Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This analysis predicts mass spectra for heavy pentaquark states, revealing their properties using QCD methods.
In this work, we systematically investigate the mass spectra of fully heavy pentaquark states <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><a:mi>Q</a:mi><a:mi>Q</a:mi><a:mi>Q</a:mi><a:mi>Q</a:mi><a:mover accent="true"><a:mi>Q</a:mi><a:mo stretchy="false">¯</a:mo></a:mover></a:math> within the framework of QCD sum rules. Employing three configurations of interpolating currents, we obtain the following mass predictions: for the <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><e:mi>c</e:mi><e:mi>c</e:mi><e:mi>c</e:mi><e:mi>c</e:mi><e:mover accent="true"><e:mi>c</e:mi><e:mo stretchy="false">¯</e:mo></e:mover></e:math> states, the masses are determined to be <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><i:msubsup><i:mn>7.79</i:mn><i:mrow><i:mo>−</i:mo><i:mn>0.17</i:mn></i:mrow><i:mrow><i:mo>+</i:mo><i:mn>0.18</i:mn></i:mrow></i:msubsup><i:mtext> </i:mtext><i:mtext> </i:mtext><i:mi>GeV</i:mi></i:math>, <k:math xmlns:k="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><k:msubsup><k:mn>7.76</k:mn><k:mrow><k:mo>−</k:mo><k:mn>0.18</k:mn></k:mrow><k:mrow><k:mo>+</k:mo><k:mn>0.23</k:mn></k:mrow></k:msubsup><k:mtext> </k:mtext><k:mtext> </k:mtext><k:mi>GeV</k:mi></k:math>, <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><m:msubsup><m:mn>7.81</m:mn><m:mrow><m:mo>−</m:mo><m:mn>0.18</m:mn></m:mrow><m:mrow><m:mo>+</m:mo><m:mn>0.17</m:mn></m:mrow></m:msubsup><m:mtext> </m:mtext><m:mtext> </m:mtext><m:mi>GeV</m:mi></m:math>, while for the <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><o:mi>b</o:mi><o:mi>b</o:mi><o:mi>b</o:mi><o:mi>b</o:mi><o:mover accent="true"><o:mi>b</o:mi><o:mo stretchy="false">¯</o:mo></o:mover></o:math> states, the corresponding masses are calculated as <s:math xmlns:s="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><s:mn>22.35</s:mn><s:mo>±</s:mo><s:mn>0.19</s:mn><s:mtext> </s:mtext><s:mtext> </s:mtext><s:mi>GeV</s:mi></s:math>, <u:math xmlns:u="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><u:mn>22.27</u:mn><u:mo>±</u:mo><u:mn>0.22</u:mn><u:mtext> </u:mtext><u:mtext> </u:mtext><u:mi>GeV</u:mi></u:math>, <w:math xmlns:w="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><w:msubsup><w:mn>22.37</w:mn><w:mrow><w:mo>−</w:mo><w:mn>0.20</w:mn></w:mrow><w:mrow><w:mo>+</w:mo><w:mn>0.18</w:mn></w:mrow></w:msubsup><w:mtext> </w:mtext><w:mtext> </w:mtext><w:mi>GeV</w:mi></w:math>, respectively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jing et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: