vix.ing · top · new · best · stats · spec

CP violation difference in Bo and B^± decays explained No tree-penguin interference in B+ → K+πo

2006/08/25 by Harry J. Lipkin, Lipkin, Harry J. · 1 citation
Physics and Astronomy · #FOS: Physical sciences #High Energy Physics - Phenomenology (hep-ph) #Neutrino Physics Research #Particle physics theoretical and experimental studies #Quantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions #hep-ph

paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.hep-ph/0608284

10 pages

openalex publication_date 2006/08/25 · arxiv created 2006/09/25 · arxiv updated 2009/12/01 · openalex created_date 2016/06/24 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28

Abstract

A new experimental analysis of B→ Kπ decays provides finite experimental values for the contributions from interference terms between the dominant penguin amplitude and the color-favored and color-suppressed tree amplitudes. These results can explain the puzzling failure to see CP violation in B^±→ Kπ decays. Tree-penguin interference contributions are commonly believed to be the source of the observed direct CP violation in Bo→ K^±π^∓ decays. The data show that the color-favored and color-suppressed tree contributions interfere destructively in B^±→ K^±πo decays and nearly cancel. This suprising cancellation is not predicted by present theory. There is also no prediction for any difference produced by changing the flavor of the spectator quark. Isospin and Pauli effects that change with spectator quark flavor are examined and show using group theory and the color-spun SU(6) algebra how they produce both the near cancellation and the dependence on spectator quark flavor. The standard B→ Kπ analysis which treats tree-penguin interference only in first order has three parameters overdetermined by four experimental branching ratios. Previous analyses confirmed the model but with large errors leaving the values of tree-penguin interference contributions less that two standard deviations from zero. The new analysis finds interference contributions well above the errors.

Cited by

Related