1: \documentclass[aps,preprint,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
2: %\documentstyle[12pt,amssymb,epsf]{article}
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4: \usepackage{graphics,epsfig}
5: \topmargin -1.5cm
6:
7: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
8: \newcommand{\bd}{\begin{document}}
9: \newcommand{\ed}{\end{document}}
10: \newcommand{\bc}{\begin{center}}
11: \newcommand{\ec}{\end{center}}
12: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}}
13: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}
14: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
15: \renewcommand{\theenumi}{\roman{enumi}}
16: \newcommand{\se}{\section}
17: \newcommand{\sse}{\subsection}
18: \newcommand{\bi}{\bibitem}
19:
20: \newcommand{\func}{\rm}
21: %\def\figcap{\section*{Figure Captions\markboth
22: % {FIGURECAPTIONS}{FIGURECAPTIONS}}\list
23: % {Figure \arabic{enumi}:\hfill}{\settowidth\labelwidth{Figure 999:}
24: % \leftmargin\labelwidth
25: % \advance\leftmargin\labelsep\usecounter{enumi}}}
26: %\let\endfigcap\endlist \relax
27:
28: %\input psfig
29:
30:
31: \begin{document}
32:
33: %\begin{center}
34: \begin{titlepage}
35: \begin{flushright}
36: \today
37: \end{flushright}
38: \vskip 0.05in
39: \null
40: \begin{center}
41: \vspace{.15in}
42: {\Large {\bf
43: T violation in $\Lambda_{b}\rightarrow \Lambda \ell^+
44: \ell^-$ decays with polarized $\Lambda$ }
45: }\\
46: \vspace{1.0cm} \par
47: \vskip 2.1em
48: {\large
49: \begin{tabular}[t]{c}
50: {\bf Chuan-Hung Chen$^a$, C.~Q.~Geng$^{b,c}$ and J.~N.~Ng$^c$}
51: \\
52: \\
53: {\sl ${}^a$Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica}
54: \\ {\sl $\ $ Taipei, Taiwan 115, Republic of China }
55: \\
56: {\sl ${}^b$Department of Physics, National Tsing Hua University}
57: \\ {\sl $\ $ Hsinchu, Taiwan, Republic of China }
58: \\
59: {\sl ${}^c$Theory Group, TRIUMF, 4004 Wesbrrok Mall}
60: \\ {\sl $\ $ Vancouver, B.C. V6T
61: 2A3, Canada}
62: \end{tabular}}
63: \par \vskip 5.3em
64:
65: {\Large\bf Abstract}
66: \end{center}
67: %\begin{abstract}
68:
69: We study the T violating effects in the baryonic decays of
70: $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-\ (l=e\,,\mu)$ with polarized
71: $\Lambda$.
72: We show that the transverse $\Lambda$ polarizations in these
73: baryonic decays could be as large as $50\%$ in CP violating
74: theories beyond the standard model such as the SUSY models,
75: which can be tested in various future hadron colliders.
76:
77: %\end{abstract}
78:
79: \end{titlepage}
80:
81: %\newpage
82:
83: Recently, time-reversal violation (TV) has been measured
84: experimentally in the $K^0$ system \cite{TVk}, and thus
85: complements the information on CP violation (CPV) that has been
86: steadily accumulating for the past thirty seven years. The data is
87: in accordance with the CPT theorem which is fundamental to local
88: quantum field theories with Lorentz invariance and the usual
89: spin-statistics connection. However, the origin of the violation
90: remains unclear. In the standard model, CPV or TV arises from a
91: unique physical phase in the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) quark
92: mixing matrix \cite{ckm}. This paradigm also predicts CPV effect
93: in the b-quark system. To test the accuracy of this paradigm and
94: to search for other sources of CPV one needs to look for new
95: processes, especially the $B^0$ system. Indeed this is an
96: important quest of the B-factories. In addition we deem it
97: particularly interesting if the time reversal symmetry violation
98: can be directly detected in the b-system rather than inferring it
99: as a consequence of CPT invariance. In this paper, we will study
100: the T violating effects in the baryonic decays of
101: $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$.
102:
103: It is known that for a general three-body decay of a baryon the triple
104: spin-momentum
105: correlations, such as $\vec{s}\cdot \left( \vec{p}_{i}\times \vec{p}%
106: _{j}\right) $, are T-odd observables, where $\vec{s}$ and
107: $\vec{p}_{i,j}$ are the spin and momentum vectors of the final
108: particles, respectively. There are a number of different sources
109: that might give rise to these T-odd observables. The most
110: important ones being the weak CPV such as the CKM phase of the SM.
111: However, final state
112: interactions such as QCD for non-leptonic decays
113: or the electromagnetic (EM) interaction
114: among the final state particles can also make contributions. These
115: are usually less interesting and they could even hide the signals
116: from the weak CPV. We note that the T-odd triple correlations do
117: not need non-zero strong phases unlike some of CP violating
118: observables, such as the rate asymmetry between a particle and its
119: antiparticle.
120:
121: In $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda l^{+}l^{-}$ decays, due to
122: experimental concerns only one polarization state can be measured. We can
123: use either the polarization of the lepton ($s_{l}$) or the $\Lambda $
124: baryon ($s_{\Lambda}$)
125: to study the T-odd correlations. For the case with a polarized lepton,
126: since the T-odd correlation such as the transverse lepton
127: polarization is always associated with the lepton mass, we expect
128: that the T violating effects are small for the light lepton modes
129: \cite{CQ}. Although the $\tau $ mode has less
130: suppression due to its mass, the corresponding branching ratio
131: which is $O(10^{-7})$ is about one order of magnitude smaller than
132: that for the $e$ and $\mu $ ones. The above considerations plus the fact
133: that the efficiency of
134: spin measurements in general are not
135: high make lepton polarization a poor choice. In our following analysis, we
136: will concentrate on the search for the
137: possibility of large T-odd term such as $\vec{s}_{\Lambda }\cdot (\vec{p}%
138: _{l^{+}}\times \vec{p}_{\Lambda })$
139: in $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow \Lambda l^{+}l^{-}$ with $l=e$ and $\mu $,
140: and we can set $m_{l}=0$ within the accuracy of our calculations.
141:
142: We start with the effective Hamiltonian for $b\rightarrow sl^{+}l^{-}$ by
143: including the right-handed couplings in the hadronic sector are given by
144:
145: \begin{eqnarray}
146: {\cal H}\left( b\rightarrow sl^{+}l^{-}\right) &=&\frac{G_{F}\alpha _{em}}{%
147: \sqrt{2}\pi }V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}\left[ H_{1\mu }L_{V}^{\mu }\ +H_{2\mu
148: }L_{A}^{\mu }\right] \label{hameff}
149: \end{eqnarray}
150: with
151: \begin{eqnarray}
152: H_{1\mu } &=&\bar{s}\gamma ^{\mu }\left(
153: C_{9}^{L}P_{L}+C_{9}^{R}P_{R}\right) b -\frac{2m_{b}}{q^{2}}\bar{s}i\sigma
154: _{\mu \nu }q^{\nu }\left( C_{7}^{L}P_{R}+C_{7}^{R}P_{L}\right) b\,,
155: \nonumber
156: \\
157: H_{2\mu } &=&\bar{s}\gamma ^{\mu }\left(
158: C_{10}^{L}P_{L}+C_{10}^{R}P_{R}\right) b \,, \nonumber \\
159: L_{V}^{\mu } &=&\bar{l}\gamma ^{\mu }l\,, \nonumber \\
160: L_{A}^{\mu } &=&\bar{l}\gamma ^{\mu }\gamma _{5}l\,,
161: \label{hameff1}
162: \end{eqnarray}
163: where $C_{i}^{L}$ and $C_{i}^{R}\left( i=7,9,10\right) $ denote the
164: effective Wilson coefficients of left- and right-handed couplings,
165: respectively. In the standard model,
166: \begin{eqnarray}
167: C_{9}^{L}=C_{9}^{eff}\,, &&C_{9}^{R}=0\,, \nonumber \\
168: C_{10}^{L}=C_{10}\,, &&C_{10}^{R}=0\,, \nonumber \\
169: C_{7}^{L}=C_{7}^{eff}\,, &&C_{7}^{R}={\frac{m_{s}}{m_{b}}}C_{7}^{eff}\,,
170: \label{SMWC}
171: \end{eqnarray}
172: where $C_{9}^{eff}$, $C_{10}$, and $C_{7}^{eff}$ are the standard Wilson
173: coefficients \cite{Buras}.
174:
175: To study the exclusive decays of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$, one needs to
176: know the form factors in the transition of $\Lambda _{b}(p_{\Lambda
177: _{b}})\rightarrow \Lambda ( p_{\Lambda })$, parametrized generally as
178: follows:
179:
180: \begin{eqnarray}
181: \left\langle \Lambda \right| \bar{s}\ \Gamma _{\mu }\ b\left| \Lambda
182: _{b}\right\rangle &=&f_{1}^{(T)}\bar{u}_{\Lambda }\gamma _{\mu }u_{\Lambda
183: _{b}}+f_{2}^{(T)}\bar{u}_{\Lambda }i\sigma _{\mu \nu }\ q^{\nu }u_{\Lambda
184: _{b}}+f_{3}^{(T)}q_{\mu }\bar{u}_{\Lambda }u_{\Lambda _{b}}, \nonumber \\
185: \left\langle \Lambda \right| \bar{s}\ \Gamma _{\mu }\gamma _{5}\ b\left|
186: \Lambda _{b}\right\rangle &=&g_{1}^{(T)}\bar{u}_{\Lambda }\gamma _{\mu
187: }\gamma _{5}u_{\Lambda _{b}}+g_{2}^{(T)}\bar{u}_{\Lambda }i\sigma _{\mu \nu
188: }\ q^{\nu }\gamma _{5}u_{\Lambda _{b}}+g_{3}^{(T)}q_{\mu }\bar{u}_{\Lambda
189: }\gamma _{5}u_{\Lambda _{b}}\,, \label{atcq}
190: \end{eqnarray}
191: where $\Gamma_{\mu}=\gamma _{\mu }\ (i\sigma_{\mu\nu})$,
192: and $f_i^{(T)}$ and $g_i^{(T)}$ are the form factors of vector (tensor) and
193: axial-vector (axial-tensor) currents, respectively. In the heavy quark
194: effective theory (HQET) \cite{MR}, the form factors in Eq. (\ref{atcq}) can
195: be simplified by using
196: \begin{eqnarray}
197: \left\langle \Lambda (p_{\Lambda })\right| \bar{s}\Gamma b\left| \Lambda
198: _{b}(p_{\Lambda _{b}})\right\rangle =\bar{u}_{\Lambda }\left( F_{1}(q^{2})+%
199: \slash{\!\!\!{v}}F_{2}(q^{2})\right) \Gamma u_{\Lambda _{b}}\,,
200: \end{eqnarray}
201: where $\Gamma $ denotes the Dirac matrix, $v=p_{\Lambda _{b}}/M_{\Lambda
202: _{b}}$ is the four-velocity of $\Lambda _{b}$, and $q=p_{\Lambda
203: _{b}}-p_{\Lambda }$ is the momentum transfer, and the relations among the
204: form factors can be found in Ref. \cite{chen-prd63}. Explicitly, under the
205: HEQT, we have
206: \begin{eqnarray}
207: f_{1} &=& g_{2} = f^{T}_{2}=g^{T}_{2} = F_{1}+\sqrt{r}F_{2}\,,
208: \nonumber
209: \\
210: \rho &\equiv &M_{\Lambda _{b}}\left( {\frac{f_{2}+g_{2}}{f_{1}+g_{1}}}%
211: \right) = \frac{M_{\Lambda _{b}}}{q^2}\left( {\frac{f^{T}_{1}+g^{T}_{1}}
212: {f_{1}+g_{1}}}%
213: \right) = {\frac{F_{2}}{F_{1}+\sqrt{r}F_{2}}}\,. \label{HQETff}
214: \end{eqnarray}
215:
216: In order to study the T violating effects using the $\Lambda $ spin
217: polarization, we write the $\Lambda $ four-spin vector in terms of a unit
218: vector, $\hat{\xi}$, along the $\Lambda $ spin in its rest frame, as
219: \begin{eqnarray}
220: s_{0}\,=\,\frac{\vec{p}_{\Lambda }\cdot \hat{\xi}}{M_{\Lambda }},\qquad \vec{
221: s}\,=\,\hat{\xi}+\frac{s_{0}}{E_{\Lambda }+M_{\Lambda }}\vec{p}_{\Lambda },
222: \end{eqnarray}
223: and choose the unit vectors along the longitudinal, normal, transverse
224: components of the $\Lambda $ polarization, to be
225: \begin{eqnarray}
226: \hat{e}_{L} &=&\frac{\vec{p}_{\Lambda }}{\left| \vec{p}_{\Lambda }\right| },
227: \nonumber \\
228: \hat{e}_{N} &=&\frac{\vec{p}_{\Lambda }\times \left( \vec{p}_{l^{-}}\times
229: \vec{p}_{\Lambda }\right) }{\left| \vec{p}_{\Lambda }\times \left( \vec{p}%
230: _{l^{-}}\times \vec{p}_{\Lambda }\right) \right| }, \nonumber \\
231: \hat{e}_{T} &=&\frac{\vec{p}_{l^{-}}\times \vec{p}_{\Lambda }}{\left| \vec{p}%
232: _{l^{-}}\times \vec{p}_{\Lambda }\right| }\,, \label{uv}
233: \end{eqnarray}
234: respectively. Hence, the differential decay rates with polarized
235: $\Lambda $ is given by
236: \begin{eqnarray}
237: d\Gamma &=&\frac{1}{2}d\Gamma ^{0}\left[ 1+\vec{P}\cdot
238: \hat{\xi}\right]\,,
239: \label{diffrate} \\
240: d\Gamma ^{0}\left( t\right) &=&\frac{G_{F}^{2}\alpha _{em}^{2}\lambda
241: _{t}^{2}}{96\pi ^{5}}M_{\Lambda _{b}}^{5}\sqrt{t^{2}-r}f_{1}^{2}R_{\Lambda
242: _{b}}\left( t\right) dt,
243: \label{diffrate0}
244: \end{eqnarray}
245: where $\vec{P}$ is the $\Lambda$ polarization vector, defined by
246: \begin{eqnarray}
247: \vec{P}=P_{L}\hat{e}_{L}+P_{N}\hat{e}_{N}+P_{T}\hat{e}_{T}\,,
248: \end{eqnarray}
249: and
250: \begin{eqnarray}
251: R_{\Lambda _{b}}\left( t\right) &=&\left[ \left( 3\left( 1+r\right)
252: t-2r-4t^{2}\right) +s\rho ^{2}\left( 3\left( 1+r\right) t-4r-2t^{2}\right)
253: +6\rho \sqrt{r}s\left( 1-t\right) \right] \nonumber \\
254: &&\times \left( \left| C_{9}^{R}\right| ^{2}+\left| C_{9}^{L}\right|
255: ^{2}+\left| C_{10}^{R}\right| ^{2}+\left| C_{10}^{L}\right| ^{2}\right)
256: \nonumber \\
257: &&+\frac{4\hat{m}_{b}}{s}\left( 3\left( 1+r\right) t-4r-2t^{2}\right) \left(
258: \left| C_{7}^{R}\right| ^{2}+\left| C_{7}^{L}\right| ^{2}\right) \nonumber
259: \\
260: &&-6\sqrt{r}s\left[ 1+2\left( t-r\right) \rho +s\rho ^{2}\right] \left( {\rm
261: {Re}C_{9}^{R}C_{9}^{L*}+{Re}C_{10}^{R}C_{10}^{L*}}\right) \nonumber \\
262: &&+12\hat{m}_{b}\left[ 2\rho \left( r+t^{2}-\left( 1+r\right) t\right) -%
263: \sqrt{r}\left( 1-t\right) \left( 1+s\rho ^{2}\right) \right] \left( {\rm {Re}%
264: C_{9}^{R}C_{7}^{L*}+{Re}C_{9}^{L}C_{7}^{R*}}\right) \nonumber \\
265: &&+12\hat{m}_{b}\left[ 2\rho \sqrt{r}s+\left( t-r\right) \left( 1+s\rho
266: ^{2}\right) \right] \left( {\rm {Re}C_{9}^{R}C_{7}^{R*}+{Re}%
267: C_{9}^{L}C_{7}^{L*}}\right) \,,
268: \end{eqnarray}
269: with $\lambda _{t}=V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}$, $t=E_{\Lambda }/M_{\Lambda _{b}}$, $%
270: r=M_{\Lambda }^{2}/M_{\Lambda _{b}}^{2}$, $\hat{m}_{b}=m_{b}/M_{\Lambda
271: _{b}}$, and $s=1+r-2t$. The kinematic ranges for $t$ and $s$ are
272: \begin{eqnarray}
273: \sqrt{r}\leq t &\leq &\frac{1}{2}\left( 1+r\right) \,, \nonumber
274: \\
275: 0\leq s &\leq &\left( 1-\sqrt{r}\right) ^{2}\,.
276: \end{eqnarray}
277: With the T odd transverse $\Lambda $ polarizations defined by
278: \[
279: P_{T}=\frac{d\Gamma \left( \hat{\xi}\cdot \hat{e}_{T}=1\right) -d\Gamma
280: \left( \hat{\xi}\cdot \hat{e}_{T}=-1\right) }{d\Gamma \left( \hat{\xi}\cdot
281: \hat{e}_{T}=1\right) +d\Gamma \left( \hat{\xi}\cdot \hat{e}_{T}=-1\right) }
282: \,,
283: \]
284: and from Eq. (\ref{diffrate}) we obtain
285: \begin{eqnarray}
286: P_{T} &=&\frac{3\pi }{4R_{\Lambda _{b}}\left( t\right) }\sqrt{s\phi }\left(
287: 1-s\rho ^{2}\right) \nonumber \\
288: &&\times \left[ \left( {\rm {Im}C_{9}^{R}C_{10}^{L*}-{Im}C_{9}^{L}C_{10}^{R*}%
289: }\right) -\frac{2\hat{m}_{b}}{s}\left( 1-t\right) \left( {\rm {Im}%
290: C_{7}^{L}C_{10}^{R*}-{Im}C_{7}^{R}C_{10}^{L*}}\right) \right] \;\;, \label{Pt}
291: \end{eqnarray}
292: where $\phi \left( s\right) =\left( 1-r\right) ^{2}-2s\left( 1+r\right)
293: +s^{2}$.
294:
295: To understand Eq. (\ref{Pt}), we first examine the hadronic currents with $%
296: V\pm A$ types of interactions. From Eq. (\ref{hameff}), there are three
297: possible sources which
298: could lead to $T$-odd correlations:
299: %\renewcommand{\theenumi}{\roman{enumi}}
300: \renewcommand{\labelenumi}{(\theenumi)}
301: \begin{enumerate}
302: \item $H_{i\mu}H_{i\nu}^{\dagger}
303: L_{V(A)}^{\mu}L_{V(A)}^{\nu\dagger}\,,\;\;\;\;\;\ (i=1,2)$
304: \item $H_{1\mu }^{L(R)}H_{2\nu
305: }^{L(R)\dagger }L_{V}^{\mu }L_{A}^{\nu \dagger}$,
306: \item $H_{1\mu
307: }^{L(R)}H_{2\nu }^{R(L)\dagger }L_{V}^{\mu }L_{A}^{\nu\dagger }$,
308: \end{enumerate}
309: where $H_{i\mu }^{L(R)}$ involve only
310: left-handed (right-handed) currents. By summing all the lepton spin degrees
311: of freedom, we get $\sum L_V^{\mu}L_V^{\nu\dagger}=\sum L_A^{\mu}
312: L_A^{\nu\dagger}=(p_l^{\mu}p_{\bar{l}}^{\nu}+p_l^{\nu}p_{\bar{l}}^{\mu}
313: -g^{\mu\nu}p_l\cdot p_{\bar{l}})$, which are symmetric with respect to $\mu$
314: and $\nu$. Since $H_{i\mu}H_{i\nu}^{\dagger}\propto\varepsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha%
315: \beta} s_{\Lambda}^{\alpha}p_{\Lambda_b}^{\beta}$ is antisymmetric between $%
316: \mu$ and $\nu$, it is clear that no T-odd terms can be constructed from (i).
317: For the case in (ii), even though $ \sum L_V^{\mu}L_A^{\nu\dagger}
318: =-4i\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}p_{l\alpha}p_{\bar{l}\beta}$ is
319: antisymmetric,
320: $ H_{1\mu}^{L(R)}H_{2\nu}^{L(R)\dagger}\propto$ \\
321: $ M_{\Lambda}Tr(\slash{\!\!\!s}_{\Lambda}\gamma_{\mu}
322: \slash{\!\!\!p}_{\Lambda_b}
323: \gamma_{\nu})=4M_{\Lambda}\left(s_{\Lambda\mu}p_{\Lambda_b\nu }
324: +s_{\Lambda\nu}p_{\Lambda_b\mu}-g_{\mu\nu}s_{\Lambda} \cdot
325: p_{\Lambda_b}\right)$ is symmetric in $\mu $ and $\nu$ and thus, the
326: possible terms in (ii) also vanish. However, T-odd correlations can arise
327: from (iii) by observing that $H_{1\mu}^{L(R)}H_{2\nu}^{R(L)\dagger}\propto
328: M_{\Lambda_b}Tr (\not{\!}\!{p}_{\Lambda}\not{\!}\!{s}_{\Lambda}\gamma_{\mu}%
329: \gamma_{\nu})
330: =4M_{\Lambda_b}\left(-p_{\Lambda\mu}s_{\Lambda\nu}+p_{\Lambda\nu}
331: s_{\Lambda\mu}\right)$ is antisymmetric. Hence, in $\Lambda _{b}\rightarrow
332: \Lambda l^{+}l^{-}$ decays, the non-vanished T-odd terms can be induced from
333: $\left( V-A\right) \times \left( V+A\right)$ hadronic currents. This is,
334: explicitly
335: shown in Eq. (\ref{Pt}). The TV quantity is related to
336: Im$C_{9}^{R}C_{10}^{L*}$ and Im%
337: $C_{9}^{L}C_{10}^{R*}$, respectively. Similarly, with the dipole operators,
338: we expect that T-odd observables are proportional to Im$C_{7}^{R}C_{10}^{L*}$
339: and Im$C_{7}^{L}C_{10}^{R*}$.
340:
341: As seen in Eq. (\ref{Pt}), to have a non-zero value of $P_T$, it
342: is necessary to have conditions of (i) the existence of $C_k^R$
343: and (ii) a phase of $C_i^LC_j^R\ (i\neq j)$. These conditions are
344: clearly different from those of the T odd transverse lepton
345: polarizations in both inclusive decay of $b\to s l^+l^-$
346: \cite{Tin} and exclusive ones, such as $B\to K^{(*)}l^+l^-$
347: \cite{TexM} and $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda l^+l^-$ \cite{TexB}, and
348: other CP violating asymmetries as well \cite{CQ,HK}.
349: Such property
350: distinguishes the T odd transverse $\Lambda$ polarizations from various
351: other T odd observables. In the standard model, since there are no $C^R_{9}$
352: and $C^R_{10}$ as seen from Eq. (\ref{SMWC}),
353: \begin{eqnarray}
354: P_T^{SM}&\propto& {\frac{m_s}{m_b}}Im\left(C_7^{eff}C_{10}\right)\,,
355: \end{eqnarray}
356: which is suppressed. We note that the contribution to $P_T$
357: from the EM final state interaction is $<O(10^{-3})$. Moreover, the long-distance (LD)
358: effects in the one-loop matrix elements of
359: $O_{1,2}$ \cite{Buras} and $\Lambda_b \rightarrow \Lambda J/\Psi$
360: with $J/\Psi\rightarrow l^+ l^-$
361: are absorbed to $C^{L}_{9}$. On the
362: other hand, it is clear that a large value of $P_T$, according to
363: Eq. (\ref{Pt}), can be obtained if a theory contains $C_9^R$ or
364: $C_{10}^R$ or a large $C_7^R$, with a non-zero phase.
365: Many theories beyond the
366: standard model could give rise to $C_9^R$ or $C_{10}^R$; examples are
367: the left-right symmetric and supersymmetric models.
368:
369: To illustrate our result, we use
370: SUSY models both with
371: and without R-parity. For a SUSY model with R-parity, we take the one
372: given
373: by Ref. \cite{Masiero}, denoted as $M1$, in which
374: \begin{eqnarray}
375: C_{7}^{L\,M1} &=&-1.75\left( \delta _{23}^{u}\right) _{LL}-0.25\left( \delta
376: _{23}^{u}\right) _{LR}-10.3\left( \delta _{23}^{d}\right) _{LR} \,,
377: \nonumber \\
378: C_{9}^{L\,M1} &=&0.82\left( \delta _{23}^{u}\right) _{LR} \,, \nonumber \\
379: C_{10}^{L\,M1} &=&-9.37\left( \delta _{23}^{u}\right) _{LR}+1.4\left( \delta
380: _{23}^{u}\right) _{LR}\left( \delta _{33}^{u}\right) _{RL}+2.7\left( \delta
381: _{23}^{u}\right) _{LL}\,, \nonumber \\
382: C_{7}^{R\,M1} &=&-10.3\left( \delta _{23}^{d}\right) _{RL} \,, \nonumber \\
383: C_{9}^{R\,M1} &=&1.32\left( \delta _{23}^{d}\right) _{RL}\left( \delta
384: _{33}^{d}\right) _{LR}\,, \nonumber \\
385: C_{10}^{R\,M1} &=&-17.6\left( \delta _{23}^{d}\right) _{RL}\left( \delta
386: _{33}^{d}\right) _{LR}\,, \label{susywr}
387: \end{eqnarray}
388: where the values of parameters $\delta_{ij}^q$ are as follows :
389: \begin{eqnarray}
390: \left( \delta _{23}^{d}\right) _{LR} & \sim & \left( \delta _{23}^{d}\right)
391: _{RL} \:\sim \;-3\times 10^{-2}e^{i\theta _{1}}\,, \nonumber \\
392: \left( \delta _{33}^{d}\right) _{LR} & \sim & \left( \delta _{33}^{u}\right)
393: _{RL}\: \sim \: 0.5\,, \nonumber \\
394: \left( \delta _{23}^{u}\right) _{LR} & \sim & -0.7e^{i\theta _{2}}\,,
395: \nonumber
396: \\
397: \left( \delta _{23}^{u}\right) _{LL} & \sim & 0.1\,,
398: \end{eqnarray}
399: with taking the phases of $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ to be $\pi /4$ and $-\pi
400: /10$, respectively.
401:
402:
403: To demonstrate the difference we study a SUSY model without R-parity
404: ($M2$, see Ref. \cite{Nardi}). In this case we have
405:
406: \begin{eqnarray}
407: C_{9}^{R\,M2} &=&-C_{10}^{R\,M2}\;=\;\frac{\pi }{\sqrt{2}G_{F}\alpha _{em}}%
408: \frac{1}{V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}}\frac{\lambda _{ij3}^{\prime *}\lambda
409: _{ij2}^{\prime }}{2M_{\tilde{u}_{j}}^{2}} \label{susynr}
410: \end{eqnarray}
411: where
412: \begin{eqnarray}
413: \left| \lambda _{ijk}^{\prime }\right| &\simeq &\left( 2\sqrt{2}G_{F}\tan
414: ^{2}\beta \right) ^{1/2}\zeta _{i}m_{d_{j}}\lambda^{2} \label{susynr1}
415: \end{eqnarray}
416: and
417: \begin{eqnarray}
418: \lambda _{ij3}^{\prime *}\lambda _{ij2}^{\prime } &\simeq &2\sqrt{2}%
419: G_{F}\tan ^{2}\beta \zeta _{i}^{2}m_{d_{j}}^{2}\lambda^{4}e^{i\theta _{\not%
420: {R}}} \label{susynr2}
421: \end{eqnarray}
422: with the parameters $\lambda \sim 0.22$, $\tan \beta \sim 10$, $\zeta _{i}
423: \sim 0.9$, and $\theta _{\not{R}} =2\pi/5$.
424: We note that the parameters we have chosen for
425: the two models satisfy various experimental
426: constraints \cite{Masiero,Nardi}.
427:
428: By using the parameters in Eqs. (\ref{susywr})-(\ref{susynr2}), the values
429: for the form factors in Refs. \cite{CQ,chen-prd63},
430: and Eq. (\ref{diffrate0}),
431: we give the differential branching ratios (BRs) of
432: $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda\mu^+ \mu^-$ with respect to $E_{\Lambda}$
433: in Figure \ref{rpmurate} with and without including
434: resonant states of $\Psi$ and $\Psi ^{\prime }$,
435: and we find that
436: the integrated BRs for the latter are $(2.10,\,1.66,\,4.41)\times 10^{-6}$
437: for the standard and SUSY with
438: and without R-parity models, respectively.
439:
440: In Figures \ref{susypt} and \ref{rppt}, we show
441: $P_T(\Lambda_b\to\Lambda \mu^+\mu^-)$ as a function of $%
442: E_{\Lambda}/M_{\Lambda_b}$
443: for $M1$ and $M2$, with and without the LD contributions,
444: respectively. As seen
445: from the figures, even though the derivations of BRs to the standard
446: model result are insignificant, the transverse $\Lambda$ polarization
447: asymmetries can be over $50\%$ in both SUSY models with and without
448: R-parity. Similar results are also expected the decay of
449: $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda e^+e^-$.
450: We remark that measuring a large $P_T$ in $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda
451: l^+l^-$ is a clean indication of T violation as well as new CP
452: violation mechanism beyond the standard model.
453:
454: Finally, we note
455: that to measure $P_T(\Lambda_b\to\Lambda
456: \mu^+\mu^-)\sim 10\%$ at $3\sigma$ level, at least $4.5\times 10^7$ $%
457: \Lambda_b$ decays are required if we use $BR(\Lambda_b\to\Lambda
458: \mu^+\mu^-)\sim 2\times 10^{-6}$.
459: Clearly, the measurement could be done in the second generation
460: of B-physics experiments, such as LHCb, ATLAS, and CMS at the LHC, and
461: BTeV at
462: the Tevatron, which produce $\sim 10^{12}b\bar{b}$ pairs per year \cite{BB}.
463: This is certainly within reach of a super B factory under discussion now
464: \cite{SuperB}.
465: %\newline
466:
467: \noindent {\bf Acknowledgments}
468:
469: This work was supported in part by
470: the National Center for Theoretical Science,
471: National Science Council of the Republic of China under
472: Contract Nos. NSC-90-2112-M-001-069 and NSC-90-2112-M-007-040,
473: and National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
474:
475: %\newpage
476:
477: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
478:
479:
480: \bibitem{TVk} CPLEAR Collaboration, A. Angelopoulos et al., {\em Phys. Lett.%
481: } {\bf B444}, 43 (1998).
482:
483: \bibitem{ckm} N. Cabibbo, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 10}, 531 (1963); M.
484: Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, {\em Prog. Theor. Phys.} {\bf 49}, 652 (1973).
485:
486: \bibitem{CQ}
487: C.~H.~Chen and C.~Q.~Geng,
488: %``Lepton asymmetries in heavy baryon decays of Lambda/b $\to$ Lambda l+ l-,''
489: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 516}, 327 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0101201].
490:
491: \bibitem{Buras} G. Buchalla, A. J. Buras and M. E. Lautenbacher, {\em Rev.
492: Mod. Phys.} {\bf 68}, 1230 (1996).
493:
494: \bibitem{MR} T. Mannel, W. Roberts and Z. Ryzak {\em Nucl. Phys}. {\bf B355}%
495: , 38 (1991);
496:
497: T. Mannel and S. Recksiegel {\em J. Phys.} {\bf G24}, 979 (1998).
498:
499: \bibitem{chen-prd63} C.H. Chen and C. Q. Geng, {\em Phys Rev.} {\bf D64},
500: 114024 (2001).
501:
502: \bibitem{Tin} F. Kruger and L.M. Sehgal, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B380}, 199
503: (1996).
504:
505: \bibitem{TexM} C.Q. Geng and C.P. Kao, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D57}, 4479
506: (1998).
507:
508: \bibitem{TexB}
509: C.~H.~Chen and C.~Q.~Geng,
510: %``Baryonic rare decays of Lambda/b $\to$ Lambda l+ l-,''
511: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}, 074001 (2001)
512: [arXiv:hep-ph/0106193].
513:
514: \bibitem{HK}
515: G.~Hiller and A.~Kagan,
516: %``Probing for new physics in polarized Lambda/b decays at
517: %the Z,''
518: arXiv:hep-ph/0108074.
519:
520:
521: \bibitem{Masiero} F. Gabbiani, E. Gabrielli, A. Masiero, and L.
522: Silvestrini, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B477, }321-352 (1996); E. Lunghi{\it , }A.
523: Masiero, I. Scimemi, and L. Silvestrini, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B568,} 120-144
524: (2000).
525:
526: \bibitem{Nardi} D. Guetta and E. Nardi, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D58}, 012001
527: (1998) and references therein.
528:
529: \bibitem{BB} N. Harnew, Proc. of Heavy Flavors 8, (Southampton. 1999).
530:
531: \bibitem{SuperB} See, $e.g.$, G.~Eigen,
532: %``Performance of multipurpose detectors in super B factories,''
533: arXiv:hep-ex/0112042.
534:
535: \end{thebibliography}
536:
537: \newpage
538:
539: \begin{figure}[htbp]
540: %\special{psfile=rpmurate.eps angle=0 hscale=90 vscale=90 hoffset=-100
541: %voffset=-520}
542: %\vspace{15cm}
543: \centerline{\psfig{figure=rpmurate.eps,height=2.7in }
544: }\caption{ Differential BRs of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda \mu^+\mu^-$ as
545: a function of $E_{\Lambda}$ with and without resonant shapes,
546: where the solid, dash-dotted and dashed curves stand for the
547: results of the standard and SUSY with and without R-parity models,
548: respectively. } \label{rpmurate}
549: \end{figure}
550: %
551: \begin{figure}[htbp]
552: \centerline{\psfig{figure=susypt.eps,height=2.8in }}
553: % \special{psfile=susypt.eps angle=0 hsacle=90 vscale=90 hoffset=-100
554: %voffset=-520}
555: %\vspace{15cm}
556: \caption{ Transverse $\Lambda$ polarization in $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda
557: \mu^+\mu^-$ as a function of $E_{\Lambda}/M_{\Lambda_b}$ in the SUSY model
558: with R-parity. The curves with and without resonant shapes represent
559: including and no long-distance contributions, respectively. }
560: \label{susypt}
561: \end{figure}
562: %
563: \begin{figure}[htbp]
564: \centerline{ \psfig{figure=rppt.eps,height=2.8in}}
565: %\special{psfile=rppt.eps angle=0 hscale=90 vscale=90 hoffset=-100
566: %voffset=-520} \vspace{15cm}
567: \caption{ Same as Figure \ref{susypt}
568: but for the SUSY model without R-parity. } \label{rppt}
569: \end{figure}
570:
571:
572: \end{document}
573:
574: \newpage
575: \begin{figcap}
576: \item
577: Differential BRs of $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda \mu^+\mu^-$
578: as a function of $E_{\Lambda}$ with and without
579: resonant shapes, where the solid, dash-dotted and dashed curves
580: stand for the results of the standard and SUSY with and without
581: R-parity models, respectively.
582:
583: \item
584: Transverse $\Lambda$ polarization in
585: $\Lambda_b\to\Lambda \mu^+\mu^-$ as a
586: function of $E_{\Lambda}/M_{\Lambda_b}$ in the SUSY model
587: with R-parity.
588: The curves with and without resonant shapes represent including and no
589: long-distance contributions, respectively.
590:
591: \item
592: Same as Figure 1 but for the SUSY model
593: without R-parity.
594:
595: \end{figcap}
596:
597:
598:
599: