1: %\tolerance = 10000
2: \documentclass[12pt,twoside]{article}
3: \usepackage{rotating,booktabs}
4: \usepackage{amsmath}
5: \usepackage{graphicx}
6: \usepackage{dcolumn}
7: \usepackage{bm}
8: \usepackage{amssymb}
9: \usepackage{latexsym}
10: %\usepackage{drftcite}
11: %\documentstyle[preprint,aps,epsfig,psfig]{revtex}
12: %\documentclass{article}
13:
14:
15:
16:
17: %\def\Journal#1#2#3#4{{#1}{\bf #2} (#4), #3} %eu type
18: \def\Journal#1#2#3#4{{#1} {\bf #2}, #3 (#4)} %us type
19: % Some useful journal names
20: \def\Preprint#1#2{{#1}{/#2}}
21:
22:
23: \def\PTP{ Prog. Theor. Phys.}
24: \def\NCA{ Nuovo Cimento}
25: \def\NIM{ Nucl. Instrum. Methods}
26: \def\NIMA{{ Nucl. Instrum. Methods} {\bf A}}
27: \def\NPA{{ Nucl. Phys.} {\bf A}}
28: \def\NPB{{ Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B}}
29: \def\PLB{{ Phys. Lett.} {\bf B}}
30: \def\PLC{{ Phys. Rep.} {\bf C}}
31: \def\PRLA{{ Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf A}}
32: \def\PRL{ Phys. Rev. Lett.}
33: %\def\PRD{{ Phys. Rev.} {\bf D}}
34: \def\PRD{{ Phys. Rev.} { D}}
35: %\def\PRC{{ Phys. Rev.} {\bf C}}
36: \def\PRC{{ Phys. Rev.} { C}}
37: \def\PR{ Phys. Rev.}
38: \def\ZPC{{ Z. Phys.} {\bf C}}
39: \def\ZPA{{ Z. Phys.} {\bf A}}
40: \def\ANN{{ Ann. Phys.}}
41: %-------------------------------
42: \def\PRT{ Phys. Rep.}
43: \def\JPG{{ J. Phys.} G}
44: %---------------------------
45:
46: \def\tstrut{\vrule height2.5ex depth0pt width0pt} % used in tables
47: \def\jtstrut{\vrule height5ex depth0pt width0pt} % used in tables
48: \def\MeV{\textrm{ MeV}}
49: \def\GeV{\textrm{ GeV}}
50: \def\J{J/\psi}
51:
52: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
53: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
54: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
55: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
56: \newcommand{\bean}{\begin{eqnarray*}}
57: \newcommand{\eean}{\end{eqnarray*}}
58:
59: \begin{document}
60:
61: %\draft
62: % Adjust the following two lines to center the manuscript on the page.
63: % This can be printer configuration specific.
64: %\voffset=-2.2cm
65: %\hoffset=-0.cm
66:
67:
68: % add words to TeX's hyphenation exception list
69: %\hyphenation{author another created financial paper re-commend-ed}
70:
71: % declarations for front matter
72: \title{Subthreshold $\rho$ contribution in $J/\psi$ decay to
73: $\omega\pi\pi$ and $K\bar{K}\pi$
74: % \footnote{Supported in part by National Natural Science Foundation of
75: % China under Grant Nos.19775051 19875024 and 19905011}
76: }
77:
78: \vspace{2cm}
79: \author{F. Q. Wu$^{a,b,d}$ and B. S. Zou$^{a,b,c}$\\
80: a) CCAST (World Laboratory), P. O. Box 8730, Beijing 100080,China
81: \footnote{mailing address; E-mail: wufq@ihep.ac.cn, zoubs@ihep.ac.cn}\\
82: b) Institute of High Energy Physics, CAS, Beijing 100049, China\\
83: c) Institute of Theoretical Physics, CAS, Beijing 100080, China\\
84: d) Graduate School, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing
85: 100049,China}
86:
87: \date{\today}
88:
89: % typeset front matter
90:
91: \maketitle
92:
93: \begin{abstract}
94: We carry out a theoretical and Monte Carlo study on the $J/\psi$
95: decays into $\omega\pi\pi$ and $K\bar{K}\pi$ through intermediate
96: subthreshold $\rho$ meson by using SU(3)-symmetric Lagrangian
97: approach. It is found that the subthreshold $\rho$ contribution
98: is not negligible and may have significant influence on partial
99: wave analysis of resonances in these channels, especially near the
100: $\omega \pi$ and $K \bar{K}$ thresholds.
101:
102: \end{abstract}
103: \vspace{1cm}
104: %{\bf PACS number(s): 13.25.Gv, 14.40.Gx, 13.66.Bc, 13.30.Eg}
105:
106: %\newpage
107:
108: \section{Introduction}
109: In recent years, much effort has been devoted to the study of
110: meson and baryon spectra. Of particular interests, the $J/\psi$
111: decays now provide an excellent source of information for studying
112: light hadron spectroscopy and searching for glueballs, hybrids,
113: and exotic states \cite{bes-review}. Several interesting
114: near-threshold structures were observed and studied, such as the
115: broad $\sigma$ near $\pi\pi$ threshold \cite{bes-sigma}, the broad
116: $\kappa$ near $K\pi$ threshold \cite{bes-kappa}, the narrow
117: $f_0(980)$ peak near $\bar KK$ threshold \cite{bes-f980}, and the
118: narrow structure near $\bar pp$ threshold \cite{bes-p-anti-p}.
119: While various mechanisms were proposed to explain these structures
120: \cite{sigma1}, the conventional t-channel meson exchange final
121: state interaction mechanism \cite{rho-exchange,Wu:2003wf} can give
122: consistent explanation for all these structures. The t-channel
123: $\rho$ meson exchange was found to play a very important role for
124: all these structures.
125:
126: In this paper, we want to address two other puzzling
127: near-threshold phenomena in $J/\psi$ decays. The first one is the
128: ``$b_1$ puzzle" in the $J/\psi \to \omega \pi \pi$. Both DM2
129: Collaboration \cite{dm2 5pi} and BESII Collaboration
130: \cite{bes-sigma} obtained a much broader width for the
131: near-$\omega\pi$-threshold resonance $b_1(1235)$: while PDG gives
132: the width $(142\pm 9)$ MeV \cite{PDG}, the DM2 and BESII gave it
133: as $(210\pm 19)$ MeV and $(195\pm 20)$ MeV, respectively. The
134: second puzzle is that there is a clear near-$\bar KK$-threshold
135: enhancement in both $J/\psi\to K^+K^-\pi^0$ and $J/\psi\to
136: K_SK^\pm \pi^\mp$ Dalitz plots from DM2 data \cite{dm2-KKpi}
137: although the structure was not addressed in the paper possibly due
138: to uncertainty of background contribution. From conservation laws
139: for strong interaction, the $\bar KK$ here should have isospin 1
140: and spin-parity $1^-$. There is no known resonance of these
141: quantum numbers very close to $\bar KK$ threshold.
142:
143: It is rather tempting to claim some new near-threshold resonances
144: here. But before claiming any new physics from the seemingly
145: puzzling phenomena, one should investigate all possible
146: conventional mechanisms to see if the phenomena can be interpreted
147: within the existing theoretical framework. Motivated by this idea,
148: here we investigate the subthreshold $\rho$ contribution to these
149: channels through diagrams shown in Fig.\ref{fig:omega} and
150: Fig.\ref{fig:k} for $J/\psi \to \omega \pi \pi$ and $J/\psi\to
151: \bar KK\pi$, respectively. There are good reasons for considering
152: this mechanism. The $J/\psi\to\rho\pi$ decay has the largest
153: branching ratio among the known two-body decay channels of the
154: $J/\psi$ \cite{PDG}. The $\rho KK$ and $\rho\omega\pi$ couplings
155: are well determined to be large.
156:
157: This paper is organized as follows. In section II, we present the
158: method and formulation for calculation and Monte Carlo simulation.
159: The numerical results and discussions are given in section III.
160: %
161: \begin{figure}[htbp] %\vspace{-1.6cm}
162: \begin{center}
163: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{psi.omega.eps}
164: \caption{Diagrams for $J/\psi \rightarrow \omega \pi^+ \pi^-$
165: decay with subthreshold $\rho$ exchange. }
166: \label{fig:omega}
167: \end{center}
168: \end{figure}
169: %
170: \begin{figure}[htbp] \vspace{-1.cm}
171: \begin{center}
172: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{psi.k.k.eps}
173: \caption{Diagrams for $J/\psi \rightarrow K \bar{K} \pi$
174: decay with subthreshold $\rho$ exchange. }
175: \label{fig:k}
176: \end{center}
177: \end{figure}
178: %
179: %
180:
181: \section{Method and formulation}
182:
183: The Feynman diagrams for relevant processes with the subthreshold
184: $\rho$ contributions are depicted in Fig.\ref{fig:omega} ($J/\psi
185: \to \omega\pi^+\pi^-$ ) and Fig.\ref{fig:k} ($J/\psi \to
186: K\bar{K}\pi$ ). For the vector-vector-pseudoscalar (VVP) and the
187: pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar-vector (PPV) couplings, we use the
188: SU(3)-symmetric Lagrangians as in \cite{Wu:2003wf,lagrangian}
189: \bea
190: \label{eq:LVVP}
191: {\cal L}_{VVP} &=& \frac{G}{\sqrt{2}}\epsilon^{\mu \nu \alpha
192: \beta}\langle
193: \partial_{\mu} V_{\nu} \partial_{\alpha} V_{\beta} P \rangle,
194: %
195: \\
196: \mathcal{L}_{PPV} &=&-\frac{1}{2}iG^{\prime} \langle [P,\partial_\mu
197: P]V^\mu \rangle,
198: \eea
199: where $\langle \ldots\rangle$ means $SU(3)$ trace, $G$ and $G^\prime$ are the
200: coupling constants, and $P$ is the $3 \times 3$ matrix representation
201: of the pseudoscalar meson octet, here $P = \lambda_a P^a$, $a = 1, . .... .
202: , 8$ and $\lambda_a$ are the $3 \times 3$ generators of SU(3). A
203: similar definition of $V_\nu$ is used for the vector meson octet.
204:
205:
206: In the Gell-Mann representation, the relevant effective Lagrangians
207: are
208: \bea
209: \mathcal{L}_{\psi \rho \pi} &=& g_{\psi\rho\pi}\epsilon^{\mu \nu \alpha
210: \beta}p^\mu_\psi e^\nu(\psi) p^\alpha_\rho e^\beta(\rho), \label{psi rho pi}\\
211: \mathcal{L}_{\omega \rho \pi} &=& g_{\omega\rho\pi}\epsilon^{\mu \nu \alpha
212: \beta}p^\mu_\omega e^\nu(\omega) p^\alpha_\rho e^\beta(\rho), \label{omega rho pi}\\
213: % \mathcal{L}_{\rho\pi\pi} &=& g_{\rho\pi\pi} e^\mu(\rho) (p_{1} -
214: %p_{2})_\mu, \label{rho pi pi} \\
215: % \mathcal{L}_{\rho K \bar{K}} &=& g_{\rho K
216: %\bar{K}} e^\mu(\rho) (p_{1} - p_{2})_\mu, \label{rho k k}\\
217: %
218: \mathcal{L}_{\rho\pi\pi} &=& g_{\rho\pi\pi} [(p_{\pi^+}^\mu
219: -p_{\pi^-}^\mu )\rho^0_{\mu} + (p_{\pi^-}^\mu -p_{\pi^0}^\mu
220: )\rho^+_{\mu} +
221: (p_{\pi^0}^\mu -p_{\pi^+}^\mu )\rho^-_{\mu}] \\
222: %
223: \mathcal{L}_{\rho K \bar{K}} &=& g_{\rho K
224: \bar{K}} [(p_{K^+}^\mu - p_{K^-}^\mu)
225: \rho^0_\mu + (p_{\bar{K}^0}^\mu - p_{{K}^0}^\mu) \rho^0_\mu
226: ] + \nonumber \\ && \sqrt{2}~ g_{\rho K \bar{K}} (p_{K^0}^\mu
227: - p_{K^-}^\mu) \rho^+_\mu + \sqrt{2}~ g_{\rho K \bar{K}}
228: (p_{K^+}^\mu - p_{\bar{K}^0}^\mu) \rho^-_\mu \label{psi rho k
229: k}
230: \eea
231: where $g_{\rho K
232: \bar{K}} = \frac{1}{2} g_{\rho\pi\pi}= G^\prime$ due to flavor SU(3) symmetry.
233: Using these Lagrangians, we are able to construct following amplitudes $T_1$,
234: $T_{2a}$, $T_{2b}$, $T_{2c}$ and $T_{2d}$ corresponding the
235: diagrams in Fig.\ref{fig:omega}, Fig.\ref{fig:k}a,
236: Fig.\ref{fig:k}b, Fig.\ref{fig:k}c and Fig.\ref{fig:k}d,
237: respectively:
238: %
239: \bea T_1 &=& -g_{\psi \rho \pi} g_{\omega \rho \pi}\{
240: %---------------rho+----------------
241: \epsilon_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta} p_0^\mu e^{*\nu}(\psi) (p_1+p_2)^\alpha
242: \epsilon^{\gamma\beta\lambda \sigma} (p_1+p_2)_\gamma p_{1\lambda} e_{\sigma}(\omega) \nonumber
243: \\ && \frac{1}{(p_1+p_2)^2-m_\rho^2 + i m_\rho \Gamma_\rho}+
244: % \nonumber \\
245: %----------------rho- ---------
246: % &&
247: \frac{1}{(p_1+p_3)^2-m_\rho^2 + i m_\rho \Gamma_\rho} \nonumber
248: \\ &&
249: \epsilon_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta} p_0^\mu e^{*\nu}(\psi) (p_1+p_3)^\alpha
250: \epsilon^{\gamma\beta\lambda \sigma} (p_1+p_3)_\gamma p_{1\lambda} e_{\sigma}(\omega)
251: \} F_{\psi \rho \pi}F_{\omega \rho \pi} , \label{T1}\\
252: %
253: %
254: %
255: T_{2a} &=& T_{2b} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} T_{2c} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}T_{2d}
256: \nonumber \\
257: &=& -\frac{ 2g_{\psi \rho \pi} g_{\rho K \bar{K}}}{(p_1+p_2)^2-m_\rho^2 + i m_\rho \Gamma_\rho}
258: \epsilon_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta} p_0^\mu e^{*\nu}(\psi)
259: p_1^\alpha p_2^\beta F_{\psi \rho \pi}F_{\rho K
260: \bar{K}}. \label{T2}
261: \eea
262: %
263: %
264: Here $\Gamma_\rho$ represents the width of $\rho$; $F_{\psi \rho
265: \pi}$, $F_{\omega \rho \pi}$ and $F_{\rho K \bar{K}}$ are
266: the form factors for the $\psi \rho \pi$, $\omega \rho \pi$ and
267: $\rho K \bar{K}$ vertices, respectively.
268:
269: Usually, hadronic form factors should be applied to the
270: meson-meson-meson vertices because of the inner quark-gluon
271: structure of hadrons. It is well known that form factors play an
272: important role in many physics processes, such as $\pi\pi$
273: scattering \cite{Wu:2003wf}, NN interactions \cite{Machleidt},
274: $\pi N$ scattering \cite{Gross}, meson photo-production
275: \cite{Q.Zhao} etc.. Due to the difficulties in dealing with
276: nonperturbative QCD hadron structure, the form factors are
277: commonly adopted phenomenologically.
278:
279:
280: The most commonly used form factors for meson-meson-meson vertices
281: in $J/\psi$ decays are Blatt-Weisskopf barrier factors
282: $B_l(Q_{abc})$ \cite{VonHippel:1972fg,chung:93 98} for a decay
283: process $a\to b+c$ with orbital angular momentum $l$ between $b$
284: and $c$ mesons:
285: \bea B_1(Q_{abc},R)\!&=&\!
286: \sqrt{Q^2_0\over Q_{abc}^2+Q^2_0} ~~~~\text{for} ~l=1, \eea where
287: \begin{equation}
288: Q_{abc}^2=\frac{(s_{a}+s_{b}-s_{c})^{2}}{4s_{a}}-s_{b}
289: \end{equation}
290: %
291: is the magnitude of $\bf p_b$ or $\bf p_c$ in the rest system of
292: $a$; $s_i=E_i^2-{\bf p}^2_i$ with $E_i$ and ${\bf p}_i$ the energy
293: and the tree-momentum component of $p_i$, respectively. Here $Q_0$
294: is a hadron ``scale" parameter, $Q_0 = 0.197321/R$ GeV/c with $R$
295: reflecting the radius of the centrifugal barrier in fm. We take
296: $R=0.5$ fm for $\psi \rho \pi$ vertex and $R=0.5$ or 0.8 fm for
297: $\omega \rho \pi$ and $\rho \pi \pi$ vertices. For the sake of
298: convenience, we use the following shorthand notation for the
299: $F_{\psi \rho \pi}F_{\rho \text{m} \text{m} }$ in
300: Eqs.(\ref{T1},\ref{T2}) for various channels:
301: \bea F_1 &\equiv& \left\{ \begin{array}{clc}
302: B_1(R_{\psi \rho \pi}=0.5) B_1(R_{\rho
303: \pi\pi}=0.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} \pi \pi \pi \\
304: B_1(R_{\psi \rho \pi}=0.5) B_1(R_{\omega \rho \pi}=0.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} \omega \pi \pi
305: \\
306: B_1(R_{\psi \rho \pi}=0.5) B_1(R_{\rho K \bar{K}}=0.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} K \bar{K}\pi
307: \end{array} \right.
308: \eea
309: % =R_{\omega\rho\pi}=0.5) \\
310: % F_2 &\equiv& B_1(Q_{abc},R_{\psi \rho \pi}= 0.5 ~\text{and}~R_{\rho \pi\pi}=R_{\omega\rho\pi}=0.8)
311: \bea F_2 &\equiv& \left\{ \begin{array}{clc}
312: B_1(R_{\psi \rho \pi}=0.5) B_1(R_{\rho
313: \pi\pi}=0.8)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} \pi \pi \pi \\
314: B_1(R_{\psi \rho \pi}=0.5) B_1(R_{\omega \rho \pi}=0.8)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} \omega \pi \pi
315: \\
316: B_1(R_{\psi \rho \pi}=0.5) B_1(R_{\rho K \bar{K}}=0.8)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} K \bar{K}\pi
317: \end{array} \right.
318: \eea
319:
320: The monopole form factor is also a frequently used s-channel form
321: factor \cite{Wu:2003wf,Liu,Titov}:
322: \begin{equation}
323: F(\Lambda, q)=\frac{\Lambda^2+m^2}{\Lambda^2+q^2},
324: \end{equation}
325: where $m$ and $q$ are the mass and the four-momentum of the
326: intermediate particle, respectively, and $\Lambda$ is the
327: so-called cut-off momentum that can be determined by fitting the
328: experimental data. We take a commonly used value $\Lambda$=1.5 GeV
329: for $\rho \pi \pi$ \cite{Wu:2003wf} and $\omega \rho \pi$
330: \cite{Titov} vertices. For $\rho K \bar{K}$ vertex,
331: $\Lambda$=1.5-4.5 GeV was used in literature
332: \cite{rho-exchange,Wu:2003wf}. It is possible that mesons
333: involving heavier quarks have smaller size and corresponding need
334: larger cut-off $\Lambda$ parameter for the relevant vertices. We
335: take $\Lambda$=1.5-4.5 GeV for $\J\rho\pi$ vertex and $\rho K
336: \bar{K}$ vertex. Similarly, we define
337: \bea F_3 &\equiv& \left\{ \begin{array}{llc}
338: F(\Lambda_{\psi \rho \pi}=4.5) F(\Lambda_{\rho
339: \pi\pi}=1.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} \pi \pi \pi \\
340: F(\Lambda_{\psi \rho \pi}=4.5) F(\Lambda_{\omega \rho \pi}=1.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} \omega \pi \pi
341: \\
342: F(\Lambda_{\psi \rho \pi}=4.5) F(\Lambda_{\rho K \bar{K}}=1.5-4.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} K \bar{K}\pi
343: \end{array} \right.
344: \eea
345: \bea F_4 &\equiv& \left\{ \begin{array}{llc}
346: F(\Lambda_{\psi \rho \pi}=1.5) F(\Lambda_{\rho
347: \pi\pi}=1.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} \pi \pi \pi \\
348: F(\Lambda_{\psi \rho \pi}=1.5) F(\Lambda_{\omega \rho \pi}=1.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} \omega \pi \pi
349: \\
350: F(\Lambda_{\psi \rho \pi}=1.5) F(\Lambda_{\rho K \bar{K}}=1.5-4.5)&, & J/\psi \stackrel{\rho}{\to} K \bar{K}\pi
351: \end{array} \right.
352: \eea
353:
354: %when we use this form of form factor $F_{\psi \rho \pi}F_{\rho
355: %\text{m} \text{m} }$ in Eq.(\ref{T1},\ref{T2})).
356:
357: The differential decay widths can be evaluated as
358: %
359: \begin{eqnarray}
360: d\Gamma(J/\psi \to \omega \pi^+ \pi^- )&=&
361: \frac{(2\pi)^4}{2M_{\psi}}{|{{T_1}}|}^2 d\Phi_3 (p_0; p_1, p_2,
362: p_3), \label{gamma1} \\
363: %
364: %
365: d\Gamma(J/\psi \to K \bar{K} \pi )&=&
366: \frac{({2\pi})^4}{2M_{\psi}}({|{{T_{2a}}}|}^2 + {|{{T_{2b}}}|}^2 +
367: {|{{T_{2c}}}|}^2 + {|{{T_{2d}}}|}^2) \nonumber \\ && d\Phi_3 (p_0;
368: p_1, p_2, p_3), \label{gamma3}
369: \end{eqnarray}
370: with $M_{\psi}$ being the mass of $J/\psi$ and the three body
371: phase space factor
372: %
373: \begin{equation}
374: d\Phi_3 (p_0; p_1, p_2,p_3) = \delta^4 (p_0-p_1-p_2-p_3) \frac{d^3
375: p_1}{{(2 \pi)}^3 2E_1} \frac{d^3 p_2}{{(2 \pi)}^3 2E_2} \frac{d^3
376: p_3}{{(2 \pi)}^3 2E_3}.
377: \end{equation}
378: %
379:
380: >From above equations and following the covariant tensor amplitude
381: method described in detail in Refs.\cite{chung:93 98}, the entire
382: calculations are straightforward although tedious. The numerical
383: results are given in the following section.
384:
385: \section{Numerical results and discussions} %or{ Conclusions}
386:
387: In the model described so far, there are four relevant coupling
388: constants, $g_{\psi\rho\pi}$, $g_{\omega\rho\pi}$ and $g_{\rho\pi\pi}$
389: (see Eqs.(\ref{psi rho pi}-\ref{psi rho k k})). The $g_{\rho\pi\pi}$
390: can be obtained by evaluating the
391: process $\rho \to \pi\pi $ with various form factors. In an
392: analogous way, we can obtain $g_{\psi\rho\pi}$ through the
393: sequential decays $\psi \to \rho\pi$ with $\rho \to \pi \pi$ and
394: $g_{\omega\rho\pi}$ through $\omega \to \rho\pi$ with $\rho \to
395: \pi \pi$ by using the similar approach described in the section
396: above. The experimental data of $\rho \to \pi\pi $,
397: $\psi \to \rho \pi$, $\omega \to \pi \pi \pi$ decay widths are
398: from the PDG \cite{PDG}. The results are shown in Table
399: \ref{table:result}.
400:
401:
402: We use two forms of $\Gamma_\rho$ in Eqs.(\ref{T1},\ref{T2}).
403: First we take it as a constant of 0.149 GeV. Then we take an
404: energy dependent width including $\pi\pi$, $\omega\pi$ and $K
405: \bar{K}$ channels
406:
407: \be \Gamma_{\rho}(s) = \Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow\pi\pi}(s)
408: +\Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow \omega\pi}(s) + \Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow K
409: \bar{K}}(s) \equiv \Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow (\pi\pi+\omega\pi+ K
410: \bar{K})},
411: \ee
412: where energy dependent partial width
413: $\Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow\pi\pi}$, $\Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow
414: \omega\pi}$ and $\Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow K \bar{K}}$ are obtained
415: by the method similar to Eqs.(\ref{gamma1},\ref{gamma3}). Usually
416: only $\rho\to\pi\pi$ width is considered in the $\rho$ propagator.
417: But in reality, when the invariant mass of the off-peak $\rho$
418: meson goes above $\omega\pi$ and $K\bar K$ thresholds, the
419: off-peak $\rho$ can also decay into these new channels and the
420: corresponding partial decay widths should be included in its total
421: energy dependent width. This will make the tail of $\rho$
422: propagator drops faster for energies above the new thresholds than
423: the usual propagator with constant width. We find that the two
424: forms of $\Gamma_{\rho}$ have little influence on coupling
425: constants. So we use the same coupling constants in amplitudes
426: with the same form factor (see Table \ref{table:result}).
427:
428: In order to demonstrate how large effect the s-channel
429: subthreshold $\rho$ exchange may have upon various channels, their
430: contributions are calculated and compared with experimental decay
431: widths of the corresponding final states. The results are listed
432: in Table \ref{table:result}. The $R^\rho_{\omega\pi\pi}$ and
433: $R^\rho_{K\bar K\pi}$ represent the ratio of theoretical
434: contribution from the subthreshold $\rho$ exchange to the
435: experimental width taken from PDG \cite{PDG} for the channels
436: $\omega\pi^+\pi^-$ and $K\bar K\pi$, respectively:
437: \bea
438: R^\rho_{\omega\pi\pi}&\equiv&{\frac{\Gamma_{th}(J/\psi\stackrel{\rho}{\rightarrow}\omega\pi^+\pi^-)}
439: {\Gamma_{ex}(J/\psi\rightarrow\omega\pi^+\pi^-)}},\\
440: R^\rho_{K\bar K\pi}&\equiv& {\frac{\Gamma_{th}(J/\psi\stackrel{\rho}{\rightarrow} K\bar{K}\pi)}
441: {\Gamma_{ex}(J/\psi\rightarrow K\bar{K}\pi)}}.
442: \eea
443: The range of variations for $R^\rho_{K\bar K\pi}$ in Table
444: \ref{table:result} for form factor $F_3$ and $F_4$ comes from the
445: variation of $\Lambda$ between 1.5 and 4.5 GeV for the $\rho K
446: \bar{K}$ vertex.
447:
448:
449: \begin{center}
450: \begin{table}
451: \caption{The coupling constants and the percentages of the
452: s-channel subthreshold $\rho$ exchange contribution as functions of
453: the form factors (F. F.) and of the choice of $\rho$ width.}
454: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
455:
456: \hline
457: % $\stackrel{\textstyle form}{factor}$ &
458: F. F.&
459: $\Gamma_{\rho}$ &
460: $g_{\rho\pi\pi}$&$g_{{\scriptscriptstyle J/{\Psi}} \rho
461: \pi}$&$g_{\omega\rho\pi}$
462:
463: &$R^\rho_{\omega\pi\pi}$
464: %7
465: &$R^\rho_{K\bar K\pi}$
466: \\
467: &${\scriptstyle(GeV)}$&&${\scriptstyle(GeV^{-1})}$&${\scriptstyle(GeV^{-1})}$&${\scriptstyle(\%)}$&${\scriptstyle(\%)}$
468:
469: \\ \hline
470: $F_1$
471: &0.149&8.18&8.61&14.56&21.0 &4.5
472: \\ \cline{2-2}\cline{6-7}
473: $$
474: &${\scriptstyle\Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow(\pi\pi+\omega\pi+ K \bar{K})}}$
475: &&$\times 10^{-3}$ & &18.3 &4.3
476:
477: \\ \hline
478: $F_2$
479: &0.149&10.69&8.70&14.68&11.1 &4.2
480: \\ \cline{2-2}\cline{6-7}
481: $$
482: &${\scriptstyle\Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow(\pi\pi+\omega\pi+ K \bar{K})}}$
483: &&$\times 10^{-3}$ &&9.3 &4.0
484: \\ \hline
485:
486: $F_3$&0.149&6.05&2.31&11.82&7.7 &1.7-3.4
487: \\ \cline{2-2}\cline{6-7}
488:
489: &${\scriptstyle\Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow(\pi\pi+\omega\pi+ K \bar{K})}}$
490: &&$\times 10^{-3}$ &&6.3 &1.6-3.2
491: \\ \hline
492: $F_4$&0.149&6.05&2.35&11.82&3.9 &1.0-1.8
493: \\ \cline{2-2}\cline{6-7}
494:
495: &${\scriptstyle\Gamma_{\rho\rightarrow(\pi\pi+\omega\pi+ K \bar{K})}}$
496: &&$\times 10^{-3}$ &&3.1 &0.9-1.7
497: \\ \hline
498: \end{tabular}
499: \label{table:result}
500: \end{table}
501: \end{center}
502:
503: From Table \ref{table:result}, we see that no
504: matter which form of $\Gamma_\rho$ and form factor are employed,
505: the range of the $R^\rho_{\omega\pi\pi}$ is from 3.1\% to 21.0\%
506: and that of $R^\rho_{K\bar K\pi}$ is from 0.9\% to 4.5\%.
507: It means that the
508: contribution of the s-channel subthreshold $\rho$ exchange is not
509: negligible for both $J/\psi \to \omega\pi\pi$ and $J/\psi \to
510: K\bar{K}\pi$ channels. The subthreshold $\rho$ contribution may
511: have significant influence on the analysis of resonances near
512: $\omega\pi$ and $K\bar K$ thresholds.
513:
514:
515: In order to see the influence it may have on analysis of resonances
516: near thresholds, we perform a Monte Carlo simulation to give
517: predictions on various invariant mass spectra and Dalitz plots for
518: these two channels as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:dalitz.omega},
519: Fig.\ref{fig:mass pipi} and Fig.\ref{fig:invariant.kk}, in which we
520: take form factor $F_2$ and $\Gamma_\rho$=0.149 GeV. The dotted
521: lines in the invariant mass spectra denote the uniform phase space
522: distributions without considering the dynamical interactions. In
523: Fig.\ref{fig:dalitz.omega}, a clear enhancement about 1.2 GeV near
524: the $\omega\pi$ threshold appears in both invariant mass spectrum
525: and Dalitz plot. Comparing with experimental results (Fig.7 and
526: Fig.10 in Ref.\cite{dm2 5pi}; Fig.1 and Fig.2 in
527: Ref.\cite{bes-sigma}), one can expect that this enhancement, as the
528: background of $b_1(1235)$, should reduce the measured width of
529: $b_1(1235)$ from this reaction and may well explain the ``$b_1$
530: puzzle".
531:
532: \begin{figure}[htbp] %\vspace{-1.6cm}
533: \begin{center}
534: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{omega.eps}
535: \caption{ The $\omega\pi$ invariant-mass distribution (solid line)
536: and the Dalitz plot for $J/\psi \to \omega\pi^+\pi^-$ decay
537: through $\rho$ exchange with form factor $F_2$ and
538: $\Gamma_\rho$=0.149 GeV, compared with phase space distribution
539: (dotted line). }\label{fig:dalitz.omega}
540: \end{center}
541: \end{figure}
542:
543: One interesting phenomena in the Dalitz plot of
544: Fig.\ref{fig:dalitz.omega} is that there is also a clear
545: enhancement band near $\pi\pi$ threshold, which is shown more
546: clearly in the Fig.\ref{fig:mass pipi} for the $\pi\pi$
547: invariant-mass distribution of $J/\psi \to \omega\pi^+\pi^-$ decay
548: (solid line). This enhancement band comes mainly from the
549: interference terms of two Feynman diagrams in Fig.\ref{fig:omega},
550: because if we do not include the interference term of Fig.
551: \ref{fig:omega}, the visible bump located in $0.5-1.0$ GeV will
552: be much reduced in the $\pi^+ \pi^-$ invariant-mass distribution
553: as shown by the dot-dashed line. Therefore, the subthreshold
554: $\rho$ contribution may even have influence upon the analysis of
555: the $\sigma$ meson from this channel.
556:
557:
558: \begin{figure}[htbp]
559: \begin{center}
560: \includegraphics[scale=0.4]{pipi.imd.eps}
561: \caption{The $\pi\pi$ invariant-mass distribution for $J/\psi \to
562: \omega\pi^+\pi^-$ decay through $\rho$ exchange with form factor
563: $F_2$ and $\Gamma_\rho$=0.149 GeV (solid line), compared with the
564: phase space distribution (dotted line) and the result ignoring the
565: interference effect between subthreshold $\rho^+$ and $\rho^-$
566: contributions (dot-dashed line). }\label{fig:mass pipi}
567: \end{center}
568: \end{figure}
569:
570: \begin{figure}[htbp] %\vspace{-1.6cm}
571: \begin{center}
572: \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{kk.eps}
573: \caption{The $K \bar{K}$ invariant-mass distribution (solid line)
574: and the Dalitz plot for $J/\psi \to K\bar{K}\pi$ decay through
575: $\rho$ exchange with form factor $F_2$ and $\Gamma_\rho$=0.149
576: GeV, compared with phase space distribution (dotted line).}
577: \label{fig:invariant.kk}
578: \end{center}
579: \end{figure}
580:
581: In Fig.\ref{fig:invariant.kk}, a clear peak around 1.1 GeV near
582: the threshold is also seen in the $K \bar{K}$ invariant-mass
583: distribution. By looking at Table \ref{table:result} and
584: Fig.\ref{fig:invariant.kk}, it is natural to expect that the
585: subthreshold $\rho$ contribution is an important source for the
586: near-threshold enhancement found in $J/\psi \to K^+ K^- \pi^0$
587: decay by the DM2 Collaboration \cite{dm2-KKpi}. Hence the result
588: provides another evidence of the important role played by the
589: subthreshold $\rho$ contribution.
590:
591: Since the mass of $\rho$ is more than 150 MeV below the
592: $\omega\pi$ and $K \bar{K}$ thresholds and the width of $\rho$ is
593: not very broad, some people naively assume that the subthreshold
594: $\rho$ contribution can be neglected in these channels of $J/\psi$
595: decays. However, this paper should greatly change this point of
596: view for the channels with final state particles coupling strongly
597: to the subthreshold $\rho$. A similar important subthreshold
598: contribution was previously noticed for $J/\psi\to\bar NN\pi$
599: channels from subthreshold nucleon pole \cite{Sinha}.
600:
601: In summary, the $\rho$ exchange plays a very important role in
602: many low-energy strong interaction processes, such as $\pi\pi$
603: scattering, $\pi K$ scattering, $\pi N$ interaction etc.. In
604: this paper, we extend the mechanism to interpret some long
605: standing problems observed in $J/\psi$ decays. It is found that
606: the subthreshold $\rho$ contribution is not negligible for both
607: $J/\psi\to\omega\pi\pi$ and $J/\psi\to K\bar K\pi$ channels, and
608: should be included in analyzing these channels. It may well
609: explain the longstanding $b_1$ puzzle near $\omega\pi$ threshold
610: in $J/\psi\to\omega\pi\pi$ and the near $K\bar K$ threshold
611: enhancement in $J/\psi \to K \bar{K} \pi$ decay.
612:
613:
614: \section*{Acknowledgments}
615: We acknowledge stimulating discussions with BES members on
616: relevant issues. One of us (Wu) would like to thank Bo-Chao Liu,
617: Ju-Jun Xie, Xin Zhang, Feng-Kun Guo, Hai-Qing Zhou for valuable
618: comments and discussions during the preparation of this paper.
619: This work is partly supported by the National Nature Science
620: Foundation of China under grants Nos. 10225525, 10435080 and by
621: the Chinese Academy of Sciences under project No. KJCX2-SW-N02.
622:
623:
624:
625: %@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
626:
627: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
628: %
629:
630:
631: %--------------jpsi experiment ---------------------------------
632: \bibitem{bes-review}
633: W.Li, BES Collaboration, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf 20}, 1560
634: (2005); X.Shen, BES Collaboration, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf 20},
635: 1706 (2005); B.S.Zou, Nucl. Phys. {\bf A692}, 362 (2001);
636: C.Z.Yuan, AIP Conf. Proc. {\bf 814}, 65 (2006); B.C.Liu and
637: B.S.Zou, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 96}, 042002 (2006).
638: %
639: \bibitem{bes-sigma} M.~Ablikim {\it et al.}, BES Collaboration, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 598}, 149
640: (2004).
641: %
642: \bibitem{bes-kappa}
643: M.~Ablikim {\it et al.}, BES Collaboration,
644: %``Evidence for kappa meson production in J/psi $\to$ anti-K*(892)0 K+ pi-
645: %process,''
646: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 633}, 681 (2006).
647: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0506055;%%
648: %
649: \bibitem{bes-f980}
650: M.~Ablikim {\it et al.}, BES Collaboration,
651: %``Evidence for f0(980) f0(980) production in chi/c0 decays,''
652: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 092002 (2004).
653: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0406079;%%
654: %
655: \bibitem{bes-p-anti-p}
656: J.~Z.~Bai {\it et al.}, BES Collaboration,
657: %``Observation of a near-threshold enhancement in the p anti-p mass spectrum
658: %from radiative J/psi $\to$ gamma p anti-p decays,''
659: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91}, 022001 (2003).
660:
661:
662: \bibitem{sigma1}
663: %L.Roca {\sl et al.}, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf 20}, 1897 (2005);
664: %``Unitary chiral dynamics in J/psi decays into V P P and the role of the
665: %scalar mesons,''
666: % T.~V.~Brito, F.~S.~Navarra, M.~Nielsen and M.~E.~Bracco,
667: %``QCD sum rule approach for the light scalar mesons as four-quark states,''
668: % Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 608}, 69 (2005);
669: H.~Q.~Zheng, Z.~Y.~Zhou, G.~Y.~Qin, Z.~G.~Xiao, J.~J.~Wang and N.~Wu,
670: %``The kappa resonance in s wave pi K scatterings,''
671: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A733}, 235 (2004);
672: %below:``Reinterpreting several narrow 'resonances' as threshold cusps,''
673: D.V.Bugg, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 598}, 8 (2004);
674: B.~Kerbikov, A.~Stavinsky and V.~Fedotov,
675: %``Model-independent view on the low-mass proton antiproton enhancement,''
676: Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 69}, 055205 (2004);
677: % A.Datta, P.J.O'Donell, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 567}, 273 (2003);
678: % above:A New state of baryonium
679: M.L.Yan, and Si Li, Bin Wu and B.Q. Ma, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 72}, 034027 (2005);
680: %above:Baryonium with a phenomenological Skyrmion-type potential.
681: % B.Loiseau and S.Wycech, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 72}, 011001 (2005);
682: %above:Antiproton-proton channels in J/psi decays
683: T.~D.~Cohen, B.~A.~Gelman and S.~Nussinov,
684: %``New near-threshold mesons,''
685: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 578}, 359 (2004).
686:
687: \bibitem{rho-exchange}
688: D.Lohse, J. W. Durso, K. Holinde and J. Speth, Nucl. Phys. {\bf
689: A516}, 513 (1990);
690: %above:Meson exchange model for pseudoscalar meson meson scattering
691: % idem, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 234}, 235 (1990);
692: %above: Scalar Mesons In Pi Pi And K Pi Scattering.
693: S.~Krewald, R.~H.~Lemmer and F.~P.~Sassen,
694: %``Lifetime of kaonium,''
695: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 016003 (2004);
696: B.S.Zou and D.V.Bugg, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 50}, 591 (1994);
697: B.~S.~Zou and H.~C.~Chiang,
698: %``One-pion exchange final-state interaction and the p anti-p near threshold
699: %enhancement in J/psi $\to$ gamma p anti-p decays,''
700: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 034004 (2004);
701: A.Sibirtsev, J. Haidenbauer, S. Krewald, Ulf-G. Meissner, and A. W.
702: Thomas, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 71}, 054010 (2005).
703: %above:Near threshold enhancement of the p anti-p mass spectrum in j/psi decay.
704:
705:
706: %-----------------form factor------------------------
707: %\cite{Wu:2003wf}
708: \bibitem{Wu:2003wf}
709: F.Q.Wu and B.S.Zou, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf A20}, 1905 (2005);
710: F.~Q.~Wu, B.~S.~Zou, L.~Li and D.~V.~Bugg,
711: %``New study of the isotensor pi pi interaction,''
712: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf A735}, 111 (2004);
713: L. Li, B. S. Zou and G. L. Li, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 67} , 034025
714: (2003).
715: %``Studying K pi S-wave scattering in K-matrix formalism,''
716: %
717: %-----------------end theory side------------------
718:
719: \bibitem{dm2 5pi} J. E. Augustin et al., DM2 Collaboraton, Nucl.Phys. {\bf B320}, 1
720: (1989).
721: %
722: \bibitem{PDG} S. Eidelman et al., Particle Data Group, Review of Particle Physics, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 592}, 1
723: (2004).
724: %
725: \bibitem{dm2-KKpi} J. Jousset et al., DM2 Collaboration, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 41}, 1389
726: (1990).
727:
728:
729: %--------------------lagrangian-----------------
730: \bibitem{lagrangian}
731: %\bibitem{Bramon}
732: % A.~Bramon, A. Grau and G. Pancheri,
733: %``Chiral perturbation theory and radiative V0 $\to$ two neutral pseudoscalar
734: %gamma decays,''
735: % Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 289}, 97 (1992);
736: %``Scalar sigma meson effects in rho and omega decays into pi0 pi0 gamma,''
737: A. Bramon, R. Escribano, J. L. Lucio M., M. Napsuciale, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 517}, 345
738: (2001);
739: %\bibitem{chiral j vpp}
740: L. Roca, J.E. Palomar, E. Oset, H.C. Chiang, Nucl. Phys. {\bf
741: A744}, 127 (2004);
742: %\cite{Klingl:1996by}
743: %\bibitem{Klingl:1996by}
744: F.~Klingl, N.~Kaiser and W.~Weise,
745: %``Effective Lagrangian approach to vector mesons, their structure and
746: %decays,''
747: Z.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 356}, 193 (1996).
748: %--------------end Lagrangian----------------
749:
750: \bibitem{Machleidt}
751: R. Machleidt, K. Holinde and Ch. Elster,
752: \Journal{\PRT}{149}{1}{1987}; F. Gross, J. W. Van Orden, and K.
753: Holinde, \Journal{\PRC}{45}{2094}{1992}.
754: %
755: \bibitem{Gross} B. C. Pearce
756: and B. K. Jennings, \Journal{\NPA}{528}{655}{1991}; C. Sch\"{u}tz,
757: J.W. Durso, K. Holinde and J. Speth,
758: \Journal{\PRC}{49}{2671}{1994}.
759: %
760: \bibitem{Q.Zhao}
761: Q. Zhao, Z. Li , and C. Bennhold, \Journal{\PRC}{58}{2393}{1998};
762: Q. Zhao, B. Saghai, and J.S. Al-Khalili,
763: \Journal{\PLB}{509}{231}{2001}; T. Sato, and T. -S. H. Lee,
764: \Journal{\PRC}{54}{2660}{1996}.
765: %
766: %
767: %\cite{VonHippel:1972fg}
768: \bibitem{VonHippel:1972fg}
769: F.~Von Hippel and C.~Quigg,
770: %``Centrifugal-Barrier Effects In Resonance Partial Decay Widths, Shapes, And
771: %Production Amplitudes,''
772: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 5}, 624 (1972).
773: %\cite{Chung:1993da}
774: \bibitem{chung:93 98}
775: S. U. Chung, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 48} , 1225 (1993);
776: %``Helicity coupling amplitudes in tensor formalism,''
777: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D57,431;%%
778: %
779: B.~S.~Zou and D.~V.~Bugg,
780: %``Covariant tensor formalism for partial wave analyses of psi decay to
781: %mesons,''
782: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ A {\bf 16}, 537 (2003).
783:
784: \bibitem{Liu} L. C. Liu and W. X. Ma, \Journal{\JPG}{26}{L59}{2000}.
785:
786: \bibitem{Titov}
787: A.~I.~Titov, B.~Kampfer and B.~L.~Reznik,
788: %``Production of omega and Phi mesons in near-threshold pi N reactions:
789: %Baryon resonances and validity of the OZI rule,''
790: Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 65}, 065202 (2002);
791: A.~Sibirtsev and W.~Cassing,
792: %``On the current status of OZI violation in pi N and p p reactions,''
793: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ A {\bf 7}, 407 (2000);
794: Y.~Oh and T.~S.~H.~Lee,
795: %``Coupled-channel effects in omega photoproduction near threshold,''
796: Phys.\ Rev.\ C {\bf 66}, 045201 (2002).
797:
798: \bibitem{Sinha} R.Sinha and S.Okubo, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 30}, 2333
799: (1984); W.-H.Liang, P.-N. Shen, B.S. Zou, and A. Faessler, Euro.
800: Phys. J. A {\bf 21}, 487 (2004).
801: %-----------------end form factor-----------------------
802:
803:
804:
805:
806: \end{thebibliography}
807:
808: \end{document}
809: