AG-2026.04-1337·hep-ph
Comparing relativistic and non-relativistic quark pair creation models
Authors
- Xiu-Li Gao
- Yu-Hui Zhou
- Bin Wu
- Zhi-Yong Zhou
Abstract
We investigate the strong decay properties of light unflavored and strange mesons within a relativistic quark-pair-creation (QPC) framework, and compare the results with those obtained in the conventional non-relativistic QPC model. Our analysis shows that, within the present theoretical and experimental uncertainties, the relativistic QPC model yields predictions for strong decay widths of comparable overall quality to those of the non-relativistic QPC model. This indicates that the non-relativistic QPC approach remains adequate for estimating decay widths in most practical applications. Nevertheless, owing to the inclusion of Lorentz boosts and Wigner rotations, the relativistic QPC model exhibits a stronger suppression of decay amplitudes in the high-energy region. This feature may be useful in studies based on unquenched quark models, where the relativistic QPC coupling could lead to more controlled meson-loop effects and mass shifts.
Submitted
23 April 20261 month ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2604.21403
Summary
A relativistic version of quark-pair-creation theory predicts meson decay rates about as accurately as the simpler non-relativistic version, but with sharper suppression at high energies that could improve loop calculations.
- Relativistic effects (Lorentz boosts and Wigner rotations) don't significantly improve overall predictions for how light mesons decay, validating the simpler non-relativistic approach for most practical use.
- The relativistic model does suppress decay amplitudes more strongly at high energies, a feature that could matter when accounting for intermediate meson loops in more sophisticated quark models.
- This work clarifies when physicists can safely use faster approximations versus when relativistic corrections become important—useful guidance for choosing computational complexity.
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.