- Access by Xinjiang University
Nonet symmetry in , and decays
Phys. Rev. D 77, 014024 – Published 24 January, 2008Erratum Phys. Rev. D 77, 019905 (2008)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.77.014024
Abstract
The nonet symmetry scheme seems to describe rather well the masses and mixing angle of the ground state pseudoscalar mesons. It is expected that nonet symmetry should also be valid for the matrix elements of the pseudoscalar density operators which play an important role in charmless two-body decays with or in the final state. Starting from the divergences of the octet and singlet axial vector currents, we show that nonet symmetry for the pseudoscalar mass term implies nonet symmetry for the pseudoscalar density operators. In this nonet symmetry scheme, we find that the branching ratio , with in the final state agrees well with data, while those with are underestimated, but by increasing the form factor by 40%–50%, one could explain the tree-dominated and measured branching ratios. With this increased form factor and with only a moderate annihilation contribution, we are able to obtain for the penguin-dominated branching ratios, quite close to the measured value. This supports the predicted value for the form factor in PQCD and light-cone sum rules approach. A possible increase by 15% of for would bring the predicted branching ratio to , very close to experiment.
Corrections
24 January, 2008
Erratum
Publisher’s Note: Nonet symmetry in , and decays [Phys. Rev. D 77, 014024 (2008)]
Article Text
References (24)
- J. F. Donoghue, E. Golowich, and B. R. Holstein, Dynamics of the Standard Model (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992).
- J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Nucl. Phys. B250, 465 (1985).
- T. N. Pham, Phys. Lett. B 246, 175 (1990).
- P. Ball and J.-M. Frère, Phys. Lett. B 365, 367 (1996).
- H. Georgi, Phys. Rev. D 49, 1666 1994.
- J. M. Gerard and E. Kou, Phys. Lett. B 616, 85 (2005).
- Y. Dupont and T. N. Pham, Phys. Rev. D 29, 1368 (1984); T. N. Pham, 30, 234 (1984).
- C. Isola and T. N. Pham (unpublished).
- J. M. Gerard and E. Kou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 261804 (2006).
- M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, M. Neubert, and C. T. Sachrajda, Nucl. Phys. B606, 245 (2001).
- M. Beneke and M. Neubert, Nucl. Phys. B675, 333 (2003).
- A. Ali, G. Kramer, and C. Lü, Phys. Rev. D 58, 094009 (1998).
- B. Dutta, C. S. Kim, S. Oh, and G. H. Zhu, Eur. Phys. J. C 37, 273 (2004).
- Particle Data Group, J. Phys. G 32, 1 (2006).
- T. N. Pham, in 2nd Workshop on the CKM Unitarity Triangle, Durham, April, 2003, eConf C0304052, WG415 (2003); arXiv:hep-ph/0306271.
- E. Barberio, XXIII International Symposium on Lepton and Photon Interactions at High Energy, Aug. 13-18 2007, Daegu, Korea.
- A. Abulencia et al. (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 062003 (2006), quoted in Ref. [14].
- D. Brown, XXIII International Symposium on Lepton and Photon Interactions at High Energy, Aug. 13-18 2007, Daegu, Korea.
- P. Ball and R. Zwicky, Phys. Rev. D 71, 014015 (2005).
- E. Barberio et al. (Heavy Flavor Averaging Group), arXiv:0704.3575.
- T. N. Pham and G. H. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 69, 114016 (2004).
- D. S. Du, J. F. Sun, D. S. Yang, and G. H. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 65, 094025 (2002); 66, 079904(E) (2002).
- Y. Y. Charng, T. Kurimoto, and H.-n. Li, Phys. Rev. D 74, 074024 (2006).
- P. Ball and G. W. Jones, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2007) 025.