1: % ****** Start of file apssamp.tex ******
2: %
3: % This file is part of the APS files in the REVTeX 4 distribution.
4: % Version 4.0 of REVTeX, August 2001
5: %
6: % Copyright (c) 2001 The American Physical Society.
7: %
8: % See the REVTeX 4 README file for restrictions and more information.
9: %
10: % TeX'ing this file requires that you have AMS-LaTeX 2.0 installed
11: % as well as the rest of the prerequisites for REVTeX 4.0
12: %
13: % See the REVTeX 4 README file
14: % It also requires running BibTeX. The commands are as follows:
15: %
16: % 1) latex apssamp.tex
17: % 2) bibtex apssamp
18: % 3) latex apssamp.tex
19: % 4) latex apssamp.tex
20: %
21: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
22: %\documentclass[preprint,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
23:
24: % Some other (several out of many) possibilities
25: %\documentclass[preprint,aps]{revtex4}
26: %\documentclass[preprint,aps,draft]{revtex4}
27: %\documentclass[prb]{revtex4}% Physical Review B
28:
29: \usepackage{epsfig}
30: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
31: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
32: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
33:
34: %******************DEFINITIONS FOR FIGURES******************
35: % These should work on Mac's and Unix machines. You need epsf.def.
36: %\input epsf.tex
37: \def\DESepsf(#1 width #2){\epsfxsize=#2 \epsfbox{#1}}
38: % Null macro in case the ones above don't work.
39: %\def \DESepsf(#1 width #2){\bf #1 here: just uncomment the macro.}
40: \newcommand{\im}{{\rm Im}}
41: \newcommand{\out}{{\rm out}}
42: %******************END DEFINITIONS*************************
43:
44: %\nofiles
45:
46: \begin{document}
47:
48: %\preprint{APS/123-QED}
49:
50: %%
51: \title{\boldmath{Accounting for Slow $J/\psi$ from $B$ Decay}}
52: %
53:
54: \author{$^{a)}$Chun-Khiang Chua}
55: %\altaffiliation[Also at ]{Physics Department, XYZ University.}
56: %Lines break automatically or can be forced with \\
57: \author{$^{a)}$Wei-Shu Hou}%
58: %\email{Second.Author@institution.edu}
59: \author{$^{b)}$Gwo-Guang Wong}
60: % \homepage{http://www.Second.institution.edu/~Charlie.Author}
61: \affiliation{%
62: $^{a)}$Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei,
63: Taiwan 10764, Republic of China\\
64: $^{b)}$Department of International Trade, Lan Yang Institute of
65: Technology, Toucheng, Ilan, Taiwan 26141, Republic of China
66: }%
67: %\affiliation{$^{b)}$Department of Physics, Chung Yuan Christian
68: %University, Chung-Li, Taiwan 32023, Republic of China
69: %}%
70:
71: \date{\today}% It is always \today, today,
72: % but any date may be explicitly specified
73:
74: \begin{abstract}
75: A slow $J/\psi$ excess exists in the inclusive $B\to J/\psi+X$
76: spectrum, and is indicative of some hadronic effect. From color
77: octet nature of $c\bar c$ pair in $b\to c\bar cs$ decay, one such
78: possibility would be $B \to J/\psi+ K_g$ decay, where $K_g$ is a
79: hybrid resonance with $\bar sgq$ constituents. We show that a
80: $K_g$ resonance of $\sim$ 2 GeV mass and suitably broad width
81: could be behind the excess.
82: \end{abstract}
83: %
84:
85: \pacs{13.25.Hw, %Decays of bottom mesons}
86: 14.40.Nd} %Bottom mesons
87: %\pacs{ %Valid PACS appear here
88: %}
89: % PACS, the Physics and Astronomy
90: % Classification Scheme.
91: %\keywords{Suggested keywords}%Use showkeys class option if keyword
92: %display desired
93: \maketitle
94:
95:
96: Using 1.12 fb$^{-1}$ data, the CLEO experiment published the
97: inclusive $B\to J/\psi+X$ spectrum~\cite{CLEO95}. After
98: subtracting $\chi_{c1}$, $\chi_{c2}$ and $\psi(2S)$ feeddown,
99: there was a hint of excess events around $p^*_{J/\psi}\sim 0.5$
100: GeV, where $p^*_{J/\psi}$ is $J/\psi$ momentum in $\Upsilon(4S)$
101: frame.
102: %
103: With 6.2 fb$^{-1}$ data, the Belle experiment
104: presented~\cite{Schrenk} the inclusive $B\to J/\psi+X$ spectrum.
105: After feeddown subtraction, one could also infer~\cite{IC} an
106: excess for $p^*_{J/\psi}\lesssim 0.8$ GeV.
107: %
108: Recently, the BaBar experiment published~\cite{BaBar02} similar
109: results based on 20.3~fb$^{-1}$ data, showing clear excess beyond
110: NRQCD expectations~\cite{Beneke}, of order $10^{-3}$ in rate, for
111: $p^*_{J/\psi}\lesssim 0.8$ GeV.
112:
113:
114: As the excess involves slow moving $J/\psi$ mesons, it must have
115: hadronic, rather than perturbative, origins.
116: %
117: Various proposals have been advanced.
118: %
119: The suggestion of $B\to J/\psi\bar\Lambda p$~\cite{Brodsky} has
120: been studied recently by BaBar~\cite{BaBar03}; the event rate at
121: $10^{-5}$ order cannot explain the slow $J/\psi$ excess.
122: %
123: Intrinsic charm content of the $B$ meson could lead to $B\to
124: J/\psi D(+\pi)$ final states~\cite{IC}, which can in principle
125: explain the data, but experimental studies are not yet
126: forthcoming. If $B\to J/\psi D\pi$ dominates, the slow pion does
127: not pair with $D$ to form a $D^*$, and would pose a challenge.
128: %
129: Another possibility~\cite{Eilam} would be $B\to J/\psi K_g$, where
130: $K_g$ is a hybrid meson with $\bar sgq$ constituents. A recent
131: estimate~\cite{Close} suggests that the rate could be in the
132: ballpark.
133:
134:
135: In this note we take a heuristic approach to explore the last
136: possibility. We find the hybrid scenario is indeed viable. We
137: suggest the signature of $B\to J/\psi + K+n\pi$, where $n$ cannot
138: be more than a few, should be experimentally searched for. If the
139: $K+n\pi$ system tends to peak at some mass, but does not descend
140: from $D$ meson decay, then the hybrid meson picture could be
141: substantiated.
142:
143: Let us visualize why a hybrid meson recoiling against a $J/\psi$
144: could be the right picture. In $b\to c\bar c s$ decay, the $c\bar
145: c$ pair is dominantly formed in a color octet configuration, hence
146: charmonium production is color-suppressed. Imagine that, upon $b$
147: quark weak decay, the $c$ and $\bar c$ quarks are moving apart
148: with more than $\sim 1$~GeV kinetic energy. Soft ``muck" effects
149: cannot change the configuration, and the system would tend to
150: break up into open charm meson pairs, resulting in $D^{(*)}\bar
151: D_s^{(*)}$ or $D\bar D\bar K$ final states. But if the $c$ and
152: $\bar c$ momenta are relatively colinear, it can be viewed as a
153: ``proto-charmonium". Because of the heaviness of $m_c$, this
154: small, dominantly color octet $c\bar c$ system would recoil
155: against the $s$ quark, again relatively unperturbed by the soft
156: ``muck". By the time it separates from the $s$ quark by order 1
157: fm, strong, nonperturbative effects set in: it has to hadronize.
158: But since this is already a ``proto-charmonium", i.e. the spatial
159: and spin wave-function already maps well onto some physical
160: charmonium state, the only problem is it has to shed color. An
161: effective color octet charge is thus left to neutralize the $s\bar
162: q$ system, and the simplest configuration is that of $sg\bar q$,
163: which we call an $\bar K_g$ hybrid system.
164:
165: Whether a $K_g$ hybrid meson really exists becomes semantical. As
166: visualized above, the leftover color octet charge with the color
167: octet $s\bar q$ system is not by perturbative gluon
168: emission~\cite{Eilam}, but by the fact that two separate color
169: strings extend from the $s$ and the $\bar q$ towards the point
170: where the $c\bar c$ hadronization took place. It is plausible that
171: this $s$--$g$--$\bar q$ string configuration could resonate and
172: the amplitude gets enhanced, and energy-momentum is exchanged with
173: the departing charmonium. If the $K_g$ resonance is of order
174: 2~GeV~\cite{Isgur} in mass, then the $J/\psi$ has to be slow. We
175: have therefore constructed the physical picture whereby slow
176: $J/\psi$ (charmonium in general) can receive enhancement.
177:
178:
179: Let us illustrate further this picture. The relevant effective
180: weak Hamiltonian is
181: %\begin{eqnarray}
182: %H_{\rm W}&=&{G_F\over\sqrt2} V^*_{cs} V_{cb}
183: % \big[c_1\,\overline s \gamma^\mu(1-\gamma_5)c\,
184: % \overline c \gamma_\mu(1-\gamma_5)b
185: %\nonumber\\
186: %&&+ c_2\,\overline c \gamma^\mu(1-\gamma_5)c\,
187: % \overline s \gamma_\mu(1-\gamma_5)b\big].
188: %\end{eqnarray}
189: \begin{eqnarray}
190: H_{\rm W}&=&{G_F\over\sqrt2} V^*_{cs} V_{cb}
191: (c_1\,{\cal O}_1+c_2\,{\cal O}_2),
192: \nonumber\\
193: {\cal O}_{1(2)}&\equiv&\overline s_\alpha
194: \gamma^\mu(1-\gamma_5)c^{\alpha(\beta)}\,
195: \overline c_{\beta(\alpha)} \gamma_\mu(1-\gamma_5)b^\beta.
196: \end{eqnarray}
197: The amplitude for $\bar B\to J/\psi \bar K$ decay is
198: \begin{equation}
199: A(J/\psi \bar K)=\frac{G_{\rm F}}{\sqrt2} V^*_{cs} V_{cb} \, a_2
200: \, \langle J/\psi\vert \bar c \gamma^\mu c \vert 0\rangle \langle
201: \bar K\vert \bar s \gamma_\mu b\vert \bar B\rangle,
202: \label{eq:K}
203: \end{equation}
204: where $a_2$ is the effective coefficient governing
205: color-suppressed modes, which in the naive factorization limit is
206: $c_2+c_1 /3$.
207: %
208: Fitting data gives $a_2\gtrsim 0.25$, but factorization
209: calculations tend to give lower values of $a_2\lesssim$ 0.2,
210: suggesting that nonfactorized effects are important.
211:
212:
213: We now infer from Eq. (\ref{eq:K}) by analogy the formula for
214: $B\to J/\psi K_g$.
215: %
216: %
217: %
218: It is well known that
219: \begin{equation}
220: {\cal O}_1=2\,(\overline c\,T^a c)_{V-A} (\overline s\,T^a
221: b)_{V-A}+\frac{{\cal O}_2}{3} ,
222: \end{equation}
223: where $T^a$ is the color SU(3) generator. A color octet $\bar c c$
224: pair is favored.
225: %%Starting from the color allowed effective Hamiltonian,
226: The ``proto-$J/\psi$" would still be produced by a $\bar cc$
227: vector current, but stripping off the extra color as it departs,
228: one is left with a ``constituent" gluon in association with the
229: $s\bar q$ bilinear.
230: %
231: The nonperturbative picture should be two (different colored)
232: strings extending from the point of departure of the $J/\psi$
233: towards the recoiling $s$ and spectator $\bar q$ quarks.
234: %
235: %
236: %
237: Using a factorization language for sake of illustration, the
238: matrix element product, $\langle J/\psi\,g|(\bar c T^a
239: c)_{V-A}|0\rangle \; \langle (s\bar q)_8|(\bar s\,T^a
240: b)_{V-A}|\bar B\rangle$, where $g$ is a constituent gluon and $(s
241: \bar q)_8$ is a color octet quark pair, should be nonvanishing.
242: The final state therefore has the $J/\psi$ recoiling against a
243: color singlet $s \bar q g$ configuration, which could form a
244: hybrid $K_g$ meson. We heuristically write the operator $2\,(\bar
245: c\,T^a c)_{V-A} (\bar s\,T^a b)_{V-A}$ as $\bar c\gamma^\mu
246: c\,[\bar sgb]_\mu$, which we now take as our Ansatz.
247: %
248: %
249: %
250: %We write the operator heuristically as $\bar sgb$.
251: %
252: %
253: %
254: Thus, the formula for $\bar B\to J/\psi \bar K_g$ becomes,
255: \begin{equation}
256: A(J/\psi \bar K_g) \propto \frac{G_{\rm F}}{\sqrt2} V^*_{cs}
257: V_{cb} \, c_1 \, \langle J/\psi\vert \bar c \gamma^\mu c \vert
258: 0\rangle \langle \bar K_g\vert [\bar s gb]_\mu \vert \bar
259: B\rangle,
260: \label{eq:Kg}
261: \end{equation}
262: where the $[\bar sgb]$ operator can convert the $\bar B$ meson
263: into $\bar K_g$, including matching its $J^P$, in analogy with the
264: $\bar s\gamma_\mu b$ current converting $\bar B$ into $\bar
265: K^{(*)}$.
266: %
267: %We assume that the magnitude of the transition matrix element is
268: %similar to that of the $\overline B\to \overline K$ transition
269: %matrix element.
270: %
271: Note that the decay amplitude is proportional to $c_1\sim 1$
272: rather than $a_2$, but there is some proportionality constant,
273: {\it hopefully of order 1}, from the Ansatz
274: %
275: we made above.
276: %
277: Due to the usual difficulty of hadronic physics and the model
278: dependence that would necessarily arise, we do not attempt at
279: calculating theoretically this proportionality constant, but turn
280: to data for its determination.
281:
282:
283:
284:
285:
286: The simplest situation would be to have a $K_g$ meson with $J^P =
287: 0^{\mp}$ (note that there are no ``exotic" kaon hybrids). The
288: contraction of vector current indices should then be very similar
289: between Eqs. (\ref{eq:K}) and (\ref{eq:Kg}), and the $B\to J/\psi
290: K_g(0^{\mp})$ decay rate is estimated to be
291: % Collecting the above, the $\overline B\to J/\psi \overline
292: %K_g$ contribution relative to $\overline B\to J/\psi \overline K$
293: % is estimated as
294: \begin{equation}
295: \kappa_0^2 \left\vert\frac{c_1}{a_2}\right\vert^2 \frac
296: {p^3_{K_g}}{p^3_{K}} |{\rm BW}|^2 \, {\mathcal B}(B\to J/\psi K),
297: \label{eq:KgovK}
298: \end{equation}
299: where $\kappa_0$ is related to the aforementioned proportionality
300: factor, but it also contains possible differences in $B\to K_g$
301: and $B\to K$ form factors, and $p_{K_{(g)}}$ is the momentum of
302: $K_{(g)}$ in the $B$ decay frame. Since the hybrid $K_g$ meson is
303: expected to be broad, the decay rate is modulated by the
304: Breit-Wigner factor~\cite{PDG}
305: %
306: \begin{equation}
307: {\rm BW}(q^2)=\frac{\sqrt{q^2}\,\Gamma(q^2) }{(q^2-m^2)+i
308: \sqrt{q^2} \Gamma(q^2)},
309: \label{eq:BW}
310: \end{equation}
311: where $q^2=m_{J/\psi}^2+m_B^2-2 m_B E_{J/\psi}$ and $E_{J/\psi}$
312: is the $J/\psi$ energy in the $B$ rest frame.
313: %
314: Note that, to account for kinematic dependence~\cite{PDG}, a
315: $\sqrt{q^2}$ factor is used instead of $m$. Furthermore,
316: \begin{equation}
317: \Gamma(q^2)=\sqrt{q^2} \, \frac{\Gamma_0}{m},
318: \label{eq:width}
319: \end{equation}
320: where $m$, $\Gamma_0$ are the mass and width of $K_g$ at
321: $q^2=m^2$.
322:
323:
324:
325: We now make a fit to the inclusive $J/\psi$ spectrum and see
326: whether a single hybrid $K_g$ suffices to account for the observed
327: excess.
328: %
329: The direct (feeddown subtracted) $B\to J/\psi X$ data is taken
330: from Ref.~\cite{BaBar02}. BaBar uses NRQCD plus $B\to J/\psi
331: K^{(*)}$ simulation results to fit their data. To simplify, we
332: follow Refs.~\cite{Brodsky,IC}, and use
333: \begin{equation}
334: f(p)=N (p-p_{\rm min})(p-p_{\rm max}) \exp\left[-\frac{(p-\bar
335: p)^2}{\sigma^2_0}\right],
336: \end{equation}
337: to mimic the color-octet NRQCD~\cite{Beneke} and $J/\psi
338: K^{(*)}$~\cite{BaBar02} components.
339: %
340: We find $(N,\ p_{\rm min},\ p_{\rm max},\ \bar p,\ \sigma_0) =
341: (26,\ 0,\ 1.95,\ 1.21,\ 0.5)$ and $(180,\ 1.2,\ 1.95,\ 1.65,\
342: 0.3)$, with all energy-momentum in GeV, give good accounts of the
343: two contributions, respectively.
344:
345:
346: Adding now the $B\to J/\psi K_g$ contribution of
347: Eq.~(\ref{eq:KgovK}), % since our formulation is in $B$ restframe,
348: we smear by a Gaussian with rms spread of 0.12~GeV~\cite{BaBar02}
349: to account for broadening in the $\Upsilon(4S)$ frame. Using
350: $|c_1/a_2|=5$ for illustration, and the isospin averaged
351: ${\mathcal B}(B\to J/\psi K)=0.94\times 10^{-3}$, and allowing the
352: NRQCD contribution to float in the new fit, we obtain
353: \begin{equation}
354: \kappa_0\simeq 2.3,\ m\simeq 2.08\;{\rm GeV},\ \Gamma_0\simeq
355: 72\;{\rm MeV}.
356: \label{eq:fit}
357: \end{equation}
358: The NRQCD contribution is reduced by 12\% with respect to
359: Ref.~\cite{BaBar02}, the fitted $B\to J/\psi K_g$ branching ratio
360: is $8.5\times 10^{-4}$, and the spectrum is shown in
361: Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum}(a).
362: %
363: It is remarkable that a single $0^\mp$ hybrid $K_g$ meson with
364: mass $\sim$ 2.1 GeV and width $\sim$ 100 MeV could account for the
365: observed slow $J/\psi$ excess. The fudge factor $\kappa_0\sim$ 2.3
366: means our inference by analogy is in the right ballpark.
367:
368:
369: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
370: \begin{figure}[t!]
371: %\smallskip
372: \centerline{
373: {\epsfxsize3 in \epsffile{Kg.eps}}
374: }
375: %\hskip-0.3cm
376: \centerline{
377: {\epsfxsize3 in \epsffile{Kg1.eps}}
378: }
379: %\smallskip\smallskip\smallskip\smallskip
380: \caption{
381: $B\to J/\psi+X$ decay spectrum. Data is from Ref.~\cite{BaBar02}.
382: The dotted and short-dashed lines correspond to $J/\psi K^{(*)}$
383: simulation~\cite{BaBar02} and NRQCD component~\cite{Beneke}. The
384: long-dashed line corresponds to the $B\to J/\psi K_g$ contribution
385: for (a) $0^\mp$ and (b) $1^\mp$ case, with fitted mass and width
386: given in text.}
387: \label{fig:spectrum}
388: \end{figure}
389: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
390:
391:
392: Let us investigate the case for $K_g$ meson with $J^P = 1^\mp$.
393: %
394: Replacing $K$ by $K^*$ in Eq. (\ref{eq:K}), we estimate, in
395: analogy to Eq. (\ref{eq:KgovK}), the $B\to J/\psi K_g(1^{\mp})$
396: decay rate to be
397: %
398: \begin{equation}
399: \kappa_1^2 \left\vert\frac{c_1}{a_2}\right\vert^2 \frac
400: {p_{K_g}}{p_{K^*}} |{\rm BW}|^2 \,{\mathcal B}(B\to J/\psi K^*),
401: \label{eq:Kg1ovKst}
402: \end{equation}
403: where $\kappa_1$ is analogous to $\kappa_0$, but now the $B\to
404: K_g$ and $B\to K^*$ form factor ratio can be rather complicated,
405: because of two possible helicity configurations. Absorbing all of
406: this into $\kappa_1$, we retain linear momentum dependence
407: corresponding to longitudinally polarized component, which is
408: expected to be dominant from usual form factor models, as well as
409: in the heavy quark limit.
410:
411: Performing a fit as before using isospin averaged ${\mathcal
412: B}(B\to J/\psi K^*)=1.35\times 10^{-3}$, we obtain
413: \begin{equation}
414: \kappa_1\simeq 0.6,\ m\simeq 2.05\;{\rm GeV},\ \Gamma_0\simeq
415: 70\;{\rm MeV}.
416: \label{eq:fit1}
417: \end{equation}
418: The NRQCD contribution is reduced by 11\% with respect to
419: Ref.~\cite{BaBar02}, and the fitted ${\mathcal B}(B\to J/\psi
420: K_g(1^\mp))$ is $7.9\times 10^{-4}$. The spectrum is shown in
421: Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum}(b), which is similar to
422: Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum}(a) since mass and width are almost the
423: same.
424: %
425: Note that the fudge factor $\kappa_1\simeq 0.6$ appears even more
426: reasonable than the $0^\mp$ case.
427:
428:
429: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
430: \begin{figure}[t!]
431: %\smallskip
432: \centerline{
433: {\epsfxsize3 in \epsffile{Kgprime.eps}}
434: }
435: %\hskip-0.3cm
436: \centerline{
437: {\epsfxsize3 in \epsffile{Kg1prime.eps}}
438: }
439: %\smallskip\smallskip\smallskip\smallskip
440: \caption{
441: Same as Fig. 1 but allowing the NRQCD
442: component to float for an improved fit.}
443: \label{fig:spectrum2}
444: \end{figure}
445: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
446:
447: Fig. \ref{fig:spectrum} suggests that the fits may not yet be
448: optimized for $p^*_{J/\psi}$ between 0.9--1.5 GeV. As we have
449: allowed some freedom in the strength of the NRQCD
450: contribution~\cite{Beneke}, we now allow its peak position to
451: float as well. Fitting again, we find
452: %
453: for $0^\mp$ case
454: \begin{equation}
455: \kappa_0\simeq 2.0,\ m\simeq 2.08\;{\rm GeV},\ \Gamma_0\simeq
456: 147\;{\rm MeV},
457: \label{eq:fitp}
458: \end{equation}
459: with the NRQCD contribution reduced by 13\% with respect to
460: Ref.~\cite{BaBar02}, and the parameter $\bar p$ shifted by 100~MeV
461: to 1.31~GeV. The fitted $B\to J/\psi K_g$ branching ratio becomes
462: $12.9\times 10^{-4}$.
463: %
464: For $1^\mp$ case, we find
465: \begin{equation}
466: \kappa_1\simeq 0.5,\ m\simeq 2.03\;{\rm GeV},\ \Gamma_0 \simeq
467: 103\;{\rm MeV},
468: \label{eq:fit1p}
469: \end{equation}
470: with NRQCD contribution reduced by 10\% with respect to
471: Ref.~\cite{BaBar02}, $\bar p$ shifted from 1.21 GeV to 1.29~GeV,
472: and fitted ${\mathcal B}(B\to J/\psi K_g(1^\mp)) \simeq 10.5\times
473: 10^{-4}$.
474: %
475: The fitted spectrum is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum2}. The
476: remaining slight ``discrepancy" can be attributed to the
477: difference between a perturbative vs. hadronic approach, e.g.
478: summing over $J/\psi K_1$~\cite{psiK1}, $J/\psi K_2^*$, etc.
479: modes.
480:
481: We do not commit ourselves to what should be the lightest $K_g$
482: hybrid state, or how large is the splitting for further
483: excitations. It is gratifying, however, that the fitted masses of
484: order 2--2.1 GeV is close to expectations~\cite{Isgur}. The width
485: of 70--150 MeV may seem narrow, but kaonic hybrids have not been
486: widely discussed in the literature, and the relative narrowness
487: would make experimental identification easier.
488: %
489: As for decay modes, we remark that flux tube models
490: suggest~\cite{Isgur2} hybrids decay into final states with one
491: excited meson. Thus, one should consider reconstructing $K_g$ in
492: $K_{0,1,2}^*\pi(\rho)$, $K^{(*)} f_{0,1,2}$, maybe also $K
493: f_2^\prime$ final states.
494: %
495: It would be fascinating if a heavy kaon resonance is found to be
496: dominating the slow $J/\psi$ excess from $B$ decay.
497:
498: We note that the $K_g$ width is larger for the improved fit of
499: Fig.~2. We have checked that $\Gamma_0\sim$ 250~MeV is possible,
500: if the ``peak position" parameter $\bar p$ is allowed to shift
501: slightly higher, to 1.34 GeV and 1.31 GeV, respectively, for the
502: $0^\mp$ and $1^\mp$ cases. Thus, the narrowness of $\Gamma_0 \sim
503: 70$ MeV of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:fit}) and (\ref{eq:fit1}) may be an
504: artefact of trying to mimic the NRQCD result of
505: Ref.~\cite{Beneke}. The latter work subtracted $B\to J/\psi K$ and
506: $J/\psi K^*$, an approach BaBar adopted, but it was done before
507: the Belle measurement~\cite{psiK1} of ${\mathcal B}(B\to J/\psi
508: K_1(1270)) \simeq 1.55\times 10^{-3}$ (isospin averaged), which is
509: comparable to $B\to J/\psi K$ and $J/\psi K^*$. An update of
510: Ref.~\cite{Beneke} would be helpful.
511:
512:
513: The $0^-$ and $1^-$ hybrid quantum numbers allow us to make some
514: insight into the possible cause of sizable nonfactorizable
515: contributions to $B\to J/\psi K^{(*)}$, $J/\psi K_1$ decay. The
516: physical $K^{(*)}$ state may have a hybrid Fock component,
517: %\begin{equation}
518: $\vert K\rangle = c_\theta \vert K^{(0)}\rangle + s_\theta \vert
519: K_g^{(0)}\rangle$.
520: % \label{eq:Fock}
521: %\end{equation}
522: One then finds
523: \begin{equation}
524: a_2^{\rm eff.} = a_2^{\rm fac.} \left( c_\theta + \frac{c_1}{a_2}
525: \kappa s_\theta \right),
526: \label{eq:a2eff}
527: \end{equation}
528: where $a_2^{\rm fac.}$ is from factorization calculations,
529: typically of order 0.15--0.2. One sees from our fitted $\kappa$
530: values that a hybrid admixture of a few \% to no more than 10\% in
531: the $K^{(*)}$ wavefunction can suffice to account for the large
532: $a_2^{\rm eff.} \sim$ 0.25--0.3 extracted from data, in large part
533: because of gaining the $c_1/a_2$ factor.
534:
535: %Our finding of $\kappa \sim 1$, together with ${\mathcal B}(B\to
536: %J/\psi K_g) \sim {\mathcal B}(B\to J/\psi K^{(*)})$, ${\mathcal
537: %B}(B\to J/\psi K_1(1270)$), gives the picture that a single $K_g$
538: %state is produced.
539: %
540: %We argued, heuristically, that soft ``muck" physics cannot change
541: %the $c\bar c$ configuration as it propagates in the carcass of the
542: %deceased $B$ meson. This is akin to heavy quark symmetry. Although
543: %color-octet, the fact that the $c\bar c$ stays relatively small
544: %until it hadronizes,
545:
546: We comment on a recent proposal that slow $J/\psi$ from $B$ decay
547: could arise from $cq\bar q\bar c$ four quark states~\cite{cqqq}.
548: The physical picture would be that the color octet $c\bar c$ picks
549: up a color octet $q\bar q$ pair as it hadronizes. Ref.~\cite{cqqq}
550: gave some arguments for why $J/\psi$ may end up slow.
551: %
552: It may not be so easy to distinguish this proposal from the
553: present one, as both lead to $J/\psi + K + n\pi$ final states, and
554: in fact both mechanisms may well be at work concurrently.
555: %
556: To distinguish the two mechanisms, one would have to check whether
557: the charmonium system is resonating with some of the recoil
558: hadrons. For $K_g$ mechanism, it would be helpful if
559: $K_{0,1,2}^*\pi(\rho)$, $K^{(*)} f_{0,1,2}$, $K f_2^\prime$
560: dominance in final state is borne out.
561: %
562: We remark that for most pictures, one should also find excess in
563: slow $\eta_c$ mesons.
564:
565: In summary, we have illustrated that a single hybrid $K_g$ state
566: recoiling against a $J/\psi$ could explain the slow $J/\psi$
567: excess observed in $B$ decay with rate at $10^{-3}$ order. The
568: fitted $K_g$ mass is of order 2.05--2.1 GeV, with width of order
569: 70--150 MeV, but could be broader. Experimental signature would be
570: to reconstruct $K_g\to K+n\pi$, probably in
571: $K_{0,1,2}^*\pi(\rho)$, $K^{(*)} f_{0,1,2}$, $K f_2^\prime$
572: configurations.
573:
574:
575:
576: \vskip 0.3cm
577: \noindent %{\bf Acknowledgement}.\ \
578: We thank Hsuan-Cheng Huang for discussions, and Jim Mueller for
579: pointing out Ref.~\cite{Close} to us. This work is supported in
580: part by NSC grants 91-2112-M-002-027, 91-2811-M-002-043, the MOE
581: CosPA Project, and the BCP Topical Program of NCTS.
582:
583: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
584:
585: \bibitem{CLEO95} R.~Balest {\it et al.} [CLEO Collaboration], Phys.\
586: Rev.\ D {\bf 52}, 2661 (1995).
587:
588: \bibitem{Schrenk} S.E. Schrenk [Belle Collaboration], presented at ICHEP2000,
589: July 2000, Osaka, Japan.
590:
591: %\cite{Chang:2001yf}
592: \bibitem{IC}
593: C.H.~Chang and W.S.~Hou,
594: %``Probing for the charm content of B and Upsilon mesons,''
595: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}, 071501 (2001).
596: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D64,071501;%%
597:
598: \bibitem{BaBar02}
599: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
600: %``Study of inclusive production of charmonium mesons in B decay,''
601: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 032002 (2003). % [arXiv:hep-ex/0207097].
602: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0207097;%%
603:
604: \bibitem{Beneke}
605: M.~Beneke, G.A.~Schuler and S.~Wolf,
606: %``Quarkonium momentum distributions in photoproduction and B decay,''
607: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 034004 (2000). % [arXiv:hep-ph/0001062].
608: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0001062;%%
609:
610: \bibitem{Brodsky}
611: S.J.~Brodsky and F.S.~Navarra,
612: %``Looking for exotic multiquark states in nonleptonic B decays,''
613: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 411}, 152 (1997). % [arXiv:hep-ph/9704348].
614: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704348;%%
615:
616: \bibitem{BaBar03}
617: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
618: %``Evidence for B+ $\to$ J/psi p anti-Lambda and search for B0 $\to$ J/psi p anti-p,''
619: %arXiv:
620: hep-ex/0303036.
621: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0303036;%%
622:
623: \bibitem{Eilam}
624: G.~Eilam, M.~Ladisa and Y.D.~Yang,
625: %``Study of B0 $\to$ J/psi D(*) and eta/c D(*) in perturbative QCD,''
626: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 037504 (2002). % [arXiv:hep-ph/0107043].
627: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0107043;%%
628:
629: \bibitem{Close}
630: F.E.~Close and J.J.~Dudek,
631: %``Electroweak production of hybrid mesons in a flux-tube simulation of lattice QCD,''
632: %arXiv:
633: hep-ph/0304243.
634:
635: %\cite{Isgur:bm}
636: \bibitem{Isgur}
637: N.~Isgur and J.~Paton,
638: %``A Flux Tube Model For Hadrons In QCD,''
639: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 31}, 2910 (1985).
640: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D31,2910;%%
641:
642: %\cite{Chay:2000xn}
643: %\bibitem{a2th}
644: %H.~Y.~Cheng and K.~C.~Yang,
645: %``B $\to$ J/psi K decays in QCD factorization,''
646: %Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 074011 (2001); % [arXiv:hep-ph/0011179];
647: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0011179;%%
648: %J.~Chay and C.~Kim,
649: %``Analysis of the QCD-improved factorization in B $\to$ J/psi K,''
650: %arXiv:hep-ph/0009244;
651: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0009244;%%
652:
653: %\bibitem{a1a2ex}
654: %H.~Y.~Cheng and K.~C.~Yang,
655: %``Updated analysis of a1 and a2 in hadronic two-body decays of B mesons,''
656: %Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 092004 (1999). % [arXiv:hep-ph/9811249].
657: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9811249;%%
658:
659: \bibitem{PDG}
660: K.~Hagiwara {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group],
661: %``Review Of Particle Physics,''
662: Phys. Rev. D~{\bf 66}, 010001 (2002).
663: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D66,010001;%%
664:
665: %\cite{Lichtenberg:ja}
666: %\bibitem{Lichtenberg:ja}
667: %D.~B.~Lichtenberg,
668: %``Corrections To The Mass And Width Of A Resonance,''
669: %Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 10}, 3865 (1974).
670: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D10,3865;%%
671:
672: %\cite{Abe:2001wa}
673: \bibitem{psiK1}
674: K.~Abe {\it et al.} [Belle Collaboration],
675: %``Observation of B $\to$ J/psi K1(1270),''
676: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 87}, 161601 (2001).
677: %[arXiv:hep-ex/0105014].
678: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0105014;%%
679:
680: %\cite{Isgur:vy}
681: \bibitem{Isgur2}
682: N.~Isgur, R.~Kokoski and J.~Paton,
683: %``Gluonic Excitations Of Mesons: Why They Are Missing And Where To Find Them,''
684: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 54}, 869 (1985).
685: %%CITATION = PRLTA,54,869;%%
686:
687: %\cite{Cheng:2003kg}
688: \bibitem{cqqq}
689: H.Y.~Cheng and W.S.~Hou,
690: %``B decays as spectroscope for charmed four-quark states,'' arXiv:
691: hep-ph/0305038.
692: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305038;%%
693:
694: \end{thebibliography}
695:
696:
697:
698:
699: \end{document}
700: