Physics of Atomic Nuclei

, Volume 69, Issue 3, pp 520–527 | Cite as

Observation of the tensor glueball

  • V. V. Anisovich
  • M. A. Matveev
  • J. Nyiri
  • A. V. Sarantsev
Elementary Particles and Fields Theory

Abstract

In the reactions p-pπ0π0, ηη, ηη′, in the mass region 1900–2400 MeV there are four relatively narrow resonances f2(1920), f2(2020), f2(2240), and f2(2300) and a broad one f2(2000). In the framework of quark combinatorics, we carry out an analysis of the decay constants for all five resonances. It is shown that the relations for the decay constants corresponding to the broad resonance f2(2000) → π0π0, ηη, ηη′ are the same as those corresponding to a glueball. An additional argument in favor of the glueball nature of f2(2000) is the fact that f2(1920), f2(2020), f2(2240), and f2(2300) fit well the q-q trajectories in the (n, M2) plane (where n is the radial quantum number), while the broad f2(2000) resonance turns out to be an unnecessary extra state for these trajectories.

PACS numbers

14.40.-n 12.38.-t 12.39.-MK 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    PDG (S. Eidelman et al.), Phys. Lett. B 592, 1 (2004).ADSGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. V. Anisovich et al., Phys. Lett. B 491, 47 (2000).ADSGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    WA 102 Collab. (D. Barberis et al.), Phys. Lett. B 471, 440 (2000).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. S. Longacre and S. J. Lindenbaum, Report BNL-72371-2004.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Etkin et al., Phys. Lett. B 165, 217 (1985); 201, 568 (1988).ADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    V. A. Schegelsky, A. V. Sarantsev, V. A. Nikonov, et al., Preprint PNPI-2005, No. 2607 (Petersburg Nucl. Phys. Inst.).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. V. Anisovich, V. V. Anisovich, and A. V. Sarantsev, Phys. Rev. D 62, 051502 (2000).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    V. V. Anisovich, M. N. Kobrinsky, J. Nyiri, and Yu. M. Shabelski, Quark Model and High-Energy Collisions, 2nd ed. (World Sci., Singapore, 2004).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    V. V. Anisovich, Usp. Fiz. Nauk 174, 49 (2004) [Phys. Usp. 47, 45 (2004)].Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    V. V. Anisovich, Pis’ma Zh. Éksp. Teor. Fiz. 80, 845 (2004) [JETP Lett. 80, 715 (2004)].Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. V. Anisovich, D. V. Bugg, and A. V. Sarantsev, Phys. Rev. D 58, 111503 (1998).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    V. V. Anisovich, Yu. D. Prokoshkin, and A. V. Sarantsev, Phys. Lett. B 389, 388 (1996); Z. Phys. A 357, 123 (1997).ADSGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. V. Anisovich, V. V. Anisovich, and A. V. Sarantsev, Phys. Lett. B 395, 123 (1997); Z. Phys. A 359, 173 (1997).ADSGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    I. S. Shapiro, Nucl. Phys. A 122, 645 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    I. Yu. Kobzarev, N. N. Nikolaev, L. B. Okun, Yad. Fiz. 10, 864 (1969) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 10, 499 (1969)].Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    L. Stodolsky, Phys. Rev. D 1, 2683 (1970).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. V. Anisovich, V. A. Nikonov, A. V. Sarantsev, and V. V. Sarantsev, in Proceedings of the PNPI XXX, Scientific Highlight, Theoretical Physics Division, Gatchina, 2001, p. 58.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B 72, 461 (1974); G. Veneziano, Nucl. Phys. B 117, 519 (1976).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. V. Anisovich, hep-ph/0104005.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    V. V. Anisovich, M. G. Huber, M. N. Kobrinsky, and B. Ch. Metsch, Phys. Rev. D 42, 3045 (1990); V. V. Anisovich, V. A. Nikonov, and J. Nyiri, Yad. Fiz. 64, 877 (2001) [Phys. At. Nucl. 64, 812 (2001)].CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. Peters and E. Klempt, Phys. Lett. B 352, 467 (1995).ADSGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    V. V. Anisovich and A. V. Sarantsev, Eur. Phys. J. A 16, 229 (2003).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    S. S. Gershtein, A. K. Likhoded, and Yu. D. Prokoshkin, Z. Phys. C 24, 305 (1984); C. Amsler and F. E. Close, Phys. Rev. D 53, 295 (1996); Phys. Lett. B 353, 385 (1995); V. V. Anisovich, Phys. Lett. B 364, 195 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    V. V. Anisovich, D. V. Bugg, D. I. Melikhov, and V. A. Nikonov, Phys. Lett. B 404, 166 (1997).ADSGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    E. Eisenhandler et al., Nucl. Phys. B 98, 109 (1975).ADSGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    A. A. Carter et al., Phys. Lett. B 67, 117 (1977).ADSGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    UK QCD Collab. (G. S. Bali, K. Schilling, A. Hulsebos, et al.), Phys. Lett. B 309, 378 (1993); C. J. Morningstar and M. J. Peardon, Phys. Rev. D 60, 034509 (1999); M. Loan, X.-Q. Luo, and Z.-H. Luo, hep-lat/0503038.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    H. B. Meyer and M. J. Teper, hep-ph/0409183.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    D. V. Bugg, Phys. Rep. 397, 257 (2004).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    L. Faddeev, A. J. Niemi, and U. Wiedner, hepph/0308240.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. V. Anisovich
    • 3
  • M. A. Matveev
    • 3
  • J. Nyiri
    • 1
    • 3
  • A. V. Sarantsev
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.KFKI Research Institute for Particle and Nuclear PhysicsBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Petersburg Nuclear Physics InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesGatchinaRussia
  3. 3.Petersburg Nuclear Physics InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesGatchinaRussia
  4. 4.HISKP, UniversitätBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations