The analysis of the charmonium-like states X∗(3860)X^{*}(3860),X(3872)X(3872), X(3915)X(3915), X(3930)X(3930) and X(3940)X(3940) according to its strong decay behaviors

Inspired by the newly observed state $X^{*}(3860)$, we analyze the strong decay behaviors of some charmonium-like states $X^{*}(3860)$,$X(3872)$, $X(3915)$, $X(3930)$ and $X(3940)$ by the $^{3}P_{0}$ model. We carry out our work based on the hypothesis that these states are all being the charmonium systems. Our analysis indicates that $0^{++}$ charmonium state can be a good candidate for $X^{*}(3860)$ and $1^{++}$ state is the possible assignment for $X(3872)$. Considering as the $3^{1}S_{0}$ state, the decay behavior of $X(3940)$ is inconsistent with the experimental data. So, we can not assign $X(3940)$ as the $3^{1}S_{0}$ charmonium state by present work. Besides, our analysis imply that it is reasonable to assign $X(3915)$ and $X(3930)$ to be the same state, $2^{++}$. However, combining our analysis with that of Zhou~\cite{ZhouZY}, we speculate that $X(3915)$/$X(3930)$ might not be a pure $c\overline{c}$ systems

Analysis of the strong coupling form factors of ΣbNB\Sigma_bNB and ΣcND\Sigma_c ND in QCD sum rules

In this article, we study the strong interaction of the vertexes $\Sigma_bNB$ and $\Sigma_c ND$ using the three-point QCD sum rules under two different dirac structures. Considering the contributions of the vacuum condensates up to dimension $5$ in the operation product expansion, the form factors of these vertexes are calculated. Then, we fit the form factors into analytical functions and extrapolate them into time-like regions, which giving the coupling constant. Our analysis indicates that the coupling constant for these two vertexes are $G_{\Sigma_bNB}=0.43\pm0.01GeV^{-1}$ and $G_{\Sigma_cND}=3.76\pm0.05GeV^{-1}$.Comment: 6 figure

Strong coupling constants and radiative decays of the heavy tensor mesons

In this article, we analyze tensor-vector-pseudoscalar(TVP) type of vertices $D_{2}^{*+}D^{+}\rho$, $D_{2}^{*0}D^{0}\rho$, $D_{2}^{*+}D^{+}\omega$, $D_{2}^{*0}D^{0}\omega$, $B_{2}^{*+}B^{+}\rho$, $B_{2}^{*0}B^{0}\rho$, $B_{2}^{*+}B^{+}\omega$, $B_{2}^{*0}B^{0}\omega$, $B_{s2}^{*}B_{s}\phi$ and $D_{s2}^{*}D_{s}\phi$, in the frame work of three point QCD sum rules. According to these analysis, we calculate their strong form factors which are used to fit into analytical functions of $Q^{2}$. Then, we obtain the strong coupling constants by extrapolating these strong form factors into deep time-like regions. As an application of this work, the coupling constants for radiative decays of these heavy tensor mesons are also calculated at the point of $Q^{2}=0$. With these coupling constants, we finally calculate the radiative decay widths of these tensor mesons.Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1810.0597

Analysis of the charmed mesons D1∗(2680)D_{1}^{*}(2680), D3∗(2760)D_{3}^{*}(2760) and D2∗(3000)D_{2}^{*}(3000)

In this work, we systematically study the strong decay behaviors of the charmed mesons $D_{1}^{*}(2680)$, $D_{3}^{*}(2760)$ and $D_{2}^{*}(3000)$ reported by the LHCb collaboration. By comparing the masses and the decay properties with the results of the experiment, we assigned these newly observed mesons as the $2S\frac{1}{2}1^{-}$, $1D\frac{5}{2}3^{-}$ and $1F\frac{5}{2}2^{+}$ states respectively. As a byproduct, we also study the strong decays of the unobserved $2P\frac{3}{2}2^{+}$ and $2F\frac{5}{2}2^{+}$ charmed mesons, which is helpful to the future experiments in searching for these charmed mesons.Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:0803.0106 by other author

Systematic analysis of the DJ(2580)D_{J}(2580), DJ∗(2650)D_{J}^{*}(2650), DJ(2740)D_{J}(2740), DJ∗(2760)D_{J}^{*}(2760), DJ(3000)D_{J}(3000) and DJ∗(3000)D_{J}^{*}(3000) in DD meson family

In this work, we tentatively assign the charmed mesons $D_{J}(2580)$, $D_{J}^{*}(2650)$, $D_{J}(2740)$, $D_{J}^{*}(2760)$, $D_{J}(3000)$ and $D_{J}^{*}(3000)$ observed by the LHCb collaboration according to their spin-parity and masses, then study their strong decays to the ground state charmed mesons plus light pseudoscalar mesons with the $^{3}P_{0}$ model. According to these study, we assigned the $D_{J}^{*}(2760)$ as the $1D\frac{5}{2}3^{-}$ state, the $D_{J}^{*}(3000)$ as the $1F\frac{5}{2}2^{+}$ or $1F\frac{7}{2}4^{+}$ state, the $D_{J}(3000)$ as the $1F\frac{7}{2}3^{+}$ or $2P\frac{1}{2}1^{+}$ state in the $D$ meson family. As a byproduct, we also study the strong decays of $2P\frac{1}{2}0^{+}$,$2P\frac{3}{2}2^{+}$, $3S\frac{1}{2}1^{-}$, $3S\frac{1}{2}0^{-}$ etc, states, which will be helpful to further experimentally study mixings of these $D$ mesons.Comment: 16 pages,1 figure. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:0801.4821 by other author

Analysis of the strong vertices of ΣcND∗\Sigma_cND^{*} and ΣbNB∗\Sigma_bNB^{*} in QCD sum rules

The strong coupling constant is an important parameter which can help us to understand the strong decay behaviors of baryons. In our previous work, we have analyzed strong vertices $\Sigma_{c}^{*}ND$, $\Sigma_{b}^{*}NB$, $\Sigma_{c}ND$, $\Sigma_{b}NB$ in QCD sum rules. Following these work, we further analyze the strong vertices $\Sigma_{c}ND^{*}$ and $\Sigma_{b}NB^{*}$ using the three-point QCD sum rules under Dirac structures $q\!\!\!/p\!\!\!/\gamma_{\alpha}$ and $q\!\!\!/p\!\!\!/p_{\alpha}$. In this work, we first calculate strong form factors considering contributions of the perturbative part and the condensate terms $\langle\overline{q}q\rangle$, $\langle\frac{\alpha_{s}}{\pi}GG\rangle$ and $\langle\overline{q}g_{s}\sigma Gq\rangle$. Then, these form factors are used to fit into analytical functions. According to these functions, we finally determine the values of the strong coupling constants for these two vertices $\Sigma_{c}ND^{*}$ and $\Sigma_{b}NB^{*}$.Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1705.0322

Comparative study of earthquake-related and non-earthquake-related head traumas using multidetector computed tomography

OBJECTIVE: The features of earthquake-related head injuries may be different from those of injuries obtained in daily life because of differences in circumstances. We aim to compare the features of head traumas caused by the Sichuan earthquake with those of other common head traumas using multidetector computed tomography. METHODS: In total, 221 patients with earthquake-related head traumas (the earthquake group) and 221 patients with other common head traumas (the non-earthquake group) were enrolled in our study, and their computed tomographic findings were compared. We focused the differences between fractures and intracranial injuries and the relationships between extracranial and intracranial injuries. RESULTS: More earthquake-related cases had only extracranial soft tissue injuries (50.7% vs. 26.2%, RR=1.9), and fewer cases had intracranial injuries (17.2% vs. 50.7%, RR = 0.3) compared with the non-earthquake group. For patients with fractures and intracranial injuries, there were fewer cases with craniocerebral injuries in the earthquake group (60.6% vs. 77.9%, RR = 0.8), and the earthquake-injured patients had fewer fractures and intracranial injuries overall (1.5 + 0.9 vs. 2.5 +1.8; 1.3 + 0.5 vs. 2.1 + 1.1). Compared with the non-earthquake group, the incidences of soft tissue injuries and cranial fractures combined with intracranial injuries in the earthquake group were significantly lower (9.8% vs. 43.7%, RR = 0.2; 35.1% vs. 82.2%, RR = 0.4). CONCLUSION: As depicted with computed tomography, the severity of earthquake-related head traumas in survivors was milder, and isolated extracranial injuries were more common in earthquake-related head traumas than in non-earthquake-related injuries, which may have been the result of different injury causes, mechanisms and settings