- Email: [email protected]
bb mesons
VI1.157
Meson Full Listings
See key on page IV.I
#J(4415), Bottomonium ¢(4415) BRANCHING RATIOS
rllr
F(hadrons)/l'total VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
¢lominant
SIEGRIST
76
TECN
COMMENT
MRK1
e+ e -
NOTE
¢ ( 4 4 1 5 ) REFERENCES BRANDELIK KNIES 51EGRIST
78C PL 76B 361 77 Hamburg Syrup. 93 76 PRL 36 700
- BURMESTER 77 LUTH 77
+Cc~ds+
(AACH. DESY, HAMB, MPIM. TOKY) (PLUTO Coltab.) (LBL, SLAC)
+Abrams, Boyarski. Breidenbach+
DETERMINATIONS
OF
As is the case for d/W(1S) and ~(2S), the full widths of the b o u n d bb states T(1S),
T(2S), and T(3S) are not
directly measurable, since they are much smaller t h a n the
O T H E R R E L A T E D PAPERS - -
PL 66B 395 PL 70B 120
ON WIDTH
THE T STATES
+Criegee+ (DESY, HAMB, SIEG. WUPP) +Pierre, Abrams. Alarn. Boyarski+ (LBL. SLAC)
energy resolution of the e+e - storage rings where these states are produced.
The c o m m o n indirect m e t h o d to determine F
starts from
r = F~t/B~t ,
(1)
T(I1020) T00a60) T(4S)
BB threshold
b(3s)
T(as)
Xbo
xbe(eP)
hadrons
vb(2s) ladl
THE BOTTOMONIUM
T(1S)
jPC
=
0-+
1--
SYSTEM
Y
1+ -
0 ++
1++
2++
T h e level scheme of the bb states showing experimentally established states with solid lines. Singlet states are called /]b and hb, triplet states T and XbJ. In parentheses it is sufficient to give the radial q u a n t u m n u m b e r a n d the orbital angular m o m e n t u m to specify the states with all their q u a n t u m numbers. E.g., hb(2P) m e a n s 21P1 with n = 2, L = 1, S = 0, J = 1, P C = + - . I f found, D-wave states would be called qb(nD) and T j ( n D ) , with J = 1,2,3 and n = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , . . . . For the Xb states, the spins of only the X.b2(1P) and Xbl(1P) have been experimentally established. T h e spins of the other Xb are given as the preferred values, based on the q u a r k o n i u m models. T h e figure also shows the observed hadronic and radiative transitions.
VI1.158
Meson Full Listings T(1S)
= T(9460)
where Fgg is one leptonic partial width and Be~ is the corresponding branching fraction (g = e, #, or r). One then assumes e-#-r universality and uses F~f
I T(lS) or T(9460) 1
Fee
T(15)
Bet = average of B~,e, Bin, and B ~ .
(2)
The electronic partial width £~: is also not directly measurable at e+e storage rings, only' the combination Pe~Fhad/F, where Fhad is the hadronic partial width and Phad + 3F,,,,
VALUE (MeV) 9461).32:1_0.22 OUR AVERAGE
MASS
ideogram hadrons hadrons hadrons
1Value includes data of ARTAMONOV 82.
(3)
F .
cr(e+e
77(] --)
DOCUMENT ID TEEN COMMENT Error includes scale factor of 2.5. See the below. BARU 86 REDE e+ e ~ 1 ARTAMONOV 84 REDE e+ e ~ MACKAY 84 REDE e+ e - ~
9460.59±0.12 9460.6 ±0.4 9459.97~0.11±0.07
WEIGHTED AVERAGE 9 4 6 0 . 3 2 - 0.22 (Error scaled by 2.5)
This combination is obtained experimentally from the energyintegrated hadronic cross section
,
=
IG(J PC)
I
- - T -+ hadrons)dE
~SOIIRIIC(~
-~
6rrr,~rh.a c,, . - M 6rr2 r!l~)r,,,.tCio),: r g
(4)
'
where M is the T mass, and Cr and C! O) are radiative correction factors. Cr is used for obtaining P,,~, as (tefined in
X
....... .....
Eq. (1) and contains corrections from all orders of QED for describing (bb) -+ e+e . The lowest order QED value p(0/ relevant for the comparison with potential-model calculations, is defined by the lowest order QED graph (Born term) alone and is about 7% lower than F,.,.. In the past, this distinction had been overlooked by some authors as pointed out by ALEXANDER 89, BARU 86, C O O P E R 86, KOENIGSMANN 86, and others. The Listings give experinlental results Oll B,.,,, Bin,, Brr, mid PeeFh~,t/F- The entries of the latter quantity tlave been re-evaluated using consistently the correction procedure of KURAEV 85. The partial width F,, is obtained from the average values for
F,.,.Fhad/Fand Bee using
W 9459.5
\ ~
, ~'~/A 9460.0
T(lS)
BARU ARTAMONOV
9460.5
86 84
9461.5
9462.0
mass ( M e V )
T(1S) WIDTH VAL UE (keV] 52.1±2.1 OUR EVALUATION
DOCUMENT ID See T mini-review.
T(15)
DECAY MODES
Mode
Fraction (Fi/'r)
Confidence level
rI
T+ 7
(2.97±0.35) %
(5)
F2 F3
I~ tz e+ e
(2.57-*0.07) % (2.52±0.17) %
The total width F is then obtained front Eq. (1). \Vc do not list P~,,, and F values of individual experiments. The F,,,. values in the Meson Summary Table are also those defined in Eq. (1) and no longer the lowest order quantities r(°) ~ee
F4
J/¢9(1S)
r5
/,,~
[,,,,,
r,,,£h.d F(1 - 3Bee)
5.1
12~" Level = 0 . 0 0 2 }
(Confid . . . .
9461.0
REDE REDE
Hadronic decays
•
anything
(1.1 ±0.4 ) × 10 3 x i0 3
< 21
90%
Radiative decays r6
-vq'(958)
< 13
x io 3
90%
r7
7~/
< 3.5
x 10 - 4
90°/0
r8
h f~(1525)
< 1.35
× 10 - 4
90%
F9 FIO
n'f2(1720) ~ ~,f2(1270)
"?,KK
<64 < 48
xl0 ×10
5 5
90% 90%
Fll
^,f4(2220) ~
7K+K
< 1.5
×i0
S
90%
T(15) r(i)r(e +e )/r(total)
ror3/r
F(hadrons) x F(e + e-)/rtota, VALUE (keV~
DOCUMENT tO
TEEN
COMMENT
EBAL CLEO CUSB DASP LENA CNTR PLUT
e+ e+ e+ e+ e+ e+ e+
1.24:t-0.04 OUR AVERAGE 1.23±0.02±0.05 137±006±0.09 1.17±0.06±010 1.23@008±0,04 113±007±011 1.09±0.25 1 35±014
2 JAKUBOWSKI 3 GILES 3 TUTS 3 ALBRECHT 3 NICZYPORUK 3 BeCK 4 BERGER
88 84B 83 82 82 80 79
ee e e e ee-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons
2 Radiative corrections evaluated following KURAEV 85. 3 Radiative corrections reevaluated by 8UCHMUELLER 88 following KURAEV 85. 4 Radiative corrections reevaluated by ALEXANDER 89 using B(##) = 0.026.
VII.159
Meson Full Listings T(IS) = T(9460)
See key on page IV. 1
T(15) PARTIAL WIDTHS
VALUE (units 20- 5 )
r3
yALUE (keYI !L.34+0.04 OUR EVALUATION
<13 <81
T(IS) BRANCHINGRATIOS rl/r TEEN
r(')'f4(2220)
COMMENT
±0.002
0.034 ± 0 . 0 0 4
±0.004
5 ALBRECHT GILES
5Using B(T(15) ~
ee) = B ( T ( 1 S ) ~
85C ARG
T(2S)
83
e+ e -
CLEO
~
~+~
# # ) = 0.0256; not used for width evaluations.
r2/r EVTS
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
TEEN
COMMENT
")' K +
11 A L B R E C H T SCHMITT
89 88
ARG CBAL
T(15) ~ T(15)~
TEEN
COMMENT
?~r+ 7r"iX
K-)/rtota,
EL%
rn/r
DOCUMENT ID
< 2.9 <20
90 90
12ALBRECHT 12 B A R U
89 89
< 31
90
12 BEAN
86 CLEO
12Including unknown branching ratio of f4(2220) ~
COMMENT
ARG MD1
T(15)~ T(15) ~
-~K+K ~/K + K -
T(I5) ~
7 K-- K -
K + K-.
0.02.57=E0.0007 OUR AVERAGE 0.0252±0.0007±0.0007
CHEN
89B CLEO
0.0261 ± 0.0009 ± 0.0011
KAARSBERG
89
0.0230/-0.0025+0.0013
86
CSB2
e+ e -
I
~
#+/~-e+ e- ~ p+/~-T(25)
I
ALBRECHT
87 ARG
0.0284±0.0018J.0.0020
BESSON
84
CLEO
0.027 + 0 . 0 0 3 : 1 - 0 . 0 0 3
ANDREWS
83
CLEO
~+ 7r-/z+/zT(25) 7r+ ~r-- # + # e+ e -
0.0270±0.0028±0.0014
TUTS
83
CUSB
e+ e -
0.032 ± 0 . 0 1 3
-F0.003
ALBRECHT
82
DASP
e+ e -
0.038 ± 0 . 0 1 5
±0.002
N I C Z Y P O R U K 82
LENA
e+ e /~+#-
0.014 + - 0 0.034 .014
BOCK
80
CNTR
e+e #+#--
£).022 ± 0 . 0 2 0
BERGER
79
PLUT
e+ e -
TEEN
COMMENT
#+#-
/~+p-
#+#-
r (e + e-)/rtota I
ra/r
VALUE
EVT5
DOCUMENT ID
(I.0252:£0.0017 OUR AVERAGE 0.0242 ± 0.0014 ± 0.0014 CL028 ± 0 . 0 0 3
307
±0.002
CL051 ~0.030
ALBRECHT
87 ARG
BESSON
84
BERGER
80C P L U T
CLEO
T(25) ?r+ T r - e + e T(2S) ?r+ T r - e + e e+ e e+ e-
['(J/~b(15)
anything)/rtota I ~_/ALUE(units lO 3) CL O/~o
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMEN!
6 FULTON 89 CLEO e+ e - ~ # + / 7 I, • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • <20
90
6 U s i n g B((J/~b) - -
N I C Z Y P O R U K 83
#+/~
X
I
) = (6.9 ± 0.9)%.
rs/r 4)
EL%
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
90
N I C Z Y P O R U K 83
LENA
~ZALUE (units I0 -3 )
EL%
DOCUMENT IO
TEEN
COMMENT
<13
90
SCHMITT
CBAL
T(1S) ~
<21
rb/r
r (TT/(958))/rtotal
88
? X
I
r7/r
r(1,~)/rtotal VALUE (units i0-4) <3.5
EL%
DOCUMENT IO
90
SCHMITT
EL%
DOCUMENT ID
88
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL
T(1S) ~
TECN
COMMENT
~f
X
I
r(7 f~(1525))/rtotal
V_'ALUE(units 10 5)
rg/r
<13.5 90 7BEAN 86 CLEO T - - ~ ~K+K • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • <19.4
90
7Assuming B(f~(1525) ~ r(Tf2(1720)-~
V_ALUE (units 10 5)
7ALBRECHT KK)
7KK~/rtota
89
ARG
T(15)~
TEEN
COMMENT
-
~K+K
= 0.71. I
CL~
rg/r
DOCUMENT IO
< 3.2 90 8 BEAN 86 CLEO T ( 1 5 ) ~ ~ K + K • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • < 5.0 < 2.1 <43 < 2.6
I
LENA
r'(plr)/rtotal VALUE (units lO
--OTHER
r4/r
1.1-1-0.4<-0.2
90 90 90 90
8 A s s u m i n g B(f2(1720 ) ~ 9Assuming B(f2(l?20) ~ 10Assuming B(f2(1720 ) ~
8ALBRECHT 9ALBRECHT 10 S C H M I T T 9 BEAN K+ K 7r+~r
) -- 1.0. ) = 1.0.
T/~I) = 1.0.
89 89 88 86
ARG ARG CBAL ELEO
T(15) ~ T(1S) ~ T(15) ~
T(I5) ~
?K+K "fTr+Tr q X ~Tr + 7r
T(IS) REFERENCES FULTON 90B PR D41 1 4 0 1 +Hempstead (CLEO Collab) ALBRECHT 89 ZPHY C42 349 +Boeckmann,Glaeser, Harder+ (ARGUS Collab.) ALEXANDER 89 NP B320 45 +Bonvicini, Drell, Frey. Luth (LBL, MICH, SLAC) BARU 89 ZPHY C42 505 +Beilin, Blinov+ (NOVO) CHEN 89B PR D39 3528 +Mcllwain, Miller+ (CLEO Collab.) FULTON 89 PL B224 445 +Haas, Hempstead÷ (CLEO Collab.) KAARSBERG 89 PRL 62 2077 +Heintz+ (CUSB Collab.) BUCHMUEL.. 88 HE e+ e Physics 412 Buchmuetler, Cooper (HANN, MIT) Editors: A. All and P. Soeding, World Scientific, Singapore JAKUBOWSKI 88 ZPHY C40 49 ~Antreasyan,Barrels+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) IGJPC SCHMITT 88 ZPHY C40 199 +Antreasyan+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) ALBRECHT 87 ZPHY C35 283 +Binder, Boeckmann, Glaeser+ (ARGUS Collab.) RARU 86 ZPHY C30 551 +81inov. Bondar, Bukin+ (NOVO) BEAN 86 PR D34 9O5 ~Bobbink, Brock, Engler+ (CLEO Collab) ALBRECHT 8SC PL 154B 452 +DrescheL Heller+ (ARGUS Collab.) KURAEV 85 SJNP 41 466 +Fadin (ASCI) Translated from YAF 41 733. ARTAMONOV 84 RE 137B 272 +8aru, Blinov, Bondar+ (NOVO) BESSON 84 PR Da0 1433 ~Green, Hicks, Namjoshi, Sannes+ (CLEO Collab.) GILES 84B PR D29 1285 tHassard, Hempstead, Kinoshita+ (CLEO Collab.) MACKAY 04 PR D29 2483 +Hasard, Giles, Hempstead+ (CUSB Collab.) ANDREWS 83 PRL EO 807 +Avery, Berkelman, Cassel+ (CLEO Collab.) GILES 83 PRL 50 877 + (HARV, OSU, ROCH, RUTG, SYRA, VAND+) NICZYPORUK 83 ZPHY C17 197 +Jakubowski,Zeludziewicz+ (LENA Collab.) TUTS 83 CornedCone 284 (CUSB Collab.) ALBRECHT 82 PL 116B 383 +Hofmann+ (DESY, DORT, HELD, LUND, ITEP) ARTAMONOV 82 PL II8B 225 +Baru, Blinov, 8ondar, Bukin. Groshev(NOVO) NICZYPORUK 82 ZPHY ClS 299 +Folger, Bienlein+ (LENA Collab.) BERGER 80C PL 93B 497 +lackas+ (AACH, DESY, HAMB, SIEG, WUPP) ROCK 8O ZPHY C6 125 +Blanar, Blum+ (HELD, MPIM. DESY, HAMB) BERGER 79 ZPHY Cl 343 +Alexandert (AACH, DESY, HAM8, SIEG, WUPG)
COOPER KOENIGS.. ALBRECHT ARTAMONOV ARTAMONOV MAGERAS MUELLER NICZYPORUK ALBRECHT ANDREWS BOHRINGER KOURKOU... ANGELIS BADIER DARDEN BERGER 81ENLEIN DARDEN GARELICK KAPLAN YOH COBB HERB INNES
86 86 84 84 82 81
81 81 80 80 80 80 79 79 79 78 78 78 78 70 78 77 77 77
I
7r~r) = 0.84.
< 1.5 90 12 F U L T O N 90B CLEO T ( L S ) ~ ? K + K • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
r(#+#-)/rtota, VALUE
--*
VALUE (units 10 5)
O.(T297=EO.O035 OUR AVERAGE 0.027 ± 0 . 0 0 4
DOCUMENT ID
90 90
11Using B(f2(1270 ) ~
l'(r+ r-)/rtota, DOCUMENT ID
EL%
< 4.8 90 11BEAN 86 £ L E O T ( 1 5 ) ~ "y~r~r • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
_DOCUMENT ID See T mini-review.
VALUE
rlo/r
r(~ f2(1270))/rtota I
r(~+~-)
Berkeley Conf. 67 DESY 88/136 PL 1348 137 PL 137B 272 PL 118B 225 PRL 46 1 1 1 5 PRL 46 1181 PRL 46 92 PL 93B 500 PRL 44 1 1 0 8 PRL 44 1 1 1 1 PL 91B 481 PL 87B 398 PL 86B 98 PL 80B 419 PL 76B 243 PE ?BB 360 PL 76B 246 PR D18 945 PRL 40 435 PRL 41 684 PL 728 273 PRL 39 252 PRL 39 1240
RELATED PAPERS-(MIT Roenigsmann (DESY) +Drescher, Heller+ (ARGUS Collab +Baru, Blinov, Bondar+ (NOVO) +Baru, Blinov, Bondar, Bukin, G~oshev+ (NOVO +Bohringer, Finocchiaro+ (COLU, STON, LSU, MPIM + (RUTG. SYRA, LEMO, VAND, CORN, ITHA+ +Jakubowski, geludziewicz, Folger+ (LENA Collab +Hofmann+ (DESY, DORT, HELD, LUND +Berkelman, Billing, Cabenda+ (CLEO Collab. +Costantini, Finocchiaro (COLU, STON) Kourkoumelis+ (ATHU, NTUA, BNL, CERN÷ +Besch, Blumenfeld+ (CERN, COLU, OXF, ROCK +Boucrot+ (SACL, CERN, CDEF. EPOL, LALO +Hofmann, Schubert+ (DESY, DORT, HELD, LUND +Alexander+ (AACH, DESY, HAM8, SIEG, WUPG +Glawe, Bock, Blanar÷ (DESY.HAMB, HELD, MPIM +Hofmann, Schubert+ (DESY, DORT, HELD, LUND +Gauthier, Hicks, Oliver+ (NEAS. WASH, TUFT +Appel, Herb, Horn+ (STON, FNAL, COLU +Herb, Horn, Lederman(COLU, FNAL, STON +lwata, Fabjan+ (BNL, CERN, SYRA, YALE +Horn, Lederman, Appel, Ito+ (COLU, FNAL, STON +AppeL Brown, Herb, Horn+ (COLU, FNAL, STON
I I
I I
VII.160
Meson Full Listings Xb0(Im) = Xoo(9860), X0~(im) = Xb1(9890), Xo2(IP) ---- Xo2(9915)
I Xbo(1P)I
Xb1(1P) DECAY M O D E S IG(J PC)
or Xbo(9860)
=
??(0
preferred + + ) Mode
Fraction ( F i / F )
7T(lS)
(35±8) %
J needs c o n f i r m a t i o n . rl
Observed in radiative decay of the T ( 2 5 ) , therefore C = + . B r a n c h i n g ratio requires E1 transition, M 1 is strongly disfavored, therefore P = + .
Xbo(1P) VALUE (MeV~
I" ('T T ( 1 S ) ) / r t o t a VALUE
MASS
DOCUMENT ID
TECN
COMMENT
9860.0±0.5/_1.4 9858.3± 1.6±2.7 9864.1±7 ± i • • • We do not use the following
1 ALBRECHT 85E ARG 1 NERNST 85 CBAL 1 HAAS 84 C L E O data for averages, fits, limits,
T(25) ~ conv. ~ X T(25) ~ 7 X T(25) -- conv. 7 X etc. • • •
9872.8±0.7±5.0
1 KLOPFEN...
T(25) ~
CUSB
"y X
,y ENERGYIN T(2S) DECAY DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
I
rl/r DOCUMENT ID
0.32±0.06±0.07 0.47±0.18
WALK KLOPFEN...
Xbl (1P) SKWARNICKI WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN. PAUSS
1From I' energy below, assuming T ( 2 5 ) mass - 10023.4 MeV.
VALUE (MeV)
BRANCHING RATIOS
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL CUSB
T(25) ~ T(25)~
0.354-0.08 OUR AVERAGE
9859.84-1.3 OUR AVERAGE
83
Xbl(1P)
87 86 85E 85 84 83 83
PRL 58 972 PR D34 2 6 1 1 PL 160B 331 PRL 54 2 1 9 5 PRL 52 799 PRL 51 160 PL t30B 439
86 83
.-f.y~-f%?f+.~
REFERENCES
~Antreasyan, Besset~ (Crystal BaH Coliab.)J +Zschorsch+ (Crysta~ Ball Collab.) +Orescher, Heller4 (ARGUS Collab) ÷Antreasyan, Aschman+ (Crystal Ball Collab) ÷Jensen. Kagan, Kass Behrends+ (CLEO Collab.) Klopfenstein, Horstkotte+ (CUSB Collab.} +Oietl, Eigen+ (MPIM, COLU, CORN, LSU. STON)
COMMENT
162.34-1.3 OUR AVERAGE 1621±0.54-1.4 ALBRECHT 8SE ARG 163.8±1.6±2.7 NERNST 85 CBAL 158.0±7 4-1 HAAS 84 CLEO • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits,
T ( 2 5 ) ~ conv. "r X T(25) ~ 7 X T ( 2 S ) ~ conv. ~f X etc. • • •
149.4±0.7±5.0
T(25) ~
KLOPFEN...
83
CUSB
7 X
I
x
Mode
Fraction ( r i / r )
"yT(15)
<6 %
I
= J needs confirmation.
Observed in radiative decay of the T ( 2 S ) , therefore C = + . B r a n c h i n g ratio requires E1 transition, M1 is strongly disfavored, therefore P = + . J = 2 from S K W A R N I C K I 87.
Xbo(1P) DECAYMODES rl
(iP)
or Xb2(9915)I
Confidence level Xb2(1P)
90% VALUE (MeV~
rl/r
r('~T(15))/Ftotal VALUE ~ DOCUMENTIO TEEN COMMENT <0.06 90 WALK 86 CBAL T ( 2 5 ) ~ ?*H~+ • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • 90
PAUSS
83
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB CUSB
T(25) T(2S) T(25) T(25) T(25) T(25)
9913.24-0.6 OUR AVERAGE
Xbo(1P) BRANCHING RATIOS
<0.ii
MASS
DOCUMENT ID
CUSB T ( 2 5 ) ~
7 ? ~ + f-
9915.8±1.1±1.3 9912.2±0.3±09 9912.4±0.8±2.2 9913.3±0.7±10 9914.610.3±20 9914.0±40
I I i i i i
WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN... PAUSS
86 85E 85 84 83 83
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
%'H'~*~ conv. 7 X 7 X cony. -v X "~ X "~7~+,~-
1 From % energy below, assuming T ( 2 5 ) mass = 10023,4 MeV.
Xbo(1P) REFERENCES WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN.. PAUSS
I
86 8SE 85 84 83 83
Xbl(1P)
PR D34 2 6 1 1 PL 1608 331 PRL 54 2 1 9 5 PRL 52 799 PRL 51 160 PL 130B 439
+Zschorsch+ (Crystal Ball Collab) +Ore%her, Heller(ARGUS Collab.) +Antreasyan, Aschman~ (Crystal Ball Collab.) +Jensen, Kagan, Kass, Behrends~ (CLEO Collab.) Klopfenstein, Horstkotte+ (CUSB Collab) +Dietl, Eigen+ (MPIM, COLU, CORN, LSU, STONI
I
:
or Xb1(9890) 1
J needs confirmation.
-y E N E R G Y VALUE (MeV)
IN T ( 2 5 )
DECAY
DOCUMENT tO
TECN
COMMENT
CBAL ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB CUSB
T(2S) T(25) T(2S) T(25) T(25) T(25)
109.6=t=0.6 OUR AVERAGE 107.0±11±1.3 110.6±03±0.9 110.4±08±2.2 109.5~0.711.0 108.2±0.3=2.0 108.8±40
WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN... PAUSS
Xb2(1P) Observed in radiative decay of the T ( 2 5 ) , therefore C = + . B r a n c h i n g ratio requires E1 transition, M1 is strongly disfavored, therefore P = + . J = 1
DECAY
86 85E 85 84 83 83
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --
7~,f+ cony. 7X cony. 7X ~r'q +
~-~ X 7X [
MODES
Mode
Fraction ( F i / F )
"rT(15)
(22±4) %
from S K W A R N I C K I 87. F1 Xbl(1P) VALUE (MeV~
MASS
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
Xb2(1P)
COMMENT
9891,9+0.7 OUR AVERAGE 9890.84-0.94-1.3 9890.8±0.3/-11 9892.0±0.84-2.4 9893.6±0.8±1.0 9894.4±0.44-3.0 9892.04-3.0
1 WALK 1 ALBRECHT 1 NERNST i HAAS 1 KLOPFEN... 1 PAUSS
86 85E 85 84 83 83
CBAL ARG CBAL CLEO CUS8 CUSB
T(25) T(25) T(25) T(25) T(2S) T(25)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
7R,t + ~cony. -~ X "Y X conv. "r X "r X ",Tt+t
VALUE
VALUE (MeV)
DOCUMENT IO
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB CUSB
T(25) T(25) T(25) T(25) T(25) T(2S)
130.64-0.7 OUR AVERAGE WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN... PAUSS
86 85E 85 84 83 83
FI/F
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
7~f + cony. ~, X 7 X cony. 7 X ~, X 7--ff+ f -
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL CUSB
T(25) ~ T(25)~
0.22:E0,04 OUR AVERAGE 0.27±0.06:E0.06 020±0.05
WALK KLOPFEN...
Xb2(1P)
"~ ENERGY IN T(25) DECAY
RATIOS
DOCUMENT ID
I From 7 energy below, assuming T ( 2 5 ) mass = 10023.4 MeV.
131.7±0.9±1.3 131.7±0.3/_1.1 130.6±[email protected] 129.04-0.8/_1.0 128.1±0.4±3.0 130.64-3.0
BRANCHING
r(-yT(15))/rtotal
SKWARNICKI WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN PAUSS
87 86 85E 85 84 83 83
PRL 58 972 PR D34 2 6 1 1 PL 1608 331 PRL 54 2 1 9 5 PRL 52 799 PRL 51 160 PL 130B 439
86 83
%~+ £%~fFF.~
REFERENCES
+Antreasyan, Besset (Crystal Ball Colbb)J ~Zschorsch~ (Crystal Ball Collab) +Drescher, Heller+ (ARGUS Coliab) +Antreasyan, Aschrnan+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) +Jensen, Kagan, Kass, Behren0st (CLEO Collab) KIopfenstein, Horstkotte+ (CUSB Colbb) +Dietl, Eigen~ (MPIM, COLU. CORN, LSU, STON) I
VI1.161
Meson Full Listings T(2S) = T(10023)
See key on page IV.1
IT(2S)
or T(10023)
r(,+,-)Irtota,
I
I G ( J PC) =
??(I--)
r3/r
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
0.017::E0.015-1-0.006
HAAS
T(2S) VALUE (GeV)
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
86B REDE e+ e- ~ 84 REDE e+ e- ~
hadrons hadrons
VALUE (keV~
90
DOCUMENT ID
<0.008
90
LURZ
~
DO~VMENT ID
DECAY MODES Fraction ( r i / r )
Confidence level
rl F2
T(15)~r+~r T(iS)Tr07r 0
(18.5 4-0.8 ) % ( 8.8 4-1.1 ) %
r3
7-+T -
( 1.7 4-1.6 ) %
r4 r5 F6
#+#e+e T(1S)Tr °
( 1.374-0.26)% ( 1.364-0.26)% < 8 x 10 - 3
90%
F7
T(1S)F/
<
90%
2
× 10 . 3
R a d i a t i v e decays ( 6,7 4-0.9 ) %
7Xbl(1P)
F9 7Xb2(1P) rio ~/Xbo(IP)
( 6.6 + 0 . 9 ) %
rn r12
"ff2(1720) 3'f~(1525)
< <
r13
7f2(1270)
<
F14
~f f4(2220)
( 4.3 59 5.3
4.1.0
)% x 10 - 4 x 10- 4
90% 90%
x 10 - 4
90%
2.41
0.54 4-0.07 +0.09 -0.05 0.41 4-0.18
JAKUBOWSKI GILES TUTS ALBRECHT
88 84B 83 82
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL CLEO CUSB DASP
e+ e+ e+ e+
~ ~ ~ ~
hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons
3 NICZYPORUK 81£ LENA
e+ e - ~
hadrons
3 BOCK
e+ e - ~
hadrons
80
eeee-
I
CNTR
ALBRECHT
87
ARG
<0.007
90
LURZ
87
CBAL
<0.010
90
BESSON
84
CLEO
hadrons. See T minl-review.
BRANCHING
RATIOS
rz/r
I" ( T ( 1 S ) I t + 7 r - ) / r t o t a l EVTS
0.185+0.008 OUR AVERAGE 0.1814-0.0054-0.010 Ii.6k
ALBRECHT
87
0.1694-0.040
GELPHMAN
85
0.191±0.0124-0.006 0.18910.026
BESSON FONSECA
84 84
0.21 ±0.07
7
TEEN
COMMENT
ARG CBAL
e+ e - ~ MM e+ e -
CLEO CUSB
r + 7r- MM e+ e -
lr+ ~ -
e+e-~4-~
EVT$
e+ e -
r2/r DOCUMENT /D
ALBRECHT GELPHMAN FONSECA
COMMENT •
•
•
e+e - ~ MM e+e - ~ 3~r0 )
~r+r-t-l-t /±£-(~,,f.
DOCUMENT ID
0.067-1-0.009 OUR AVERAGE 0.091±0.018+0.022 0.065±0.007±0.012 0.080+0.017 ± 0,016 0.059±0.014
ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN...
85E 85 84 83
TECN
COMMENT
ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB
e+ e e+e e+ ee+e -
TEEN
COMMENT
ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB
e+e - ~ e+e - ~ e+e - ~ e+e - ~
T~N
COMMENT
~ ~
7 conv X
~
~X
~fX ~ "-f cony X
rg/r
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
0.0~,=EO.009 OUR AVERAGE 0.0984-0.0214-0.024 0.058 4- 0.007 + 0.010 0,1024-0.0184-0.021 0.061±0.014
ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN...
8SE 85 84 83
~convX -IX ",, conv X 7X rl0/r
DOCUMENT ID
0.043:1:0.010 OUR AVERAGE 0.064±0.014±0.016 ALBRECHT 8SE ARG 0.0364-0.0084-0.009 NERNST 85 CBAL 0.0444-0.0234-0.009 HAAS 84 CLEO • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, KLOPFEN...
83
e + e - ~ 3"convX e+e - ~ ~,X e+ e - ~ ~f cony X etc. • • •
CUSB
rn/r CL.~
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
<59 90 5 ALBRECHT 89 ARG T(25) ~ 7K + K• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • 90
6ALBRECHT
89
ARG
T(25)~
?~r+~r -
r(7 f~(1525))/rtotal
rz2/r
VALUE (units 10-5 )
CL~.~o
<53
90
DOCUMENT ID
7 ALBRECHT
TEEN
87 ARG 85 CBAL 84 CUSB
COMMENT
e+ e - ~ e+ e - ~ e+ e - ~
r (7f 2 ( 1 2 7 0 ) ) / r t o t a
89
TEEN
COMMENT
ARG
T(25) ~
TEEN
COMMENT
ARG
T(25)~
TEEN
COMMENT
r13/r
I
VALUE (units 10-5 /
EL%
<24.1
9~-
8Using B(f2(1270) ~
VALUE (units 10 5)
"/K + K -
K K ) = 0.71.
DOCUMENT ID
8
~
T
89
77r+~r -
~T~)=0.84 r14/r CL~4
DOCUMENT ID
• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
t+ {- ~ + ~r-
NICZYPORUK 81B LENA
~r0 ~rO)/ rtota '
0.068:1:0.011 OUR AVERAGE 0.095 4- 0.019 4- 0.019 25 0.0804-0.015 0,103 4- 0.023
~ E- 7"f
r (7 f4(2220))/rtotal -
t + ~ - ~r+ Tr-
VALUE
e+ e - ~
re/r
r(7Xbl(1P))/rtotal VALUE
7Re-evaluated assuming B(f~(1525) ~ T(2S)
COMMENT
5Re-evaluated assuming B(f2(1720 ) ~ K + K - ) = 0.19. 6Includes unknown branching ratio of f2(1720) ~ 7r+ ~r-. rs
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
90
< 5.9
PARTIAL WIDTHS
e+ e - ~
#+ #-
r (7 f2(1720))/rtotal I
r(e±e-) VALUE (keV~
87 CBAL
<0.005
0.0354-0.014
2 Radiative corrections evaluated foflowing KURAEV 85. 3 Radiative corrections reevaluated by BUCHMUELLER 88 following KURAEV 85.
I].5864"0,029 OUR EVALUATION
TEEN
<0.002 90 FONSECA 84 CUSB • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc.
VALUE (units 10-5 )
T(2S)
e+ e - ~
rT/r
VALUE
r0rs/r DOCUMENT ID
2 3 3 3
#4- /k#4-##+ p-
r (7x~o(1P))/rtotaI
r(hadrons) x r ( e + e - ) / r t o t a l OUR AVERAGE 4-0.02 4-0.04 4-0.05 4-0.07
e- ~ e- ~ e- ~ •
r ( 7 Xb2(Z O ) ) / r t o t a l
r(i)r(e + e-)/r(total)
VALUE (keV~
e+ e+ e+ •
r(T(ZS)~/)/rtotal
•
T(2S)
89 CSB2 85 ARG 84B CLEO limits, etc. •
rdr ~
DOCUMENT ID
Mode
COMMENT
#+#-)=0.026
VALUE
VALUE
£( T ( 1 5 )
~+ T-
r(T(15)r°)/rtotal
WIDTH
See T mini-review.
T(25)
TEEN
NICZYPORUK 81c LENA
4Re-evaluated using B(T(1S) ~ T(2S)
VALUE
e+ e- ~
r4/r DOCUMENT'D
~
<0,038
1 Reanalysis of ARTAMONOV 84.
0.562:t:0.027 0.54 4-0.04 0.58 4-0.03 0.59 4-0.03 0.60 4-0.12
84B CLEO
0.0137+0.0026 OUR AVERAGE 0,01384-0.00254-0.0015 KAARSBERG 0.009 4-0.006 4-0,006 4 ALBRECHT 0,018 4-0,008 4-0,005 HAAS • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits,
MASS
10.0Q3304.:0.00031 OUR AVERAGE 10.0236 4-0.0005 1 BARU 10.0231 ±0.0004 BARBER
F8
COMMENT
r (#+ #-)/rtota ' VALUE
434-8 OUR EVALUATION
TEEN
7r0 ~ro £4- ~ r F t - ~r0 ~r0 ~ - £ - r 0 ~r0
<6.8
90
9 ALBRECHT
9Includes unknown branching ratio of f4(2220) ~
89
ARG
K+ K-.
T(2S) ~
7K + K-
I
VII.162
Meson Full Listings
T(25)-- T(I0023), Xu0(2m)=Xuo(10235),Xb1(2m)--Xb1(10255) XbO(2P) REFERENCES
T ( 2 5 ) REFERENCES ALBRECHT 89 ZPHY C42 34g +Boeckmann.Glaeser. Harder4 (ARGUS Collab ) KAARSBERG 89 PRL 62 2077 ~Heintz4 (CUSB Col~ab) BUCHMUEL 88 HE e+e Physics 412 Buchmueller, Cooper (HANN, MIT) Editors: A. All and P Soedin8, World Scientific. Singapore JAKUROWSKI 88 ZPHY C40 49 +Antreasyan,Barrels+ (Crystal Ball Collab)IGJRC ALBRECHT 07 ZPHY C35 283 +Binder, Boeckmann, Glaeser~ (ARGUS Collab.) LURZ 87 ZPHY C36 383 +Antreasyan,Besset+ (Crystal Ball Collab ) BARU 8EB ZPHY C32 662 +81inov, Bondar, Bukin(NOVO) ALBRECHT 85 ZPHY C20 45 +Dreschell, Heller~ (ARGUS Collab) ALBRECHT 85E PL 1gOB 331 +Drescher, Holler+ (ARGUS Collab) GELPHMAN 85 PR D l l 2893 ~Lurz, Antreasyan~ (Crystal Ball Collab ) KURAEV 85 SJNP 41 466 +Fadin (ASCI} Translated from YAF 41 733 NERNST 85 RRL 54 2 1 9 5 tAntreasyan, Aschman+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) ARTAMONOV 84 PL 137B 272 +Baru, Blinov, Bondar(NOVO) BARBER 84 PL 135B 498 + (DESY, ARGUS Collab.. Crystal Ball Collab) BESSON 84 PR D30 1433 +Green. Hicks, Namjoshi, Sannes+ (CLEO Collab) FONSECA 84 NP B242 31 ~MaBeras, Son, Dietl, EiBen4 (CUSB Collab) GILES 84B PR D29 1285 +Hassard, Hempstead, Kinoshita+ (CLEO Collab.) HAAS 84 PRL 52 799 +Jensen, KaBan, Kass, Behrends+ (CLEO Collab ) HAAS 84B PR D30 1996 +Jensen, Kagan, Kass, Behrends+ (CLEO Collab) KLOPFEN 83 PRL 51 160 Klopfenstein, Horstkotte+ {CUSB Collab.) TUTS 83 CornellConf. 284 (CUSB Collab) ALBRECHT 82 PL 116B 383 ~Hofmann+ (DESY, DOBT, HELD. LUND. ITEP) NICZYPORUK 81B PL 1.0OB 95 +Chen, Folger. Lurz+ (LENA Collab} NICZYPORUK 81C PL 99B 169 +Chert. VoseL Wegener+ (LENA Collab.) BOCK 80 ZPHY C6 125 { Blanaf, Blum(HELD, MPIM. DESY, HAMB) -
ALEXANDER COOPER WALK ALBRECHT ARTAMONOV ANDREWS GREEN MAGERAS MUELLER ANDREWS ARESTOV BOHRINGER KOURKOU UENO BIENLEIN DARDEN KAPLAN YOH COBB HERB INNES
89 06 86 84 84 83 82 81 8] 80 80 80 80 79 78 78 78 70 77 77 ?7
-
OTHER
NP B320 45 Berkeley Conf. 67 PR D34 2 6 1 1 PL 134B 137 PL IgTB 272 PRL 50 807 RRL 49 617 PRL 46 1115 PBL 46 1.181 PRL 44 1 . 1 0 8 IHEP 80 165 PRL 44 1.111. PL 91B 481 PRL 42 486 RL 78B 360 PL 76B 246 PRL 40 435 PRL 41 684 PL 72B 273 PRL 30 252 PBL 39 1240
I xb0(2P) I
RELATED PAPERS -
-
+Bonvicini, Orell, Frey, Luth (LBL, M~CH, SLAC) (MIT) +Zschorsch+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) +Drescher, Heller+ (ARGUS Collab.) +Baru, Blinov, Bondar÷ (NOVO) +Avery, Berkelman, Cassel+ (CLEO Collab.) +Sannes, Skubic, SnydeH (CLEO Collab ) +Bohringer, Finocchiaro+ (GOLU,STON, LSU, MPIM) + {RUTG, SYRA. LEMO, VANO. CORN. ITHA+) fBerkelman, Billin8, Cabenda+ (CLEO Collab.) +Bogoljubski(SERP) +CostantinLginocchiaro (COLU, STON) Kourkoumelis* (ATHU, NTUA, BNL. CERN+) +Brown, Herb, Hem, Fisk+ (FNAL, COLU, STON) {Glawe, Bock, B~anar+ (DESY, HAMB, HELD, MRIM) +Hofmann, Schubert4 (DESY, DORT. HELD, LUND) +Appel. Herb. Hom~ (STON, FNAL, COLU) +Herb, Horn, Lederman(COLU, FNAL, STON) +lwata, Fabjan4 (BNL, CERN, SYRA, YALE) +Horn, Lederman, Appel, Ito+ (COLU, FNAL, STON) +Appel. Brown, Herb, Horn+ (COLU, FNAL, STON)
/~(J~)
LEE FRANZINI 07
Hamburg Conf 139
- TUTS EIGEN HAN
83 82 82
CornellConf 284 PRL 49 1616 PRL 49 1 6 1 2
(CUSB Collab) (CUSB Coliab) (EUS8 Collab)
tBohringer, Herb+ +Horstkotte, Imlay+
I Xbz(2P) I
,G(jPC)
= ??(1 preferred + + )
or Xb1(10255)
J needs confirmation.
Observed in radiative decay of t h e T ( 3 S ) , therefore C = + . Branching; ratio requires E1 t r a n s i t i o n , M 1 is strong;ly disfavored, therefore P = + .
Xbt(2P)
MASS
VALUE (OeV) DOCUMENT ID 10.2.552J-O.0004 OUR AVERAGE Error includes scale 10.2556±0.0005 1 LEE-FRANZINI87 10.2548±0.00045 1 LEE-FRANZINI87
TEEN COMMENT factor of 1.2. CUSB e+ e ~ ? X CUSB e+ e - ~ f + f - "r'~
1 From ~. energy below assuming T ( 3 5 ) mass - 10355.3 MeV.
-/ENERGY IN T(3S) DECAY VALUE (MeV) 99.63=0.4 OUR AVERAGE 99.2±0.5 100.0±0.45
DOCUMENT ID Error includes scca~ factor LEE-FRANZINI87 LEE F R A N Z l N I 8 7
Xbl(2P)
DECAY
TEEN of 1.2. CUSB CUSB
COMMENT e+ e e+ e
Mode
Fraction ( F i / F )
^,T(2S)
(25 ±8 )%
I- 2
^,T(15)
( 6 lil.7)
= 7?(0 preferred ++)
~ ~
X.bl(2P) BRANCHING
%
RATIOS
rl/r
r(-~T(25))/rtotal Observed in radiative decay of t h e T ( 3 5 ) ,
therefore C = + .
Branching; ratio
TEEN
COMMENT
CUSB CUSB
e+ e e+ e
2Using B ( T ( 3 5 ) ~
10.23533=0.0011 OUR AVERAGE 10.2353±0.0016 102352+0.0016
1 LEE F R A N Z I N I 8 7 1 LEE-FRANZlNI87
COMMENT
2 ~ - N I 8 7
CUSB
e+e
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
2 ~ - I N I 8 7
CUSB
e+e-~
~ ~
~
2~/EI ~-
r2/r
0,0613= 0.017 DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
F('yT(15))/rtotal VALUE
Xbo(2P) MASS VALUE (GeV~
DOCUMENT 119
VALUE 0.2473=0.083
requires E1 t r a n s i t i o n , M 1 is s t r o n g l y disfavored, therefore P = + .
~ X f + ,~ ~
MODES
rl
J needs confirmation.
or X b 0 ( 1 0 2 3 5 )
(CUSB Collab.)
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
-~ X ~ ~ - ~-,
Xbl(2P)'z)=0
~,'xtS-E-
120 ± 0.026.
X b t ( 2 P ) REFERENCES
1 From ~ energy below assuming T ( 3 5 ) mass = 10355.3 MeV. LEE FRANZINI 87
- -
9" ENERGY IN T ( 3 5 ) DECAY VALUE (MeV}
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
LEE-FRANZINI87 LEE-FRANZINI87
CUSB CUSB
e+e e+e
TUTS EIGEN HAN
119.3:E1.1 OUR AVERAGE 119.3±16 119.4± 1.6
~ ~
?X t-f-q~
Xbo(2P) DECAY MODES Mode
Fraction ( r i / r )
r I
-YT(2S)
(7
r2
,~,T(15)
(1.4tl.O)%
±4
)%
Xbo(2P) B R A N C H I N G RATIOS r ('7 T ( 2 S ) ) VALUE
/ rtota I
0.0693=0.041
rl/r DOCUMENT (D 2 LEE-FRANZINI8?
TEEN
COMMENT
CUSB
e+ e
TEEN
COMMENT
CUSB
e+ e
~
qqf+
f-
~ff'f
~-
r2/r
F ('7T(15))/Ftota I VALUE 0.0].49=O.O10 2Using B ( T ( 3 5 ) ~
DOCUMENT ID 2 LEE F R A N Z I N I 8 7 Xbo(2P)?) = 0 0 4 8 ± 0.014.
Hamburg Conf. 139
~
8] 82 82
(CUSB Collab )
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
CornellGanf 284 PBL 49 1616 PRL 49 ]612
• Bohrirlgeq Herb*Horstkotte, Imlay~
(CUSB Collab) (CUSB Coflab ) (CUSB Collab )
Vli.163
Meson Full Listings
,See key on page IV.1 Xo2(2P)
= Xb2(i0270),
T(35)=
T(I0355)
Radiative decays
I6(J PC)
or X b 2 ( 1 0 2 7 0 )
F6 F7 F8
= ??(2 preferred + + ) J needs confirmation.
I
"~Xb2(2P) "fXbl(2P)
(12.8 ±2.9 ) % (12.0 ±2.6 ) % ( 4.8 ±1.4 )%
"/Xbo(2P)
Observed in radiative decay of the T ( 3 5 ) , therefore C = +. Branching ratio requires E1 transition, M1 is strongly disfavored, therefore P = +.
T(3S) r(i)F(e + e-)/F(total)
rors/r
F(hadrons) x F ( e + e - ) / r t o t a l
Xb2(2P) M A S S VALUE (GeV)
VALUE (keV)
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
10.2690-I-0.0807 OUR AVERAGE Error in~ud~s scale factor of 2,2. 10.2682±0.0005 1 L E E - F R A N Z I N I 8 7 C U S B e+ e 10.2697±0.00045 t L E E - F R A N Z I N I 8 7 C U S B e+ e -
~ ~
7 X E F ~ - "~--f
DOCUMENT 10
TEEN
COMMENT
0.415:1:0.030 OUR AVERAGE Error includes scalefactor of 1.1. 0.45 £0.03 +0.03 2 GILES 848 CLEO e+ e ~ hadrons 0.39 10.02 +0.03 2 TUTS 83 CUSB e+ e - ~ hadrons 2 Radiative corrections reevaluated by BUCHMUELLER 88 following KURAEV 85.
1 From q~ energy below, assuming T ( 3 5 ) mass -- 10355.5 MeV.
T(3S) PARTIAL WIDTHS
r(e+e -) 3' E N E R G Y IN T ( 3 S ) D E C A Y
F5
VALUE (keY)
DOCUMENT IO
0.44=t=0.03 OUR EVALUATION VALUE (MeV)
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
LEE-FRANZINI87 LEE FRANZlNI87
CUSB CUSB
e+ e ~ -,f X e+ e - -- ~+ ~- --f?
Xb2(2P) D E C A Y
0.101i0.017
MODES
1.6k
Fraction ( r i / r )
F(T(2S)~ + ~-)/rtota,
(19 ±7 )% (6.39-1.8) %
0.022i0.005 OUR AVERAGE
Xb2(2P) B R A N C H I N G
VALUE
F1/F
VALUE
DOCUMENT tD
2 LEE-FRAN~NI87
TEEN
COMMENT
CUSB
e+ e -
~
-'f-~+ t -
I:(~T(tS))/rtota,
r2/r
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
0.063:E0.018
TEEN
Xb2(2P).~)=0.128
~
3,?£4-~ -
31~ 5
e+ e
TEEN
COMMENT
~
7r+ ~
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
BOWCOCK
87
CLEO
82
CUSB
e+ e ~ 7r+ 7r- X, ~T+ 7r-- f + ~ T ( 3 5 ) ~ ~r+Tr E ~ -
TEEN
COMMENT
r3/r
VALUE
EVT5
0.03479-0.0034
3.9k
BOWCOCK
87
CLEO
e+ e -
o o49 ±0.010 o o39 ±o.o13
22
GREEN MAGERAS
82 82
CLEO CUSB
T(35) -T(35)~
DOCUMENT ID
0.0363=1=0.11031 OUR AVERAGE
2o
~
7r+ ~r
F4/F
F(p, + # - ) / r t o t a l EVT5
DOCUMENT ID
CHEN
o o33 ±o.o13 ±o.oo~
~o9o
TEEN
89B CLEO
COMMENT
e+ e 4__
KAARSBERG 89 CSB2
E+~-~'-
ANDREWS
e+ e #+#-
83
CLEO
#+#-
rg/r
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
TECN
COMMENT
0.128 :EO.O12+0.026
LEE-FRANZlNI87
CUSB
e+ e -
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
0.120=1=0.011 +0.024
LEE-FRANZINI87
CUSB
e+ e -
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
TECN
COMMENT
0.048 + 0 . 0 1 0 4-0.010
~
CUSB
e+ e -
~
q X
F('rXbl(2P))/Ftotal i~(j ;c) = ??(~--)
rT/r
10.3553:1:0.0005
TEEN
868 REDE
COMMENT
e+ e -
1 Reanalysis of A R T A M O N O V 84.
T(35) WIDTH VALUE (keY) 24.34-2.9 OUR EVALUATION
-/ X
rB/r N
I
8
7
~
~ X
T(3S) REFERENCES
DOCUMENT 10
1 BARU
~
r (~ X b o ( 2 P ) ) / F t o t a I
T(3S) M A S S VALUE (GeV)
X,
7r+ 7r- t~ ~ ~r+Tr E ~
r('rXb2(2P))lCtotal (CUSB Collab.) (CUSB Collab.) (CUSB Collab,)
+Bohringer, Herb+ +Horstkotte, Imlay+
I o~ T(zO3~S) I
X,
MAGERAS
o o1739-OOOlS± o.ooli (CUSB Collab )
CornellConf. 284 PRL 49 101.6 PRL 49 1 6 1 2
DOCUMENT ID
0.0181=E0.0017 OUR AVERAGE 0.0202 + 0.0019 ,I 0.0033
Hambur8 Conf. 139
- 83 82 82
CLEO
r2/r
VALUE
± 0.029
Xb2(2P) R E F E R E N C E S
rUTS EtGEN HAN
COMMENT
COMMENT
CUSB e+e
2~-INI87
87
TEEN
r(T(IS)~+;r-)/rtota,
it (*7 T ( 2 5 ) ) / Ftota I 0.1894-0.065
BOWCOCK
EVTB
o021~ooos o o31~oo2o
RATIOS
rl/r
EVTS
Mode
I.EE-FRANZINI 87
hadrons. See T mini-review.
anything)/Ftota I
"~T(25) "yT(lS)
2Using B(T(3S) ~
~
T(3S) BRANCHING RATIOS
r(T(25) VALUE
F1 F2
e+ e -
COMMENT
Errorincludesscalefactor of 2.1.
85.9:1:0.7 OUR AVERAGE I]6.7±0.5 35.39-0.45
DOCUMENT ID See T mini-review.
~
hadrons
CHEN 89B PR D39 3528 +MclIwain, Miller+ (CLEO Collab.) KAARSBERG 89 PRL 02 2077 +Heintz+ {CUSB Collab.) BUCHMUEL 88 HE e+ e- Physics 412 BuchrnueIler, Cooper (HANN, MIT) Editors: A. Ali and P, Soeding, World Scientific, Singapore BOWCOCK 87 PRL 58 307 ~Giles, Hassard. Kinoshita+ (CLEO Col~ab) LEE-FRANZINI 87 Hamburg Conf, 139 [CUSB Collab I BARU 868 ZPHY C32 662 +Blinov, Bondar, Bukin+ (NOVO) SJNP 41 4~rom 6 YAF 41+padin 733. KURAEV 85 Translated (ABEl) ARTAMONOV 84 PL 137B 272 +Baru, Blinov, Bondar+ (NOVO) GILES 84B PR D29 1285 +Hassard, Hernpstead, Kinoshita+ [CLEO Collab.) ANDREWS 83 PRL 50 807 +Avery. Berkelrnan, Casse)+ (CLEO Cobab.) TUTS 83 CornellConf 284 (CUSB Collab) GREEN 82 PRL 49 617 +Sannes, Skubic, Snyder+ (CLEO Cobab.) MAGERAS 82 PL 1188 453 +Herb, Imlay+ (COLU, CORN, LSU, MPIM, STON)
T(3S) DECAY MODES
- -
Mode
Fraction ( F i / F )
I-1 I-2 I-3
T(2S) anything T(2S)~r+Tr T(1S)~ + ; ' r -
(10.1 + 1 . 7
) %
(
) %
I-4
#+/~-
(363+0.31) (1.81±0.17)
I- 5
e--e-
(1.814_0.25) %
2.2 ± 0 . 5
% %
ALEXANDER ARTAMONOV GILES HAN PETERSON ANDREWS BOHRINGER UENO YoHKAPLAN COBB HER8 INNES
89 84 84B 82 82 80 80 79 78 78 77 77 77
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
He 8320 45 PL 1378 272 PR D29 ]285 PRL 49 1 6 1 2 PL 114B 277 PRL 44 1 1 0 8 PRL 44 1 1 1 1 PRL 42 486 PRL 40 435 PRL 41 684 PL 728 273 PRL 39 252 PRL 39 1240
+Bonvicini, Drel[. Frey. Luth (LBL, MIEN, SLAC) +Baru, Blinov, Bondar+ (NOVO) +Hassard, Hempstead, KinosMta4 {CLEO Collab) +Horstkotte, Imlay+ (CUSB Collab) +Giannini, Lee Franzini+ (CUSB Codab) +Berkelman, Billing, Cabenda+ (CLEO Colla6 ) ~Costantini, Einocchiaro {COLU, STON) -Brown, Herb, Hom, Fisk+ (FNAL, COLU, STON) +Appel, Her6, Horn+ (STON, FNAL. COLU) +Herb, Horn, Lederman+ (COLU, FNAL, STON) tlwata, Fabjan+ (BNL, CERN, SYRA, YALE) +Horn, Lederman, Appel, Ito+ (COLU,FNAL, STON) +Appel, Brown, Herb, Horn+ (COLU, FNAL, STON)
VII. 164
Meson Full Listings T(4S) = T(10580), T(10860), T(11020), Non-q~ Candidates
IT(4S) or T{,o,80)l
IG(J PC)
=
??(1
Ia(J PC) =
IT(11o2o)I
)
77(1
)
T(11020) MASS 7(45) MASS VALUE (GeV)
DOCUMENT ID
VALUE (GeV) TEEN
10.5800:t:0.0035 1 BEBEK 87 CLEO e+ e - ~ hadrons • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • 10.5774±0.0010
2 LOVELOCK
85
CUSB
e+ e -
~
DOCUMENT tO
11 0 1 9 ± 0 . 0 0 5 ± 0 . 0 0 7 11.020±0.030
BESSON LOVELOCK
COMMENT
85 85
CLEO CUSB
e+ e - ~ e+ e ~
TEEN
COMMENT
CLEO CUSB
e~ e e+ e
hadrons hadrons
hadrons
T(11020) WIDTH
I Reanalysis of BESSON 85. 2 No systematic error given. VALUE (MeV~ 79 4-16 O U R A V E R A G E 61.0±13 ±22 900±20.0
T(45) WIDTH VALUE (MeV) 23.84-2.2 O U R A V E R A G E 20.0±2 ±4 25 ± 2 . 5
DOCUMENT ID BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
TEEN
COMMENT
CLEO CUSB
e+ e - ~ e+ e ~
Mode
Fraction ( F i / F ) (lO1±O.21)
BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
-~
hadrons hadrons
T(11020) DECAY MODES
F1
e+e
DOCUMENT ID
hadrons hadrons
T(4S) DECAY MODES
F1
TEEN
11.019+@008 OUR A V E R A G E
COMMENT
Mode
Fraction {Fi./F )
e+e
(1.6±0.5) x 10 - 6
T(11020) PARTIAL WIDTHS
× 10 5
r(e+e - ) T(4S) PARTIAL WIDTHS r(e+e - ) VALUE (keY) 0,24 4-0.05 O U R A V E R A G E 0.192±0,007±0.038 0.283±0.037
DOCUMENT ID TEEN COMMENT Error includes scale factor of 1.7. BESSON 85 CLEO e+ e ~ hadrons LOVELOCK 85 CUSB e+ e ~ hadrons
BEBEK
87
PR D36 1289
,Berkelrnan, Blucher, Cassel+
BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
PRL 54 381 PRL 54 377
+Green, Namjoshi, Sannes+ -Horstkotte. Klopfenstein+
ANDREWS FINOCCHI.
(CLEO Collab ) (CLEO Coflab ) (CUSB Collab I
80B PRL 45 219 80 PRL 45 222
85
PRL 54 381 PRL 54 377
85
2) Other
1 ( o86o)1
/6(jPC)
=
77(1
NOTE VALUE (GeV} 10.865:E0.C118 O U R A V E R A G E 10.868±0.006±0005 10.845±0020
non-q~
ON NON-qq
BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
hadrons hadrons
TEEN
COMMENT
CLEO CUSB
e+ e e+ e
~ ~
hadrons hadrons
T(10860) DECAY MODES
F1
Mode
Fraction ( r i / r )
e*e
(2 8 ± 0 . 7 ) × 10 6
T(10860) PARTIAL WIDTHS CJOCUMENT tO TECN COMMENT Error includes scale factor of 1.3. BESSON 85 CLEO e+ e ~ hadrons LOVELOCK 85 CUSB e + e ~ hadrons
T(I0860) REFERENCES BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
PRL 54 381 PRL 54 877
~ ~
hadrons hadrons
(CLEO Collab } (CUSB Collab)
CANDIDATES candidates:
q~q~
and q~g
hybrids.
for possible bound states.
MESONS
m a y be bound states in(luding gluons:
+Green, Namjoshi, Sannes~ +Horstkotte, Klopfenstein +
gluonia or glueballs,
Another example of non-qq mesons could
be multiquark states. For detailed reviews see, e.g., CLOSE 87. C O O P E R 86, M E S H K O V 86, HEUSCH 86, T O K I 88. T h e theoretical guidance on the properties of unusual states is often contradictory, and models which agree in the q~ sector often differ in their predictions about new states. A m o n g the naively expected signatures for gluonium are: (i) no place in qq llOnets~ (ii) flavor-singlet couplings, (iii) enhanced production in gluon-rich channels such as
r(e+e - ) VALUE (keV) 0.31 4-0.01 O U R A V E R A G E 0.22 ± 0 . 0 5 ± 0 . 0 7 0.365±0070
e+ e e+ e -
that in addition to the conventional q~ meson states, there
T(10860) WIDTH DOCUMENT ID
CLEO CUSB
T h e existence of a gluon self coupling in QCD suggests
DOCUMENT ID TEEN COMMENT Error includes scale factor of 1.1. BESSON 85 CLEO e~ e ~ LOVELOCK 85 CUSB e+ e ~
and hybrids (q~.q).
VALUE (MeV) 110 + 1 3 OUR AVERAGE 112.0+17 ± 2 3 110.0±15.0
COMMENT
,Green, Namjoshi, Sarlrles+ ÷Horstkotte Klopfenstein+
See also N N ( 1 1 0 0 - 3 6 0 0 )
)
7(10860) MASS
85 85
TECN
We include here mini-reviews and reference lists on non-q~-candidates. These are divided into two subsections: 1) Gluonium candidates, and
(CLEO Collab ) (CUSB Collab )
* Berkelman, Cabenda. Cassel+ Finocchiaro, Giannini, Lee Franzini*
BESSON LOVELOCK
NON-q
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
- -
DOCUMENT ID
T(11020) REFERENCES BESSON LOVELOCK
7(45) REFERENCES
F1
VALUE (keV) 0.1304,0.030 OUR A V E R A G E 0095-t-0.03 ± 0 . 0 3 5 0.156±0.040
(CLEO Collab ) (CUSB Callab.)
J/~,(18) decay, (iv) reduced 72' coupling, (v) exotic q u a n t u m numbers not allowed for qq (in some cases).
However it lnust be pointed out t h a t mixing effects and other dynanfical effects will obscure these simple signatures. If the inixing is large, onlv counting the number of observed states remains a clear signal for non-exotic non-q~ states.
Meson Full Listings
See key on page IV.I
#J(4415), Bottomonium ¢(4415) BRANCHING RATIOS
rllr
F(hadrons)/l'total VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
¢lominant
SIEGRIST
76
TECN
COMMENT
MRK1
e+ e -
NOTE
¢ ( 4 4 1 5 ) REFERENCES BRANDELIK KNIES 51EGRIST
78C PL 76B 361 77 Hamburg Syrup. 93 76 PRL 36 700
- BURMESTER 77 LUTH 77
+Cc~ds+
(AACH. DESY, HAMB, MPIM. TOKY) (PLUTO Coltab.) (LBL, SLAC)
+Abrams, Boyarski. Breidenbach+
DETERMINATIONS
OF
As is the case for d/W(1S) and ~(2S), the full widths of the b o u n d bb states T(1S),
T(2S), and T(3S) are not
directly measurable, since they are much smaller t h a n the
O T H E R R E L A T E D PAPERS - -
PL 66B 395 PL 70B 120
ON WIDTH
THE T STATES
+Criegee+ (DESY, HAMB, SIEG. WUPP) +Pierre, Abrams. Alarn. Boyarski+ (LBL. SLAC)
energy resolution of the e+e - storage rings where these states are produced.
The c o m m o n indirect m e t h o d to determine F
starts from
r = F~t/B~t ,
(1)
T(I1020) T00a60) T(4S)
BB threshold
b(3s)
T(as)
Xbo
xbe(eP)
hadrons
vb(2s) ladl
THE BOTTOMONIUM
T(1S)
jPC
=
0-+
1--
SYSTEM
Y
1+ -
0 ++
1++
2++
T h e level scheme of the bb states showing experimentally established states with solid lines. Singlet states are called /]b and hb, triplet states T and XbJ. In parentheses it is sufficient to give the radial q u a n t u m n u m b e r a n d the orbital angular m o m e n t u m to specify the states with all their q u a n t u m numbers. E.g., hb(2P) m e a n s 21P1 with n = 2, L = 1, S = 0, J = 1, P C = + - . I f found, D-wave states would be called qb(nD) and T j ( n D ) , with J = 1,2,3 and n = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , . . . . For the Xb states, the spins of only the X.b2(1P) and Xbl(1P) have been experimentally established. T h e spins of the other Xb are given as the preferred values, based on the q u a r k o n i u m models. T h e figure also shows the observed hadronic and radiative transitions.
VI1.158
Meson Full Listings T(1S)
= T(9460)
where Fgg is one leptonic partial width and Be~ is the corresponding branching fraction (g = e, #, or r). One then assumes e-#-r universality and uses F~f
I T(lS) or T(9460) 1
Fee
T(15)
Bet = average of B~,e, Bin, and B ~ .
(2)
The electronic partial width £~: is also not directly measurable at e+e storage rings, only' the combination Pe~Fhad/F, where Fhad is the hadronic partial width and Phad + 3F,,,,
VALUE (MeV) 9461).32:1_0.22 OUR AVERAGE
MASS
ideogram hadrons hadrons hadrons
1Value includes data of ARTAMONOV 82.
(3)
F .
cr(e+e
77(] --)
DOCUMENT ID TEEN COMMENT Error includes scale factor of 2.5. See the below. BARU 86 REDE e+ e ~ 1 ARTAMONOV 84 REDE e+ e ~ MACKAY 84 REDE e+ e - ~
9460.59±0.12 9460.6 ±0.4 9459.97~0.11±0.07
WEIGHTED AVERAGE 9 4 6 0 . 3 2 - 0.22 (Error scaled by 2.5)
This combination is obtained experimentally from the energyintegrated hadronic cross section
,
=
IG(J PC)
I
- - T -+ hadrons)dE
~SOIIRIIC(~
-~
6rrr,~rh.a c,, . - M 6rr2 r!l~)r,,,.tCio),: r g
(4)
'
where M is the T mass, and Cr and C! O) are radiative correction factors. Cr is used for obtaining P,,~, as (tefined in
X
....... .....
Eq. (1) and contains corrections from all orders of QED for describing (bb) -+ e+e . The lowest order QED value p(0/ relevant for the comparison with potential-model calculations, is defined by the lowest order QED graph (Born term) alone and is about 7% lower than F,.,.. In the past, this distinction had been overlooked by some authors as pointed out by ALEXANDER 89, BARU 86, C O O P E R 86, KOENIGSMANN 86, and others. The Listings give experinlental results Oll B,.,,, Bin,, Brr, mid PeeFh~,t/F- The entries of the latter quantity tlave been re-evaluated using consistently the correction procedure of KURAEV 85. The partial width F,, is obtained from the average values for
F,.,.Fhad/Fand Bee using
W 9459.5
\ ~
, ~'~/A 9460.0
T(lS)
BARU ARTAMONOV
9460.5
86 84
9461.5
9462.0
mass ( M e V )
T(1S) WIDTH VAL UE (keV] 52.1±2.1 OUR EVALUATION
DOCUMENT ID See T mini-review.
T(15)
DECAY MODES
Mode
Fraction (Fi/'r)
Confidence level
rI
T+ 7
(2.97±0.35) %
(5)
F2 F3
I~ tz e+ e
(2.57-*0.07) % (2.52±0.17) %
The total width F is then obtained front Eq. (1). \Vc do not list P~,,, and F values of individual experiments. The F,,,. values in the Meson Summary Table are also those defined in Eq. (1) and no longer the lowest order quantities r(°) ~ee
F4
J/¢9(1S)
r5
/,,~
[,,,,,
r,,,£h.d F(1 - 3Bee)
5.1
12~" Level = 0 . 0 0 2 }
(Confid . . . .
9461.0
REDE REDE
Hadronic decays
•
anything
(1.1 ±0.4 ) × 10 3 x i0 3
< 21
90%
Radiative decays r6
-vq'(958)
< 13
x io 3
90%
r7
7~/
< 3.5
x 10 - 4
90°/0
r8
h f~(1525)
< 1.35
× 10 - 4
90%
F9 FIO
n'f2(1720) ~ ~,f2(1270)
"?,KK
<64 < 48
xl0 ×10
5 5
90% 90%
Fll
^,f4(2220) ~
7K+K
< 1.5
×i0
S
90%
T(15) r(i)r(e +e )/r(total)
ror3/r
F(hadrons) x F(e + e-)/rtota, VALUE (keV~
DOCUMENT tO
TEEN
COMMENT
EBAL CLEO CUSB DASP LENA CNTR PLUT
e+ e+ e+ e+ e+ e+ e+
1.24:t-0.04 OUR AVERAGE 1.23±0.02±0.05 137±006±0.09 1.17±0.06±010 1.23@008±0,04 113±007±011 1.09±0.25 1 35±014
2 JAKUBOWSKI 3 GILES 3 TUTS 3 ALBRECHT 3 NICZYPORUK 3 BeCK 4 BERGER
88 84B 83 82 82 80 79
ee e e e ee-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons
2 Radiative corrections evaluated following KURAEV 85. 3 Radiative corrections reevaluated by 8UCHMUELLER 88 following KURAEV 85. 4 Radiative corrections reevaluated by ALEXANDER 89 using B(##) = 0.026.
VII.159
Meson Full Listings T(IS) = T(9460)
See key on page IV. 1
T(15) PARTIAL WIDTHS
VALUE (units 20- 5 )
r3
yALUE (keYI !L.34+0.04 OUR EVALUATION
<13 <81
T(IS) BRANCHINGRATIOS rl/r TEEN
r(')'f4(2220)
COMMENT
±0.002
0.034 ± 0 . 0 0 4
±0.004
5 ALBRECHT GILES
5Using B(T(15) ~
ee) = B ( T ( 1 S ) ~
85C ARG
T(2S)
83
e+ e -
CLEO
~
~+~
# # ) = 0.0256; not used for width evaluations.
r2/r EVTS
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
TEEN
COMMENT
")' K +
11 A L B R E C H T SCHMITT
89 88
ARG CBAL
T(15) ~ T(15)~
TEEN
COMMENT
?~r+ 7r"iX
K-)/rtota,
EL%
rn/r
DOCUMENT ID
< 2.9 <20
90 90
12ALBRECHT 12 B A R U
89 89
< 31
90
12 BEAN
86 CLEO
12Including unknown branching ratio of f4(2220) ~
COMMENT
ARG MD1
T(15)~ T(15) ~
-~K+K ~/K + K -
T(I5) ~
7 K-- K -
K + K-.
0.02.57=E0.0007 OUR AVERAGE 0.0252±0.0007±0.0007
CHEN
89B CLEO
0.0261 ± 0.0009 ± 0.0011
KAARSBERG
89
0.0230/-0.0025+0.0013
86
CSB2
e+ e -
I
~
#+/~-e+ e- ~ p+/~-T(25)
I
ALBRECHT
87 ARG
0.0284±0.0018J.0.0020
BESSON
84
CLEO
0.027 + 0 . 0 0 3 : 1 - 0 . 0 0 3
ANDREWS
83
CLEO
~+ 7r-/z+/zT(25) 7r+ ~r-- # + # e+ e -
0.0270±0.0028±0.0014
TUTS
83
CUSB
e+ e -
0.032 ± 0 . 0 1 3
-F0.003
ALBRECHT
82
DASP
e+ e -
0.038 ± 0 . 0 1 5
±0.002
N I C Z Y P O R U K 82
LENA
e+ e /~+#-
0.014 + - 0 0.034 .014
BOCK
80
CNTR
e+e #+#--
£).022 ± 0 . 0 2 0
BERGER
79
PLUT
e+ e -
TEEN
COMMENT
#+#-
/~+p-
#+#-
r (e + e-)/rtota I
ra/r
VALUE
EVT5
DOCUMENT ID
(I.0252:£0.0017 OUR AVERAGE 0.0242 ± 0.0014 ± 0.0014 CL028 ± 0 . 0 0 3
307
±0.002
CL051 ~0.030
ALBRECHT
87 ARG
BESSON
84
BERGER
80C P L U T
CLEO
T(25) ?r+ T r - e + e T(2S) ?r+ T r - e + e e+ e e+ e-
['(J/~b(15)
anything)/rtota I ~_/ALUE(units lO 3) CL O/~o
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMEN!
6 FULTON 89 CLEO e+ e - ~ # + / 7 I, • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • <20
90
6 U s i n g B((J/~b) - -
N I C Z Y P O R U K 83
#+/~
X
I
) = (6.9 ± 0.9)%.
rs/r 4)
EL%
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
90
N I C Z Y P O R U K 83
LENA
~ZALUE (units I0 -3 )
EL%
DOCUMENT IO
TEEN
COMMENT
<13
90
SCHMITT
CBAL
T(1S) ~
<21
rb/r
r (TT/(958))/rtotal
88
? X
I
r7/r
r(1,~)/rtotal VALUE (units i0-4) <3.5
EL%
DOCUMENT IO
90
SCHMITT
EL%
DOCUMENT ID
88
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL
T(1S) ~
TECN
COMMENT
~f
X
I
r(7 f~(1525))/rtotal
V_'ALUE(units 10 5)
rg/r
<13.5 90 7BEAN 86 CLEO T - - ~ ~K+K • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • <19.4
90
7Assuming B(f~(1525) ~ r(Tf2(1720)-~
V_ALUE (units 10 5)
7ALBRECHT KK)
7KK~/rtota
89
ARG
T(15)~
TEEN
COMMENT
-
~K+K
= 0.71. I
CL~
rg/r
DOCUMENT IO
< 3.2 90 8 BEAN 86 CLEO T ( 1 5 ) ~ ~ K + K • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • < 5.0 < 2.1 <43 < 2.6
I
LENA
r'(plr)/rtotal VALUE (units lO
--OTHER
r4/r
1.1-1-0.4<-0.2
90 90 90 90
8 A s s u m i n g B(f2(1720 ) ~ 9Assuming B(f2(l?20) ~ 10Assuming B(f2(1720 ) ~
8ALBRECHT 9ALBRECHT 10 S C H M I T T 9 BEAN K+ K 7r+~r
) -- 1.0. ) = 1.0.
T/~I) = 1.0.
89 89 88 86
ARG ARG CBAL ELEO
T(15) ~ T(1S) ~ T(15) ~
T(I5) ~
?K+K "fTr+Tr q X ~Tr + 7r
T(IS) REFERENCES FULTON 90B PR D41 1 4 0 1 +Hempstead (CLEO Collab) ALBRECHT 89 ZPHY C42 349 +Boeckmann,Glaeser, Harder+ (ARGUS Collab.) ALEXANDER 89 NP B320 45 +Bonvicini, Drell, Frey. Luth (LBL, MICH, SLAC) BARU 89 ZPHY C42 505 +Beilin, Blinov+ (NOVO) CHEN 89B PR D39 3528 +Mcllwain, Miller+ (CLEO Collab.) FULTON 89 PL B224 445 +Haas, Hempstead÷ (CLEO Collab.) KAARSBERG 89 PRL 62 2077 +Heintz+ (CUSB Collab.) BUCHMUEL.. 88 HE e+ e Physics 412 Buchmuetler, Cooper (HANN, MIT) Editors: A. All and P. Soeding, World Scientific, Singapore JAKUBOWSKI 88 ZPHY C40 49 ~Antreasyan,Barrels+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) IGJPC SCHMITT 88 ZPHY C40 199 +Antreasyan+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) ALBRECHT 87 ZPHY C35 283 +Binder, Boeckmann, Glaeser+ (ARGUS Collab.) RARU 86 ZPHY C30 551 +81inov. Bondar, Bukin+ (NOVO) BEAN 86 PR D34 9O5 ~Bobbink, Brock, Engler+ (CLEO Collab) ALBRECHT 8SC PL 154B 452 +DrescheL Heller+ (ARGUS Collab.) KURAEV 85 SJNP 41 466 +Fadin (ASCI) Translated from YAF 41 733. ARTAMONOV 84 RE 137B 272 +8aru, Blinov, Bondar+ (NOVO) BESSON 84 PR Da0 1433 ~Green, Hicks, Namjoshi, Sannes+ (CLEO Collab.) GILES 84B PR D29 1285 tHassard, Hempstead, Kinoshita+ (CLEO Collab.) MACKAY 04 PR D29 2483 +Hasard, Giles, Hempstead+ (CUSB Collab.) ANDREWS 83 PRL EO 807 +Avery, Berkelman, Cassel+ (CLEO Collab.) GILES 83 PRL 50 877 + (HARV, OSU, ROCH, RUTG, SYRA, VAND+) NICZYPORUK 83 ZPHY C17 197 +Jakubowski,Zeludziewicz+ (LENA Collab.) TUTS 83 CornedCone 284 (CUSB Collab.) ALBRECHT 82 PL 116B 383 +Hofmann+ (DESY, DORT, HELD, LUND, ITEP) ARTAMONOV 82 PL II8B 225 +Baru, Blinov, 8ondar, Bukin. Groshev(NOVO) NICZYPORUK 82 ZPHY ClS 299 +Folger, Bienlein+ (LENA Collab.) BERGER 80C PL 93B 497 +lackas+ (AACH, DESY, HAMB, SIEG, WUPP) ROCK 8O ZPHY C6 125 +Blanar, Blum+ (HELD, MPIM. DESY, HAMB) BERGER 79 ZPHY Cl 343 +Alexandert (AACH, DESY, HAM8, SIEG, WUPG)
COOPER KOENIGS.. ALBRECHT ARTAMONOV ARTAMONOV MAGERAS MUELLER NICZYPORUK ALBRECHT ANDREWS BOHRINGER KOURKOU... ANGELIS BADIER DARDEN BERGER 81ENLEIN DARDEN GARELICK KAPLAN YOH COBB HERB INNES
86 86 84 84 82 81
81 81 80 80 80 80 79 79 79 78 78 78 78 70 78 77 77 77
I
7r~r) = 0.84.
< 1.5 90 12 F U L T O N 90B CLEO T ( L S ) ~ ? K + K • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
r(#+#-)/rtota, VALUE
--*
VALUE (units 10 5)
O.(T297=EO.O035 OUR AVERAGE 0.027 ± 0 . 0 0 4
DOCUMENT ID
90 90
11Using B(f2(1270 ) ~
l'(r+ r-)/rtota, DOCUMENT ID
EL%
< 4.8 90 11BEAN 86 £ L E O T ( 1 5 ) ~ "y~r~r • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
_DOCUMENT ID See T mini-review.
VALUE
rlo/r
r(~ f2(1270))/rtota I
r(~+~-)
Berkeley Conf. 67 DESY 88/136 PL 1348 137 PL 137B 272 PL 118B 225 PRL 46 1 1 1 5 PRL 46 1181 PRL 46 92 PL 93B 500 PRL 44 1 1 0 8 PRL 44 1 1 1 1 PL 91B 481 PL 87B 398 PL 86B 98 PL 80B 419 PL 76B 243 PE ?BB 360 PL 76B 246 PR D18 945 PRL 40 435 PRL 41 684 PL 728 273 PRL 39 252 PRL 39 1240
RELATED PAPERS-(MIT Roenigsmann (DESY) +Drescher, Heller+ (ARGUS Collab +Baru, Blinov, Bondar+ (NOVO) +Baru, Blinov, Bondar, Bukin, G~oshev+ (NOVO +Bohringer, Finocchiaro+ (COLU, STON, LSU, MPIM + (RUTG. SYRA, LEMO, VAND, CORN, ITHA+ +Jakubowski, geludziewicz, Folger+ (LENA Collab +Hofmann+ (DESY, DORT, HELD, LUND +Berkelman, Billing, Cabenda+ (CLEO Collab. +Costantini, Finocchiaro (COLU, STON) Kourkoumelis+ (ATHU, NTUA, BNL, CERN÷ +Besch, Blumenfeld+ (CERN, COLU, OXF, ROCK +Boucrot+ (SACL, CERN, CDEF. EPOL, LALO +Hofmann, Schubert+ (DESY, DORT, HELD, LUND +Alexander+ (AACH, DESY, HAM8, SIEG, WUPG +Glawe, Bock, Blanar÷ (DESY.HAMB, HELD, MPIM +Hofmann, Schubert+ (DESY, DORT, HELD, LUND +Gauthier, Hicks, Oliver+ (NEAS. WASH, TUFT +Appel, Herb, Horn+ (STON, FNAL, COLU +Herb, Horn, Lederman(COLU, FNAL, STON +lwata, Fabjan+ (BNL, CERN, SYRA, YALE +Horn, Lederman, Appel, Ito+ (COLU, FNAL, STON +AppeL Brown, Herb, Horn+ (COLU, FNAL, STON
I I
I I
VII.160
Meson Full Listings Xb0(Im) = Xoo(9860), X0~(im) = Xb1(9890), Xo2(IP) ---- Xo2(9915)
I Xbo(1P)I
Xb1(1P) DECAY M O D E S IG(J PC)
or Xbo(9860)
=
??(0
preferred + + ) Mode
Fraction ( F i / F )
7T(lS)
(35±8) %
J needs c o n f i r m a t i o n . rl
Observed in radiative decay of the T ( 2 5 ) , therefore C = + . B r a n c h i n g ratio requires E1 transition, M 1 is strongly disfavored, therefore P = + .
Xbo(1P) VALUE (MeV~
I" ('T T ( 1 S ) ) / r t o t a VALUE
MASS
DOCUMENT ID
TECN
COMMENT
9860.0±0.5/_1.4 9858.3± 1.6±2.7 9864.1±7 ± i • • • We do not use the following
1 ALBRECHT 85E ARG 1 NERNST 85 CBAL 1 HAAS 84 C L E O data for averages, fits, limits,
T(25) ~ conv. ~ X T(25) ~ 7 X T(25) -- conv. 7 X etc. • • •
9872.8±0.7±5.0
1 KLOPFEN...
T(25) ~
CUSB
"y X
,y ENERGYIN T(2S) DECAY DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
I
rl/r DOCUMENT ID
0.32±0.06±0.07 0.47±0.18
WALK KLOPFEN...
Xbl (1P) SKWARNICKI WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN. PAUSS
1From I' energy below, assuming T ( 2 5 ) mass - 10023.4 MeV.
VALUE (MeV)
BRANCHING RATIOS
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL CUSB
T(25) ~ T(25)~
0.354-0.08 OUR AVERAGE
9859.84-1.3 OUR AVERAGE
83
Xbl(1P)
87 86 85E 85 84 83 83
PRL 58 972 PR D34 2 6 1 1 PL 160B 331 PRL 54 2 1 9 5 PRL 52 799 PRL 51 160 PL t30B 439
86 83
.-f.y~-f%?f+.~
REFERENCES
~Antreasyan, Besset~ (Crystal BaH Coliab.)J +Zschorsch+ (Crysta~ Ball Collab.) +Orescher, Heller4 (ARGUS Collab) ÷Antreasyan, Aschman+ (Crystal Ball Collab) ÷Jensen. Kagan, Kass Behrends+ (CLEO Collab.) Klopfenstein, Horstkotte+ (CUSB Collab.} +Oietl, Eigen+ (MPIM, COLU, CORN, LSU. STON)
COMMENT
162.34-1.3 OUR AVERAGE 1621±0.54-1.4 ALBRECHT 8SE ARG 163.8±1.6±2.7 NERNST 85 CBAL 158.0±7 4-1 HAAS 84 CLEO • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits,
T ( 2 5 ) ~ conv. "r X T(25) ~ 7 X T ( 2 S ) ~ conv. ~f X etc. • • •
149.4±0.7±5.0
T(25) ~
KLOPFEN...
83
CUSB
7 X
I
x
Mode
Fraction ( r i / r )
"yT(15)
<6 %
I
= J needs confirmation.
Observed in radiative decay of the T ( 2 S ) , therefore C = + . B r a n c h i n g ratio requires E1 transition, M1 is strongly disfavored, therefore P = + . J = 2 from S K W A R N I C K I 87.
Xbo(1P) DECAYMODES rl
(iP)
or Xb2(9915)I
Confidence level Xb2(1P)
90% VALUE (MeV~
rl/r
r('~T(15))/Ftotal VALUE ~ DOCUMENTIO TEEN COMMENT <0.06 90 WALK 86 CBAL T ( 2 5 ) ~ ?*H~+ • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • 90
PAUSS
83
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB CUSB
T(25) T(2S) T(25) T(25) T(25) T(25)
9913.24-0.6 OUR AVERAGE
Xbo(1P) BRANCHING RATIOS
<0.ii
MASS
DOCUMENT ID
CUSB T ( 2 5 ) ~
7 ? ~ + f-
9915.8±1.1±1.3 9912.2±0.3±09 9912.4±0.8±2.2 9913.3±0.7±10 9914.610.3±20 9914.0±40
I I i i i i
WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN... PAUSS
86 85E 85 84 83 83
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
%'H'~*~ conv. 7 X 7 X cony. -v X "~ X "~7~+,~-
1 From % energy below, assuming T ( 2 5 ) mass = 10023,4 MeV.
Xbo(1P) REFERENCES WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN.. PAUSS
I
86 8SE 85 84 83 83
Xbl(1P)
PR D34 2 6 1 1 PL 1608 331 PRL 54 2 1 9 5 PRL 52 799 PRL 51 160 PL 130B 439
+Zschorsch+ (Crystal Ball Collab) +Ore%her, Heller(ARGUS Collab.) +Antreasyan, Aschman~ (Crystal Ball Collab.) +Jensen, Kagan, Kass, Behrends~ (CLEO Collab.) Klopfenstein, Horstkotte+ (CUSB Collab) +Dietl, Eigen+ (MPIM, COLU, CORN, LSU, STONI
I
:
or Xb1(9890) 1
J needs confirmation.
-y E N E R G Y VALUE (MeV)
IN T ( 2 5 )
DECAY
DOCUMENT tO
TECN
COMMENT
CBAL ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB CUSB
T(2S) T(25) T(2S) T(25) T(25) T(25)
109.6=t=0.6 OUR AVERAGE 107.0±11±1.3 110.6±03±0.9 110.4±08±2.2 109.5~0.711.0 108.2±0.3=2.0 108.8±40
WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN... PAUSS
Xb2(1P) Observed in radiative decay of the T ( 2 5 ) , therefore C = + . B r a n c h i n g ratio requires E1 transition, M1 is strongly disfavored, therefore P = + . J = 1
DECAY
86 85E 85 84 83 83
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --
7~,f+ cony. 7X cony. 7X ~r'q +
~-~ X 7X [
MODES
Mode
Fraction ( F i / F )
"rT(15)
(22±4) %
from S K W A R N I C K I 87. F1 Xbl(1P) VALUE (MeV~
MASS
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
Xb2(1P)
COMMENT
9891,9+0.7 OUR AVERAGE 9890.84-0.94-1.3 9890.8±0.3/-11 9892.0±0.84-2.4 9893.6±0.8±1.0 9894.4±0.44-3.0 9892.04-3.0
1 WALK 1 ALBRECHT 1 NERNST i HAAS 1 KLOPFEN... 1 PAUSS
86 85E 85 84 83 83
CBAL ARG CBAL CLEO CUS8 CUSB
T(25) T(25) T(25) T(25) T(2S) T(25)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
7R,t + ~cony. -~ X "Y X conv. "r X "r X ",Tt+t
VALUE
VALUE (MeV)
DOCUMENT IO
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB CUSB
T(25) T(25) T(25) T(25) T(25) T(2S)
130.64-0.7 OUR AVERAGE WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN... PAUSS
86 85E 85 84 83 83
FI/F
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
7~f + cony. ~, X 7 X cony. 7 X ~, X 7--ff+ f -
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL CUSB
T(25) ~ T(25)~
0.22:E0,04 OUR AVERAGE 0.27±0.06:E0.06 020±0.05
WALK KLOPFEN...
Xb2(1P)
"~ ENERGY IN T(25) DECAY
RATIOS
DOCUMENT ID
I From 7 energy below, assuming T ( 2 5 ) mass = 10023.4 MeV.
131.7±0.9±1.3 131.7±0.3/_1.1 130.6±[email protected] 129.04-0.8/_1.0 128.1±0.4±3.0 130.64-3.0
BRANCHING
r(-yT(15))/rtotal
SKWARNICKI WALK ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN PAUSS
87 86 85E 85 84 83 83
PRL 58 972 PR D34 2 6 1 1 PL 1608 331 PRL 54 2 1 9 5 PRL 52 799 PRL 51 160 PL 130B 439
86 83
%~+ £%~fFF.~
REFERENCES
+Antreasyan, Besset (Crystal Ball Colbb)J ~Zschorsch~ (Crystal Ball Collab) +Drescher, Heller+ (ARGUS Coliab) +Antreasyan, Aschrnan+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) +Jensen, Kagan, Kass, Behren0st (CLEO Collab) KIopfenstein, Horstkotte+ (CUSB Colbb) +Dietl, Eigen~ (MPIM, COLU. CORN, LSU, STON) I
VI1.161
Meson Full Listings T(2S) = T(10023)
See key on page IV.1
IT(2S)
or T(10023)
r(,+,-)Irtota,
I
I G ( J PC) =
??(I--)
r3/r
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
0.017::E0.015-1-0.006
HAAS
T(2S) VALUE (GeV)
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
86B REDE e+ e- ~ 84 REDE e+ e- ~
hadrons hadrons
VALUE (keV~
90
DOCUMENT ID
<0.008
90
LURZ
~
DO~VMENT ID
DECAY MODES Fraction ( r i / r )
Confidence level
rl F2
T(15)~r+~r T(iS)Tr07r 0
(18.5 4-0.8 ) % ( 8.8 4-1.1 ) %
r3
7-+T -
( 1.7 4-1.6 ) %
r4 r5 F6
#+#e+e T(1S)Tr °
( 1.374-0.26)% ( 1.364-0.26)% < 8 x 10 - 3
90%
F7
T(1S)F/
<
90%
2
× 10 . 3
R a d i a t i v e decays ( 6,7 4-0.9 ) %
7Xbl(1P)
F9 7Xb2(1P) rio ~/Xbo(IP)
( 6.6 + 0 . 9 ) %
rn r12
"ff2(1720) 3'f~(1525)
< <
r13
7f2(1270)
<
F14
~f f4(2220)
( 4.3 59 5.3
4.1.0
)% x 10 - 4 x 10- 4
90% 90%
x 10 - 4
90%
2.41
0.54 4-0.07 +0.09 -0.05 0.41 4-0.18
JAKUBOWSKI GILES TUTS ALBRECHT
88 84B 83 82
TEEN
COMMENT
CBAL CLEO CUSB DASP
e+ e+ e+ e+
~ ~ ~ ~
hadrons hadrons hadrons hadrons
3 NICZYPORUK 81£ LENA
e+ e - ~
hadrons
3 BOCK
e+ e - ~
hadrons
80
eeee-
I
CNTR
ALBRECHT
87
ARG
<0.007
90
LURZ
87
CBAL
<0.010
90
BESSON
84
CLEO
hadrons. See T minl-review.
BRANCHING
RATIOS
rz/r
I" ( T ( 1 S ) I t + 7 r - ) / r t o t a l EVTS
0.185+0.008 OUR AVERAGE 0.1814-0.0054-0.010 Ii.6k
ALBRECHT
87
0.1694-0.040
GELPHMAN
85
0.191±0.0124-0.006 0.18910.026
BESSON FONSECA
84 84
0.21 ±0.07
7
TEEN
COMMENT
ARG CBAL
e+ e - ~ MM e+ e -
CLEO CUSB
r + 7r- MM e+ e -
lr+ ~ -
e+e-~4-~
EVT$
e+ e -
r2/r DOCUMENT /D
ALBRECHT GELPHMAN FONSECA
COMMENT •
•
•
e+e - ~ MM e+e - ~ 3~r0 )
~r+r-t-l-t /±£-(~,,f.
DOCUMENT ID
0.067-1-0.009 OUR AVERAGE 0.091±0.018+0.022 0.065±0.007±0.012 0.080+0.017 ± 0,016 0.059±0.014
ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN...
85E 85 84 83
TECN
COMMENT
ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB
e+ e e+e e+ ee+e -
TEEN
COMMENT
ARG CBAL CLEO CUSB
e+e - ~ e+e - ~ e+e - ~ e+e - ~
T~N
COMMENT
~ ~
7 conv X
~
~X
~fX ~ "-f cony X
rg/r
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
0.0~,=EO.009 OUR AVERAGE 0.0984-0.0214-0.024 0.058 4- 0.007 + 0.010 0,1024-0.0184-0.021 0.061±0.014
ALBRECHT NERNST HAAS KLOPFEN...
8SE 85 84 83
~convX -IX ",, conv X 7X rl0/r
DOCUMENT ID
0.043:1:0.010 OUR AVERAGE 0.064±0.014±0.016 ALBRECHT 8SE ARG 0.0364-0.0084-0.009 NERNST 85 CBAL 0.0444-0.0234-0.009 HAAS 84 CLEO • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, KLOPFEN...
83
e + e - ~ 3"convX e+e - ~ ~,X e+ e - ~ ~f cony X etc. • • •
CUSB
rn/r CL.~
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
<59 90 5 ALBRECHT 89 ARG T(25) ~ 7K + K• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • 90
6ALBRECHT
89
ARG
T(25)~
?~r+~r -
r(7 f~(1525))/rtotal
rz2/r
VALUE (units 10-5 )
CL~.~o
<53
90
DOCUMENT ID
7 ALBRECHT
TEEN
87 ARG 85 CBAL 84 CUSB
COMMENT
e+ e - ~ e+ e - ~ e+ e - ~
r (7f 2 ( 1 2 7 0 ) ) / r t o t a
89
TEEN
COMMENT
ARG
T(25) ~
TEEN
COMMENT
ARG
T(25)~
TEEN
COMMENT
r13/r
I
VALUE (units 10-5 /
EL%
<24.1
9~-
8Using B(f2(1270) ~
VALUE (units 10 5)
"/K + K -
K K ) = 0.71.
DOCUMENT ID
8
~
T
89
77r+~r -
~T~)=0.84 r14/r CL~4
DOCUMENT ID
• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
t+ {- ~ + ~r-
NICZYPORUK 81B LENA
~r0 ~rO)/ rtota '
0.068:1:0.011 OUR AVERAGE 0.095 4- 0.019 4- 0.019 25 0.0804-0.015 0,103 4- 0.023
~ E- 7"f
r (7 f4(2220))/rtotal -
t + ~ - ~r+ Tr-
VALUE
e+ e - ~
re/r
r(7Xbl(1P))/rtotal VALUE
7Re-evaluated assuming B(f~(1525) ~ T(2S)
COMMENT
5Re-evaluated assuming B(f2(1720 ) ~ K + K - ) = 0.19. 6Includes unknown branching ratio of f2(1720) ~ 7r+ ~r-. rs
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
90
< 5.9
PARTIAL WIDTHS
e+ e - ~
#+ #-
r (7 f2(1720))/rtotal I
r(e±e-) VALUE (keV~
87 CBAL
<0.005
0.0354-0.014
2 Radiative corrections evaluated foflowing KURAEV 85. 3 Radiative corrections reevaluated by BUCHMUELLER 88 following KURAEV 85.
I].5864"0,029 OUR EVALUATION
TEEN
<0.002 90 FONSECA 84 CUSB • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc.
VALUE (units 10-5 )
T(2S)
e+ e - ~
rT/r
VALUE
r0rs/r DOCUMENT ID
2 3 3 3
#4- /k#4-##+ p-
r (7x~o(1P))/rtotaI
r(hadrons) x r ( e + e - ) / r t o t a l OUR AVERAGE 4-0.02 4-0.04 4-0.05 4-0.07
e- ~ e- ~ e- ~ •
r ( 7 Xb2(Z O ) ) / r t o t a l
r(i)r(e + e-)/r(total)
VALUE (keV~
e+ e+ e+ •
r(T(ZS)~/)/rtotal
•
T(2S)
89 CSB2 85 ARG 84B CLEO limits, etc. •
rdr ~
DOCUMENT ID
Mode
COMMENT
#+#-)=0.026
VALUE
VALUE
£( T ( 1 5 )
~+ T-
r(T(15)r°)/rtotal
WIDTH
See T mini-review.
T(25)
TEEN
NICZYPORUK 81c LENA
4Re-evaluated using B(T(1S) ~ T(2S)
VALUE
e+ e- ~
r4/r DOCUMENT'D
~
<0,038
1 Reanalysis of ARTAMONOV 84.
0.562:t:0.027 0.54 4-0.04 0.58 4-0.03 0.59 4-0.03 0.60 4-0.12
84B CLEO
0.0137+0.0026 OUR AVERAGE 0,01384-0.00254-0.0015 KAARSBERG 0.009 4-0.006 4-0,006 4 ALBRECHT 0,018 4-0,008 4-0,005 HAAS • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits,
MASS
10.0Q3304.:0.00031 OUR AVERAGE 10.0236 4-0.0005 1 BARU 10.0231 ±0.0004 BARBER
F8
COMMENT
r (#+ #-)/rtota ' VALUE
434-8 OUR EVALUATION
TEEN
7r0 ~ro £4- ~ r F t - ~r0 ~r0 ~ - £ - r 0 ~r0
<6.8
90
9 ALBRECHT
9Includes unknown branching ratio of f4(2220) ~
89
ARG
K+ K-.
T(2S) ~
7K + K-
I
VII.162
Meson Full Listings
T(25)-- T(I0023), Xu0(2m)=Xuo(10235),Xb1(2m)--Xb1(10255) XbO(2P) REFERENCES
T ( 2 5 ) REFERENCES ALBRECHT 89 ZPHY C42 34g +Boeckmann.Glaeser. Harder4 (ARGUS Collab ) KAARSBERG 89 PRL 62 2077 ~Heintz4 (CUSB Col~ab) BUCHMUEL 88 HE e+e Physics 412 Buchmueller, Cooper (HANN, MIT) Editors: A. All and P Soedin8, World Scientific. Singapore JAKUROWSKI 88 ZPHY C40 49 +Antreasyan,Barrels+ (Crystal Ball Collab)IGJRC ALBRECHT 07 ZPHY C35 283 +Binder, Boeckmann, Glaeser~ (ARGUS Collab.) LURZ 87 ZPHY C36 383 +Antreasyan,Besset+ (Crystal Ball Collab ) BARU 8EB ZPHY C32 662 +81inov, Bondar, Bukin(NOVO) ALBRECHT 85 ZPHY C20 45 +Dreschell, Heller~ (ARGUS Collab) ALBRECHT 85E PL 1gOB 331 +Drescher, Holler+ (ARGUS Collab) GELPHMAN 85 PR D l l 2893 ~Lurz, Antreasyan~ (Crystal Ball Collab ) KURAEV 85 SJNP 41 466 +Fadin (ASCI} Translated from YAF 41 733 NERNST 85 RRL 54 2 1 9 5 tAntreasyan, Aschman+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) ARTAMONOV 84 PL 137B 272 +Baru, Blinov, Bondar(NOVO) BARBER 84 PL 135B 498 + (DESY, ARGUS Collab.. Crystal Ball Collab) BESSON 84 PR D30 1433 +Green. Hicks, Namjoshi, Sannes+ (CLEO Collab) FONSECA 84 NP B242 31 ~MaBeras, Son, Dietl, EiBen4 (CUSB Collab) GILES 84B PR D29 1285 +Hassard, Hempstead, Kinoshita+ (CLEO Collab.) HAAS 84 PRL 52 799 +Jensen, KaBan, Kass, Behrends+ (CLEO Collab ) HAAS 84B PR D30 1996 +Jensen, Kagan, Kass, Behrends+ (CLEO Collab) KLOPFEN 83 PRL 51 160 Klopfenstein, Horstkotte+ {CUSB Collab.) TUTS 83 CornellConf. 284 (CUSB Collab) ALBRECHT 82 PL 116B 383 ~Hofmann+ (DESY, DOBT, HELD. LUND. ITEP) NICZYPORUK 81B PL 1.0OB 95 +Chen, Folger. Lurz+ (LENA Collab} NICZYPORUK 81C PL 99B 169 +Chert. VoseL Wegener+ (LENA Collab.) BOCK 80 ZPHY C6 125 { Blanaf, Blum(HELD, MPIM. DESY, HAMB) -
ALEXANDER COOPER WALK ALBRECHT ARTAMONOV ANDREWS GREEN MAGERAS MUELLER ANDREWS ARESTOV BOHRINGER KOURKOU UENO BIENLEIN DARDEN KAPLAN YOH COBB HERB INNES
89 06 86 84 84 83 82 81 8] 80 80 80 80 79 78 78 78 70 77 77 ?7
-
OTHER
NP B320 45 Berkeley Conf. 67 PR D34 2 6 1 1 PL 134B 137 PL IgTB 272 PRL 50 807 RRL 49 617 PRL 46 1115 PBL 46 1.181 PRL 44 1 . 1 0 8 IHEP 80 165 PRL 44 1.111. PL 91B 481 PRL 42 486 RL 78B 360 PL 76B 246 PRL 40 435 PRL 41 684 PL 72B 273 PRL 30 252 PBL 39 1240
I xb0(2P) I
RELATED PAPERS -
-
+Bonvicini, Orell, Frey, Luth (LBL, M~CH, SLAC) (MIT) +Zschorsch+ (Crystal Ball Collab.) +Drescher, Heller+ (ARGUS Collab.) +Baru, Blinov, Bondar÷ (NOVO) +Avery, Berkelman, Cassel+ (CLEO Collab.) +Sannes, Skubic, SnydeH (CLEO Collab ) +Bohringer, Finocchiaro+ (GOLU,STON, LSU, MPIM) + {RUTG, SYRA. LEMO, VANO. CORN. ITHA+) fBerkelman, Billin8, Cabenda+ (CLEO Collab.) +Bogoljubski(SERP) +CostantinLginocchiaro (COLU, STON) Kourkoumelis* (ATHU, NTUA, BNL. CERN+) +Brown, Herb, Hem, Fisk+ (FNAL, COLU, STON) {Glawe, Bock, B~anar+ (DESY, HAMB, HELD, MRIM) +Hofmann, Schubert4 (DESY, DORT. HELD, LUND) +Appel. Herb. Hom~ (STON, FNAL, COLU) +Herb, Horn, Lederman(COLU, FNAL, STON) +lwata, Fabjan4 (BNL, CERN, SYRA, YALE) +Horn, Lederman, Appel, Ito+ (COLU, FNAL, STON) +Appel. Brown, Herb, Horn+ (COLU, FNAL, STON)
/~(J~)
LEE FRANZINI 07
Hamburg Conf 139
- TUTS EIGEN HAN
83 82 82
CornellConf 284 PRL 49 1616 PRL 49 1 6 1 2
(CUSB Collab) (CUSB Coliab) (EUS8 Collab)
tBohringer, Herb+ +Horstkotte, Imlay+
I Xbz(2P) I
,G(jPC)
= ??(1 preferred + + )
or Xb1(10255)
J needs confirmation.
Observed in radiative decay of t h e T ( 3 S ) , therefore C = + . Branching; ratio requires E1 t r a n s i t i o n , M 1 is strong;ly disfavored, therefore P = + .
Xbt(2P)
MASS
VALUE (OeV) DOCUMENT ID 10.2.552J-O.0004 OUR AVERAGE Error includes scale 10.2556±0.0005 1 LEE-FRANZINI87 10.2548±0.00045 1 LEE-FRANZINI87
TEEN COMMENT factor of 1.2. CUSB e+ e ~ ? X CUSB e+ e - ~ f + f - "r'~
1 From ~. energy below assuming T ( 3 5 ) mass - 10355.3 MeV.
-/ENERGY IN T(3S) DECAY VALUE (MeV) 99.63=0.4 OUR AVERAGE 99.2±0.5 100.0±0.45
DOCUMENT ID Error includes scca~ factor LEE-FRANZINI87 LEE F R A N Z l N I 8 7
Xbl(2P)
DECAY
TEEN of 1.2. CUSB CUSB
COMMENT e+ e e+ e
Mode
Fraction ( F i / F )
^,T(2S)
(25 ±8 )%
I- 2
^,T(15)
( 6 lil.7)
= 7?(0 preferred ++)
~ ~
X.bl(2P) BRANCHING
%
RATIOS
rl/r
r(-~T(25))/rtotal Observed in radiative decay of t h e T ( 3 5 ) ,
therefore C = + .
Branching; ratio
TEEN
COMMENT
CUSB CUSB
e+ e e+ e
2Using B ( T ( 3 5 ) ~
10.23533=0.0011 OUR AVERAGE 10.2353±0.0016 102352+0.0016
1 LEE F R A N Z I N I 8 7 1 LEE-FRANZlNI87
COMMENT
2 ~ - N I 8 7
CUSB
e+e
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
2 ~ - I N I 8 7
CUSB
e+e-~
~ ~
~
2~/EI ~-
r2/r
0,0613= 0.017 DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
F('yT(15))/rtotal VALUE
Xbo(2P) MASS VALUE (GeV~
DOCUMENT 119
VALUE 0.2473=0.083
requires E1 t r a n s i t i o n , M 1 is s t r o n g l y disfavored, therefore P = + .
~ X f + ,~ ~
MODES
rl
J needs confirmation.
or X b 0 ( 1 0 2 3 5 )
(CUSB Collab.)
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
-~ X ~ ~ - ~-,
Xbl(2P)'z)=0
~,'xtS-E-
120 ± 0.026.
X b t ( 2 P ) REFERENCES
1 From ~ energy below assuming T ( 3 5 ) mass = 10355.3 MeV. LEE FRANZINI 87
- -
9" ENERGY IN T ( 3 5 ) DECAY VALUE (MeV}
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
LEE-FRANZINI87 LEE-FRANZINI87
CUSB CUSB
e+e e+e
TUTS EIGEN HAN
119.3:E1.1 OUR AVERAGE 119.3±16 119.4± 1.6
~ ~
?X t-f-q~
Xbo(2P) DECAY MODES Mode
Fraction ( r i / r )
r I
-YT(2S)
(7
r2
,~,T(15)
(1.4tl.O)%
±4
)%
Xbo(2P) B R A N C H I N G RATIOS r ('7 T ( 2 S ) ) VALUE
/ rtota I
0.0693=0.041
rl/r DOCUMENT (D 2 LEE-FRANZINI8?
TEEN
COMMENT
CUSB
e+ e
TEEN
COMMENT
CUSB
e+ e
~
qqf+
f-
~ff'f
~-
r2/r
F ('7T(15))/Ftota I VALUE 0.0].49=O.O10 2Using B ( T ( 3 5 ) ~
DOCUMENT ID 2 LEE F R A N Z I N I 8 7 Xbo(2P)?) = 0 0 4 8 ± 0.014.
Hamburg Conf. 139
~
8] 82 82
(CUSB Collab )
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
CornellGanf 284 PBL 49 1616 PRL 49 ]612
• Bohrirlgeq Herb*Horstkotte, Imlay~
(CUSB Collab) (CUSB Coflab ) (CUSB Collab )
Vli.163
Meson Full Listings
,See key on page IV.1 Xo2(2P)
= Xb2(i0270),
T(35)=
T(I0355)
Radiative decays
I6(J PC)
or X b 2 ( 1 0 2 7 0 )
F6 F7 F8
= ??(2 preferred + + ) J needs confirmation.
I
"~Xb2(2P) "fXbl(2P)
(12.8 ±2.9 ) % (12.0 ±2.6 ) % ( 4.8 ±1.4 )%
"/Xbo(2P)
Observed in radiative decay of the T ( 3 5 ) , therefore C = +. Branching ratio requires E1 transition, M1 is strongly disfavored, therefore P = +.
T(3S) r(i)F(e + e-)/F(total)
rors/r
F(hadrons) x F ( e + e - ) / r t o t a l
Xb2(2P) M A S S VALUE (GeV)
VALUE (keV)
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
10.2690-I-0.0807 OUR AVERAGE Error in~ud~s scale factor of 2,2. 10.2682±0.0005 1 L E E - F R A N Z I N I 8 7 C U S B e+ e 10.2697±0.00045 t L E E - F R A N Z I N I 8 7 C U S B e+ e -
~ ~
7 X E F ~ - "~--f
DOCUMENT 10
TEEN
COMMENT
0.415:1:0.030 OUR AVERAGE Error includes scalefactor of 1.1. 0.45 £0.03 +0.03 2 GILES 848 CLEO e+ e ~ hadrons 0.39 10.02 +0.03 2 TUTS 83 CUSB e+ e - ~ hadrons 2 Radiative corrections reevaluated by BUCHMUELLER 88 following KURAEV 85.
1 From q~ energy below, assuming T ( 3 5 ) mass -- 10355.5 MeV.
T(3S) PARTIAL WIDTHS
r(e+e -) 3' E N E R G Y IN T ( 3 S ) D E C A Y
F5
VALUE (keY)
DOCUMENT IO
0.44=t=0.03 OUR EVALUATION VALUE (MeV)
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
LEE-FRANZINI87 LEE FRANZlNI87
CUSB CUSB
e+ e ~ -,f X e+ e - -- ~+ ~- --f?
Xb2(2P) D E C A Y
0.101i0.017
MODES
1.6k
Fraction ( r i / r )
F(T(2S)~ + ~-)/rtota,
(19 ±7 )% (6.39-1.8) %
0.022i0.005 OUR AVERAGE
Xb2(2P) B R A N C H I N G
VALUE
F1/F
VALUE
DOCUMENT tD
2 LEE-FRAN~NI87
TEEN
COMMENT
CUSB
e+ e -
~
-'f-~+ t -
I:(~T(tS))/rtota,
r2/r
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
0.063:E0.018
TEEN
Xb2(2P).~)=0.128
~
3,?£4-~ -
31~ 5
e+ e
TEEN
COMMENT
~
7r+ ~
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
BOWCOCK
87
CLEO
82
CUSB
e+ e ~ 7r+ 7r- X, ~T+ 7r-- f + ~ T ( 3 5 ) ~ ~r+Tr E ~ -
TEEN
COMMENT
r3/r
VALUE
EVT5
0.03479-0.0034
3.9k
BOWCOCK
87
CLEO
e+ e -
o o49 ±0.010 o o39 ±o.o13
22
GREEN MAGERAS
82 82
CLEO CUSB
T(35) -T(35)~
DOCUMENT ID
0.0363=1=0.11031 OUR AVERAGE
2o
~
7r+ ~r
F4/F
F(p, + # - ) / r t o t a l EVT5
DOCUMENT ID
CHEN
o o33 ±o.o13 ±o.oo~
~o9o
TEEN
89B CLEO
COMMENT
e+ e 4__
KAARSBERG 89 CSB2
E+~-~'-
ANDREWS
e+ e #+#-
83
CLEO
#+#-
rg/r
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
TECN
COMMENT
0.128 :EO.O12+0.026
LEE-FRANZlNI87
CUSB
e+ e -
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
TEEN
COMMENT
0.120=1=0.011 +0.024
LEE-FRANZINI87
CUSB
e+ e -
VALUE
DOCUMENT ID
TECN
COMMENT
0.048 + 0 . 0 1 0 4-0.010
~
CUSB
e+ e -
~
q X
F('rXbl(2P))/Ftotal i~(j ;c) = ??(~--)
rT/r
10.3553:1:0.0005
TEEN
868 REDE
COMMENT
e+ e -
1 Reanalysis of A R T A M O N O V 84.
T(35) WIDTH VALUE (keY) 24.34-2.9 OUR EVALUATION
-/ X
rB/r N
I
8
7
~
~ X
T(3S) REFERENCES
DOCUMENT 10
1 BARU
~
r (~ X b o ( 2 P ) ) / F t o t a I
T(3S) M A S S VALUE (GeV)
X,
7r+ 7r- t~ ~ ~r+Tr E ~
r('rXb2(2P))lCtotal (CUSB Collab.) (CUSB Collab.) (CUSB Collab,)
+Bohringer, Herb+ +Horstkotte, Imlay+
I o~ T(zO3~S) I
X,
MAGERAS
o o1739-OOOlS± o.ooli (CUSB Collab )
CornellConf. 284 PRL 49 101.6 PRL 49 1 6 1 2
DOCUMENT ID
0.0181=E0.0017 OUR AVERAGE 0.0202 + 0.0019 ,I 0.0033
Hambur8 Conf. 139
- 83 82 82
CLEO
r2/r
VALUE
± 0.029
Xb2(2P) R E F E R E N C E S
rUTS EtGEN HAN
COMMENT
COMMENT
CUSB e+e
2~-INI87
87
TEEN
r(T(IS)~+;r-)/rtota,
it (*7 T ( 2 5 ) ) / Ftota I 0.1894-0.065
BOWCOCK
EVTB
o021~ooos o o31~oo2o
RATIOS
rl/r
EVTS
Mode
I.EE-FRANZINI 87
hadrons. See T mini-review.
anything)/Ftota I
"~T(25) "yT(lS)
2Using B(T(3S) ~
~
T(3S) BRANCHING RATIOS
r(T(25) VALUE
F1 F2
e+ e -
COMMENT
Errorincludesscalefactor of 2.1.
85.9:1:0.7 OUR AVERAGE I]6.7±0.5 35.39-0.45
DOCUMENT ID See T mini-review.
~
hadrons
CHEN 89B PR D39 3528 +MclIwain, Miller+ (CLEO Collab.) KAARSBERG 89 PRL 02 2077 +Heintz+ {CUSB Collab.) BUCHMUEL 88 HE e+ e- Physics 412 BuchrnueIler, Cooper (HANN, MIT) Editors: A. Ali and P, Soeding, World Scientific, Singapore BOWCOCK 87 PRL 58 307 ~Giles, Hassard. Kinoshita+ (CLEO Col~ab) LEE-FRANZINI 87 Hamburg Conf, 139 [CUSB Collab I BARU 868 ZPHY C32 662 +Blinov, Bondar, Bukin+ (NOVO) SJNP 41 4~rom 6 YAF 41+padin 733. KURAEV 85 Translated (ABEl) ARTAMONOV 84 PL 137B 272 +Baru, Blinov, Bondar+ (NOVO) GILES 84B PR D29 1285 +Hassard, Hernpstead, Kinoshita+ [CLEO Collab.) ANDREWS 83 PRL 50 807 +Avery. Berkelrnan, Casse)+ (CLEO Cobab.) TUTS 83 CornellConf 284 (CUSB Collab) GREEN 82 PRL 49 617 +Sannes, Skubic, Snyder+ (CLEO Cobab.) MAGERAS 82 PL 1188 453 +Herb, Imlay+ (COLU, CORN, LSU, MPIM, STON)
T(3S) DECAY MODES
- -
Mode
Fraction ( F i / F )
I-1 I-2 I-3
T(2S) anything T(2S)~r+Tr T(1S)~ + ; ' r -
(10.1 + 1 . 7
) %
(
) %
I-4
#+/~-
(363+0.31) (1.81±0.17)
I- 5
e--e-
(1.814_0.25) %
2.2 ± 0 . 5
% %
ALEXANDER ARTAMONOV GILES HAN PETERSON ANDREWS BOHRINGER UENO YoHKAPLAN COBB HER8 INNES
89 84 84B 82 82 80 80 79 78 78 77 77 77
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
He 8320 45 PL 1378 272 PR D29 ]285 PRL 49 1 6 1 2 PL 114B 277 PRL 44 1 1 0 8 PRL 44 1 1 1 1 PRL 42 486 PRL 40 435 PRL 41 684 PL 728 273 PRL 39 252 PRL 39 1240
+Bonvicini, Drel[. Frey. Luth (LBL, MIEN, SLAC) +Baru, Blinov, Bondar+ (NOVO) +Hassard, Hempstead, KinosMta4 {CLEO Collab) +Horstkotte, Imlay+ (CUSB Collab) +Giannini, Lee Franzini+ (CUSB Codab) +Berkelman, Billing, Cabenda+ (CLEO Colla6 ) ~Costantini, Einocchiaro {COLU, STON) -Brown, Herb, Hom, Fisk+ (FNAL, COLU, STON) +Appel, Her6, Horn+ (STON, FNAL. COLU) +Herb, Horn, Lederman+ (COLU, FNAL, STON) tlwata, Fabjan+ (BNL, CERN, SYRA, YALE) +Horn, Lederman, Appel, Ito+ (COLU,FNAL, STON) +Appel, Brown, Herb, Horn+ (COLU, FNAL, STON)
VII. 164
Meson Full Listings T(4S) = T(10580), T(10860), T(11020), Non-q~ Candidates
IT(4S) or T{,o,80)l
IG(J PC)
=
??(1
Ia(J PC) =
IT(11o2o)I
)
77(1
)
T(11020) MASS 7(45) MASS VALUE (GeV)
DOCUMENT ID
VALUE (GeV) TEEN
10.5800:t:0.0035 1 BEBEK 87 CLEO e+ e - ~ hadrons • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • 10.5774±0.0010
2 LOVELOCK
85
CUSB
e+ e -
~
DOCUMENT tO
11 0 1 9 ± 0 . 0 0 5 ± 0 . 0 0 7 11.020±0.030
BESSON LOVELOCK
COMMENT
85 85
CLEO CUSB
e+ e - ~ e+ e ~
TEEN
COMMENT
CLEO CUSB
e~ e e+ e
hadrons hadrons
hadrons
T(11020) WIDTH
I Reanalysis of BESSON 85. 2 No systematic error given. VALUE (MeV~ 79 4-16 O U R A V E R A G E 61.0±13 ±22 900±20.0
T(45) WIDTH VALUE (MeV) 23.84-2.2 O U R A V E R A G E 20.0±2 ±4 25 ± 2 . 5
DOCUMENT ID BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
TEEN
COMMENT
CLEO CUSB
e+ e - ~ e+ e ~
Mode
Fraction ( F i / F ) (lO1±O.21)
BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
-~
hadrons hadrons
T(11020) DECAY MODES
F1
e+e
DOCUMENT ID
hadrons hadrons
T(4S) DECAY MODES
F1
TEEN
11.019+@008 OUR A V E R A G E
COMMENT
Mode
Fraction {Fi./F )
e+e
(1.6±0.5) x 10 - 6
T(11020) PARTIAL WIDTHS
× 10 5
r(e+e - ) T(4S) PARTIAL WIDTHS r(e+e - ) VALUE (keY) 0,24 4-0.05 O U R A V E R A G E 0.192±0,007±0.038 0.283±0.037
DOCUMENT ID TEEN COMMENT Error includes scale factor of 1.7. BESSON 85 CLEO e+ e ~ hadrons LOVELOCK 85 CUSB e+ e ~ hadrons
BEBEK
87
PR D36 1289
,Berkelrnan, Blucher, Cassel+
BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
PRL 54 381 PRL 54 377
+Green, Namjoshi, Sannes+ -Horstkotte. Klopfenstein+
ANDREWS FINOCCHI.
(CLEO Collab ) (CLEO Coflab ) (CUSB Collab I
80B PRL 45 219 80 PRL 45 222
85
PRL 54 381 PRL 54 377
85
2) Other
1 ( o86o)1
/6(jPC)
=
77(1
NOTE VALUE (GeV} 10.865:E0.C118 O U R A V E R A G E 10.868±0.006±0005 10.845±0020
non-q~
ON NON-qq
BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
hadrons hadrons
TEEN
COMMENT
CLEO CUSB
e+ e e+ e
~ ~
hadrons hadrons
T(10860) DECAY MODES
F1
Mode
Fraction ( r i / r )
e*e
(2 8 ± 0 . 7 ) × 10 6
T(10860) PARTIAL WIDTHS CJOCUMENT tO TECN COMMENT Error includes scale factor of 1.3. BESSON 85 CLEO e+ e ~ hadrons LOVELOCK 85 CUSB e + e ~ hadrons
T(I0860) REFERENCES BESSON LOVELOCK
85 85
PRL 54 381 PRL 54 877
~ ~
hadrons hadrons
(CLEO Collab } (CUSB Collab)
CANDIDATES candidates:
q~q~
and q~g
hybrids.
for possible bound states.
MESONS
m a y be bound states in(luding gluons:
+Green, Namjoshi, Sannes~ +Horstkotte, Klopfenstein +
gluonia or glueballs,
Another example of non-qq mesons could
be multiquark states. For detailed reviews see, e.g., CLOSE 87. C O O P E R 86, M E S H K O V 86, HEUSCH 86, T O K I 88. T h e theoretical guidance on the properties of unusual states is often contradictory, and models which agree in the q~ sector often differ in their predictions about new states. A m o n g the naively expected signatures for gluonium are: (i) no place in qq llOnets~ (ii) flavor-singlet couplings, (iii) enhanced production in gluon-rich channels such as
r(e+e - ) VALUE (keV) 0.31 4-0.01 O U R A V E R A G E 0.22 ± 0 . 0 5 ± 0 . 0 7 0.365±0070
e+ e e+ e -
that in addition to the conventional q~ meson states, there
T(10860) WIDTH DOCUMENT ID
CLEO CUSB
T h e existence of a gluon self coupling in QCD suggests
DOCUMENT ID TEEN COMMENT Error includes scale factor of 1.1. BESSON 85 CLEO e~ e ~ LOVELOCK 85 CUSB e+ e ~
and hybrids (q~.q).
VALUE (MeV) 110 + 1 3 OUR AVERAGE 112.0+17 ± 2 3 110.0±15.0
COMMENT
,Green, Namjoshi, Sarlrles+ ÷Horstkotte Klopfenstein+
See also N N ( 1 1 0 0 - 3 6 0 0 )
)
7(10860) MASS
85 85
TECN
We include here mini-reviews and reference lists on non-q~-candidates. These are divided into two subsections: 1) Gluonium candidates, and
(CLEO Collab ) (CUSB Collab )
* Berkelman, Cabenda. Cassel+ Finocchiaro, Giannini, Lee Franzini*
BESSON LOVELOCK
NON-q
OTHER RELATED PAPERS - -
- -
DOCUMENT ID
T(11020) REFERENCES BESSON LOVELOCK
7(45) REFERENCES
F1
VALUE (keV) 0.1304,0.030 OUR A V E R A G E 0095-t-0.03 ± 0 . 0 3 5 0.156±0.040
(CLEO Collab ) (CUSB Callab.)
J/~,(18) decay, (iv) reduced 72' coupling, (v) exotic q u a n t u m numbers not allowed for qq (in some cases).
However it lnust be pointed out t h a t mixing effects and other dynanfical effects will obscure these simple signatures. If the inixing is large, onlv counting the number of observed states remains a clear signal for non-exotic non-q~ states.