4.7 Article

Diffusion Monte Carlo calculations of fully heavy compact hexaquarks

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 106, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.114028

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion
  2. Junta de Andalucia group PAIDI-205
  3. Spanish Ministerio de Universidades under Plan de Recuperacion, Transformacion y Resiliencia - European Union-NextGenerationEU
  4. [PID2020 - 113565GB-C22]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A diffusion Monte Carlo technique was used to describe fully heavy compact arrangements in a constituent quark model. The masses of the six-quark arrangements were found to be larger than the sums of any of the two baryons they can be split into, but smaller than the masses for a set of six isolated quarks, indicating that they are bound systems. The analysis showed that all the hexaquarks considered in this study are compact objects, except for cccbbb, which appears to be a loose association of two baryons for all possible spin values.
We used a diffusion Monte Carlo technique to describe the properties of fully heavy compact arrangements (no dibaryon molecules) including six quarks and no antiquarks within the framework of a constituent quark model. Only arrangements whose wavefunctions were eigenvectors of L2 with eigenvalue l = 0 were taken into account, what means that we only considered the subset of all the possible color-spin combinations that make the total wavefunctions antisymmetric with respect to the interchange of any two quarks of the same type. In all cases, the masses of the six-quark arrangements are larger than the ones corresponding to the sum of any of the two baryons we can split them into, but smaller than the ones for a set of six isolated quarks, i.e., all them are bound systems. The analysis of their structure indicates that all the hexaquarks considered in this work are compact objects, except the cccbbb, that appears to be a loose association of two baryons for all the possible spin values.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据