Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Inspired by the recent report from the LHCb Collaboration on <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><a:msub><a:mi>T</a:mi><a:mrow><a:mi>c</a:mi><a:mi>c</a:mi></a:mrow></a:msub></a:math>, which can be interpreted as a molecular <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><c:mi>D</c:mi><c:msup><c:mi>D</c:mi><c:mo>*</c:mo></c:msup></c:math>, we investigated two trimeson systems of the <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><e:msub><e:mi>T</e:mi><e:mrow><e:mi>c</e:mi><e:mi>c</e:mi></e:mrow></e:msub></e:math> partner with <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><g:mi>I</g:mi><g:msup><g:mi>J</g:mi><g:mi>P</g:mi></g:msup><g:mo>=</g:mo><g:mn>0</g:mn><g:msup><g:mn>1</g:mn><g:mo>−</g:mo></g:msup></g:math> in the framework of a chiral quark model. In the first case, because of the attraction between <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><i:msup><i:mi>D</i:mi><i:mo>*</i:mo></i:msup></i:math> and <k:math xmlns:k="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><k:mover accent="true"><k:mi>D</k:mi><k:mo stretchy="false">¯</k:mo></k:mover></k:math>, we explored the existence of bound states in the system <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><o:msup><o:mi>D</o:mi><o:mo>*</o:mo></o:msup><o:mi>D</o:mi><o:mover accent="true"><o:mi>D</o:mi><o:mo stretchy="false">¯</o:mo></o:mover></o:math>, which is obtained by adding <s:math xmlns:s="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><s:mover accent="true"><s:mi>D</s:mi><s:mo stretchy="false">¯</s:mo></s:mover></s:math> into the molecular bound state <w:math xmlns:w="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><w:msub><w:mi>T</w:mi><w:mrow><w:mi>c</w:mi><w:mi>c</w:mi></w:mrow></w:msub></w:math> (<y:math xmlns:y="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><y:mi>D</y:mi><y:msup><y:mi>D</y:mi><y:mo>*</y:mo></y:msup></y:math>). Similarly, in the second case, we explored whether there is a bound state in the <ab:math xmlns:ab="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><ab:msup><ab:mi>D</ab:mi><ab:mo>*</ab:mo></ab:msup><ab:mi>D</ab:mi><ab:mi>K</ab:mi></ab:math> system, which is obtained by adding <cb:math xmlns:cb="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><cb:mi>K</cb:mi></cb:math> into the <eb:math xmlns:eb="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><eb:msub><eb:mi>T</eb:mi><eb:mrow><eb:mi>c</eb:mi><eb:mi>c</eb:mi></eb:mrow></eb:msub></eb:math>, given the attraction between <gb:math xmlns:gb="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><gb:mi>D</gb:mi></gb:math> and <ib:math xmlns:ib="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><ib:mi>K</ib:mi></ib:math>. The results show that both of them are bound states, in which the binding energy of the molecular state <kb:math xmlns:kb="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><kb:mi>D</kb:mi><kb:msup><kb:mi>D</kb:mi><kb:mo>*</kb:mo></kb:msup><kb:mi>K</kb:mi></kb:math> is relatively small, only <mb:math xmlns:mb="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mb:mn>0.4</mb:mn><mb:mo>±</mb:mo><mb:mn>0.4</mb:mn><mb:mtext> </mb:mtext><mb:mtext> </mb:mtext><mb:mi>MeV</mb:mi></mb:math>, while the binding energy of <ob:math xmlns:ob="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><ob:mi>D</ob:mi><ob:msup><ob:mi>D</ob:mi><ob:mo>*</ob:mo></ob:msup><ob:mover accent="true"><ob:mi>D</ob:mi><ob:mo stretchy="false">¯</ob:mo></ob:mover></ob:math> is up to <sb:math xmlns:sb="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><sb:mn>1.6</sb:mn><sb:mo>±</sb:mo><sb:mn>0.3</sb:mn><sb:mtext> </sb:mtext><sb:mtext> </sb:mtext><sb:mi>MeV</sb:mi></sb:math>. According to the calculation results of the root-square-mean distances, the spatial structure of the two systems shows the obvious <ub:math xmlns:ub="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><ub:mrow><ub:mo stretchy="false">(</ub:mo><ub:mi>D</ub:mi><ub:msup><ub:mrow><ub:mi>D</ub:mi></ub:mrow><ub:mrow><ub:mo>*</ub:mo></ub:mrow></ub:msup><ub:mo stretchy="false">)</ub:mo><ub:mtext>−</ub:mtext><ub:mo stretchy="false">(</ub:mo><ub:mover accent="true"><ub:mrow><ub:mi>D</ub:mi></ub:mrow><ub:mrow><ub:mo stretchy="false">¯</ub:mo></ub:mrow></ub:mover><ub:mo>/</ub:mo><ub:mi>K</ub:mi><ub:mo stretchy="false">)</ub:mo></ub:mrow></ub:math> structure, in which <cc:math xmlns:cc="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><cc:mi>D</cc:mi></cc:math> is close to <ec:math xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><ec:msup><ec:mi>D</ec:mi><ec:mo>*</ec:mo></ec:msup></ec:math> while <gc:math xmlns:gc="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><gc:mi>D</gc:mi><gc:msup><gc:mi>D</gc:mi><gc:mo>*</gc:mo></gc:msup></gc:math> as a whole is relatively distant from the third hadron (<ic:math xmlns:ic="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><ic:mover accent="true"><ic:mi>D</ic:mi><ic:mo stretchy="false">¯</ic:mo></ic:mover><ic:mo>/</ic:mo><ic:mi>K</ic:mi></ic:math>), which are similar to the nucleon-electron structure. As a result, we strongly recommend that these bound states <mc:math xmlns:mc="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mc:mi>D</mc:mi><mc:msup><mc:mi>D</mc:mi><mc:mo>*</mc:mo></mc:msup><mc:mover accent="true"><mc:mi>D</mc:mi><mc:mo stretchy="false">¯</mc:mo></mc:mover></mc:math> and <qc:math xmlns:qc="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><qc:mi>D</qc:mi><qc:msup><qc:mi>D</qc:mi><qc:mo>*</qc:mo></qc:msup><qc:mi>K</qc:mi></qc:math> are searched for experimentally.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tan et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: