Paper detail

The cross section of $e^+e^- \to Λ\overline Σ^0+{\rm c.c.}$ as a litmus test of isospin violation in the decays of vector charmonia into $Λ\overline Σ^0+{\rm c.c.}$

Under the aegis of isospin conservation, the amplitudes in Born approximation, i.e., considering the only one-photon-exchange mechanism, of the decay $ψ\to Λ\overline Σ^0+{\rm c.c.}$, where $ψ$ is a vector charmonium, and of the reaction $e^+e^- \to Λ\overline Σ^0+{\rm c.c.}$ at the $ψ$ mass, are parametrized by the same electromagnetic coupling. It follows that, the modulus of such a coupling can be extracted the data on the two observables: the decay branching fraction and the annihilation cross section. By considering the first two vector charmonia, $J/ψ$ and $ψ(2S)$, it is found that, especially in the case of $ψ(2S)$, there is a substantial discrepancy between the values of the modulus of the same electromagnetic coupling extracted from the branching ratio and the cross section. We propose, as a possible explanation for such a disagreement, the presence in the decay amplitude of an isospin-violating contribution driven by a mechanism based on physical (on-shell) intermediate states, that, due to their own nature, should be more effective in the $ψ(2S)$ decay than in that of the $J/ψ$.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 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.