64
The meson landscape Scalars and Glue in Strong QCD New states beyond Weird baryons: pentaquark problems “Diquarks,Tetraquarks, Pentaquarks and no quarks” 1 Theory to Reality via Lattice&Jlab Strong Q C D

The meson landscape

  • Upload
    greg

  • View
    23

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Strong. “Diquarks,Tetraquarks, Pentaquarks and no quarks”. The meson landscape. Q. C. D. Scalars and Glue in Strong QCD. New states beyond. Weird baryons: pentaquark problems. Theory to Reality via Lattice&Jlab. 1. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: The meson landscape

The meson landscape

Scalars and Glue in Strong QCD

New states beyond

Weird baryons: pentaquark problems

“Diquarks,Tetraquarks, Pentaquarks and no quarks”

1

Theory to Reality via Lattice&Jlab

Strong

Q C D

Page 2: The meson landscape

Only discuss hadrons that are either

Agreed to experimentally exist

Page 3: The meson landscape

Only discuss hadrons that are either

Agreed to experimentally existAgreed experimentally to exist

Page 4: The meson landscape

Only discuss hadrons that are either

Agreed to experimentally existAgreed experimentally to exist

or

Agreed theoretically should exist

Life is hard enough anyway and theorists are easily led astray

Page 5: The meson landscape

ArndtBuccellaCarlsonDyakanovEllisFaberGianniniHuangInoueJaffeKarlinerLipkinMaltmanNussinovOhPolyakovQiangRosnerStechTrillingUVenezianoWilczekXiangYangZhu

If Theta pentaquark doesn’t exist,then these (and many other theorists)should be congratulated on their creativity

Pentaquark

Page 6: The meson landscape

Somethings are deceptively simple

m(Bc) = 6276.5 (4.0) (2.7)

Page 7: The meson landscape

Somethings are deceptively simple

m(Bc) = 6276.5 (4.0) (2.7)

m(c)+m(b) ~ ½[m(psi) + m(upsilon)] = 6278.6

Heavy mass scale of c and b make agreements look artificially good

better than 1 per mille !

Page 8: The meson landscape

Somethings are deceptively simple

m(Bc) = 6276.5 (4.0) (2.7)

m(c)+m(b) ~ ½[m(psi) + m(upsilon)] = 6278.6

Heavy mass scale of c and b make agreements look artificially good

better than 1 per mille !

WHY does it work so well? Constituent d.o.f.robust=gift of nature

Page 9: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

9460

10023

9860

9893

9913

3686

3097

3415

3510

3556

3772

cc*)

Narrow below MM threshold

Anothergift of nature

Page 10: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

9460

10023

9860

9893

9913

3686

3097

3415

3510

3556

3772

cc*)

Lattice QCD: Linear: Flux tube…..implies…

Page 11: The meson landscape

Gluonic hybrid mesons

c.m

.c.m

.

e.g. p=1e.g. p=1

Exciting the flux tube

Lattice&model agree spectrum; decays in FT; starting in lattice

Page 12: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

770 780/1020

1460

1700

I=1 vector : I=0 nn*; ss*

1320 1270/1525

1300 1285/1530

1420

+ Problem of nn* ss* flavour mixing

Clean below S-wave MM thresholdsAnd no prominent G expected45

Page 13: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

770 780/1020

1460

1700

I=1 vector : I=0 nn*; ss*

1320 1270/1525

1300 1285/1530

1420 1370/1500/1710

+ Problem of nn* ss* flavour mixing

44

Page 14: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

770

1460

1700

I=1 vector : I=0 JP = 2+ 1+ 0+

13201270/1525

13001285/1530

1420 1370/1500/1710980 980/600

43

Page 15: The meson landscape

Far away from qq* lowest multiplets… except for 0++

Glueballs spectrum in YangMills from Lattice

Optimist: is this a signal for scalar glueball?

41

Page 16: The meson landscape

Only scalar glueballbelow 2 GeV

Glueballs spectrum in YangMills from Lattice

Optimist: is this a signal for scalar glueball?

42

Page 17: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

770

1460

1700

I=1 vector : I=0 JP = 2+ 1+ 0+

13201270/1525

13001285/1530

1420 1370/1500/1710980 980/600

1+

? qq* + Glueball

Lattice G =1.6 \pm

40

Page 18: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

770

1460

1700

I=1 vector : I=0 JP = 2+ 1+ 0+

13201270/1525

13001285/1530

1420 1370/1500/1710980 980/600

[qq][q*q*]

39

Page 19: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

770

1460

1700

I=1 vector : I=0 JP = 2+ 1+ 0+

13201270/1525

13001285/1530

1420 1370/1500/1710980 980/600

Data do not imply GBut given lattice and qq*Does consistent pic emerge?

Can data eliminate it; or even make it robust?

