AG-2026.04-1162·hep-ph·cross-listed: nucl-th
Effect of $K^*$ meson magnetic dipole moment on the $e^+e^- \to K^+ K^-π^0 π^0 $ cross section
Authors
- Luis A. Jiménez Pérez
- Antonio Rojas
- Genaro Toledo
Abstract
We explore the sensitivity of the $e^{+} e^{-} \to K^+ K^- 2 π^0$ cross section to the magnetic dipole moment (MDM) of the $K^*$ vector meson. We describe the $γ^* \to 2K2π$ vertex using a vector meson dominance model, including the intermediate resonant contributions relevant for energies below 2.4 GeV. Using BaBar data for this process, we show that this observable is indeed sensitive to the MDM of the $K^*$; we obtain a central value for the MDM of $μ_{K^*}=4.5$ and an upper bound of $\barμ_{K^*} = 6.3$, in units of $e/2 m_{K^*}$. We emphasize the need for higher precision data to provide a first data-driven determination of this parameter to confront it with theoretical predictions.
Submitted
14 April 20261 month ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2604.12150
Summary
Physicists used electron-positron collision data to measure the magnetic dipole moment of the K* meson—a property related to how strongly it couples to magnetic fields—by analyzing how often specific particles are produced in these collisions.
- The K* meson's magnetic dipole moment had never been measured from real data before; this work provides the first experimental constraint by studying a particular decay pattern in collider experiments.
- The measurement exploits 'vector meson dominance,' a technique that treats certain quantum interactions as if they're dominated by intermediate particle resonances, making the calculation tractable.
- Current precision isn't enough to decisively test theoretical predictions, so the authors call for better experimental data—a common situation where theory outpaces experiment's ability to verify it.
curious · generated by claude-haiku-4-5
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.