Paper detail

Delta isobar masses, large N_c relations, and the quark model

Motivated by recent remarks on the Delta+ mass and comparisons between the quark model and relations based on large-N_c with perturbative flavor breaking, two sets of Delta masses consistent with these constraints are constructed. These two sets, based either on an experimentally determined mass splitting or a quark model of isospin symmetry breaking, are shown to be inconsistent. The model dependence of this inconsistency is examined, and suggestions for improved experiments are made. An explicit quark model calculation and mass relations based on the large-N_c limit with perturbative flavor breaking are compared. The expected level of accuracy of such relations is realized in the quark model, except for mass relations spanning more than one SU(6) representation. It is shown that the Delta0 and Delta++ pole masses and Delta0 - Delta+ = (Delta- - Delta++)/3 about 1.5 MeV are more consistent with model expectations than the analogous Breit-Wigner masses and their splittings.

preprint1998arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.