Download PDF

Journal of High Energy Physics

, 2015:104 | Cite as

Exploiting the symmetries of P and S wave for B →K ∗ μ + μ −

Open Access
Regular Article - Theoretical Physics
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

After summarizing the current theoretical status of the four-body decay B → K ∗(→ Kπ)μ + μ −, we apply the formalism of spin-symmetries to the full angular distribution, including the S-wave part involving a broad scalar resonance K 0 ∗ . While we recover in the P-wave sector the known relation between the angular observables P i (′) , we find in the S-wave sector two new relations connecting the coefficients of the S-wave angular distribution and reducing the number of independent S-wave observables from six to four. Included in the experimental data analysis, these relations can help to reduce the background from S-wave pollution. We further point out the discriminative power of the maximum of the angular observable P 2 as a charm-loop insensitive probe of right-handed currents. Moreover, we show that in absence of right-handed currents the angular observables P 4 ′ and P 5 ′ fulfill the relation P 4 ′  = βP 5 ′ at the position where P 2 reaches its maximum.

Keywords

Rare Decays B-Physics 
Download to read the full article text

Notes

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

References

  1. [1]
    F. Krüger and J. Matias, Probing new physics via the transverse amplitudes of B 0 → K ∗0(→ K − π +)ℓ+ℓ− at large recoil, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 094009 [hep-ph/0502060] [INSPIRE].
  2. [2]
    D. Bečirević and E. Schneider, On transverse asymmetries in B → K ∗ℓ+ℓ−, Nucl. Phys. B 854 (2012) 321 [arXiv:1106.3283] [INSPIRE].ADSMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. Matias, F. Mescia, M. Ramon and J. Virto, Complete anatomy of \( {\overline{B}}_d\to {\overline{K}}^{\ast 0}\left(\to K\pi \right){\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-} \) and its angular distribution, JHEP 04 (2012) 104 [arXiv:1202.4266] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias, M. Ramon and J. Virto, Implications from clean observables for the binned analysis of B → K ∗ μ + μ − at large recoil, JHEP 01 (2013) 048 [arXiv:1207.2753] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    S. Descotes-Genon, T. Hurth, J. Matias and J. Virto, Optimizing the basis of B → K ∗ℓ+ℓ− observables in the full kinematic range, JHEP 05 (2013) 137 [arXiv:1303.5794] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias and J. Virto, Understanding the B → K ∗ μ + μ − anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 074002 [arXiv:1307.5683] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    LHCb collaboration, Measurement of form-factor-independent observables in the decay B 0 → K ∗0 μ + μ −, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 191801 [arXiv:1308.1707] [INSPIRE].
  8. [8]
    S. Descotes-Genon, L. Hofer, J. Matias and J. Virto, On the impact of power corrections in the prediction of B → K ∗ μ + μ − observables, JHEP 12 (2014) 125 [arXiv:1407.8526] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    W. Altmannshofer et al., Symmetries and asymmetries of B → K ∗ μ + μ − decays in the standard model and beyond, JHEP 01 (2009) 019 [arXiv:0811.1214] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    W. Altmannshofer and D.M. Straub, New physics in B → K ∗ μμ?, Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2646 [arXiv:1308.1501] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    F. Beaujean, C. Bobeth and D. van Dyk, Comprehensive Bayesian analysis of rare (semi)leptonic and radiative B decays, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 2897 [Erratum ibid. C 74 (2014) 3179] [arXiv:1310.2478] [INSPIRE].
  12. [12]
    R.R. Horgan, Z. Liu, S. Meinel and M. Wingate, Calculation of B 0 → K ∗0 μ + μ − and B s0 → ϕμ + μ − observables using form factors from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 212003 [arXiv:1310.3887] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias and J. Virto, Optimizing the basis of B → K ∗ l + l − observables and understanding its tensions, PoS(EPS-HEP 2013)361 [arXiv:1311.3876] [INSPIRE].
  14. [14]
    C. Hambrock, G. Hiller, S. Schacht and R. Zwicky, B → K ∗ form factors from flavor data to QCD and back, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 074014 [arXiv:1308.4379] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    LHCb collaboration, Differential branching fraction and angular analysis of the B + → K + μ + μ − decay, JHEP 02 (2013) 105 [arXiv:1209.4284] [INSPIRE].
  16. [16]
    LHCb collaboration, Differential branching fractions and isospin asymmetries of B → K (∗) μ + μ − decays, JHEP 06 (2014) 133 [arXiv:1403.8044] [INSPIRE].
  17. [17]
    S. Descotes-Genon, L. Hofer, J. Matias and J. Virto, Current status of the B → K ∗ μ + μ − anomaly and global analysis of b → sℓℓ deviations, in preparation.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    M. Wingate, private communication.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    LHCb collaboration, Test of lepton universality using B + → K +ℓ+ℓ− decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 151601 [arXiv:1406.6482] [INSPIRE].
  20. [20]
    D. Ghosh, M. Nardecchia and S.A. Renner, Hint of lepton flavour non-universality in B meson decays, JHEP 12 (2014) 131 [arXiv:1408.4097] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    T. Hurth, F. Mahmoudi and S. Neshatpour, Global fits to b → sℓℓ data and signs for lepton non-universality, JHEP 12 (2014) 053 [arXiv:1410.4545] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    W. Altmannshofer and D.M. Straub, New physics in b → s transitions after LHC run 1, arXiv:1411.3161 [INSPIRE].
  23. [23]
    S. Jäger and J. Martin Camalich, On B → V ℓℓ at small dilepton invariant mass, power corrections and new physics, JHEP 05 (2013) 043 [arXiv:1212.2263] [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    A. Bharucha, D.M. Straub and R. Zwicky, B → V ℓ+ℓ− in the standard model from light-cone sum rules, arXiv:1503.05534 [INSPIRE].
  25. [25]
    S. Descotes-Genon, L. Hofer, J. Matias and J. Virto, Theoretical status of B → K ∗ μ + μ − : the path towards new physics, in Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Prospects in the Physics of Discrete Symmetries (DISCRETE 2014), London U.K., 2-6 Dec 2014 [J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 631 (2015) 012027] [arXiv:1503.03328] [INSPIRE].
  26. [26]
    P. Ball and R. Zwicky, New results on B → π, K, η decay form factors from light-cone sum rules, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 014015 [hep-ph/0406232] [INSPIRE].
  27. [27]
    S. Jäger and J. Martin Camalich, Reassessing the discovery potential of the B → K ∗ℓ+ℓ− decays in the large-recoil region: SM challenges and BSM opportunities, arXiv:1412.3183 [INSPIRE].
  28. [28]
    J. Lyon and R. Zwicky, Resonances gone topsy turvy — the charm of QCD or new physics in b→sℓ+ℓ− ?,arXiv:1406.0566 [INSPIRE].
  29. [29]
    A. Khodjamirian, T. Mannel, A.A. Pivovarov and Y.M. Wang, Charm-loop effect in B → K (∗)ℓ+ℓ− and B → K ∗γ, JHEP 09 (2010) 089 [arXiv:1006.4945] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    D. Bečirević and A. Tayduganov, Impact of B → K 0∗ ℓ + ℓ − on the new physics search in B → K ∗ℓ+ℓ− decay, Nucl. Phys. B 868 (2013) 368 [arXiv:1207.4004] [INSPIRE].ADSMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    J. Matias, On the S-wave pollution of B → K ∗ℓ+ℓ− observables, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 094024 [arXiv:1209.1525] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    T. Blake, U. Egede and A. Shires, The effect of S-wave interference on the B 0 → K ∗0ℓ+ℓ− angular observables, JHEP 03 (2013) 027 [arXiv:1210.5279] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    M. Döring, U.-G.Meißner and W. Wang, Chiral dynamics and S-wave contributions in semileptonic B decays, JHEP 10 (2013) 011 [arXiv:1307.0947] [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    U. Egede, T. Hurth, J. Matias, M. Ramon and W. Reece, New physics reach of the decay mode \( \overline{B}\to {\overline{K}}^{\ast 0}{\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-} \), JHEP 10 (2010) 056 [arXiv:1005.0571] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. [35]
    E. Lunghi and J. Matias, Huge right-handed current effects in B → K ∗(Kπ)ℓ+ℓ− in supersymmetry, JHEP 04 (2007) 058 [hep-ph/0612166] [INSPIRE].
  36. [36]
    J. Matias and N. Serra, Symmetry relations between angular observables in B 0 → K ∗ μ + μ − and the LHCb P 5′ anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 034002 [arXiv:1402.6855] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  37. [37]
    K.A. Petridis, private communication.Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    U. Egede, M. Patel and K.A. Petridis, Method for an unbinned measurement of the q 2 dependent decay amplitudes of \( {\overline{B}}^0\to {{\overline{K}}^{\ast}}^0{\mu}^{+}{\mu}^{-} \) decays, JHEP 06 (2015) 084 [arXiv:1504.00574] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Grup de Física TeòricaUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations