Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Advances in High Energy Physics

Volume 2014, Article ID 432903, 7 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/432903
Research Article

Study of and Decays via QCD Sum Rules

Cyprus International University, Faculty of Engineering, Nicosia, Northern Cyprus, Mersin 10, Turkey

Received 19 February 2014; Revised 18 April 2014; Accepted 7 May 2014; Published 25 May 2014

Academic Editor: Alexey A. Petrov

Copyright © 2014 V. Bashiry. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The publication of this article was funded by SCOAP3.

Abstract

We present the calculation of the form factor of the and decays in the frame work of QCD sum rules. We also find branching ratio = which is in agreement with the experimental data. Furthermore, we estimate the  MeV, where experimental bound for full width of is  MeV.

1. Introduction

Heavy quarkonium states (like and ) and their decay modes offer a laboratory to study the strong interaction in the nonperturbative regime. Charmonium in particular has served as a calibration tool for the corresponding techniques and models [1, 2]. Heavy quarkonium states can have many bound states and decay channels used to study and determine different parameters of standard model (SM) and QCD from the theoretical perspective. In particular, the calculation of bottomonium masses [3], total widths, coupling constants [47], and branching ratio can serve as benchmarks for the low energy predictions of QCD. In addition, the theoretical calculations on the branching ratio of radiative decays of heavy quarkonium states are relatively clean with respect to the hadronic or semileptonic decays, and their comparison with experimental data could provide important insights into their nature and hyperfine interaction. In this regard, the decay width and branching ratio of radiative decays of several and states analysed by using an effective Lagrangian approach valid for heavy quarkonia [8, 9].

The QCD sum rules have been used for the radiative transitions in charmonium and bottomonium cases [1015]. But exclusive and decays have not yet been studied in the framework of the QCD sum rules. The decay studied by CLEO detector operating at CESR [16, 17]. The next experimental studies of exclusive and decays are going to start with next operation of LHC.

We present the theoretical study on the form factor of exclusive and decays in the frame work of QCD sum rules. Note that in order to calculate the branching ratio we have to acquire information about the masses and decay constants of the participating particles. It is worth mentioning that the masses can be obtained either by means of the experimental results, that is, the particle data group or by the theoretical methods. The decay constants, on the other hand, can be calculated theoretically via different nonperturbative methods. In this respect, masses and decay constants and spectrum of heavy quarkonium states are calculated in the various approaches (see, e.g., [1, 1825]). Here, firstly, we calculate the form factor of and decays in the framework of three-point QCD sum rules; secondly, we calculate the branching ratio of exclusive and decays.

In Section 2, we introduce the QCD sum rules technique for the form factors of exclusive and decays. Last section is devoted to the numerical analysis and discussion.

2. QCD Sum Rules for the Form Factors

The three-point correlation function associated with the and vertex is given by where is the time ordering operator and is momentum of photon. Each meson and photon field can be described in terms of the quark field operators as follows:

We calculate the correlation function equation (1) in two different methods. In phenomenological or physical approach, it can be evaluated in terms of hadronic parameters such as masses, decay constants, and form factors. In theoretical or QCD side, on the other hand, it is calculated in terms of QCD parameters, which are quark and gluon degrees of freedom, by the help of the operator product expansion (OPE) in deep Euclidean region. Equating the structure calculated in two different approaches of the same correlation function, we get a relation between hadronic parameters and QCD degrees of freedom. Finally, we apply double Borel transformation with respect to the momentum of initial and final mesons ( and ). This final operation suppresses the contribution of the higher states and continuum.

2.1. Phenomenological Side

We insert the complete sets of appropriate vector meson ( ) and scalar meson ( ) states (regarding the conservation of the quantum numbers of corresponding interpolating currents) inside correlation functions equation (1). Here, vector state is either or and scalar state is state. After integrating over the and , we get the following result for the correlation function equation (1): where contains the contribution of the higher and continuum states with the same quantum numbers.

The matrix elements of the above equation are related to the hadronic parameters as follows: where is the form factor of transition and is the polarization vector associated with the vector meson. Using (4) in (3) and considering the summation over polarization vectors via the result of the physical side is as follows: We are going to compare the coefficient of structure for further calculation from different approaches of the correlation functions.

2.2. Theoretical (QCD) Side

Theoretical side consists of perturbative (bare loop; see Figure 1) and nonperturbative parts (the contributions of two gluon condensate diagrams, Figure 2). We calculate it in the deep Euclidean space ( and ). We consider this side as

432903.fig.001
Figure 1: The bare loop diagram for the and decays.
fig2
Figure 2: Two gluon condensate diagram as a radiative correction for the and decays.
2.2.1. Bare Loop

The perturbative part is a double dispersion integral as follows: where is called spectral density. We aim to evaluate the spectral density with the help of the bare loop diagram in Figure 1. One of the generic methods to calculate this bare loop integral is the Cutkosky method, where the quark propagators of Feynman integrals are replaced by the Dirac delta functions: Then, using the Cutkosky method we get spectral density as where and is the color number. Note that, since three functions of integrand must vanish simultaneously, the physical regions in the plane must satisfy the following inequality:

2.2.2. Two Gluon Condensates

We consider the two gluon condensate diagrams. Note that we do not include the heavy quarks condensate diagrams, since the heavy quark contributions are exactly reducible to the gluon condensate [26]. Now, as a nonperturbative part, we must add contributions coming from the gluon condensates presented in Figures 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d), 2(e), and 2(f).

These diagrams are calculated in the Fock-Schwinger fixed-point gauge [2729], where the vacuum gluon field is as follows: where is the gluon momentum and is the gluon field. In addition, the quark-gluon-quark vertex is used as

We come across the following integrals in calculating the gluon condensate contributions [30, 31]: where is the momentum of the spectator quark .

These integrals are calculated by shifting to the Euclidean space-time and using the Schwinger representation for the Euclidean propagator: This kind of expression is very easy for the Borel transformation since where is Borel parameter.

We perform integration over the loop momentum and over the two parameters which we use in the exponential representation of propagators [28]. As a final operation we apply double Borel transformations to and . We get the Borel transformed form of the integrals in (14) as where and and are the Borel parameters. The function is as follows: where where the circumflex of in the equations is used for the results after the double Borel transformation. As a result of the lengthy calculations we obtain the following expressions for the two gluon condensate:

Now, we can compare coefficient of (6) and (7). Our result related to the sum rules for the corresponding form factor is as follows: Note that finally we have to set for the real photon.

3. Numerical Analysis

In this section we calculate the value of form factors and the branching ratios. We use  GeV and  GeV [32], which correspond to the pole masses  GeV and  GeV [6]. Also,  MeV [32],  MeV [32],  MeV [32],  MeV [32],  MeV [33],  MeV [33],  MeV [3],  MeV [3], and the full width for :  MeV [32] are used.

To do further numerical analyses we have to know the value or range of the auxiliary parameters of QCD sum rules. Those are the continuum thresholds ( and ) and the Borel mass parameters ( and ). The physical results are required to be either weakly dependent on or independent of the aforementioned parameters. Therefore, we must consider the working regions of these auxiliary parameters where the dependence of the form factors is weak. We also consider the working regions for the Borel mass parameters and in a way that both the contributions of the higher states and continuum are sufficiently suppressed and the contributions coming from higher dimensions operators can be ignored. With the aforementioned conditions, we find the stable region for the form factor in the following intervals: and for decays (see also Figures 3 and 4). We also get and for decays.

432903.fig.003
Figure 3: The dependence of the on for three different values of , , and for the decays. The green, blue, and purple lines are for minimum, central, and maximum values of and .
432903.fig.004
Figure 4: The dependence of the on for three different values of , , and for the decays. The green, blue, and purple lines are for minimum, central, and maximum values of and .

The continuum thresholds, and , are fixed by the mass of the corresponding ground-state hadron. Note that they must not be greater than the energy of the first excited states with the same quantum numbers. In our numerical calculations the following regions for the continuum thresholds in and channels are used: and for and channels, respectively. Here, is the mass of either or meson and is the mass of either or meson. We studied the dependence of the form factor ( ) on continuum thresholds (see Figures 3 and 4). The figures show the weak dependence of the form factor for the chosen intervals.

Note that we follow the standard procedure in the QCD sum rules, where the continuum thresholds are supposed to be independent of Borel mass parameters and . However, this assumption is not free of uncertainties (see, e.g., [34]).

Considering the large negative enables us to evaluate the correlation function by means of OPE that gives better convergence property; therefore, we use the extrapolation of the form factor from negative into the physical region (positive region).

The best fit curve for is employed for the negative region and fit is extrapolated for the positive region (see Figure 5). The values , , and for and , , and for decays are obtained via (23).

432903.fig.005
Figure 5: The dependence of the fit function (23) and the form factor (22) on for values of , , , and for the decays. The blue line is (22).

Using in (23), we obtain the and the for and decays, respectively. It is worth mentioning that firstly, the contributions of the two gluon condensate in the value of the is about . Secondly, roughly 80% of the errors in our numerical calculation arise from the variation continuum thresholds, Borel mass parameter in the given intervals, and uncertainties of the input parameters and the remaining 20% occurs as a result of the quark masses when one proceeds from the to the pole-scheme mass parameters, the input parameters.

The matrix element for the decay of and is as follows: where and are the momentum and polarization of final state vector meson, that is, either or mesons, is the polarization of real photon, and is the momentum of initial scalar meson.

Using this matrix element, we get where is mass of either or meson and is either mass of or meson. The decay width for decays is

The branching ratio of can be evaluated with (26) and using the experimental total width that is This result is in good agreement with the experimental measurement [32] and the result of the potential model given in [8, 9], which are respectively.

We get for decays. Using this value we calculate the decay width as follows: This decay width and the measured branching ratio [17] allow us to evaluate the total width of . We estimate that the full width , which is consistent with the experimental results that indicate the full width [17].

Conflict of Interests

The author declares that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to T. M. Aliev and K. Azizi for their useful discussions.

References

  1. N. Brambilla, M. Krämer, R. Mussa et al., “Heavy quarkonium physics,” CERN Yellow Report, CERN-2005-005, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  2. D. Besson and T. Skwarnicki, “Upsilon spectroscopy: transitions in the bottomonium system,” Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 333–378, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. E. V. Veliev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, G. Kaya, and A. Türkan, “Thermal QCD sum rules study of vector charmonium and bottomonium states,” The European Physical Journal A, vol. 47, no. 9, article 110, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. E. V. Veliev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, and N. Aksit, “Investigation of heavy-heavy pseudoscalar mesons in thermal QCD sum rules,” Journal of Physics G, vol. 39, no. 1, Article ID 015002, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  5. H. Sundu, J. Y. Sungu, S. Sahin, N. Yinelek, and K. Azizi, “Strong coupling constants of bottom and charmed mesons with scalar, pseudoscalar, and axial vector kaons,” Physical Review D, vol. 83, Article ID 114009, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  6. Z.-G. Wang, “Analysis of the vector and axialvector Bc mesons with QCD sum rules,” The European Physical Journal A, vol. 49, article 131, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  7. B. O. Rodrigues, M. E. Bracco, M. Nielsen, and F. S. Navarra, “D*Dρ vertex from QCD sum rules,” Nuclear Physics A, vol. 852, no. 1, pp. 127–140, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  8. F. de Fazio, “Radiative transitions of heavy quarkonium states,” Physical Review D, vol. 79, Article ID 054015, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. F. de Fazio, “Erratum: radiative transitions of heavy quarkonium states [Phys. Rev. D 79, 054015 (2009)],” Physical Review D, vol. 83, Article ID 099901, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. A. Y. Khodjamirian, “Dispersion sum rules for the amplitudes of radiative transitions in quarkonium,” Physics Letters B, vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 460–464, 1980. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. A. Y. Khodjamirian, “On the calculation of J/ψηcγ width in {QCD},” Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics, vol. 39, 614 pages, 1984, Yadernaya Fizika, vol. 39, pp. 970–976, 1984. View at Google Scholar
  12. L. S. Dulian, A. G. Oganesian, and A. Y. Khodjamirian, “Radiative decays of charmonium P levels in quantum chromodynamics,” Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics, vol. 44, 483 pages, 1986, Yadernaya Fizika, vol. 44, pp. 746–755, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  13. V. A. Beilin and A. V. Radyushkin, “Quantum chromodynamics sum rules and J/ψηcγ decay,” Nuclear Physics B, vol. 260, no. 1, pp. 61–78, 1985. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. L. J. Reinders, H. Rubinstein, and S. Yazaki, “Hadron properties from QCD sum rules,” Physics Reports, vol. 127, no. 1, pp. 1–97, 1985. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. P. Colangelo and A. Khodjamirian, “QCD sum rules, a modern perspective,” in At the Frontier of Particle Physics, M. Shifman, Ed., vol. 3, pp. 1495–1576, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  16. N. E. Adam, J. P. Alexander, K. Berkelman (CLEO Collaboration) et al., “Branching fractions for ψ(2S)-to-J/ψ transitions,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 94, Article ID 232002, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  17. M. Kornicer, R. E. Mitchell, C. M. Tarbert (CLEO Collaboration) et al., “Measurements of branching fractions for electromagnetic transitions involving the χbJ(1P) states,” Physical Review D, vol. 83, Article ID 054003, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  18. E. Eichten, S. Godfrey, H. Mahlke, and J. L. Rosner, “Quarkonia and their transitions,” Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 80, article 1161, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  19. S. Eidelman, H. Mahlke-Kruger, C. Patrignani, C. Amsler, (Particle Data Group) et al., “2013 review of particle,” Physics Physics Letters B, vol. 667, p. 1029, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  20. S. Godfrey and S. L. Olsen, “The exotic XYZ charmonium-like Mesons,” Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science, vol. 58, pp. 51–73, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  21. T. Barnes and S. L. Olsen, “Chapter 14. Charmonium spectroscopy,” International Journal of Modern Physics A, vol. 24, no. 1, article 305, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  22. G. V. Pakhlova, P. N. Pakhlov, and S. I. Eidelman, “Exotic charmonium,” Physics-Uspekhi, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 219–241, 2010, Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk, vol. 180, pp. 225–248, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  23. N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, B. K. Heltsley et al., “Heavy quarkonium: progress, puzzles, and opportunities,” The European Physical Journal C, vol. 71, article 1534, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  24. V. Bashiry, “On the mass and the decay constant of recently observed bound state,” Physical Review D, vol. 84, Article ID 076008, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  25. V. Bashiry, K. Azizi, and S. Sultansoy, “Masses and decay constants of bound states containing fourth family quarks from QCD sum rules,” Physical Review D, vol. 84, Article ID 036006, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  26. M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, “QCD and resonance physics. Theoretical foundations,” Nuclear Physics B, vol. 147, no. 5, pp. 385–447, 1979. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. V. A. Fock, “Proper time in classical and quantum mechanics,” Physikalische Zeitschrift der Sowjetunion, vol. 12, pp. 404–425, 1937. View at Google Scholar
  28. J. Schwinger, “On gauge invariance and vacuum polarization,” Physical Review, vol. 82, no. 5, pp. 664–679, 1951. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. V. Smilga, Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics, vol. 35, article 215, 1982.
  30. T. M. Aliev and M. Savci, “Analysis of the semileptonic Bc→Bu*l+l- decay from QCD sum rules,” European Physical Journal C, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 413–421, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. V. V. Kiselev, A. K. Likhoded, and A. I. Onishchenko, “Semileptonic Bc-meson decays in sum rules of QCD and NRQCD,” Nuclear Physics B, vol. 569, no. 1–3, pp. 473–504, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. J. Beringer, J. F. Arguin, R. M. Barnett (Particle Data Group) et al., “Review of particle physics (RPP),” Physical Review D, vol. 86, Article ID 010001, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  33. E. V. Veliev, H. Sundu, K. Azizi, and M. Bayar, “Scalar quarkonia at finite temperature,” Physical Review D, vol. 82, no. 5, Article ID 056012, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. W. Lucha, D. Melikhov, and S. Simula, “Effective continuum threshold in dispersive sum rules,” Physical Review D, vol. 79, no. 9, Article ID 096011, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus