About   Contents   Introduction   Synopsis   Search   Subject Index   Summaries   Texts

ALBAJAR 1987C

UA1 collaboration; Albajar, C. et al.
Search for B^o anti-B^o Oscillations at the CERN Proton Antiproton Collider. Paper 2
Phys. Lett. 186B (1987) 247; Phys. Lett. 197B (1987) 565;

Abstracts
We report a search for B^o ← anti-B^o oscillations using events with two identified muons from data collected at the CERN anti-p p collider. In the absence of B^o ← anti-B^o oscillations, dimuons coming directly from decays of beauty-antibeauty pairs must have opposite signs. Like-sign dimuons are expected from events where one muon arises from beauty decay and the other from the charm decay of the associated beauty-charm cascade. Taking these processes into account, together with the contribution from charm production, the predicted ratio of like-sign to unlike-sign muon pairs is 0.26 ± 0.03. Experimentally we measure 0.42 ± 0.07 ± 0.03. A natural explanation for the excess of like-sign events is the existence of a significant amount of B^o ← anti-B^o transitions. The fraction of beauty particles that produce first-generation decay muons with the opposite electric charge from that expected with out mixing is deduced to be: χ = 0.121 ± 0.047. Combined with the null result from searching B^o ← anti-B^o oscillations at e⁺ e^– colliders, our results are consistent with transitions in the B_s system, as favored theoretically.

Accelerator CERN-PBAR/P Detectors UA1

Related references
See also
T. D. Lee and C. S. Wu, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Sci. 16 (1966) 511;
Particle Data Group, Review of Particle Properties, M. Aguilar-Benitez, Phys. Lett. 170B (1986) 1;
A. Ali and Z. Aydin, Nucl. Phys. B148 (1979) 165;
W. C. Louis et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 56 (1986) 1027;
M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Progr. of Theor. Phys. 49 (1973) 652;
N. Cabibbo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10 (1963) 531;
L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51 (1983) 1945;
A. Ali and C. Jarlskog, Phys. Lett. 144B (1984) 266;
V. Barger and R. J. N. Philips, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 (1985) 2752;
V. Barger and R. J. N. Philips, Phys. Lett. 143B (1984) 259;
I. I. Bigi and A. I. Sanda, Nucl. Phys. B193 (1981) 85;
I. I. Bigi and A. I. Sanda, Phys. Rev. D29 (1984) 1393;
Mark II Coll., T. Schaad et al., Phys. Lett. 160B (1985) 188;
UA1 Coll., C. Albajar et al., Phys. Lett. 186B (1987) 237;
E. Eichten et al., Rev. of Mod. Phys. 56 (1984) 579;
A. Chen et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 (1984) 1084;
J. Green et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 51 (1983) 347;
S. E. Csorna et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 1894;
W. Bacino et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979) 1073;
TASSO Coll., M. Althoff et al., Phys. Lett. 138B (1984) 441;
ABCDHW Coll., A. Breakstone et al., Phys. Lett. 135B (1984) 510;
J. Ellis, M. K. Gaillard, D. V. Nanopoulos, and S. Rudaz, Nucl. Phys. B131 (1977) 285;

Reactions

	anti-p p μ– μ+ X	540,630 GeV (Ecm)	mass, pt, ang
	anti-p p 2μ+ X	540,630 GeV (Ecm)	mass, pt, ang
	anti-p p 2μ– X	540,630 GeV (Ecm)	mass, pt, ang
	anti-p p bottom anti-bottom X	540,630 GeV (Ecm)
	Bo anti-Bo		amp, qnc
	Bs anti-Bs		amp, qnc
	Bs μ– X
	anti-Bs μ+ X
	Bo μ– X
	anti-Bo μ– X