APS » Phys. Rev. D » Volume 80 » Issue 5

K. M. Ecklund,¹ Q. He,² J. Insler,² H. Muramatsu,² C. S. Park,² E. H. Thorndike,² F. Yang,² M. Artuso,³ S. Blusk,³ S. Khalil,³ R. Mountain,³ K. Randrianarivony,³ T. Skwarnicki,³ S. Stone,³ J. C. Wang,³ L. M. Zhang,³ G. Bonvicini,⁴ D. Cinabro,⁴ A. Lincoln,⁴ M. J. Smith,⁴ P. Zhou,⁴ J. Zhu,⁴ P. Naik,⁵ J. Rademacker,⁵ D. M. Asner,⁶ K. W. Edwards,⁶ J. Reed,⁶ A. N. Robichaud,⁶ G. Tatishvili,⁶ E. J. White,⁶ R. A. Briere,⁷ H. Vogel,⁷ P. U. E. Onyisi,⁸ J. L. Rosner,⁸ J. P. Alexander,⁹ D. G. Cassel,⁹ R. Ehrlich,⁹ L. Fields,⁹ L. Gibbons,⁹ S. W. Gray,⁹ D. L. Hartill,⁹ B. K. Heltsley,⁹ J. M. Hunt,⁹ D. L. Kreinick,⁹ V. E. Kuznetsov,⁹ J. Ledoux,⁹ H. Mahlke-Krüger,⁹ J. R. Patterson,⁹ D. Peterson,⁹ D. Riley,⁹ A. Ryd,⁹ A. J. Sadoff,⁹ X. Shi,⁹ S. Stroiney,⁹ W. M. Sun,⁹ J. Yelton,¹⁰ P. Rubin,¹¹ N. Lowrey,¹² S. Mehrabyan,¹² M. Selen,¹² J. Wiss,¹² M. Kornicer,¹³ R. E. Mitchell,¹³ M. R. Shepherd,¹³ C. M. Tarbert,¹³ D. Besson,¹⁴ T. K. Pedlar,¹⁵ J. Xavier,¹⁵ D. Cronin-Hennessy,¹⁶ K. Y. Gao,¹⁶ J. Hietala,¹⁶ R. Poling,¹⁶ P. Zweber,¹⁶ S. Dobbs,¹⁷ Z. Metreveli,¹⁷ K. K. Seth,¹⁷ B. J. Y. Tan,¹⁷ A. Tomaradze,¹⁷ S. Brisbane,¹⁸ J. Libby,¹⁸ L. Martin,¹⁸ A. Powell,¹⁸ C. Thomas,¹⁸ G. Wilkinson,¹⁸ H. Mendez,¹⁹ J. Y. Ge,²⁰ D. H. Miller,²⁰ I. P. J. Shipsey,²⁰ B. Xin,²⁰ G. S. Adams,²¹ D. Hu,²¹ B. Moziak,²¹ and J. Napolitano²¹

(CLEO Collaboration)

¹Rice University, Houston, Texas 77005, USA
²University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA
³Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13244, USA
⁴Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202, USA
⁵University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TL, United Kingdom
⁶Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 5B6
⁷Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA
⁸University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA
⁹Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA
¹⁰University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA
¹¹George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia 22030, USA
¹²University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois 61801, USA
¹³Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
¹⁴University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045, USA
¹⁵Luther College, Decorah, Iowa 52101, USA
¹⁶University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA
¹⁷Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA
¹⁸University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3RH, United Kingdom
¹⁹University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, Puerto Rico 00681
²⁰Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA
²¹Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York 12180, USA

Using e⁺e^--->D_s^-D_s^*+ and D_s^*-D_s⁺ interactions at 4170 MeV collected with the CLEO-c detector, we investigate the semileptonic decays D_s⁺-->f₀(980)e⁺nu and D_s⁺-->phie⁺nu. By examining the decay rates as functions of the four-momentum transfer squared q², we measure the ratio [((d[script B])/(dq[sup 2]))(D_s⁺-->f₀(980)e⁺nu)[script B](f₀-->pi⁺pi^-)]/[((d[script B])/(dq[sup 2]))(D_s⁺-->phie⁺nu)[script B](phi-->K⁺K^-)] at q² of zero to be (42±11)%. This ratio has been predicted to equal the rate ratio [[script B](B_s-->J/psif₀)[script B](f₀-->pi⁺pi^-)]/[[script B](B_s-->J/psiphi)[script B](phi-->K⁺K^-)], thus indicating that the CP eigenstate J/psif₀ could be useful for measuring CP violation via B_s mixing. Assuming a simple pole model for the form factor |f₊(q²)| in the f₀e⁺nu decay, we find a pole mass of (1.7_-0.7^+4.5±0.2) GeV. We also determine the f₀ mass and width as (977_-9⁺¹¹±1) and (91_-22⁺³⁰±3) MeV, respectively. In addition, we present updated results for [script B](D_s⁺-->f₀(980)e⁺nu)[script B](f₀-->pi⁺pi^-)=(0.20±0.03±0.01)% and [script B](D_s⁺-->phie⁺nu)=(2.36±0.23±0.13)%. Assuming that the f₀ wave function is a combination of strange and nonstrange quark-antiquark components, we use our measurement for [script B](D_s⁺-->f₀(980)e⁺nu) to extract a value of the mixing angle that we find consistent with |[overline s]s> dominance, adding to the mystery as to why the f₀ decays predominantly to two pions rather than two kaons.

©2009 The American Physical Society

View Cart	Download Citation
MyScitation	Print View