15/38

Page 20: The meson landscape

Scalar Glueball and Mixing

s

n

G

16/37

Page 21: The meson landscape

Scalar Glueball and Mixing

Meson

1710

1500

1370

s

n

G

36

Page 22: The meson landscape

Scalar Glueball and Mixing

Meson G ss* nn*

1710 0.39 0.91 0.15

1500 - 0.65 0.33 - 0.70

1370 0.69 - 0.15 - 0.70

s

n

G

LEAR/WA102Meson pair decays

35

Page 23: The meson landscape

Meson G ss* nn*

1710 0.39 0.91 0.15

1500 - 0.65 0.33 - 0.70

1370 - 0.69 0.15 0.70

s

n

0- 0- meson decays LEAR/WA102

FC Kirk

Scalar Glueball and Mixinga simple example for expt to rule out

Nontrivial correlationwith relative masses

heavy

l

lightmiddle

Page 24: The meson landscape

Scalar Glueball and Mixing:how to measure flavour state

Meson G ss* nn*

1710 0.39 0.91 0.15

1500 - 0.65 0.33 - 0.70

1370 0.69 - 0.15 - 0.70

s

n

33

Page 25: The meson landscape

Scalar Glueball and Mixing

Meson G ss* nn*

1710 0.39 0.91 0.15

1500 - 0.65 0.33 - 0.70

1370 0.69 - 0.15 - 0.70

s

n

Page 26: The meson landscape

from BES

A flavour filter for 0++ 0-+ 2++mesons and glueballs

>1 billion 1000 per meson

Challenge: Turn Lattice QCD Glueball spectrum into physics31

Page 27: The meson landscape

flux-tube degrees-of-freedom

c.m

.c.m

.

e.g. p=1e.g. p=1

Costs about 1 to 1.5GeV energy to excite phonon“pi/R”Hybrid qq* @ 2GeV; Hybrid cc* @ 4-4.5GeV

Barnes FC Swanson 93

Exotic 1-+ clean example

30

Page 28: The meson landscape

\sim 2.2 GeV ss* quarks LGT \sim 2 GeV ud flavours

Michael…

29

Page 29: The meson landscape

28

Page 30: The meson landscape

Light flavor dangerPi very light = bigger threat e.g. pi b1 below 1-+ hybrid

26/27

Page 31: The meson landscape

Light flavor dangerPi very light = bigger threat e.g. pi b1 below 1-+ hybrid

Heavy flavors: K D B more “normal”KK1 threshold vs ss*hybridDD1 threshold versus cc* hybridBB1 threshold versus bb* hybrid27/26

Page 32: The meson landscape

Predicted 1-+ Hybrid masses (with spin splittings)

25

Page 33: The meson landscape

29/24

Page 34: The meson landscape

“Hybrid” and 3^3S_1almost decoupled

30/23

Page 35: The meson landscape

Predicted 1-+ Hybrid masses (with spin splittings)

Spin hyperfine splittings

1- - (4.25) Y(4260?)1- + (4.1) HQLGT0- + (3.95) X(3940?)

Barnes FC 82Chanowitz Sharpe

e+e- feebly coupled

e+e- \to \psi + X?

22

Page 36: The meson landscape

e+e- \to psi pi pi BaBar sees new vector cc*

Y(4260)

No sign of established3S/2D(4040/4160)4S(4400)in the psi pipi data

Y(4260) thus seemsanomalous

Also no place for extra cc* state

\Gamma(ee) 5-80eVCompare \sim 1 keV !!

But width 90MeV dominantly psi pipi !

Page 37: The meson landscape

Belle e+e- to + X

???

0-+;1-+

33/20

Page 38: The meson landscape

Masses OK. Need to go

Beyond spectroscopy:

Hybrid decays and production.

34/19

Page 39: The meson landscape

What are the general properties of OZI strong decay?

Page 40: The meson landscape
Page 41: The meson landscape

What properties

Michael McNeile 06

FC Burns 06

confirms Flux Tube for hybrid:conventional

Lattice S-wave decays now calculated Michael McNeile

Exactly WHAT is Lattice revealing about dynamics:What aspect(s) of Flux Tube model are being confirmed?

Page 42: The meson landscape

2

qq* create in S=1

qq* create in S=0 0

38/15

Page 43: The meson landscape

J – S = “L” Factorisation of S and L

qq* created in S=1

S=0 cannot decay to S=0 + S=0 “spin singlet selection rule”

Factorisation and S=1 creationis powerful result if generally true.

Determine nature of Y(4260) by DD_1 pattern

Page 44: The meson landscape

SL Factorisation and S=1selection rules for psi*(cc*) \to DD_1

Also applies to KK_1 decays of ss* vectorse.g. Jlab around 2.2 GeV

40/13

Page 45: The meson landscape

e+e- KK_1

phi pi pi

Intriguing resonantsignal at 2175

= phi(hybrid)??

2175 – m(phi)=4265 – m(psi)!!??

Jlablook indiffractive

41/12

Page 46: The meson landscape

4260 decay if hybrid

Do data fit with this?

What next (theory and data)

42/11

Page 47: The meson landscape

flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays

c.m

.c.m

.

e.g. p=1e.g. p=1

Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed

Isgur Paton 92 light exotics

FC Page 95 all

43/10

Page 48: The meson landscape

flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays

c.m

.c.m

.

e.g. p=1e.g. p=1

Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed

Isgur Paton 92 light exotics

FC Page 95 all

Look for DD_1 and D*D_0 near threshold Look for psi pipi and h1c eta

44/9

Page 49: The meson landscape

flux-tube breaking and hybrid decays

c.m

.c.m

.

e.g. p=1e.g. p=1

Break tube: S+P states yes; S+S suppressed

Isgur Paton 92 light exotics

FC Page 95 all

Look for DD_1 and D*D_0 near threshold Look for psi pipi and h1c eta

Absence of DD; DD*; DsDs …

45/8

Page 50: The meson landscape

Y(4260): D_s and D_s* channels

NoDsDsresonance

eliminatestetraquarkcsc*s*

46/7

Page 51: The meson landscape

Y(4260): D and D* channels

NoDDDD* orD*D*resonance

47/6

Page 52: The meson landscape

The large psi +pi pi = hint of large DD1

D

D_1 uu * pi pi

psi

e+e- psi(hybrid) DD_1

S-wave, relative mom \sim 0; DD_1 interchange constituents to make psi pipi “strongly”

Similar for phi(hybrid) KK_1 phi pipi 48/5

Page 53: The meson landscape

All consistent with predictions for hybrid charmoniumFC+Page 1995

Search DD_1 and D*D_0 in DD\pi\pi

If NOT hybrid cc* then why not/where is it ?!

Page 54: The meson landscape

Can glueballs ever be (dis)proven?

Page 55: The meson landscape

Can glueballs ever be (dis)proven?

Are valence hybrids drowned by continuum mesons?

Page 56: The meson landscape

Can glueballs ever be (dis)proven?

Are valence hybrids drowned by continuum mesons?

Heavy flavours cleaner thy but less interesting for Jlab

ss*g & qq*g at Jlab – flavour dependence and sort out phenom

Lattice challenge = is there 1-+ qq*g signal or is it pi b1 where is the valence hybrid in mass

Page 57: The meson landscape

Can glueballs ever be (dis)proven?

Are valence hybrids drowned by continuum mesons?

Heavy flavours cleaner thy but less interesting for Jlab

ss*g & qq*g at Jlab – flavour dependence and sort out phenom

Lattice challenge = is there 1-+ qq*g signal or is it pi b1 where is the valence hybrid in mass

Lattice challenge = do hybrids really prefer S+P decays(a lot of phenomenology/expt prejudice based on it)

Page 58: The meson landscape

Can glueballs ever be (dis)proven?

Are valence hybrids drowned by continuum mesons?

Heavy flavours cleaner thy but less interesting for Jlab

ss*g & qq*g at Jlab – flavour dependence and sort out phenom

Lattice challenge = is there 1-+ qq*g signal or is it pi b1 where is the valence hybrid in mass

Lattice challenge = do hybrids really prefer S+P decays(a lot of phenomenology/expt prejudice based on it)

General challenge: rate for hybrid photo/electroprod sum rules = not suppressed (hidden assumptions) models primitive

Page 59: The meson landscape

gamma rho

pi

hybrid

NN

yes no

Model assumed this

Page 60: The meson landscape

gamma rho

pi

hybrid

NN

gamma rhohybrid

pi

hybrid

NN

yes

yes

no

no

Model assumed this

Model ignored this

Page 61: The meson landscape

ss*g & qq*g at Jlab – flavour dependence and sort out phenom

Lattice radiative transitions now in progress (heavy flavors)Jlab group……hope for intuition on light flavour rates for Jlab

JLab Hybrids: Theory

JLab Hybrids: Experiment

Diffractive production of 1– at 2175MeV into phi pipi; KK1Hybrid S=0 cant make S=0+S=0: K+K(1P1)=0 test.K1(3P1:1P1) tests for 3S1:3D1:hybrid vector

Page 62: The meson landscape
Page 63: The meson landscape

Scalar Glueball and Mixing

Meson G ss* nn*

1710 + + +1500 - + - 1370 + - -

s

n

G

3 state mixingRelative phases

Page 64: The meson landscape

2S: 1-

1S: 1-

1D: 1-

2+

1+

0+

3686

3097

3415

3510

3556

3772

cc*)

29801S: 0-

36252S: 0-

Possible 0-+Glueball \sim 3.6 GeVImpact on eta_c’ ??

Compare in B decay, gamma gamma;ee \to psi + eta_c’