1: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,prl]{revtex4}
2: %\documentclass[twocolumn,nofootinbib,showpacs,prl]{revtex4}
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4: %\usepackage{cite}
5: \newcommand{\x}[1]{{\textstyle #1}}
6: \newcommand{\xrm}[1]{\mbox{ #1}}
7: \newcommand{\fnd}[2]{\frac{\textstyle #1}{\textstyle #2}}
8: \newcommand{\bm}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $#1$}}
9: \newcommand{\dissum}[2]{\displaystyle \sum_{#1}^{#2}}
10: \newcommand{\abs}[1]{\left| #1\right|}
11: \begin{document}
12: %\title{New BABAR state \bm{D_{sJ}}(2860) \\ as the first radial excitation
13: %of the \bm{D_{s0}^{\ast}}(2317)}
14: \title{\bm{D_{sJ}}(2860) as the first radial excitation of the
15: \bm{D_{s0}^{\ast}}(2317)}
16: \author{Eef van Beveren}
17: \email{eef@teor.fis.uc.pt}
18: \affiliation{Centro de F\'{\i}sica Te\'{o}rica,
19: Departamento de F\'{\i}sica, Universidade de Coimbra,
20: P-3004-516 Coimbra, Portugal}
21: \author{George Rupp}
22: \email{george@ist.utl.pt}
23: \affiliation{Centro de F\'{\i}sica das Interac\c{c}\~{o}es Fundamentais,
24: Instituto Superior T\'{e}cnico, Edif\'{\i}cio Ci\^{e}ncia, Piso 3,
25: P-1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal}
26: \date{\today}
27:
28: \begin{abstract}
29: A coupled-channel model previously employed to describe
30: the narrow $D_{s0}^{\ast}$(2317) and broad $D_0^{\ast}$(2400)
31: charmed scalar mesons is generalized so as to include all ground-state
32: pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar and vector-vector two-meson channels.
33: All parameters are chosen fixed at published values,
34: except for the overall coupling constant,
35: which is fine-tuned to reproduce the $D_{s0}^{\ast}$(2317) mass.
36: Thus, the radial excitations $D_{s0}^{\ast}$(2850) and $D_0^{\ast}$(2740)
37: are predicted, both with a width of about 50 MeV.
38: The former state appears to correspond to the new $D_{sJ}$(2860) resonance
39: decaying to $DK$ announced by BABAR in the course of this work.
40: Also the $D_0^{\ast}$(2400) resonance is roughly reproduced,
41: though perhaps with a somewhat too low central resonance peak.
42: \end{abstract}
43:
44: \pacs{14.40.Lb, 14.40.Ev, 13.25.-k, 12.39.Pn}
45:
46: \maketitle
47:
48: The discovery of the $D_{s0}^*(2317)$ \cite{PRL90p242001} and
49: $D_{s1}(2460)$ \cite{PRD68p032002} charm-strange mesons three years ago has
50: triggered a strongly renewed interest in heavy-light mesons, and even meson
51: spectroscopy in general. Especially the $D_{s0}^*(2317)$ has given rise to many
52: different theoretical efforts (see Ref.~\cite{PRD74p037501} for a long though
53: still incomplete list of references). The reason is its surprisingly low mass,
54: some 170 MeV below the predictions of standard relativized constituent quark
55: models for the ground-state scalar $c\bar{s}$ meson (see e.g.\
56: Ref.~\cite{PRD32p189}), an assignment that has in the meantime been confirmed
57: by experiment \cite{PDG2006}. This discrepancy led several model builders to
58: propose alternative explanations for the $D_{s0}^*(2317)$, such as a tetraquark
59: or a meson molecule. However, in Ref.~\cite{PRL91p012003} we showed how the low
60: mass of the $D_{s0}^*(2317)$ can be quantitatively
61: understood by taking into account its strong coupling to the nearby $S$-wave
62: $DK$ channel. This explanation was later supported by Refs.~\cite{PLB601p137}
63: and \cite{PRD70p114013}. Similarly, we explained the $D_{s1}(2460)$ in
64: Ref.~\cite{EPJC32p493} via its strong coupling to the $S$-wave $D^*\!K$
65: threshold. The coupled-channel model employed in Ref.~\cite{PRL91p012003} had
66: been previously used, with essentially the same parameters, to reproduce the
67: $S$-wave $K\pi$ phase shifts and predict \cite{EPJC22p493} the $K_0^*(800)$
68: (alias $\kappa$) resonance, later confirmed by experiment \cite{PDG2006}.
69:
70: Nevertheless, no consensus has been reached so far on the $D_{s0}^*(2317)$,
71: in part due to the poor experimental status of the very broad
72: partner charm-nonstrange state, listed as $D_0^*(2400)$, but first reported
73: at a mass of 2308 MeV \cite{PRD69p112002} and later also at 2407 MeV
74: \cite{PLB586p11}. Therefore, a more detailed coupled-channel analysis of
75: charmed scalar mesons is very opportune, also in view of new and heavier states
76: that are expected to be found at B factories. Clearly, for a reliable
77: description of higher resonances, additional decay channels must be accounted
78: for. Thus, in the present Letter, we extend \cite{Madrid_talk} the model of
79: Ref.~\cite{PRL91p012003} by including all lowest pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar (PP)
80: and vector-vector (VV) two-meson channels that couple to the scalar $c\bar{s}$
81: and $c\bar{n}$ ($n=u,d$) systems, in an approach very similar to
82: Ref.~\cite{HEPPH0606022}. In the latter paper, the coupling to all PP channels
83: allowed to fit the properties of the light scalar mesons $\sigma$, $\kappa$,
84: $a_0$(980), and $f_0$(980), such as phase shifts, line-shapes, elasticities,
85: and inelastic amplitudes, obtaining an overall good description of these
86: observables, as well as very reasonable pole positions. In the present
87: investigation, the inclusion of the VV channels as well is crucial to study
88: possible radial excitations, as in the $c\bar{n}$ and $c\bar{s}$ sectors the
89: lowest VV channels open at roughly 2.8 GeV and 2.9 GeV, respectively.
90:
91: We will first discuss the results and finish this Letter with a short
92: description of the mathematics behind the Resonance-Spectrum Expansion
93: (RSE), which is the framework of our model \cite{IJTPGTNO11p179}.
94: In Fig.~\ref{DK} we show, for the $c\bar{s}$ case,
95: the resulting $S$-wave $DK\to DK$ cross sections.
96: \begin{figure}[htbp]
97: \begin{center}
98: \begin{tabular}{c}
99: \includegraphics[height=220pt, angle=0]{Ds0_total.ps}
100: \mbox{} \\[-20pt]
101: \end{tabular}
102: \end{center}
103: \caption[]{The predicted $S$-wave $DK\to DK$ cross sections.
104: The dashed curve corresponds to PP channels only, the solid curve
105: to PP + VV channels.
106: In the inset, we compare the model results to the data, with arbitrary
107: normalization taken from Ref.~\cite{DsJ2860}.}
108: \label{DK}
109: \end{figure}
110: The dashed line refers to the case where only PP channels are included,
111: the solid line to the case where also VV channels are accounted for.
112: We will discuss the latter case.
113: A comparison of differences for the two situations
114: is presented below for the $c\bar{n}$ system.
115:
116: At energies close to threshold (at 2.363 GeV),
117: the cross sections are large due to the presence of the
118: $D_{s0}^{\ast}(2317)$ bound state just below threshold.
119: For higher total invariant mass ($\sqrt{s}$), the cross sections
120: decrease, however not as fast as expected, due to the presence of
121: a scattering-matrix pole, which we find at $2779-i233$ MeV.
122: At 2.516 GeV one observes the effect of the opening of the
123: $D_{s}\eta$ channel, while
124: at about 2.79 GeV the cross sections almost vanish.
125: The first radial excitation of the $D_{s0}^{\ast}(2317)$
126: is found with a peak mass of 2847 MeV and a width
127: of 47 MeV, and so is a good candidate for the new BABAR state
128: $D_{sJ}$(2860) \cite{DsJ2860}, which decays to $DK$ and not to $D^{\ast}\!K$,
129: having a mass of 2857 MeV and a width of 48 MeV.
130: In our model it is associated with a resonance pole
131: at $2842-i23.6$ MeV.
132: From the inset of Fig.~\ref{DK},
133: one can judge how well our ${D_{s0}^{\ast}}'$(2850)
134: predicts the line shape of BABAR's $D_{sJ}$(2860).
135: There is furthermore some indication \cite{DsJ2860} that the data need
136: a broad state as well, which might correspond to our pole at $2779-i233$.
137:
138: In Fig.~\ref{Dpi} we show, for the $c\bar{n}$ case,
139: the resulting $S$-wave $D\pi\to D\pi$ cross sections.
140: \begin{figure}[htbp]
141: \begin{center}
142: \begin{tabular}{c}
143: \includegraphics[height=220pt, angle=0]{D0_total.ps}
144: \mbox{} \\[-20pt]
145: \end{tabular}
146: \end{center}
147: \caption[]{The predicted elastic $S$-wave $D\pi$ cross sections.
148: The dashed curve correspond to PP channels only, the solid curve
149: to PP + VV channels. In the inset, we compare the model results
150: to the data, with arbitrary normalization
151: taken from Ref.~\cite{PRD69p112002}.}
152: \label{Dpi}
153: \end{figure}
154: We find the lowest resonance pole at $2149-i111$ MeV (PP) or $2174-i96.4$ MeV
155: (PP+VV), with peak mass at 2180 MeV or 2190 MeV, respectively.
156: This broad resonance should correspond to the $D_0^{\ast}$(2400).
157: Our prediction seems too low, but is not unreasonable in view of the unsettled
158: experimental situation \cite{PDG2006}, and also considering our highly
159: dynamical $D_0^{\ast}$(2400) pole \cite{PRL91p012003}, which can travel a long
160: distance with moderate changes in the model's coupling constant ($\lambda$).
161: For instance, if we reduce $\lambda$ somewhat so as to let the
162: $D_{s0}^{\ast}(2317)$ become slightly heavier, though still below the
163: $DK$ threshold, it is possible to increase the $D_0^{\ast}$(2400) mass
164: prediction by up to 100 MeV. Nevertheless, we believe it is safer to
165: keep the established $D_{s0}^{\ast}(2317)$ in its place, considering
166: the persisting uncertainties regarding the $D_0^{\ast}$(2400).
167: Moreover, the experimental values concern production processes, and
168: not elastic scattering. Furthermore, the analyses rely on a Breit-Wigner
169: shape for the $D^{\ast}_{2}$(2460) resonance, which has a large contribution
170: to the total signal. In the inset of Fig.~\ref{Dpi},
171: we show a comparison of our signal with the data \cite{PRD69p112002},
172: for invariant masses well below the $D^{\ast}_{2}$(2460) resonance.
173:
174: Next we look for poles at higher energies. In this situation, we only
175: consider the poles for the full PP+VV system, as several VV channels
176: open above $\sim2.8$ GeV. Still in the $c\bar{n}$ case,
177: we find a relatively narrow pole at $2737-i24.0$ MeV and a very broad one
178: at $2703-i228$ MeV. The narrow state, with a width of about 50 MeV,
179: corresponds to the first radial excitation of the $c\bar{n}$ system, shifted
180: to complex energy by the coupled channels, while the very broad resonance
181: is the strongly distorted and shifted ground state of the confinement
182: spectrum, also found in Ref.~\cite{PRL91p012003}, though now with a width of
183: roughly 450 MeV instead of $\approx200$ MeV. Note that the
184: $D_0^{\ast}$(2400) is a dynamical continuum pole, just as in
185: Ref.~\cite{PRL91p012003}. The narrow resonance at about 2.74 GeV predicted here
186: should be observable, though the $S$-wave elastic $D\pi$ cross section is quite
187: small (see Fig.~\ref{Dpi}, solid curve).
188:
189: Finally, let us turn to a short description of the model employed in this work.
190: The model's scattering matrix ($S$) for $N$ two-meson channels
191: (masses $M_{i1}$ and $M_{i2}$, $i=1$, 2, 3, $\dots$, $N$,
192: orbital angular momentum $\ell_{i}$, relative linear momentum $k_{i}$),
193: all coupled to one quark-antiquark confinement channel
194: (radial confinement spectrum given by
195: $E_{0}=\omega\left(\ell_{q\bar{q}}+3/2\right) +m_{q}+m_{\bar{q}}$,
196: $E_{1}=E_{0}+2\omega$, $E_{2}=E_{1}+2\omega$, $\dots$),
197: has the following closed form \cite{IJTPGTNO11p179}:
198: \begin{widetext}
199: \begin{equation}
200: S_{ij}(E)\; =\;\delta_{ij}\; -\; 2i\fnd
201: {
202: 2\lambda^{2}r_{q\bar{q}}
203: \left\{\dissum{n=0}{\infty}\fnd{g_{i}(n)g_{j}(n)}{E-E_{n}}\right\}
204: \sqrt{\fnd{\mu_{i}\mu_{j}}{k_{i}k_{j}}}k_{i}k_{j}
205: j_{\ell_{i}}\left( k_{i}r_{q\bar{q}}\right)
206: j_{\ell_{j}}\left( k_{j}r_{q\bar{q}}\right)
207: }
208: {
209: 1+2i\lambda^{2}r_{q\bar{q}}
210: \dissum{m=1}{N}
211: \left\{\dissum{n=0}{\infty}\fnd{\abs{g_{m}(n)}^{2}}{E-E_{n}}\right\}
212: \mu_{m}k_{m}
213: j_{\ell_{m}}\left( k_{m}r_{q\bar{q}}\right)
214: h^{(1)}_{\ell_{m}}\left( k_{m}r_{q\bar{q}}\right)
215: }
216: \;\;\; ,
217: \label{multiS}
218: \end{equation}
219: \end{widetext}
220: where, in the $i$-th channel,
221: the linear momentum $k_{i}$ and reduced mass $\mu_{i}$
222: are related to the total invariant mass $E$ of the system,
223: and to the two meson masses $M_{i1}$ and $M_{i2}$,
224: through
225: \begin{eqnarray*}
226: E & = & \sqrt{k_{i}^{2}+M_{i1}^{2}}+\sqrt{k_{i}^{2}+M_{i2}^{2}}
227: \;\;\; ,\\ [5pt]
228: E^{2} & = & 2k_{i}^{2}+M_{i1}^{2}+M_{i2}^{2}+2E\mu_{i}
229: \;\;\; .
230: \end{eqnarray*}
231: $j_{\ell}$ and $h^{(1)}_{\ell}$ represent the spherical Bessel and Hankel
232: function of the first kind, respectively.
233:
234: The model parameters representing quark masses ($m_{n}=0.406$ GeV,
235: $m_{s}=0.508$ GeV, $m_{c}=1.562$ GeV) and the radial
236: spacings in the bare confinement spectrum ($\omega =0.19$ GeV)
237: are kept identical to the ones
238: originally optimized in Ref.~\cite{PRD27p1527}, and also used in
239: Ref.~\cite{HEPPH0606022}.
240: Moreover, the parameter $r_{q\bar{q}}$, which stands for
241: the average radius of $^{3\!}P_{0}$ quark-pair creation,
242: is identical to the value $r_{sn}=3.2$ GeV$^{-1}$ used in
243: Ref.~\cite{EPJC22p493}, but scaled with the reduced
244: quark mass in order to impose flavor symmetry of our equations
245: \cite{PRD74p037501,MPLA19p1949}, i.e.,
246: \begin{eqnarray*}
247: r_{cn} & = &
248: \fnd{m_{s}\left( m_{c}+m_{n}\right)}{m_{c}\left( m_{s}+m_{n}\right)}r_{sn}
249: =2.24\;\xrm{GeV}^{-1}
250: \;\;\; ,\\ [5pt]
251: r_{cs} & = &
252: \fnd{m_{n}\left( m_{c}+m_{s}\right)}{m_{c}\left( m_{n}+m_{s}\right)}r_{sn}
253: =1.88\;\xrm{GeV}^{-1}
254: \;\;\; .
255: \end{eqnarray*}
256: The overall decay coupling constant $\lambda$ is fine-tuned to reproduce
257: the mass of the now very well established $D_{s0}^{\ast}(2317)$.
258: Yet, also $\lambda$ turns out to be close
259: to the values used in the light scalar sector \cite{HEPPH0606022},
260: owing to the referred flavor-symmetric mass scaling.
261: This yields the values $\lambda=2.854$
262: GeV$^{-3/2}$ when only PP channels are included, and $\lambda=2.617$
263: GeV$^{-3/2}$ with PP as well as VV channels. Note that the former value
264: of $\lambda$ is fully compatible with the values found for the light
265: scalars in Ref.~\cite{HEPPH0606022}, which analysis was also restricted
266: to PP channels. The change in $\lambda$ from the VV channels amounts
267: to a reduction by less than 10\%.
268:
269: The channels included in the present work are summarized in
270: Table~\ref{channels}, their relative couplings to the
271: $q\bar{q}$ channels in Table~\ref{couplings}.
272: \begin{table}[htbp]
273: \begin{center}
274: \begin{tabular}{||c|c||c|c||}
275: \hline\hline\multicolumn{2}{||c||}{}&\multicolumn{2}{c||}{}\\[-10pt]
276: \multicolumn{2}{||c||}{charm-nonstrange} &
277: \multicolumn{2}{c||}{charm-strange}\\ [3pt]
278: \hline\hline & & & \\ [-10pt]
279: Channels&Thresh.\ &Channels&Thresh.\ \\
280: (waves) & (GeV) & (waves) & (GeV)\\ [3pt]
281: \hline & & & \\ [-10pt]
282: $D\pi$ ($S$) &2.004& $DK$ ($S$) &2.363\\
283: $D\eta$ ($S$) &2.415& $D_{s}\eta$ ($S$) &2.516\\
284: $D\eta '$ ($S$) &2.825& $D_{s}\eta'$ ($S$) &2.926\\
285: $D_{s}K$ ($S$) &2.464& & \\
286: $D^{\ast}\rho$ ($S,D$) &2.784& $D^{\ast}K^{\ast}$ ($S,D$) &2.902\\
287: $D^{\ast}\omega$ ($S,D$) &2.791& $D_{s}^{\ast}\phi$ ($S,D$) &3.132\\
288: $D_{s}^{\ast}K^{\ast}$ ($S,D$) &3.006&&\\[3pt]
289: \hline\hline
290: \end{tabular}
291: \end{center}
292: \caption[]{The various meson-meson channels included in this analysis,
293: and their threshold energies.}
294: \label{channels}
295: \end{table}
296: \begin{table}[htbp]
297: \begin{center}
298: \begin{tabular}{||c||c||}
299: \hline\hline & \\[-10pt]
300: charm-nonstrange & charm-strange\\ [3pt]
301: \hline\hline & \\ [-10pt]
302: $\sqrt{1/16}$ & $\sqrt{1/12}$\\ [5pt]
303: $x\sqrt{1/144}-y\sqrt{1/72}$ & $-y\sqrt{1/72}-x\sqrt{1/36}$ \\ [5pt]
304: $y\sqrt{1/144}+x\sqrt{1/72}$ & $x\sqrt{1/72}-y\sqrt{1/36}$ \\ [5pt]
305: $\sqrt{1/24}$ & \\ [5pt]
306: $\sqrt{1/48}\;,\sqrt{5/12}$ & $\sqrt{1/36}\;,\sqrt{5/9}$ \\ [5pt]
307: $\sqrt{1/144}\;,\sqrt{5/36}$ & $\sqrt{1/72}\;,\sqrt{5/18}$ \\ [5pt]
308: $\sqrt{1/72}\;,\sqrt{5/18}$ & \\[3pt]
309: \hline\hline
310: \end{tabular}
311: \end{center}
312: \caption[]{The relative couplings
313: (four-fermion recombination coefficients \cite{ZPC21p291})
314: for the various meson-meson channels included in this analysis
315: (in the same order as in Table~\ref{channels}),
316: to $J^{PC}=0^{++}$ $c\bar{n}$
317: and $c\bar{s}$ in $S$ or $D$ waves.
318: For the relative couplings to higher radial excitations $n$,
319: one has $g(n)=\sqrt{(n+1)}g(0)/2^{n}$ for $S$
320: and $g(n)=\sqrt{(2n+5)}g(0)/(5\times 2^{n})$ for $D$ waves.
321: The symbols $x$ and $y$ stand for $\cos\Theta_{\mbox{\scriptsize PS}}$ and
322: $\sin\Theta_{\mbox{\scriptsize PS}}$, respectively.}
323: \label{couplings}
324: \end{table}
325:
326: The pseu\-do\-scalar $\eta$-$\eta '$ mixing angle $\Theta_{PS}$ we choose
327: at the recently found
328: experimental value $\Theta_{PS}=-13.5^\circ$ \cite{HEPEX0411081} (octet-singlet
329: basis).
330: However, we also verify our results for another frequently used value,
331: i.e., $\Theta_{PS}=-17.3^\circ$ \cite{HEPPH0606022}, which turns out to change
332: the predictions by only a few MeV. We force the damping of closed scattering
333: channels with subthreshold form factors, which are a standard tool in modern
334: multichannel phase-shift analyses:
335: \begin{equation}
336: g^2_{i}(n)\;\to\; g^2_{i}(n)\, e^\x{\alpha k_{i}^{2}}
337: \;\;\;\;\xrm{for}\;\;\;\;
338: \Re e\, k_{i}^{2}<0
339: \;\;\; .
340: \label{damping}
341: \end{equation}
342: We choose the value $\alpha=4$ GeV$^{-2}$, which is the same as used
343: in the analysis of the light scalars \cite{HEPPH0606022}.
344: Such a suppression, in addition to the one resulting from our kinematically
345: relativistic Schr\"{o}dinger formalism, can be justified from relativistic
346: covariance, offshellness, self-energies, and other effects not accounted
347: for in the present model. These contributions are, of course, very difficult
348: to rigorously evaluate in our nonperturbative scheme. However, even if we
349: were to completely switch off subthreshold damping, our $D_{s0}^{\ast}$(2850)
350: pole would only shift to $2864-i\times15$ MeV, after a readjustment of
351: $\lambda$ so as to reproduce again the $D_{s0}^{\ast}$(2317) mass.
352:
353: Having now fixed all parameters in formula~(\ref{multiS}),
354: we can search our amplitudes for resonance poles.
355: We predict the first radial excitations of the ${D_{s0}^{\ast}}$(2317)
356: and $D_0^{\ast}$(2400) to come out as
357: ${D_{s0}^{\ast}}'$(2850) \footnote
358: {In the one-PP-channel calculations of Ref.~\cite{PRD74p037501} and
359: Ref.~\cite{MPLA19p1949} (3rd paper), the ${D_{s0}^{\ast}}'$(2850) pole was
360: estimated at $2923-i57$ MeV and $2928-i20$ MeV, respectively. Here, with a
361: restriction to the three PP channels only, the pole comes out at $2804-i59.9$
362: MeV.}
363: and ${D_{0}^{\ast}}'$(2740), respectively. We furthermore predict the very
364: broad states ${D_{s0}^{\ast}}$(2780) and ${D_{0}^{\ast}}$(2700), which might
365: show up in a more pronounced way in production experiments than in elastic
366: scattering.
367:
368: Note added in proof: after completion of this work, the BABAR collaboration
369: posted a preprint \cite{HEPEX0607082} confirming the announcement of the
370: $D_{sJ}(2860)$ in Ref.~\cite{DsJ2860}. Furthermore, three theoretical papers
371: on this new state have appeared in the meantime, the first one
372: \cite{HEPPH0607245} favoring a $3^-$ ($1\,^3\!D_3$) assignment, the second
373: \cite{HEPPH0608139} a $0^+$ ($2\,^3\!P_0$) like we do, and the third
374: \cite{HEPPH0609013} admitting either possibility. Clearly, the non-observation
375: so far of the $D^*\!K$ decay mode, forbidden for a scalar meson, favors the
376: $0^+$ option, although the $D_s\eta$ mode, not observed either, is allowed in
377: both the $0^+$ and $3^-$ scenarios. It is also interesting that
378: Ref.~\cite{HEPPH0607245}, which makes out a case for the $3^-$ assignment,
379: predicts branching ratios $D_{sJ}(2860)\to D^*\!K/DK\,=\,0.39$ for $3^-$, and
380: $D_{sJ}(2860)\to D_s\eta/DK\,=\,0.34$ for $0^+$. We predict a value of 0.30 for
381: the latter branching ratio, if we include all PP+VV channels. Anyhow,
382: experiment will have the final word on interpreting the $D_{sJ}(2860)$ beyond
383: any doubt, by observing either $D_s\eta$ or $D^*\!K$.
384: \section*{Acknowledgments}
385: This work was presented at the QNP06 conference in Madrid \cite{Madrid_talk},
386: unknowing of the simultaneous experimental release at
387: the CHARM06 conference in Beijing \cite{DsJ2860}.
388: We are indebted to S.~Tosi for drawing our attention to the brand-new data.
389: This work was supported in part by the {\it Funda\c{c}\~{a}o para a
390: Ci\^{e}ncia e a Tecnologia} \/of the {\it Minist\'{e}rio da Ci\^{e}ncia,
391: Tecnologia e Ensino Superior} \/of Portugal, under contract
392: POCI/FP/63437/2005.
393: \enlargethispage*{10pt}
394: \begin{thebibliography}{3}
395: \bibitem{PRL90p242001}
396: B.~Aubert {\it et al.} [BABAR Collaboration],
397: %``Observation of a narrow meson decaying to $D_s^+ \pi^0$ at a mass of
398: %2.32-GeV/c$^2$,''
399: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 90}, 242001 (2003)
400: [arXiv:hep-ex/0304021].
401: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0304021;%%
402:
403: \bibitem{PRD68p032002}
404: D.~Besson {\it et al.} [CLEO Collaboration],
405: %``Observation of a narrow resonance of mass 2.46-GeV/c**2 decaying to D/s*+
406: %pi0 and confirmation of the D/sJ*(2317) state,''
407: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 032002 (2003)
408: [arXiv:hep-ex/0305100].
409: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0305100;%%
410:
411: \bibitem{PRD74p037501}
412: E.~van Beveren, J.~E.~G.~N.~Costa, F.~Kleefeld, and G.~Rupp,
413: %``From the kappa via the D/s0*(2317) to the chi/c0: Connecting light and
414: %heavy scalar mesons,''
415: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74}, 037501 (2006)
416: [arXiv:hep-ph/0509351].
417: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0509351;%%
418:
419: \bibitem{PRD32p189}
420: S.~Godfrey and N.~Isgur,
421: %``Mesons In A Relativized Quark Model With Chromodynamics,''
422: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 32}, 189 (1985).
423: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D32,189;%%
424:
425: \bibitem{PDG2006}
426: W.~M.~Yao {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group],
427: %``Review of particle physics,''
428: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 33}, 1 (2006).
429: %%CITATION = JPHGB,G33,1;%%
430:
431: \bibitem{PRL91p012003}
432: E.~van Beveren and G.~Rupp,
433: %``Observed $D_{s}$(2317) and tentative $D$(2100--2300)
434: %as the charmed cousins of the light scalar nonet,''
435: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91}, 012003 (2003)
436: [arXiv:hep-ph/0305035].
437: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305035;%%
438:
439: \bibitem{PLB601p137}
440: D.~S.~Hwang and D.~W.~Kim,
441: %``Mass of D/sJ*(2317) and coupled channel effect,''
442: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 601}, 137 (2004)
443: [arXiv:hep-ph/0408154].
444: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0408154;%%
445:
446: \bibitem{PRD70p114013}
447: Yu.~A.~Simonov and J.~A.~Tjon,
448: %``The coupled-channel analysis of the D and D/s mesons,''
449: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 114013 (2004)
450: [arXiv:hep-ph/0409361].
451: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0409361;%%
452:
453: \bibitem{EPJC32p493}
454: E.~van Beveren and G.~Rupp,
455: %``Continuum bound states K(L), D1(2420), D/s1(2536) and their partners K(S),
456: %D1(2400), D/sJ*(2463),''
457: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 32}, 493 (2004)
458: [arXiv:hep-ph/0306051].
459: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0306051;%%
460:
461: \bibitem{EPJC22p493}
462: Eef van Beveren and George Rupp,
463: %``Modified Breit-Wigner formula for mesonic resonances describing
464: %OZI decays of confined $q\bar{q}$ states and the light scalar mesons,''
465: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 22}, 493 (2001)
466: [arXiv:hep-ex/0106077].
467: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0106077;%%
468:
469: \bibitem{PRD69p112002}
470: K.~Abe {\it et al.} [Belle Collaboration],
471: %``Study of B- $\to$ D**0 pi- (D**0 $\to$ D(*)+ pi-) decays,''
472: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 112002 (2004)
473: [arXiv:hep-ex/0307021].
474: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0307021;%%
475:
476: \bibitem{PLB586p11}
477: J.~M.~Link {\it et al.} [FOCUS Collaboration],
478: %``Measurement of masses and widths of excited charm mesons D2* and evidence
479: %for broad states,''
480: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 586}, 11 (2004)
481: [arXiv:hep-ex/0312060].
482: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0312060;%%
483:
484: \bibitem{Madrid_talk}
485: E.~van Beveren and G.~Rupp,
486: {\it Multichannel calculation of the very narrow $D_{sJ}^{\ast}$(2317) and
487: the very broad $D_0^{\ast}$(2300--2400)},
488: parallel talk given by G.\ Rupp on 6 June 2006 at the {\sl
489: IVth Intern.\ Conf.\ on Quarks and Nuclear Physics,} 5--10 June 2006,
490: Madrid, Spain.
491:
492: \bibitem{HEPPH0606022}
493: E.~van Beveren, D.~V.~Bugg, F.~Kleefeld and G.~Rupp,
494: %``The nature of sigma, kappa, a0(980) and f0(980),''
495: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 641}, 265 (2006)
496: [arXiv:hep-ph/0606022].
497: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0606022;%%
498:
499: \bibitem{IJTPGTNO11p179}
500: E.~van Beveren and G.~Rupp,
501: Int. J. Theor. Phys. Group Theor. Nonlin. Opt. {\bf 11}, 179 (2006)
502: [arXiv:hep-ph/0304105].
503: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0304105;%%
504:
505: \bibitem{DsJ2860}
506: A.~Palano,
507: {\it New Spectroscopy with Charm quarks at B factories,}
508: plenary talk given on 7 June 2006 at the
509: {\sl Charm2006 Intern.\ Workshop,} 5--7 June 2006, Beijing, China;
510: Silvano Tosi, private communication.
511:
512: \bibitem{PRD27p1527}
513: E.~van Beveren, G.~Rupp, T.~A.~Rijken, and C.~Dullemond,
514: %``Radial spectra and hadronic decay widths of light and heavy mesons,''
515: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 27}, 1527 (1983).
516: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D27,1527;%%
517:
518: \bibitem{MPLA19p1949}
519: E.~van Beveren and G.~Rupp,
520: %``Classification of the scalar mesons: A strange pole expedition into charm
521: %and beauty territory,''
522: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 19}, 1949 (2004)
523: [arXiv:hep-ph/0406242];
524: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406242;%%
525: G.~Rupp, F.~Kleefeld, and E.~van Beveren,
526: %``Scalar mesons and Adler zeros,''
527: AIP Conf.\ Proc.\ {\bf 756} (2005) 360
528: [arXiv:hep-ph/0412078];
529: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412078;%%
530: F.~Kleefeld,
531: %``The light and heavy scalars in unitarized coupled channel and Lagrangian
532: %approaches,''
533: AIP Conf.\ Proc.\ {\bf 717}, 332 (2004)
534: [arXiv:hep-ph/0310320].
535: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0310320;%%
536:
537: \bibitem{ZPC21p291}
538: E.~van Beveren,
539: %``Coupling constants and transition potentials for hadronic decay
540: %modes of a meson,''
541: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 21}, 291 (1984)
542: [arXiv:hep-ph/0602247].
543: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C21,291;%%
544:
545: \bibitem{HEPEX0411081}
546: P.~Kroll,
547: %``Isospin symmetry breaking through pi0 - eta - eta' mixing,''
548: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 20}, 2667 (2005)
549: [arXiv:hep-ph/0509031];
550: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0509031;%%
551: % \bibitem{Muller:2004vf}
552: S.~E.~M\"uller [KLOE Collaboration],
553: %``KLOE results at the Frascati Phi-factory DAPHNE,''
554: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 20}, 1888 (2005)
555: [arXiv:hep-ex/0411081];
556: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0411081;%%
557: also see
558: %\bibitem{Scadron:2006mq}
559: M.~D.~Scadron, F.~Kleefeld, and G.~Rupp,
560: %``Pion chiral symmetry breaking in the quark-level linear sigma model and
561: %chiral perturbation theory,''
562: arXiv:hep-ph/0601196.
563: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0601196;%%
564:
565: \bibitem{HEPEX0607082}
566: B.~Aubert [BABAR Collaboration],
567: %``Observation of a new D/s meson decaying to D K at a mass of
568: %2.86-GeV/c**2,''
569: arXiv:hep-ex/0607082.
570: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0607082;%%
571:
572: \bibitem{HEPPH0607245}
573: P.~Colangelo, F.~De Fazio and S.~Nicotri,
574: %``D/sJ(2860) resonance and the s(l)(P) = 5/2- c anti-s (c anti-q) doublet,''
575: arXiv:hep-ph/0607245.
576: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0607245;%%
577:
578: \bibitem{HEPPH0608139}
579: F.~E.~Close, C.~E.~Thomas, O.~Lakhina and E.~S.~Swanson,
580: %``Canonical Interpretation of the D/sJ(2860) and D/sJ(2690),''
581: arXiv:hep-ph/0608139.
582: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0608139;%%
583: \bibitem{HEPPH0609013}
584: B.~Zhang, X.~Liu, W.~Z.~Deng and S.~L.~Zhu,
585: %``D/sJ(2860) and D/sJ(2715),''
586: arXiv:hep-ph/0609013.
587: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0609013;%%
588:
589: \end{thebibliography}
590: \end{document}
591: