Comment on "Sequential Single-Pion Production Explaining the Dibaryon "$d^*(2380)$" Peak"

TL;DR

This paper critiques a previous calculation suggesting a sequential process as an alternative explanation for the $d^*(2380)$ peak, emphasizing that the results and presentation are not convincing as an alternative to the dibaryon interpretation.

Contribution

The authors challenge the validity of a prior sequential process model as an explanation for the $d^*(2380)$ resonance, reaffirming the dibaryon interpretation.

Findings

The sequential process calculation does not convincingly reproduce the $d^*(2380)$ peak.

The presentation of the sequential process as an alternative is not supported.

The dibaryon interpretation remains the more consistent explanation.

Abstract

In arxiv: 2102.05575 a two-step process $pn \to (pp) \pi^- \to (\Delta N) \pi^- \to (d \pi^+) \pi^-$ was calculated by using experimental total cross sections for the single-pion production processes $pn \to pp \pi^-(I=0)$ and $pp \to d \pi^+$. As a result the authors obtain a resonance-like structure for the total $pn \to d\pi^+\pi^-$ cross section of about the right size and width of the observed $d^*(2380)$ peak at an energy about 40 MeV below the $d^*(2380)$ mass. We object both the results of the sequential process calculation and its presentation as an alternative to the dibaryon interpretation.