Phys. Rev. Lett.
100,
091801
(2008)
[6 pages]
Comparison of D→KS0π and D→KL0π Decay Rates
Q. He et al. CLEO Collaboration
Show All Authors/Affiliations
Hide All Authors/Affiliations
Q. He1, J. Insler1, H. Muramatsu1, C. S. Park1, E. H. Thorndike1, F. Yang1, T. E. Coan2, Y. S. Gao2, M. Artuso3, S. Blusk3, J. Butt3, J. Li3, N. Menaa3, R. Mountain3, S. Nisar3, K. Randrianarivony3, R. Sia3, T. Skwarnicki3, S. Stone3, J. C. Wang3, K. Zhang3, G. Bonvicini4, D. Cinabro4, M. Dubrovin4, A. Lincoln4, D. M. Asner5, K. W. Edwards5, R. A. Briere6, T. Ferguson6, G. Tatishvili6, H. Vogel6, M. E. Watkins6, J. L. Rosner7, N. E. Adam8, J. P. Alexander8, D. G. Cassel8, J. E. Duboscq8, R. Ehrlich8, L. Fields8, L. Gibbons8, R. Gray8, S. W. Gray8, D. L. Hartill8, B. K. Heltsley8, D. Hertz8, C. D. Jones8, J. Kandaswamy8, D. L. Kreinick8, V. E. Kuznetsov8, H. Mahlke-Krüger8, P. U. E. Onyisi8, J. R. Patterson8, D. Peterson8, J. Pivarski8, D. Riley8, A. Ryd8, A. J. Sadoff8, H. Schwarthoff8, X. Shi8, S. Stroiney8, W. M. Sun8, T. Wilksen8, M. Weinberger8, S. B. Athar9, R. Patel9, V. Potlia9, J. Yelton9, P. Rubin10, C. Cawlfield11, B. I. Eisenstein11, I. Karliner11, D. Kim11, N. Lowrey11, P. Naik11, M. Selen11, E. J. White11, J. Wiss11, R. E. Mitchell12, M. R. Shepherd12, D. Besson13, T. K. Pedlar14, D. Cronin-Hennessy15, K. Y. Gao15, J. Hietala15, Y. Kubota15, T. Klein15, B. W. Lang15, R. Poling15, A. W. Scott15, A. Smith15, P. Zweber15, S. Dobbs16, Z. Metreveli16, K. K. Seth16, A. Tomaradze16, J. Ernst17, K. M. Ecklund18, H. Severini19, W. Love20, V. Savinov20, O. Aquines21, Z. Li21, A. Lopez21, S. Mehrabyan21, H. Mendez21, J. Ramirez21, G. S. Huang22, D. H. Miller22, V. Pavlunin22, B. Sanghi22, I. P. J. Shipsey22, B. Xin22, G. S. Adams23, M. Anderson23, J. P. Cummings23, I. Danko23, D. Hu23, B. Moziak23, and J. Napolitano23 (CLEO Collaboration)
1University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA
2Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas 75275, USA
3Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13244, USA
4Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202, USA
5Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 5B6
6Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA
7Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA
8Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA
9University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA
10George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia 22030, USA
11University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois 61801, USA
12Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
13University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045, USA
14Luther College, Decorah, Iowa 52101, USA
15University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA
16Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA
17State University of New York at Albany, Albany, New York 12222, USA
18State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York 14260, USA
19University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019, USA
20University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260, USA
21University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, Puerto Rico 00681, USA
22Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA
23Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York 12180, USA
Received 8 November 2007; published 3 March 2008
We present measurements of D→KS0π and D→KL0π branching fractions using 281 pb-1 of ψ(3770) data at the CLEO-c experiment. We find that B(D0→KS0π0) is larger than B(D0→KL0π0), with an asymmetry of R(D0)=0.108±0.025±0.024. For B(D+→KS0π+) and B(D+→KL0π+), we observe no measurable difference; the asymmetry is R(D+)=0.022±0.016±0.018. The D0 asymmetry is consistent with the value based on the U-spin prediction A(D0→K0π0)/A(D0→K̅ 0π0)=-tan2θC, where θC is the Cabibbo angle.
© 2008 The American Physical Society
URL:
http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.091801
DOI:
10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.091801
|
|
