Productions of X(1835) as baryonium with sizable gluon content

The X(1835) has been treated as a baryonium with sizable gluon content, and to be almost flavor singlet. This picture allows us to rationally understand X(1835) production in $J/\psi$ radiative decays, and its large couplings with $p\bar{p}$, $\eta^{\prime}\pi\pi$. The processes $\Upsilon(1S)\to \gamma X(1835)$ and $J/\psi\to \omega X(1835)$ have been examined. It has been found that $Br(\Upsilon(1S)\to\gamma X(1835))Br(X(1835)\to p\bar{p})<6.45\times10^{-7}$, which is compatible with CLEO's recently experimental result (Phys.Rev.$\mathbf{D73}$ (2006) 032001;hep-ex/0510015). The branching fractions of $Br(J/\psi\to\omega X(1835))$, $Br(J/\psi\to\rho X(1835))$ with $X(1835)\to p\bar{p}$ and $X(1835)\to\eta^{\prime}\pi^{+}\pi^{-}$ have been estimated by the quark-pair creation model. We show that they are heavily suppressed, so the signal of X(1835) is very difficult, if not impossible, to be observed in these processes. The experimental checks for these estimations are expected. The existence of the baryonium nonet is conjectured, and a model independent derivation of their production branching fractions is presented.Comment: 21 pages, 4 figure

Strong and Electromagnetic Decays of X(1835) as a Baryonium State

With the assumption that the recently observed X(1835) is a baryonium state we have studied the strong decays of $X(1835) \to \eta^{(\prime)} \pi^+ \pi^-, \eta^{(\prime)} \pi^0 \pi^0$ and the electromagnetic decay of $X(1835) \to 2\gamma$ in the framework of effective Lagrangian formalism. In the present investigation we have included the contributions from the iso-singlet light scalar resonances but we have not included the isospin violating effect. Our result for the strong decay of $X(1835) \to \eta^{\prime} \pi^+ \pi^-$ is smaller than the observed data. The decay width for the radiative decay of $X(1835) \to 2\gamma$ is consistent with the assumption that it decays through the glueball. In addition, the width for the strong decay of $X(1835) \to \eta \pi^+ \pi^-$ is larger than that of the strong decay of $X(1835) \to \eta^{\prime} \pi^+ \pi^-$ due to the large phase space and coupling constant $g_{N\bar{N}\eta}$. From our investigation, it is not possible to interpret X(1835) as a baryonium.Comment: Corrected typo

Decay Widths of X(1835) as Nucleon-Antinucleon Bound State

Partial decay widths of various decay channels of the X(1835) are evaluated in the 3P0 quark model, assuming that the X(1835) is a nucleon-antinucleon bound state. It is found that the decays to rho+rho, omega+omega and pion+a0(1450) dominate over other channels, and that the product branching fractions of J/psi to pion+pion+eta and J/psi to pion+pion+eta' are in the same order. We suggest that the X(1835) may be searched in the pion+a0(1450) channel.Comment: Changed X(1850) to X(1835) in Abstrac

X(1835): A Possible Baryonium?

We point out that (1) the large $p\bar p$ coupling and suppressed mesonic coupling of X(1835) and (2) the suppression of the three-body strange final states strongly indicate that X(1835) may be a $p\bar p$ baryonium. We also point out that the branching ratio of $X(1835)\to\eta \pi\pi$ should be bigger than that of $X(1835)\to\eta^\prime \pi\pi$. If BES further confirms the non-observation of X(1835) in the $\eta\pi\pi$ channel, that will be very puzzling. Finally, X(1835) may be used a tetraquark generator if X(1835) is really established as a baryonium state.Comment: Comments and suggestions welcom

Categorizing resonances X(1835), X(2120) and X(2370) in the pseudoscalar meson family

Inspired by the newly observed three resonances X(1835), X(2120) and X(2370), in this work we systematically study the two-body strong decays and double pion decays of $\eta(1295)/\eta(1475)$, $\eta(1760)/X(1835)$ and $X(2120)/X(2370)$ by categorizing $\eta(1295)/\eta(1475)$, $\eta(1760)/X(1835)$, X(2120) and X(2370) as the radial excitations of $\eta(548)/\eta^\prime(958)$. Our numerical results indicate the followings: (1) The obtained theoretical strong decay widths of three pseudoscalar states $\eta(1295)$, $\eta(1475)$ and $\eta(1760)$ are consistent with the experimental measurements; (2) X(1835) could be the second radial excitation of $\eta^\prime(958)$; (3) X(2120) and X(2370) can be explained as the third and fourth radial excitations of $\eta(548)/\eta^\prime(958)$, respectively.Comment: 16 pages, 15 figures, 3 tables. Accepted for publication in Phys. Rev.

X(1835)X(1835) and the New Resonances X(2120)X(2120) and X(2370)X(2370) Observed by the BES Collaboration

We calculate the decay widths of both the second and the third radial excitations of $\eta$ and $\eta'$ within the framework of $^3P_0$ model. After comparing the theoretical decay widths and decay patterns with the available experimental data of $\eta(1760)$, $X(1835)$, $X(2120)$ and $X(2370)$, we find that the interpretation of $\eta(1760)$ and $X(1835)$ as the second radial excitation of $\eta$ and $\eta'$ crucially depends on the measured mass and width of $\eta(1760)$, which is still controversial experimentally. We suggest that there may be sizable $p\bar{p}$ content in $X(1835)$. $X(2120)$ and $X(2370)$ can not be understood as the third radial excitations of $\eta$ and $\eta'$, $X(2370)$ probably is a mixture of $\eta'(4{^1}{S}{_0})$ and glueball.Comment: 20 pages, 6 figure

Financing early intervention: interim paper: Graham Allen Review

"This short document sets out the areas of focus for Part 2 of the review, which will report in May/June 2011. Over the next few months we will be exploring options to improve the financing of Early Intervention programmes. This will include a particular focus on attracting additional private sector investment into those programmes which best deliver outcomes, whilst at the same time recognising the barriers that need to be addressed within the public sector." - Page 1

The Case for the Repeal Amendment

Today, a political movement has arisen to oppose what seems to be a highly discretionary and legally unconstrained federal government. Beginning in the Bush Administration during the Panic of 2008 and accelerating during the Obama Administration, the federal government has bailed out or taken over banks, car companies, and student loans. It is now preparing to vastly expand the Internal Revenue Service to help it take charge of the practice of medicine for the first time in American history. This marked and rapid increase of power has shaken many Americans who are now looking to the United States Constitution with renewed interest in the limits it imposes on the powers of Congress. Despite what the Constitution says, however, federal judges have allowed Congress to exceed its enumerated powers for so long, it seems they no longer entertain even the possibility of enforcing the text. Judges appointed by both Republican and Democratic presidents largely operate within what academics call the New Deal settlement. By this it is meant that the courts allow Congress to exercise unchecked power over the national economy and everything that may affect it, limited only by the express guarantees of the Bill of Rights. In this arena, with some exceptions, the post-New Deal judiciary disagrees only on whether other unenumerated rights may also receive protection and, if so, which ones. But whatever few additional fundamental rights may be recognized, they do not include the protection of any so-called economic liberty that might inhibit the national regime of economic regulation. In this manner, the original scheme of islands of federal powers in a sea of liberty has been transformed into a regime of islands of rights in a vast sea of national power. But judicial passivism is not the only cause of expanding congressional power. Also responsible are two changes to the Constitution\u27s structure that were made in 1913 as populist or progressive reforms but which fundamentally altered the relationship between the federal government, the states, and the people as it appears in the Constitution\u27s text