Measuring the CP-Violating Phase by a Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment with Hyper-Kamiokan

合集下载

安德烈莫洛亚对追忆似水年华作的序英语原文

安德烈莫洛亚对追忆似水年华作的序英语原文André Maurois' Preface to 'Remembrance of Things Past'In his preface to Marcel Proust's masterpiece,'Remembrance of Things Past,' André Maurois pays tribute to Proust's unique writing style and unrivaled ability to capture the essence of human experience. Maurois highlights the profound impact the novel has had on both the literary world and the readers who have been entranced by its beauty and depth. Maurois begins by acknowledging the complexity and vastness of Proust's work, describing it as a 'monumental edifice erected by an architect who is also a poet.' He emphasizes the immersive nature of the novel, where readers are invited to explore the intricacies of memory, time, and the human psyche. Proust's writing, according to Maurois, transports us to a realm where the past merges with the present, and the boundaries between reality and imagination blur.Furthermore, Maurois praises Proust's ability to bring to life a multitude of characters, each with their own unique quirks, desires, and flaws. These characters, Maurois suggests, are not mere figments of Proust's imagination but rather reflections of the diverse aspects of human nature that reside within all of us. Through their stories, Proust invites us toreflect on our own experiences, desires, and the passage of time.Maurois also lauds Proust's prose style, which he describes as 'musical, vibrant, and evocative.' Proust's words, Maurois argues, have the power to stir emotions and awakenlong-forgotten memories within the reader. The sheer beauty of his language, combined with his meticulous attention to detail, creates a vivid and immersive reading experience that resonates deeply with the audience.In conclusion, Maurois asserts that 'Remembrance of Things Past' is not just a novel but a transformative journey that challenges our perception of time, memory, and the human experience. Proust's ability to capture the essence of life and his unparalleled talent for storytelling have solidified his place as one of the greatest literary figures of all time. Maurois' preface serves as a testament to the enduring impact of Proust's work and encourages readers to embark on this remarkable literary adventure.。

Mixing and CP Violation in the Decay of Neutral D Mesons at CLEO

a rXiv:h ep-e x /0126v15Feb21CLEO CONF 01-1Mixing and CP Violation in the Decay of Neutral D Mesons at CLEO.CLEO Collaboration (February 5,2001)Abstract We present preliminary results of several analyses searching for the eﬀects of CP violation and mixing in the decay of D 0mesons.We ﬁnd no evidence of CP asymmetry in ﬁve diﬀerent two-body decay modes of the D 0to pairs of light pseudo-scalar mesons:A CP (K +K −)=(+0.05±2.18±0.84)%,A CP (π+π−)=(+2.0±3.2±0.8)%,A CP (K 0S π0)=(+0.1±1.3)%,A CP (π0π0)=(+0.1±4.8)%and A CP (K 0S K 0S )=(−23±19)%.We present the ﬁrst measurement of the rate of wrong-sign D 0→K +π−π0decay:R W S =0.0043+0.0011−0.0010±0.0007.Finally,we describe a measurement of the mixing parameter y CP =∆ΓD.Cronin-Hennessy,1A.L.Lyon,1E.H.Thorndike,1T.E.Coan,2V.Fadeyev,2Y.S.Gao,2Y.Maravin,2I.Narsky,2R.Stroynowski,2J.Ye,2T.Wlodek,2M.Artuso,3C.Boulahouache,3K.Bukin,3E.Dambasuren,3G.Majumder,3R.Mountain,3S.Schuh,3T.Skwarnicki,3S.Stone,3J.C.Wang,3A.Wolf,3J.Wu,3S.Kopp,4M.Kostin,4A.H.Mahmood,5S.E.Csorna,6I.Danko,6K.W.McLean,6Z.Xu,6R.Godang,7G.Bonvicini,8D.Cinabro,8M.Dubrovin,8S.McGee,8G.J.Zhou,8A.Bornheim,9E.Lipeles,9S.P.Pappas,9A.Shapiro,9W.M.Sun,9A.J.Weinstein,9D.E.Jaﬀe,10R.Mahapatra,10G.Masek,10H.P.Paar,10D.M.Asner,11A.Eppich,11T.S.Hill,11 R.J.Morrison,11R.A.Briere,12G.P.Chen,12T.Ferguson,12H.Vogel,12A.Gritsan,13 J.P.Alexander,14R.Baker,14C.Bebek,14B.E.Berger,14K.Berkelman,14F.Blanc,14 V.Boisvert,14D.G.Cassel,14P.S.Drell,14J.E.Duboscq,14K.M.Ecklund,14R.Ehrlich,14 P.Gaidarev,14L.Gibbons,14B.Gittelman,14S.W.Gray,14D.L.Hartill,14B.K.Heltsley,14 P.I.Hopman,14L.Hsu,14C.D.Jones,14J.Kandaswamy,14D.L.Kreinick,14M.Lohner,14A.Magerkurth,14T.O.Meyer,14N.B.Mistry,14E.Nordberg,14M.Palmer,14J.R.Patterson,14D.Peterson,14D.Riley,14A.Romano,14H.Schwarthoﬀ,14 J.G.Thayer,14D.Urner,14B.Valant-Spaight,14G.Viehhauser,14A.Warburton,14 P.Avery,15C.Prescott,15A.I.Rubiera,15H.Stoeck,15J.Yelton,15G.Brandenburg,16A.Ershov,16D.Y.-J.Kim,16R.Wilson,16T.Bergfeld,17B.I.Eisenstein,17J.Ernst,17 G.E.Gladding,17G.D.Gollin,17R.M.Hans,17E.Johnson,17I.Karliner,17M.A.Marsh,17C.Plager,17C.Sedlack,17M.Selen,17J.J.Thaler,17J.Williams,17K.W.Edwards,18 R.Janicek,19P.M.Patel,19A.J.Sadoﬀ,20R.Ammar,21A.Bean,21D.Besson,21X.Zhao,21 S.Anderson,22V.V.Frolov,22Y.Kubota,22S.J.Lee,22J.J.O’Neill,22R.Poling,22A.Smith,22C.J.Stepaniak,22J.Urheim,22S.Ahmed,23M.S.Alam,23S.B.Athar,23 L.Jian,23L.Ling,23M.Saleem,23S.Timm,23F.Wappler,23A.Anastassov,24E.Eckhart,24 K.K.Gan,24C.Gwon,24T.Hart,24K.Honscheid,24D.Hufnagel,24H.Kagan,24R.Kass,24 T.K.Pedlar,24J.B.Thayer,24E.von Toerne,24M.M.Zoeller,24S.J.Richichi,25H.Severini,25P.Skubic,25A.Undrus,25V.Savinov,26S.Chen,27J.Fast,27J.W.Hinson,27J.Lee,ler,27E.I.Shibata,27I.P.J.Shipsey,27and V.Pavlunin271University of Rochester,Rochester,New York146272Southern Methodist University,Dallas,Texas752753Syracuse University,Syracuse,New York132444University of Texas,Austin,Texas787125University of Texas-Pan American,Edinburg,Texas785396Vanderbilt University,Nashville,Tennessee372357Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,Blacksburg,Virginia240618Wayne State University,Detroit,Michigan482029California Institute of Technology,Pasadena,California9112510University of California,San Diego,La Jolla,California9209311University of California,Santa Barbara,California9310612Carnegie Mellon University,Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania1521313University of Colorado,Boulder,Colorado80309-039014Cornell University,Ithaca,New York1485315University of Florida,Gainesville,Florida3261116Harvard University,Cambridge,Massachusetts0213817University of Illinois,Urbana-Champaign,Illinois6180118Carleton University,Ottawa,Ontario,Canada K1S5B6 and the Institute of Particle Physics,Canada 19McGill University,Montr´e al,Qu´e bec,Canada H3A2T8 and the Institute of Particle Physics,Canada20Ithaca College,Ithaca,New York1485021University of Kansas,Lawrence,Kansas66045 22University of Minnesota,Minneapolis,Minnesota5545523State University of New York at Albany,Albany,New York12222 24Ohio State University,Columbus,Ohio4321025University of Oklahoma,Norman,Oklahoma73019 26University of Pittsburgh,Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania15260 27Purdue University,West Lafayette,Indiana47907I.INTRODUCTION AND MOTIV ATIONThe study of mixing in the K0and B0d sectors has provided a wealth of information to guide the form and content of the Standard Model.In the framework of the Standard Model,mixing in the charm meson sector is predicted to be small[1],making this an excellent place to search for non-Standard Model eﬀects.Similarly,measurable CP violation(CPV) phenomena in strange[2,3]and beauty[4–6]mesons are the impetus for many current and future experiments[7–10].The Standard Model predictions for CPV for charm mesons are of the order of0.1%[11],with one recent conjecture of nearly1%[12].Observation of CPV in charm mesons exceeding the percent level would be strong evidence for non-Standard Model processes.A D0can evolve into aD0→f ,¯r is the charge conjugated quantity,and f is a wrong-sign ﬁnal state,such as K+π−π0.The diﬀerent contributions to R WS and A can be separated by studying the proper decay time dependence of WSﬁnal states,as we have done in D0→K+π−[16],and has been doneby FOCUS in[17].The diﬀerential WS rate relative to the right-sign(RS)process,in time√units of the mean D0lifetime,t D0=(415±4)fs[18],is r(t)≡[R D+s≈10.6 GeV provided by the Cornell Electron Storage Ring(CESR).The data were recorded by the CLEO II detector[21]upgraded with the installation of a silicon vertex detector(SVX)[22]and by changing the drift chamber gas from an argon-ethane mixture to a helium-propane mixture[23].The upgraded conﬁguration is referred to as CLEO II.V.The Monte Carlo simulation of the CLEO II.V detector was based upon GEANT[24], and simulated events were processed in the same manner as the data.The D0candidates are reconstructed through the decay sequence D⋆+→D0π+s[25].The charge of the slow pion(π+s)tags theﬂavor of the D0candidate at production.The charged daughters of the D0are required to leave hits in the SVX and these tracks are constrained to come from a common vertex in three dimensions.The trajectory of the D0is projected back to its intersection with the CESR luminous region to obtain the D0production point. Theπ+s is reﬁt with the requirement that it come from the D0production point,and the conﬁdence level of theχ2of this reﬁt is used to reject background.The energy release in the D⋆→D0π+s decay,Q≡M⋆−M−mπ,obtained from the above technique is observed to have a width ofσQ=190±2keV[26],which is a combination of the intrinsic width and our resolution,where M and M⋆are the reconstructed masses of the D0and D⋆+candidates respectively,and mπis the charged pion mass.The reconstruction technique discussed above has also been used by CLEO to measure the D∗+intrinsic width,ΓD∗+=96±4±22keV(preliminary)[27].In the mixing analyses described below,the distribution of candidates in the Q vs M plane areﬁt to determine both right-sign and wrong-sign yields.We calculate t using only the vertical component of the D0candidateﬂight distance.This is eﬀective because the vertical extent of the CESR luminous region hasσvertical=7µm[28]. The resolution on the D0decay point(x v,y v,z v)is typically40µm in each dimension.We measure the centroid of the CESR luminous region(x b,y b,z b)using e+e−→q¯q(q=udscb) events from sets of data with integrated luminosity of several pb−1,obtaining a resolution on the centroid of less than5µm.We express t as t=M/p vertical×(y v−y b)/(cτD0),where p vertical is the vertical component of the total momentum of the D0candidate.The error in t,σt,is typically0.4(in D0lifetimes),although when the D0direction is near the horizontal planeσt can be large.III.CP VIOLATION IN D0DECAYCP Violation in charm meson decay is expected to be small in the Standard Model,which makes charm meson decay a good place to look for non-Standard Model eﬀects.Cabbibo suppressed charm meson decays have all the necessary ingredients for CP violation–multiple paths to the sameﬁnal state and a weak phase.However,in order to get sizable CP violation, theﬁnal state interactions need to contribute non-trivial phase shifts between the amplitudes. Largeﬁnal state interactions are a likely reason why the prediction for the ratio of branching ratios of(D0→K+K−)/(D0→π+π−)yields a value roughly half of the observed value[18], hence these may provide a good hunting ground for CP violation.Previous searches for mixing-induced[16]or direct[29,18]CP violation in the neutral charm meson system have set limits of∼30%or a few percent,respectively.We present results of searches for direct CP violation in neutral charm meson decay to pairs of light pseudo-scalar mesons:K+K−,π+π−,K0Sπ0,π0π0and K0S K0S.A.Search for CP violation in D0→K+K−and D0→π+π−decay The asymmetry we want to measure,A=Γ(D0→f)−Γ Γ(D0→f)+ΓΓ(D⋆+→π+s f)+Γ(D⋆−→π−s f)The slow pion and D0are produced by the CP-conserving strong decay of the D⋆+,so the slow pion serves as an unbiasedﬂavor tag of the D0.The decay asymmetry can be obtained from the apparent production asymmetry shown above because the production of D⋆±is CP-conserving.The asymmetry result is obtained byﬁtting the energy release(Q)spectrum of the D⋆+→D0π+s events.The D0mass spectra areﬁt as a check.The background-subtracted Q spectrum isﬁt with a signal shape obtained from K+π−data and a background shape determined using Monte Carlo.Figure1shows ourﬁts to both D→π+π−and D→K+K−distributions found in data,for both signs of the slow pionﬂavor tag.The parameters of the slow pion dominate the Q distribution,so all modes have the same shape.We do theﬁts in bins of D0momentum to eliminate any biases due to diﬀerences in the D0momentum spectra between the data and the MC.The preliminary results are A(K+K−)=0.0005±0.0218(stat)±0.0084(syst)and A(π+π−)=0.0195±0.0322(stat)±0.0084(syst).We use many diﬀerent variations of theﬁt shapes,both empirical and analytical,to assess the systematic uncertainties due to theﬁtting procedure(0.69%).We also consider biases due to the detector material(0.07%),the reconstruction software(0.48%),and forward–backward acceptance variations(c¯c pairs are not produced symmetrically in the forward/backward directions in e+e−collisions at√s∼10.6GeV.The K0S andπ0candidates are constructed using only good quality tracks and show-ers.The tracks(showers)whose combined invariant mass is close to the K0S(π0)massQ Fits for KK CP RatesQ (GeV/c 2)05000500Q Fits for ππ CP Rates Q (GeV/c 2)FIG.1.Q distributions for D 0→K +K −(left)and D 0→π+π−(right)candidates separated into samples tagged as D ∗+(top)and D ∗−(bottom).Shown immediately to the right of each Q distribution are the point by point residuals of the ﬁt.In each case the data points are shown with error bars and the solid line represents our ﬁtting results.Summary of A CP (KK)A CP (KK) (%)FIG.2.A (K +K −)from this analysis compared to previous results.Summary of A(ππ)CPA(ππ) (%)CPFIG.3.A(π+π−)from this analysis compared to previous results.are kinematically constrained to the K0S(π0)mass,improving the D0mass resolution. The tracks used to form K0S candidates are required to satisfy criteria designed to reduce background from D0→π+π−X decays and combinatorics.Candidate events with recon-structed D0masses close to the known D0mass are selected to determine the asymmetry, A(f)= Γ(D0→f)−Γ(D0→f) .The Q distributions of the candidates in the three decay modes are shown in Figures4,5,and6.A prominent peak indicative of D⋆+→D0π+s decay is observed in all three distributions.The total num-ber of D0andD0to a givenﬁnal state is determined by taking the diﬀerence of the number of events in the signal region,and the asymmetry is obtained by dividing by the number of candidates determined above.This method of determining the asymmetry implicitly assumes that the background is symmetric.We have searched for any sources of false asymmetries:from theπ+sﬁnding(0.19%), from theﬁtting(0.5%),and from the backgrounds(0.35%K0Sπ0,0%π0π0and12%K0S K0S). Weﬁnd no signiﬁcant biases,but apply the measured corrections and add their uncertainties to the total.We obtain the results A(K0Sπ0)=(+0.1±1.3)%,A(π0π0)=(+0.1±4.8)% and A(K0S K0S)=(−23±19)%where the uncertainties contain the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties.All systematic uncertainties,except for the0.5%uncertainty assigned for possible bias in theﬁtting method,are determined from data and would be reduced in future higher luminosity samples.All measured asymmetries are consistent with zero and no indication of signiﬁcant CP vi-olation is observed.This measurement of A(K0Sπ0)is a signiﬁcant improvement over previous results,and the other two asymmetries reported areﬁrst measurements.Q (GeV)C a n d i d a t e s / 500 k e V FIG.4.(a)Fitted Q distribution for D 0→K 0Sπ0candidates.The points with error bars are the data,the solid line represents the background and the dashed line shows the interpolation intothe Q signal region.(b)The Q distributions for D 0→K 0Sπ0(points)and D 0→π0π0(histogram)candidates.Q (GeV)C a n d i d a t e s / 500 k e V FIG.6.(a)Fitted Q distribution for D 0→K 0S K 0S candidates.The points with error bars are the data,the solid line represents the background and the dashed line shows the interpolationinto the Q signal region.(b)The Q distributions for D 0→K 0S K 0S(points)and K ∗(892)0,ρ(1700)+,εRS εW S·N W S D 0→Kππ0decay combined with an uncorrelated πS ,2)combinations from e +e −→u d ,and swhich corresponds to approximately eight times the integrated luminosity of the data sample. The Q–m(Kππ0)ﬁt yields a WS signal of38±9events and a ratio N W S/N RS=0.0043+11−10. Projections of the data andﬁt results in slices through the signal region in each variable are shown in Fig.7.The statistical signiﬁcance of this signal is found to be4.9standard deviations.The average eﬃciency ratio in Eq.(1)is determined using aﬁt to the Dalitz plot variables m2(K+π−)and m2(K+π0)in the WS data.In thisﬁt,the amplitudes and phases are initial-ized to the RS values,and those corresponding to the K∗(892)+and K∗(892)0resonances areﬂoated relative to the dominantρ(770)−and other minor bining the square of theﬁtted amplitude function with a parameterization of the eﬃciency determined using a large non-resonant Monte Carlo sample,we measure an average eﬃciency ratio of 1.00±0.02(stat).Studies are under way to examine the extent and the signiﬁcance of this surprising similarity between the RS and WS Dalitz plots.The dominant systematic errors in this analysis come from the uncertainty in the Monte Carlo background distributions(14%),uncertainty in the amplitudes and phases that are ﬁxed in theﬁt(8%),and uncertainty in the background Dalitz plot distributions(3%).Several powerful checks of the Q–m(Kππ0)and Dalitz plotﬁts are performed in order to verify the validity of these results.Fits using speciﬁc background regions of the Q–m(Kππ0) plane test the sensitivity to the Monte Carlo background distributions.The WS Dalitz plot is alsoﬁt using hypotheses which include one of the K∗(892)+,K∗(892)0,orρ(770)−resonances,in order to provide an upper limit on the error due to thisﬁt.Only the K∗(892)0 hypothesis leads to an eﬃciency ratio that diﬀers signiﬁcantly from one,but this hypothesis is strongly disfavored by the data.We measure the wrong sign rate to be(stat)±0.0007(syst)(preliminary).(2) R W S=0.0043+0.0011−0.0010This result is consistent with the CLEO II.V[16]and FOCUS[17]D0→Kπmeasurements. This measurement of R W S can be used to obtain limits on R DCSD as a function of y′within the limits on x′set by CLEO,as shown in Figure8.Work is in progress to use the lifetime distribution of this sample to yield independent limits on x′,y′,and R DCSD.V.SEARCH FOR CP DEPENDENT LIFETIME DIFFERENCES DUE TO D0−(4)2Γwhere∆Γis the width diﬀerence between the physical eigenstates of the neutral D.In the limit that CP is conserved in charm decays,y CP=y,where y is the mixing parameter deﬁned0.0000.00250.0050.00750.010Q (GeV)N u m b e r o f E v e n t s /289 k eVm(K ππ0) (GeV/c 2)N u m b e r o f E v e n t s /12.5 M e V /c2FIG.7.Results of the ﬁt to the data to determine N W S /N RS .Projections in the variables a)Q and b)m (Kππ0),after selecting the signal region (within two standard deviations)in the other variable.y/R D C S D (%)parison of measured doubly-Cabibbo-suppressed rates as a function of y ′.The variable y ′may not be the same for D 0→K +π−and D 0→K +π−π0.K π Mass (GeV/c 2)C o m b i n a t i o n s /0.001 G e V /c2K π Proper Time (ps)C o m b i n a t i o n s /0.05 p sFIG.9.The invariant mass (left)and proper time (right)distributions for D 0→K −π+candidates.The curve is the ﬁt described in the text.in Section I.With the CP asymmetry for KK and ππconsistent with zero as discussed in Section III,this limit is well motivated and we will simply use y for the rest of this section.We can then express y asy =ττCP +−1(5)where τKK Mass (GeV/c 2)C o m b i n a t i o n s /0.001 G e V /c2KK Proper Time (ps)C o m b i n a t i o n s /0.05 p sFIG.10.The invariant mass (left)and proper time (right)distributions for D 0→K +K −candidates.The curve is the ﬁtdescribed in the text.ππ Mass (GeV/c 2)C o m b i n a t i o n s /0.001 G e V /c2ππ Proper Time (ps)C o m b i n a t i o n s /0.05 p sFIG.11.The invariant mass (left)and proper time (right)distributions for D 0→π+π−candidates.The curve is the ﬁt described in the text.TABLE I.Summary of the lifetimeﬁts.The parameters are those described in the text.Note that we have constrained the candidates to a D0mass of1.86514GeV,the Monte Carlo corrected weighted average of the data.The signal lifetime is highly dependent on the D0mass used in the constraint,while the lifetime diﬀerence is not.This technique yields the smallest uncertainty in y, but it not optimal for measuring the absolute D0lifetime and was not used in[34].Parameter KKNumber of Signal2463±650.4046±0.00360.401±0.017Background Frac(%)50.7±0.781.0±4.832.2±7.5τback(ps)0.436±0.0203.8±0.9Fixedσmis(ps)FixedD 0-D 0Mixing Limitsx ′ (ΓD /2)y ′ (ΓD /2)FIG.12.Allowed regions,at 95%CL,in the x ′vs y ′plane for some recent results.This result is consistent with zero.It is also consistent with our previous result from wrong sign Kπ[16],the FOCUS results from wrong sign Kπ[17],and the FOCUS results from Kπversus KK [35].This result is shown along with some of the previous measurements in Figure 12.VI.SUMMARYWe present preliminary results of several analyses searching for the eﬀects of CP violation and mixing in the decay of D 0mesons.We ﬁnd no evidence of CP asymmetry in ﬁve diﬀer-ent two-body decay modes of the D 0to pairs of light pseudo-scalar mesons:A CP (K +K −)=(0.05±2.18±0.84)%,A CP (π+π−)=(2.0±3.2±0.8)%,A CP (K 0S π0)=(+0.1±1.3)%,A CP (π0π0)=(+0.1±4.8)%and A CP (K 0S K 0S )=(−23±19)%.We present the ﬁrst mea-surement of the rate of wrong-sign D 0→K +π−π0decay:R W S =0.0043+0.0011−0.0010±0.0007.Finally,we describe a measurement of the mixing parameter y =∆ΓREFERENCES[1]H.N.Nelson,hep-ex/9908021.[2]KTeV Collaboration,A.Alavi-Harati et al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.83,22(1999).[3]NA48Collaboration,V.Fanti et al.,Phys.Lett.B465,335(1999).[4]BaBar Collaboration,B.Aubert et al.,“A study of time-dependent CP-asymmetries inB0d→J/ψK0S and B0d→ψ(2S)K0S decays”,BABAR-CONF-00/01,SLAC-PUB-8640, hep-ex/0008048.[5]Belle Collaboration,H.Aihara,“A measurement of CP violation in B0d meson decayswith Belle”,To be published in the proceedings of the30th International Conference on High-Energy Physics(ICHEP2000),Osaka,Japan,27Jul-2Aug2000,hep-ex/0010008.[6]CDF Collaboration,F.Abe et al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.81,5513(1998);T.Aﬀolder et al.(CDF Collaboration),Phys.Rev.D61,072005(2000).[7]I.-H.Chiang et al.,AGS Experiment Proposal926(1996).[8]KAMI Collaboration,E.Cheu et al.,“An expression of interest to detect and measurethe direct CP violating decay K L→π0ν¯νand other rare decays at Fermilab using the Main Injector”,22September1997,hep-ex/9709026.[9]“Proposal for an Experiment to Measure Mixing,CP Violation and Rare Decays inCharm and Beauty Particle Decays at the Fermilab Collider-BTeV”,15may2000, /public proposal/.[10]LHCb Collaboration,“Technical Proposal A Large Hadron Collider Beauty Experi-ment for Precision Measurements of CP Violation and Rare Decays”,Printed at CERN, Geneva,Switzerland,ISBN92-9083-123-5.[11]F.Bucella et al.,Phys.Rev.D51,3478(1995).[12]I.I.Bigi,“Flavor dynamics-central mysteries of the Standard Model”,To be publishedin the Proceedings of the30th International Conference on High-Energy Physics(ICHEP 2000),Osaka,Japan,27Jul-2Aug2000,hep-ex/0009021.[13]T.D.Lee,R.Oehme,and C.N.Yang,Phys.Rev.106,340(1957);A.Pais and S.B.Treiman,Phys.Rev.D12,2744(1975).Our x and y are in terms of mixing amplitudes, while Pais and Treiman use the eigenvalues of the mixing Hamiltonian;both deﬁni-tions agree in the limit of CP conservation.In our convention,y>0implies the real intermediate states with CP=+1,such as K+K−,make the larger contribution to y.[14]S.L.Glashow,J.Illiopolous,and L.Maiani,Phys.Rev.D2,1285(1970).[15]M.Leurer,Y.Nir,and N.Seiberg,Nucl.Phys.B420,468(1994);N.Arkani-Hamed etal.,hep-ph/9909326.[16]CLEO Collaboration,R.Godang et al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.84,5038(2000).R W S=(0.332+0.063−0.065±0.040)%,95%CL(1/2)x′2<0.041%and−5.8%<y<1.0%.[17]FOCUS Collaboration,J.M.Link et al.,hep-ex/0012048.[18]C.Caso et al.(Particle Data Group),Eur.Phys.J.C3,1(1998).[19]S.B.Treiman and R.G.Sachs,Phys.Rev.103,1545(1956).[20]L.Wolfenstein,Phys.Rev.Lett.75,2460(1995);T.E.Browder and S.Pakvasa,Phys.Lett.B383,475(1996);A.F.Falk,Y.Nir,and A.A.Petrov,J.High Energy Phys.9912,019(1999).[21]Y.Kubota et al.,Nucl.Instrum.Methods Phys.Res.A320,66(1992).[22]T.S.Hill,Nucl.Instrum.Methods Phys.Res.A418,32(1998).[23]D.Peterson,Nucl.Phys.B(Proc.Suppl.)54B,31(1997).[24]R.Brun et al.,GEANT3Users Guide,CERN DD/EE/84-1.[25]Charge conjugation is implied throughout,except where the charge conjugate states areexplicitly shown,such as in an asymmetry deﬁnition.[26]This result is for the D0→K+π−mode.Other modes have similar widths since theuncertainty on the slow pion dominates the width of the Q distribution.[27]First Measurement ofΓ(D∗+),CLEO-CONF01-02.[28]D.Cinabro et al.,Phys.Rev.E57,1193(1998).[29]CLEO Collaboration,J.Bartelt et al.,Phys.Rev.D52,4860(1995).[30]FOCUS Collaboration,J.M Link et al.,Phys.Lett.B491,232(2000);Erratum-ibid.495,443(200);E791Collaboration,E.M.Aitala et al.,Phys.Lett.B421,405(1998);E687Collaboration,P.L.Frabetti et al.,Phys.Rev.D50,2953(1994);E691Collabo-ration,J.C.Anjos et al.,Phys.Rev.D44,3371(1991).[31]CLEO Collaboration,G.Bonvicini et al.,to be published in Phys.Rev.D m.,CLNS00/1708,hep-ex/0012054.[32]CLEO Collaboration,S.Kopp et al.,hep-ex/0011065,submitted to Phys.Rev.D,November2000.[33]M.Gronau,J.L.Rosner,hep-ph/0010237(2000),submitted to Phys.Lett.B.[34]CLEO Collaboration,G.Bonvicini et al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.82,4586(1999).[35]FOCUS Collaboration,J.M.Link et al.,Phys.Lett.B485,62(2000).。

Neutrino Superbeams and the Magic Baseline

a r X i v :h e p -e x /0303023v 1 17 M a r 2003Neutrino Superbeams and the Magic BaselineA.Asratyan ∗,G.V.Davidenko,A.G.Dolgolenko,V.S.Kaftanov,M.A.Kubantsev †,and V.VerebryusovInstitute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics,B.Cheremushkinskaya St.25,Moscow 117259,RussiaFebruary 7,2008AbstractWe examine the sensitivity to νµ→νe of a conceptual experiment witha neutrino superbeam incident on a Megaton-scale water Cherenkov detectorover a ”magic”baseline ∼7300km.With realistic beam intensity and ex-posure,the experiment may unambiguously probe sin 22θ13and the sign of∆m 231down to sin 22θ13∼10−3.Detecting the subdominant oscillation νµ→νe on the ”atmospheric”scale ofL/E has emerged as a priority for long-baseline accelerator experiments.This is be-cause the νµ→νe and ¯νµ→¯νe probabilities are sensitive to yet-unknown parametersof neutrino mixing:the mixing angle θ13,the sign of the ”atmospheric”mass-squared diﬀerence ∆m 231,and the CP -violating phase δCP [1].However,extracting the val-ues of these parameters from measured probabilities will encounter the problem of degenerate solutions [2].In particular,the asymmetry between P (νµ→νe )andP (¯νµ→¯νe )may arise from either the intrinsic CP violation and the matter eﬀectthat is correlated with the sign of∆m231[3].The degeneracies can be resolved by comparing the data taken with a shorter and longer baselines[4].Selecting the lat-ter as the”magic”baseline L magic≃7300km will render this strategy particularlyeﬀective:for L=L magic,all∆m221-induced eﬀects like CP violation are predicted to vanish up to second order of the small parameter∆m221/∆m231[2,5].Therefore, selecting L=L magic may allow to uniquely determine sin22θ13and the sign of∆m231, but notδCP which should be probed with a shorter baseline.In this paper,we discuss a conceptual experiment that involves a neutrino ”superbeam”incident on a water Cherenkov detector over a magic baseline of L= 7340km1.A water Cherenkov target is selected on the merit of good separation and spectrometry of electromagnetic showers[6],and is assumed to be a megaton-scale detector like UNO or Hyper-Kamiokande[7].In tuning the energy of the neutrino beam,one must take into account that the Eν-dependence of oscillation probability for L=7340km is strongly aﬀected by Earth matter:for∆m231>0,the matter eﬀect[3]shifts theﬁrst maximum of P(νµ→νe)down to Eν/∆m231≃2.5×103 GeV/eV2from the vacuum value of5.9×103GeV/eV2.Assuming∆m231=0.003 eV2,the oscillation maximum is at Eν≃7.5GeV which conveniently matches the peak ofνµﬂux in the”Medium-Energy”(or PH2me)beam of Fermilab’s Main Injector,as designed for the NuMI–MINOS program[8].Therefore,this is selected as the model beam in our simulation.We assume1.6×1021protons on neutrino target per year,as expected upon the planned upgrade of Main Injector’s intensity [9].In the absence of oscillations,the beam will produce some58νµCC(21¯νµCC) events per1kton×yr in the far detector with theν(¯ν)setting of the focusing system.At neutrino energies below1GeV,as in the proposed JHF–Kamioka experi-ment[10],νe appearance can be eﬃciently detected in a water Cherenkov apparatus by selecting1-ring e-like events of the reactionνe N→e−X that is dominated by quasielastics.(Here and in what follows,X denotes a system of hadrons other than theπ0,in which the momenta of all charged particles are below the Cherenkov threshold in water.)At substantially higher energies considered in this paper,using the1e signature ofνµ→νe is complicated by more background from theﬂavor-blind NC reactionνN→νπ0X:its cross section increases with Eν,and so doesthe fraction ofπ0mesons whoseγγdecays produce a single e-like ring in the wa-ter Cherenkov detector2.In[12],we have demonstrated thatνe appearance can be analyzed with less NC background by detecting the reactionsνe N→e−π+X and νe N→e−π0X that involve emission of a charged or neutral pion3.We proceed to brieﬂy describe the selections of these CC reactions,as formulated in[12].The reactionνe N→e−π+X is selected by requiring two rings in the detector, of which one is e-like and the other is non-showering and has a large emission angle of θπ>500.This is referred to as the”eπsignature”.The selectionθπ>500is aimed at suppressing the NC reactionνp→νπ0p in which the momentum of theﬁnal proton is above the Cherenkov threshold4.The residual NC background is largely due to the reactionνN→νπ0π±X with two pions in theﬁnal state.TheνµCC background arises from the reactionνµN→µ−π0X in which the muon is emitted at a broad angle.TheντCC background arises from the dominant oscillationνµ→ντfollowed byντN→τ−π+X andτ−→e−ν¯ν.The reactionνe N→e−π0X is selected by requiring either three e-like rings of which twoﬁt toπ0→γγ,or two e-like rings that would notﬁt to aπ0.This is referred to as the”multi-e signature”.The NC background arises from the re-actionνN→νπ0π0N in which at least one of the twoπ0mesons has not been reconstructed.Note that in the latter reaction the twoπ0mesons are emitted with comparable energies,whereas inνe N→e−π0X the e−tends to be the lead-ing particle.This suggests a selection based on the absolute value of asymmetry A=(E1−E2)/(E1+E2),where E1and E2are the energies of the two showers for the two-ring signature,and of the reconstructedπ0and the”odd”shower—for the three-ring signature.In this paper,we use the selection|A|>0.6.TheντCC background is largely due to electronic decays ofτleptons produced in association with aπ0.TheνµCC background originates from CC events with a muon below the Cherenkov threshold and twoπ0mesons in theﬁnal state,and is negligibly small.In the simulation,the matter eﬀect is accounted for in the approximation of uniform matter density along the neutrino path( ρ =4.3g/cm3for L=7340km),which adequately reproduces the results of exact calculations for the actual density proﬁle of the Earth[3].Relevant neutrino-mixing parameters are assigned the values consistent with the atmospheric and reactor data[14,15]:∆m231=±0.003eV2, sin22θ23=1,and sin22θ13=0.01(the latter value is ten times below the upper limit imposed in[15]).The simulation relies on the neutrino-event generator NEUGEN based on the Soudan-2Monte Carlo[16],that takes full account of exclusive channels like quasielastics and excitation of baryon resonances.The E vis distributions of1e-like,eπ-like,and multi-e-like events are illustrated in Fig.1,assuming∆m231>0and incident neutrinos.Here,E vis stands for the net energy of all e-like rings.Total background to theνµ→νe signal is seen to bethe greatest for1e-like events,and therefore we drop these from further analysis. Combined E vis distributions of eπ-like and multi-e-like events are shown in Fig.2 for either beam setting and either sign of∆m231.With equalνand¯νexposures of1 Mton×yr,the oscillation signal reaches some250events for∆m231>0and incident neutrinos,and some140events for∆m231<0and incident antineutrinos.The experimental strategy we adopt is to share the overall exposure between theνand¯νrunning so as to equalize the expected backgrounds under theνµ→νe and¯νµ→¯νe signals,and then analyze the diﬀerence between the E vis distributions for theνand¯νbeams.The motivation is that many systematic uncertainties on the background should cancel out in the diﬀerence5.Theνand¯νbackgrounds are approximately equalized by running1.7–1.8times longer in the¯νmode than in the νmode(see Fig.2).The diﬀerence between the E vis distributions for theνand ¯νbeams,assumingνand¯νexposures of1.0and1.8Mton×yr,is illustrated in Fig. 3.Depending on the sign of∆m231,this distribution shows either a bump or a dip at oscillation maximum with respect to the background that corresponds to sin22θ13=0.In order to estimate the signiﬁcance of the oscillation signal in Fig.3,we vary the E vis interval so as to maximize the”ﬁgure of merit”F=(Sν−S¯ν)/√5This is particularly important here,as the large dip angle of the neutrino beam(∼350)will rule out the construction of a”near”water Cherenkov detector.4obtain F=+19.6for∆m231>0,and F=−20.8for∆m231<0.Recalling that these ﬁgures refer to sin22θ13=0.01,we estimate that at90%CL the sensitivity to either sin22θ13and the sign of∆m231will be maintained down to sin22θ13≃8×10−4.Still lower values of sin22θ13may perhaps be probed with a neutrino factory in combination with a magnetized iron–scintillator detector[17,5].Note however that the experimental scheme proposed in this paper is based on proven technology and involves a multi-purpose facility[7]rather than a dedicated detector.To summarize,we have examined the physics potential of an experiment with a neutrino superbeam that irradiates a Megaton-scale water Cherenkov detector over the”magic”baseline∼7300km.With realistic beam intensity and exposure, the experiment may probe sin22θ13and the sign of∆m231down to sin22θ13values below10−3.Thus obtained values of these parameters,that are not aﬀected by degeneracies,can then be used as input for extractingδCP from the data collected with a shorter baseline as in the JHF–Kamioka experiment[10].References[1]S.M.Bilenky,C.Giunti,and W.Grimus,Phys.Rev D58,033001(1998);O.Yasuda,Acta Phys.Polon.B30,3089(1999);I.Mocioiu and R.Shrock,JHEP11,050(2001).[2]H.Minakata and H.Nunokawa,JHEP10,001(2001);P.Huber,M.Lindner,and W.Winter,Nucl.Phys.B645,3(2002);V.Barger,D.Marfatia,and K.Whisnant,Phys.Rev.D65,073023(2002);M.Lindner,Physics potential of future long-baseline neutrino oscillation exper-iments,talk presented at the XXth Int.Conf.on Neutrino Physics and Astro-physics,Munchen,May2002,TUM-HEP-474/02(arXiv:hep-ph/0209083).[3]H.Minakata and H.Nunokawa,Phys.Rev.D57,4403(1998);I.Mocioiu and R.Shrock,Phys.Rev.D62,053017(2000);M.Freund,M.Lindner,S.T.Petcov,and A.Romanino,Nucl.Instr.Meth.A451,18(2000).5[4]Y.F.Wang et al.,Phys.Rev.D65,073021(2002);V.Barger,D.Marfatia,and K.Whisnant,How two neutrino superbeams do better than one,arXiv:hep-ph/0210428.[5]P.Huber and W.Winter,Neutrino factories and the magic baseline,arXiv:hep-ph/0301257.[6]M.Shiozawa,in Proc.of RICH-98,Nucl.Instr.Meth.A433,240(1999).[7]M.Koshiba,Phys.Rep.220,229(1992);K.Nakamura,Neutrino Oscillations and Their Origin,(Universal Academy Press,Tokyo,2000),p.359;K.Nakamura,talk presented at Int.Workshop on Next Generation Nucleon Decay and Neutrino Detector(NNN99),SUNY at Stony Brook,September 1999;C.K.Jung,talk presented at Int.Workshop on Next Generation Nucleon De-cay and Neutrino Detector(NNN99),SUNY at Stony Brook,September1999 (arXiv:hep-ex/0005046);M.Goodman et al.(UNO Proto-Collaboration),Physics potential and feasibil-ity of UNO,June2001(see /).[8]S.Wojcicki,Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.91,91,216(2001);V.Paolone,Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.100,197(2001);S.E.Kopp,The NuMI neutrino beam and potential for an oﬀ-axis experiment, talk presented at the NuFact’02Workshop,Imperial College,London,2002 (arXiv:hep-ex/0210009);Neutrino Oscillation Physics at Fermilab:the NuMI–MINOS Project,Fermilab report NuMI-L-375,May1998(see /ndk/hypertext/numiarXiv:hep-ex/0106019);R.R.Volkas,Proc.Workshop on Physics at the Japan Hadron Facility(World Scientiﬁc,Signapore,2002),p.73(arXiv:hep-ph/0211307).[11]C.Mauger,in Proc.of NuInt01,Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.112,146(2002);seeextraﬁgures at http://neutrino.kek.jp/nuint01/.[12]A.Asratyan et al.,Multi-ring signatures of the oscillationνµ→νe in a waterCherenkov detector,arXiv:hep-ex/0302013.[13]J.H.Beacom and S.Palomares–Ruiz,Neutral-current atmospheric neutrinoﬂuxmeasurement using neutrino-proton elastic scattering in Super-Kamiokande, arXiv:hep-ph/0301060.[14]Y.Fukuda et al.(Super-Kamiokande Coll.),Phys.Rev.Lett.81,1562(1998);T.Kajita and Y.Totsuka,Rev.Mod.Phys.73,85(2001);M.Shiozawa(for the Super-Kamiokande Coll.),talk presented at the XXth Int.Conf.on Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics,Munchen,May2002.[15]M.Apollonio et al.(CHOOZ Coll.),Phys.Lett.B466,415(1999).[16]H.Gallagher,Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.112,188(2002);H.Gallagher and M.Goodman,Neutrino Cross Sections,Fermilab report NuMI-112,PDK-626,November1995(see /ndk/hypertext/numiFigure1:E vis distributions of1e-like events(left-hand panel),eπ-like events(middlepanel),and multi-e-like events(right-hand panel)for∆m231>0and incident neutri-nos.From bottom,the depicted components are theνµ→νe signal(shaded area), intrinsicνe CC background(white area),ντCC background(black area),νµCC back-ground(white area),and the NC background(light-shaded area).Event statisticsare for an exposure of1Mton×yr.8Figure2:Combined E vis distributions of eπ-like and multi-e-like events for inci-dent neutrinos and antineutrinos(left-and right-hand panels)and for positive andnegative values of∆m231(top and bottom panels).From bottom,the depicted com-ponents are theνµ→νe signal(shaded area),intrinsicνe CC background(white area),ντCC background(black area),νµCC background(white area),and the NCbackground(light-shaded area).Event statistics are for equalνand¯νexposures of1Mton×yr.9Figure3:The diﬀerence between the E vis distributions for theνand¯νsettins of the beam,assuming unequalνand¯νexposures of1.0and1.8Mton×yr,respectively. The upper and lower histograms are for∆m231>0and∆m231<0,respectively.The expectation for sin22θ13=0is illustrated by points with error bars that depict the statistical uncertainty.10。

Feasibility of Beauty Baryon Polarization Measurement in Lambda0 Jpsi Decay Channel by Atla

a rXiv:h ep-ph/945231v15May1994Institute of Physics,Acad.of Sci.of the Czech Rep.PRA–HEP–94/3and hep-ph/9405231Nuclear Centre,Charles University May 5,1994Prague Feasibility of Beauty Baryon Polarization Measurement in Λ0J/ψdecay channel by ATLAS-LHC Julius Hˇr ivn´a ˇc ,Richard Lednick´y and M´a ria Smiˇz ansk´a Institute of Physics AS CR Prague,Czech Republic submitted to Zeitschrift f¨u r Physik CAbstractThe possibility of beauty baryon polarization measurement by cascade decay angu-lar distribution analysis in the channel Λ0J/ψ→pπ−l +l −is demonstrated.The error analysis shows that in the proposed LHC experiment ATLAS at the luminosity 104pb −1the polarization can be measured with the statistical precision better than δ=0.010for Λ0b and δ=0.17for Ξ0b .IntroductionThe study of polarization eﬀects in multiparticle production provides an important infor-mation on spin-dependence of the quark conﬁnement.Thus substantial polarization of the hyperons produced in nucleon fragmentation processes[1,2]as well as the data onthe hadron polarization asymmetry were qualitatively described by recombination quark models taking into account the leading eﬀect due to the valence hadron constituents[3−6].Although these models correctly predict practically zero polarization ofΛandΩ−,they fail to explain the large polarization of antihyperonsΣ−recently discovered in Fermilab[7,8].The problem of quark polarization eﬀects could be clariﬁed in polarization measure-ments involving heavy quarks.In particular,an information about the quark mass de-pendence of these eﬀects could be obtained[4,9].The polarization is expected to be proportional to the quark mass if it arises due to scattering on a colour charge[10−12]. The opposite dependence takes place if the quark becomes polarized due to the interac-tion with an”external”conﬁningﬁeld,e.g.,due to the eﬀect of spontaneous radiation polarization[13].The decrease of the polarization with increasing quark mass is expected also in the model of ref.[14].In QCD the polarization might be expected to vanish with the quark mass due tovector character of the quark-gluon coupling[10].It was shown however in Ref.[15] that the quark mass should be eﬀectively replaced by the hadron mass M so that even the polarization of ordinary hadrons can be large.The polarization is predicted to be independent of energy and to vanish in the limit of both low and high hadron transverse momentum p t.The maximal polarization P max(x F)is reached at p t≈M and depends on the Feynman variable x F.Its magnitude(and in particular its mass dependence)is determined by two quark-gluon correlators which are not predicted by perturbative QCD.The polarization of charm baryons in hadronic reactions is still unmeasured due to the lack of suﬃcient statistics.Only some indications on a nonzero polarization were reported[16,17].For beauty physics the future experiments on LHC or HERA give an opportunity to obtain large statistical samples of beauty baryon(Λ0b,Ξ0b)decays intoΛ0J/ψ→pπ−l+l−,which is favorable mode to detect experimentally.Dedicated triggers for CP-violation eﬀects in b-decays,like the high-p t one-muon trigger(LHC)[18] or the J/ψtrigger(HERA)[19]are selective also for this channel.Below we consider the possibility of polarization measurement of beauty baryonsΛ0b andΞ0b with the help of cascade decay angular distributions in the channelΛ0b(Ξ0b)→Λ0J/ψ→pπ−l+l−.1Polarization measurement method and an estimation of the statistical error.In the case of parity nonconserving beauty baryon(B b)decay the polarization causes the asymmetry of the distribution of the cosine of the angelθbetween the beauty baryon decay and production analyzers:w(cosθ)=1| p inc× p B b|,where p inc and p Bbare momenta of incident particle and B b in c.m.system.The asymmetry parameterαb characterizes parity nonconservation in a weak de-cay of B b and depends on the choice of the decay analyzer.In the two-body decay B b→Λ0J/ψit is natural to choose this analyzer oriented in the direction ofΛ0momentum pΛ0in the B b rest system.The considered decay can be described by4helicity ampli-tudes A(λ1,λ2)normalized to unity:a+=A(1/2,0),a−=A(−1/2,0),b+=A(−1/2,1) and b−=A(1/2,−1),|a+|2+|a−|2+|b+|2+|b−|2=1.(2) The diﬀerence ofΛ0and J/ψhelicitiesλ1-λ2is just a projection of B b spin onto the decay analyzer.The decay asymmetry parameterαb is expressed through these amplitudes in the formαb=|a+|2−|a−|2+|b+|2−|b−|2.(3) If P-parity in B b decay were conserved,then|a+|2=|a−|2,|b+|2=|b−|2so thatαb would be0.In the case of known and suﬃciently nonzero value ofαb the beauty baryon polarization could be simply measured with the help of angular distribution(1)(see, e.g.,[20]).Due to lack of experimental information and rather uncertain theoretical estimates ofαb for the decayΛ0b→Λ0J/ψ[21]both the polarization andαb(or the decay amplitudes)should be determined simultaneously.This can be achieved with the2help of information onΛ0and J/ψdecays.Though it complicates the analysis,it shouldbe stressed that the measurement of the beauty baryon decay amplitudes could give valuable constrains on various theoretical models.Generally,such a measurement canbe done provided that at least one of the secondary decays is asymmetric and its decayasymmetry parameter is known[9].In our case it is the decayΛ0→pπ−with the asymmetry parameterαΛ=0.642.The angular distribution in the cascade decay B b→Λ0J/ψ→pπ−l+l−follows di-rectly from Eq.(6)of[9],taking into account that the only nonzero multipole parameters.It can be written in the formin the decay J/ψ→l+l−are T00=1and T20=110w(Ω,Ω1,Ω2)=1formula(4)integrated over the azimuthal anglesφ1,φ2would be in principle suﬃcient [9].In this case the number of free parameters is reduced to4(the phases don’t enter) and only a3-dimensionalﬁt is required.We will see,however,that the information on these angles may substantially increase the precision of the P b determination.To simplify the error analysis,we follow ref.[9]and consider here only the most unfavourable situation,when the parameters P2b,|a+|2−|a−|2and|b+|2−|b−|2are much smaller thanα2Λ.In this case the moments<F i>can be considered to be independent, having the diagonal error matrixW=13,19,115,145,16135,16135,2135,2135,245,245).(7)Here N is a number of B b events(assuming that the background can be neglected,see next section).The error matrix V of the vector a of the parameters a j,j=1,..7deﬁned in (6)isV( a)=(A T W−1A)−1,(8) where the elements of the matrix A are A ij=d(f1i.f2i)V11=δ0N,(9)δ0=1α2Λ.[(2r0−1)2180+4r2015+(1−r0)(1+coshχ)10.(10)Hereδ0depends only on the relative contribution r0of the decay amplitudes with helicityλ2=0and on the relative phaseχ(Figs.1a,b).The maximal error on P b is δmax=4.7Nand it corresponds to the case when r0=1√√√,Σ∗b →Λ0b πand the electromagnetic decays Ξ0′b →Ξ0b γor Ξ0∗b →Ξ0b γ.The observable polarization P obs depends on the polarizations P B b of direct beauty baryons and their production fractions b B b (i.e.probabilities of the b-quark to hadronize to certain baryons B b ).In considered decays the beauty baryon Λ0b or Ξ0b retains −13)of the polarizationof a parent with spin 12+)(see Appendix).For P obs we get:P obs =b Λ0b P Λ0b + i (−13b Σ∗bi P Σ∗bi )3b Ξ0′b P Ξ0′b+1b Ξ0b +b Ξ0′b +b Ξ0∗b.(12)The summation goes over positive,negative and neutral Σb and Σ∗b .Assuming the polar-ization of the heavier states to be similar in magnitude to that of directly produced Λ0b or Ξ0b (P Λ0b or P Ξ0b )we may expect the observed polarization in an interval of (0.34−0.67)P Λ0bfor Λ0b and (0.69−0.84)P Ξ0b for Ξ0b.The polarization can be measured for Λ0b and Ξ0b baryons and for their antiparticles.Λ0b (Ξ0b )are unambigously distinquishable from their antiparticles by eﬀective mass of pπ−system from Λ0→pπ−decay.The wrong assignment of antiproton and pion masses gives the kinematical reﬂection ofΞ0b is governed by b→dcc.HoweverΛ0fromΞ0b→Ξ0J/ψorΞ−b→Ξ−J/ψis produced in a weak hyperon decay,so this background can be eﬃciently reduced by the cut on the minimal distance d between J/ψandΛ0.A conservative cut d<1.5mm reduces this background by a factor≈0.05(Fig.3b).The background from B0d→J/ψK0when one ofπmesons is considered as a proton is negligible after the eﬀective mass cuts on(pπ)and(pπJ/ψ)systems.Background from fake J/ψ′s,as it has been shown in[18],can be reduced to a low level by cuts on the distance between the primary vertex and the production point of the J/ψcandidate and the distance of closest approach between the two particles from the decay.These cuts also suppress the background from real J/ψ′s comming directly from hadronization.The number of producedΛ0b andΞ0b is calculated for the cross section of pp→busing the last segment of the hadron calorimeter by its minimum ionizing signature.-ForΛ0J/ψ→pπ−e+e−decay both electrons are required to have p e⊥>1GeV.The low threshold for electrons is possible,because of electron identiﬁcation in the transition radiation tracker(TRT)[24].The events are required to contain one muon with a pµ⊥> 6GeV and|η|<1.6The second set of cuts corresponds to’oﬄine’analysis cuts.The same cuts as for B0d→J/ψK0reconstruction[18]can be used(the only exception is the mass requirement forΛ0candidate,see the last of the next cuts):-The two charged hadrons fromΛ0decay are required to be within the tracking volume |η|<2.5,and transverse momenta of both to be greater than0.5GeV.-Λ0decay length in the transverse plane with respect to the beam axis was required to be greater than1cm and less than50cm.The upper limit ensures that the charged tracks fromΛ0decay start before the inner radius of TRT,and that there is a space point from the innermost layer of the outer silicon tracker.The lower limit reduces the combinatorial background from particles originating from the primary vertex.-The distance of closest approach between the two muon(electron)candidates forming the J/ψwas required to be less than320µm(450µm),giving an acceptance for signal of 0.94.-The proper time of theΛ0b decay,measured from the distance between the primary vertex and the production point of the J/ψin the transverse plane and the reconstructed p⊥ofΛ0b,was required to be greater than0.5ps.This cut is used to reduce the combina-torial background,giving the acceptance for signal events0.68.-The reconstructedΛ0and J/ψmasses were required to be within two standart de-viations of nominal values.The results on expectedΛ0b andΞ0b statistics and the errors of their polarization mea-surement are summarized in Table2.For both channels the statistics of reconstructed events at the luminosity104pb−1will be790000(220000)Λ0b and2600(720)Ξ0b,where the values are derived using UA1(CDF)results.For this statistics the maximal value of the statistical error on the polarization mea-surement,calculated from formulae(9)and(10),will be0.005(0.01)forΛ0b and0.09(0.17) forΞ0b.7ConclusionAt LHC luminosity104pb−1the beauty baryonsΛ0b andΞ0b polarizations can be measured with the help of angular distributions in the cascade decaysΛ0J/ψ→pπ−µ+µ−and Λ0J/ψ→pπ−e+e−with the statistical precision better than0.010forΛ0b and0.17for Ξ0b.AppendixThe polarization transfered toΛ0b,which was produced indirectly in strongΣb andΣ∗b decays,depends on the ratio∆| p inc× pΣb|,where p inc and pΣb are momenta of incident particle andΣb in c.m.system.Ω1=(θ1,φ1)are the polar and the azimuthal angles ofΛ0inΛ0b rest frame with the axes deﬁned as z1↑↑ pΛ0b,y1↑↑ n× pΛ0b.After the transformation ofΩ1→Ω′1ofΛ0angles from the helicity frame x1,y1,z1to the canonical frame x,y,z with z↑↑ n and the integration over cosθandφ′1we get the distribution of the cosine of the angle between theΛ0momentum vector(Λ0b decay analyzer)and theΣb orΣ∗b production normal(which can be considered coinciding with theΛ0b production normal due to a small energy release in theΣb orΣ∗b decays):w(cosθ′1)∼1∓13(13(1References[1]K.Heller,Proceedings of the VII-th Int.Symp.on High Energy SpinPhysics,Protvino,1986vol.I,p.81.[2]L.Pondrom,Phys.Rep.122(19985)57.[3]B.Andersson et al.,Phys.Lett.85B(1979)417.[4]T.A.De Grand,H.I.Miettinen,Phys.Rev.D24(1981)2419.[5]B.V.Struminsky,Yad.Fiz.34(1981)1954.[6]R.Lednicky,Czech.J.Phys.B33(1983)1177;Z.Phys.C26(1985)531.[7]P.M.Ho et al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.65(1990)1713.[8]A.Morelos et al.,FERMILAB-Pub-93/167-E.[9]R.Lednicky,Yad.Fiz.43(1986)1275(Sov.J.Nucl.Phys.43(1986),817).[10]G.Kane,Y.P.Yao,Nucl.Phys.B137(1978)313.[11]J.Szwed,Phys.Lett.105B(1981)403.[12]W.G.D.Dharmaratna,Gary R.Goldstein,Phys.Rev.D41(1990)1731.[13]B.V.Batyunya et al.,Czech.J.Phys.B31(1981)11.[14]C.M.Troshin,H.E.Tyurin,Yad.Fiz.38(1983)1065.[15]A.V.Efremov,O.V.Teryaev,Phys.Lett.B150(1985)383.[16]A.N.Aleev et al.,Yad.Fiz.43(1986)619.[17]P.Chauvatet et al.,Phys.Lett.199B(1987)304.[18]The ATLAS Collaboration,CERN/LHCC/93-53,Oct.1993.[19]W.Hoﬀmann,DESY93-026(1993).[20]H.Albrecht et al.,DESY93-156(1993).9[21]A.H.Ball et al.,J.Phys.G:Nucl.Part.Phys.18(1992)1703.[22]UA1Collaboration,Phys.Lett.273B(1991)544.[23]CDF Collaboration,Phys.Rev.D47(1993)R2639.[24]I.Gavrilenko,ATLAS Internal Note INDET-NO-016,1992.[25]A.F.Falk and M.E.Peskin,SLAC-PUB-6311,1993.[26]R.Lednicky,DrSc Thesis,JINR-Dubna1990,p.174(in russian).10i f 2i011P ba +a ∗+−a −a ∗−−b +b ∗++b −b ∗−cos θ13P b αΛ−a +a ∗+−a −a ∗−+12b −b ∗−d 200(θ2)52b +b ∗+−1P b −a +a ∗++a −a ∗−−12b −b ∗−d 200(θ2)cos θ172b +b ∗+−1P b αΛ8P b αΛ3Im (a +a ∗−)sin θsin θ1sin 2θ2sin φ1102Re (b −b ∗+)sin θsin θ1sin 2θ2cos (φ1+2φ2)112Im (b −b ∗+)sin θsin θ1sin 2θ2sin (φ1+2φ2)−32Re (b −a ∗++a −b ∗+)sin θcos θ1sin θ2cos θ2cos φ213√P b αΛ−32Re (b −a ∗−+a +b ∗+)cos θsin θ1sin θ2cos θ2cos(φ1+φ2)15√P b αΛ16√P b−32Im (a −b ∗+−b −a ∗+)sin θsin θ2cos θ2sin φ218√αΛ−32Im (b −a ∗−−a +b ∗+)sin θ1sin θ2cos θ2sin(φ1+φ2)Table 1:The coeﬃcients f 1i ,f 2i and angular functions F i in distribution (4).11Parameter Value forΛ0b CommentL[cm−2s−1]1033b(b→B b)0.08br(B b→Λ0J/ψ)2.210−2(0.610−2)J/ψ→µ+µ−0.06Λ0→pπ−0.641.110−4(0.310−3)0.060.64b)500µbN(µ+µ−pπ−)accepted1535000pµ⊥>6GeV,|η|<1.6(426000)pµ⊥>3GeV,|η|<2.5pπ,p⊥>0.5GeV,|η|<2.5740(210)2400(670)N(µeepπ−)reconstructed65000(18000)the maximum statistical error0.005on the polarization measurement(0.010)δ(P b)Table2:Summary on beauty baryon measurement possibilities for LHC experiment AT-LAS.The values in brackets correspond to the CDF result,while the analogical values without brackets to the UA1result.12Figure1:The maximal statistical error on the polarization measurementδ(P b)andδ0=N+1Figure 2:The Λ0J/ψeﬀective mass distribution:The peak at 5.62GeV is from Λ0b and background comes from J/ψfrom a b-hadron decay and Λ0either from the multiparticle production or from a b-hadron decay (a).The events that passed the cut on the transverse momenta (p T >0.5GeV )for p and π−from Λ0decay (b).14Figure 3:The Λ0J/ψeﬀective mass distribution:The peak at 5.84GeV is from Ξ0b →Λ0J/ψdecay.The background with the centre at ≈5.5GeV comes from Ξ0b →Ξ0J/ψ,Ξ0→Λ0π0and Ξ−b →Ξ−J/ψ,Ξ−→Λ0π−decays (a).The events that passed the cut on the minimal distance of J/ψand Λ0(d <1.5mm )(b).15。

4级长度的天仙配英语作文

4级长度的天仙配英语作文The story of the "4-Character Length Heavenly Couple" is a timeless tale of love, devotion, and the triumph of the human spirit. This enchanting narrative has captivated audiences for generations, transcending cultural boundaries and inspiring countless adaptations in various forms of media. At its core, the story explores the profound connection between two individuals who, despite the odds, find solace and strength in each other's embrace.The narrative begins with the introduction of the two protagonists, Qi Xiu and Bai Cao, whose names are as poetic as the love that blossoms between them. Qi Xiu, a young scholar renowned for his intellect and unwavering principles, crosses paths with Bai Cao, a beautiful and spirited maiden whose grace and compassion captivate all who encounter her. From the moment their eyes meet, a spark ignites, and the two are irrevocably drawn to one another.As the story unfolds, the challenges that Qi Xiu and Bai Cao face are formidable. Their love is threatened by the rigid social conventions of their time, which dictate that their union is forbidden. Families onboth sides vehemently oppose the match, driven by a web of political ambitions, social status, and deeply rooted prejudices. The young couple must navigate a treacherous path, risking everything to defend their love and forge a future together.Through their unwavering determination and unwavering faith in each other, Qi Xiu and Bai Cao overcome the obstacles that stand in their way. They demonstrate a level of courage and resilience that inspires all who bear witness to their story. Their love becomes a beacon of hope, a testament to the power of the human spirit to transcend even the most daunting of circumstances.As the narrative progresses, the depth of Qi Xiu and Bai Cao's bond is revealed. They share a profound intellectual and spiritual connection, engaging in lively discussions on philosophy, literature, and the nature of the universe. Their conversations are not merely an exchange of words but a harmonious meeting of minds, a testament to the transformative power of love.The story's climax is a poignant and heart-wrenching moment, as Qi Xiu and Bai Cao face the ultimate test of their love. Forced to make a choice between their own happiness and the well-being of their families, they are confronted with a decision that will shape the course of their lives forever. The reader is left in suspense, wondering whether their love will prevail or succumb to the unrelentingdemands of a society unwilling to embrace their union.The resolution of the story is both bittersweet and uplifting. While the path Qi Xiu and Bai Cao choose may not be the one they had envisioned, their love transcends the physical realm and becomes a timeless testament to the enduring power of the human spirit. Their story becomes a symbol of hope, a reminder that even in the face of insurmountable odds, true love can conquer all.The enduring appeal of the "4-Character Length Heavenly Couple" lies in its universal themes of love, sacrifice, and the triumph of the human spirit. The story resonates with audiences across cultures and generations, for it speaks to the fundamental desires and struggles that unite us all. It is a tale that reminds us of the transformative power of love, the courage to follow our hearts, and the resilience to overcome even the most daunting of challenges.As the years pass and the world continues to evolve, the story of Qi Xiu and Bai Cao remains a cherished part of our collective cultural heritage. It is a testament to the enduring power of storytelling and the ability of literature to touch the hearts and minds of people across time and space. The "4-Character Length Heavenly Couple" will continue to captivate and inspire generations to come, reminding us of the profound beauty and complexity of the human experience.。

OSHA现场作业手册说明书

DIRECTIVE NUMBER: CPL 02-00-150 EFFECTIVE DATE: April 22, 2011 SUBJECT: Field Operations Manual (FOM)ABSTRACTPurpose: This instruction cancels and replaces OSHA Instruction CPL 02-00-148,Field Operations Manual (FOM), issued November 9, 2009, whichreplaced the September 26, 1994 Instruction that implemented the FieldInspection Reference Manual (FIRM). The FOM is a revision of OSHA’senforcement policies and procedures manual that provides the field officesa reference document for identifying the responsibilities associated withthe majority of their inspection duties. This Instruction also cancels OSHAInstruction FAP 01-00-003 Federal Agency Safety and Health Programs,May 17, 1996 and Chapter 13 of OSHA Instruction CPL 02-00-045,Revised Field Operations Manual, June 15, 1989.Scope: OSHA-wide.References: Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations §1903.6, Advance Notice ofInspections; 29 Code of Federal Regulations §1903.14, Policy RegardingEmployee Rescue Activities; 29 Code of Federal Regulations §1903.19,Abatement Verification; 29 Code of Federal Regulations §1904.39,Reporting Fatalities and Multiple Hospitalizations to OSHA; and Housingfor Agricultural Workers: Final Rule, Federal Register, March 4, 1980 (45FR 14180).Cancellations: OSHA Instruction CPL 02-00-148, Field Operations Manual, November9, 2009.OSHA Instruction FAP 01-00-003, Federal Agency Safety and HealthPrograms, May 17, 1996.Chapter 13 of OSHA Instruction CPL 02-00-045, Revised FieldOperations Manual, June 15, 1989.State Impact: Notice of Intent and Adoption required. See paragraph VI.Action Offices: National, Regional, and Area OfficesOriginating Office: Directorate of Enforcement Programs Contact: Directorate of Enforcement ProgramsOffice of General Industry Enforcement200 Constitution Avenue, NW, N3 119Washington, DC 20210202-693-1850By and Under the Authority ofDavid Michaels, PhD, MPHAssistant SecretaryExecutive SummaryThis instruction cancels and replaces OSHA Instruction CPL 02-00-148, Field Operations Manual (FOM), issued November 9, 2009. The one remaining part of the prior Field Operations Manual, the chapter on Disclosure, will be added at a later date. This Instruction also cancels OSHA Instruction FAP 01-00-003 Federal Agency Safety and Health Programs, May 17, 1996 and Chapter 13 of OSHA Instruction CPL 02-00-045, Revised Field Operations Manual, June 15, 1989. This Instruction constitutes OSHA’s general enforcement policies and procedures manual for use by the field offices in conducting inspections, issuing citations and proposing penalties.Significant Changes∙A new Table of Contents for the entire FOM is added.∙ A new References section for the entire FOM is added∙ A new Cancellations section for the entire FOM is added.∙Adds a Maritime Industry Sector to Section III of Chapter 10, Industry Sectors.∙Revises sections referring to the Enhanced Enforcement Program (EEP) replacing the information with the Severe Violator Enforcement Program (SVEP).∙Adds Chapter 13, Federal Agency Field Activities.∙Cancels OSHA Instruction FAP 01-00-003, Federal Agency Safety and Health Programs, May 17, 1996.DisclaimerThis manual is intended to provide instruction regarding some of the internal operations of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and is solely for the benefit of the Government. No duties, rights, or benefits, substantive or procedural, are created or implied by this manual. The contents of this manual are not enforceable by any person or entity against the Department of Labor or the United States. Statements which reflect current Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission or court precedents do not necessarily indicate acquiescence with those precedents.Table of ContentsCHAPTER 1INTRODUCTIONI.PURPOSE. ........................................................................................................... 1-1 II.SCOPE. ................................................................................................................ 1-1 III.REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 1-1 IV.CANCELLATIONS............................................................................................. 1-8 V. ACTION INFORMATION ................................................................................. 1-8A.R ESPONSIBLE O FFICE.......................................................................................................................................... 1-8B.A CTION O FFICES. .................................................................................................................... 1-8C. I NFORMATION O FFICES............................................................................................................ 1-8 VI. STATE IMPACT. ................................................................................................ 1-8 VII.SIGNIFICANT CHANGES. ............................................................................... 1-9 VIII.BACKGROUND. ................................................................................................. 1-9 IX. DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY. ........................................................ 1-10A.T HE A CT................................................................................................................................................................. 1-10B. C OMPLIANCE S AFETY AND H EALTH O FFICER (CSHO). ...........................................................1-10B.H E/S HE AND H IS/H ERS ..................................................................................................................................... 1-10C.P ROFESSIONAL J UDGMENT............................................................................................................................... 1-10E. W ORKPLACE AND W ORKSITE ......................................................................................................................... 1-10CHAPTER 2PROGRAM PLANNINGI.INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 2-1 II.AREA OFFICE RESPONSIBILITIES. .............................................................. 2-1A.P ROVIDING A SSISTANCE TO S MALL E MPLOYERS. ...................................................................................... 2-1B.A REA O FFICE O UTREACH P ROGRAM. ............................................................................................................. 2-1C. R ESPONDING TO R EQUESTS FOR A SSISTANCE. ............................................................................................ 2-2 III. OSHA COOPERATIVE PROGRAMS OVERVIEW. ...................................... 2-2A.V OLUNTARY P ROTECTION P ROGRAM (VPP). ........................................................................... 2-2B.O NSITE C ONSULTATION P ROGRAM. ................................................................................................................ 2-2C.S TRATEGIC P ARTNERSHIPS................................................................................................................................. 2-3D.A LLIANCE P ROGRAM ........................................................................................................................................... 2-3 IV. ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM SCHEDULING. ................................................ 2-4A.G ENERAL ................................................................................................................................................................. 2-4B.I NSPECTION P RIORITY C RITERIA. ..................................................................................................................... 2-4C.E FFECT OF C ONTEST ............................................................................................................................................ 2-5D.E NFORCEMENT E XEMPTIONS AND L IMITATIONS. ....................................................................................... 2-6E.P REEMPTION BY A NOTHER F EDERAL A GENCY ........................................................................................... 2-6F.U NITED S TATES P OSTAL S ERVICE. .................................................................................................................. 2-7G.H OME-B ASED W ORKSITES. ................................................................................................................................ 2-8H.I NSPECTION/I NVESTIGATION T YPES. ............................................................................................................... 2-8 V.UNPROGRAMMED ACTIVITY – HAZARD EVALUATION AND INSPECTION SCHEDULING ............................................................................ 2-9 VI.PROGRAMMED INSPECTIONS. ................................................................... 2-10A.S ITE-S PECIFIC T ARGETING (SST) P ROGRAM. ............................................................................................. 2-10B.S CHEDULING FOR C ONSTRUCTION I NSPECTIONS. ..................................................................................... 2-10C.S CHEDULING FOR M ARITIME I NSPECTIONS. ............................................................................. 2-11D.S PECIAL E MPHASIS P ROGRAMS (SEP S). ................................................................................... 2-12E.N ATIONAL E MPHASIS P ROGRAMS (NEP S) ............................................................................... 2-13F.L OCAL E MPHASIS P ROGRAMS (LEP S) AND R EGIONAL E MPHASIS P ROGRAMS (REP S) ............ 2-13G.O THER S PECIAL P ROGRAMS. ............................................................................................................................ 2-13H.I NSPECTION S CHEDULING AND I NTERFACE WITH C OOPERATIVE P ROGRAM P ARTICIPANTS ....... 2-13CHAPTER 3INSPECTION PROCEDURESI.INSPECTION PREPARATION. .......................................................................... 3-1 II.INSPECTION PLANNING. .................................................................................. 3-1A.R EVIEW OF I NSPECTION H ISTORY .................................................................................................................... 3-1B.R EVIEW OF C OOPERATIVE P ROGRAM P ARTICIPATION .............................................................................. 3-1C.OSHA D ATA I NITIATIVE (ODI) D ATA R EVIEW .......................................................................................... 3-2D.S AFETY AND H EALTH I SSUES R ELATING TO CSHO S.................................................................. 3-2E.A DVANCE N OTICE. ................................................................................................................................................ 3-3F.P RE-I NSPECTION C OMPULSORY P ROCESS ...................................................................................................... 3-5G.P ERSONAL S ECURITY C LEARANCE. ................................................................................................................. 3-5H.E XPERT A SSISTANCE. ........................................................................................................................................... 3-5 III. INSPECTION SCOPE. ......................................................................................... 3-6A.C OMPREHENSIVE ................................................................................................................................................... 3-6B.P ARTIAL. ................................................................................................................................................................... 3-6 IV. CONDUCT OF INSPECTION .............................................................................. 3-6A.T IME OF I NSPECTION............................................................................................................................................. 3-6B.P RESENTING C REDENTIALS. ............................................................................................................................... 3-6C.R EFUSAL TO P ERMIT I NSPECTION AND I NTERFERENCE ............................................................................. 3-7D.E MPLOYEE P ARTICIPATION. ............................................................................................................................... 3-9E.R ELEASE FOR E NTRY ............................................................................................................................................ 3-9F.B ANKRUPT OR O UT OF B USINESS. .................................................................................................................... 3-9G.E MPLOYEE R ESPONSIBILITIES. ................................................................................................. 3-10H.S TRIKE OR L ABOR D ISPUTE ............................................................................................................................. 3-10I. V ARIANCES. .......................................................................................................................................................... 3-11 V. OPENING CONFERENCE. ................................................................................ 3-11A.G ENERAL ................................................................................................................................................................ 3-11B.R EVIEW OF A PPROPRIATION A CT E XEMPTIONS AND L IMITATION. ..................................................... 3-13C.R EVIEW S CREENING FOR P ROCESS S AFETY M ANAGEMENT (PSM) C OVERAGE............................. 3-13D.R EVIEW OF V OLUNTARY C OMPLIANCE P ROGRAMS. ................................................................................ 3-14E.D ISRUPTIVE C ONDUCT. ...................................................................................................................................... 3-15F.C LASSIFIED A REAS ............................................................................................................................................. 3-16VI. REVIEW OF RECORDS. ................................................................................... 3-16A.I NJURY AND I LLNESS R ECORDS...................................................................................................................... 3-16B.R ECORDING C RITERIA. ...................................................................................................................................... 3-18C. R ECORDKEEPING D EFICIENCIES. .................................................................................................................. 3-18 VII. WALKAROUND INSPECTION. ....................................................................... 3-19A.W ALKAROUND R EPRESENTATIVES ............................................................................................................... 3-19B.E VALUATION OF S AFETY AND H EALTH M ANAGEMENT S YSTEM. ....................................................... 3-20C.R ECORD A LL F ACTS P ERTINENT TO A V IOLATION. ................................................................................. 3-20D.T ESTIFYING IN H EARINGS ................................................................................................................................ 3-21E.T RADE S ECRETS. ................................................................................................................................................. 3-21F.C OLLECTING S AMPLES. ..................................................................................................................................... 3-22G.P HOTOGRAPHS AND V IDEOTAPES.................................................................................................................. 3-22H.V IOLATIONS OF O THER L AWS. ....................................................................................................................... 3-23I.I NTERVIEWS OF N ON-M ANAGERIAL E MPLOYEES .................................................................................... 3-23J.M ULTI-E MPLOYER W ORKSITES ..................................................................................................................... 3-27 K.A DMINISTRATIVE S UBPOENA.......................................................................................................................... 3-27 L.E MPLOYER A BATEMENT A SSISTANCE. ........................................................................................................ 3-27 VIII. CLOSING CONFERENCE. .............................................................................. 3-28A.P ARTICIPANTS. ..................................................................................................................................................... 3-28B.D ISCUSSION I TEMS. ............................................................................................................................................ 3-28C.A DVICE TO A TTENDEES .................................................................................................................................... 3-29D.P ENALTIES............................................................................................................................................................. 3-30E.F EASIBLE A DMINISTRATIVE, W ORK P RACTICE AND E NGINEERING C ONTROLS. ............................ 3-30F.R EDUCING E MPLOYEE E XPOSURE. ................................................................................................................ 3-32G.A BATEMENT V ERIFICATION. ........................................................................................................................... 3-32H.E MPLOYEE D ISCRIMINATION .......................................................................................................................... 3-33 IX. SPECIAL INSPECTION PROCEDURES. ...................................................... 3-33A.F OLLOW-UP AND M ONITORING I NSPECTIONS............................................................................................ 3-33B.C ONSTRUCTION I NSPECTIONS ......................................................................................................................... 3-34C. F EDERAL A GENCY I NSPECTIONS. ................................................................................................................. 3-35CHAPTER 4VIOLATIONSI. BASIS OF VIOLATIONS ..................................................................................... 4-1A.S TANDARDS AND R EGULATIONS. .................................................................................................................... 4-1B.E MPLOYEE E XPOSURE. ........................................................................................................................................ 4-3C.R EGULATORY R EQUIREMENTS. ........................................................................................................................ 4-6D.H AZARD C OMMUNICATION. .............................................................................................................................. 4-6E. E MPLOYER/E MPLOYEE R ESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................................................... 4-6 II. SERIOUS VIOLATIONS. .................................................................................... 4-8A.S ECTION 17(K). ......................................................................................................................... 4-8B.E STABLISHING S ERIOUS V IOLATIONS ............................................................................................................ 4-8C. F OUR S TEPS TO BE D OCUMENTED. ................................................................................................................... 4-8 III. GENERAL DUTY REQUIREMENTS ............................................................. 4-14A.E VALUATION OF G ENERAL D UTY R EQUIREMENTS ................................................................................. 4-14B.E LEMENTS OF A G ENERAL D UTY R EQUIREMENT V IOLATION.............................................................. 4-14C. U SE OF THE G ENERAL D UTY C LAUSE ........................................................................................................ 4-23D.L IMITATIONS OF U SE OF THE G ENERAL D UTY C LAUSE. ..............................................................E.C LASSIFICATION OF V IOLATIONS C ITED U NDER THE G ENERAL D UTY C LAUSE. ..................F. P ROCEDURES FOR I MPLEMENTATION OF S ECTION 5(A)(1) E NFORCEMENT ............................ 4-25 4-27 4-27IV.OTHER-THAN-SERIOUS VIOLATIONS ............................................... 4-28 V.WILLFUL VIOLATIONS. ......................................................................... 4-28A.I NTENTIONAL D ISREGARD V IOLATIONS. ..........................................................................................4-28B.P LAIN I NDIFFERENCE V IOLATIONS. ...................................................................................................4-29 VI. CRIMINAL/WILLFUL VIOLATIONS. ................................................... 4-30A.A REA D IRECTOR C OORDINATION ....................................................................................................... 4-31B.C RITERIA FOR I NVESTIGATING P OSSIBLE C RIMINAL/W ILLFUL V IOLATIONS ........................ 4-31C. W ILLFUL V IOLATIONS R ELATED TO A F ATALITY .......................................................................... 4-32 VII. REPEATED VIOLATIONS. ...................................................................... 4-32A.F EDERAL AND S TATE P LAN V IOLATIONS. ........................................................................................4-32B.I DENTICAL S TANDARDS. .......................................................................................................................4-32C.D IFFERENT S TANDARDS. .......................................................................................................................4-33D.O BTAINING I NSPECTION H ISTORY. .....................................................................................................4-33E.T IME L IMITATIONS..................................................................................................................................4-34F.R EPEATED V. F AILURE TO A BATE....................................................................................................... 4-34G. A REA D IRECTOR R ESPONSIBILITIES. .............................................................................. 4-35 VIII. DE MINIMIS CONDITIONS. ................................................................... 4-36A.C RITERIA ................................................................................................................................................... 4-36B.P ROFESSIONAL J UDGMENT. ..................................................................................................................4-37C. A REA D IRECTOR R ESPONSIBILITIES. .............................................................................. 4-37 IX. CITING IN THE ALTERNATIVE ............................................................ 4-37 X. COMBINING AND GROUPING VIOLATIONS. ................................... 4-37A.C OMBINING. ..............................................................................................................................................4-37B.G ROUPING. ................................................................................................................................................4-38C. W HEN N OT TO G ROUP OR C OMBINE. ................................................................................................4-38 XI. HEALTH STANDARD VIOLATIONS ....................................................... 4-39A.C ITATION OF V ENTILATION S TANDARDS ......................................................................................... 4-39B.V IOLATIONS OF THE N OISE S TANDARD. ...........................................................................................4-40 XII. VIOLATIONS OF THE RESPIRATORY PROTECTION STANDARD(§1910.134). ....................................................................................................... XIII. VIOLATIONS OF AIR CONTAMINANT STANDARDS (§1910.1000) ... 4-43 4-43A.R EQUIREMENTS UNDER THE STANDARD: .................................................................................................. 4-43B.C LASSIFICATION OF V IOLATIONS OF A IR C ONTAMINANT S TANDARDS. ......................................... 4-43 XIV. CITING IMPROPER PERSONAL HYGIENE PRACTICES. ................... 4-45A.I NGESTION H AZARDS. .................................................................................................................................... 4-45B.A BSORPTION H AZARDS. ................................................................................................................................ 4-46C.W IPE S AMPLING. ............................................................................................................................................. 4-46D.C ITATION P OLICY ............................................................................................................................................ 4-46 XV. BIOLOGICAL MONITORING. ...................................................................... 4-47CHAPTER 5CASE FILE PREPARATION AND DOCUMENTATIONI.INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 5-1 II.INSPECTION CONDUCTED, CITATIONS BEING ISSUED. .................... 5-1A.OSHA-1 ................................................................................................................................... 5-1B.OSHA-1A. ............................................................................................................................... 5-1C. OSHA-1B. ................................................................................................................................ 5-2 III.INSPECTION CONDUCTED BUT NO CITATIONS ISSUED .................... 5-5 IV.NO INSPECTION ............................................................................................... 5-5 V. HEALTH INSPECTIONS. ................................................................................. 5-6A.D OCUMENT P OTENTIAL E XPOSURE. ............................................................................................................... 5-6B.E MPLOYER’S O CCUPATIONAL S AFETY AND H EALTH S YSTEM. ............................................................. 5-6 VI. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES............................................................................. 5-8A.B URDEN OF P ROOF. .............................................................................................................................................. 5-8B.E XPLANATIONS. ..................................................................................................................................................... 5-8 VII. INTERVIEW STATEMENTS. ........................................................................ 5-10A.G ENERALLY. ......................................................................................................................................................... 5-10B.CSHO S SHALL OBTAIN WRITTEN STATEMENTS WHEN: .......................................................................... 5-10C.L ANGUAGE AND W ORDING OF S TATEMENT. ............................................................................................. 5-11D.R EFUSAL TO S IGN S TATEMENT ...................................................................................................................... 5-11E.V IDEO AND A UDIOTAPED S TATEMENTS. ..................................................................................................... 5-11F.A DMINISTRATIVE D EPOSITIONS. .............................................................................................5-11 VIII. PAPERWORK AND WRITTEN PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS. .......... 5-12 IX.GUIDELINES FOR CASE FILE DOCUMENTATION FOR USE WITH VIDEOTAPES AND AUDIOTAPES .............................................................. 5-12 X.CASE FILE ACTIVITY DIARY SHEET. ..................................................... 5-12 XI. CITATIONS. ..................................................................................................... 5-12A.S TATUTE OF L IMITATIONS. .............................................................................................................................. 5-13B.I SSUING C ITATIONS. ........................................................................................................................................... 5-13C.A MENDING/W ITHDRAWING C ITATIONS AND N OTIFICATION OF P ENALTIES. .................................. 5-13D.P ROCEDURES FOR A MENDING OR W ITHDRAWING C ITATIONS ............................................................ 5-14 XII. INSPECTION RECORDS. ............................................................................... 5-15A.G ENERALLY. ......................................................................................................................................................... 5-15B.R ELEASE OF I NSPECTION I NFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 5-15C. C LASSIFIED AND T RADE S ECRET I NFORMATION ...................................................................................... 5-16。

CP-Violating Phases in the MSSM

dgq /e
∼
αs π
mqmg˜|A∗ + m4f˜
µ tan β|
sin γ
(1)
For up-type quarks, take tan β → cot β. Here
γ is the argument of the oﬀ-diagonal element of the squark mass matrix, γ = arg(A∗ + µ tan β).
For typical values of the masses, mg˜ = mf˜ = |A∗ + µ tan β| = 100 GeV, the requirement that
the quark EDM contribution to the neutron EDM satisfy the experimental bound[4] of |dn| < 1.1 × 10−25e cm implies that the phase γ be very small, sin γ <∼ 0.001. However, this bound can be considerably relaxed by making the squarks heav-
af
=
g′4 128π
(YL2 + YR2)
m2f (mf˜2 + mB2
− m2f )2 ,
(2)
and the p-wave suppression is evident, as af ∼ m2f . Here YL(YR) is the left(right) sfermion hypercharge. In the presence of CP -violation and

Test of $CPT$ Symmetry in $CP$-violating $B$ Decays

0 ¯0 > , p1 |Bd > +q1 |B d 0 ¯0 > , p2 |Bd > −q2 |B d
(1)
0 ¯0 where p1,2 and q1,2 are parameters of the Bd Bd mass matrix elements. For convenience, the
Γ 0 0 ¯0 > , > +˜ g+ (t)|B |Bd (t) > = e−(im+ 2 )t g+ (t)|Bd d
t 0 ¯0 > , ¯ 0 (t) > = e−(im+ Γ 2) g ˜− (t)|Bd > +g− (t)|B |B d d
Hale Waihona Puke (3)where∆Γ t ∆Γ t θ θ g± (t) = cos2 e±(i∆m− 2 ) 2 + sin2 e∓(i∆m− 2 ) 2 , 2 2 t ∆Γ t ∆Γ θ θ g ˜± (t) = sin cos e(i∆m− 2 ) 2 − e−(i∆m− 2 ) 2 e±iφ . 2 2
d d
In this work, we shall make an instructive analysis of the eﬀects of CP T violation on CP violating asymmetries in neutral B -meson decays. Both time-dependent and time-integrated CP asymmetries are calculated to meet various possible measurements at e+ e− B factories. We suggest several ways for distinguishing CP T violation from direct CP violation in B decay amplitudes and indirect CP violation via interference between decay and mixing. We show that it is diﬃcult to extract the CP T -violating information from the time-integrated ¯ 0 → ψKS and π + π − . measurements of neutral B decays to CP eigenstates such as B 0 /B

跟他有什么关系英语作文

跟他有什么关系英语作文Title: The Significance of Connection: Exploring Relationships in "What's the Matter with Him?"In the narrative "What's the Matter with Him?" by an unnamed author, the central theme revolves around the complexities of human relationships and the significance of connection. The story delves into the dynamics between characters, particularly focusing on the protagonist and their interaction with another individual. Through various encounters and exchanges, the narrative unfolds layers of meaning regarding the nature of relationships and the impact they have on individuals. This essay aims to dissect the significance of the relationship between the protagonist and the other character, exploring its relevance and implications within the context of the story.First and foremost, the relationship between the protagonist and the other character serves as a catalystfor personal growth and introspection. Interactions withothers often provide opportunities for self-reflection, allowing individuals to gain insights into their own thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. In "What's the Matterwith Him?", the protagonist's encounters with the other character prompt moments of introspection, leading to a deeper understanding of oneself and one's place in the world. Through these interactions, the protagonist grapples with questions of identity, belonging, and purpose, ultimately undergoing a transformative journey of self-discovery.Furthermore, the relationship between the protagonist and the other character highlights the interconnectednessof human experiences. Despite differences in background, personality, and circumstance, the characters in the story are bound together by shared experiences and emotions. Through their interactions, they navigate themes of empathy, compassion, and understanding, bridging the gap betweentheir individual worlds. In doing so, the narrative emphasizes the universal nature of human connection, illustrating how relationships have the power to transcend barriers and unite individuals in a common humanity.Moreover, the relationship between the protagonist and the other character serves as a lens through which larger societal issues are examined. Within the narrative, the characters grapple with issues of prejudice, discrimination, and social inequality, reflecting broader systemic challenges within society. Through their interactions, the story sheds light on the complexities of these issues, highlighting the ways in which interpersonal relationships intersect with larger social structures. By exploring the dynamics between the characters, the narrative prompts readers to confront their own biases and assumptions, fostering greater awareness and understanding of the world around them.In conclusion, the relationship between the protagonist and the other character in "What's the Matter with Him?" is of significant importance within the narrative, serving asa catalyst for personal growth, a reflection of interconnected human experiences, and a lens through which larger societal issues are examined. Through their interactions, the characters navigate themes of identity,empathy, and social inequality, ultimately contributing to a richer understanding of the complexities of human relationships and the world in which they unfold. As the story unfolds, it becomes evident that the significance of this relationship extends far beyond the confines of its fictional setting, resonating with readers on a deeply personal and universal level.。

企业盈利质量分析中英文对照外文翻译文献

企业盈利质量分析中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Measuring the quality of earnings1. IntroductionGenerally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) offer some flexibility in preparing the financial statements and give the financial managers some freedom to select among accounting policies and alternatives. Earning management uses the flexibility in financial reporting to alter the financial results of the firm (Ortega and Grant, 2003).In other words, earnings management is manipulating the earning to achieve apredetermined target set by the management. It is a purposeful intervention in the external reporting process with the intent of obtaining some private gain (Schipper, 1989).Levit (1998) defines earning management as a gray area where the accounting is being perverted; where managers are cutting corners; and, where earnings reports reflect the desires of management rather than the underlying financial performance of the company.The popular press lists several instances of companies engaging in earnings management. Sensormatic Electronics, which stamped shipping dates and times on sold merchandise, stopped its clocks on the last day of a quarter until customer shipments reached its sales goal. Certain business units of Cendant Corporation inflated revenues nearly $500 million just prior to a merger; subsequently, Cendant restated revenues and agreed with the SEC to change revenue recognition practices. AOL restated earnings for $385 million in improperly deferred marketing expenses. In 1994, the Wall Street Journal detailed the many ways in which General Electric smoothed earnings, including the careful timing of capital gains and the use of restructuring charges and reserves, in response to the article, General Electric reportedly received calls from other corporations questioning why such common practices were “front-page” news.Earning management occurs when managers use judgment in financial reporting and in structuring transactions to alter financial reports to either mislead some stakeholders about the underlying economic performance of the company or to influence contractual outcomes that depend on reported accounting numbers (Healy and Whalen, 1999).Magrath and Weld (2002) indicate that abusive earnings management and fraudulent practices begins by engaging in earnings management schemes designed primarily to “smooth” earnings to meet internally or externally imposed earnings forecasts and analysts’ expectations.Even if earnings management does not explicitly violate accounting rules, it is an ethically questionable practice. An organization that manages its earnings sends amessage to its employees that bending the truth is an acceptable practice. Executives who partake of this practice risk creating an ethical climate in which other questionable activities may occur. A manager who asks the sales staff to help sales one day forfeits the moral authority to criticize questionable sales tactics another day.Earnings management can also become a very slippery slope, which relatively minor accounting gimmicks becoming more and more aggressive until they create material misstatements in the financial statements (Clikeman, 2003)The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued three staff accounting bulletins (SAB) to provide guidance on some accounting issues in order to prevent the inappropriate earnings management activities by public companies: SAB No. 99 “Materiality”, SAB No. 100 “Restructuring and Impairment Charges” and SAB No. 101 “Revenue Recognition”.Earnings management behavior may affect the quality of accounting earnings, which is defined by Schipper and Vincent (2003) as the extent to which the reported earnings faithfully represent Hichsian economic income, which is the amount that can be consumed (i.e. paid out as dividends) during a period, while leaving the firm equally well off at the beginning and the end of the period.Assessment of earning quality requires sometimes the separations of earnings into cash from operation and accruals, the more the earnings is closed to cash from operation, the higher earnings quality. As Penman (2001) states that the purpose of accounting quality analysis is to distinguish between the “hard” numbers resulting from cash flows and the “soft” numbers resulting from accrual accounting.The quality of earnings can be assessed by focusing on the earning persistence; high quality earnings are more persistent and useful in the process of decision making.Beneish and Vargus (2002) investigate whether insider trading is informative about earnings quality using earning persistence as a measure for the quality of earnings, they find that income-increasing accruals are significantly more persistent for firms with abnormal insider buying and significantly less persistent for firms with abnormal insider selling, relative to firms which there is no abnormal insider trading.Balsam et al. (2003) uses the level of discretionary accruals as a direct measurefor earning quality. The discretionary accruals model is based on a regression relationship between the change in total accruals as dependent variable and change in sales and change in the level of property, plant and equipment, change in cash flow from operations and change in firm size (total assets) as independent variables. If the regression coefficients in this model are significant that means that there is earning management in that firm and the earnings quality is low.This research presents an empirical study on using three different approaches of measuring the quality of earnings on different industry. The notion is; if there is a complete consistency among the three measures, a general assessment for the quality of earnings (high or low) can be reached and, if not, the quality of earnings is questionable and needs different other approaches for measurement and more investigations and analysis.The rest of the paper is divided into following sections: Earnings management incentives, Earnings management techniques, Model development, Sample and statistical results, and Conclusion.2. Earnings management incentives2.1 Meeting analysts’ expectationsIn general, analysts’ expectations and company predictions tend to address two high-profile components of financial performance: revenue and earnings from operations.The pressure to meet revenue expectations is particularly intense and may be the primary catalyst in leading managers to engage in earning management practices that result in questionable or fraudulent revenue recognition practices. Magrath and Weld (2002) indicate that improper revenue recognition practices were the cause of one-third of all voluntary or forced restatements of income filed with the SEC from 1977 to 2000.Ironically, it is often the companies themselves that create this pressure to meet the market’s earnings expec tations. It is common practice for companies to provide earnings estimates to analysts and investors. Management is often faced with the task of ensuring their targeted estimates are met.Several companies, including Coca-Cola Co., Intel Corp., and Gillette Co., have taken a contrary stance and no longer provide quarterly and annual earnings estimates to analysts. In doing so, these companies claim they have shifted their focus from meeting short-term earnings estimates to achieving their long-term strategies (Mckay and Brown, 2002).2.2 To avoid debt-covenant violations and minimize political costsSome firms have the incentive to avoid violating earnings-based debt covenants. If violated, the lender may be able to raise the interest rate on the debt or demand immediate repayment. Consequently, some firms may use earnings-management techniques to increase earnings to avoid such covenant violations. On the other hand, some other firms have the incentive to lower earnings in order to minimize political costs associated with being seen as too profitable. For example, if gasoline prices have been increasing significantly and oil companies are achieving record profit level, then there may be incentive for the government to intervene and enact an excess-profit tax or attempt to introduce price controls.2.3 To smooth earnings toward a long-term sustainable trendFor many years it has been believed that a firm should attempt to reduce the volatility in its earnings stream in order to maximize share price. Because a highly violate earning pattern indicates risk, therefore the stock will lose value compared to others with more stable earnings patterns. Consequently, firms have incentives to manage earnings to help achieve a smooth and growing earnings stream (Ortega and Grant, 2003).2.4 Meeting the bonus plan requirementsHealy (1985) provides the evidence that earnings are managed in the direction that is consistent with maximizing executives’ earnings-based bonus. When earnings will be below the minimum level required to earn a bonus, then earning are managed upward so that the minimum is achieved and a bonus is earned. Conversely, when earning will be above the maximum level at which no additional bonus is paid, then earnings are managed downward. The extra earnings that will not generate extra bonus this current period are saved to be used to earn a bonus in a future period.When earnings are between the minimum and the maximum levels, then earnings are managed upward in order to increase the bonus earned in the current period.2.5 Changing managementEarnings management usually occurs around the time of changing management, the CEO of a company with poor performance indicators will try to increase the reported earnings in order to prevent or postpone being fired. On the other hand, the new CEO will try shift part of the income to future years around the time when his/her performance will be evaluated and measured, and blame the low earning at the beginning of his contract on the acts of the previous CEO.3. Earnings management techniquesOne of the most common earnings management tools is reporting revenue before the seller has performed under the terms of a sales contract (SEC,SAB No. 101,1999).Another area of concern is where a company fails to comply with GAAP and inappropriately records restructuring charges and general reserves for future losses, reversing or relieving reserves in inappropriate periods, and recognizing or not recognizing an asset impairment charge in the appropriate period (SEC, SAB No. 100, 1999).Managers can influence reported expenses through assumptions and estimates such as the assumed rate of return on pension plan asset and the estimated useful lives of fixed assets, also they can influence reported earnings by controlling the timing of purchasing, deliveries, discretionary expenditures, and sale of assets.3.1 Big bath“Big Bath” charges are one-time restructuring charge. Current earnings will be decreased by overstating these one-time charges. By reversing the excessive reserve, future earnings will increase.Big bath charges are not always related to restructuring. In April 2001, Cisco Systems Inc. announced charges against earnings of almost $4 billion. The bulk of the charge, $2.5 billion, consisted of an inventory write down. Writing off more than a billion dollars from inventory now means more than a billion dollars of less cost in the future period. This an example of what ultra-conservative accounting in oneperiod makes possible in future periods.3.2 Abuse of materialityAnother area that might be used by accountants to manipulate the earning is the application of materiality principle in preparing the financial statements, this principle is very wide, flexible and has no specific range to determine where the item is material or not. SEC uses the interpretation ruled by the supreme court in identifying what is material; the supreme court has held that a fact is material if there is a substantial likelihood that the fact would have been viewed by reasonable investor as having significan tly altered the “total mix” of information made available (SEC, SAB No. 99, 1999).The SEC has also introduced some considerations for a quantitatively small misstatement of a financial statement item to be material:. whether the misstatement arises from an item capable of precise measurement or whether it arises from an estimate and, if so, the degree of imprecision inherent in the estimate;. whether the misstatement masks a change in earnings or other trends;.whether the misstatement hides a failure to meet analysts’ consensus expectations for the enterprise;. whether the misstatement changes a loss into income or vice versa;. whether the misstatement concerns a segment or other portion of the registrant’s business that has been identified as playing a significant role in the registrant’s operations or profitability; and. whether the misstatement involves concealment of an unlawful transaction.3.3 Cookie jar“Cookie jar” reserve –sometimes labeled rainy day reserve or contingency reserves, in periods of strong financial performance, cookie jar reserve enable to reduce earnings by overstating reserves, overstating expenses, and using one-time write-offs. In periods of weak financial performance, cookie jar reserves can be used to increase earnings by reversing accruals and reserves to reduce current period expenses (Kokoszka, 2003).The most famous example of use of cookie jar reserves is WorldCom Inc. In August 2002, an internal review revealed that the company had $2.5 billion reserves related to litigation, uncollectible and taxes. The company used most of them in a series of so-called reserve reversals in order to have higher earnings.Source: Khaled ElMoatasem Abdelghany,2005. “Measuring the quality of earnings”, Managerial Auditing Journal, vol.20, no.9, pp.1001 – 1015.译文：衡量盈利质量1、引言一般公认会计原则（GAAP）提供准备一定的灵活性的财务报表，给财务经理一定的自由空间进行选择会计政策和方案。

The Classical Analogue of CP-violation

arXiv:hep-ph/9609471v1 25 Sep E CLASSICAL ANALOGUE OF CP–VIOLATION
Decio Cocolicchio(1,2) and Luciano Telesca(3)
(1) Dipartimento di Matematica, Univ. Basilicata, Potenza, Italy Via N. Sauro 85, 85100 Potenza, Italy
(2) Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Milano, Italy Via G. Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy
(3) Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Istituto di Metodologie Avanzate C/da S. Loya TITO, Potenza, Italy
P.A.C.S. number(s): 11.30.Er, 13.20.Eb, 13.25.+m, 14.40.Aq
Abstract The phenomenological features of the mixing in the neutral pseudoscalar mesons K0 − K0 can be illustrated in the classical framework of mechanics and by means of electromagnetic coupled circuits. The time-reversed not-invariant processes and the related phenomenon of CP -nonconservation can be induced by dissipative eﬀects which yield a not vanishing imaginary part for the relevant Hamiltonian. Thus, two coupled dissipative oscillators can resemble the peculiar asymmetries which are so common in the realm of high energy particle physics.

威尼斯商人人物简介

Antonio has risked the entirety of his fortune on oversea trading ventures, yet he agrees to guarantee the potentially lethal loan Bassanio secures from Shylock. He is willing to offer up a pound of flesh, signifying a union that grotesquely alludes to the rite of marriage, where two partners become “one flesh”. Further evidence of the nature of Antonio’s feelings for Bassanio appears later in the play, when Antonio’s proclamations resonate with the hyperbole and self-satisfaction of a doomed lover’s declaration: “pray God Bassanio come/ To see me pay his debt, and then I care not”② (Act Ⅲ, Scene III, 35-36) without a mate, he is indeed the “tainted wether”—or castrated ram—of the flock, and he will likely return to his favorite pastime of moping about the streets of Venice② (Act Ⅳ, Scene I, 113). After all, he has effectively disabled himself from pursuing hid hobby—abusing Shylock—by insisting that the Jew convert to Christianity. Although a 16th century audience might have seen this demand as merciful, as Shylock is saving himself from eternal damnation by converting, we are less likely to be convinced. Not only does Antonio’s reputation as an anti-Semite precede him, but the only instance in the play when he breaks out of his doldrums in his “storm” against Shylock②(ActⅠ, Scene III, 132). In this play, Antonio proves his character is melancholy, cruelty and some seldom saying—homosexual.

从语用学角度分析美国情景剧《生活大爆炸》中的言语幽默

The study makes a pragmatic analysis of the verbal humor in the sitcom The Big Bang Theory by some major theories in Pragmatics. Cooperative Principle, Politeness Principle and Speech Act Theory are major theories in pragmatics. The study testifies the feasibility of analyzing the verbal humor in sitcoms from the perspective of pragmatics and explores the generation mechanism of verbal humor under the pragmatic theoretical framework. On the basis of the pragmatic analysis, it is found that humor is generated by deliberately or unintentionally violating CP, PP and illocutionary act. Furthermore, the study is helpful for the viewers to get a deep understanding of the verbal humor in the sitcom The Big Bang Theory. It also does good to the second language learners for having an easier learning enviroment and arousing their learning interest. Key Words：verbal humor；pragmatic analysis；The Big Bang Theory；Sitcom

芯片测试仪设备操作指南说明书

MechanicsOscillationsElliptical Oscillation of a String PendulumDESCRIPTION OF ELLIPTICAL OSCILLATIONS OF A STRING PENDULUM AS THE SU-PERIMPOSITION OF TWO COMPONENTS PERPENDICULAR TO ONE ANOTHER.UE1050121 06/15 MEC/UDFig. 1: Experiment set-upGENERAL PRINCIPLESDepending on the initial conditions, a suitable suspended string pendulum will oscillate in such a way that the bob’s motion describes an ellipse for small pendulum deflections. If the motion is resolved into two perpendicu-lar components, there will be a phase difference between those components.This experiment will investigate the relationship by measuring the oscillations with the help of two perpendicularly mounted dynamic force sensors. The amplitude of the components and their phase difference will then be evaluated. The phase shift between the oscillations will be shown directly by displaying the oscillations on a dual-channel oscilloscope.Three special cases shed light on the situation:a) If the pendulum swings along the line bisecting the two force sensors, the phase shift φ = 0°.b) If the pendulum swings along a line perpendicular to that bisecting the two force sensors, the phase shift φ = 180°.c) If the pendulum bob moves in a circle, the phase shift φ =oscillation directions of the string pendulum under in-vestigationLIST OF EQUIPMENT1 SW String Pendulum Set 1012854 (U61025)1 SW Stand Equipment Set 1012849 (U61022)1 SW Sensors Set @230 V 1012850 (U61023-230) or1 SW Sensors Set (@115 V 1012851 (U61023-115) 1 USB Oscilloscope 2x50 MHz 1017264 (U112491)SET-UP∙Screw the stand rods with both external and internal threads into the outer threaded sockets of the base plate. ∙Extend both rods by screwing rods with external thread only onto the ends of them.∙Attach double clamps near the top of both stand rods and turn them to point inwards so that the slots are vertical and facing one another.∙Attach both springs from the spring module to the lugs on the cross bar (angled side).∙Hang the large loop of string from the lug on the flat side.Fig. 3 Assembly of spring module∙Connect the springs and vector plate to the hook of a dynamic force sensor with a small loop of string and care-fully pull everything taut.∙Attach the force sensor with the screw tightened by hand. ∙Attach the second force sensor in the same way.Fig. 4 Attachment of dynamic force sensors to spring module∙Pull the string through the eyelet of the spring module (in the middle of the metal disc).∙Thread the end of the string through the two holes of the length adjustment slider.Fig. 5 Set up of string3B Scientific GmbH, Rudorffweg 8, 21031 Hamburg, Germany, ∙Clamp the cross bar into the slots of the two double clamps, suspend a weight from the end of the string and set up the height of the pendulum using the length ad-justment slider.Fig. 6 Attachment of cross bar in double clamp ∙ Connect the force sensors to the inputs for channels A and B of the MEC amplifier board.∙ Connect outputs A and B of the MEC control unit to channels CH1 and CH2 of the oscilloscope.EXPERIMENT PROCEDURE∙Set the oscilloscope time base time/div to 1 s, select a vertical deflection for channels CH1 and CH2 of 50 mV DC and set the trigger to “Edge” mode, “Normal” sweep, “Source CH1” and “Slope +”.∙Slightly deflect the string pendulum and allow it to oscil-late in a plane which bisects the alignment of the two force sensors (oscillation path a in Fig. 2). Observe the oscilloscope trace and save it.∙Slightly deflect the string pendulum and allow it to oscil-late in a plane which is perpendicular to the one which bi-sects the two force sensors (oscillation path b in Fig. 2). Observe the oscilloscope trace and save it.∙Slightly deflect the string pendulum and allow it to oscil-late in a circle (oscillation path c in Fig. 2). Observe the oscilloscope trace and save it.SAMPLE MEASUREMENT AND EVALUA-TIONWhen the pendulum is oscillating in the plane of the bisecting angle between the sensors, the two sensors will experience symmetric loading (oscillation path a in Fig. 2). The signals from the two force sensors will be in phase, i.e. the phase shift between them will be φ= 0° (Fig. 7).Fig. 7: Oscillation components for a string pendulum swingingalong the line bisecting the two force sensorsWhen the pendulum is oscillating in the plane perpendicular to the bisecting angle between the sensors, the two sensors will experience asymmetric loading (oscillation path b in Fig. 2). The signals from the two force sensors will be wholly out of phase, i.e. the phase shift between them will be φ= 180° (Fig. 8).Fig. 8: Oscillation components for a string pendulum swingingalong the line perpendicular to that bisecting the two force sensorsThe circular oscillation is a superimposition of the oscillations along the plane of the bisecting angle between the sensors and the angle perpendicular to it with a phase shift of φ = 90°(Fig. 9).Fig. 9: Oscillation components for a string pendulum describ-ing a circle。

CP Test in the W Pair Production via Photon Fusion at NLC

a r X i v :h e p -p h /9303203v 1 2 M a r 1993UM–P-93/16OZ-93/6CP Test in the W Pair Productionvia Photon Fusion at NLCJ.P.Ma and B.H.J.McKellarRecearch Center for High Energy Physics School of PhysicsUniversity of Melbourne Parkville,Victoria 3052AustraliaAbstract1.IntroductionThe W pair production at e+e−colliders is an impotant process,in which the inter-actions between the weak gauge bosons in the Standard Model can be studied.But,as the c.m.s.energy of a e+e−collider increases,the cross section for e++e−→W++W−√decreases as expected from gauge invariance.At NLC with2.CP Constraints and CP odd ObservablesWe consider the following process in the c.m.s.of the initial state:γ(p1)+γ(p2)→W+(k1)+W−(k2)p1+p2=0(2.1) and the amplitude for the process(2.1)is:T fi=εν1(p1)εν2(p2)ε∗µ1(k1)ε∗µ2(k2)Aν1ν2µ1µ2(p1,p2,k1,k2)(2.2)We assume that the polarization of the initial photons is not known.Then,a CP test in(2.1)is possible only if the polarizations of the W+or W−are observed.To obtain information about the polarizations we consider the leptonic decay of the W bosons.That means,we actually consider the process:γ(p1)+γ(p2)→W+(k1)+W−(k2)→ℓ+(q1)+ℓ−(q2)+neutrinos(2.3) For the decay process W+(k1)→ℓ+(q1)+νwith a moving W+a covariant decay matrix ρ+µν(k1,q1)can be deﬁned and is normalized as:1(1−βˆk1·ˆq1)2ρ+µν(k1,q1)=(−gµν+k1µk1ν|k1|,ˆq1=q1k01(2.5)andΩ1is the solid angle of q1.At tree-level in the SM the decay matrixρ+µν(k1,q1)takes the form:ρ+µν(k1,q1)=34Aν1ν2µ1µ2(p1,p2,k1,k2)A∗ν1ν2µ′1µ′2(p1,p2,k1)·ρ+µ1µ′1(k1,q1)ρ−µ2µ′2(k2,q2)(2.7)If CP invariance holds,the following relation holds for RR(p1,k1,q1,q2)=R(p1,k1,−q2,−q1).(2.8)The expectaction value of any observable O,which is a function of p1,k1,q1and q2 can be obtained:<O>=1x1x2β4π(k01)−2 dΩ14π(k01)−2 dΩ2M WO2=(ˆp·ˆq+)2−(ˆp·ˆq−)2O3=ˆp·(ˆq+−ˆq−)ˆp·(ˆq+×ˆq−)(2.10)withˆq+=q+|q−|(2.11)and the vectorˆp is the direction of motion of the electron or positron.Because of the Bose symmetry of the two photon initial state the expectation value of any observable whichis odd inˆp,is zero.With these observables one can also deﬁne the corresponding CP asymmetries:N(O i>0)−N(O i<0)A i=introduces CP violation.This type of diagram is shown in Fig.1,where the loop is a fermionic loop.CP violation is caused by the couplings between¯fiγ5f and neutral Higgs ﬁelds,and the heaviest fermion is dominant.In the following we will take only the top quark into account and employ the notation used in[10]and[11].In this notation CP violation due to the neutral Higgs exchange is paramerized with a3×3real othogonal matrix d,the nonzero oﬀdiagonal matrix elements d3j and d j3(j=1,2)indicating CP violation.The couplings involved in Fig.1are:L=e m t3e¯tγµtAµ+eM W3α2ˆs2z2(arcsin(z))2,for z≤112+i z2−1z2−1)2,for z>1(3.3)Here M H stands for the mass ofφ1and D H is its propagator which is discussed further in Sect.4.The CP violating part of the quantity R deﬁned in(2.7)is then obtained through the interference between T A and the amplitude for(2.1)at the tree-level from the standard model.In(3.2)the coupling parameters ctgβand d11d13are unknown.From the upper bound of the electric dipole moment of the neutron one can not obtain enough information to constrain d11d13.From the fact that the d is a3×3real othogonal matrix an upper boundcan be derived:d11d13≤1,for M H<2M W(4.1)ˆs−M2HIn this case,the absorbtive(dispersive)part of the amplitude T A in(3.2)corresponds to Im I(z)(Re I(z)).For M H>2M W,the absorptive part in the D H does lead to signiﬁcant eﬀects in our observables.We parametrize the propagator in Breit–Wigner approximation in term ofthe total decay widthΓH:(ˆs−M2H)−iΓH M HD H(ˆs,M H)=ˆs−M2H−iπδ(ˆs−M2H)(4.3) We used the both expressions for the D H in our numerical calculations of our CP odd observables.By varyingΓH from0to40GeV weﬁnd that the expression in(4.3)is a good approximation for our observables.However,for M H>2m tΓH can be very large because of the large mass M H and the new decay channel.For such large values ofΓH,for example,forΓH>100GeV,some numerical results of our observables can be changed in order of50%compared with them by smallΓH.Keeping this in mind,we present only our results calculated with the smallΓH and in this case the expectation value of the CP odd observables or the CP asymmetries are proportional to the product of d11d31and ctgβ.We take the photon distribution function given in[1],where we assume that the laser energy is1.26eV and the e−γconversion factor is one.To simulate experimental cuts,we select for measuring the CP violation eﬀect only these events,in which the lepton energy E+(−)is larger than10GeV and the angle of the outgoing leptons with respect to the√electron or positron beam direction is not smaller ingFor M H=200GeV:A1=−2.82×10−4d11d31ctgβ,<O1>=−3.1×10−5d11d31ctgβ(4.5)A3=2.35×10−4d11d31ctgβ,<O3>=1.05×10−4d11d31ctgβFor M H=350GeV:A1=−7.65×10−4d11d31ctgβ,<O1>=−7.36×10−4d11d31ctgβ(4.6)A3=3.45×10−4d11d31ctgβ,<O3>=1.17×10−4d11d31ctgβFor M H=500GeV:A1=−1.35×10−4d11d31ctgβ,<O1>=−1.53×10−4d11d31ctgβ(4.7)A3=−1.27×10−4d11d31ctgβ,<O3>=−4.48×10−5d11d31ctgβWe do not present the results for<O2>and A2because they are one order of magnitude smaller than the results for<O1>and A1.To determine the sensitivity of our CP odd observables we also calculated the variances of them and the cross section for the process(2.3)at ing the standard model at tree level and taking the leptonic branching ratio(≈33%)of the W decay into account,we have under the conditions mentioned above:σ=4pb,<O21>=0.57,<O23>=0.096(4.8) Note that the variance for an asymmetry is identically1.Assumming the luminosity per year at NLC to be10fb,the number of the available events is about4·104.We obtain then the statistical errors for our observables:δA1=δA3= N event=0.5%,δO1= N event=0.4%,δO3= N event=0.15%(4.9)CP violation is detectable only if the<O i>or A i(i=1,2,3)are at least larger than their statistical error.Taking<O1>at M H=350GeV as an example,the product d11d31ctgβshould be larger than5.4.To summarize:in this work we studied the possibility of detecting CP violation in γγ→W+W−at NLC,our CP odd observables and the corresponding CP asymmetriesare constructed with the directly measured energies and momenta of the leptons from the W decay.For the observables we propose one can detect CP violation without requiring complete knowledge about the c.m.s.of the initial photons and about the rest frame of the W bosons.Therefore,our observables are easy to measure.The prediction of the CP violation eﬀects is worked out for two Higgs doublet models.The eﬀect of the Higgs width is studied and it is signiﬁcant.If the Higgs sector of these models is not CP invariant,then CP violation can be measured with our CP odd observables in some parameter region.Acknowledgment:We thank Dr.X.G.He and Dr.S.Tovey for useful discussions.References[1]I.F.Ginzburg et al.,Nucl.Instrum.Methods.205(1983)47[2]S.Y.Choi and F.Schrempp,Phys.Lett.B272(1991)149[3]E.Yehudai,Phys.Rev.D44(1991)3434[4]M.Kobayashi and T.Maskawa,Prog.of Theo.Phys.49(1973)652[5]G.C.Branco and M.N.Rebelo,Phys.Lett.B160(1985)117J.Liu and L.Wolfenstein,Nucl.Phys.B289(1987)1S.Weinberg,Phys.Rev.D42(1990)860[6]B.Grzadkowski and J.F.Gunion,Phys.Lett.B287(1992)237[7]C.R.Schmidt and M.Peskin,Phys.Rev.Lett.69(1992)410[8]W.Bernreuther,T.Schr¨o der and T.N.Pham,Phys.Lett.B279(1992)389[9]W.Bernreuther,O.Nachtmann,P.Overmann and T.Schr¨o der,Nucl.Phys.B388(1992)53[10]A.M´e ndez and P.Pomarol,Phys.Lett.B272(1991)313[11]X.G.He and J.P.Ma and B.H.J.McKellar,Melbourne–Preprint,UM–P–92/25,to be published in Phys.Lett.B[12]B.Grzadkowski and J.F.Gunion,Phys.Lett.B294(1992)361Figure CaptionFig.1.One of the two Feynman graphs for the CP violating amplitude.The other one is to obtain through interchanging the two photons.。

Effects of Large CP Phases on the Proton Lifetime in Supersymmetric Unification

a r X i v :h e p -p h /0004098v 2 2 S e p 2000Eﬀects of Large CP Phases on the Proton Lifetime inSupersymmetric UniﬁcationTarek Ibrahim a,b and Pran Nath ba.Department of Physics,Faculty of Science,University of Alexandria,Alexandria,Egyptb.Department of Physics,Northeastern University,Boston,MA 02115-5000,USA Abstract The eﬀects of large CP violating phases arising from the soft SUSY breaking parameters on the proton lifetime are investigated in supersymmetric grand uni-ﬁed models.It is found that the CP violating phases can reduce as well as enhance the proton lifetime depending on the part of the parameter space one is in.Mod-iﬁcations of the proton lifetime by as much as a factor of 2due to the eﬀects of the CP violating phases are seen.The largest eﬀects arise for the lightest sparticle spectrum in the dressing loop integrals and the eﬀects decrease with the increasing scale of the sparticle masses.An analysis of the uncertainties in the determination of the proton life time due to uncertainties in the quark masses and in the otherinput data is also given.These results are of import in the precision predictions of the proton lifetime in supersymmetric uniﬁcation both in GUT and in string models when the soft SUSY breaking parameters are complex.1IntroductionIt is well known that there are new sources of CP violation in supersymmetrictheories which arise from the soft SUSY breaking sector of the theory.The normalsize of such phases is O(1)and an order of magnitude estimate shows that suchlarge phases would lead to a conﬂict with the current experimental limits on theelectron[1]and on the neutron electric dipole moment[2].The conventional wayssuggested to avoid this conﬂict is either to assume that the phases are small[3,4]or that the SUSY spectrum is heavy[5].However,recently it was demonstrated[6]that this need not to be the case and indeed there could be consistency withexperiment even with large CP violating phases and a light spectrum due to aninternal cancellation mechanism among the various contributions to the EDMs.The above possibility has led to a considerable further activity[7,8,9]and theeﬀects of large CP phases under the cancellation mechanism have been investigatedin dark matter with the EDM constraints[10],in gµ−2[11]and in other low energy physics phenomena[12].In this paper we investigate the eﬀects of large CP violating phases on nucleonstability in supersymmetric grand uniﬁcation with baryon and lepton number vio-lating dimensionﬁve operators[13,14,15].The main result of this analysis is thatthe dressing loop integrals that enter in the supersymmetric proton decay analysisare modiﬁed due to the eﬀect of the large CP violating phases.The CP eﬀectson the proton life time are most easily exhibited by considering Rτdeﬁned inEq.(22)which is the ratio of the p lifetime with phases and without phases.Rτislargely independent of the GUT structure which cancels out in the ratio.Since thedressing loop integrals enter in the proton decay lifetime in both GUT and stringmodels which contain the baryon and the lepton number violating dimensionﬁveoperators,the phenomena of CP violating eﬀects on the proton lifetime shouldhold for a wide range of models both of GUT and of string variety[16].However,for concreteness we will considerﬁrst the simplest SU(5)supersymmetric granduniﬁed model,and then consider a non-minimal extension.As discussed abovesimilar analyses should hold for a wider class of models and so what we do belowshould serve as an illustration of the general idea of the eﬀect of large CP phaseson the proton lifetime.The outline of the paper is as follows:In Sec.2we give a theoretical analysis ofthe eﬀects of CP violating phases on proton decay in the minimal supersymmetricSU(5)model for speciﬁcity.In Sec.3we discuss the numerical eﬀects of the CPviolating phases on Rτunder the EDM constraints.A non-minimal extension is also discussed and an analysis of the uncertainties in the predictions of the proton life time due to uncertainties in the quark masses,inβp and in the KM matrix elements is given.Conclusions are given in Sec.4.2Theoretical analysis of CP violating phases on proton decay in supersymmetric GUTsIn the minimal supergravity uniﬁed model(mSUGRA)[17]the soft SUSY breaking can be parameterized by m0,m1is the universal gaugino mass,A0is the universal trilinear coupling all 2taken at the GUT scale,and tanβ=<H2>/<H1>is the ratio of the Higgs VEVs where H2gives mass to the up quark and H1gives mass to the down quark and the lepton.In addition,the eﬀective theory below the GUT scale contains the Higgs mixing parameterµwhich enters in the superpotential in the termµH1H2. In the presence of CP violation oneﬁnds that the minimal model contains two independent CP violating phases which can be taken to beθµ,which is the phase which is the phase of A0.ofµandαAFor more general situations when one allows for non-universalities,the soft SUSY breaking sector of the theory brings in more CP violating phases.Thus unlike the case of mSUGRA here the U(1)×SU(2)×SU(3)gaugino masses˜m i (i=1,2,3)can have arbitrary phases,i.e.,˜m i=|˜m i|e iξi(i=1,2,3)(1) While in the universal case aﬁeld redeﬁnition can eliminate the common phase of the gaugino masses,here oneﬁnds that the diﬀerence of the gaugino phases does persist in the low energy theory and in fact is found to be a useful tool in arranging for the cancellation mechansim to work for the satisfaction of the EDMs.In the following analysis we carry out an analysis of the proton decay with the most general allowed set of CP violating phases.The deﬁnition of the mass matrices for charginos,neutralinos and for squarks and sleptons have been explicitly exhibited in Ref.[18]and we refer the reader to this paper for details.The focus of the present work is to analyze the eﬀects of CP violating phases on p decay and to estimate its size.For the sake of concreteness we begin with a discussion of the simplest grand uniﬁcation model,i.e.,the minimal SU(5)model.However,the techniquediscussed here to include the CP eﬀects on p decay can be used to anlayse the CP violating eﬀects for any supersymmetric uniﬁed model with baryon and lepton number violating dimensionﬁve operators.This class includes string models.As mentioned above we consider for concreteness and simplicity the minimal SU(5)model whose matter interactions are given by[13,14,15]1W Y=−ǫabc(P f u1V)ij(f d2)kl(˜u Lbi˜d Lcj(¯e c Lk(V u L)al−¯νc k d Lal)+...)+H.c.(3) ML5R=−1whereL ui=δL Iδ˜u†iR(6)Here L I is the sum of fermion-sfermion-gluino,fermion-sfermion-chargino and fermion-sfermion-neutralino interactions and∆L ui=[|D ui11|2∆ui1+|D ui12|2∆u i2]∆R ui=[|D ui21|2∆ui1+|D ui22|2∆u i2](7) and∆LR ui=−D ui11D ui12[∆ui1−∆u i2]∆RL ui=−D ui11D∗ui12[∆ui1−∆u i2].(8) Here˜u i1and˜u i2are the squark mass eigenstates for the squarkﬂavors u i1and u i2and∆ui1and∆ui2are the corresponding propagators,and D ui is the diagonalizingmatrix for the˜u i squarks,i.e.,D†ui M2˜uiD ui=diag(M2˜ui1,M2˜ui2)(9)We note the special arrangement of the complex quantities and their complexconjugates in Eqs.7and8.Speciﬁcally we note that while in the absence of CPphases∆LR ui=∆RL ui this is not the case in the presence of CP phases and in generalone has∆LR ui=∆RL ui as is seen from Eqs.(8).L ui and R ui deﬁned by Eq.(6)receive contributions from the chargino,the neutralino and the gluino exchanges.Following the standard procedure[13,14,15]one obtains the eﬀective dimensionsix operators for the baryon and the lepton number violating interaction arisingfrom dressing of the dimensionﬁve operators.From this eﬀective interaction oneobtains the proton lifetime decay widths for various modes using the eﬀectiveLagrangian methods.We limit ourselves here to the dominant decay mode p→¯νi K+.Including the CP violating eﬀects the decay width for this process is givenbyΓ(p→¯νi K+)=β2p m Nm2N)2|Aνi K|2A2L(A L S)2|(1+m N(D+3F)A LSY R1δi3)+2m BD(1+Y tk3−(e−iξ3Y˜g−Y˜Z)δi2+A R SwhereAνi K=(sin2βM2W)−1α22P2m c m d i V†i1V21V22[F(˜c;˜d i;˜W)+F(˜c;˜e i;˜W)](11) In the above A L(A S)are the long(short)suppression factors,D,F,fπare the eﬀec-tive Lagrangian parameters,andβp is deﬁned byβp UγL=ǫabcǫαβ<0|dαaL uβbL uγcL|p> where UγL is the proton wavefunction.Theoretical determinations ofβp lie in the range0.003−0.03GeV3.Perhaps the more reliable estimate is from lattice gauge calculations which gives[19]βp=(5.6±0.5)×10−3GeV3.Aside from the explicit CP phases via the exponential factor e−iξ3in Eq.(10), CP eﬀects enter dominantly in F’s which are the dressing loop integrals.For the chargino exchange in the presence of CP violating phases one hasF(˜u i;˜d j;˜W)=−32π2iA=1,2[∆L uai S∗A1−∆LR uaiǫu i S∗A2]˜GA[∆L d j U∗A1−∆LR d jǫd j U∗A2](12)Here˜G A(A=1,2)are the propagators for the chargino mass eigenstates and the matrices U and S enter in the biunitary transformations to diagonlize the chargino mass matrix M C such thatU∗M C S−1=diag(˜mχ+1,˜mχ+2)(13)In Eq.(10)the quantities Y tk i are the corrections due to the chargino exchanges involving third generation squarks,Y˜g is the contribution from the gluino exchange, Y˜Z is the contribution from the neutralino exchange,and Y R i are the contributions from the dressing of the RRRR dimension5operators.The gluino exchange contribution Y˜g is given byY˜g=4P2α3mc V21V†21V22H(˜u;˜d;˜g)−H(˜d;˜d;˜g)P2m t m d V11V32V†33F(˜c;˜b;˜W)+F(˜c;˜τ;˜W)(15)and byY R2=P1mc m b V21V22V†31Q(˜τ;˜t;˜W)where Q’s are deﬁned as follows:Q(˜τ;˜t;˜W)=−32π2i(mτ2M W cosβ) A=1,2∆RτU∗A2[ǫt∆R˜t S∗A2−∆RL˜t S∗A1]˜G A(17) The dressing loop integrals can be expressed in terms of the basic integralf(µi,µj,µk)=−16π2i ∆i∆j˜G k(18)wheref(µi,µj,µk)=µkµ2i−µ2j lnµ2iµ2i−µ2k lnµ2isame low energy sparticle spectrum.The reason is that the CP eﬀects are largely governed by the nature of the low energy physics,e.g.,the sparticle mass spectrum and the couplings of the sparticles with matter.Thus we expect similar size CP violating eﬀects in models with diﬀerent GUT structures but with similar size sparticle spectrumTo discuss the CP violating eﬀects on the proton lifetime it is useful to consider the ratio Rτ(p→¯ν+K+)deﬁned byRτ(p→¯ν+K+)=τ(p→¯ν+K+)/τ0(p→¯ν+K+)(22)Hereτ(p→¯ν+K+)is the proton lifetime with CP violating phases andτ0(p→¯ν+K+)is the lifetime without CP phases.This ratio is largly model independent. Thus most of the model dependent features such as the nature of the GUT or the string model would be contained mostly in the front factors such as the Higgs triplet mass,the quark masses,the A S and A L suppression factors all of which cancel out in the ratio.Similarly the quantityβp which is poorly known cancels out in the ratio as do the KM matrix elements.We analyze Rτunder the constraints that CP violating phases obey the exper-imental limits on the electron and the neutron EDMs.For the electron and for the neutron the current experimental limits are[1,2]|d e|<4.3×10−27ecm,|d n|<6.3×10−26ecm(23) We are interested in the eﬀects of large phases on the proton lifetime and for these to satisfy the EMD constraints we use the cancellation mechanism.In Fig.2 we presentﬁve cases where for diﬀerent inputs the electron EDM is plotted as a function ofθµ.An analysis of the neutron EDM for the same input is given in Fig.3.Oneﬁnds the cancellation mechanism produces several regions where the EDM constraints are satisﬁed.In Fig.4we give a plot of Rτfor the same set of inputs as in Figs.2and3.The analysis shows that Rτis a sensitive function of the CP phaseθµand variations of a factor of around2can occur.We also note that both a suppression as well as an enhancement of the proton lifetime can occur as a consequence of the CP violating eﬀects.Interestingly the largest CP eﬀects on Rτoccur here at the points of maximum cancellation in the EDMs as may be seen by a comparison of Figs.2,3and4.The variations in Rτdue to the phases arise because of constructive and destructive interference between the exchange contributions of chargino1(χ+1)and chargino2(χ+2)(see Fig.1).We give an illustration of thisphenomenon in Table1.The analysis of Table1exhibits the cancellation in the imaginary part of the amplitude for the decay process p→¯ν+K+from chargino 1and chargino2,and this cancellation leads to an enhancement in the p lifetime ratio for this case.It is possible to promote each of the cancellation points in Figs.2and3into a trajectory in the m0−m1λm12→mass(m b)we use m b=4.74±0.14GeV[27].The contributions from theﬁrst generation quarks are small and are not the sources of any signiﬁcant uncertainty in the p lifetime.The errors in the KM matrix elements are of a subleading order for the¯νK mode but are still signiﬁcant enough to be included.We use the results of Ref.[27]for the allowed ranges of the KM matrix elements.Forβp we use the result of the lattice gauge analysis of Ref.[19].In Fig.6we exhibit the error corridor for the proton lifetime for the case(1)of Fig.2with M2/aΛ=0.01,M2=M G. Oneﬁnds that given the current errors in the input data the predictions for the proton lifetime has an uncertainty of about a factor of2(11.5−0.5)on either side of the mean.A similar analysis holds for the cases(2-5)of Fig.2.We note that the uncertainties in the predictions of the proton lifetime is of the same order as the size of the CP violating eﬀects.It is for this reason that we choose to exhibit the results of our analysis in Figs.4and5in terms of the ratio Rτsince the eﬀects of the uncertainties cancel in the ratio.The analysis also shows that an improvement in the determination of the quark masses and ofβp is essential for a more precise prediction of the proton lifetime in supersymmetric uniﬁcation of the type discussed here.The reduction of the error in the prediction of p lifetime will also help to deﬁne the CP eﬀects on proton decay when such a decay is experimentally observed.In summary the CP violating eﬀects on the proton lifetime are relatively large if the sparticle spectrum entering the dressing loop integrals is relatively light and the CP violating eﬀects get progressively smaller as the scale of the sparticle spectrum entering the dressing loops gets progressively larger.The current experimental limits on the sparticle masses allow for a relatively light sparticle spectrum,i.e., signiﬁcantly smaller than1TeV.This means that there exists the possibility of signiﬁcant CP violating eﬀects on the proton lifetime.However,the minimal SU(5)model does not support the scenario with a light spectrum and thus the CP violating eﬀects for the case of the minimal model are small.However,for the non-minimal case proton stability can occur even for a relatively light spectrum due to suppression from a more complicated Higgs triplet sector.In these types of models CP violating eﬀects can be signiﬁcant.4ConclusionIn this paper we have investigated the eﬀects of CP violating phases arising from the soft SUSY breaking sector of the theory on the proton decay amplitudes.It isfound that the CP eﬀects can increase or decrease the proton decay rates and that the size of their eﬀect depends sensitively on the region of the parameter space one is in.Eﬀects as large as a factor of2are seen to arise from CP violating phases in the part of the parameter space investigated and even larger eﬀects in the full parameter space may occur.It is found that the CP violating eﬀects in the min-imal SU(5)model are typically small since a relatively heavy sparticle spectrum is needed to stabilize the proton in this case and a heavy spectrum suppresses the CP eﬀects in the dressing loop integral.However,signiﬁcantly larger CP eﬀects on the p lifetime are possible in non-minimal models with more than one pair of Higgs triplets since in these models the proton can be stabilized with a relatively light sparticle spectrum.We also investigated the uncertainties in the p lifetime predictions due to uncertainties in the quark masses,inβp and in the KM matrix elements.Weﬁnd that these uncertainties modify the proton lifetime by a factor of2around the mean value.The observations arrived at in this analysis would be applicable to a wide class of models,including GUT models and string models with dimensionﬁve baryon and lepton number violating operatorsNote Added:After the paper was submitted for publication an improved limit on p→¯νµK+mode ofτ(p→¯νµK+)>1.9×1033yr has been reported[28].The new limit does not aﬀect the conclusions arrived at in this paper. AcknowledgementsThis research was supported in part by NSF grant PHY-9901057Table1:CP eﬀects on Chargino dressings.case Chargino2(−.22,−.89)(Re Aνµ/|Aνµ0|,Im Aνµ/|Aνµ0|)sum1&2.74 Table caption:The table gives an analysis of the dressing loop integrals for dresssings with Charginos1&2(see Fig.1)and their sum for the case when m0=71GeV,m1operators by chargino,gluino and neutralino exchanges that contribute to the pro-ton decay.Cancellation among diagrams such as betweenχ+1andχ+2exchanges can lead to an enhancement of the proton lifetime.The dressings of the RRRR dimensionﬁve operators is also exhibited.Fig.2:Plot of Log10|d e|vsθµexhibiting cancellations where theﬁve curves cor-respond to theﬁve sets of input for the parameters tanβ,m0,m1/2,ξ1,ξ2,ξ3, ,and A0given by(1)2,71,148,−1.15,−1.4,1.27,−.4,4(dotted),(2)2,71,148,αA−.87,−1.0,1.78,−.4,4(solid),(3)4,550,88,.5,−1.55,1.5,.6,.8(dashed),(4)4,750,88, 1.5,1.6,1.7,.6,.8(long dashed),and(5)2,71,148,.55,1.,1.35,−.4,4(dot-dashed).All masses are in GeV and all phases are in radians.Fig.3:Plot of Log10|d n|vsθµexhibiting cancellations where theﬁve curves corre-spond to theﬁve sets of input for the parameters tanβ,m0,m1/2,ξ1,ξ2,ξ3,αA,and A0as given in Fig.2.Fig.4:The ratio Rτof the proton lifetime with phases and without phases as a function ofθµfor theﬁve cases given in Fig.2.Fig.5:The ratio Rτas a function of the scaling factorλdeﬁned in the text.The four curves correspond to the four sets of input for the parameters tanβ,ξ1,ξ2,ξ3, and A0given by(1)2,−1.15,−1.4,1.27,−1.7,−.4,4with m0=71and m1/2=θµ,αA148for the point of intersection with Rτaxis(dotted).,(2)2,−.87,−1.0,1.78,−2.15,−.4,4 with m0=71and m1/2=148for theﬁrst point(solid).(3)4,.5,−1.55,1.5,1.56,.6,.8 with m0=550and m1/2=88for theﬁrst point(dashed).(4)4,1.5,1.6,1.7,−1.56,.6,.8 with m0=750and m1/2=88for theﬁrst point(long dashed).All masses are in GeV and all phases are in radians.All trajectories satisfy edms constraints.Fig.6:Exhibition of the uncertainties in the proton lifetime predictions due to uncertainties in the input data for case(1)of Fig.2where we assumed M2/aΛ= 0.01,M2=M G.References[1]mins,et.al.,Phys.Rev.A50,2960(1994);K.Abdullah,et.al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.65,234(1990).[2]P.G.Harris et.al.,Phys.Rev.Lett.82,904(1999);see also moreauxand R.Golub,Phys.Rev.D61,051301(2000).[3]J.Ellis,S.Ferrara and D.V.Nanopoulos,Phys.Lett.B114,231(1982);J.Polchinski and M.B.Wise,Phys.Lett.B125,393(1983); E.Franco and M.Mangano,Phys.Lett.B135,445(1984);R.Garisto and J.Wells,Phys. Rev.D55,611(1997).For reviews see S.M.Barr and W.J.Marciano,in CP Violation[12]A number of other works where large CP violating phases aﬀect SUSY phe-nomena consist of:W.Hollik,J.I.Illana,S.Rigolin and D.Stockinger,Phys.Lett.B425,322(1998);K.S.Babu,C.Kolda,J.March-Russel,F.Wilczek, Phys.Rev.D59,016004(1999);T.Goto,Y.Okada and Y.Shimizu,Phys.Rev.D58,094006,1998;S.Y.Choi and M.Drees,Phys.Rev.Lett.81,5509(1998);S.Y.Choi,A.Djouadi,H.S.Song and P.M.Zerwas,Eur.Phys.J.C8,669, 1999;S.Baek and P.Ko,Phys.Rev.Lett.83,488(1999);hep-ph/9909433;S.Y.Choi,M.Guchait,H.S.Song and W.Y.Song,hep-ph/9904276;T.Goto,Y.Y.Keum,T.Nihei and Y.Shimizu,Phys.Lett.B460,333(1999);M.Aoki,G-C Cho and N.Oshimo,Nucl.Phys.B554,50(1999);S.Barr and S.Khalil,Phys.Rev.D61,035005(2000);H.H.Asatrian and H.M.Asa-trian,Phys.Lett.B460,148(1999);Y.Okada,K.Okumura,Y.Shimizu, Phys.Rev.D61,094001(2000);J.L.Kneur and M.Moultaka,Phys.Rev.D61,095003(2000);hep-ph/9907360;hep-ph/9910267;W-G Ma et.al.,Phys.Rev.D60,115009(1999);S.Y.Choi,H.S.Song,W.Y.Song,Phys.Rev.D61, 075004(2000);A.Dedes,S.Moretti,hep-ph/9909418;hep-ph/9908516S.Y.Choi,Jae Sik Lee,hep-ph/9909315;V.Barger,T.Han,T.-J.Li,and T.Plehn, hep-ph/9907425;D.A.Demir,A.Masiero,and O.Vives,Phys.Rev.D61, 075009(2000);O.Vives,hep-ph/9909345;M.Brhlik,L.Everett,G.L.Kane, S.F.King,and O.Lebedev,hep-ph/9909480;N.Ghodbane hep-ph/9909499;S.Mrenna,G.L.Kane and L-T.Wang,hep-ph/9910477;C.-S.Huang and L.Wei,hep-ph/0001174;F.Kruger and J.C.Romao,hep-ph/0002089;S.Khalil, T.Kobayashi and O.Vives,hep-ph/0003086;M.Carena,J.Ellis,A.Pilaftsis, and C.Wagner,hep-ph/0003180;S.Bae,hep-ph/0003309.[13]S.Weinberg,Phys.Rev.D26,287(1982);N.Sakai and T.Yanagida,Nucl.Phys.B197,533(1982);S.Dimopoulos,S.Raby and F.Wilczek,Phys.Lett.112B,133(1982);J.Ellis, D.V.Nanopoulos and S.Rudaz,Nucl.Phys.B202,43(1982);S.Chadha,G.D.Coughlan,M.Daniel and G.G.Ross,Phys.Lett.149B,47(1984).[14]P.Nath,R.Arnowitt and A.H.Chamseddine,Phys.Rev.32D,2348(1985).[15]R.Arnowitt,A.H.Chamseddine,and P.Nath,Phys.Lett.B156,215(1985);Phys.Rev.F38,1479(1988);J.Hisano,H.Murayama and T.Yanagida,Nucl.Phys.B402,46(1993);T.Goto and T.Nihei,Phys.Rev.D59,115009(1999).[16]See,e.g.,R.Arnowitt and P.Nath,Phys.Rev.Lett.62,2225(1989);Phys.Lett.B287,89(1992).[17]A.H.Chamseddine,R.Arnowitt and P.Nath,Phys.Rev.Lett.49,970(1982);For reviews see,P.Nath,R.Arnowitt and A.H.Chamseddine,“Applied N =1Supergravity”(World Scientiﬁc,Singapore,1984);H.P.Nilles,Phys.Rep.110,1(1984).[18]T.Ibrahim and P.Nath,Phys.Rev.D58,111301(1998).[19]M.B.Gavela,Nucl.Phys.B312,269(1989).[20]R.Arnowitt and P.Nath,Phys.Rev.D60,044002(1999);Phys.Rev.D49,1479(1994);M.E.Gomez,J.Rizos,and K.Tamvakis,Phys.Rev.D58, 057701(1998).[21]M.Takita,Talk at ICHEP,Vancouver,1998.[22]For recent SO(10)analyses see, e.g.,V.Lucas and S.Raby,Phys.Rev.D54,2261(1996);ibid.D55,6988(1997);S,Urano and R.Arnowitt,hep-ph/9611389;S.M.Barr,Phys.Rev.D59,015004(1999);K.S.Babu,J.C.Pati, and F.Wilczek,Phys.Lett.B423,337(1998);Nucl.Phys.B566,33(2000);R.N.Mohapatra,Trieste Lectures1999,hep-ph/9911272.[23]J.Prades and A.Pich,Nucl.Phys.B(Proc.Suppl.)74,309(1999).[24]K.G.Chetyrkin,J.H.Kuhn and A.A.Pivovarov,Nucl.Phys.B533,473(1998).[25]C.A.Dominguez,L.Pirovano and K.Schiler,Nucl.Phys.B(Proc.Suppl.)74,313(1999).[26]V.Lubicz,Nucl.Phys.B(Proc.Suppl.)74,291(1999);V.Gimenez,Nucl.Phys.B(Proc.Suppl.)74,296(1999).[27]C.Caso et.al.,European Physical Journal C3,1(1998).[28]Y.Totsuka,Talk at the SUSY2K Conference,CERN,June26-July1,2000.。

网络流行语“我的内心几乎是崩溃的”的模因论解读

校园英语 / 语言文化网络流行语“我的内心几乎是崩溃的”的模因论解读西北师范大学外国语学院/范攀攀【摘要】2015年“我的内心几乎是崩溃的”蹿红网络，成为大众追捧的网络流行语。

模因论对于此类语言现象具有很强的解释力。

本文从“我的内心几乎是崩溃的”的释义及产生入手，从模因论的角度出来研究其复制和传播的过程，探讨了其成为强势模因的语言内在和外在的原因，以期为运用模因论分析流行语提供借鉴和参考。

【关键词】我的内心几乎是崩溃的模因强势模因【Abstract】In 2015, “我的内心几乎是崩溃的”(My heart is almost broken)became extremely popular among netizens. Memetics theory has a strong explanatory power for this kind of language phenomenon. This paper begins by explaining the meaning and tracking the source of the popular expression. Based on an analysis of how the expression replicates and spreads, the paper further explores language reasons -- both internal and external -- for its becoming a powerful meme in light of memetics. This paper attempts to provide people with some potential insights to effectively analyze other popular expressions from the perspective of memetics.【Key words】My heart is almost broken; meme; powerful meme一、引言近年来，随着互联网的快速发展，网络语言逐渐走进我们的生活。

Violating Cooperative Principle to Create Humor

Violating Cooperative Principle to Create Humor Abstract: Humor is almost everywhere. We can find it in our conversation. Humor is a kind of language art and it can be created by many reasons. This essay will analyze humor from a knowledge of pragmatics--cooperative principle (CP), a theory formulated by American linguist H. P. Grice. This essay will show how the humorous effects achieved due to the breaking of certain maxims of the cooperative principle. It also provides a lot of examples to show how to achieve humorous effects by applying Grice’s cooperative principle. The creation of humor and violation of CP have close relationship. Violating CP in the surface may create humor. A better understanding about humor will be achieved under an analysis of CP. As a linguistic phenomenon, humor has its own charm. It can relieve interpersonal relationships and make others feel comfortable.Key words: Humor; cooperative principle; analysis; violation1 IntroductionPragmatics is a newly arising discipline. It was built and developed in the 1970s. And it has been developing rapidly. By the early 80s, pragmatics had been generally accepted as one of the basic branches of linguistics. It studies the use of language in human communication as determined by the conditions of society.(Mey, 2001:6) It studies the way how humans use their language. In humans’communication, most of humors are created in discourse. The creating of humor cannot exist without the internal rules of language.The discourse may create different meanings in different contexts. People may say something which is not relevant with the other due to some understandable reasons. In this way, the speaker may create humor.Humor is often created from discourse. It is a quality of being amusing or comic. Humor is part of our life, but we are not familiar with the psychological process. And the Cooperative Principle makes important contributions to analyze humor. This essay will analyze English humor from one of the basic pragmatic theory—Cooperative Principles(CP). We may learn the process of creating humor and appreciate humor better.2 Relative conceptionsAmerican linguist Herbert Paul Grice proposed the Cooperative Principle which makes great contributions to analyze humor. When communicating, people have something to tell each other. Communication, further more, requires people to cooperate; the ‘bare facts’of conversation come alive only in a mutually accepted,pragmatically determined context. Cooperation has itself been elevated to the status of an independent principle in the works of the late British\American philosopher H. P. Grice (1975). In order to explain further the cooperative principle, Grice borrowed from the German philosopher Immanuel Kant four categories: quantity, quality, relation and manner. That is, the CP is specified from these four aspects. And the content of each category is known as maxim.2.1 The Maxim of QuantityThe category of Quantity, concerned with the quantity of information to be provided, has two maxims:(1)Makeyour contribution as information as isrequired (for the current purpose of the exchange).(2)Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.Grice has some doubts as to the necessity of the second maxim. First, to be overinformative may not be a transgression of the CP but merely a waste of time. Second, there is a later maxim concerning relevance, which ensures that no excess of information will be given to lead to any side effects or cause any confusion. (Jiang Wangqi, 2001)2.2 The Maxim of QualityIn the category of Quality these is a super maxim:Try to make your contribution one that is true.Specifically, there are two specific maxims:(1)Do not say what you believe to be false.(2)Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.Grice suggests that the observance of the Quality maxims is a matter of greater urgency than is the observance of others.2.3 The Maxim of RelationThe category of Relation has a single maxim“Be relevant”.Though the maxim itself is terse, its formulation conceals a number of problems that exercise a good deal: what different kinds and focuses of relevance there may be,how the meaning in the talk exchange, how to allow for the fact that subjects of conversation are legitimately changed, and so on.2.4 The Maxim of MannerThe category of Manner, different from others, do not relate “to what is said but, rather to HOW what is said is to be said”. There is also a super maxim “Be perspicuous” and the specific maxims are:(1)Avoid obscurity of expression.(2)Avoid ambiguity.(3)Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).(4)Be orderly. (Grice: 1975)When we speak we generally have something like the CP and its maxims in our mind to guide us, though sub-consciously, or even unconsciously. We will try to say things which are true, relevant, as well as informative enough, and in a clear manner. Hearers will also try to interpret what is said to them in this way. If there are obvious signs that one, or more, of the maxims is not followed, one will try to find out the reason. Humor may be created in the process of finding.3 Violating the Maxims to Create Humor3.1 Violating the Maxim of QuantityAccording to the Maxim of Quantity, people should give enough information to the listener. But in real conversation, the speaker often does not give enough information.(1) One woman was sitting on a bench and a dog was lying near to the bench. A man came to the woman and talked to her:Man: Does your dog bite?Woman: No.(The man reached down to feel the dog. The dog bites the man’s hand.)Man: Ouch! Hey! You said your dog doesn’t bite.Woman: He doesn’t. But that’s not my dog. (黄奕,2006:57)According to the Maxim of Quantity, the information the speaker offered should not be less than the overall information. And the listener can believe the offered information only if it is enough for him to understand what the speaker said. In the conversation, that man thought the information the woman offered should be true and enough. So he petted the dog. We always take the things that have happened smoothly for granted. The man in the conversation naturally thought the dog near the bench was the woman’s. He asked the question and the woman answered no. Although what the woman said was true, but she did not tell the man the dog is not hers. The answer was against the Maxim of Quantity. However, if the speaker gives more information, humor can also be created.4.4 License to violate the Maxim of Manner(6) Two people are talking about the theatre last night.A: You went to the theatre last night: what play did you see?B: Well, I watched a number of people stand on the stage in Elizabethan costumes uttering a series of sentence which corresponded closely with the script of Twelfth Night.B’s answer was lengthy and tedious. He violated the maxim of manner deliberately to make his comment on that theatre understood. At this time, A wanted to know why B can violate the maxim and also make himself understood. B successfully made A know his real comments on the theatre in a humorous way.5 ConclusionHumor is part of our life. It may be created by many elements. Humor can make language lively and make people happy. This essay analyzes the process of humor from the cooperative principle. We may understand how humor is created after we have analyzed it according to the CP. CP is one of the important principles in pragmatics, and humor results form from violation of CP. This article analyzes the humor caused by violation of CP from a pragmatic perspective. We know that the discourse which obeys the principle outside may not really gain a good conversational result. And the discourse which violates the principle may be cooperative in real conversation. People may violate the principle for sake of strengthening the relationship between others, thinking of others’feelings, and making humor. We can not effect our daily conversation because of obeying CP simply. We may create different conversation results using different ways of talking. The conversation will be a success as long as people can understand its real meaning.Bibliography:[1]Gillian Brown & George Yule. Discourse Analysis [M] Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press and Cambridge University Press, 2000.[2]Grice, H.P. Logic and Conversation[M]. New York: Academic Press. 1975.[3]Jacob L. Mey. Pragmatics: An Introduction[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press and Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2001.[4]Jiang Wangqi. Pragmatics. Theories and Applications [M]. Beijing: Beijing University Press, 2000.[5]顾之京. 笑苑擷英——古代笑话译注[M]. 银川:宁夏人民出版社,1983:24-27.[6]黄慧丽. 幽默言语的语用解析[J].黄山学院学报,2004(2):23-25.[7]黄奕. 幽默与合作原则[J]. 外语研究,2006(3):54-57.[8]吕光旦. 英语幽默——理解与欣赏[M].上海:上海外语教育出版社,1990:32-37.[9]吴晓利. 浅谈英语语用学合作原则的应用[J].濮阳职业技术学院学报,2006 (2):67-68.[10]徐栾. 合作原则中准则违背的可行性之探索[J].四川师范大学学报(社会科学版增刊),2005:95-97.[11]朱海神、金玲. 合作原则的违反与幽默的产生[J]. 南宁师范高等专科学校学报, 2004(3):58-59.[12]左自鸣. 幽默中的语用学[J].广西师范学院学报,2003(2):118-119.。