A study of the ππ phase-shift solutions in the mass region 1.0 to 1.8 GeV from π−p → π−π+n at 17.2 GeV

Hyams, B.; Jones, C. L.; Weilhammer, P.; Blum, W.; Dietl, H.; Grayer, G.; Koch, W.; Lorenz, E.; Lütjens, G.; Männer, W.; Meißburger, J.; Ochs, Wolfgang; Stierlin, U.

doi:10.1016/0550-3213(75)90616-1

Cited by 130 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it can be shown that Im z 3 < 0 below 1.8 GeV. Concerning the data above KK threshold, those from Protopopescu et al [31] only reach 1150 MeV, whereas the CERN-Munich Collaboration in its latest work (Hyams et al [34]) made a full study dedicated to ππ from 1 to 1. [34], showed that two of their solutions were "somewhat less favored by χ 2 " and some may contain unphysical artifacts (like the (+ − −) solution ).…”

Section: Partial Waves Above Kk Thresholdmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Concerning the data above KK threshold, those from Protopopescu et al [31] only reach 1150 MeV, whereas the CERN-Munich Collaboration in its latest work (Hyams et al [34]) made a full study dedicated to ππ from 1 to 1. [34], showed that two of their solutions were "somewhat less favored by χ 2 " and some may contain unphysical artifacts (like the (+ − −) solution ). They also indicate that one of the most favored solutions, the so-called "(− − −)" solution is almost identical to the one provided in a previous work of the collaboration [32] below 1.4 GeV.…”

Section: Partial Waves Above Kk Thresholdmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, in the same publication of Grayer et al [33] by the CERN-Munich Collaboration, five different sets of ππ → ππ data are shown, labeled A to E, and some of them are incompatible with the others, as can be seen in Fig.2. Moreover, with the notable exceptions of [31,34], it seems that providing Tables with their results was not fashionable in those days and that only very vague statements about systematic uncertainties were made. Sometimes, as in [33], statistical uncertainties were provided for each set of solutions.…”

Section: The 70's and Meson-meson Scattering Phases No Breit-wigner mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

From controversy to precision on the sigma meson: A review on the status of the non-ordinary f0(500) resonance

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The existence and properties of the sigma meson have been controversial for almost six decades, despite playing a central role in the spontaneous chiral symmetry of QCD or in the nucleonnucleon attraction. This controversy has also been fed by the strong indications that it is not an ordinary quark-antiquark meson. Here we review both the recent and old experimental data and the model independent dispersive formalisms which have provided precise determinations of its mass and width, finally settling the controversy and leading to its new name: f 0 (500). We then provide a rather conservative average of the most recent and advanced dispersive determinations of its pole position √ s σ = 449 +22−16 −i(275±12). In addition, after comprehensive introductions, we will review within the modern perspective of effective theories and dispersion theory, its relation to chiral symmetry, unitarization techniques, its quark mass dependence, popular models, as well as the recent strong evidence, obtained from the QCD 1/N c expansion or Regge theory, for its non ordinary nature in terms of quarks and gluons.

show abstract

Section: Partial Waves Above Kk Thresholdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Partial Waves Above Kk Thresholdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The 70's and Meson-meson Scattering Phases No Breit-wigner mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From controversy to precision on the sigma meson: A review on the status of the non-ordinary f0(500) resonance

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…points (+) are from set (---) and data points (x) are from set (++ -) of Ref. [8]. Solid points below 0.6 GeV are data from Ref.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Relevant experimental ππ phase shifts and inelasticities were taken from the analysis by Hyams et al [8]. This group has extracted a pion-pion scattering amplitude in the M ππ = 1.02 -1.78 GeV region from pion production in pion-nucleon scattering.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ?? S-wave in the 1 to 2 GeV region from a ??, $$\bar K$$ K and ??(??) coupled channel model

Kloet

Loiseau

1995

Z. Physik A - Hadrons and Nuclei

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A simple ππ,KK, and ρρ(ωω) fully coupled channel model is proposed to predict the isoscalar S-wave phase shifts and inelasticities for ππ scattering in the 1.0 to 2.0 GeV region. The S-matrix is required to exhibit poles corresponding to the established isoscalar J π = 0 + resonances f 0 (975), f 0 (1400), and f 0 (1710). A dominant feature of the experimental ππ inelasticity is the clear opening of theKK channel near 1 GeV, and the opening of another channel in the 1.4 -1.5 GeV region. The success of our model in predicting this observed dramatic energy dependence indicates that the effect of multipion channels is adequately described by the ππ coupling to theKK channel, * Unité de Recherche des Universités Paris 11 et Paris 6 Associée au CNRS 1 the ρρ(4π) and ωω(6π) channels.

show abstract

The πK Scattering and Related Processes

Lang

1978

Fortschr. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A study of the ππ phase-shift solutions in the mass region 1.0 to 1.8 GeV from π−p → π−π+n at 17.2 GeV

Cited by 130 publications

References 11 publications

From controversy to precision on the sigma meson: A review on the status of the non-ordinary f0(500) resonance

From controversy to precision on the sigma meson: A review on the status of the non-ordinary f0(500) resonance

The ?? S-wave in the 1 to 2 GeV region from a ??, $$\bar K$$ K and ??(??) coupled channel model

The πK Scattering and Related Processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About