format: text

text:
# On a classification of mesons

## Abstract

We give a mass formula for computing the mass spectrum of mesons. By this formula we show that there are many mesons with their masses corresponding to a prime number. In particular we show that all strange mesons are with their masses corresponding to a prime number. With these prime numbers indexing the mesons we give a classification of mesons. We set up a knot model of mesons to derive this mass formula. In this knot model mesons and their anti-particles are modeled by knots and their mirror images respectively. Then the amphichiral knots which are equivalent to their mirror images are used to model mesons which are identical with their anti-particles. With this knot model we show that there is a periodic phenomenon in the classification of mesons such that the starting nonet and the ending nonet are nonets of pseudoscalar mesons with the $`\pi `$ meson modeled by an amphichiral knot. From this periodic phenomenon we give a theoretical argument for the existence of charm-anticharm mesons.

We give a formula to compute the mass spectrum of mesons, as follows . Let $`M`$ denote the mass of a meson. Then we propose the following formula for $`M`$:

$$M=a\times bMev$$
(1)
where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are integers such that $`a`$ is as a consecutive number for indexing the meson; $`b`$ is as a number related to the total angular momentum $`J`$ of the meson. This number $`b`$ is proportional to the winding number of a knot model of the meson while $`a`$ is as an index of the knot model of the meson . The number $`b`$ is around a number which is determined to be the number $`45`$. As examples let us consider the nonet of pseudoscalar mesons. By using (1) we have that $`\pi (135)`$ is with the mass $`3\times 45=135Mev`$ where $`a=3`$ is as a consecutive number and $`b=45`$ is as a number proportional to the winding number of a knot model of the meson $`\pi (135)`$. The number $`45`$ is related to the total angular momentum $`J`$ of $`\pi (135)`$. Similarly by using (1) we have that the masses of $`\eta (549)`$ and $`\eta ^{^{}}(958)`$ are given by $`13\times 42=546Mev`$ and $`23\times 42=966Mev`$ respectively where $`a=13`$ and $`a=23`$ are as indexes for the knot models of $`\eta (549)`$ and $`\eta ^{^{}}(958)`$ respectively. Let us then consider strange mesons. For strange mesons let us modify (1) by introducing a number for the strange degree of freedom. We consider the following mass formula of a strange meson:

$$M=a\times b+n\times sMev$$
(2)
where the number $`s`$ equals $`12`$ or $`24`$ is for the strange degree of freedom of the strange meson; $`n`$ is an integer as the excited level of state of the strange meson and is also related to the total angular momentum $`J`$ of the strange meson. As an example let us consider the strange meson $`K(498)=K^0(498)`$. By using (2) we have that the mass of $`K(498)`$ is given by $`11\times 43+1\times 24=497Mev`$ where $`a=11`$, $`b=43`$, $`n=1`$ and $`s=24`$. The two numbers $`43`$ and $`1`$ approximately correspond to that $`J=0`$ for $`K(498)`$. Here the number $`n=1`$ gives the excited level of the strange state of $`K(498)`$. Let us then consider mesons of the form $`s\overline{s}`$ where $`s`$ denotes the strange quark. For such mesons let us modify (1) by introducing a strange-antistrange degree of freedom by the following formula:

$$M=a\times b+n\times s\overline{s}Mev$$
(3)
where $`s\overline{s}`$ denotes a number equal to $`16`$ or $`32`$ which is for the strange-antistrange degree of freedom of mesons of the form $`s\overline{s}`$ and $`n`$ is an integer as the excited level of strange-antistrange state of the $`s\overline{s}`$ meson and is also related to the total angular momentum $`J`$ of the $`s\overline{s}`$ meson. As an example let us consider the $`\varphi (1020)`$ meson which is of the form $`s\overline{s}`$. By using (2) we have that the mass of $`\varphi (1020)`$ is given by $`23\times 43+1\times 32=1021Mev`$ where $`a=23`$, $`b=43`$, $`n=1`$ and $`s\overline{s}=32`$. The number $`43`$ and $`1`$ approximately correspond to that $`J=1`$ for $`\varphi (1020)`$. Here we have that $`32=2\times 16`$ and we use the multiples of $`16`$ as the $`s\overline{s}`$ degree of freedom. We remark that this $`s\overline{s}`$ degree of freedom is a multiple of $`16`$ and is not a multiple of $`12`$ (or $`24`$) where $`12`$ (or $`24`$) is for the strange degree of freedom. We shall explain this phenomenon in a more complete investigation of this knot model of mesons . With the above three formulas we then compute the mass of the light mesons listed in . We list the results of this computation in the following table which is as a classification of mesons.

It is interesting to note that in this table all the strange mesons are indexed by a prime number $`a`$. Also many mesons are indexed by a prime number $`a`$. In this table the prime indexed number $`a`$ is in bold face. We use this index $`a`$ and the total angular momentum $`J`$ as the basic characteristics for the classification of mesons. Thus the index $`a`$ is together with the usual classification $`J^{PC}`$ to give a classification of mesons. However we shall relax the classification with the index $`PC`$ that we allow a classification of mesons with mixing $`PC`$. We use the number $`b`$ and the number $`n`$ to roughly determine the $`J`$ of the meson for classification. Let us first consider the first and the second row of this table. These two nonets are classified by four prime numbers $`3,11,13`$ and $`23`$ and three consecutive prime numbers $`17,19,23`$ respectively. The number $`23`$ is jumped from the second nonet to the first nonet and this jumping is regarded as the characteristic of mesons with the notation $``$ such as the meson $`\eta ^{^{}}(958)`$. The number $`46`$ is greater than $`43`$. This difference of winding numbers gives an estimate of $`J`$ that if the first nonet is with $`J=0`$ then the second nonet is with $`J=1`$. Then starting from the third row of the table the classification is simpler in that each row of mesons is classified by at most two consecutive prime numbers except the two rows of scalar mesons started with $`a_0(980)`$ and $`a_0(1450)`$ respectively; and the three rows started with $`\pi (1800),X(2000)`$ and $`a_4(2040)`$ respectively; and the last row. This last low is interesting in that it is again a nonet of pseudoscalar mesons which is similar to the first nonet of pseudoscalar mesons in that the $`\pi `$ mesons in these two nonets are modeled by an amphichiral knot. We shall later investigate this periodic phenomenon in more detail. In the row of the scalar mesons $`a_0(980),f_0(980),K_0^{}(1430)`$ and $`f_0(1370)`$ we classify scalar mesons by three consecutive prime numbers $`23,29`$ and $`31`$. A characteristic of this classification of scalar mesons is that the index $`31`$ for the strange meson $`K(1430)`$ is greater than the index $`29`$ for $`f_0(1370)`$ and this is different from that for the pseudoscalar and vector mesons of the first and second rows of the table. We remark that the properties and classification of scalar mesons have been studied in detail. Experiments show that the scalar mesons $`a_0(980),f_0(980)`$ have some property of mesons of the form $`s\overline{s}`$ -. Here we show that $`a_0(980),f_0(980)`$ and $`\eta ^{^{}}(958)`$ are indexed by the same prime number $`23`$ as the $`s\overline{s}`$ meson $`\varphi (1020)`$. This argrees with the experiments on $`a_0(980),f_0(980)`$. Then the scalar mesons $`a_0(1450),f_0(1500),K_0^{}(1950)`$ and $`f_J(1710)`$ ($`J`$ is determined to be $`0`$) are with indexes $`33,41,38`$ which are in the region of the three consecutive prime numbers $`31,37`$ and $`41`$ and we may regard these four mesons as classified by the three consecutive prime numbers $`31,37`$ and $`41`$. We note that the index for $`K_0^{}(1950)`$ is the prime number $`41`$ which is greater than the prime number $`37`$ (or $`38`$) and this agrees with the classification for the scalar mesons $`a_0(980),f_0(980),K_0^{}(1430)`$ and $`f_0(1370)`$. In this classification table except the first and the last row we have that the indexes $`a`$ for the mesons of the same row and of the first and the second columns are of the same number except in some cases where these two indexes are slightly different but are still in the region between two consecutive prime numbers. This is the basic characteristic of this classification of mesons. From the table we see that the largest such exceptional difference is the pair $`\pi _2(1670)`$ and $`\eta _2(1645)`$ which are indexed by $`37`$ and $`35`$ respectively. We note that the exceptional first and last rows are similar in that they are indexed by four prime numbers while all other rows are indexed by at most three consecutive prime numbers. This similarity of the first and the last row shows that this is a periodic phenomenon of the classification table. Let us then consider the three rows started with the $`\pi `$ mesons $`\pi _1(1405),\pi _2(2100)`$ and $`\pi _4(2250)`$. These three rows are with mixing $`PC`$. Comparing to the first row started with the $`\pi (135)`$ meson and with four prime numbers we see that these three rows are compressed to have only two consecutive prime numbers and that the first two members of each of these three rows are of the same index. It is for this characteristic that these three rows are formed as classification of mesons with $`\pi `$ mesons as the $`I=1`$ meson. We shall later show that although these three mesons are denoted as a $`\pi `$ meson they are not a real $`\pi `$ meson as the $`\pi (135)`$ in the sense that the $`\pi (135)`$ is modeled by an amphichiral knot while these three $`\pi `$ mesons are modeled by nonamphichiral knots. It is also for this reason that a mixing $`PC`$ classification is allowed in the formation of the three nonets for these three $`\pi `$ mesons. Let us then consider the two rows started with the mesons $`X(1600)`$ and $`X(1775)`$ respectively. These two rows are similar to the three rows started with the $`\pi `$ mesons $`\pi _1(1405),\pi _2(2100)`$ and $`\pi _4(2250)`$. Thus we predict that $`X(1600)`$ is the meson $`\pi _2(1600)`$ and $`X(1775)`$ is the meson $`\pi _2(1775)`$. Similarly for the row started with $`\pi _4(2250)`$ we predict that the meson $`X(2360)`$ is the meson $`f_4(2360)`$ and that the meson $`f_J(2220)`$ is the meson $`f_4(2220)`$. This $`f_J(2220)`$is with the computed mass $`\mathrm{𝟒𝟕}\times 47=2209`$. Here we have $`b=47`$ which is larger than $`46`$ but is smaller than $`50`$. From this rough estimate we have that the $`J`$ of this meson is roughly between $`2`$ and $`4`$. This agrees with experiments on the $`J`$ for this meson . Here we put it to this row to determine that the $`J`$ of this meson is $`4`$. For the row started with the vector meson $`\rho (1700)`$ we have the meson $`X(1910)`$. Here from our classification we predict that $`X(1910)`$ is the $`\varphi (1910)`$. For the row started with the meson $`X(2000)`$ we predict that this meson is the $`a_2(2000)`$. Let us then consider the nineth row of mesons containing the $`\eta (1440)`$ meson. Experiments show that there are two peaks $`\eta _H(1475)`$ and $`\eta _L(1410)`$ for this $`\eta (1440)`$ -. Here from our computation we have two results on the mass of $`\pi (1300)`$: $`\mathrm{𝟑𝟏}\times 42=1302Mev`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟐𝟗}\times 45=1305Mev`$. Thus for the two peaks $`\eta _H(1475)`$ and $`\eta _L(1410)`$ we may have two classifications $`\pi (1302),\eta (1295),K(1460),\eta _H(1475)`$ and $`\pi (1305),\eta (1295),K(1460),\eta _L(1410)`$. Similarly for the meson $`f_2(1270)`$ in the sixth and seventh rows we have two computational results: $`\mathrm{𝟐𝟗}\times 44=1276Mev`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟑𝟏}\times 41=1271Mev`$. We let these two results correspond to the two mesons $`f_2(1430)`$ and $`f_2^{^{}}(1525)`$. This then gives two classifications: $`a_2(1320)`$, $`f_2(1270)`$, $`K_2^{}(1430)`$, $`f_2(1430)`$ and $`a_2(1320)`$, $`f_2(1270)`$, $`K_2^{}(1430)`$, $`f_2^{^{}}(1525)`$. We remark that this double phenomenon may be due to the closeness of the two prime numbers $`29`$ and $`31`$. This closeness gives two close computations for the mass of $`f_2(1270)`$ and for the mass of $`\pi (1300)`$. Physically this means that a meson with a state indexed by $`31`$ (or $`29`$) can be easily transited to form a state indexed by $`29`$ (or $`31`$). Let us then consider the row started with $`\rho (2150)`$. For this row we predict the existence of a $`K^{}`$ meson with mass approximately equal to $`\mathrm{𝟒𝟑}\times 52+12=2248Mev`$. This $`K^{}`$ is close to the $`K_2(2250)`$. Experiments show that there are various peaks in strange meson systems in the $`21502260Mev`$ region . We thus predict that this $`K^{}`$ is in this region. Similarly for the row started with the meson $`a_0(2020)`$ we predict that there is a $`K_0^{}`$ meson with mass approximately given by $`\mathrm{𝟒𝟕}\times 47+36=2245Mev`$. This $`K_0^{}`$ is also close to the $`K_2(2250)`$. We thus predict that this $`K_0^{}`$ is also in this $`21502260Mev`$ region of strange meson systems. Similarly we consider the row started with $`a_6(2450)`$. For this row we predict the existence of a $`K_6^{}`$ meson with mass approximately equal to $`\mathrm{𝟒𝟕}\times 53+12=2503Mev`$. We predict that this $`K_6^{}`$ is close to the $`K_4(2500)`$.

Let us now consider the last row of the classification table. We show that this row gives a periodic phenomenon of classification of mesons in a sense as follows. First we have that this row is again classified with four prime numbers as the first row of the classification table (For this last row the four prime numbers are consecutive). Then let us show that why the region of the $`X(2710)`$ meson contains a $`\pi `$ meson. To this end let us model mesons as knots, as follows. First let us index the prime knots by prime numbers by the following table

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}& & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{prime knot}& \mathrm{𝟑}_\mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟒}_\mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟓}_\mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟓}_\mathrm{𝟐}& \mathrm{𝟔}_\mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟔}_\mathrm{𝟐}& \mathrm{𝟔}_\mathrm{𝟑}& \mathrm{𝟕}_\mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟕}_\mathrm{𝟐}& \mathrm{𝟕}_\mathrm{𝟑}\\ & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{prime number}& & 3& 5& 7& 11& 13& 17& 19& 23& 29\\ & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{prime knot}& \mathrm{𝟕}_\mathrm{𝟒}& \mathrm{𝟕}_\mathrm{𝟓}& \mathrm{𝟕}_\mathrm{𝟔}& \mathrm{𝟕}_\mathrm{𝟕}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟐}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟒}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟓}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟔}\\ & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{prime integer}& 31& 37& 41& 43& 47& 53& 59& 61& 67& 71\end{array}$$

where the prime knot $`\mathrm{𝟑}_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ is assigned with the number $`1`$. We have that the prime knots $`\mathrm{𝟒}_\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟔}_\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑}`$ are assigned with the prime integers $`3,17`$ and $`59`$ respectively. These three knots are called amphichiral knot in that they are equivalent to their mirror images. It follows that these three knots are suitable to model elementary particles which are identical with their anti-particles (For those elementary particles which are not identical with their anti-particles we then model them by nonamphichiral knots in such a way that their anti-particles are modeled by the mirror images of these nonamphichiral knots). Thus we have that it is suitable to model $`\pi (135)`$ with the prime knot $`\mathrm{𝟒}_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ and to model $`\rho (770)`$ and $`\omega (783)`$ with the prime knot $`\mathrm{𝟔}_\mathrm{𝟐}`$ since these mesons are identifcal with their anti-particles. Now we have that the $`K(3100)`$ meson is assigned with the prime number $`67`$ and since the prime number $`59`$ is assigned to the amphichiral knot $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑}`$ we have that the mass region of $`X(2710)`$ which contains $`f_6(2710)`$  should also contain a $`\pi `$ meson since $`X(2710)`$ can be indexed by $`59`$ with the computed mass $`\mathrm{𝟓𝟗}\times 46=2714Mev`$. Thus we have $`X(2710)=\pi (2710)`$. We remark that we may also use nonamphichiral knots to model elementary particles which are identical with their anti-particles by using an average of the nonamphichiral knot with its mirror image. Here the amphichiral knots $`\mathrm{𝟒}_\mathrm{𝟏},\mathrm{𝟔}_\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑}`$ are special in that they are only for modeling mesons which are identical with their anti-particles. Then for a meson such as the $`\pi (135)`$ meson which is modeled by the amphichiral knot $`\mathrm{𝟒}_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ we have that this meson should have special property which is only from an amphichiral knot. For the $`\pi (135)`$ meson this special property is that it is the starting meson of the family of mesons. Then when $`X(2710)`$ is identified as a special $`\pi `$ meson modeled by the amphichiral knot $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑}`$ with the index number $`59`$ it is then similar to the the starting $`\pi (135)`$ meson modeled by the amphichiral knots $`\mathrm{𝟒}_\mathrm{𝟏}`$. This thus gives a periodic phenomenon of the classification of mesons. It is then interesting to note from the classification table that the prime numbers $`59`$ and $`61`$ are not occupied with the $`K`$ mesons while the consecutive prime numbers starting from $`29`$ upto $`53`$ are all occupied with the $`K`$ mesons. This is similar to that the prime numbers $`3,5,7`$ are not occupied with the $`K`$ mesons. Let us explain this phenomenon as follows. We have that $`59`$ should not be occupied with the $`K`$ mesons since $`59`$ is assigned to the amphichiral knot $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑}`$ and the $`K`$ mesons are not identified with their anti-particles. Then let us suppose that there is a $`K`$ meson which occupies the prime number $`61`$. Then this $`K`$ meson should not be in a nonet with the $`I=1`$ nonstrange meson assigned with the number $`59`$ because the amphichiral knot $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑}`$ is for mesons such as the $`\pi `$ meson with $`I=1`$ having the property that the index number for the $`K`$ meson does not consecutively follow $`59`$ (This is similar to the amphichiral knot $`\mathrm{𝟒}_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ for the meson $`\pi (135)`$). Thus in this nonet the meson with $`I=1`$ is assigned with an index number less than $`59`$. However we see from the classification table that starting from the second nonet the difference between the index number of meson with $`I=1`$ and the index number for the $`K`$ meson in the same nonet is not more than the difference between the two consecutive prime numbers where the larger one is the prime index number of the $`K`$ meson. Thus according to this rule there will have no $`K`$ mesons occupying the prime number $`61`$. Now since there are no $`K`$ mesons occupying the prime numbers $`59`$ and $`61`$ this gives a room for introducing a new degree of freedom. We have that $`\mathrm{𝟔𝟏}\times 50+48=3098Mev`$ where $`48=2\times 24`$ is similar to $`2\times 16`$ for the $`\varphi (1020)`$ meson where $`2\times 16`$ is for the $`s\overline{s}`$ degree of freedom of the $`\varphi (1020)`$ meson. This approximates the experimemtal mass $`3096Mev`$ of the $`J/\psi `$ meson which is of the form where $`c`$ denotes the charm quark. The number $`48=2\times 24`$ is then for the $`c\overline{c}`$ degree of freedom of $`J/\psi `$ and thus the prime integer $`61`$ is assigned to the $`J/\psi `$ meson. Then for the prime number $`59`$ we have $`\mathrm{𝟓𝟗}\times 50+24=2974Mev`$. This approximates the experimemtal mass $`2979Mev`$ of the $`\eta _c(2979)`$ meson. Thus $`\eta _c(2979)`$ is indexed by the prime number $`59`$. The excited level of $`c\overline{c}`$ of $`\eta _c(2979)`$ is proportional to $`24`$ which is half of $`48`$ of the $`c\overline{c}`$-meson $`J/\psi `$. This agrees with the property of $`\eta _c(2979)`$ that it is partially a $`c\overline{c}`$-meson but is not a complete $`c\overline{c}`$-meson such as the $`J/\psi `$ meson. We note that since $`\eta _c(2979)`$ is indexed by the prime number $`59`$ we have that $`\eta _c(2979)`$ is modeled by the amphichiral knot $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑}`$. This agrees with the usual classification that $`\eta _c(2979)`$ is put into the beginning pseudoscalar nonet and it is as a periodic phenomenon that both $`\pi (135)`$ and $`\eta _c(2979)`$ are amphichiral knots. Let us then consider more $`c\overline{c}`$-mesons in the following table

$$\begin{array}{cccc}& & & \\ c\overline{c}\text{-meson}& \text{computed mass}& c\overline{c}\text{-meson}& \text{computed mass}\\ & & & \\ \eta _c(1S)(2979)& \mathrm{𝟓𝟗}\times 50+24=2974& \eta _c(2S)(3594)& \mathrm{𝟕𝟗}\times 45+36=3591\\ & & & \\ J/\psi (1S)(3096)& \mathrm{𝟔𝟏}\times 50+48=3098& \psi (2S)(3686)& \mathrm{𝟕𝟑}\times 50+36=3686\\ & & & \\ \chi _{c0}(1P)((3415)& \mathrm{𝟕𝟏}\times 48=3408& \psi (3770)& \mathrm{𝟖𝟑}\times 45+36=3771\\ & & & \\ \chi _{c1}(1P)((3510)& \mathrm{𝟕𝟑}\times 48=3504& \psi (3836)& \mathrm{𝟖𝟑}\times 45+248=3831\\ & & & \\ h_c(1P)(3526)& \mathrm{𝟕𝟑}\times 48+24=3528& \psi (4040)& \mathrm{𝟖𝟗}\times 45+36=4041\\ & & & \\ \chi _{c2}(1P)((3556)& \mathrm{𝟕𝟗}\times 45=3555& \psi (4160)& \mathrm{𝟖𝟑}\times 50+236=4162\\ & & & \\ & & \psi (4415)& \mathrm{𝟗𝟕}\times 45+48=4413\end{array}$$

where $`12,24,36`$ and $`48`$ are for the $`c\overline{c}`$ degree of freedom. From this table we see that the computed masses approximate the experimentl masses. We notice that the computed masses of $`\chi `$ mesons do not have the term of multiple of $`12,24,36`$ and $`48`$. This agrees with the property of $`\chi `$ that they are not a complete $`c\overline{c}`$ meson. Also we notice that there are many $`c\overline{c}`$-mesons in this mass region. Let us give a knot model argument to explain this phenomenon. Let us extend the table of indexing prime knots by prime integers with the following table:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccc}& & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{prime knot}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟕}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟖}& \mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟗}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟏}}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟐}}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟑}}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟒}}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟓}}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟔}}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟕}}& \mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟖}}\\ & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{prime number}& 73& 79& 83& 89& 97& 101& 103& 107& 109& 113& 127& 131\end{array}$$

In this table we list prime knots with eight crossings. In knot theory we have the fact that the sets of prime knots with even crossings such as $`\mathrm{𝟔}_{()},\mathrm{𝟖}_{()},\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}_{()}`$ contain amphichiral knots while the sets of prime knots with odd crossings such as $`\mathrm{𝟕}_{()},\mathrm{𝟗}_{()}`$ contain no (or only a few) amphichiral knots. In this table of prime knots with eight crossings we have amphichiral knots $`\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟑},\mathrm{𝟖}_\mathrm{𝟗},\mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟐}},\mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟕}},\mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟖}}`$ while there are no amphichiral knots of the form $`\mathrm{𝟕}_{()}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟗}_{()}`$. Since these amphichiral knots are suitable for modeling mesons which are identical with their anti-particles such as the $`\pi `$ and $`c\overline{c}`$ mesons this explains that why there is a family of $`c\overline{c}`$ mesons appearing in this mass region. Here we predict that there will have $`c\overline{c}`$ mesons modeled by the amphichiral knots $`\mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟐}},\mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟕}},\mathrm{𝟖}_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟖}}`$ which are indexed by the prime numbers $`101,127`$ and $`131`$ respectively.

We remark that the $`\sigma `$ meson  has not been included in the above classification. We shall at elsewhere give a knot model of this meson to show its existence and properties.


text:
# Exclusive Double-Charmonium Production from 𝒆⁺𝒆⁻ Annihilation into Two Virtual Photons

## I Introduction

Recently, the Belle Collaboration observed $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation into two charmonium states at a center-of-mass energy $`\sqrt{s}=10.6`$ GeV by studying the recoil momentum spectrum of the $`J/\psi `$ Abe:2002rb . The collaboration measured the cross section for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ and also found evidence for production of $`J/\psi +\chi _{c0}`$ and $`J/\psi +\eta _c(2S)`$. With more precise measurements and additional data, it may be possible to discover the $`D`$-wave charmonium states $`\eta _{c2}(1D)`$ and $`\psi _2(1D)`$ at the $`B`$ factories by studying the momentum spectra of the $`J/\psi `$ and other charmonium states.

The exclusive cross sections for double-charmonium states provide stringent tests of the NRQCD factorization method for calculating the cross sections for heavy-quarkonium production BBL . The predictions of the NRQCD factorization method for exclusive double-charmonium production reduce essentially to those of the color-singlet model for quarkonium production CSM , up to relativistic corrections that are second order in the relative velocity $`v`$ of the quark and antiquark in the charmonium. The nonperturbative factors in the NRQCD factorization formula for the cross section in the nonrelativistic limit can be determined phenomenologically from electromagnetic annihilation decay rates. Cross sections for double-charmonium production can therefore be predicted, up to corrections that are suppressed by powers of $`v^2`$, without any unknown phenomenological factors.

Recent calculations of the cross section for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ have given results that are about an order of magnitude smaller than the Belle measurement Braaten:2002fi ; Liu:2002wq . The relativistic corrections are large, and they may account for part of the discrepancy Braaten:2002fi . It has also been suggested that there may be large nonperturbative corrections to double-charmonium cross sections at the $`B`$-factory energy Liu:2002wq .

In this paper, we calculate the cross sections for $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation into two charmonium states that have the same charge-conjugation parity (C-parity), such as $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$. These processes proceed, at leading order in the QCD coupling $`\alpha _s`$, through QED diagrams with that contain two virtual photons. One might expect that these cross sections would be much smaller than those for charmonia with opposite C-parity because they are suppressed by a factor of $`\alpha ^2/\alpha _s^2`$. However, if both charmonia have quantum numbers $`J^{PC}=1^{}`$, then there is a contribution to the cross section in which each photon fragments into a charmonium Bodwin:2002fk . The fragmentation contribution is enhanced by powers of $`E_{\mathrm{beam}}/m_c`$, where $`E_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ is the beam energy and $`m_c`$ is the charm-quark mass Bodwin:2002fk . This enhancement can compensate for the suppression factor that is associated with the coupling constants. In particular, the predicted cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ at the $`B`$ factories is larger than that for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$.

## II  Cross sections

In this section, we calculate the contributions from $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation through two virtual photons to the production cross sections for double-charmonium states $`H_1+H_2`$. Charge-conjugation symmetry requires the two charmonia to be either two $`C=1`$ states or two $`C=+1`$ states. We express our results in terms of the ratio $`R[H_1+H_2]`$, which is defined by

$`R[H_1+H_2]={\displaystyle \frac{\sigma [e^+e^{}H_1+H_2]}{\sigma [e^+e^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{}]}},`$ (1)
where $`\sigma [e^+e^{}\mu ^+\mu ^{}]=\pi \alpha ^2/(3E_{\mathrm{beam}}^2)`$ and $`E_{\mathrm{beam}}=\sqrt{s}/2`$ is the beam energy in the center-of-momentum (CM) frame. We give the angular distributions $`dR/dx`$ for each of the helicity states of $`H_1`$ and $`H_2`$. The angular variable is $`x=\mathrm{cos}\theta `$, where $`\theta `$ is the angle between the $`e^{}`$ and $`H_1`$ in the $`e^+e^{}`$ CM frame.

### II.1 Asymptotic behavior

The 4 QED diagrams that contribute to the process $`e^+e^{}\gamma ^{}\gamma ^{}c\overline{c}_1+c\overline{c}_1`$ at order $`\alpha ^4`$ are shown in Fig. 1. The diagrams in Figs. 1(a) and 1(b) contribute only for charmonia with quantum numbers $`J^{PC}=1^{}`$, such as $`J/\psi `$, $`\psi (2S)`$, and $`\psi _1(1D)`$. The procedure for calculating the matrix element for $`e^+e^{}H_1(P_1)+H_2(P_2)`$ from the matrix element for $`e^+e^{}c(p_1)\overline{c}(\overline{p}_1)+c(p_2)\overline{c}(\overline{p}_2)`$ is summarized in Ref. Braaten:2002fi .

When the energy $`E_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ is much larger than the charm-quark mass $`m_c`$, the relative sizes of the double-charmonium cross sections are governed largely by the number of kinematic suppression factors $`r^2`$, where the variable $`r`$ is defined by

$`r^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4m_c^2}{E_{\mathrm{beam}}^2}}.`$ (2)
If we set $`m_c=1.4`$ GeV and $`E_{\mathrm{beam}}=5.3`$ GeV, then $`r^2=0.28`$.

The asymptotic behavior of the ratio $`R[H_1+H_2]`$ as $`r0`$ can be determined from the helicity selection rules for exclusive processes in perturbative QCD Chernyak:dj ; Brodsky:1981kj , which apply equally well to QED. For generic charmonia, whose quantum numbers are different from those of the photon, only the diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d) contribute. There is a suppression factor $`r^2`$ for each $`c\overline{c}`$ pair with small relative momentum in the final state. Thus the ratio $`R[H_1(\lambda _1)+H_2(\lambda _2)]`$ decreases at least as fast as $`r^4`$ as $`r0`$. This slowest asymptotic decrease can occur only if the sum of the helicities of the charmonia vanishes: $`\lambda _1+\lambda _2=0`$. For every unit of helicity by which this selection rule is violated, there is a further suppression factor of $`r^2`$. Thus the estimate for the ratio $`R`$ at leading-order in the QED and QCD coupling constants is

$`R[H_1(\lambda _1)+H_2(\lambda _2)]\alpha ^2(v^2)^{3+L_1+L_2}(r^2)^{2+|\lambda _1+\lambda _2|}.`$ (3)
The factor of $`v^{3+2L}`$ for a charmonium state with orbital angular momentum $`L`$ comes from the NRQCD matrix elements. At leading order, there may, of course, be further suppression factors of $`r^2`$, and the cross section could even vanish. For charmonia with opposite charge conjugation, the estimate for $`R`$ is given by Eq. (3) with $`\alpha ^2`$ replaced by $`\alpha _s^2`$. Thus, the cross sections for generic charmonia with the same charge conjugation are suppressed compared to those for opposite charge conjugation by a factor of $`\alpha ^2/\alpha _s^210^3`$.

Production cross sections for charmonia with $`J^{PC}=1^{}`$ are an exception to this generic estimate because they also receive contributions from the diagrams in Figs. 1(a) and 1(b), which we will refer to as photon-fragmentation diagrams. These contributions are enhanced because the virtual-photon propagators are of order $`1/m_c^2`$ instead of order $`1/E_{\mathrm{beam}}^2`$. In the amplitude, there are also two numerator factors of $`m_c`$ instead of $`E_{\mathrm{beam}}`$, which arise from the $`c\overline{c}`$ electromagnetic currents. Hence, the net enhancement of the squared amplitude is $`(E_{\mathrm{beam}}/m_c)^4`$, and the contributions to $`R`$ can be nonzero in the limit $`r0`$. As $`r0`$ with fixed scattering angle $`\theta `$, the photon-fragmentation contributions to the cross section factor into the cross section for $`e^+e^{}\gamma \gamma `$ with photon scattering angle $`\theta `$ and the fragmentation probabilities for $`\gamma H_1`$ and $`\gamma H_2`$. These fragmentation probabilities are nonzero at order $`\alpha `$ only for $`J^{PC}=1^{}`$ states with helicities satisfying $`\lambda _1=\lambda _2=\pm 1`$. The contribution to the ratio $`R`$ for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ has the behavior

$`R[J/\psi (\lambda _1)+J/\psi (\lambda _2)]\alpha ^2(v^2)^3,\lambda _1=\lambda _2=\pm 1.`$ (4)
This estimate applies equally well to $`J/\psi +\psi (2S)`$ and $`\psi (2S)+\psi (2S)`$. For $`J/\psi +\psi _1(1D)`$ and $`\psi (2S)+\psi _1(1D)`$, there is an additional suppression factor of $`v^4`$ from the NRQCD matrix elements. For $`\psi _1(1D)+\psi _1(1D)`$, the additional suppression factor is $`v^8`$.

Using the QCD version of Eq. (3), we obtain the estimate

$`R[J/\psi +\eta _c]\alpha _s^2(v^2)^3(r^2)^3,`$ (5)
which holds generally for $`S`$-wave final states with opposite C-parity. The ratio $`R`$ in Eq. (4) is suppressed relative to Eq. (5) by a factor of $`(\alpha /\alpha _s)^210^3`$, but the enhancement factor that scales as $`r^6`$ makes the cross sections comparable in magnitude at the energy of a $`B`$ factory.

### II.2 $`𝑺`$-wave + $`𝑺`$-wave

The cross section for $`\eta _c+\eta _c`$ receives contributions only from the nonfragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d). The angular distribution is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR}{dx}}[\eta _c+\eta _c]={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{3}}x^2(1x^2)r^4(1r^2)^{5/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{\eta _c}O_1_{\eta _c}}{m_c^6}}.`$ (6)
The total ratio $`R`$ for $`\eta _c+\eta _c`$ is obtained by integrating over $`x`$ only from 0 to 1 in order to avoid double-counting of the identical final-state particles:

$`R[\eta _c+\eta _c]={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{45}}r^4(1r^2)^{5/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{\eta _c}O_1_{\eta _c}}{m_c^6}}.`$ (7)
Note that the ratio (7) depends on the charm-quark mass $`m_c`$ explicitly and also through the variable $`r`$ defined in Eq. (2). One of the factors of $`(1r^2)^{1/2}`$ in Eq. (7) is the nonrelativistic limit of the phase-space factor $`P_{\mathrm{CM}}/E_{\mathrm{beam}}`$, where $`P_{\mathrm{CM}}`$ is the momentum of either charmonium in the center-of-momentum frame. It can be expressed as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{P_{\mathrm{CM}}}{E_{\mathrm{beam}}}}={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^{1/2}(s,M_{H_1}^2,M_{H_2}^2)}{s}},`$ (8)
where $`\lambda (x,y,z)=x^2+y^2+z^22(xy+yz+zx)`$ and $`M_{H_i}`$ is the mass of $`H_i`$.

The angular distribution $`dR/dx`$ for $`\eta _c+\eta _c(2S)`$ is given by an expression identical to Eq. (6), except that one of the factors of $`O_1_{\eta _c}`$ is replaced by $`O_1_{\eta _c(2S)}`$. Since the two final-state particles are distinguishable, the total ratio $`R`$ for $`\eta _c+\eta _c(2S)`$ is obtained by integrating over $`x`$ from $`1`$ to $`1`$. Thus, the total ratio $`R`$ for $`\eta _c+\eta _c(2S)`$ is obtained from Eq. (7) by replacing one of the factors of $`O_1_{\eta _c}`$ by $`O_1_{\eta _c(2S)}`$ and multiplying by a factor 2.

The cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ receives contributions from all four diagrams in Fig. 1, including the photon-fragmentation diagrams. The angular distribution $`dR/dx`$ is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR}{dx}}[J/\psi (\lambda _1)+J/\psi (\lambda _2)]={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{F(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,x)(1r^2)^{1/2}}{[4(1r^2)(1x^2)+r^4]^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{J/\psi }O_1_{J/\psi }}{m_c^6}},`$ (9)
where the entries of $`F(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,x)`$ are

$`F(0,0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`r^4x^2(1x^2)[2+3r^4r^6+4x^2(1r^4)]^2,`$ (10a)
$`F(\pm 1,1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`(1+x^2)(1x^2)[67r^2+4r^4r^6+4x^2r^2(1r^2)]^2,`$ (10b)
$`F(\pm 1,\pm 1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`r^4x^2(1x^2)[34r^2+4r^4r^6+4x^2r^2(1r^2)]^2,`$ (10c)
$`F(\pm 1,0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`F(0,\pm 1,x)=(r^2/2)[(2r^2)^2(32r^2+r^4)^2x^2(72228r^2`$ (10d)
$`+359r^4292r^6+130r^832r^{10}+3r^{12})+4x^4(960r^2+122r^4`$
$`112r^6+58r^814r^{10}+r^{12})+16x^6r^2(1r^2)(611r^2+11r^4`$
$`2r^6)+64x^8r^4(1r^2)^2].`$
The total ratio $`R`$ is obtained by summing over the helicities $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ and integrating over $`x`$ only from $`0`$ to $`1`$. The resulting expression is so complicated that it is not very useful to write it down. The ratio $`dR/dx`$ for $`J/\psi +\psi (2S)`$ is given by an expression identical to Eq. (9), except that one of the factors of $`O_1_{J/\psi }`$ is replaced by $`O_1_{\psi (2S)}`$ and the range of $`x`$ is from $`1`$ to $`1`$.

In the limit $`r0`$ with $`x`$ fixed, only the transverse helicity states $`\lambda _1=\lambda _2=\pm 1`$ in Eq. (10b) contribute. The angular distribution $`dR/dx`$ summed over helicities reduces in this limit to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR}{dx}}[J/\psi (\pm 1)+J/\psi (1)]{\displaystyle \frac{3(1+x^2)}{2(1x^2)}}P_{\gamma J/\psi }^2,`$ (11)
where $`P_{\gamma J/\psi }`$ is the probability for a photon to fragment into a $`J/\psi `$ Fleming:1994iu :

$`P_{\gamma J/\psi }=e_c^2\pi \alpha {\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{J/\psi }}{m_c^3}}.`$ (12)
The coefficient of $`P_{\gamma J/\psi }^2`$ in Eq. (11) is $`dR/dx`$ for the process $`e^+e^{}\gamma \gamma `$. The differential ratio (11) is compatible with the asymptotic form (4). However the integrated cross section is enhanced by a factor $`\mathrm{ln}(8/r^4)`$, relative to Eq. (4). The logarithmic factor arises because, as can be seen from Eq. (9), the potential divergence at $`x=\pm 1`$ in the integral of Eq. (11) is cut off at $`1\pm xr^4/8`$.

Chang, Qiao, and Wang have pointed out that the cross sections for $`e^+e^{}J/\psi +\gamma `$ is also large if $`E_{\mathrm{beam}}m_c`$ Chang:1997dw . The reason is that this process has a fragmentation contribution that factors into the short-distance cross section for $`e^+e^{}\gamma \gamma `$ and a single fragmentation probability $`P_{\gamma J/\psi }`$. The ratio $`dR/dx`$ for this process therefore has a finite limit as $`r0`$, and the cross section is sharply peaked near the beam direction.

### II.3 $`𝑺`$-wave + $`𝑷`$-wave

The cross section for $`J/\psi +h_c`$ receives contributions only from the nonfragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d). The angular distribution is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR}{dx}}[J/\psi (\lambda _1)+h_c(\lambda _2)]={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{24}}G(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,x)r^4(1r^2)^{3/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{J/\psi }O_1_{h_c}}{m_c^8}},`$ (13)
where the non-zero entries of $`G(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,x)`$ are

$`G(0,0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`2(1x^2),`$ (14a)
$`G(0,\pm 1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`r^2(13x^2+4x^4),`$ (14b)
$`G(\pm 1,1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`8(1x^4),`$ (14c)
$`G(\pm 1,0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`4r^2x^2(1+x^2).`$ (14d)
The total ratio $`R`$ is obtained by summing over the helicities $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ and integrating over $`x`$ from $`1`$ to $`1`$:

$`R[J/\psi +h_c]={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{45}}r^4(53+22r^2)(1r^2)^{3/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{J/\psi }O_1_{h_c}}{m_c^8}}.`$ (15)
The cross section for $`\eta _c+\chi _{cJ}`$ receives contributions only from the nonfragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d). The angular distribution is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR}{dx}}[\eta _c+\chi _{cJ}(\lambda _2)]={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{27}}G_J(\lambda _2,x)r^4(1r^2)^{3/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{\eta _c}O_1_{\chi _{cJ}}}{m_c^8}},`$ (16)
where the non-zero entries of $`G_J(\lambda _2,x)`$ are

$`G_0(0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`(3/4)(1x^2),`$ (17a)
$`G_1(0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`9x^2(1x^2),`$ (17b)
$`G_1(\pm 1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`(9r^2/32)(1+x^2+16x^4),`$ (17c)
$`G_2(0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`(3/4)(1x^2),`$ (17d)
$`G_2(\pm 1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`(9r^2/32)(1+x^2).`$ (17e)
The total ratio $`R`$ is obtained by summing over the helicities $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ and integrating over $`x`$ from $`1`$ to $`1`$:

$`R[\eta _c+\chi _{cJ}]={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{27}}G_Jr^4(1r^2)^{3/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{\eta _c}O_1_{\chi _{cJ}}}{m_c^8}},`$ (18)
where the coefficients $`G_J`$ are

$`G_0`$ $`=`$ $`1,`$ (19a)
$`G_1`$ $`=`$ $`(3/10)(8+17r^2),`$ (19b)
$`G_2`$ $`=`$ $`(1/2)(2+3r^2).`$ (19c)
### II.4 $`𝑷`$-wave + $`𝑷`$-wave

The cross section for $`h_c+h_c`$ receives contributions only from the nonfragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d). The angular distribution is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR}{dx}}[h_c(\lambda _1)+h_c(\lambda _2)]={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{24}}H(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,x)r^4(1r^2)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{h_c}O_1_{h_c}}{m_c^{10}}},`$ (20)
where the functions $`H(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,x)`$ are

$`H(0,0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`2x^2(1x^2)[46r^2+3r^44x^2(1r^2)]^2,`$ (21a)
$`H(\pm 1,1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`h_1(x)+h_1(x),`$ (21b)
$`H(\pm 1,0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`H(0,\pm 1,x)=h_2(x)+h_2(x),`$ (21c)
$`H(\pm 1,\pm 1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`(r^4/2)x^2(1x^2)[1+(54x^2)(1r^2)]^2.`$ (21d)
The functions $`h_i(x)`$ in Eqs. (21b) and (21c) are defined by

$`h_1(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(1/4)(1+x)^2(1x^2)[(2r^2)^2+4x(1x)r^2(1r^2)]^2,`$ (22a)
$`h_2(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(r^2/8)(1x)^2[(1+2x)(2r^2)8x^2(1+x)(1r^2)]^2.`$ (22b)
The total ratio $`R`$ is obtained by summing over the helicities $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ and integrating over $`x`$ from $`0`$ to $`1`$:

$`R[h_c+h_c]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{3780}}(22723880r^2+3300r^42158r^6+781r^8)`$ (23)
$`\times r^4(1r^2)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{h_c}O_1_{h_c}}{m_c^{10}}}.`$
We have not calculated the cross sections for $`\chi _{cJ}+\chi _{cJ^{}}`$. They receive contributions only from the nonfragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d). We therefore expect them to be comparable to the cross section for $`h_c+h_c`$.

### II.5 $`𝑺`$-wave + $`𝑫`$-wave

The cross section for $`\eta _c+\eta _{c2}`$ receives contributions only from the nonfragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d). The angular distribution is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR}{dx}}[\eta _c+\eta _{c2}(\lambda _2)]={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{288}}I(\lambda _2,x)r^4(1r^2)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{\eta _c}O_1_{\eta _{c2}}}{m_c^{10}}},`$ (24)
where the functions $`I(\lambda _2,x)`$ are

$`I(0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`x^2(1x^2)[48r^2+5r^4+4x^2(1r^2)(2r^2)]^2,`$ (25a)
$`I(\pm 1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`i_1(x)+i_1(x),`$ (25b)
$`I(\pm 2,x)`$ $`=`$ $`i_2(x)+i_2(x).`$ (25c)
The functions $`i_i(x)`$ in Eqs. (25b) and (25c) are defined by

$`i_1(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(3r^2/4)(1x)^2[23r^22xr^28x^2(1+x)(1r^2)]^2,`$ (26a)
$`i_2(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(3r^4/4)(1x^2)(1x)^2[1+(1r^2)(1+2x)^2]^2.`$ (26b)
Then total ratio $`R`$ is obtained by summing over the helicities $`\lambda _2`$ and integrating over $`x`$ from $`1`$ to $`1`$:

$`R[\eta _c+\eta _{c2}]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{22680}}(12323048r^2+4880r^43726r^6+1439r^8)`$ (27)
$`\times r^4(1r^2)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{\eta _c}O_1_{\eta _{c2}}}{m_c^{10}}}.`$
The cross section for $`J/\psi +\psi _1`$ receives contributions from all four diagrams in Fig. 1, including the photon fragmentation diagrams. The angular distribution is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR}{dx}}[J/\psi (\lambda _1)+\psi _1(\lambda _2)]={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2e_c^4\alpha ^2}{5760}}{\displaystyle \frac{J(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,x)(1r^2)^{1/2}}{[4(1r^2)(1x^2)+r^4]^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{O_1_{J/\psi }O_1_{\psi _1}}{m_c^{10}}},`$ (28)
where the functions $`J(\lambda _1,\lambda _2,x)`$ are

$`J(0,0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`2r^4x^2(1x^2)[84+124r^2158r^4+101r^622r^8+4x^2(1r^2)`$ (29a)
$`\times (3437r^2+34r^42r^6)32x^4(1r^2)^2(2r^2)]^2,`$
$`J(\pm 1,1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`j_+(x)+j_+(x),`$ (29b)
$`J(\pm 1,0,x)`$ $`=`$ $`j_{+0}(x)+j_{+0}(x),`$ (29c)
$`J(0,\pm 1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`j_{0+}(x)+j_{0+}(x),`$ (29d)
$`J(\pm 1,\pm 1,x)`$ $`=`$ $`j_{++}(x)+j_{++}(x).`$ (29e)
The functions $`j_{\lambda \lambda ^{}}(x)`$ are defined by

$`j_+(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(1/4)(1x^2)(1x)^2[3(2r^2)(52+16r^238r^4+11r^6+2r^8)`$ (30a)
$`24xr^4(2r^2)^2(1r^2)+4x^2r^2(1r^2)(4085r^2+22r^46r^6)`$
$`+96x^3r^4(1r^2)^232x^4r^2(1r^2)^2(23r^2)]^2,`$
$`j_{+0}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(r^2/8)(1x)^2[64x^5r^2(1r^2)^2+128x^4r^2(1r^2)^28x^3r^2(1r^2)`$ (30b)
$`\times (22+5r^2+2r^4)4x^2r^2(1r^2)(4613r^2+8r^4)2x(15656r^2`$
$`+4r^4+38r^613r^8)(2r^2)(15628r^224r^4+19r^6)]^2,`$
$`j_{0+}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(r^2/8)(1+x)^2[64x^5r^2(1r^2)^2128x^4r^2(1r^2)^28x^3r^2(1r^2)`$ (30c)
$`\times (1+26r^2+2r^4)+4x^2r^2(1r^2)(5231r^2+8r^4)2x(156+28r^2`$
$`164r^4+143r^634r^8)+(2r^2)(15640r^2+18r^4+r^6)]^2,`$
$`j_{++}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`(r^4/4)(1x^2)[32x^5r^2(1r^2)^24x^3r^2(1r^2)(5730r^2+2r^4)24x^2r^2`$ (30d)
$`\times (1r^2)x(156196r^2+284r^4137r^6+22r^8)+6r^2(2r^2)^2]^2.`$
The total ratio $`R`$ is obtained by summing over the helicities $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ and integrating $`x`$ from $`1`$ to $`1`$.

We have not calculated the cross section for $`J/\psi +\psi _2(1D)`$. It receives contributions only from the nonfragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d). We therefore expect it to be comparable to the cross section for $`\eta _c+\eta _{c2}(1D)`$.

## III  Predictions for $`𝑩`$ factories

In this section, we calculate the cross sections for exclusive double-charmonium production in $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation at the $`B`$ factories. We also analyze the errors in the prediction for the $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ production cross section.

### III.1  Cross sections

The results in Section II were expressed in terms of the ratio $`R`$, which is defined in Eq. (1). The corresponding cross sections are

$`\sigma [H_1+H_2]={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \alpha ^2}{3s}}R[H_1+H_2].`$ (31)
The ratios $`R`$ depend on the coupling constant $`\alpha `$, the charm-quark mass $`m_c`$, and the NRQCD matrix elements $`O_1_H`$.

For the charm-quark mass $`m_c`$, we use the next-to-leading-order pole mass, which can be expressed in terms of the running mass $`\overline{m}_c(\overline{m}_c)`$ as

$`m_c=\overline{m}_c(\overline{m}_c)\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}\right).`$ (32)
If we take the running mass of the charm quark to be $`\overline{m}_c(\overline{m}_c)=1.2\pm 0.2`$ GeV, then the pole mass is $`m_c=1.4\pm 0.2`$ GeV.

The NRQCD matrix element $`O_1_H`$ can be determined phenomenologically from the electromagnetic annihilation decay rate of either $`H`$ or of a state that is related to $`H`$ by the heavy-quark spin symmetry. We make use of the values of the matrix elements that were obtained from such an analysis in Ref. Braaten:2002fi . That analysis takes into account the next-to-leading-order QCD corrections to the annihilation rate in the cases of the $`S`$\- and $`P`$-wave states. It obtains the NRQCD matrix elements for the $`2S`$ and $`1D`$ states from the electronic decay rates of the $`\psi (2S)`$ and $`\psi _1(1D)`$, under the assumption that the mixing between the $`2S`$ and $`1D`$ states is negligible. The values of the matrix elements from that analysis are summarized in Table 1 for the case $`m_c=1.4`$ GeV. For different values of $`m_c`$, the values in Table 1 should be multiplied by $`(m_c/1.4\mathrm{GeV})^{2+2L}`$, where $`L=0`$, 1, and 2 for $`S`$-waves, $`P`$-waves, and $`D`$-waves, respectively.

Our predictions for double-charmonium cross sections are given in Table 2 for $`C=1`$ states and in Table 3 for $`C=+1`$ states. The error bars are those associated with the uncertainty in the pole mass $`m_c`$ only. The small error bars for the $`\eta _c+\eta _c`$ cross section in Table 3 are a consequence of the value of $`m_c`$ being fortuitously close to a zero in the derivative of the cross section with respect to $`m_c`$. Note that the cross sections in Table 2 are in fb, while those in Table 3 are in units of $`10^3`$ fb. All of the cross sections, except those for which both of the charmonia are in $`1^{}`$ states, are at least 3 orders of magnitude smaller than the $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ cross section. The cross sections for the $`1^{}`$ states are dominated by the photon-fragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(a) and 1(b). For $`m_c=1.4`$ GeV, the photon-fragmentation diagrams contribute 114.5% of the $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ cross section. The nonfragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(c) and 1(d) contribute 0.9%, while the interference term contributes $``$15.4%.

The cross sections for production of double-charmonium states with opposite C-parity were calculated in Refs. Braaten:2002fi ; Liu:2002wq . The cross sections at the $`B`$-factory energy in Table II of Ref. Braaten:2002fi  were calculated using the same NRQCD matrix elements as the cross section in Table 1. In spite of the suppression factor of $`\alpha ^2/\alpha _s^2`$, the predicted cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ is larger than that for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ by about a factor of 1.8. The kinematic enhancement factor that scales as $`r^6`$ more than compensates for the suppression factor of $`\alpha ^2/\alpha _s^2`$. Four of the powers of $`r^1`$ come from the enhancement associated with fragmentation processes. The other two powers of $`r^1`$ come from the fact that the final state $`J/\psi (\pm 1)+\eta _c`$ violates hadron helicity conservation by one unit. The angular distributions $`d\sigma /d|x|`$ for $`m_c=1.4`$ GeV are shown in Fig. 2. The normalizations are such that the areas under the curves are equal to the integrated cross sections 6.65 fb and 3.78 fb. At $`x=0`$, the differential cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ (normalized as in Fig. 2) is smaller than that for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ by about a factor 0.66. However the differential cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ is strongly peaked near the beam direction at $`x=\pm 0.994`$, where it is larger than that for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ by about a factor 9.3. The reason for the sharp peak is evident from the expression (11) for the limiting behavior as $`r0`$ with $`x`$ fixed. As we have already mentioned, this peak in the angular distribution leads to an enhancement factor $`\mathrm{ln}(8/r^4)`$ in the integrated cross section.

### III.2  Perturbative corrections

The perturbative corrections to the cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ have not yet been calculated. However the perturbative corrections to the dominant photon-fragmentation diagrams in Figs. 1(a) and 1(b) are closely related to the perturbative correction to the electromagnetic annihilation decay rate for $`J/\psi e^+e^{}`$, which gives a multiplicative factor

$`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}\right)^2.`$ (33)
The perturbative correction to the photon-fragmentation terms in the cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ is just the square of the expression (33). If we choose the QCD coupling constant to be $`\alpha _s=0.25`$, which corresponds to a renormalization scale $`2m_c`$, then the perturbative correction yields a multiplicative factor $`(0.79)^4=0.39`$. The same perturbative correction factor applies to the cross sections for $`J/\psi +\psi (2S)`$ and $`\psi (2S)+\psi (2S)`$. This perturbative correction factor applies only to the leading contributions to the cross sections in the limit $`r0`$. However, since these contributions are dominant, we conclude that the perturbative corrections are likely to decrease the cross sections by about a factor of 3.

### III.3  Relativistic corrections

The prescription for calculating the leading relativistic correction for $`S`$-wave charmonium production processes was summarized in Ref. Braaten:2002fi . The leading relativistic correction is conveniently expressed in terms of a quantity $`v^2_H`$ that can be defined formally as a ratio of matrix elements in NRQCD. It can also be determined phenomenologically, using the mass $`M_H`$ of the charmonium state as input Gremm:1997dq .

If we keep only the dominant photon-fragmentation contribution to the cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$, then the relativistic correction to the cross section is closely related to the relativistic correction to the electromagnetic annihilation decay rate for $`J/\psi e^+e^{}`$. The relativistic correction to the photon-fragmentation probability $`P_{\gamma J/\psi }`$ in Eq. (12) is a multiplicative factor

$`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}v^2_H\right)^2\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{2m_c}{M_{J/\psi }}}\right)^3.`$ (34)
The first factor in the expression (34) arises from the expansion of the electromagnetic current in powers of $`v`$ Braaten:1998au , while the second factor arises from the dependence of the rate on the charmonium mass, which can be determined from dimensional analysis. The decay rate for $`J/\psi e^+e^{}`$ is multiplied by the same factor, except that $`2m_c/M_{J/\psi }`$ is raised to the power 2 instead of 3. The relativistic correction associated with the phase space for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ can be taken into account by replacing the factor $`(1r^2)^{1/2}`$ in Eq. (9) by the expression for $`P_{\mathrm{CM}}/E_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ given by Eq. (8). If all of these correction factors are taken into account, both in the decay rate for $`J/\psi e^+e^{}`$ and in $`P_{\gamma J/\psi }`$, then the net effect on the prediction for the production cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ is simply to multiply it by

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{2m_c}{M_{J/\psi }}}\right)^2\times {\displaystyle \frac{P_{\mathrm{CM}}/E_{\mathrm{beam}}}{(1r^2)^{1/2}}}.`$ (35)
For $`m_c=1.4`$ GeV, the relativistic corrections decrease the cross sections for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$, $`J/\psi +\psi (2S)`$, and $`\psi (2S)+\psi (2S)`$ by multiplicative factors of about 0.78, 0.62, and 0.49, respectively. The relativistic corrections also decrease the sensitivity to the value of $`m_c`$. The error associated with variations of $`m_c`$ in the cross section for $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ in Table 2 is about 41% for $`m_c=1.4`$ GeV. After we take into account the relativistic correction in (35), this error decreases to about 9%.

The relativistic corrections to the $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ cross section are significantly smaller than and have the opposite sign from the relativistic corrections to the $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ cross section, which are given in Ref. Braaten:2002fi . For $`m_c=1.4`$ GeV, the relativistic corrections to the $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ cross section are estimated to increase the cross section by about a factor 5.5. The large difference in the relativistic corrections suggests that there may be large relativistic corrections not only to the absolute cross sections for double-charmonium production, but also to the ratios of those cross sections.

### III.4  Phenomenology

Recently, the Belle Collaboration has measured the cross section for the production of $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ by observing a peak in the momentum spectrum of the $`J/\psi `$ that corresponds to the 2-body final state $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ Abe:2002rb . The measured cross section is

$`\sigma [J/\psi +\eta _c]\times B[4]=\left(33_6^{+7}\pm 9\right)\mathrm{fb},`$ (36)
where $`B[4]`$ is the branching fraction for the $`\eta _c`$ to decay into at least 4 charged particles. Since $`B[4]<1`$, the right side of Eq. (36) is a lower bound on the production cross section for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$. This lower bound is about an order of magnitude larger than the predictions of NRQCD in the nonrelativistic limit Braaten:2002fi ; Liu:2002wq . The relativistic corrections are large, and they may account for part of the discrepancy Braaten:2002fi . There may also be large nonperturbative corrections to double-charmonium production at the $`B`$-factory energy Liu:2002wq . However the large discrepancy between the predictions and the measurement is still disturbing. In the Belle fit to the $`J/\psi `$ momentum distribution, the full width at half maximum of the $`\eta _c`$ peak is about 0.11 GeV. Since the mass difference between the $`J/\psi `$ and $`\eta _c`$ is about 0.12 GeV, there are probably $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ events that contribute to the $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ signal that is observed by Belle. If these were taken into account, they would increase the compatibility between the NRQCD prediction of the cross section and the Belle measurement.

The signal for the production of $`J/\psi +X`$, with $`m_X`$ near the mass of the $`\eta _c`$, can be resolved into the contributions from $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ and from $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$. One way to do this is to measure the angular distribution of the production products and fit to a linear combination of the angular distributions in Fig. 2. This method tests not only the predicted production rates, but also the dominance of the photon-fragmentation production mechanism. Alternatively, one can measure directly the rate for the production of $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ with subsequent decay of both $`J/\psi `$’s into lepton pairs. In the analysis of Ref. Abe:2002rb , the data set for $`J/\psi +X`$, with $`m_X`$ near the mass of the $`\eta _c`$, contains only $`67\pm 13`$ events. Since the branching fraction for $`J/\psi `$ into $`e^+e^{}`$ or $`\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ is only about 0.12, that data sample may not be large enough to allow one to employ this method. However, as the integrated luminosity increases, the double-dilepton signal should become observable.

The Belle Collaboration also saw evidence for $`J/\psi +\chi _{c0}(1P)`$ and $`J/\psi +\eta _c(2S)`$ events. The $`\eta _c(2S)`$ was recently discovered by the Belle Collaboration at a mass of $`M_{\eta _c(2S)}=3654\pm 6\pm 8`$ MeV Choi:2002na . Since the mass difference between the $`\psi (2S)`$ and the $`\eta _c(2S)`$ is only about 0.03 GeV, any signal for $`J/\psi +\eta _c(2S)`$ in the $`J/\psi `$ momentum spectrum is probably also contaminated by $`J/\psi +\psi (2S)`$ events. A 3-peak fit to the momentum spectrum of the $`J/\psi `$ by the Belle Collaboration gives approximately 67, 39, and 42 events with an accompanying $`\eta _c`$, $`\chi _{c0}(1P)`$, or $`\eta _c(2S)`$, with an uncertainty of 12-15 events. The predictions in Ref. Braaten:2002fi  for the relative cross sections for the production of a $`J/\psi `$ with an accompanying $`\eta _c`$, $`\chi _{c0}(1P)`$, or $`\eta _c(2S)`$ are 1.00, 0.63, and 0.42, respectively. The observed proportion of events is compatible with the NRQCD predictions.

In summary, we have calculated the cross sections for $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation through two virtual photons into exclusive double-charmonium states. The cross sections are particularly large if the two charmonia are both $`1^{}`$ states. In the absence of radiative and relativistic corrections, the predicted cross section for the production of $`J/\psi +J/\psi `$ at the $`B`$ factories is larger than that for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ by a factor of about 3.7. The perturbative and relativistic corrections for these two processes may be rather different and could significantly change the prediction for the ratio of the cross sections. Nevertheless, the inclusion of contributions from processes involving two virtual photons in the theoretical prediction for the cross section for $`J/\psi +\eta _c`$ production is likely to decrease the large discrepancy between that prediction and the Belle measurement.

###### Acknowledgements.

One of us (E.B.) would like to thank B. Yabsley for valuable discussions. The research of G.T.B. and J.L. in the High Energy Physics Division at Argonne National Laboratory is supported by the U. S. Department of Energy, Division of High Energy Physics, under Contract W-31-109-ENG-38. The research of E.B. is supported in part by the U. S. Department of Energy, Division of High Energy Physics, under grant DE-FG02-91-ER4069 and by Fermilab, which is operated by Universities Research Association Inc. under Contract DE-AC02-76CH03000 with the U. S. Department of Energy.