Timeline for Possible implications of Tetraquark/Quark Quartet
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15, 2016 at 12:51 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Mar 4, 2016 at 8:33 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited tags; edited title
|
| Jan 27, 2016 at 15:21 | comment | added | user46925 | it's not sure that it is bottomonium | |
| Sep 15, 2015 at 18:26 | answer | added | aQuestion | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 12, 2015 at 3:08 | answer | added | MikeV | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jun 20, 2013 at 20:09 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackPhysics/status/347808377184870400 | ||
| Jun 18, 2013 at 20:10 | comment | added | Peter Kravchuk | @dmckee, I said that it cites newer results (LEPS, DIANA, in the very first lines). This is, however, off-topic here. | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 20:05 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | @PeterKravchuk That is a phenomenology paper. If you are talking about $(0.5 \pm 0.1)\text{ MeV}$, it is a computation not a measurement and concerns the lifetime of the $\theta^+$ which is assumed to exist in the context of the calculation. | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 19:52 | comment | added | Peter Kravchuk | @dmckee, it is really peculiar story, because there are recent papers like arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1204.5644, citing newer results with $5\sigma$ and above. Looks like there is still no wide consensus. | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 19:46 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/33578 physics.stackexchange.com/q/1534 | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 19:40 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | @Peter I believe that all claims of having seen evidence for the $\theta (\text{some mass})$ were withdrawn with good grace when many other labs couldn't find it and the analysis was called into question. | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 19:36 | comment | added | Peter Kravchuk | @dmckee, do you know the current state of art on penta-quark? | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 19:28 | history | edited | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 307 characters in body
|
| Jun 18, 2013 at 19:27 | comment | added | Trimok | Nothing forbids 4 quarks or more. The interesting quantity is lifetime. For instance, even for mesons, you could find mesons, made with 2 quarks, with lifetime = $4.5 ~10^{-24}s$ (rho mesons). You certainly cannot find a 4-quark particle with, for instance, the lifetime of a neutron. | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 19:25 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | Particle physics types will remember the penta-quark kerffufle a while ago. I presume that this has been checked carefully with that history in mind. | |
| Jun 18, 2013 at 18:45 | history | asked | nijankowski | CC BY-SA 3.0 |