[Figures and Memo]
[Need Invest.]
[Wrong Sign Page]
Note: this table of D0-D0bar mixing references is not complete,
and I sincerely apologize for any references that I have overlooked.
If you know of any such references, or if you find errors, please
let me know.
Harry Nelson, hnn@charm.physics.ucsb.edu
Conversions: here, I neglect CP violation. However, the types of
CP violation present or expected in the K0 and B0_d
systems would not substantially alter these relationships.
x = (delta-M in GeV) * 6.305*10^11
x = (M_12 in GeV) * 3.153*10^11
(6.305*10^11 = 1./(0.197327)*2.99792 * 10^23 * 0.415 * 10^-12
= c/(hbar * c) * tau_D = tau_D/hbar
y = (G_12 in GeV) * 6.305*10^11
y = (delta-G in GeV) * 3.153*10^11
===============================================================================
******************
* STANDARD MODEL *
******************
(predictions enumerated by the tag `smp#')
===============================================================================
SEARCH FOR CHARM.
By Mary K. Gaillard, Benjamin W. Lee (Fermilab), Jonathan
L. Rosner (Minnesota U.). FERMILAB-PUB-74/86-THY, Aug 1974. 99pp.
Published in Rev.Mod.Phys.47:277,1975
(spires key=48933)
In section B.4. of this paper, they consider D0-D0bar mixing, for
the first time in the literature (as far as I know; they do not
give any reference to earlier work). They point out that x and
y are of order tan^2(theta_C).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHARMONIUM SPECTROSCOPY.
By Thomas Appelquist, A. De Rujula, H.David Politzer
(Harvard U.), S.L. Glashow (MIT, LNS). Print-74-1704
(HARVARD), (Received Dec 1974). 10pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.34:365,1975 (*Title changed in
journal to `Spectroscopy of the New Mesons'*)
(spires key=57282)
Toward the end of this paper, they discuss mixing, and they surmise
that the magnitude of delta-M \approx tan^2(theta_C)/tau_D. They
forget to square for the rate computation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WEAK DECAYS OF CHARMED HADRONS.
By R.L. Kingsley, S.B. Treiman, F. Wilczek, A. Zee (Princeton U.). Print-75-0029 (PRINCETON), (Received
Jan 1975). 17pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D11:1919,1975
(spires key=58858)
Toward the end of this paper, there is a section on D0-D0bar mixing,
which is the best in the early literature. They again deduce (and attribute
to Gaillard, Lee, and Rosner) that |x|, |y| \approx tan^2(theta_C). They
then note that a D0 going to states with a K- or K0bar is favored, and
a D0 going to states with a K+ or K0 is disfavored; they note the existence
of DCSD. They note the nearly exact GIM suppression, due to the lightness
of the s and d quarks on the scale of the W (calling it exact SU(3) symmetry),
and they note that Gaillard and Lee already knew about the additional
suppression. Finally, in equation (9), they give the expression for
`R_WS', in terms of delta-Gamma and delta-M. An amusing quote is:
`Since charmed mesons will pretty surely have lifetimes too small
to permit direct measurements of the kind that have been carried
out in the K_S, K_L system, one can at best hope to get information
on mixing only through indirect methods, by integrating count rates
over time.'
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CP VIOLATING EFFECTS IN HEAVY MESON SYSTEMS
By Hai-Yang Cheng (Purdue U.). PURD-TH-81-6, (Received Jan 1982). 48pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D26:143,1982
(spires key=865834)
Evaluated 4 CKM scenarios; all had |V_ub| = 0.07; the modern
value is 0.0032+-0.0008, which is 22 times smaller. The scenarios
differed in their assumptions for m_t and V_cb; the modern
m_t is 174+-5 GeV; the modern |V_cb| is 0.040+-0.002. All these
changes render Cheng's predictions a little bit moot, but it is
interesting to absorb the archaeology of CKM predictions.
