what can we learn from hadronic and radiative decays of light ...b. kubis, hadronic and radiative...
TRANSCRIPT
What can we learn from hadronic and radiative decaysof light mesons?
Bastian Kubis
Helmholtz-Institut fur Strahlen- und Kernphysik (Theorie)
Bethe Center for Theoretical Physics
Universitat Bonn, Germany
Light Meson Decays Workshop, Jefferson Lab, August 5th 2012
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 1
Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons
Chiral perturbation theory and dispersion relations
Final-state interactions of two pions
• Pion vector form factor
• Decays η, η′ → π+π−γ
Final-state interactions of three pions
• 3-particle dynamics for ω/φ → 3π talk by S. Schneider on Wednesday
• η → 3π: quark mass ratios and Dalitz plot parameterstalk by S. Lanz on Tuesday
Meson transition form factors
• η, η′ → γℓ+ℓ− thanks to A. Wirzba
• ω/φ → π0ℓ+ℓ− talk by S. Schneider on Wednesday
Outlook
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 2
Light mesons without models
Chiral perturbation theory (ChPT) . . . talk by J. Bijnens on Monday
• Effective field theory: simultaneous expansion inquark masses + small momenta
⊲ systematically improvable⊲ well-established link to QCD⊲ so what’s wrong with it?!
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 3
Light mesons without models
Chiral perturbation theory (ChPT) . . . talk by J. Bijnens on Monday
• Effective field theory: simultaneous expansion inquark masses + small momenta
⊲ systematically improvable⊲ well-established link to QCD⊲ so what’s wrong with it?!
. . . and its limitations
• strong final-state interactions render corrections large
• physics of light pseudoscalars (π, K, η) only⊲ (energy) range limited by resonances
e.g. pion–pion scattering: σ(500), ρ . . .⊲ not applicable to decays of (e.g.) vector mesons at all
−→ marry ChPT and dispersion relations in order to
apply ChPT where it works best!
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 3
Light mesons without models
Dispersion relations on one page
Re(z)
Im(z)
s
4M2π
analyticity & Cauchy’s theorem:
T (s) =1
2πi
∮
∂Ω
T (z)dz
z − s
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 4
Light mesons without models
Dispersion relations on one page
Re(z)
Im(z)
s
4M2π
analyticity & Cauchy’s theorem:
T (s) =1
2πi
∮
∂Ω
T (z)dz
z − s
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 4
Light mesons without models
Dispersion relations on one page
Re(z)
Im(z)
s
4M2π
analyticity & Cauchy’s theorem:
T (s) =1
2πi
∮
∂Ω
T (z)dz
z − s
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 4
Light mesons without models
Dispersion relations on one page
Re(z)
Im(z)
s
4M2π
analyticity & Cauchy’s theorem:
T (s) =1
2πi
∮
∂Ω
T (z)dz
z − s
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 4
Light mesons without models
Dispersion relations on one page
Re(z)
Im(z)
s
4M2π
analyticity & Cauchy’s theorem:
T (s) =1
2πi
∮
∂Ω
T (z)dz
z − s
−→ 1
2πi
∫ ∞
4M2π
discT (z)dz
z − s
=1
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ImT (z)dz
z − s
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 4
Light mesons without models
Dispersion relations on one page
Re(z)
Im(z)
s
4M2π
analyticity & Cauchy’s theorem:
T (s) =1
2πi
∮
∂Ω
T (z)dz
z − s
−→ 1
2πi
∫ ∞
4M2π
discT (z)dz
z − s
=1
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ImT (z)dz
z − s
• discT (s) = 2i ImT (s) calculable by “cutting rules”:
T (s) T (s)
e.g. if T (s) is a ππ partial wave −→
discT (s)
2i= ImT (s) =
2qππ√sθ(s−4M2
π)|T (s)|2
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 4
Light mesons without models
Dispersion relations on one page
Re(z)
Im(z)
s
4M2π
analyticity & Cauchy’s theorem:
T (s) =1
2πi
∮
∂Ω
T (z)dz
z − s
−→ 1
2πi
∫ ∞
4M2π
discT (z)dz
z − s
=1
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ImT (z)dz
z − s
• discT (s) = 2i ImT (s) calculable by “cutting rules”:
T (s) T (s)inelastic intermediate states (KK, 4π)suppressed at low energies
−→ will be neglected in the following
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 4
Pion form factor constrained by analyticity and unitarity
• just two particles in final state: form factor; from unitarity:
=disc
1
2idiscFI(s) = ImFI(s) = FI(s)×θ(s−4M2
π)× sin δI(s) e−iδI(s)
−→ final-state theorem: phase of FI(s) is just δI(s) Watson 1954
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 5
Pion form factor constrained by analyticity and unitarity
• just two particles in final state: form factor; from unitarity:
=disc
1
2idiscFI(s) = ImFI(s) = FI(s)×θ(s−4M2
π)× sin δI(s) e−iδI(s)
−→ final-state theorem: phase of FI(s) is just δI(s) Watson 1954
• solution to this homogeneous integral equation known:
FI(s) = PI(s)ΩI(s) , ΩI(s) = exp
s
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′δI(s
′)
s′(s′ − s)
PI(s) polynomial, ΩI(s) Omnès function Omnès 1958
• today: high-accuracy ππ (and πK) phase shifts availableAnanthanarayan et al. 2001, García-Martín et al. 2011, Caprini et al. 2012
(Büttiker et al. 2004)
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 5
Pion vector form factor
• pion vector form factor clearly non-perturbative: ρ resonance
-0,2 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1
sππ [GeV2]
1
10
|FV
(sπ
π)|2
ChPT at one loop
data on e+e− → π+π−
Omnès representation
Stollenwerk et al. 2012
−→ Omnès representation vastly extends range of applicability
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 6
Application: η, η′→ π+π−γ
• η(′) → π+π−γ driven by the chiral anomaly, π+π− in P-wave
−→ final-state interactions the same as for vector form factor
• ansatz: Aη(′)
ππγ = A× P (sππ)× FVπ (sππ), P (sππ) = 1 + α(′)sππ
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 7
Application: η, η′→ π+π−γ
• η(′) → π+π−γ driven by the chiral anomaly, π+π− in P-wave
−→ final-state interactions the same as for vector form factor
• ansatz: Aη(′)
ππγ = A× P (sππ)× FVπ (sππ), P (sππ) = 1 + α(′)sππ
• spectra with fitted normalisation and slope(s) α(′)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Eγ[GeV]
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
dΓ/dEγ[arb. units]
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Eγ[GeV]
0
5
10
15
20
dΓ/dEγ[arb. units]
Stollenwerk et al. 2012
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 7
Application: η, η′→ π+π−γ
• η(′) → π+π−γ driven by the chiral anomaly, π+π− in P-wave
−→ final-state interactions the same as for vector form factor
• ansatz: Aη(′)
ππγ = A× P (sππ)× FVπ (sππ), P (sππ) = 1 + α(′)sππ
• divide data by pion form factor −→ P (sππ)
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
sππ [GeV2]
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
P(s π
π)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
sππ [GeV2]
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
P(s π
π)
Stollenwerk et al. 2012
−→ exp.: αWASA = (1.89± 0.64)GeV−2, αKLOE = (1.31± 0.08)GeV−2
−→ interpret α(′) by matching to chiral perturbation theory
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 7
Dispersion relations for three-body decays
Example: ω/φ → 3π
• beyond ChPT: copious efforts to develop EFT for vector mesonsBijnens et al.; Bruns, Meißner; Lutz, Leupold; Gegelia et al.; Kampf et al.. . .
• vector mesons highly important for (virtual) photon processes
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 8
Dispersion relations for three-body decays
Example: ω/φ → 3π
• beyond ChPT: copious efforts to develop EFT for vector mesonsBijnens et al.; Bruns, Meißner; Lutz, Leupold; Gegelia et al.; Kampf et al.. . .
• vector mesons highly important for (virtual) photon processes
• typically used for 3π decays: improved tree-level models(vector-meson dominance, hidden local symmetry. . . )
+ crossed +ω
ρ
π
π
π
ω
π
π
π
• similarly in experimental analyses φ → 3π: KLOE 2003, CMD-2 2006
sum of 3 Breit–Wigners (ρ+, ρ−, ρ0)+ constant background term
−→ obviously, unitarity relation cannot be fulfilled!
• particularly simple system: restricted to odd partial waves
−→ P-wave interactions only (neglecting F- and higher)B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 8
From unitarity to integral equation
Decay amplitude can be decomposed into single-variable functions
M(s, t, u) = iǫµναβnµpνπ+pαπ−p
βπ0 F(s, t, u)
F(s, t, u) = F(s) + F(t) + F(u)
Unitarity relation for F(s):
discF(s) = 2iF(s)︸︷︷︸
right-hand cut
+ F(s)︸︷︷︸
left-hand cut
× θ(s− 4M2
π)× sin δ11(s) e−iδ11(s)
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 9
From unitarity to integral equation
Unitarity relation for F(s):
discF(s) = 2iF(s)︸︷︷︸
right-hand cut
+ F(s)︸︷︷︸
left-hand cut
× θ(s− 4M2
π)× sin δ11(s) e−iδ11(s)
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 9
From unitarity to integral equation
Unitarity relation for F(s):
discF(s) = 2iF(s)︸︷︷︸
right-hand cut
× θ(s− 4M2
π)× sin δ11(s) e−iδ11(s)
=disc
• right-hand cut only −→ Omnès problem
F(s) = aΩ(s) , Ω(s) = exp
s
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′
s′δ11(s
′)
s′ − s− iǫ
−→ amplitude given in terms of pion vector form factor
++pair0V +0pair+V +0pairVF(s, t, u) =
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 9
From unitarity to integral equation
Unitarity relation for F(s):
discF(s) = 2iF(s)︸︷︷︸
right-hand cut
+ F(s)︸︷︷︸
left-hand cut
× θ(s− 4M2
π)× sin δ11(s) e−iδ11(s)
• inhomogeneities F(s): angular averages over the F(s)
F(s) = aΩ(s)
1 +s
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′
s′sin δ11(s
′)F(s′)
|Ω(s′)|(s′ − s− iǫ)
F(s) =3
2
∫ 1
−1
dz (1− z2)F(t(s, z)
)Khuri, Treiman 1960
Aitchison 1977
Anisovich, Leutwyler 1998
F(s) = +++ ...
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 9
From unitarity to integral equation
Unitarity relation for F(s):
discF(s) = 2iF(s)︸︷︷︸
right-hand cut
+ F(s)︸︷︷︸
left-hand cut
× θ(s− 4M2
π)× sin δ11(s) e−iδ11(s)
• inhomogeneities F(s): angular averages over the F(s)
F(s) = aΩ(s)
1 +s
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′
s′sin δ11(s
′)F(s′)
|Ω(s′)|(s′ − s− iǫ)
F(s) =3
2
∫ 1
−1
dz (1− z2)F(t(s, z)
)Khuri, Treiman 1960
Aitchison 1977
Anisovich, Leutwyler 1998
−→ crossed-channel scattering between s-, t-, and u-channel
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 9
ω/φ → 3π Dalitz plots
• only one subtraction constant a −→ fix to partial width
• normalised Dalitz plot in y = 3(s0−s)2MV (MV −3Mπ)
, x =√3(t−u)
2MV (MV −3Mπ):
ω → 3π : φ → 3π :
• ω Dalitz plot is relatively smooth
• φ Dalitz plot clearly shows ρ resonance bands
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 10
ω/φ → 3π Dalitz plots
• only one subtraction constant a −→ fix to partial width
• normalised Dalitz plot in y = 3(s0−s)2MV (MV −3Mπ)
, x =√3(t−u)
2MV (MV −3Mπ):
ω → 3π : φ → 3π :
ω → 3π
• ω Dalitz plot is relatively smooth
• φ Dalitz plot clearly shows ρ resonance bands
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 10
Experimental comparison to φ → 3π
• fit to Dalitz plot: 1.98× 106 events in 1834 bins KLOE 2003
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9000
2000
4000
6000
8000
Bin number
#eve
nts
(effi
cien
cyco
rrec
ted)
Omnès χ2 = 1.71 ... 2.06
KLOE (2003)
F(s) = aΩ(s) = exp
[
s
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′
s′δ11(s
′)
s′ − s
]
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 11
Experimental comparison to φ → 3π
• fit to Dalitz plot: 1.98× 106 events in 1834 bins KLOE 2003
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9000
2000
4000
6000
8000
Bin number
#eve
nts
(effi
cien
cyco
rrec
ted)
Omnès χ2 = 1.71 ... 2.06
Disp1 χ2 = 1.17 ... 1.50
KLOE (2003)
F(s) = aΩ(s)
[
1 +s
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′
s′F(s′) sin δ11(s
′)
|Ω(s′)|(s′ − s− iǫ)
]
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 11
Experimental comparison to φ → 3π
• fit to Dalitz plot: 1.98× 106 events in 1834 bins KLOE 2003
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9000
2000
4000
6000
8000
Bin number
#eve
nts
(effi
cien
cyco
rrec
ted)
Omnès χ2 = 1.71 ... 2.06
Disp1 χ2 = 1.17 ... 1.50
Disp2 χ2 = 1.02 ... 1.03
KLOE (2003)
F(s) = aΩ(s)
[
1 + b s+s2
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′
s′2F(s′) sin δ11(s
′)
|Ω(s′)|(s′ − s− iǫ)
]
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 11
Experimental comparison to φ → 3π
• fit to Dalitz plot: 1.98× 106 events in 1834 bins KLOE 2003
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9000
2000
4000
6000
8000
Bin number
#eve
nts
(effi
cien
cyco
rrec
ted)
Omnès χ2 = 1.71 ... 2.06
Disp1 χ2 = 1.17 ... 1.50
Disp2 χ2 = 1.02 ... 1.03
KLOE (2003)
• once-subtracted DR: highly predictive
• twice-subtracted DR: one additional complex parameter fitted
• phenomen. contact term seems to emulate rescattering effects!
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 11
Predictions for experiment: ω → 3π Dalitz plot parameters
• ω → 3π Dalitz plot smooth −→ polynomial parameterisation
|Fpol(z, φ)|2 = |N |2
1 + 2αz + 2βz3/2 sin 3φ+ 2γz2 + 2δz5/2 sin 3φ+O(z3)
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 12
Predictions for experiment: ω → 3π Dalitz plot parameters
• ω → 3π Dalitz plot smooth −→ polynomial parameterisation
|Fpol(z, φ)|2 = |N |2
1 + 2αz+2βz3/2 sin 3φ+ 2γz2 + 2δz5/2 sin 3φ
(
|Fpol(z, φ)|2/|F(z, φ)|2 − 1
)
[%]
x [MeV]
y[M
eV]
α× 103 β × 103 γ × 103 δ × 103
84 . . . 96 — — —
74 . . . 84 24 . . . 28 — —
73 . . . 81 24 . . . 28 3 . . . 6 —
74 . . . 83 21 . . . 24 0 . . . 2 7 . . . 8
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 12
Predictions for experiment: ω → 3π Dalitz plot parameters
• ω → 3π Dalitz plot smooth −→ polynomial parameterisation
|Fpol(z, φ)|2 = |N |2
1 + 2αz + 2βz3/2 sin 3φ+2γz2 + 2δz5/2 sin 3φ
(
|Fpol(z, φ)|2/|F(z, φ)|2 − 1
)
[%]
x [MeV]
y[M
eV]
α× 103 β × 103 γ × 103 δ × 103
84 . . . 96 — — —
74 . . . 84 24 . . . 28 — —
73 . . . 81 24 . . . 28 3 . . . 6 —
74 . . . 83 21 . . . 24 0 . . . 2 7 . . . 8
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 12
Predictions for experiment: ω → 3π Dalitz plot parameters
• ω → 3π Dalitz plot smooth −→ polynomial parameterisation
|Fpol(z, φ)|2 = |N |2
1 + 2αz + 2βz3/2 sin 3φ+ 2γz2+2δz5/2 sin 3φ
(
|Fpol(z, φ)|2/|F(z, φ)|2 − 1
)
[%]
x [MeV]
y[M
eV]
α× 103 β × 103 γ × 103 δ × 103
84 . . . 96 — — —
74 . . . 84 24 . . . 28 — —
73 . . . 81 24 . . . 28 3 . . . 6 —
74 . . . 83 21 . . . 24 0 . . . 2 7 . . . 8
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 12
Predictions for experiment: ω → 3π Dalitz plot parameters
• ω → 3π Dalitz plot smooth −→ polynomial parameterisation
|Fpol(z, φ)|2 = |N |2
1 + 2αz + 2βz3/2 sin 3φ+ 2γz2 + 2δz5/2 sin 3φ
(
|Fpol(z, φ)|2/|F(z, φ)|2 − 1
)
[%]
x [MeV]
y[M
eV]
α× 103 β × 103 γ × 103 δ × 103
84 . . . 96 — — —
74 . . . 84 24 . . . 28 — —
73 . . . 81 24 . . . 28 3 . . . 6 —
74 . . . 83 21 . . . 24 0 . . . 2 7 . . . 8
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 12
Predictions for experiment: ω → 3π Dalitz plot parameters
• ω → 3π Dalitz plot smooth −→ polynomial parameterisation
|Fpol(z, φ)|2 = |N |2
1 + 2αz + 2βz3/2 sin 3φ+ 2γz2 + 2δz5/2 sin 3φ
(
|Fpol(z, φ)|2/|F(z, φ)|2 − 1
)
[%]
x [MeV]
y[M
eV]
α× 103 β × 103 γ × 103 δ × 103
84 . . . 96 — — —
74 . . . 84 24 . . . 28 — —
73 . . . 81 24 . . . 28 3 . . . 6 —
74 . . . 83 21 . . . 24 0 . . . 2 7 . . . 8
−→ 2 Dalitz plot parameters sufficient at 1% accuracy
−→ compare η → 3π0 (same 3-fold symmetry):α = (−31.7± 1.6)× 10−3 PDG average
β ≈ −4× 10−3 γ ≈ +1× 10−3 Schneider, BK, Ditsche 2011
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 12
Quark masses and η → 3π decays
• η → 3π isospin violating; two sources in the Standard Model:
mu 6= md e2 6= 0
• electromagnetic contribution small Sutherland 1967
Baur, Kambor, Wyler 1996; Ditsche, BK, Meißner 2009
η → π+π−π0 : ALOc (s, t, u) =
B(mu −md)
3√3F 2
π
1 +3(s− s0)
M2η −M2
π
s = (pπ+ + pπ−)2 , 3s0.= M2
η + 3M2π
• ∆I = 1 relation between charged and neutral decay amplitudes:
η → 3π0 : An(s, t, u) = Ac(s, t, u) +Ac(t, u, s) +Ac(u, s, t)
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 13
Quark masses and η → 3π decays
• η → 3π isospin violating; two sources in the Standard Model:
mu 6= md e2 6= 0
• electromagnetic contribution small Sutherland 1967
Baur, Kambor, Wyler 1996; Ditsche, BK, Meißner 2009
η → π+π−π0 : ALOc (s, t, u) =
B(mu −md)
3√3F 2
π
1 +3(s− s0)
M2η −M2
π
s = (pπ+ + pπ−)2 , 3s0.= M2
η + 3M2π
• ∆I = 1 relation between charged and neutral decay amplitudes:
η → 3π0 : An(s, t, u) = Ac(s, t, u) +Ac(t, u, s) +Ac(u, s, t)
• relevance: (potentially) clean access to mu −md
but : large higher-order / final-state interactions
−→ require good theoretical Dalitz-plot description
to extract normalisation
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 13
η → 3π: final-state interactions
• strong final-state interactions among pions
⊲ tree level: Γ(η → π+π−π0) = 66 eV Cronin 1967
⊲ one-loop: Γ(η → π+π−π0) = 160± 50 eV Gasser, Leutwyler 1985
⊲ experimental: Γ(η → π+π−π0) = 296± 16 eV PDG
• major source: large S-wave final-state rescattering −→use dispersion relations to resum those beyond loop expansion
• similar formalism to ω/φ → 3π, but more partial waves
(S waves I = 0, 2, P wave I = 1)
match subtraction constants to ChPT and/or to datatalk by S. Lanz on Tuesday
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 14
η → 3π: final-state interactions
• strong final-state interactions among pions
⊲ tree level: Γ(η → π+π−π0) = 66 eV Cronin 1967
⊲ one-loop: Γ(η → π+π−π0) = 160± 50 eV Gasser, Leutwyler 1985
⊲ experimental: Γ(η → π+π−π0) = 296± 16 eV PDG
• major source: large S-wave final-state rescattering −→use dispersion relations to resum those beyond loop expansion
• similar formalism to ω/φ → 3π, but more partial waves
(S waves I = 0, 2, P wave I = 1)
match subtraction constants to ChPT and/or to datatalk by S. Lanz on Tuesday
• on the other hand: consider r =Γ(η → 3π0)
Γ(η → π+π−π0)
ChPT: rtree = 1.54 , r1-loop = 1.46 , r2-loop = 1.47
PDG: r = 1.432± 0.026 (fit) , r = 1.48± 0.05 (average)
−→ agrees rather well Bijnens, Ghorbani 2007
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 14
η → 3π0 Dalitz plot parameter α
|An(x, y)|2 = |Nn|21 + 2α z + . . .
z ∝ (s− s0)
2 + (t− s0)2 + (u− s0)
2
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
ChPT O(p4)
ChPT O(p6)
Dispersive (KWW)
Crystal Ball@BNL
Crystal Barrel@LEAR
GAMS-2000
KLOE
MAMI-B
MAMI-C
SND
WASA@CELSIUS
WASA@COSY
O(p4) + NREFT (full)
103 × α
+13
+13± 32
−7 . . .− 14
−25± 5
Schneider, BK,Ditsche 2011
PDG average:−31.7± 1.6
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 15
η → π+π−π0: Dalitz plot parameters
• |Ac(x, y)|2 = |Nc|21 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
x =
√3
2MηQη(u− t )
y = 32MηQη
(s0 − s)
a b d
KLOE −1.09 +−
0.010.02 0.12±0.01 0.057+
−0.0090.017
ChPT O(p6) −1.27 ± 0.08 0.39±0.10 0.055±0.057
ChPT O(p4)+ NREFT −1.21 ± 0.01 0.31±0.02 0.050±0.003
dispersive −1.16 0.24 . . . 0.26 0.09 . . . 0.10
Bijnens, Ghorbani 2007
Schneider, BK, Ditsche 2011
Kambor, Wiesendanger, Wyler 1995
• only one modern precision experiment so far KLOE 2008
−→ WASA-at-COSY coming up soon
• note large discrepancy theory vs. experiment for b !
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 16
η → 3π Dalitz parameters, charged vs. neutral
• Dalitz plot vs. amplitude expansion: x ∝ t− u , y ∝ s− s0
|Ac|2 = |Nc|21 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
|An|2 = |Nn|2
1 + 2αz + . . .
Ac = Nc
1 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
An = Nn
1 + αz + . . .
a = 2Re a , b = |a|2 + 2Re b , d = 2Re d , α = Re α
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 17
η → 3π Dalitz parameters, charged vs. neutral
• Dalitz plot vs. amplitude expansion: x ∝ t− u , y ∝ s− s0
|Ac|2 = |Nc|21 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
|An|2 = |Nn|2
1 + 2αz + . . .
Ac = Nc
1 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
An = Nn
1 + αz + . . .
a = 2Re a , b = |a|2 + 2Re b , d = 2Re d , α = Re α
• isospin relation between neutral and charged parameters:
α =1
2
(b+ d
)−→ α =
1
4
(
b+ d− a2
4− (Im a)2
)
<1
4
(
b+ d− a2
4
)
Bijnens, Ghorbani 2007
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 17
η → 3π Dalitz parameters, charged vs. neutral
• Dalitz plot vs. amplitude expansion: x ∝ t− u , y ∝ s− s0
|Ac|2 = |Nc|21 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
|An|2 = |Nn|2
1 + 2αz + . . .
Ac = Nc
1 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
An = Nn
1 + αz + . . .
a = 2Re a , b = |a|2 + 2Re b , d = 2Re d , α = Re α
• isospin relation between neutral and charged parameters:
α =1
4
(
b+ d− a2
4
)
− ζ1(1 + ζ2a)2 , ζ1 = 0.050± 0.005 , ζ2 = 0.225± 0.003
ζ1/2 determined by ππ phases Schneider, BK, Ditsche 2011
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 17
η → 3π Dalitz parameters, charged vs. neutral
• Dalitz plot vs. amplitude expansion: x ∝ t− u , y ∝ s− s0
|Ac|2 = |Nc|21 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
|An|2 = |Nn|2
1 + 2αz + . . .
Ac = Nc
1 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
An = Nn
1 + αz + . . .
a = 2Re a , b = |a|2 + 2Re b , d = 2Re d , α = Re α
• isospin relation between neutral and charged parameters:
α =1
4
(
b+ d− a2
4
)
− ζ1(1 + ζ2a)2 , ζ1 = 0.050± 0.005 , ζ2 = 0.225± 0.003
ζ1/2 determined by ππ phases Schneider, BK, Ditsche 2011
• use precise KLOE data on a, b, d as input KLOE 2008
αtheoKLOE = −0.062± 0.003stat
+0.004−0.006syst ± 0.003ππ
αexpKLOE = −0.030± 0.004stat
+0.002−0.004syst
significanttension!
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 17
η → 3π Dalitz parameters, charged vs. neutral
• Dalitz plot vs. amplitude expansion: x ∝ t− u , y ∝ s− s0
|Ac|2 = |Nc|21 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
|An|2 = |Nn|2
1 + 2αz + . . .
Ac = Nc
1 + ay + by2 + dx2 + . . .
An = Nn
1 + αz + . . .
a = 2Re a , b = |a|2 + 2Re b , d = 2Re d , α = Re α
• isospin relation between neutral and charged parameters:
α =1
4
(
b+ d− a2
4
)
− ζ1(1 + ζ2a)2 , ζ1 = 0.050± 0.005 , ζ2 = 0.225± 0.003
ζ1/2 determined by ππ phases
• displayed as constraint in a− b plane:
-1.40 -1.35 -1.30 -1.25 -1.20 -1.15 -1.10 -1.05 -1.00a
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
b
O(p4) + NREFT
KLOE
NREFT imaginary part
NO imaginary part
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 17
Hadronic decays of the η′
• large final-state interactions expected in η′ → ηππ and η′ → 3π
−→ unitarised U(3) ChPT e.g. Borasoy, Nißler 2005
• only includes two-particle unitarity:
−→ dispersive study in progress Schneider, BK
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 18
Hadronic decays of the η′
• large final-state interactions expected in η′ → ηππ and η′ → 3π
−→ unitarised U(3) ChPT e.g. Borasoy, Nißler 2005
• only includes two-particle unitarity:
−→ dispersive study in progress Schneider, BK
• claim: Gross, Treiman, Wilczek 1979
Γ(η′ → π0π+π−)
Γ(η′ → ηπ+π−)∝
(md −mu
ms
)2
assumptions: (a) A(η′ → π0π+π−) = ǫπ0η ×A(η′ → ηπ+π−)
(b) amplitudes "essentially flat" in phase space
• refuted in unitarised U(3) ChPT: assumptions too simplisticBorasoy, Meißner, Nißler 2006
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 18
(g − 2)µ, light-by-light, and transition form factors
Czerwinski et al., arXiv:1207.6556 [hep-ph]
• leading and next-to-leading hadronic effects in (g − 2)µ:
had
had
−→ hadronic light-by-light soon dominant uncertainty
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 19
(g − 2)µ, light-by-light, and transition form factors
Czerwinski et al., arXiv:1207.6556 [hep-ph]
• leading and next-to-leading hadronic effects in (g − 2)µ:
had
had
−→ hadronic light-by-light soon dominant uncertainty
• important contribution: pseudoscalar pole terms
singly / doubly virtual form factors
FPγγ∗(M2P , q
2, 0) and FPγ∗γ∗(M2P , q
21 , q
22)
π0, η, η′
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 19
(g − 2)µ, light-by-light, and transition form factors
Czerwinski et al., arXiv:1207.6556 [hep-ph]
• leading and next-to-leading hadronic effects in (g − 2)µ:
had
had
−→ hadronic light-by-light soon dominant uncertainty
• important contribution: pseudoscalar pole terms
singly / doubly virtual form factors
FPγγ∗(M2P , q
2, 0) and FPγ∗γ∗(M2P , q
21 , q
22)
• for specific virtualities: linked tovector-meson conversion decays
π0, η, η′
−→ e.g. Fπ0γ∗γ∗(M2π0 , q21,M
2ω) measurable in ω → π0ℓ+ℓ− etc.
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 19
Transition form factors in η → γℓ+ℓ−
• 2-pion contribution to Fηγ∗γ(s, 0) intimately linked to Aηππγ :
η π+
π−
γ∗
γ
discFηγ∗γ(s, 0) ∝ Aηππγ(s, 0)× FV ∗
π (s) = A× P (s)× |FVπ (s)|2
F(I=1)ηγ∗γ (s, 0) = 1 +
B(η→π+π−γ)︷︸︸︷
Aηππγ
Aηγγ
︸︷︷︸
B(η→γγ)
e s
12π2
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′q3ππ(s
′)
s′3/2P (s′)︸ ︷︷ ︸
1+α s′
|FVπ (s′)|2s′ − s
• corrections from isoscalar contributions −→ here small
• in particular: form factor slope bη function of α(η → π+π−γ)
−→ indications for significant deviation from VMD pictureHanhart, Stollenwerk, Wirzba, work in progress
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 20
Transition form factors in ω, φ → π0ℓ+ℓ−
• long-standing puzzle: transition form factor ω → π0ℓ+ℓ− far fromvector-meson-dominance picture see e.g. Terschlüsen, Leupold 2010
disc
ω
π0
π0
ωπ
+
π−
=
fωπ0(s) = fωπ0(0) +s
12π2
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′q3ππ(s
′)FV ∗π (s′)f1(s
′)
s′3/2(s′ − s)Köpp 1974
• f1(s) = fω→3π1 (s) = F(s) + F(s) P-wave projection of F(s, t, u)
• subtracting dispersion relation once yields
⊲ better convergence for ω → π0γ∗ transition form factor
⊲ sum rule for ω → π0γ −→ saturated at 90–95%
fωπ0(0) =1
12π2
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′q3ππ(s
′)
s′3/2FV ∗π (s′)f1(s
′) , Γω→π0γ ∝ |fV π0(0)|2
Schneider, BK, Niecknig 2012
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 21
Numerical results: ω → π0γ∗
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
1
10
100
√s [GeV]
|Fωπ0(s)|2
NA60 ’09NA60 ’11Lepton-GVMDTerschlüsen et al.f1(s) = aΩ(s)full dispersive
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
√s [GeV]
dΓω→
π0µ+µ−/d
s[10−
6G
eV−1]
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.610-8
10-7
10-6
10-5
10-4
10-3
10-2
10-1
100
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.70
3
6
9
10em
6√s [GeV]
dΓω→
π0e+e−/d
s[G
eV−1]
• clear enhancement vs. pure VMD
• unable to account for steep rise (similar in φ → ηℓ+ℓ−?)
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 22
Numerical results: φ → π0γ∗
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
1
10
100
√s [GeV]
|Fφπ0(s)|2
VMDf1(s) = aΩ(s)once subtracted f1(s)
twice subtracted f1(s)
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
√s [GeV]
dΓφ→
π0µ+µ−/d
s[10−
8G
eV−1]
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.910-10
10-9
10-8
10-7
10-6
10-5
10-4
10-3
10-2
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.801
2
34
5
6
7
10em
8
√s [GeV]
dΓφ→
π0e+e−/d
s[G
eV−1]
• measurement would be extremely helpful: ρ in physical region!
• partial-wave amplitude backed up by experiment
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 23
Summary
Dispersion relations for meson decays
• based on fundamental principles ofunitarity, analyticity, crossing symmetry
• rigorous treatment of two- and three-hadron final states
• extends range of applicability (at least) to full elastic regime
• matching to ChPT where it works best:
(sub)threshold, normalisation, slopes. . .
• relates hadronic to radiative decays / transition form factors
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 24
Summary
Dispersion relations for meson decays
• based on fundamental principles ofunitarity, analyticity, crossing symmetry
• rigorous treatment of two- and three-hadron final states
• extends range of applicability (at least) to full elastic regime
• matching to ChPT where it works best:
(sub)threshold, normalisation, slopes. . .
• relates hadronic to radiative decays / transition form factors
Omissions
• not-extremely-rare decays not yet seen experimentally: η′ → 4πGuo, BK, Wirzba 2011
• impact of transition form factors on rare leptonic decays
π0 → e+e−, η → ℓ+ℓ− KTeV 2007
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 24
Spares
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 25
ππ scattering constrained by analyticity and unitarity
Roy equations = coupled system of partial-wave dispersion relations+ crossing symmetry + unitarity
• twice-subtracted fixed-t dispersion relation:
T (s, t) = c(t) +1
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′
s2
s′2(s′ − s)+
u2
s′2(s′ − u)
ImT (s′, t)
• subtraction function c(t) determined from crossing symmetry
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 26
ππ scattering constrained by analyticity and unitarity
Roy equations = coupled system of partial-wave dispersion relations+ crossing symmetry + unitarity
• twice-subtracted fixed-t dispersion relation:
T (s, t) = c(t) +1
π
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′
s2
s′2(s′ − s)+
u2
s′2(s′ − u)
ImT (s′, t)
• subtraction function c(t) determined from crossing symmetry
• project onto partial waves tIJ(s) (angular momentum J , isospin I)−→ coupled system of partial-wave integral equations
tIJ(s) = kIJ(s) +
2∑
I′=0
∞∑
J′=0
∫ ∞
4M2π
ds′KII′
JJ′(s, s′)ImtI′
J′(s′)
Roy 1971
• subtraction polynomial kIJ(s): ππ scattering lengthscan be matched to chiral perturbation theory Colangelo et al. 2001
• kernel functions KII′
JJ′(s, s′) known analytically
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 26
ππ scattering constrained by analyticity and unitarity
• elastic unitarity −→ coupled integral equations for phase shifts
• modern precision analyses:⊲ ππ scattering Ananthanarayan et al. 2001, García-Martín et al. 2011
⊲ πK scattering Büttiker et al. 2004
• example: ππ I = 0 S-wave phase shift & inelasticity
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
s1/2
(MeV)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
CFDOld K decay dataNa48/2K->2 π decayKaminski et al.Grayer et al. Sol.BGrayer et al. Sol. CGrayer et al. Sol. DHyams et al. 73
δ0
(0)
1000 1100 1200 1300 1400
s1/2
(MeV)
0
0.5
1
η00(s)
Cohen et al.Etkin et al.Wetzel et al.Hyams et al. 75Kaminski et al.Hyams et al. 73Protopopescu et al.CFD .
ππ KK
ππ ππ
García-Martín et al. 2011
• strong constraints on data from analyticity and unitarity!
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 27
Pion vector form factor and ahvpµ
• more refined representation: taken from talk by G. Colangelo 2008
F πV (s) = Ω1(s)×Gω(s)× Ωinel(s)
Gω(s): ρ− ω mixingΩinel(s): inelastic for
√s & (Mπ +Mω), parametrized using
conformal mapping techniques Trocóniz, Ynduráin 2002Comparison CMD2(04)–KLOE
0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1
E (GeV)
0
10
20
30
40
50
|Fπ|2
CMD2 dataKLOE dataFit to both sets
• achieve amazing precisionfor hadronic contribution toaµ below 1 GeV:
ahvpµ (√s ≤ 2MK)
= (493.7± 1.0)× 10−10
Colangelo et al. (preliminary)
• check of data compatibilitywith analyticity / unitarity
• also extension to higher energies Hanhart 2012
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 28
Transition form factor beyond the πω threshold
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.40.1
1
10
100
√s [GeV]
|Fφπ0(s)|2
NA60 ’09NA60 ’11Lepton-G
VMDCMD-2
Terschlüsen et al.f1(s) = aΩ(s)
once subtracted f1(s)
• full solution above naive VMD, but still too low
• higher intermediate states (4π / πω) more important?
B. Kubis, Hadronic and radiative decays of light mesons – p. 29