Paper detail

New $B^{\pm}\to Kπ$ data explain absence of CP violation Tree-penguin interference canceled by Pauli effects

Observation of CP violation in $B^o\to K^\pmπ^{\mp}$ decays and its absence in $B^+\to K^+π^o$ decays are explained in new improved data analysis of more precise $B\to Kπ$ data. Success of the "Lipkin Sum Rule" indicates that four $B\tow Kπ$ branching ratios are determined by three parameters, the penguin diagram $P$ and two interference terms $P\cdot T$ and $P\cdot S$ between the dominant penguin and two tree diagrams; the color-favored and color suppressed diagrams. Previous analyzes confirmed the model with errors leaving values of interference terms less that two standard deviations from zero. The observation CP violation in $B^o\to K^\pmπ^{\mp}$ decays indicates a finite value for $P\cdot T$. New precise data analysis show $P\cdot T$ and $P\cdot S$ interference contributions well above errors. Their contributions to $B^\pm\to Kπ$ decays are shown to be nearly equal with opposite phase and cancel within experimental errors. This cancelation unexpected in previous analyzes explains the failure to see CP violation in $B^\pm\to Kπ$ decays. It can be due to the Pauli antisymmetry exchange neglected in previous analyzes. Two $B^\pm\to Kπ$ tree diagrams differ by interchange of two identical $u$ quarks. $B^o\to K^\pmπ^{\mp}$ diagrams have no identical quark pairs. This Pauli effect explains the difference produced by changing the flavor of the spectator quark which does not participate in the weak interaction. Our analysis differs from previous analyzes which assume SU(3) flavor symmetry to use input from $B\to ππ$ data and neglect Pauli effects. We use new data, include Pauli effects and strong final state interactions to all orders in QCD with no higher flavor symmetry assumed beyond isospin. We do not use $B\to ππ$ data.

preprint2011arXivOpen 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.