Scenario m_t (GeV) V_cb
-------- ------------ --------
I 15 GeV -0.22
II 15 GeV 0.48
III 30 GeV -0.14
IV 30 GeV 0.40
Then, for pure CKM, the estimates are (neglecting CP violation)
(note, to convert his table to GeV, one needs to evaluate
G_F^2 * f_p^2 * m_p * M_W^2 / 6 pi^2 = 1.11 * 10^-9 GeV, for
f_p = 0.2 GeV)
Scenario
--------
I delta-M = 3.1 * 10^-16 GeV (smp5)
x = 1.9 * 10^-4
G_12 =-1.1 * 10^-16 GeV
y =-6.9 * 10^-5
II delta-M = 5.9 * 10^-16 GeV (smp6)
x = 3.7 * 10^-4
G_12 =-1.3 * 10^-15 GeV
y =-8.0 * 10^-4
III delta-M = 1.4 * 10^-16 GeV (smp7)
x = 9.0 * 10^-5
G_12 =-1.0 * 10^-17 GeV
y =-6.4 * 10^-6
IV delta-M = 3.9 * 10^-16 GeV (smp8)
x = 2.4 * 10^-4
G_12 =-9.5 * 10^-16 GeV
y =-6.0 * 10^-4
Then, those same 4 scenarios are evaluated for 2 non-standard models,
now in the non-SM section.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The charged current couplings and CP-Violation
in the B-meson system
E.A. Paschos, B. Stech, and U. Turke
Physics Letters 128B, 240-244 (1983)
(spires key=1073389)
delta-M = 1.9 * 10^-15 GeV (smp15)
x = 1.2 * 10^-3
delta-G = 2.6 * 10^-20 GeV to 6.8E-19 GeV
y = 8.2 * 10^-9 to 2.1E-7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D0-D0bar Mixing: A Possible Test of Physics Beyond the Standard Model
A. Datta and D. Kumbhakar
Z. Phys. C 27, 515-522 (1985)
(spires key=1235028)
Datta argues that D0-D0bar mixing is suppressed by a factor
of order m_s^4/(m_c^2 * m_W^2), where m_s, m_c, and m_W are the
masses of the strange quark, charmed quark, and the W-boson,
respectively. This accounts for the difference with Wolfenstein,
below.
delta-M = (1.03-3.53) * 10^-18 GeV (smp20)
x = (0.65-2.2) * 10^-6
delta-G = 6.8 * 10^-19 GeV
y = 2.2 * 10^-7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D0 ANTI-D0 MIXING.
By Lincoln Wolfenstein (Carnegie Mellon U.). CMU-HEP85-10, (Received Aug 1985). 5pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.164B:170,1985
(spires key=1383787)
Wolfenstein first scales the Lee-Gaillard result (see below under
`original mixing sources'), by (m_s/m_c)^2, which is different than
that of Datta above; there may be some sort of physics of keeping track
(or not) of the dithering of the initial quark momenta; what Wolfenstein
says about Datta and Kumbhakar above is:
`In this note we point out that calculations using the box diagram
[note: this is used by Datta and Kumbhakar] are completely unreliable.
We believe that it is impossible at this time and probably at any
time to calculate Delta-M_D or even determine its sign. The best
we can do is estimate an order of magnitude and a reasonable upper
limit.'
Wolfenstein gives 2 Lee-Gaillard estimates, both with f_D=f_K, and:
m_s = 150 MeV
delta-M = 1.6 * 10^-17 GeV (smp21)
x = 1 * 10^-4
m_s = 500 MeV
delta-M = 1.6 * 10^-16 GeV (smp22)
x = 1 * 10^-3
from pipi, KK intermediate states:
delta-M = 3.2 * 10^-15 GeV (smp23)
x = 2 * 10^-2
The biggest Wolfenstein can possibly imagine
delta-M = 1.6 * 10^-14 GeV (smp24)
x = 1 * 10^-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISPERSIVE EFFECTS IN D0 ANTI-D0 MIXING.
By John F. Donoghue, Eugene Golowich, Barry R. Holstein (Massachusetts U., Amherst), Josip Trampetic
(Brookhaven & Boskovic Inst., Zagreb). UMHEP-233, (Received Aug 1985). 14pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D33:179,1986
(spires key=1389920)
Physical Review D 33, 179-183 (1986)
box:
delta-M = 2.5 * 10^-17 GeV (smp25)
x = 1.6 * 10^-5
2-pseudoscalar dispersive:
---------------------------
From their equation 19, with new BR's from 1998 RPP
delta-M = 4.8 * 10^-16 GeV
x = 3.0 * 10^-4
3-pseudoscalar dispersive:
---------------------------
From their equation 22
delta-M = 6.0 * 10^-16 GeV
x = 3.8 * 10^-4
4-pseudoscalar dispersive:
---------------------------
From their equation 22
delta-M = 1.0 * 10^-15 GeV (smp26)
x = 6.3 * 10^-4
.... this is also their guess for the total.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MASS MATRIX ANSATZ AND FLAVOR NONCONSERVATION IN MODELS WITH MULTIPLE HIGGS DOUBLETS.
By T.P. Cheng (Missouri U., St. Louis), Marc Sher (Washington U., St. Louis). WU-TH-87-1, Feb
1987. 25pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D35:3484,1987
(spires key=1639617)
Simple m_s^2 scaling:
delta-M = 7 * 10^-16 GeV
x = 4.4 * 10^-4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ON D0 - ANTI-D0 MIXING IN THE STANDARD MODEL.
By P. Colangelo, G. Nardulli (Bari U. & INFN, Bari), N. Paver (Trieste U. & INFN, Trieste).
BARI-TH/90-62-Rev., Feb 1990. 15pp.
Revised version.
Published in Phys.Lett.B242:71,1990
(spires key=2161788)
they use `dispersive' techniques, and they try to include the K0bar eta'
delta-M = -0.5 * 10^-13 (smp30)
x = -3.2 * 10^-2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
D0-D0bar MIXING IN HEAVY QUARK EFFECTIVE FIELD THEORY: THE SEQUEL,
by Thorsten Ohl, Giulia Ricciardi, and Elizabeth H. Simmons
Nucl. Phys. B403 (1993) 605
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9301212
(spires key=2670887)
HQET
------
delta-M = (2.2+-1.3) * 10^-17 GeV or (smp35)
x = (1.4+-0.8) * 10^-5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHARM MIXING AND CP VIOLATION IN THE STANDARD MODEL.
By Gustavo Burdman (Fermilab). FERMILAB-CONF-94-200, Jul 1994. 13pp.
Presented at Workshop on the Future of High Sensitivity Charm
Experiments: CHARM2000, Batavia, IL, 7-9 Jun 1994.
In *Batavia 1994, Proceedings, The future of high-sensitivity charm
experiments* 75-84, and Fermilab Batavia - FERMILAB-Conf-94-200
(94/07,rec.Aug.) 13 p. (414016).
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9407378
(spires key=2970562)
Short Distance
------------------
delta-M = 0.5E-17 * (fd/fpi)^2 GeV (fd=250, fpi=130 MeV)
= 1.8E-17 GeV
x = 1.2E-5
also y = 1.2E-5
Dispersive
------------
delta-M = -4.0E-16 GeV
x = -2.5E-4
HQET
------
delta-M = (1.6-3.2) * 10^-17
x = (1-2) * 10^-5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHARM AS PROBE OF NEW PHYSICS.
By Sandip Pakvasa (Hawaii U.). UH-511-787-94A, Aug 1994. 11pp.
Invited talk at CHARM2000 Workshop, Batavia, IL, Jun 7-9, 1994.
Published in Chin.J.Phys.32:1163-1172,1994.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9408270
(spires key=2980894)
Short Distance
------------------
delta-M = 0.5E-17
x = 3.2E-6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROBING NEW PHYSICS IN RARE CHARM PROCESSES.
By J.L. Hewett (SLAC). SLAC-PUB-6674, Sep 1994. 11pp.
Presented at 1994 Meeting of the American Physical Society, Division of Particles and Fields (DPF
94), Albuquerque, NM, 2-6 Aug 1994.
Published in DPF Conf.1994:0951-955 (QCD161:A6:1994)
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9409379
(spires key=3017125)
box diagrams (refers to Datta)
------------
delta-M = 5 * 10^-18 GeV (smp40)
x = 3 * 10^-6
intermediate particle dispersive (refers to never-pub Burdman, Golowich,
Hewett, Pakvasa)
--------------------------------
delta-M = 1 * 10^-16 GeV (smp41)
x = 6 * 10^-5
HQET (refers to Georgi and Ohl)
------
delta-M = 1 * 10^-17 GeV (smp42)
x = 6 * 10^-4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
POTENTIAL FOR DISCOVERIES IN CHARM MESON PHYSICS.
By Gustavo Burdman (Fermilab). FERMILAB-CONF-95-281-T, Aug 1995. 16pp.
Presented at Workshop on Tau Charm Factory, Argonne, IL, Jun 21-23, 1995.
In *Argonne 1995, Tau/charm factory* 409-424, and Fermilab Batavia -
FERMILAB-Conf-95-281 (95,rec.Aug.) 16 p.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9508349
(spires key=3202313)
A very nice review.
Revises Datta to (use f_d=250, f_pi=130 MeV):
delta-M = 9.2 * 10^-17 GeV (smp47)
x = 5.8 * 10^-5
Makes two long distance estimates:
just PP:
delta-M = 1.3 * 10^-15 * (1.46 - sqrt(b)) GeV [b=DCSD/CF rate] (smp48)
x = 8.4 * 10^-4 * (1.46 - sqrt(b))
including PV and VV:
delta-M = 1.1 * 10^-15 * (1.46 - sqrt(b)) GeV [b=DCSD/CF rate] (smp49)
x = 6.5 * 10^-4 * (1.46 - sqrt(b))
I take b=2, from David's most recent fit. then, I get
delta-M=-4.3 * 10^-16
x=-2.7E-4
HQET:
delta-M = 1.6-3.2 * 10^-17 GeV (smp51)
x = 1-2 * 10^-5
also does non-standard estimates; see below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
D MESON MIXING IN BROKEN SU(3).
By Thomas A. Kaeding (LBL, Berkeley). LBL-37224, May 1995. 11pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.B357:151-155,1995
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9505393
(spires key=3156460)
box diagrams
------------
delta-M = 4.8 * 10^-17 GeV
x = 3.0 * 10^-5
Broken SU(3) for intermediate states
------------------------------------
Table - full octet
delta-M = 9.6+-2.2 * 10^-15 GeV
x = 6.0+-1.4 * 10^-3
as large as...
delta-M = 1 * 10^-13 GeV
x = 6.3 * 10^-2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHARM NONLEPTONIC DECAYS AND FINAL STATE INTERACTIONS.
By F. Buccella (Naples U.), M. Lusignoli, A. Pugliese (Rome U. & INFN, Rome).
ROME1-1130-96, Jan 1996. 14pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.B379:249-256,1996
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9601343
(spires key=3293513)
y = 1.5 * 10^-3 (smp50)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ON DIPENGUIN CONTRIBUTION TO D0 - ANTI-D0 MIXING.
By Alexey A. Petrov (Massachusetts U., Amherst). UMHEP-439, Mar 1997. 9pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D56:1685-1687,1997
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9703335
(spires key=3525686)
Dipenguin
---------
delta-M = - 0.2 *(f_D/f_pi)^2 * 10^-17 GeV ; take (f_D/f_pi)^2 =
(186/131)^2 = 2.02
= - 0.4 * 10^-17 GeV
x = - 2.5 * 10^-6 (smp55)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
D0 - ANTI-D0 MIXING IN THE WEAK GAUGED U(4)-L X U(4)-R CHIRAL LAGRANGIAN MODEL.
By G. Amoros, F.J. Botella, S. Noguera (Valencia U.),
J. Portoles (INFN, Naples), FTUV-97-43, Jul 1997. 14pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.B422:265-276,1998
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9707293
(spires key=3587452)
delta-M = 2.2 * 10^-17 GeV
x = 1.4 * 10^-5 (smp60)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAN NEARBY RESONANCES ENHANCE D0 - ANTI-D0 MIXING?
By Eugene Golowich (Massachusetts U., Amherst), Alexey A. Petrov (Johns Hopkins U.).
UMHEP-450, Feb 1998. 9pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.B427:172-178,1998
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9802291
(spires key=3701280)
sum over about 4 type of intermediate states
delta-M = 2.4 * 10^-16 GeV (smp65)
x = 1.5 * 10^-4
delta-G = 1.8 * 10^-16 GeV
|y| = 1.1 * 10^-4
===============================================================================
***********************
* NON-STANDARD MODELS *
***********************
(predictions enumerated by the tag `nsp#')
===============================================================================
Family Symmetry
G. Volkov, V.A. Monich, and B.V. Struminski Yad. Fiz 34, 435 (1981).
(spires key=927066)
delta-M = 1 * 10^-13 GeV (nsp5)
x = 6 * 10^-2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CP VIOLATING EFFECTS IN HEAVY MESON SYSTEMS
By Hai-Yang Cheng (Purdue U.). PURD-TH-81-6, (Received Jan 1982). 48pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D26:143,1982
(spires key=865834)
Evaluated 8 Non-Standard Scenarios, where for each, the 4
CKM scenarios described in the Standard section. Additionally,
for his 2 Higgs model,
Here, m_H1=7 GeV, m_H2=25 GeV, \overline{s}_1=0.74,
\overline{s}_2=0.4, \overline{s}_3=1, \sin\delta_H=0.3, and
\cos\delta_H<0
Scenario
--------
I delta-M = 4.1 * 10^-16 GeV
x = 2.6 * 10^-4
G_12 =-1.1 * 10^-16 GeV
y =-6.9 * 10^-5
II delta-M = 1.1 * 10^-15 GeV
x = 7.0 * 10^-4
G_12 =-1.3 * 10^-15 GeV
y =-8.0 * 10^-4
III delta-M = 1.8 * 10^-16 GeV
x = 1.1 * 10^-4
G_12 =-1.0 * 10^-17 GeV
y =-6.4 * 10^-6
IV delta-M = 7.6 * 10^-16 GeV
x = 4.8 * 10^-4
G_12 =-9.5 * 10^-16 GeV
y =-6.0 * 10^-4
Here, m_H1=7 GeV, m_H2=12 GeV, \overline{s}_1=0.79,
\overline{s}_2=0.64, \overline{s}_3=1, \sin\delta_H=1.
Scenario
--------
I delta-M = 7.5 * 10^-16 GeV
x = 4.7 * 10^-4
G_12 =-1.1 * 10^-16 GeV
y =-6.9 * 10^-5
II delta-M = 2.8 * 10^-15 GeV
x = 1.8 * 10^-3
G_12 =-1.3 * 10^-15 GeV
y =-8.0 * 10^-4
III delta-M = 3.0 * 10^-16 GeV
x = 1.9 * 10^-4
G_12 =-1.1 * 10^-17 GeV
y =-7.0 * 10^-6
IV delta-M = 2.0 * 10^-15 GeV
x = 1.3 * 10^-3
G_12 =-9.5 * 10^-16 GeV
y =-6.0 * 10^-4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D0 ANTI-D0 MIXING: STANDARD VERSUS NONSTANDARD SCENARIOS.
By Amitava Datta (ICTP, Trieste). IC/84/179, Oct 1984. 9pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.154B:287,1985
(spires key=1308840)
another Higgs Doublet
-----------------------
delta-M = 8 * 10^-14 * (sin^2(theta_D))/(sin^2(theta_K)) (these are some kind
of mixing angles)
x = 0.05 * (sin^2(theta_D))/(sin^2(theta_K)) (nsp10)
extension to SU(2)_L x SU(2)_R x U(1)_{B-L}
---------------------------------------------
(A) delta-M = 10^-17 - 10^-16 GeV (nsp11)
x = (0.6 - 6.0) * 10^-5
(B) delta-M = 10^-16 - 10^-15 GeV (nsp12)
x = (0.6 - 6.0) * 10^-4
Kane-Thun Model
-----------------
delta-M = 0.5 - 1.1 * 10^-13 GeV (nsp13)
x = 3.2 - 6.9 * 10^-2
SUSY
------
(A) delta-M = 10^-21 - 10^-21 GeV (nsp14)
x = (0.06 - 60.) * 10^-8
(B) delta-M = 10^-15 - 10^-18 GeV (nsp15)
x = (0.06 - 60.) * 10^-5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MASS MIXING, CP VIOLATION AND LEFT-RIGHT SYMMETRY FOR HEAVY NEUTRAL
MESONS.
By G. Ecker, W. Grimus (Vienna U.). UWThPh-1985-14, (Received Oct 1985).
30pp.
Published in Z.Phys.C30:293,1986
(spires key=1406493)
For a higgs mass (not sure which one) of mass m_H,
delta-M = 10^-17 * (10 TeV/m_H)^2 GeV (nsp20)
x = 6.3 * 10^-6 * (10TeV/m_H)^2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNATURES FOR INTERFAMILY TRANSITIONS INVOLVING HEAVY QUARKS.
By I.I. Bigi (Aachen, Tech. Hochsch.), G. Kopp (Aachen, Tech.
Hochsch.), P.M. Zerwas (Aachen, Tech. Hochsch.). PITHA 85/15, Jul
1985. 19pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.166B:238,1986
(spires key=1390473)
No real prediction, but let's take the limit on Lambda
from the kaon case and propagate it to D mixing... then
delta-M = 1.4 * 10^-14 GeV
x = 8.5 * 10^-3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MASS MATRIX ANSATZ AND FLAVOR NONCONSERVATION IN MODELS WITH MULTIPLE HIGGS DOUBLETS.
By T.P. Cheng (Missouri U., St. Louis), Marc Sher (Washington U., St. Louis). WU-TH-87-1, Feb
1987. 25pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D35:3484,1987
(spires key=1639617)
For a higgs mass (not sure which one) of mass m_H,
delta-M = 7 * 10^-14 * (1 TeV/m_H)^2 GeV (nsp20)
x = 4.4 * 10^-2 * (1 TeV/m_H)^2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOURTH GENERATION SIGNATURES IN D0 - ANTI-D0 MIXING AND RARE D
DECAYS.
By K.S. Babu (Rochester U.), X.G. He (Melbourne U.), Xueqian Li
(Beijing, Inst. Theor. Phys.), Sandip Pakvasa (Hawaii U.).
UH-511-633-87, Oct 1987. 18pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.205B:540,1988
(spires key=1767658)
Fourth Generation, from their Fig. 1; CKM elements from 0.001 to 0.05,
and mass of b' from 50 to 250 GeV.
delta-M = 1.6E-15 to 1.6E-13 GeV
x = 1E-3 to 0.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAVOR CHANGING NEUTRAL CURRENTS AND SEESAW MASSES FOR QUARKS.
By Anjan S. Joshipura (Matscience, Chennai). Print-89-0177
(MATSCIENCE), (Received Feb 1989). 37pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D39:878,1989
(spires key=1951939)
FCNC in the seesaw limit.
delta-M = 1E-17 to 6E-15 GeV
x = 6.3E-6 to 3.8E-2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CP VIOLATION BEYOND THE STANDARD MODEL AND FINAL STATE INTERACTION PHASES IN D
MESONS.
By A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, J.C. Raynal (Orsay, LPTHE). LPTHE-ORSAY-92-34, Jun 1992. 19pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.B292:353-363,1992
(spires key=2565277)
???? (nsp25)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
SHOULD SQUARKS BE DEGENERATE?
By Yosef Nir (Weizmann Inst.), Nathan Seiberg (Rutgers U., Piscataway). RU-93-16, Apr
1993. 16pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.B309:337-343,1993
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9304307
(spires key=2738864)
If their mechanism of quark-squark alignment is correct,
mixing should be `at or near the current experimental bound'
x = 10^-1 (nsp35)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR CHANGING SCALAR INTERACTIONS.
By Lawrence Hall (UC, Berkeley), Steven Weinberg (Texas U.).
UTTG-22-92, Mar 1993.
16pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D48:979-983,1993
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9303241
(spires key=2707691)
their equation 25 and m_H=1 TeV, then:
delta-M = 1.8 * 10^-13 GeV (nsp40)
x = 1.1 * 10^-1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MASS MATRIX MODELS: THE SEQUEL.
By Miriam Leurer, Yosef Nir (Weizmann Inst.), Nathan Seiberg (Rutgers U., Piscataway).
RU-93-43, Oct 1993. 45pp.
Published in Nucl.Phys.B420:468-504,1994
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9310320
(spires key=2829835)
In section 2.3, they note:
`Then the model predicts that Delta-m_D is very close to the experimental
upper bound. This is actually not just a feature of the model presented
here, but a crucial test of the quark-squark alignment idea: in all QSA
models, (V_L^d)_{12} is highly suppressed, and, therefore, (V_L^u)_{12}
must be equal to the Cabibbo angle, namely, (V_L^u)_{12} approx lambda.
This gives:
(K_L^u)_{12} approx lambda, (2.42)
which is at the order of the upper bound. The conclusion is that in all
QSA models, D-Dbar mixing is orders of magnitude above the Standard Model
and should be very close to its present upper bound.'
In the conclusions, they note:
`Whatever the scale we associate with the New Physics, it may have many
other consequences:
(i) A horizontal symmetry could align quark mass matrices with squark
mass-squared matrices in a precise enough way to suppress SUSY
contributions to neutral meson mixing. If squarks are found, and
if they are non-degenerate, a horizontal symmetry is almost
unavoidable. Another crucial test to the quark-squark alignment
mechanism is that D-Dbar mixing should be close to the present
experimental upper bound.'
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROBING NEW PHYSICS IN RARE CHARM PROCESSES.
By J.L. Hewett (SLAC). SLAC-PUB-6674, Sep 1994. 11pp.
Presented at 1994 Meeting of the American Physical Society, Division of Particles and Fields (DPF
94), Albuquerque, NM, 2-6 Aug 1994.
Published in DPF Conf.1994:0951-955 (QCD161:A6:1994)
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9409379
(spires key=3017125)
4th Generation Mb' from 100-400 GeV, |Vcb'*Vub'| 0.0002 to 0.05
------------
delta-M = 10^-17 - 2*10^-13 GeV
x = 6.3E-6 - 0.13
2 Higgs Doublet, m_h from 50 GeV to 1000 GeV
------------
delta-M = 5*10^-18 - 2*10^-13 GeV
x = 3.2E-6 - 0.13
Flavor-Changing Higgs
--------------------------------
delta-M = 1 * 10^-16 - 2*10^-13 GeV
x = 6 * 10^-5 - 0.13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
D0 - ANTI-D0 MIXING IN THE PRESENCE OF ISOSINGLET QUARKS.
By G.C. Branco, P.A. Parada (Lisbon, IST), M.N. Rebelo (Vienna U.).
UWTHPH-1994-51,
Jan 1995. 11pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D52:4217-4222,1995
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9501347
(spires key=3086097)
delta-M = 1 * 10^-15 GeV (nsp45)
x = 6.3 * 10^-4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
POTENTIAL FOR DISCOVERIES IN CHARM MESON PHYSICS.
By Gustavo Burdman (Fermilab). FERMILAB-CONF-95-281-T, Aug 1995. 16pp.
Presented at Workshop on Tau Charm Factory, Argonne, IL, Jun 21-23, 1995.
In *Argonne 1995, Tau/charm factory* 409-424, and Fermilab Batavia -
FERMILAB-Conf-95-281 (95,rec.Aug.) 16 p.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9508349
(spires key=3202313)
A very nice review.
Also does standard mixing; see above.
4th Generation Mb' from 100-400 GeV, |Vcb'*Vub'| 0.0002 to 0.05
Figure 3
------------
delta-M = 10^-17 - 2*10^-13 GeV
x = 6.3E-6 - 0.13
2 Higgs Doublet, m_h from 50 GeV to 1000 GeV
Figure 2
------------
delta-M = 5*10^-18 - 2*10^-13 GeV
x = 3.2E-6 - 0.13
Tree Level FCNC - with one m=200 GeV
------------------------------------
delta-M = 8. * 10-14 GeV
x = 5.0E-2
SUSY - `at current limit'
--------------------------
delta-M = 1.6 * 10-13 GeV
x = 1.0E-1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHENOMENOLOGY OF TWO HIGGS DOUBLET MODELS WITH FLAVOR CHANGING NEUTRAL CURRENTS.
By David Atwood (Jefferson Lab), Laura Reina, Amarjit Soni (Brookhaven). JL-TH-96-15, Sep 1996.
31pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D55:3156-3176,1997
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9609279
(spires key=3414582)
Table II:
Model III, Case 1 delta-M = (1 -10) * 10^-17 GeV (nsp50)
x = (0.6-6 ) * 10^-5
Model III, Case 2 delta-M = (1 -10) * 10^-13 GeV (nsp51)
x = (0.6-6 ) * 10^-1
Model III, Case 3 delta-M = (1 -10) * 10^-18 GeV (nsp52)
x = (0.6-6 ) * 10^-6
Quotes: `We have verified that if the experimental precision
on D0-D0bar were increased by one order of magnitude (HN: in x)
this mixing would also start to play approximately the same
role as K0-K0bar and B0d and B0dbar, so that the three lines
in Figure 9 (HN: a bound on a coupling constant lambda as a function
of the mass of a neutral psudoscalar called A) would collapse into
one line.' (middle of section VI)
`However, due to the different flavor structure of the
D0-D0bar mixing, it would be extremely important to have a good
experimental determination in this case as well.' (Sec VI paragraph 1.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
B FACTORY PHYSICS FROM EFFECTIVE SUPERSYMMETRY.
Andrew G. Cohen (Boston U.), David B. Kaplan, Francois Lepeintre, Ann E. Nelson
(Washington U., Seattle). UW-PT-96-22, Oct 1996. 4pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.Lett.78:2300-2303,1997
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9610252
(spires key=3431193)
delta-M = 8 * 10^-16 GeV (nsp55)
x = 5 * 10^-4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERMION - BOSON TYPE SUBQUARK MODEL AND DELTA F = 2 PHENOMENA.
By Takeo Matsushima (Nagoya U.). TMI-97-1, Mar 1997. 27pp.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9704316
(spires key=3534510)
delta-M = 1 * 10^-14 GeV (nsp60)
x = 6 * 10^-3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR NONCONSERVATION AND CP VIOLATION FROM QUARK MIXINGS WITH
SINGLET QUARKS.
By Isao Kakebe, Katsuji Yamamoto (Kyoto U., Nuclear Eng. Dept.).
NEAP-53, Apr 1997. 13pp.
Published in Phys.Lett.B416:184-191,1998.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9705203
(spires key=3548503)
For a singlet quark between 1-4 TeV in mass, roughly
(nice scatter plots with delta-M_D versus neutron edm
---------------------------------------------------
delta-M = 1 * 10^-17 - 1 E-13GeV (nsp60)
x = 6.3E-6 - 6.3E-2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR CHANGING NEUTRAL CURRENTS IN THE DUALIZED STANDARD MODEL.
By Jose Bordes (Valencia U.), Hong-Mo Chan, Jacqueline Faridani (Rutherford),
Jakov Pfaudler, Sheung-Tsun Tsou (Oxford U.). FTUV-98-51, Jul 1998. 23pp.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9807277
(spires key=3783723)
delta-M = 5 * 10^-15 GeV (nsp65)
x = 3 * 10^-3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHENOMENOLOGY OF FLAVOR MEDIATED SUPERSYMMETRY BREAKING.
By D.Elazzar Kaplan (Washington U., Seattle), Graham D. Kribs
(Carnegie Mellon U.). UW-PT-99-12, Jun 1999. 54pp.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9906341
(spires key=4091671)
delta-M = 3.3 * 10^-14 GeV (nsp70) (page 37, Eq. 66, with 10 TeV
x = 2.1 * 10^-2 1&2 generation squark masses, and
1 TeV gluino mass)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATURAL FERMION MASS HIERARCHY AND NEW SIGNALS FOR THE HIGGS BOSON.
By K.S. Babu, S. Nandi (Oklahoma State U.). OSU-HEP-99-07, Jun 1999. 10pp.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9907213
(spires key=4091671)
delta-M = 4.7 * 10^-14 GeV (nsp75) (page 7; flavor changing Higgs)
x = 3.0 * 10^-2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
EFFECTS OF THE K+ ---> PI+ NEUTRINO ANTI-NEUTRINO AND OF OTHER PROCESSES ON
THE MIXING HIERARCHIES IN THE FOUR GENERATION MODEL.
By Toshihiko Hattori (Tokushima U.), Tsutom Hasuike (Anan Coll. Tech.), Seiichi
Wakaizumi (Tokushima U.). Aug 1999. 29pp.
Revised from TOKUSHIMA-99-1, January 1999.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9908447
(spires key=4158865)
delta-M = 1 * 10^-15 GeV (nsp75) (page 11; 4th generation)
x = 6 * 10^-4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR AT THE TEV SCALE WITH EXTRA DIMENSIONS.
By Nima Arkani-Hamed, Lawrence Hall, David Smith, Neal Weiner (UC, Berkeley & LBL, Berkeley).
LBL-44235, Sep 1999. 40pp.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9909326
(spires key=4187270)
They say that delta-M_D currently limits the scale of flavor to
be 1000 TeV, unless its coupling is scalar, in which case the
scale is only 500 TeV.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW PHYSICS EFFECTS IN DOUBLY CABIBBO SUPPRESSED D DECAYS.
By Sven Bergmann, Yosef Nir (Weizmann Inst.). WIS-99-32-DPP, Sep 1999. 12pp.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9909391
(spires key=4190769)
The principally discuss effects in direct decay, and suggest that
models exist that could give direct CP assymetries in D0>K+pi- of
order 30%.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ON THE OTHER FIVE KM TRIANGLES.
By I.I. Bigi, A.I. Sanda (Notre Dame U. & Nagoya U.). UND-HEP-99-BIG-06, Sep 1999. 20pp.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9909479
(spires key=4195124)
No numerical predictions, but they emphasize the importance of looking
for time-dependent CP asymmetries in D0 decays to CP eigenstates such
as K+K-, pi+pi-, and the K0S eta etc. states.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAN SUPERSYMMETRY SOFT PHASES BE THE SOURCE OF ALL CP VIOLATION?
By M. Brhlik, L. Everett, G.L. Kane (Michigan U.), S.F. King (Southampton U.), O. Lebedev (Virginia
Tech). VPI-IPPAP-99-08, Sep 1999. 13pp.
e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9909480
(spires key=4195132)
They achieve accomodation of epsilon and epsilon' with a SUSY model,
and then check to see that the D0-D0bar mixing in that model is not
too big. They say
delta-M = 10^-14 GeV
x = 0.001 -> 0.01 (the delta-M of 10^-14 GeV converts to 0.006)
===============================================================================
***************************
* ORIGINAL MIXING SOURCES *
***************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEHAVIOR OF NEUTRAL PARTICLES UNDER CHARGE CONJUGATION.
By M. Gell-Mann (Columbia U.), A. Pais (Princeton, Inst. Advanced Study). 1955.
Published in Phys.Rev.97:1387-1389,1955
Submitted November 1, 1954
(spires key=25429)
This paper invents the whole concept of particle-antiparticle mixing,
and notes that a K0 (called in this paper a theta^0) will not have
a single lifetime, but will appear to have two lifetimes. The
notation of K^0_1 and K^0_2 is introduced, and it is also noted
that these states will have a mass shift, although the value of that
shift, or a method of measuring it, is not noted.
A few interesting things about this paper: the first reference includes
a paper by L. Wolfenstein (published in 1952); and, the M. G.-M. thanks
Professor E. Fermi for a stimulating discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE ON THE DECAY AND ABSORPTION OF THE THETA0.
By A. Pais, O. Piccioni (Columbia U. & Brookhaven). 1955.
Published in Phys.Rev.100:1487-1489,1955
Submitted July 5, 1955
(spires key=1968122)
This paper introduces the concept of regeneration of K^0_1's from
a beam of K^0_2's, and first writes down the expression for the
number of K0 or K0bar as a function of time from an initially pure
K0 state. They thank R. Serber for drawing their attention to the
cos(delta-M * t) term.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternate Modes of Decay of Neutral K Mesons
By S. B. Treiman and R. G. Sachs (Palmer Physical Lab, Princeton)
Published in Phys.Rev.103:1545-1549,1956
Submitted May 18, 1956
(not in spires)
This paper develops the equations for decay of an initial K0 or
K0bar to semileptonic final states: Ke3 and Kmu3. There is a nice
plot of the time dependence (Figure 1).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Method for Determining the theta_1-theta_2 Mass Difference
By W. F. Fry and R. G. Sachs (Univ. of Wisconsin)
Published in Phys.Rev.109:2212-2213,1958
Submitted January 27, 1958
(not in spires)
This paper develops the equations for detection of a K0bar, or
a K0, after production of a K0 at t=0. In a footnote they
note that their formulas are correct if CP is conserved.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WEAK INTERACTIONS WITH LEPTON - HADRON SYMMETRY.
By S.L. Glashow, J. Iliopoulos, L. Maiani (Harvard U.). 1970.
Published in Phys.Rev.D2:1285-1292,1970
Submitted March 5, 1970
(spires key=1968181)
The introduction of the `GIM' mechanism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RARE DECAY MODES OF THE K - MESONS IN GAUGE THEORIES.
By M.K. Gaillard, Benjamin W. Lee (Fermilab). NAL-PUB-74-21-THY, Jan 1974. 75pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D10:897,1974
Submitted March 4, 1974
(spires key=24899)
Contains the observation, after a computation of the size
of the difference in mass between KL and KS,
`If this is correct, we expect m_c to less than, say, a few
GeV. The experimental implications of the existence of
charmed mesons have already been discussed by GIM, Snow,
and others.'
The J/Psi was announced in November of 1974.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
These two need to be checked out; they might have early estimates of
mixing:
WEAK DECAYS OF CHARMED HADRONS.
By R.L. Kingsley, S.B. Treiman, F. Wilczek, A. Zee (Princeton U.). Print-75-0029 (PRINCETON), (Received
Jan 1975). 17pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D11:1919,1975
(spires key=58858)
WEAK INTERACTION MODELS WITH NEW QUARKS AND RIGHTHANDED CURRENTS.
By F.A. Wilczek, A. Zee (Fermilab & Princeton U.), R.L. Kingsley, S.B. Treiman (Princeton U.).
FERMILAB-PUB-75-44-THY, Jun 1975. 47pp.
Published in Phys.Rev.D12:2768,1975
(spires key=83178)
===============================================================================
- Harry Nelson, hnn@charm.physics.ucsb.edu (9/25/99)
[Figures and Memo]
[Need Invest.]
[Wrong Sign Page]