30 10 40.63 6.80 15.62 0 3 3 3 3 B∗ γ 66 10− 108.5 10− 27.8 10− 103 10− 0 × 3 × 3 × 3 × 3 B γ 24 10− 60.4 10− 106 10− 137 10− Total 41.3 [24×.5 2.5] 30 10 40.63× 6.93× 15.9× 27.5 3.4 3 0 + 0 ¯0 ± ± 1 P0 B∗s0(5788) B K− + B K 86.7+76.7 227 225 138 135.66 0 3 3 3 3 B∗s γ 102 10− 84.7 10− 76 10− 133 10− Total 163.4× 227 225× 138× 135.8× 3 0 + 0 ¯0 1 P2 B∗s2(5840) B K− + B K 0.69+0.61 2 1.9 0.663 1.55 + 0 0 B∗ K− + B∗ K¯ 0.06+0.04 0.12 0.14 0.00799 0.13 0 3 3 3 3 B∗s γ 51 10− 159 10− 106 10− 225 10− Total 1.31×(fitted) 2 0.26 1.66× 0.777× 1.9× 1.49 0.27 0 + 0 ¯0 ± 1PBs1(5820) B∗ K− + B∗ K 149 120 0 ··· 3 3 3 B∗s γ 56 10− 39.5 10− 57.3 10− 0 × 3 × 3 × 3 Bs γ 37 10− 97.7 10− 47.8 10− Total 0×.093 149 120 160× 0.1051× 0 + 0 ¯0 1P′ Bs1(5830) B∗ K− + B∗ K 4.3+3.3 0.4 1 0 0 3 − ∼ 3 3 B∗s γ 53 10− 98.8 10− 36.9 10− 0 × 3 × 3 × 3 Bs γ 27 10− 56.6 10− 70.6 10− Total 7.6 [0×.1 0.8] 0.4 1 0 20× 0.1075× 0.5 0.3 0.3 − − ∼ ± ±

3 0 0 3 0 0 than that for Γ[B(1 P0) B∗ γ] 149 keV. Our predic- Γ[B(1 P0) B∗ γ] = 4 : 1, which is slightly larger than the tions are comparable with→ those predicted≃ in Refs. [26, 28]. It ratio 3 including→ heavy quark contributions. 3 +,0 ∼ 3 should be mentioned that the radiative decays of B(1 P0) In the Bs meson sector, the mass of Bs(1 P0) is expected are governed by the E1 transitions. For a heavy-light meson to be around 5788 MeV, which is compatible with those pre- system, the E1 transition amplitude is mainly contributed dictions in Refs. [12–14, 17, 24, 26–28]. The BK channel is A by the light quark, it is proportionalto eq/mq, where eq and mq the only OZI-allowed two body strong decay channel. Taking stands for the charge and mass of the light quark, respectively. the estimated mass M = 5788 MeV, we obtain a broad width 3 The heavy quark contributions are strongly suppressed by the Γ 270 MeV for the Bs(1 P ) state. This prediction is com- ≃ 0 heavy quark mass mQ (i.e., the factor 1/mQ). If neglecting patible with our previous result Γ 227 MeV predicted with 3 + + ≃ 3 the heavy quark contributions, one has Γ[B(1 P0) B∗ γ] : the SHO wave functions in Ref. [55]. The B (1 P ) state is → s 0 9 also predicted to be a broad state with a width of 130 230 is in good agreement with the predictions in Refs. [27, 31], ∼ − MeV in the other models [25, 26, 29]. We also study the while slightly larger than the observed width Γexp 30 MeV 3 ≃ radiative decay of Bs(1 P0), the predicted partial width for atLHC [8] and those predictionsin Refs. [25, 26, 28, 30]. The 3 0 Γ[Bs(1 P0) Bs∗γ] 100 keV is close to the predictions in decay width is nearly saturated by the B∗π channel. If we tak- Refs. [26, 28→]. Finally,≃ it should be mentioned that in some ing the mixing angle around the value obtained in the heavy- 3 works [12, 27, 28], the predicted mass of Bs(1 P0) is below quark symmetry limit, i.e. θ1P = (55 5)◦ [55, 93–97], the the BK mass threshold, which will lead to a very narrow width decay width is predicted to be in the− range± of Γ= (24.5 2.5) 3 ± for the Bs(1 P0) state. MeV,which seems to be more comparable with the LHCb observations [8]. We also study the radiative decay processes of

B1(5721) B∗γ, Bγ, their partial decay widths are predicted to be →

100 B (1P ) s 1 0 0 0 Γ[B1(5721) B∗ γ/B γ] = 66/24 keV, (26)

*+ - *0 0 80 + → + + B K B K Γ[B (5721) B∗ γ/B γ] = 206/69 keV. (27) 1 → B*K/Total 60 Our predictions are comparable with those in Ref. [42], however, most of our predictions are notably smaller than the pre-

(MeV) 40 dictions in Refs. [26–28]. The radiative decay modes B∗γ and

20 Bγ of B1(5721) may be observed in future experiments since 3 their branching fractions can reach up to the order of O(10− ). 0 In the B-meson family, the mass for the other mixed state

5.818 5.820 5.822 5.824 5.826 5.828 B1(1P1) is about 40 MeV lower than that of B1(5721) accord-

170 ing to our potential model calculations, which is consistent

B(1P )

1 with the prediction in Ref. [24]. A slightly smaller mass split-

165 ting, (10 30) MeV, between B1(5721) and B1(1P1) is given∼ in Refs.− [13, 14, 26–28]. Thus, the mass of B (1P ) 160 1 1 B* /Total might be in the range of (5700 15) MeV. Considering the ±

155 = (MeV) mass uncertainties, with the mixing angle θ P 35.2 we 1 − ◦ plot the decay width of B1(1P1) as a function of its mass in 150 Fig. 3. It is foundthat B1(1P1) is a broadstate with a width of Γ (155 10) MeV.The B∗π channel is the only OZI-allowed 145 ≃ ± two body strong decay channel. The BJ(5732) listed in the

5.685 5.690 5.695 5.700 5.705 5.710 5.715 RPP [1] is a good candidate for the B1(1P1). With this assignment, both the measured mass Mexp = 5698 MeV and width

Mass (GeV) Γexp = (128 18) MeV for the BJ(5732) are in good agreement with the± quark model predictions. However, in Ref. [23] 3 the BJ(5732) is assigned to the B(1 P0) state according to the FIG. 3: Decay widths of the 1P-wave mixed states Bs(1P1) and mass spectrum analysis. B(1P1) as a function of mass. The mixing angles for the Bs(1P1) and B(1P ) states are adopted the potential model predictions θ = As the mixed state 1P′ , the mass of Bs1(5830) is consis- 1 1P | 1i 39.6◦ and 35.2◦, respectively. tent with our fitted value M = 5821 MeV and other determi- − − nations in the literature (See Table IV). It dominantly decays into the B∗K channel. Taking the mixing angle θ1P = 39.6◦ determined by our potential model, we find that the theoret-− ical width, Γ 7.6 MeV, is too large to be comparable with ≃ Γ 3. 11P -13P mixing the measured one exp (0.5 0.3 0.3) MeV. However, if 1 1 we taking the mixing angle≃ around± the± value obtained in the heavy-quark symmetry limit, i.e. θ1P = (55 5)◦, as that The spin-orbit potential causes a strong configuration mix- − ± 3 1 adopted in Ref. [55], the decay width is predicted to be in ing between 1 P1 and 1 P1. It is generally believed that the range of Γ = 0.08 0.8 MeV, which is comparable with B1(5721) and Bs1(5830) correspond to the mixed states 1P′ − 1 | 1i the data. It indicates that the mixing angle between 1 P1 and via the 11P -13P mixing in the B and B families, respec- 3 1 1 s 1 P1 may be close to the value θ1P = 55◦ obtained in the tively. The other two mixed states B (1P ) and B (1P ) in − 1 1 s1 1 heavy-quark symmetry limit. The Bs1(5830) has large decay the the B and Bs families are waiting to be established in fu- rates into B∗sγ and Bsγ channels. Their partial decay widths ture experiments. are predicted to be Considering B (5721) as the mixed state 1P defined in 1 | 1′ i Eq.(9), our fitted mass M = 5753 MeV is reasonably com- Γ[Bs1(5830) B∗sγ] = 53 keV, (28) parable with the measured value M = 5726 MeV. With the → exp Γ[Bs1(5830) Bsγ] = 27 keV. (29) mixing angle θ1P = 35.2◦ determined from our quark model, → the width of B (5721)− 0 is predicted to be Γ 41 MeV, which The branching fractions of these radiative decays may reach 1 ≃ 10 up to O(10 2). Our predictions are comparablewith those pre- fairly large branching fraction 94%. The width of B(21S ) − ∼ 0 dicted in Refs. [26, 27, 42]. The B γ and Bsγ decay channels is predicted to be Γ 63 MeV, which is about a factor ∗s ≃ of Bs1(5830) may have good potentials to be observed in fu- 1.5 4 larger than the predictions in Refs. [24, 25, 28, 47], ture experiments. while− about a factor 1.5 2 smaller than the predictions in − In the Bs meson sector, the mass of the other mixed state Refs. [26, 27, 31, 33]. Bs1(1P1) is predicted to be about 2 40 MeV lower than In 2015, the LHCb Collaboration observed two new reso- − 0,+ 0,+ that of Bs1(5830) in various quark models [12–14, 24, 26–28]. nances BJ(5840) [8]. Considering BJ(5840) as unnatural Thus, the mass of Bs1(1P1) is estimated to be (5808 19) parity states, the relatively accurate measurements of the mass + 0 ∼0 ± MeV, which is just around the B K and B K mass thresh- and width for the neutral one are Mexp = (5863 9) MeV and ∗ − ∗ ± olds. From Fig. 3, it is seen that the strong decay properties of Γexp = (127 51) MeV,respectively [8]. Inthis case, signals of 0,+± Bs1(1P1) are very sensitive to the mass threshold. There are BJ(5840) should come from the B∗π decay mode other than 0,+ three cases to be considered. (i) If the mass of Bs1(1P1) is be- Bπ. InRefs.[18, 26–28, 39], the BJ(5840) resonances were + 1 0,+ low the B∗ K− mass threshold 5818 MeV, the radiative decay suggested to be the B(2 S 0) assignment. If BJ(5840) have 1 modes B∗γ and Bγ may play crucial roles in the decays. The an unnatural parity indeed, they strongly favor the B(2 S 0) as- with partial decay widths are estimated to be signment. The measured mass and width together with the decay modes of BJ(5840) are consistent with the our theoretical 0,+ Γ[Bs1(1P1) B∗γ] 60 keV, (30) predictions. However, a natural parity for B (5840) is also → s ≃ J Γ[Bs1(1P1) Bsγ] 40 keV. (31) possible according to the LHCb analysis (see Case B listed in 0,+ → ≃ Table I). The BJ(5840) may possibly decay into both the Then, the Bs1(1P1) should has a very narrow width of Γ B∗π and Bπ channels. If the Bπ decay mode is confirmed in + ∼ (100) keV.(ii) If the mass of Bs1(1P) lies between the B∗ K− future experiments, the BJ(5840) resonance should be other O 0 0 1 mass threshold 5818 MeV and the B∗ K mass threshold 5822 assignments since the Bπ mode is forbidden for the B(2 S 0) 0 0 MeV, the Bs1(1P1) dominantly decays into B∗ K mode, and state. 1 has a narrow width of Γ (20 15) MeV. (iii) If the mass In the Bs meson sector, our predicted mass for the Bs(2 S 0) ≃ 0 0± of Bs1(1P1) is above the B∗ K mass threshold 5822 MeV, state is M = 5944 MeV, which is comparable with the 0 0 + the Bs1(1P1) dominantly decays into B∗ K and B∗ K− chan- other quark model predictions [12–14, 24, 26–28]. Taking nels, and has a relatively broad width of Γ (70 30) MeV. M = 5944 MeV, we calculate the strong and radiative de- ≃ ± 1 It should be mentioned that the OPAL Collaboration observed cay properties of Bs(2 S 0), our results are listed in Table VI. some signals of a resonancedenoted by BsJ(5850)with a mass The B∗K channel is the only OZI-allowed two body strong 1 of Mexp = (5853 15) MeV and a width of Γ (47 22) decay channel for Bs(2 S 0). Its decay width is predicted to ± ≃ ± MeV many year ago [98]. As a candidate of Bs1(1P1), both be Γ 55 MeV, which is comparable with those predictions ≃ 1 the measured mass and width of BsJ(5850) are consistent with in Refs. [25, 26, 28, 33, 47]. The Bs(2 S 0) state should have + the predictions. To confirm the BsJ(5850) resonance and es- large potentials to be seen in the B∗ K− channel since it has a 0 0 tablished the Bs1(1P1) state, more observations of the B∗ K fairly narrow width. + and B∗ K− final states are suggested to be carried out in future experiments. 3 2. 2 S 1 states As a whole the high mass mixed state 1P1′ via the 1 3 | i 1 P1-1 P1 mixing in the B and Bs families have been well- 3 established, they correspond to two narrow states B1(5721) In the B meson sector, our predicted mass for B(2 S 1) and Bs1(5830) observed in experiments. Some evidence for is M = 5899 MeV, which is in good agreement with the the low mass mixed states 1P1 with broad widths predicted predictions in Refs. [14, 28]. Taking the mass M = 5899 in theory may have been| observedi in experiments. The MeV, we calculate the strong and radiative decay properties 3 BJ(5732) and BsJ(5850)resonanceslisted by the PDG [1]may of B(2 S 1), our results are listed in Table VI. It is found that 3 good candidates for the missing 1P in the B and B families, the B(2 S 1) state is a fairly narrow state with a width of Γ 40 1 s ≃ respectively. | i MeV, which is consistent with the prediction in Refs. [25, 47], however, a factor 2 4 smaller than the predictions in Refs. [26, 27, 31, 33∼]. This− state dominantly decays into the B. 2S -wave states B π channel with a branching fraction 54%. The partial ∗ ∼ width ratio between the two typical channels Bπ and B∗π is 1 1. 2 S 0 states predicted to be Γ[Bπ] 1 0.23, (32) The 2 S 0 states in the B and Bs families are still not es- Γ[B π] ≃ tablished. In the B meson sector, our predicted mass for the ∗ 1 3 B(2 S 0) state is M = 5876 MeV, which is in agreement with which can be used to identify the B(2 S 1) from its possible the predictions in Refs. [14, 24, 26, 28]. Taking the mass candidates observed in future experiments. M = 5876 MeV, we calculate the strong and radiative de- It should be mentioned that the BJ(5840) resonance may be 1 3 cay properties of B(2 S 0), our results are listed in Table VI. a candidate of the B(2 S 1) state as suggested in Refs. [29, 31]. 1 The decays of B(2 S 0) are governed by the B∗π mode with a As this assignment, both the mass and typical decay modes 11

TABLE VI: Partial and total decay widths (MeV) for the 2S -wave B and Bs mesons. Γ (MeV) n2S +1 L State Channel th State Channel Γ (MeV) J (bu¯ / bd¯) th 1 2 S 0 B0(5876) B∗π 59 Bs0(5944) B∗K 55 B∗η 0.05 B∗sη 3 ··· 3 B(1 P0)π 4.8 B∗sγ 0.1 10− 3 × B∗γ 0.006/0.85 10− Bs(1P)γ 0.009 × 3 B(1P)γ 0.1/0.034 Bs1(5830)γ 4.9 10− 3 × B1(5721)γ 0.026/8.8 10− Total 55 Total 63 × 3 2 S 1 B1(5899) Bπ 5.1 Bs1(5966) BK 15 Bη 0.8 Bsη 0.1 BsK 0.02 B∗K 32 B∗π 22 B∗sη 0.01 3 B∗η 0.6 Bsγ 3.6 10− 1 × 6 B2(5747)π < 0.01 Bs(2 S 0)γ 1.0 10− × 3 B(1P)π 11 Bs2(5840)γ 9 10− × 3 B1(5721)π 1 Bs(1P)γ 2.2 10− × 3 Bγ 0.029/0.008 Bs1(5830)γ 2.7 10− 1 5 5 3 × 3 B(2 S )γ 6 10− /2 10− B(1 P )γ 1.4 10− 0 × × 0 × B2(5747)γ 0.06/0.019 Total 47 3 B(1P)γ 0.015/5.2 10− × 3 B1(5721)γ 0.018/6.2 10− 3 × 3 B(1 P0)γ 0.004/1.6 10− Total 41 ×

B∗π and Bπ predicted in theory are consistent with the LHCb two main channels BK and B∗K is predicted to be observations [8]. Our predicted width Γ 41 MeV is close to ≃ Γ the lower limit of the measured width Γexp = (107 54) MeV [BK] 0 ± 0.47, (33) assuming a natural parity for BJ(5840) [8]. Furthermore, the Γ[B∗K] ≃ 3 BJ(5970) resonancewas also suggested to be the B(2 S 1) state in the literature [18, 25–27, 33, 35]. The B (5970)0,+ reso- which may be an important criterion for establishing the J 3 nances were first observed by the CDF Collaboration in the Bs(2 S 1). Bπ final states in 2013 [7], and confirmed by the LHCb Col- There may exist a strong configuration mixing between the 3 3 laboration two years later [8]. The central value of the mea- 2 S 1 and 1 D1 states, which is to be discussed in the last part of this section. sured width is Γexp 60 70 MeV with large uncertainties ≃ − (see Table I). In the LHCb observations, the B∗π decay mode has been seen, while the Bπ mode may be possibly seen [1]. If 3 C. 1D-wave states assigning BJ(5970) resonance to B(2 S 1), our predicted mass, M 5899 MeV, is about 70 MeV larger than the observation, ≃ while the predicted width, Γ 54 MeV, is consistent with the Some evidence of the 1D-wave B and Bs states may have data. As a conclusion, we cannot≃ exclude the possibilities of been observed in experiments. The B(5970)0,+ together with the BJ(5840) and BJ(5970) resonances as candidates of the the new resonances BsJ(6064) and BsJ(6114) observed at 3 B(2 S 1) state based on the present experimental information. LHCb may be good candidates of the 1D-wave states according to the mass spectrum predictions in various quark models.

3 1. 13 D states In the Bs meson sector, our predicted mass for the Bs(2 S 1) 3 state is M = 5966 MeV, which is in good agreement with the predictions in Refs. [12, 14, 28]. Taking M = 5966 In Ref. [47], by analyzing the decay properties within the MeV, we calculate the strong and radiative decay properties chiral quark model our group found that the BJ(5970) is 3 3 of Bs(2 S 1), our results are listed in Table VI. It is found most likely to be the 1 D3 assignment in the B-meson fam- 3 3 that the Bs(2 S 1) state is also a narrow state with a width ily. The BJ(5970) as a candidate of B(1 D3) is also suggested of Γ 50 MeV, which is consistent with the predictions in in Refs. [27, 31]. In present work, we restudy the BJ(5970) by Refs.≃ [25, 47], however, a factor 2 4 smaller than the pre- combining the decay properties with the mass spectrum. It is ∼ − 3 dictions in Refs. [26, 27, 33]. This state mainly decaysinto the found that as the B(1 D3) assignment the mass of B(5970) B∗K and BK channel with large branching fractions 68% can be well explained with the potential model. Our pre- and 32%, respectively. The partial width ratio between∼ the dicted mass M = 5979 MeV is in good agreement with the ∼ 12

3 observed value Mexp = (5971 5) MeV for the neutral state Bs(1 D3) may not be the main contributor to the BsJ(6064) 0 ± 3 + B(5970) [1]. By using the wave function of B(1 D3) cal- structure observed in the B K− mass spectrum. 3 culated from the potential model, we further study the decay As a whole, the BJ(5970) may be assigned as the 1 D3 as- properties, our results are listed in Table VII. It is found that signment, which can be tested by the partial width ratio be- the predicted decay width, Γ 39 MeV, is also consistent the tween Bπ and B∗π. It may be a flavor partner of the D3∗(2750) ≃ 0 measured width Γexp (56 16) MeV of B(5970) by as- and Ds3(2860) resonances listed in RPP [1]. Their masses suming P = ( 1)J and≃ using± three relativistic Breit-Wigner might be systematically overestimated by a value of 100 functions in the− fit for mass difference at LHCb [8]. The par- MeV in some quark models [11, 14, 26, 99]. There still∼ exists 3 tial width ratio between Bπ and B∗π is predicted to be a puzzle to identify the BsJ(6064) structure as the Bs(1 D3) state, although both the predicted mass and width seem to Γ[Bπ] 1.0, (34) be consistent with the observations. To establish the narrow Γ B π 3 + [ ∗ ] ≃ Bs(1 D3) state finally, the observations of both the B K− and + which is waiting to be tested in future experiments. If the B∗ K− decays and their partial width ratio are crucial in future 0,+ 3 experiments. BJ(5970) resonances correspond to the B(1 D3) assignment + indeed, the charged state BJ(5970) should have a large radiative decay rate into B (5747)+γ, the partial width and branch- 2∗ 2. 13 D states ing fraction are predicted to be 1

+ + 3 Γ[BJ(5970) B∗(5747) γ] 125 keV, (35) In the B meson sector, the mass for the B(1 D ) state → 2 ≃ 1 + + 3 is predicted to be M = 6056 MeV in our potential model Br[BJ(5970) B∗(5747) γ] 3 10− . (36) → 2 ≃ × calculations, which is comparable with the predictions in + 3 The radiative decay mode B2∗(5747) γ may be observed in fu- Refs. [13, 24, 27, 28]. Our predicted mass for B(1 D1) is 3 ture experiments. about 80 MeV larger than that for B(1 D3). Taking the mass 3 In Ref. [47], considering the BJ(5970) as the B(1 D3) as- M = 6056 MeV, we calculate the strong and radiative decay 3 signment, our group further predicted that the mass and width properties of B(1 D1), our results are listed in Table VII. It 3 3 of the Bs(1 D3) state, as a flavor partner of BJ(5970), might is found that the B(1 D1) state is a broad state with a width be M 6.07 GeV and Γ 30 MeV, respectively. The pre- of Γ 350 MeV, which is consistent with the predictions in ≃ 3 ≃ ≃ dicted mass of Bs(1 D3) is consistent with the those predicted Refs. [25, 27]. This state mainly decays into the Bπ, B∗π, and in Refs. [12, 27, 28], while a relatively narrow width is also B1(5721)π channels with branching fractions 26%, 12%, predicted by other works [25–28, 33, 35]. It is interestingly and 42%, respectively. The partial width ratio∼ between the found that the new bottom-strange structure BsJ(6064) with a two typical channels Bπ and B∗π is predicted to be mass of Mexp = (6063.5 2.0) MeV and a very narrow width Γ[Bπ] of Γ = (26 8) MeV± observed at LHCb [9] is consistent 2.2, (38) exp Γ[B π] with the predictions.± In present work, from the aspects of both ∗ ≃ 3 mass spectrum and decay properties we further discuss the which may be helpful to identify the B(1 D1) state from future 3 possibility of the BsJ(6064) structure as the Bs(1 D3) assign- observations. In Refs. [28, 29], BJ(5970) was suggested to be 3 ment in the Bs-meson family. With this assignment, it is found a candidate for B(1 D1). With this assignment we find that the that the measured mass for the BsJ(6064) structure is consis- theoretical width Γ 230 MeV is too broad to be comparable ≃ tent with the theoretical mass M = 6067 MeV. Furthermore, with the measured value measured value Γexp 60 70 MeV ≃ − the narrow width of BsJ(6064) can also be explained within (see Table I). Thus, BJ(5970) may not be a good candidate of 3 our chiral quark model. From our predicted decay proper- the 1 D1 state. 3 ties listed in Table VII, it is found that the theoretical width In the Bs meson sector, the mass for the Bs(1 D1) state Γ 13 MeV is close to lower limit of the measured value is predicted to be M = 6101 MeV in our potential model ≃ Γexp = (26 8) MeV from LHCb [9]. The partial width ratio calculations, which is comparable with the predictions in ± 3 between BK and B∗K is predicted to be Refs. [13, 24, 27]. Our predicted mass for Bs(1 D1) is about 30 MeV larger than that of B (13D ). There are large un- Γ[BK] s 3 1.2. (37) certainties in the predictions of the mass splitting between Γ[B K] ≃ 3 3 ∗ Bs(1 D1) and Bs(1 D3). In some works [12, 13, 28], the 3 3 Bs(1 D1) mass is even predicted to be smaller than that of Our predicted mass and decay properties of Bs(1 D3) are 3 Bs(1 D3). Taking the mass M = 6101 MeV, we calculate the compatible with those predicted in Refs. [27, 28, 47]. It 3 strong and radiative decay properties of Bs(1 D1), our results should be pointed out that the large branching fraction for 3 are listed in Table VII. It is found that the Bs(1 D1) state has Br[BsJ(6064) B K] 45% seems to be not consistent with → ∗ ≃ a width of Γ 130 MeV, and mainly decays into the BK and the observations naturally. Since BsJ(6064) causes a clear ≃ + B∗K channels with branching fractions 65% and 27%, re- bump structure around 6064 MeV in the B K− mass spectrum ∼ + spectively. The partial width ratio between the two typical through the B K− decay, it should also cause another narrow + channels BK and B∗K is predicted to be bump structure around 6019 MeV through the B∗ K− decay + + with a missing photon from B∗ B γ, however, this struc- Γ[BK] ture was not observed at LHCb.→ Thus, it indicates that the 2.4, (39) Γ[B∗K] ≃ 13 which is comparable with the predictions in Refs. [25, 27]. width of From the point of view of mass, the observed resonance BsJ(6114) by the LHCb Collaboration [9] is a good candidate Γ 23 MeV, (41) 3 ≃ for the Bs(1 D1) state. While, the theoretical width Γ 130 MeV is also close the upper limit of the measured≃ width and dominantly decays into B∗K channel with a branching fraction about 95%. The decay properties predicted in Γexp = (66 39) MeV. There may exist a configuration mixing ± 3 3 present work are in good agreement with those predictions between the 2 S 1 and 1 D1 states, which will be discussed in the last part of this section. in Refs. [25, 26, 28, 47]. The narrow mixed state Bs(1D2′ ) with a mass of M = 6113 MeV may be the main contrib- + utor to the BsJ(6064) structure observed in the B K− mass + 1 3 spectrum at LHCb [9]. In this case, the signal in the B K− 3. 1 D2-1 D2 mixing + mass spectrum may mainly come from the B∗ K− decay with + + a missing photon from B∗ B γ. Including the energy 3 → There is a strong configuration mixing between the 1 D2 of the missing photon, the mass and width are determined to 1 and 1 D2 states for the heavy-light mesons predicted in the be Mexp = (6109 1.8) MeV and Γexp = (22 9) MeV for ± ± potential models. For the B meson sector, with the mixing the resonance BsJ(6109) [9]. It is interestingly found that the scheme defined in Eq. (9) the mixing angle is predicted to be BsJ(6109) resonance favors the assignment of the 1D-wave θ1D = 39.5◦, which is close to the value 50.8◦ extracted in mixed state B (1D ). The predicted mass, width, decay mode − − s 2′ the heavy quark symmetry limit [25, 95, 96]. Our predicted are in good agreementwith the observations. Finally, it should 3 masses for the B(1D2) and B(1D2′ ) states are about 5973 and be mentioned that the Bs(1 D3) state may have a few contri- + 6067 MeV, respectively, which are close to the predictions in butions to the BsJ(6064) structure through the B K− decay as Refs. [13, 24]. A fairly large mass splitting between B(1D2) well, since this state with a mass of M 6067 MeV lies just ≃ and B(1D2′ ), ∆M = 94 MeV, is obtained in present work. It around the peak position. is comparable with the predictions of ∆M = 110 130 MeV in Refs. [26, 27]. With the masses and wave functions− ob- 3 3 tained from our potential model calculations, the decay prop- D. 2 S 1-1 D1 mixing erties for these two mixed states B(1D2) and B(1D2′ ) are estimated, the results are listed in Table VII. It is found that It should be mentioned that there may exist a configura- the low mass state B(1D ) has a broad width of Γ 170 3 3 2 ≃ tion mixing between the 2 S 1 and 1 D1 states. To explain MeV, and dominantly decays into B∗π and B∗(5747)π chan- 2 the strong decay properties of the D∗J(2600) and/or Ds1(2700), nels with branching fractions about 54% and 38%, respec- configuration mixing between 23S and 13D is suggested in B D 1 1 tively. While the high mass state (1 2′ ) has a relatively nar- the literature [100–104]. In Refs. [53, 54], our group also row width of Γ 90 MeV, and dominantly decays into B∗π, ≃ carefully studied the strong decay properties of the D∗J(2600) B1(5721)π and B∗(5747)π channels with branching fractions 2 and Ds1(2700). According the analysis, both D∗ (2600) and about 73%, 11% and 7%, respectively. Our predicted decay J Ds1(2700) could be explained as the mixed state SD L via properties are roughly comparable with those predictions in 3 3 | i the 2 S 1-1 D1 mixing with the following mixing scheme: Refs. [25, 26, 47]. 3 For the Bs meson sector, we predict the mixing angle θ1D = SD L cos θ sin θ 2 S 1 | i = 3 , (42) 39.9◦. Our predicted masses for the Bs(1D2) and Bs(1D2′ ) SD H ! sin θ cos θ ! 1 D1 ! −states are about 6061 and 6113 MeV, respectively, which are | i − close to the predictions in Refs. [12, 24, 27]. An intermediate where the mixed angle is estimated to be θ (45 16) . ≃ − ± ◦ mass splitting between Bs(1D2) and Bs(1D2′ ), ∆M = 52 MeV, The Ds1(2860) resonance observed in the BK final state at is obtained in present work, which is comparable with the pre- LHCb [105, 106] seems tobe thehighmass mixedstate SD H | i dictions of ∆M = 45 70 MeV in Refs. [24, 27]. With the as the partner of the low mass state Ds1(2700) [47], from masses and wave functions− obtained from our potential model which one can estimate a mass splitting ∆M 150 MeV calculations, the decay properties for these two mixed states between the high and low mass mixed states. Similarly,≃ the 3 3 Bs(1D2) and Bs(1D2′ ) are estimated, the results are listed in 2 S 1-1 D1 mixing might also exist in the B and Bs meson Table VII. It is found that the low mass state Bs(1D2)(6061) families. has a intermediate width of The strong decay properties for the mixed states SD L and | i SD H in the B and Bs meson families were studied in an- Γ 90 MeV, (40) |otheri work of our group [47]. It is interestingly found that ≃ the newly observed resonances BJ(5840) and BsJ(6114) at and dominantly decays into B∗K channel with a branching LHCb [8, 9] are most likely to be the mixed states B( SD L) | i fraction about 94%. Our predicted width is about a factor and Bs( SD H), respectively, by comparing the measured 1.5 2 smaller than those predictions in Refs. [25–28]. The masses and| widthsi with the theoretical predictions (see Figs. − + Bs(1D2) state may be observedaround6016 MeV in the B K− 1and2inRef. [47]). + mass spectrum through the B∗ K− decay with a missing pho- Considering the BJ(5840) resonance as the low mass mixed + + ton from B∗ B γ. state B( SD L), we revise the strong decay properties by using → | i While the high mass state Bs(1D2′ )(6113) has a very narrow the wave functions obtained from our quark potential model 14

200

B (6114) 160

sJ B (5840)

160

Total

120

B*K

(MeV) 80

80 (MeV)

Total

-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90

(degree)

100

B (|SD )

s L B(|SD

300

Total

250

200

B*K

B (5721) 40 (MeV)

150 1 (MeV)

100 B 20

B (1P) B*

B 1 50

-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90

(degree)

FIG. 4: The partial decay widths and total decay widths for the mixed FIG. 5: The partial decay widths and total decay widths for the mixed 3 3 3 3 states via 2 S 1 1 D1 mixing in the B-meson family as functions of states via 2 S 1 1 D1 mixing in the Bs-meson family as functions the mixing angle− θ. In the horizontal direction, the shaded region of the mixing angle− θ. In the horizontal direction, the shaded region represents the possible range of the measured width from LHCb. In represents the possible range of the measured width from LHCb. In the vertical direction, shaded region represents the possible range of the vertical direction, shaded region represents the possible range of the mixing angle θ (45 16)◦ suggested in Refs. [53, 54]. The the mixing angle θ (45 16)◦ suggested in Refs. [53, 54]. The ≃ − ± ≃ − ± masses for BJ(5840) and B( SD H) are taken to be 5890 and 6040 masses for BsJ (6114) and Bs( SD L) are taken to be 6114 and 5964 MeV, respectively. | i MeV, respectively. | i

calculations. Our results are shown in Fig. 4. With the mixing deed, the mass of B( SD H) may be about 150 MeV larger | i angle θ (45 16) determined in Refs. [53, 54] and the than that of BJ(5840). Taking a mass of M 6040 MeV ≃ − ± ◦ ≃ mass Mexp 5890 MeV measured at LHCb [8], the B( SD L) for B( SD H), we show its decay properties in Fig. 4 as well. ≃ | i | i state has a width of Γ (76 20) MeV,and dominantly decays Within the mixing angle range θ (45 16)◦ suggested ≃ ± ≃ − ± into B π channel. There may be a sizeable decay rate into the in [53, 54], the B( SD H) has a width of Γ (197 47) MeV, ∗ | i ≃ ± Bπ channel. The partial width ratio between Bπ and B∗π is and mainly decay into Bπ and B1(5721)π channels. The par- predicted to be tial width ratio between Bπ and B1(5721)π is predicted to be Γ[Bπ] Γ[Bπ] 0.1 0.7, (43) 1, (44) Γ[B∗π] ≃ − Γ[B1(5721)π] ∼ which is sensitive to the mixing angle. The predicted width is which is insensitive to the mixing angle. Future observations consistent with the measured width Γexp = (107 54) MeV by in the Bπ channelwith a larger data sample at LHCb may have J ± assuming P = ( 1) . Moreover, the predicted decay modes a potential to discover this high mass mixed state B ( SD H). − 1 | i are also consistent with the observations of BJ(5840). To bet- In the Bs meson sector, considering the BsJ(6114) reso- + ter understand the nature of BJ(5840), more accurate mea- nance observed in the B K− mass spectrum [9] as the high surements of the width together with the partial width ratio mass mixed state Bs( SD H), we revise the strong decay prop- are expected to be carried out in future experiments. erties by using the wave| i functions obtained from our quark If BJ(5840) corresponds to the low mass state B( SD L) in- potential model calculations. Our results are shown in Fig. 5. | i 15

3 It is found that with the mixing angle θ (45 16)◦ deter- with the mixed states B( SD L) and Bs( SD H) via 2 S 1- ≃ − ± 3 | i | i mined in Refs. [53, 54], the Bs( SD H) state has a width of 1 D mixing, respectively. To confirm the nature of the | i 1 Γ (95 15) MeV, and dominantly decays into BK channel BJ(5840) and BsJ(6114), the typical ratios Γ(Bπ)/Γ(B∗π) and with≃ a branching± fraction 90%. Both the decay mode B+K Γ(B K)/Γ(BK) are suggested to be measured in future exper- ∼ − ∗ and width Γexp = (66 39) MeV observed for BsJ(6114) at iments. The other two missing states, B( SD H) with a mass ± | i LHCb [9] can be well understood in our quark model cal- of M 6010 MeV and Bs( SD L) with a mass of M 5960 ≃ | i ≃ culations. Thus, the BsJ(6114) may favor the mixed state MeV, may be observed in the Bπ and B∗K final states. On the 3 3 Bs( SD H). other hand, if there is little mixing between 2 S -1 D , the | i 1 1 The mass for the low mass state Bs1( SD L) may be about BJ(5840) and BsJ(6114) resonances may be candidates for the | i 3 3 150 MeV smaller than that of BsJ(6114). Taking a mass of B(2 S 1) and Bs(1 D1) states, respectively. M 5960 MeV for the low mass state Bs ( SD L), we show 3 ≃ 1 | i The BJ(5970) resonance may be assigned as the 1 D3 state its decay propertiesin Fig. 5 as well. In the mixingangle range 3 in the B meson family, although it as a pure 2 S 1 state can- θ (45 16)◦, the Bs1( SD L) has a width of Γ (70 10) not be excluded according to present experimental informa- MeV,≃− and± mainly decay into| iB K channel. The partial≃ width± ∗ tion. To clarify the nature of BJ(5970), further observations ratio between BK and B K, ∗ of the Bπ and B∗π channels and a measurement of their partial width ratio are necessary. In the Bs family, the predicted mass Γ[BK] 3 < 0.5, (45) M 6067 MeV and width Γ 13 MeV for the Bs(1 D3) Γ[B∗K] ≃ ≃ are consistent with the BsJ(6064) structure observed in the B+K mass spectrum. However, the B (13D ) may not be the is sensitive to the mixing angle. The Bs1( SD L) is most likely − s 3 to be observed in the B+K final state with| ai larger data sam- main contributor to the BsJ(6064) structure. If BsJ(6064) cor- − 3 ple at LHCb. responds to Bs(1 D3), another narrow structure around 6019 MeV coming from the B +K decay should be observed in the As a whole the BJ(5840) and BsJ(6114) may favor the ∗ − 3 3 B+K mass spectrum, however, it was not seen at LHCb. mixed states B( SD L) and Bs( SD H) via 2 S 1-1 D1 mixing, − | i | i + respectively. Their partners B( SD H) and Bs( SD L) are ex- The narrow B (6064) structure observed in the B K mass | i | i sJ − pected to be observed in their dominant decay channels with spectrum may mainly come from the resonance BsJ(6109) de- + a larger data sample at LHCb. caying into B∗ K−. The BsJ(6109) resonance favors the assignment of the high mass 1D-wave mixed state Bs(1D2′ ) with P J = 2−. This state dominantly decays into B∗K channel with V. SUMMARY branching fraction about 95%, and the BK decay is forbidden. The other missing mixed state Bs(1D2) has a mass of The experimental progress provides us good opportunities M 5973 MeV and a width of Γ 90 MeV. It is most ≃ + ≃ to establish an abundant B and Bs-meson spectrum up to the likely to be established in the B K− mass spectrum through + + + second orbital excitations. In this work, combining the newest the B∗ K− decay with a missing photon from B∗ B γ. In → experimental progress, we carry out a systematical study of the B-meson sector, two relatively broad mixed states, B(1D2) the mass spectrum, strong decays and radiative decays of with M 5973 MeV and B(1D′ ) with M 6067 MeV, may ≃ 2 ≃ the 1P-, 1D-, and 2S -wave excited B and Bs states in the be observed their main decay channel B∗π with a larger data constitute quark model. The mass and strong decay proper- sample at LHCb. +,0 ties for the well established 1P-wave resonances B1(5721) , Finally, it should be mentioned that the BJ(5840) resonance +,0 1 B2∗(5747) , Bs1(5830) and B∗s2(5840) can be consistently ex- may be a candidate of the 2S -wave state B(2 S 0) as well. In plained. The possible assignments for the high mass res- this case, the Bπ mode of BJ(5840) is forbidden, which should 0,+ 0,+ onances/structures BJ(5840) , B(5970) , BsJ(6064) and be further confirmed in future experiments. In the Bs meson 1 BsJ(6114) are discussed. We hope that our study can provide sector, our predicted mass and width for the Bs(2 S 0) state some useful information towards establishing an abundant B are M = 5944 MeV and Γ 55 MeV, respectively. The B K ≃ ∗ and Bs-meson spectrum. Our main results are summarized as channel is the only OZI-allowed two body strong decay mode. 1 follows. The Bs(2 S 0) state should have large potentials to be seen in + For the P-wave states, several points should be emphasized. the B∗ K− channel since it has a fairly narrow width. (i) Some radiative decay processes, such as Bs1(5830) ( ) → Bs∗ γ and B∗s2(5840) B∗sγ, have good potentials to be found in future experiments→ due to their fairly branching fractions of 2 (10 ). (ii) The BJ(5732) and BsJ(5850) resonances listed O − Acknowledgement by the PDG [1] may good candidates for the missing 1P1 | 3 i state in the B and Bs families, respectively. (iii) Both B(1 P0) 3 and Bs(1 P0) may hardly be observed in experiments due to Helpful discussions with Qi-Fang Lüand Ming-Sheng Liu their very broad width of Γ 300 MeV. are greatly appreciated. This work is supported by the Na- ∼ The BJ(5840) resonance and the new BsJ(6114) struc- tional Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants Nos. + ture observed in the B K− mass spectrum may be explained U1832173, 11775078). 16

[1] P. A. Zyla et al. [Particle Data Group], Review of Particle [25] Y. Sun, Q. T. Song, D. Y. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, Higher Physics, PTEP 2020, no. 8, 083C01 (2020). bottom and bottom-strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D 89, 054026 [2] V.M. Abazov et al. [D0 Collaboration], Observation and Prop- (2014).

erties of L = 1B1 and B2∗ Mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 172001 [26] S. Godfrey, K. Moats and E. S. Swanson, B and Bs Meson (2007). Spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. D 94, 054025 (2016). [3] T. Aaltonen et al. [CDF Collaboration], Measurement of Res- [27] Q. F. L¨u, T. T. Pan, Y. Y. Wang, E. Wang and D. M. Li, Excited onance Parameters of Orbitally Excited Narrow B0 Mesons, bottom and bottom-strange mesons in the quark model, Phys. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 102003 (2009). Rev. D 94, 074012 (2016). [4] T. Aaltonen et al. [CDF Collaboration], Observation of or- [28] I. Asghar, B. Masud, E. S. Swanson, F. Akram and M. Atif bitally excited Bs mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 082001 Sultan, Decays and spectrum of bottom and bottom strange (2008). mesons, Eur. Phys. J. A 54, 127 (2018). [5] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], First observation of the [29] S. Godfrey and K. Moats, Spectroscopic Assignments of the 0 + 0 decay B∗s2(5840) B∗ K− and studies of excited Bs mesons, Excited B-Mesons, Eur. Phys. J. A 55, 84 (2019). Phys. Rev. Lett. 110→, 151803 (2013). [30] Z. H. Wang, Y. Zhang, T. H. Wang, Y. Jiang, Q. Li and [6] V. M. Abazov et al. [D0 Collaboration], Observation and prop- G. L. Wang, Strong Decays of P wave Mixing Heavy-Light + − erties of the orbitally excited B∗s2 meson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 1 States, Chin. Phys. C 42, 123101 (2018). 082002 (2008). [31] G. L. Yu and Z. G. Wang, Analysis of the excited bot-

[7] T. A. Aaltonen et al. [CDF], Study of Orbitally Excited B tom and bottom-strange states B1(5721), B2∗(5747), Bs1(5830), Mesons and Evidence for a New Bπ Resonance, Phys. Rev. B∗s2(5840), BJ(5840) and BJ(5970) in B meson family, Chin. D 90, 012013 (2014). Phys. C 44, 033103 (2020). [8] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb], Precise measurements of the properties [32] H. A. Alhendi, T. M. Aliev and M. Savcı, Strong decay con- 0,+ 0,+ of the B1(5721) and B2∗(5747) states and observation of stants of heavy tensor mesons in light cone QCD sum rules, +,0 ,+ B π− mass structures, JHEP 04, 024 (2015). JHEP 04(2016)050. 0 [9] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb], Observation of new excited Bs states, [33] J. Ferretti and E. Santopinto, Open-ﬂavor strong decays of 3 [arXiv:2010.15931 [hep-ex]]. open-charm and open-bottom mesons in the P0 model, Phys. [10] I. Belyaev, G. Carboni, N. Harnew and C. M. F. Teubert, The Rev. D 97, 114020 (2018). history of LHCb, arXiv:2101.05331 [physics.hist-ph]. [34] Z. G. Wang, Strong decay of the heavy tensor mesons with [11] S. Godfrey and N. Isgur, Mesons in a Relativized Quark Model QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 3123 (2014). with Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 32, 189 (1985). [35] H. Xu, X. Liu and T. Matsuki, Newly observed B(5970) and [12] J. Zeng, J. W. Van Orden and W. Roberts, Heavy mesons in a the predictions of its spin and strange partners, Phys. Rev. D relativistic model, Phys. Rev. D 52, 5229 (1995). 89, 097502 (2014). [13] V. Kher, N. Devlani and A. K. Rai, Spectroscopy, Decay prop- [36] Z. G. Wang, Strong decays of the bottom mesons B1(5721), erties and Regge trajectories of the B and Bs mesons, Chin. B2(5747), Bs1(5830), Bs2(5840) and B(5970), Eur. Phys. J. Phys. C 41, 093101 (2017). Plus 129, 186 (2014). [14] D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov and V. O. Galkin, Heavy-light meson [37] J. M. Zhang and G. L. Wang, Strong Decays of the Radial Ex- spectroscopy and Regge trajectories in the relativistic quark cited States B(2S ) and D(2S ), Phys. Lett. B 684, 221 (2010).

model, Eur. Phys. J. C 66, 197 (2010). [38] Z. G. Luo, X. L. Chen and X. Liu, Bs1(5830) and B∗s2(5840), [15] J. B. Liu and C. D. Lü, Spectra of heavy-light mesons in a Phys. Rev. D 79, 074020 (2009). relativistic model, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, no. 5, 312 (2017). [39] P. Gupta and A. Upadhyay, Decay width and coupling con- [16] C. B. Lang, D. Mohler, S. Prelovsek and R. M. Woloshyn, stants of charm and bottom mesons, PoS Hadron2017, 025 Predicting positive parity Bs mesons from lattice QCD, Phys. (2018). Lett. B 750, 17 (2015). [40] P. Gupta and A. Upadhyay, Placing the newly observed [17] E. B. Gregory et al., Precise B, Bs and Bc meson spectroscopy state BJ(5840) in bottom spectra along with states B1(5721), from full lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 83, 014506 (2011). B2∗(5747), Bs1(5830), B2∗s(5840) and BJ(5970), Phys. Rev. D [18] D. Jia and W. C. Dong, Regge-like spectra of excited singly 99, 094043 (2019). heavy mesons, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 134, 123 (2019). [41] S. L. Zhu and Y. B. Dai, The Effect of B pi continuum in the [19] H. Y. Cheng and F. S. Yu, Masses of Scalar and Axial-Vector QCD sum rules for the (0+, 1+) heavy meson doublet in HQET, B Mesons Revisited, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 668 (2017). Mod. Phys. Lett. A 14, 2367 (1999). [20] M. H. Alhakami, Predictions for the beauty meson spectrum, [42] A. H. Orsland and H. Hogaasen, Strong and electromagnetic Phys. Rev. D 103, 034009 (2021). decays for excited heavy mesons, Eur. Phys. J. C 9, 503 [21] Y. Lu, M. N. Anwar and B. S. Zou, How Large is the Contri- (1999). bution of Excited Mesons in Coupled-Channel Effects?, Phys. [43] G. L. Yu, Z. G. Wang and Z. Y. Li, Strong coupling constants Rev. D 95, 034018 (2017). and radiative decays of the heavy tensor mesons, Eur. Phys. J. [22] B. H. Yazarloo and H. Mehraban, Study of B and Bs mesons C 79, 798 (2019). with a Coulomb plus exponential type potential, EPL 116, [44] T. M. Aliev and M. Savc, Radiative decays of the heavy tensor 31004 (2016). mesons in light cone QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D 99, 015020 [23] M. Shah, B. Patel and P. C. Vinodkumar, Spectroscopy and (2019). flavor changing decays of B, Bs mesons in a Dirac formalism, [45] L. F. Gan and M. Q. Huang, QCD Sum Rule Analysis of Phys. Rev. D 93, 094028 (2016). Semileptonic Bs1, B∗s2, B∗s0, and B′s1 Decays in HQET, Phys. [24] M. Di Pierro and E. Eichten, Excited Heavy-Light Systems Rev. D 82, 054035 (2010). and Hadronic Transitions, Phys. Rev. D 64, 114004 (2001). [46] B. Grinstein and J. Martin Camalich, Weak Decays of Excited 17

B Mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 141801 (2016). [70] Q. Zhao, Nucleonic resonance excitations with linearly polar- [47] L. Y. Xiao and X. H. Zhong, Strong decays of higher excited ized photon in γp ωp, Phys. Rev. C 63, 025203 (2001). heavy-light mesons in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 90, [71] Q. Zhao, J. S. Al-Khalili→ and C. Bennhold, Quark model pre- 074029 (2014). dictions for K∗ photoproduction on the proton, Phys. Rev. C [48] H. X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y. R. Liu and S. L. Zhu, A re- 64, 052201 (2001). view of the open charm and open bottom systems, Rept. Prog. [72] M. S. Liu, Q. F. Lüand X. H. Zhong, Triply charmed and Phys. 80, 076201 (2017). bottom baryons in a constituent quark model, Phys. Rev. D [49] A. Manohar and H. Georgi, Chiral Quarks and the Nonrela- 101, 074031 (2020). tivistic Quark Model, Nucl. Phys. B 234, 189 (1984). [73] Q. F. Lü, K. L. Wang, L. Y. Xiao and X. H. Zhong, Mass [50] Z. P. Li, The Threshold pion photoproduction of nucleons in spectra and radiative transitions of doubly heavy baryons in a the chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 50, 5639 (1994). relativized quark model, Phys. Rev. D 96, 114006 (2017). [51] Z. P. Li, H. X. Ye and M. H. Lu, An Unified approach to pseu- [74] F. E. Close, A. Donnachie and Y. S. Kalashnikova, Radiative doscalar meson photoproductions off nucleons in the quark decays of excited vector mesons, Phys. Rev. D 65, 092003 model, Phys. Rev. C 56, 1099 (1997). (2002). [52] Q. Zhao, J. S. Al-Khalili, Z. P. Li and R. L. Workman, Pion [75] S. F. Chen, J. Liu, H. Q. Zhou and D. Y. Chen, Electric tran- photoproduction on the nucleon in the quark model, Phys. Rev. sitions of the charmed-strange mesons in a relativistic quark C 65, 065204 (2002). model, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 290 (2020). [53] X. H. Zhong and Q. Zhao, Strong decays of newly observed [76] W. J. Deng, H. Liu, L. C. Gui and X. H. Zhong, Charmonium DsJ states in a constituent quark model with effective La- spectrum and their electromagnetic transitions with higher grangians, Phys. Rev. D 81, 014031 (2010). multipole contributions, Phys. Rev. D 95, 034026 (2017). [54] X. H. Zhong, Strong decays of the newly observed D(2550), [77] W. J. Deng, H. Liu, L. C. Gui and X. H. Zhong, Spectrum and D(2600), D(2750), and D(2760), Phys. Rev. D 82, 114014 electromagnetic transitions of bottomonium, Phys. Rev. D 95, (2010). 074002 (2017). [55] X. H. Zhong and Q. Zhao, Strong decays of heavy-light [78] Q.Li,M.S.Liu,L.S.Lu, Q.F.Lü,L.C.GuiandX.H.Zhong, mesons in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 78, 014029 Excited bottom-charmed mesons in a nonrelativistic quark (2008). model, Phys. Rev. D 99, 096020 (2019). [56] X. H. Zhong and Q. Zhao, Charmed baryon strong decays in a [79] T. Barnes, S. Godfrey and E. S. Swanson, Higher charmonia, chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 77, 074008 (2008). Phys. Rev. D 72, 054026 (2005). [57] L. Y. Xiao and X. H. Zhong, Ξ baryon strong decays in a chiral [80] E. Eichten, K. Gottfried, T. Kinoshita, K. D. Lane and quark model, Phys. Rev. D 87, 094002 (2013). T. M. Yan, Charmonium: The Model, Phys. Rev. D 17, 3090 [58] L. H. Liu, L. Y. Xiao and X. H. Zhong, Charm-strange baryon (1978) Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 21, 313 (1980)]. strong decays in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 86, [81] S. Godfrey and R. Kokoski, The Properties of P Wave Mesons 034024 (2012). with One Heavy Quark, Phys. Rev. D 43, 1679 (1991). [59] H. Nagahiro, S. Yasui, A. Hosaka, M. Oka and H. Noumi, [82] S. Godfrey, Spectroscopy of Bc mesons in the relativized quark Structure of charmed baryons studied by pionic decays, Phys. model, Phys. Rev. D 70, 054017 (2004). Rev. D 95, 014023 (2017). [83] E. Eichten and F. Feinberg, Spin Dependent Forces in QCD, [60] Y. X. Yao, K. L. Wang and X. H. Zhong, Strong and radiative Phys. Rev. D 23, 2724 (1981). decays of the low-lying D-wave singly heavy baryons, Phys. [84] Chong-Hai Cai and Lei Li, Radial equation of bound state and Rev. D 98, 076015 (2018). binding energies of Ξ− hypernuclei, High Energy Physics and [61] K. L. Wang, Y. X. Yao, X. H. Zhong and Q. Zhao, Strong and Nuclear Physics 27, 1005 (2003). radiative decays of the low-lying S - and P-wave singly heavy [85] Q. Li, M. S. Liu, Q. F. Lü, L. C. Gui and X. H. Zhong, Canon- baryons, Phys. Rev. D 96, 116016 (2017). ical interpretation of Y(10750) and Υ(10860) in the Υ family, [62] L. Y. Xiao, K. L. Wang, Q. f. Lü, X. H. Zhong and S. L. Zhu, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 59 (2020). Strong and radiative decays of the doubly charmed baryons, [86] Q. Li, L. C. Gui, M. S. Liu, Q. F. Lüand X. H. Zhong, Mass Phys. Rev. D 96, 094005 (2017). spectrum and strong decays of strangeonium in a constituent [63] K. L. Wang, L. Y. Xiao, X. H. Zhong and Q. Zhao, Under- quark model, Chin. Phys. C 45, 023116 (2021). standing the newly observed Ωc states through their decays, [87] R. Koniuk and N. Isgur, Baryon Decays in a Quark Model Phys. Rev. D 95, 116010 (2017). with Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 21, 1868 (1980) Erra- [64] M. S. Liu, K. L. Wang, Q. F. Lüand X. H. Zhong, Ω baryon tum: [Phys. Rev. D 23, 818 (1981)]. spectrum and their decays in a constituent quark model, Phys. [88] S. Capstick and W. Roberts, Quark models of baryon masses Rev. D 101, 016002 (2020). and decays, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 45, S241 (2000). [65] S. J. Brodsky and J. R. Primack, The Electromagnetic Interac- [89] L. A. Copley, G. Karl and E. Obryk, Single pion photoproductions of Composite Systems, Annals Phys. 52, 315 (1969). tion in the quark model, Nucl. Phys. B 13, 303 (1969). [66] F. E. Close and L. A. Copley, Electromagnetic interactions [90] R. Sartor and F. Stancu, Photodecay amplitudes in a flux-tube of weakly bound composite systems, Nucl. Phys. B 19, 477 model for baryons, Phys. Rev. D 33, 727 (1986). (1970). [91] A. L. Licht and A. Pagnamenta, Wave functions and form- [67] F. E. Close and Z. P. Li, Photoproduction and Electroproduc- factors for relativistic composite particles. I, Phys. Rev. D 2, tion of N∗ in a Quark Model With QCD, Phys. Rev. D 42, 2194 1150 (1970). (1990). [92] G. Jaczko and L. Durand, Understanding the success of non- [68] Z. Li, Compton scattering and polarizabilities of the nucleon relativistic potential models for relativistic quark-anti-quark in the quark model, Phys. Rev. D 48, 3070 (1993). bound states, Phys. Rev. D 58, 114017 (1998). [69] Q. Zhao, Z. P. Li and C. Bennhold, Vector meson photopro- [93] N. Isgur and M. B. Wise, Weak Decays of Heavy Mesons duction with an effective Lagrangian in the quark model, Phys. in the Static Quark Approximation, Phys. Lett. B 232, 113 Rev. C 58, 2393 (1998). (1989). 18

[94] N. Isgur and M. B. Wise, Weak Transition Form-factors Be- Ds1(2710) and DsJ (2860), Phys. Rev. D 81, 014021 (2010). tween Heavy Mesons, Phys. Lett. B 237, 527 (1990). [102] F. E. Close, C. E. Thomas, O. Lakhina and E. S. Swan- 3 [95] T. Matsuki, T. Morii and K. Seo, Mixing angle between P1 son, Canonical interpretation of the DsJ (2860) and DsJ (2690), 1 and P1 in HQET, Prog. Theor. Phys. 124, 285 (2010). Phys. Lett. B 647, 159 (2007). [96] F. E. Close and E. S. Swanson, Dynamics and decay of heavy- [103] H. Yu, Z. Zhao and A. Zhang, Dynamical mixing between 3 3 light hadrons, Phys. Rev. D 72, 094004 (2005). 2 S 1 and 1 D1 charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. D 102, 054013 [97] T. Barnes, N. Black and P. R. Page, Strong decays of strange (2020). quarkonia, Phys. Rev. D 68, 054014 (2003). [104] B. Chen, X. Liu and A. Zhang, Combined study of 2S and 1D [98] R. Akers et al. [OPAL Collaboration], Observations of π B open-charm mesons with natural spin-parity, Phys. Rev. D 92, charge-ﬂavor correlations and resonant Bπ and BK produc-− 034005 (2015). tion, Z. Phys. C 66, 19 (1995). [105] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], Observation of overlap- 0 2 [99] S. Godfrey and K. Moats, Properties of Excited Charm and ping spin-1 and spin-3 D¯ K− resonances at mass 2.86GeV/c , Charm-Strange Mesons, Phys. Rev. D 93, 034035 (2016). Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 162001 (2014). [100] B. Chen, L. Yuan and A. Zhang, Possible 2S and 1D charmed [106] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], Dalitz plot analysis of 0 ¯ 0 + and charmed-strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D 83, 114025 Bs D K−π decays, Phys. Rev. D 90, 072003 (2014). (2011). → [101] D. -M. Li and B. Ma, Implication of BaBar’s new data on the 19

TABLE VII: Partial and total decay widths (MeV) for the 1D-wave B and Bs mesons.

2S +1 Observed State Γth (MeV) Observed State n LJ Channel Channel Γth (MeV) B meson (bu¯ / bd¯) Bs meson 3 1 D3 B3∗(5979) Bπ 17 B∗s3(6067) BK 7.0 Bη 0.2 Bsη 0.1 BsK 0.1 B∗K 5.8 B∗π 17 B∗sη 0.03 B∗η 0.1 Bs2(5840)γ 0.038 4 B∗s K 0.01 Bs1(5830)γ 2.0 10− × 4 B2(5747)π 0.9 Bs(1P1)γ 2.0 10− 3 × 4 B (5721)π 0.01 B (1 P )γ 1.0 10− 1 s 0 × B(1P1)π 3.6 Total 13 B2(5747)γ 0.125/0.043 3 3 B1(5721)γ 1.9 10− /0.5 10− × 3 × 3 B(1P1)γ 1.9 10− /0.5 10− 3 × 3 × 3 B(1 P0)γ 0.7 10− /0.2 10− Total× 39 ×

3 1 D1 B1∗(6056) Bπ 92 B∗s1(6101) BK 87 Bη 14 Bsη 7.3 BsK 21 B∗K 37 B∗π 41 B∗sη 2.6 3 B∗η 5.3 B (5840)γ 3.9 10− s2 × B∗s K 7.3 Bs(1P1)γ 0.017 B2(5747)π 2.1 Bs1(5830)γ 0.023 3 B1(5721)π 148 Bs(1 P0)γ 0.044 B(1P)π 20 Total 133 B2(5747)γ 0.035/0.01 B(1P)γ 0.122/0.039 B1(5721)γ 0.178 /0.056 3 B(1 P0)γ 0.201/0.066 Total 350

1D2′ B2(6067) B∗π 66 Bs2(6113) B∗K 22 B∗η 1.7 BS∗ η 0.5 B∗s K 1.4 Bs2(5840)γ 0.016 3 3 B(1 P )π 3.5 B (1P)γ 1.3 10− 0 s × B2(5747)π 6.2 Bs1(5830)γ 0.064 3 4 B1(5721)π 10 Bs(1 P0)γ 3.0 10− B(1P)π 0.4 Total× 23 B2(5747)γ 0.106/0.033 3 B(1P)γ 0.022/6.5 10− × B1(5721)γ 0.302/0.104 3 3 3 B(1 P0)γ 3.3 10− /1.0 10− Total× 90 ×

1D2 B2(5973) B∗π 92 Bs2(6061) B∗K 85 B∗η 6.7 BS∗ η 4.2 3 B∗s K 5.2 Bs2(5840)γ 6.0 10− 3 × B(1 P0)π 0.002 Bs(1P)γ 0.045 3 B2(5747)π 64 Bs1(5830)γ 0.5 10− 3 × 3 B(1P)π 0.4 B (1 P )γ 0.1 10− s 0 × B1(5721)π 0.04 Total 90 B2(5747)γ 0.026/0.008 B(1P)γ 0.223/0.076 3 3 B1(5721)γ 1.2 10− /0.3 10− 3 × 3 × 3 B(1 P0)γ 0.5 10− /0.2 10− Total× 169 ×