Measurement ofJ/ψ and ψ’ production in 800 GeV/cproton-gold collisions
Le résumé fourni par la source
With a data sample containing 1.1\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}${10}^{5}$ J/\ensuremath{\psi}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\mu}}}^{+}$${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\mu}}}^{\mathrm{\ensuremath{-}}}$ decays reconstructed with 16 MeV/${\mathit{c}}^{2}$ rms mass resolution, we have measured the differential cross sections versus Feynman-x, rapidity, and ${\mathit{p}}_{\mathit{T}}$ for the production of J/\ensuremath{\psi} and \ensuremath{\psi}' in 800 GeV/c p-Au collisions. Our results are compared with leading-order QCD predictions and with previous measurements. While the shapes of the cross sections are in qualitative agreement with QCD predictions, the magnitudes disagree by factors of 7 (J/\ensuremath{\psi}) and 25 (\ensuremath{\psi}'). Assuming an appropriate form for the differential cross sections in regions not measured we derive a total J/\ensuremath{\psi} production cross section \ensuremath{\sigma}(p+N\ensuremath{\rightarrow}J/\ensuremath{\psi}+X)=442\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}2\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}88 nb/nucleon and a (model-dependent) total \ensuremath{\psi}' cross secton \ensuremath{\sigma}(p+N\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\ensuremath{\psi}'+X)=75\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}5\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}22 nb/nucleon. For J/\ensuremath{\psi} produced at central rapidity, d\ensuremath{\sigma}(p+N\ensuremath{\rightarrow}J/\ensuremath{\psi}+X)/dy${\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Vert}}}_{\mathit{y}=0}$=230\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}5\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}46 nb/nucleon.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé, mais le titre doit être comparé manuellement.
- Titre Crossref
- Measurement of<i>J</i>/ψ and ψ’ production in 800 GeV/<i>c</i>proton-gold collisions
- Date Crossref
- 01/08/1995
- Éditeur
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.