1: \documentclass[12pt,sec]{article}
2: \usepackage{epsfig}
3: \usepackage{axodraw}
4: \setlength{\textwidth}{16.5cm}
5: \setlength{\textheight}{23cm}
6: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-0.1cm}
7: \setlength{\topmargin}{-1.4cm}
8: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{2}
9: \begin{document}
10:
11: \begin{center}
12: {\large Understanding the $e^+e^-\rightarrow D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$ processes observed by Belle }\\[0.8cm]
13: { Kui-Yong Liu}
14:
15: {\footnotesize Department of Physics, Peking University,
16: Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
17: and Department of Physics, Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China}\\[0.5cm]
18:
19: { Zhi-Guo He and Yu-Jie Zhang}
20:
21: {\footnotesize Department of Physics, Peking University,
22: Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China}\\[0.5cm]
23: { Kuang-Ta Chao}
24:
25: {\footnotesize China Center of Advanced Science and Technology
26: (World Laboratory), Beijing 100080, People's Republic of China and
27: Department of Physics, Peking University,
28: Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China}
29:
30:
31: \end{center}
32:
33: \begin{abstract}
34:
35: We calculate the production cross sections for $D^{*+}D^{*-}$,
36: $D^+D^{*-}$ and $D^+D^-$ in $e^+e^-$ annihilation through one
37: virtual photon in the framework of perturbative QCD with
38: constituent quarks. The calculated cross sections for
39: $D^{*+}D^{*-}$ and $D^+D^{*-}$ production are roughly in agreement
40: with the recent Belle data. The helicity decomposition for $D^{*}$
41: meson production is also calculated. The fraction of the
42: $D^{*\pm}_LD^{*\mp}_T$ final state in $e^+e^-\rightarrow
43: D^{*+}D^{*-}$ process is found to be 65\%. The fraction of
44: $DD^*_T$ production is 100\% and $DD^*_L$ is forbidden in $e^+e^-$
45: annihilation through one virtual photon. We further consider
46: $e^+e^-$ annihilation through two virtual photons, and then find
47: the fraction of $DD^{*}_T$ in $e^+e^-\rightarrow DD^{*}$ process
48: to be about 91\%.
49:
50: PACS number(s): 12.40.Nn, 13.85.Ni, 14.40.Gx
51:
52: \end{abstract}
53:
54: Recently, heavy meson production in $e^+e^-$ annihilation has
55: become a very interesting subject both experimentally and
56: theoretically. For instance, for charmonium production in $e^+e^-$
57: annihilation at the B-factory energy $\sqrt{s}=10.6$GeV, there are
58: large differences between the experimental
59: data~\cite{babar,belle,exdou} and the calculated cross sections
60: for both exclusive processes~\cite{ex} and inclusive
61: processes~\cite{in}. Even by including the effects of $e^+e^-$
62: annihilation into two photons in the exclusive double-charmonium
63: production~\cite{double} and inclusive charmonium
64: production~\cite{two}, the large discrepancies still
65: exist~\cite{comment}. Moreover, most recently the Belle
66: Collaboration has measured \cite{uglov} the charmed meson pair
67: $D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$ production in $e^+e^-$ annihilation and also
68: found a large differences between observed data and theoretical
69: predictions\cite{grozin}. The measured cross sections are
70: $\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow D^{{*}+}D^{{*}-})=0.65\pm0.04\pm0.07~$pb
71: and $\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow
72: D^{+}D^{{*}-})=0.71\pm0.05\pm0.09~$pb, which are, however, lower
73: than those predicted in Ref.\cite{grozin} by an order of magnitude
74: (see \cite{uglov} for the comparison). The Belle measurements of
75: the exclusive D meson pair production in $e^+e^-$ annihilation
76: could be another challenge to the theoretical studies. In order to
77: understand these production processes, in this letter we will
78: present a calculation in the framework of perturbative QCD with
79: constituent quarks. Namely, we will treat the charmed mesons
80: $D^{(*)}$ as bound states of a constituent charmed quark and a
81: constituent light antiquark, and the virtual photon will couple to
82: the charm quark, which will subsequently emit a light quark pair
83: with constituent quark masses through a virtual gluon (see the
84: upper diagram in Fig.~\ref{fey}). The virtuality of the virtual
85: gluon could be large enough for the application of perturbative
86: QCD. In addition, the case of the virtual photon coupled to the
87: light quark will also be considered (see the lower diagram in
88: Fig.~\ref{fey}). In the following we will report our calculated
89: results for both the total cross sections and the helicity
90: decomposed cross sections for these charmed meson pair production
91: in $e^+e^-$ annihilation at $\sqrt{s}=10.6$GeV, .
92:
93: Following the method in Ref.~\cite{amp}, the amplitude for
94: producing the heavy quark $(Q)$ -light antiquark $(\bar{q})$
95: bound-state $(Q\bar{q})$ is given by
96:
97: \begin{equation}
98: \label{amp} A(P)=\sum_{L_Z, S_Z}\int\frac{d^3{\bf
99: k}}{(2\pi)^3}\Psi_{L,L_Z}({\bf k})\langle LL_Z;SS_Z\mid
100: JJ_Z\rangle M(P,k),
101: \end{equation}
102: where
103: \begin{equation}
104: M(P,k)={\cal O}_\Gamma~ \Gamma_{SS_Z}(P,k),
105: \end{equation}
106: and ${\cal O}_{\Gamma}$ represents the short-distance interaction
107: producing the Q and $\bar{q}$ in a specific bound-state. {\bf k}
108: is the relative momentum between Q and $\bar{q}$.
109: $\Psi_{L,L_Z}({\bf k})$ is the Bethe-Salpeter bound state
110: wave-function. $\Gamma_{SS_Z}(P,k)$, up to second order in k, is
111: given by
112:
113: \begin{eqnarray}
114: &\Gamma_{SS_Z}(P,k)&=\sqrt{\frac{m_Q+m_q}{2m_Qm_q}}\sum_{s,\bar{s}}\langle
115: \frac{1}{2}s;\frac{1}{2}\bar{s} \mid SS_Z\rangle v(rP-k,s)\bar{u}(\bar{r}P+k,\bar{s}),\nonumber\\
116: &&\approx \sqrt{m_Q+m_q}\left (\frac {r\not{P}-\not{k}-m_q}{2m_q}
117: \right ) \left (\begin{array}{c}
118: \gamma^5 \\
119: -\not{\epsilon}(P,S_Z) \\
120: \end{array} \right ) \left
121: (\frac{\bar{r}\not{p}+\not{k}+m_Q}{2m_Q} \right )
122: \end{eqnarray}
123: where $\gamma^5$ is for spin-singlet state and
124: $-\not{\epsilon}(P,S_Z)$ is for spin-triplet state.
125:
126: For the S-wave state, we have $M(P,k)=M(P,0)$. After integrating
127: over {\bf k}, the amplitude $A(P)$ is related to the origin of the
128: radial wave-function $R_S(0)$
129:
130: \begin{equation}
131: \label{origin} \int \frac{d^3 {\bf
132: k}}{(2\pi)^3}\Psi_{00}=\frac{R_S(0)}{\sqrt{4\pi}}.
133: \end{equation}
134:
135: Using Eq.~(\ref{amp}-\ref{origin}), the calculation of the cross
136: section for the process showed in Fig.~\ref{fey} is
137: straightforward. We get the cross section as follows
138:
139: \begin{equation}
140: d\sigma=\frac{\pi
141: \alpha^2\alpha_s^2R_s(0)^4}{8s}\sqrt{1-\frac{4m^2}{s}}\mid \bar{M}
142: \mid ^2dx,
143: \end{equation}
144: where $x=\cos\theta$, $\theta$ is the angle between ${\bf p_1}$
145: and ${\bf p_3}$. The meson mass m equals $m_c+m_d$ in the leading
146: oeder non-relativistic approximation. For the $e^+e^-\rightarrow
147: D^{*+}D^{*-}$ process, $\mid \bar{M} \mid ^2$ reads
148:
149: \begin{eqnarray}
150: &\mid \bar{M} \mid^2 &=\frac{128(m_c+m_d)^2(4m_c^2+8m_cm_d+4m_d^2-s)}{81m_c^6m_d^6s^5}\nonumber\\
151: &&\times[-48m_c^{12}-192m_c^{11}m_d-288m_c^{10}m_d^2-192m_c^9m_d^3-96m_c^8m_d^4-192m_c^7m_d^5\nonumber\\
152: &&-288m_c^6m_d^6-192m_c^5m_d^7-60m_c^4m_d^8-48m_c^3m_d^9-72m_c^2m_d^{10}-48m_cm_d^{11}\nonumber\\
153: &&-12m_d^{12}-8m_c^{10}s-48m_c^9m_ds-80m_c^8m_d^2s-64m_c^7m_d^3s-56m_c^6m_d^4s\nonumber\\
154: &&-64m_c^5m_d^5s-50m_c^4m_d^6s-28m_c^3m_d^7s-20m_c^2m_d^8s-12m_cm_d^9s-2m_d^{10}s\nonumber\\
155: &&-4m_c^6m_d^2s^2-4m_c^4m_d^4s^2-m_c^2m_d^6s^2+(48m_c^{12}+192m_c^{11}m_d+288m_c^{10}m_d^2\nonumber\\
156: &&+192m_c^{9}m_d^3+96m_c^{8}m_d^4+192m_c^{7}m_d^5+288m_c^{6}m_d^6+192m_c^{5}m_d^7+60m_c^{4}m_d^8\nonumber\\
157: &&+48m_c^{3}m_d^9+72m_c^{2}m_d^{10}+48m_cm_d^{11}+12m_d^{12}-8m_c^{10}s-16m_c^{9}m_ds-16m_c^{8}m_d^{2}s\nonumber\\
158: &&-16m_c^{7}m_d^{3}s-24m_c^{6}m_d^{4}s-32m_c^{5}m_d^{5}s-18m_c^{4}m_d^{6}s-4m_c^{3}m_d^{7}s\nonumber\\
159: &&-4m_c^{2}m_d^{8}s-4m_cm_d^{9}s-2m_d^{10}s+4m_c^6m_d^2s^2+4m_c^4m_d^4s^2+m_c^2m_d^6s^2)x^2].
160: \end{eqnarray}
161:
162: For the $e^+e^-\rightarrow D^{+}D^{*-}$ process, one should
163: replace $\sqrt{1-\frac{4m^2}{s}}$ with
164: $\sqrt{\frac{(s+m_{D^+}^2-m_{D^{(*)-}}^2)^2}{s^2}-\frac{4m^2}{s}}$
165: in the phase space integration. $\mid \bar{M} \mid ^2$ is given by
166: \begin{eqnarray}
167: \mid \bar{M} \mid^2
168: &=&-\frac{128(m_c+m_d)^6(2m_c^3-m_d^3)^2(4m_c^2+8m_cm_d+4m_d^2-s)(1+x^2)}{81m_c^6m_d^6s^4}.
169: \end{eqnarray}
170:
171: For the $e^+e^-\rightarrow D^{+}D^{-}$ process, $\mid \bar{M} \mid
172: ^2$ is as follows
173:
174: \begin{eqnarray}
175: &\mid \bar{M} \mid^2&
176: =-\frac{128(m_c+m_d)^2(4m_c^2+8m_cm_d+4m_d^2-s)(1-x^2)}{81m_c^6m_d^6s^4}\nonumber\\
177: &&\times(4m_c^6+8m_c^5m_d+4m_c^4m_d^2+2m_c^2m_d^4+4m_cm_d^5+2m_d^6-2m_c^3m_ds-m_cm_d^3s).
178: \end{eqnarray}
179:
180: The Mandelstam variables are defined as
181: \begin{equation}
182: \label{t} t=(p_3-p_1)^2=m^2-\frac{s}{2}\left
183: (1-\sqrt{1-\frac{4m^2}{s}}x \right ),
184: \end{equation}
185: \begin{equation}
186: \label{u} u=(p_3-p_2)^2=m^2-\frac{s}{2}\left
187: (1+\sqrt{1+\frac{4m^2}{s}}x \right ).
188: \end{equation}
189:
190: We notify that for $e^+e^-\rightarrow D^{+}D^{*-}$ process, the
191: formula of Mandelstam variables t and u are a little different
192: from Eq.~(\ref{t}) and Eq.~(\ref{u}) because of the mass
193: difference between $D^{+}$ and $D^{*-}$. As the difference is
194: small, the change for the cross section is negligible. For
195: simplicity of the module of amplitude, we still use the definition
196: in Eq.~(\ref{t}) and Eq.~(\ref{u}).
197:
198: In the numerical calculation, the input parameters are as follows
199:
200: \begin{equation}
201: \alpha=1/137,~~~~~~\alpha_s=0.26.
202: \end{equation}
203:
204: For the Coulomb-plus-linear potential case, the value of the wave
205: function at the origin for charmonium can be found e.g. in
206: \cite{quigg}. With $m_c=1.84$ GeV, for the S-wave charmonium it
207: could be given by
208:
209: \begin{equation}
210: |R_S(0)|^2=1.454~{\rm GeV^3}.
211: \end{equation}
212:
213: We then use the potential scaling rules to get a rough estimate
214: for wave function at the origin for the charmed meson. We fix the
215: constituent c-quark mass at 1.6 GeV. The cross sections for
216: $D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$, $D^{+}D^{(*)-}$ and $D^{+}D^{-}$ are found to
217: be
218:
219: \begin{equation}
220: \label{sgdsds}\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow \gamma^* \rightarrow
221: D^{{*}+}D^{{*}-})=0.532~{\rm pb},
222: \end{equation}
223:
224: \begin{equation}
225: \sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow \gamma^* \rightarrow
226: D^{+}D^{{*}-})=0.699~{\rm pb},
227: \end{equation}
228:
229: \begin{equation}
230: \sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow \gamma^* \rightarrow
231: D^{+}D^{-})=0.098~{\rm pb}.
232: \end{equation}
233:
234: We also calculate the polarized $D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$ and
235: $D^{+}D^{(*)-}$ production. The polarized cross section can be
236: calculated by defining the longitudinal polarization vector as
237: follows~\cite{pol}
238:
239: \begin{equation}
240: \epsilon^{\mu}_L(p)=\frac{p^{\mu}}{M}-\frac{Mn^{\mu}}{n\cdot p},
241: \end{equation}
242: where $p^2=M^2$ and $n^{\mu}=(1,-\vec{p}/\mid \vec{p} \mid)$.
243:
244: The polarized modules of amplitude for $e^+e^-\rightarrow \gamma^*
245: \rightarrow D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$ is listed in Eq.~\ref{onephoton}
246: \begin{eqnarray}
247: \label{onephoton}\mid \bar{M}
248: \mid^2=\frac{-128(m_c+m_d)^6(2m_c^3+m_d^3)^2(4m_c^2+8m_cm_d+4m_d^2-s)(1+x^2)}{81m_c^6m_d^6s^4},
249: \end{eqnarray}
250:
251: The corresponding cross sections are
252:
253: \begin{equation}
254: \label{pol1}\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow \gamma^* \rightarrow
255: D^{(*)\pm}_LD^{(*)\mp}_T)=0.347~{\rm pb},
256: \end{equation}
257:
258: Using the results in Eq.~(\ref{sgdsds}) and~(\ref{pol1}), we get
259: \begin{equation}
260: \frac{\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow
261: D^{(*)\pm}_LD^{(*)\mp}_T)}{\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow
262: D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-})}=65.2\%
263: \end{equation}
264:
265: For $D^+D^{(*)-}$ case, the longitudinal cross section for one
266: photon process must be zero, since it is forbidden by parity
267: conservation and angular momentum conservation. The effective
268: $\gamma DD^{*}$ vertex in Fig~\ref{fey} only can have the form as
269:
270: \begin{equation}
271: {\cal
272: L}_{int}\sim\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}F_{\mu\nu}(q)G_{\rho\sigma}(p_4)\phi(p_3),
273: \end{equation}
274: where $F_{\mu\nu}(q)$ represents the field of the virtual photon,
275: $G_{\rho\sigma}(p_4)$ represents the field of the $D^{(*)-}$ meson
276: and $\phi(p_3)$ represents the field of the $D^+$ meson. In the
277: momentum space, the effective vertex is as follow
278:
279: \begin{equation}
280: \label{int}{\cal
281: L}_{int}\sim\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}q_{\mu}\epsilon^{\lambda}_{\nu}(q)
282: p_{4\rho}\epsilon^{\lambda^{'}}_{\sigma}(p_4).
283: \end{equation}
284:
285: If we choose the center-of-mass
286: frame of the $e^+e^-$, the formula in Eq.(\ref{int}) becomes
287:
288: \begin{eqnarray}
289: \label{ppp}{\cal
290: L}_{int}&\sim&\varepsilon^{0\nu\rho\sigma}q_{0}\epsilon^{\lambda}_{\nu}(q)
291: p_{4\rho}\epsilon^{\lambda^{'}}_{\sigma}(p_4)\nonumber\\
292: &\sim& q_{0}(\vec{p}_4
293: \times\vec{\epsilon}^{\lambda^{'}}(p_4))\cdot\vec{\epsilon}^{\lambda}(q).
294: \end{eqnarray}
295:
296: Because the space component of the longitudinal polarization
297: vector of the $D^*$ meson is parallel to the momentum of the $D^*$
298: meson, from Eq.(\ref{ppp}), one knows that the longitudinally
299: polarized $D^*$ meson cannot contribute to the process listed in
300: Fig.~\ref{fey}. The longitudinal $D^{*}$ only comes from two
301: photons process, as listed in Fig.~\ref{twofey}.
302:
303: The modules of amplitude for $e^+e^-\rightarrow 2\gamma^*
304: \rightarrow D^+D^{(*)-}$ and $e^+e^-\rightarrow 2\gamma^*
305: \rightarrow D^+D^{(*)-}_T$ are listed, respectively, in
306: Eq.~(\ref{twodds}) and Eq.~(\ref{twopol}).
307:
308: \begin{eqnarray}
309: &\label{twodds} \mid \bar{M} \mid & =
310: \frac{8(m_c-m_d)^2(m_c+m_d)^8(m_c^2+3m_cm_d+m_d^2)^2(4(m_c+m_d)^2(1-x^2)+s(1-x^2))}
311: {81m_c^6m_d^6(2m_c+m_d)^2(m_c+2m_d)^2s^3}\nonumber\\
312: \end{eqnarray}
313:
314: \begin{equation}
315: \label{twopol}\mid
316: \bar{M}_T\mid^2=\frac{32(m_c-m_d)^{2}(m_c+m_d)^{10}(mc_2+3m_cm_d+m_d^2)^2(1+x^2)}
317: {81m_c^6m_d^6s^3(2m_c+m_d)^2(m_c+2m_d)^2}.
318: \end{equation}
319:
320: The corresponding cross sections are
321:
322: \begin{equation}
323: \label{cdds}\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow 2 \gamma^* \rightarrow
324: D^{+}D^{(*)-})=0.091~{\rm pb}
325: \end{equation}
326:
327: \begin{equation}
328: \label{tdds}\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow 2\gamma^* \rightarrow
329: D^{+}D^{(*)-}_T)=0.018~{\rm pb}.
330: \end{equation}
331:
332: Then one can get the ratio of cross section for $D_T^{*}$ to total
333: cross section as follows
334: \begin{equation}
335: \frac{\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow
336: D^{+}D^{(*)-}_T)}{\sigma(e^+e^-\rightarrow D^{+}D^{(*)-})}=90.8\%.
337: \end{equation}
338:
339:
340: In summary, motivated by the measurement of the $e^+e^-
341: \rightarrow D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$ cross-sections~\cite{uglov}, we
342: calculate the cross-sections for $D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$,
343: $D^{+}D^{(*)-}$ and $D^{+}D^{-}$ in $e^+e^-$ annihilation through
344: one photon. The calculated cross-sections are roughly in agreement
345: with the experimental data. The fraction of the
346: $D_L^{(*)+}D_T^{(*)-}$ final state in the $e^+e^-\rightarrow
347: D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$ reaction is also calculated, the ratio of 65\%
348: is in some deviation from the Belle data, which is $(97 \pm
349: 5)\%$~\cite{uglov}. Moreover, for the $D^{+}D^{(*)-}$ production
350: case, in Ref.~\cite{uglov}, it is claimed that $e^+e^- \rightarrow
351: D^{+}D^{(*)-}$ is saturated by $D^{*}_L$ final state ($95.8 \pm
352: 5.6)\%$, in good agreement with the predictions of
353: Ref.~\cite{grozin}. Under our analysis, the $D_L^{*}$ final state
354: is forbidden by parity conservation and angular momentum
355: conservation. If the $e^+e^-\rightarrow 2\gamma^* \rightarrow
356: D^{+}D^{(*)-}$ process is further considered, the fraction of the
357: $D^*_T$ final state in $e^+e^-\rightarrow D^{+}D^{(*)-}$ process
358: is 90.8\%.
359:
360: \section*{Acknowledgments}
361:
362: The authors thank J.P.Ma, C.Meng and Z.Z.Song for useful
363: discussions. This work was supported in part by the National
364: Natural Science Foundation of China, and the Education Ministry of
365: China.
366:
367:
368:
369: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
370:
371: \bibitem{babar} BaBar Collaboration, B. Aubert {\it et al}., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 87},162002 (2001).
372:
373: \bibitem{belle} Belle Collaboration, K. Abe {\it et al}., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 88}, 052001(2002).
374:
375: \bibitem{exdou} Belle Colleboration, K. Abe, $et~al.$, Phys. Rev.
376: Lett. {\bf 89}, 142001(2002).
377:
378: \bibitem{ex} E.Braaten and Jungil Lee, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 67}
379: (2003)054007; K.Y.Liu, Z.G.He and K.T.Chao, Phys. Lett. B {\bf
380: 557}, (2003)45; K.Hagiwara, E.Kou and C.F.Qiao, Phys. Lett. B570,
381: 39(2003) .
382:
383: \bibitem{in} P. Cho and K. Leibovich, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 54}, 6990
384: (1996); F. Yuan, C.F. Qiao, and K.T. Chao, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 56},
385: 321 (1997); {\it ibid}, 1663 (1997); S. Baek, P. Ko, J. Lee, and
386: H.S. Song, J. Korean Phys. Soc. {\bf 33}, 97 (1998); K.Y.Liu,
387: Z.G.He and K.T.Chao, hep-ph/0301218.
388:
389: \bibitem{double} G.T.Bodwin, J.Lee and E.Braaten, Phys. Rev.
390: Lett. {\bf 90} 162001(2003).
391:
392: \bibitem{two} K.Y.Liu, Z.G.He and K.T.Chao, Phys. Rev. D {\bf
393: 68}, 031501 (2003).
394:
395: \bibitem{comment} Belle Collaboration, K. Abe {\it et al}.,
396: hep-ex/0306015.
397:
398: \bibitem{uglov} Belle Collaboration, K. Abe {\it et al}.,
399: hep-ex/0307084.
400: \bibitem{grozin} A.G.Grozin and M.Neubert, Phys. Rev. D {\bf
401: 55}, 272(1997).
402:
403:
404: \bibitem{amp} B.Guberina, J.H.K\"uhn, R.D.Peccei, and R.Ruckl,
405: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 174}, (1980)317; K.Cheung and T.C.Yuan, Phys.
406: Rev. D {\bf 53}, (1996)3591.
407:
408: \bibitem{quigg} E.J.Eichten and C.Quigg, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 52},
409: (1995)1726.
410:
411: \bibitem{pol} K.Cheung and T.C.Yuan, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 50}
412: (1994)3181.
413:
414:
415: \end{thebibliography}
416:
417: \newpage
418: \begin{figure}[t]
419: \begin{center}
420: \vspace{-3.0cm}
421: \includegraphics[width=12cm,height=16cm]{ddfey.ps}
422: \vspace{-3cm}
423: \end{center}
424: \caption{ Feynman diagrams for $e^+e^-\rightarrow \gamma^*
425: \rightarrow D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$.} \label{fey}
426: \end{figure}
427:
428: \newpage
429: \begin{figure}[t]
430: \begin{center}
431: \vspace{-3.0cm}
432: \includegraphics[width=12cm,height=16cm]{twofey.ps}
433: \vspace{-3cm}
434: \end{center}
435: \caption{ Feynman diagrams for $e^+e^-\rightarrow 2\gamma^*
436: \rightarrow D^{(*)+}D^{(*)-}$.} \label{twofey}
437: \end{figure}
438:
439: \end{document}
440: