Insights into Doubly Heavy Baryons
Exploring the production and decay of unique baryons in particle physics.
― 5 min read
Table of Contents
The study of particle physics has led to the discovery of various particles, including baryons, which are made up of three quarks. Among these, Doubly Heavy Baryons consist of two Heavy Quarks and one light quark. Since the first observation of such a baryon in 2017, researchers have been increasingly interested in understanding how these particles are produced and decay.
Doubly heavy baryons are unique because they involve more complex interactions due to the presence of heavy quarks. This complexity leads to a variety of energy scales that influence their behavior, making them interesting subjects for research into strong interactions in particle physics.
Production of Doubly Heavy Baryons
Doubly heavy baryons are produced through various processes in particle collisions. When particles collide at high energies, they can create different states of baryons, including excited states. These excited states can decay into other particles, and this decay process is essential for studying the properties of baryons.
Different experimental groups have been working to find evidence for the production of doubly heavy baryons. Notable collaborations have reported signals for specific states, but results have sometimes conflicted with theoretical predictions. Continuous searches are being made to find more evidence for these baryons through different decay channels.
The Role of Heavy Quarks
Heavy quarks, such as the charm or bottom quark, significantly influence the behavior of baryons. Their mass and the interactions with light quarks lead to unique properties of the double heavy baryons. The presence of two heavy quarks results in more intricate dynamics compared to other baryons that contain only light quarks or just one heavy quark.
Understanding the interactions involving heavy quarks is crucial, as these interactions drive the production mechanisms of doubly heavy baryons. This investigation has opened new avenues for exploring fundamental principles of particle physics.
Decay Processes
When doubly heavy baryons are produced, they may not remain stable for long. Instead, they often decay into other particles. These decay processes are vital for researchers because they allow for the identification of the original baryon state.
Different decay channels can provide insights into the properties of these baryons. For example, studying how often a baryon decays into specific particles allows scientists to calculate branching ratios, which quantify the likelihood of each decay path.
Theoretical Approaches
To understand the production and decay of doubly heavy baryons, scientists use various theoretical frameworks. One widely accepted method is the Non-Relativistic Quantum Chromodynamics (NRQCD) approach, which focuses on heavy quarks within a non-relativistic framework. This method treats the heavy quarks as nearly stationary while the light quarks move more freely.
The NRQCD approach allows for the systematic calculation of production rates and decay widths by considering the contributions of different intermediate states, such as diquark states. Understanding these contributions is essential for predicting how many events involving doubly heavy baryons may be detected in experiments.
Experimental Investigations
Researchers have conducted a wide range of experiments to detect doubly heavy baryons. High-energy collision experiments, such as those at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and future colliders, have the potential to produce large numbers of these baryons. As these experiments continue, they provide valuable data that can help improve theoretical models.
Recent advancements in particle detection and analysis techniques have made it easier to search for signals of doubly heavy baryons. By studying the decay products of baryons and comparing them with predictions, scientists can confirm their existence and learn more about their properties.
Challenges in Detection
Despite advancements, detecting doubly heavy baryons remains a challenge. One of the key issues is the fact that these baryons can decay quickly, leading to a variety of possible outcomes. Thus, distinguishing between different particles in experiments is complex and requires sophisticated detection methods.
Additionally, theoretical predictions may not always align with experimental results. This discrepancy can arise from uncertainties related to the parameters used in calculations, such as quark masses and interaction strengths. Addressing these uncertainties is crucial for improving the understanding of doubly heavy baryons.
Future Directions
The future of research into doubly heavy baryons is promising. Ongoing and upcoming experiments are expected to generate even more data that can help resolve existing questions. As scientists refine their models and improve their detection methods, our understanding of these baryons will continue to evolve.
Furthermore, the interactions and decay processes of doubly heavy baryons may provide insights into broader questions in particle physics, including the nature of strong forces. The unique properties of these baryons make them a valuable tool for testing theoretical predictions and enhancing our knowledge of fundamental physics.
Conclusion
The investigation into doubly heavy baryons is a multidisciplinary effort involving theoretical predictions, experimental work, and continuous refinement of methods. By focusing on the production and decay of these baryons, researchers are uncovering new aspects of particle physics that deepen our understanding of the universe. As experiments provide more data and theories become more sophisticated, the mysteries surrounding doubly heavy baryons will gradually unveil, potentially leading to exciting discoveries in the field.
Title: Further study on the production of P-wave doubly heavy baryons from Z-boson decays
Abstract: In this paper, we carried out a systematic investigation for the excited doubly heavy baryons production in $Z$-boson decays within the NRQCD factorization approach. Our investigation accounts for all the $P$-wave intermediate diquark states, {\it i.e.} $\langle cc\rangle[^1P_1]_{\bar 3}$, $\langle cc\rangle[^3P_J]_{6}$, $\langle bc\rangle[^1P_1]_{\bar 3/6}$, $\langle bc\rangle[^3P_J]_{\bar 3/6}$, $\langle bb\rangle[^1P_1]_{\bar 3}$, and $\langle bb\rangle[^3P_J]_{6}$ with $J = (0, 1, 2)$. The results show that contributions from all diquark states in $P$-wave were $7\%$, $8\%$, and $3\%$ in comparing with $S$-wave for the production of $\Xi_{cc}$, $\Xi_{bc}$ and $\Xi_{bb}$ via $Z$-boson decay, respectively. Based on these results, we predicted about $0.539\times 10^3(10^6)$ events for $\Xi_{cc}$, $1.827\times 10^3(10^6)$ events for $\Xi_{bc}$, and $0.036\times 10^3(10^6)$ events for $\Xi_{bb}$ can be produced annually at the LHC (CEPC). Additionally, we plot the differential decay widths of $\Xi_{cc}$, $\Xi_{bc}$ and $\Xi_{bb}$ as a function of the invariant mass $s_{23}$ and energy function $z$ distributions, and analyze the theoretical uncertainties in decay width arising from the mass parameters of heavy quark.
Authors: Hai-Jiang Tian, Xuan Luo, Hai-Bing Fu
Last Update: 2023-11-17 00:00:00
Language: English
Source URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.03388
Source PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.03388
Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Changes: This summary was created with assistance from AI and may have inaccuracies. For accurate information, please refer to the original source documents linked here.
Thank you to arxiv for use of its open access interoperability.
Reference Links
- https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9163
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s002880050534
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9607314
- https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03035848
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0101310
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.61.057502
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0208014
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0406033
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.1026
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.2538
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0605075
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.112001
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.01621
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/44/2/022001
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.11316
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.162002
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.01919
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.02744
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.08594
- https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-5632
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.011103
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.162001
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0606051
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11433-019-1471-8
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.12273
- https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.02481
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/ac0c70
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.04759
- https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5955-1
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.09903
- https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9408407
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.49.555
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9305315
- https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/34/5/006
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0610205
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.54.3228
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.55.5853
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9407339
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.64.034006
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0104173
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0602041
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0304280
- https://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0701212
- https://arXiv.org/abs/0710.0051
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1702.07181
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1101.1130
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1208.3051
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1302.0601
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1308.3998
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1408.5584
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1405.0969
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1410.2091
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1605.03070
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1610.06125
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1704.02850
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1801.02652
- https://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0601032
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1401.6269
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1510.06808
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1808.03174
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1811.07382
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1903.00722
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1912.01953
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1810.03834
- https://arXiv.org/abs/2202.01579
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1904.02339
- https://arXiv.org/abs/2206.05965
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.07520
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.12626
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03306
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1505.03275
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1811.10545
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0305079
- https://arXiv.org/abs/2004.01012
- https://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9707223
- https://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9605023
- https://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9403208
- https://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9905359
- https://arXiv.org/abs/0711.1898
- https://arXiv.org/abs/0805.4511
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0205210
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0206140
- https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9302307
- https://arXiv.org/abs/2108.06716
- https://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0012260
- https://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0410364
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1805.02535
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1009.1453
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1404.3888
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1703.09086
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1707.02834
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1808.08865
- https://arXiv.org/abs/1208.3355