Paper detail

Is observed direct CP violation in $B_d \to K^+ π^-$ due to new physics? Check standard model prediction of equal violation in $B_s \to K^- π^+$

The recently observed direct CP violation in $B_d \to K^+ π^-$ has raised suggestions of possible new physics. A robust test of the standard model vs. new physics is its prediction of equal direct CP violation in $B_s \to K^- π^+$ decay. CPT invariance requires the observed CP violation to arise from the interference between the dominant penguin amplitude and another amplitude with a different weak phase and a different strong phase. The penguin contribution to $B_d \to K^+ π^-$ is known to be reduced by a CKM factor in $B_s \to K^- π^+$. Thus the two branching ratios are very different and a different CP violation is expected. But in the standard model a miracle occurs and the interfering tree diagram is enhanced by the same CKM factor that reduces the penguin to give the predicted equality. This miracle is not expected in new physics; thus a search for and measurement of the predicted CP violation in $B_s \to K^- π^+$ decay is a sensitive test for a new physics contribution. A detailed analysis shows this prediction to be robust and insensitive to symmetry breaking effects and possible additional contributions.

preprint2005arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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 map preview

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.