Abstract
The availability of pure, high intensity, ultra-high energy resolution antiproton beams in the 0.1 to 10 GeV/c range has made it possible to make precision studies of few-quark systems and the interactions between them. Proton-antiproton interaction can now be studied with precision heretofore achieved only in the study of the proton-proton interaction. It has become possible to test scaling predictions of perturbative QCD, e.g., for the proton form-factor in the time-like region. Precision measurements of the spectra of qq mesons with charm and beauty quarks are leading to deeper understanding of the quark-quark interactions. Rather unusual and exotic effects are predicted when charmonium is embedded in nuclei. Some of these new developments are described and the feasibility of several nuclear experiments is examined.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Fermilab experiment E-760, “A Proposal to Investigate the Formation of Charmonium States Using the pbar Accumulator Ruig”, Collaboration: Fermilab, Universities of Errara, Genoa, and Torino, University of California (Irvine), Northwestern University and Pennsylvania State University.
Review of Particle Properties“ Physics Letters B239 (1990) 1.
E.D. Bloom and C.W. Peck, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 33 (1983) 143.
J.Lee-Franzini, Nude Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 3 (1988) 139.
K.K. Seth, Proc. Int. Conf. on Medium and High Energy Nuclear Physics, edited by W.-Y Pauchy Hwang, K.-F. Liu and Y. Tzeng, World Scientific (Singapore 1989 ) pp. 773–788.
C. Baglin et al., Phys. Lett B171 (1986) 135; B172 (1986) 455, B187 (1987) 191, B195 (1987) 85; B225(1989) 296; B231 (1989) 557; also Nucl. Phys. B286 (1987) 592.
Design Report: Tevatron I Project, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL (unpublished), Sept. 1984; J. Peoples, Proc. Workshop on the Design of a Low Energy Antiproton Facility, edited by D. Cline, World Scientific (Singapore 1986) p.
L. Bartoszek et al., Nucl. Instr. Meth. A301 (1991) 47. M.A. Hasan et al., Nucl. Instr. Meth. A295 (1990) 73. M. Sarmiento et al., Nucl. Instr. Meth. (to be published).
T.A. Armstrong et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., submitted for publication.
P. Kroll and W. Schweiger, Nucl. Phys. A503 (1989) 865.
P. Jenni et al., Nucl Phys. B129 (1977) 232.
Y.L. Zhang et al., Proc. Hadron ‘81, University of Maryland, Aug. 1991.
S.J. Brodsky and G.R. Farrar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 31 (1973) 1153; Phys. Rev. D11 (1975) 1309.
G. Bassompierre et al., Phys. Lett. 68B (1977) 477, also Nuovo Cimento 73A (1983) 347; B. Delcourt et al., Phys. Lett. 86B (1979) 395; D. Bisello et al., Nucl. Phys. B224 (1983) 379.
G. Bardin et al., Phys. Lett. B255 (1991) 149.
R. Anderson et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 263.
U. Camerini et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 35 (1975) 1040; B. Knapp et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 34 (1975) 1040; J. Branson et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1334, M.D. Sokoloff et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 (1986) 3003.
S.J. Brodsky and A.H. Mueller, Phys. Lett. B206 (1988) 685.
T. Matsui and H. Satz, Phys. Lett. B179 (1986) 416.
C. Baglin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. B220 (1989) 471; B251 (1990) 465; B255 (1991) 459.
H. Satz, Nucl. Phys. A. 488 (1988) 511c; V. Cerny et al., Z. Phys. C46 (1990) 481, and references therein.
G.R. Farrar, L.L. Frankfurt, M.I. Strikman and H. Liu, Nucl. Phys. B345 (1990) 125.
A.S. Caroll et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (1988) 1698.
B. Parker et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 63 (1989) 1570.
R.S. Bhalerao and L.C. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 865; LC. Liu and Q. Haider, Phys. Rev. C345 (1986) 1845; Q. Haider and L.C. Liu, Phys. Lett. B195 (1986) 515.
G.L Li, W.K. Cheng, and T.T.S. Kuo, Phys. Lett. 8195 (1987) 515.
R.E. Chrien et al., Phys. Rev. Lett 60 (1988) 2595.
S.J. Brodsky, I. Schmidt, and G.F. de Teramond, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64 (1990) 1011.
A Donnachie and P.V. Landshoff; Nucl. Phys. B244 (1984) 322.
S.J. Brodsky and B. Chertok, Phys. Rev. D14 (1976) 3003.
R. Arnold et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 1429.
Our estimate of S - 2 x 10 is substantially different from that quoted by Brodsky et al. [28]. We have used experimentally measured Fd2 (4.62 GeV/c2) - 1 x 10 8. due to Arnold et al. (Phys. Rev. Lett. 35 (1975) 776).
K. Maruyama, Proc. Workshop on Science at the KAON factory, TRIUMF (1990) vol. 2. Maruyama makes the mistake of assuming a beam intensity of 1.1x108 Ws with a 0.1% energy resolution. Actually, this intensity is projected for Ap/p = 4%. Maruyama also assumes formation cross sections of 10 32 cm2, which are six orders of magnitude larger than our calculated value of 10-38 cm2. The only way such a large discrepancy can arise is if Mazuyama has mistakenly used FA (Q2) instead of FA2(Q2).
D. Kharzeev, INFN (Pavia), preprint FNT/T-90/22, Dec. 1990.
E.V. Shuryak, Nucl. Phys. B198 (1982) 83.
G.E. Brown, priv. comm.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1992 Springer-Verlag
About this paper
Cite this paper
Seth, K.K. (1992). Antiproton Reactions and Charm (With and Without Nuclei). In: Ciofi degli Atti, C., Pace, E., Salmè, G., Simula, S. (eds) Few-Body Problems in Physics. Few-Body Systems, vol 6. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-7581-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-7581-1_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna
Print ISBN: 978-3-7091-7583-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-7091-7581-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive