D0-> K+ K- Decay Suppression - A Puzzling Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter milch
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    decay
milch
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey community!

Since a couple of hours I've been dealing with the question why the decay $$D^0 \rightarrow K^+ K^-$$ is suppressed.
If I draw the Feynman diagram for the first order decay, everything seems pretty alright as the charm quark can couple with a strange quark. The resulting W+ can then produce an up and anti-strange quark which gives above K mesons.
What piece am I missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
up and anti-strange are two different generations, there you get the Cabibbo suppression (compared to ##D^0 \rightarrow K^- \pi^+##).

It is not a rare decay. It's just not as frequent as the decay to ##K^- \pi^+##.
 
Aaah, somehow I thought the Cabibbo suppression just applies in case of a quark-quark decay. But it holds whenever any kind of quark coupling is involved (independent of the "direction" I go in the diagram), right? (Sorry in advance for these basic questions..)
 
Correct, whenever you have a coupling of a W with quarks belonging to different generations, you get a suppression (an even larger suppression if the generations are 1,3 or 2,3).
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
49
Views
12K
Back
Top