text:
# References

Recently, time-reversal violation (TV) has been measured experimentally in the $`K^0`$ system TVk , and thus complements the information on CP violation (CPV) that has been steadily accumulating for the past thirty seven years. The data is in accordance with the CPT theorem which is fundamental to local quantum field theories with Lorentz invariance and the usual spin-statistics connection. However, the origin of the violation remains unclear. In the standard model, CPV or TV arises from a unique physical phase in the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) quark mixing matrix ckm . This paradigm also predicts CPV effect in the b-quark system. To test the accuracy of this paradigm and to search for other sources of CPV one needs to look for new processes, especially the $`B^0`$ system. Indeed this is an important quest of the B-factories. In addition we deem it particularly interesting if the time reversal symmetry violation can be directly detected in the b-system rather than inferring it as a consequence of CPT invariance. In this paper, we will study the T violating effects in the baryonic decays of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }l^+l^{}`$.

It is known that for a general three-body decay of a baryon the triple spin-momentum correlations, such as $`\stackrel{}{s}\left(\stackrel{}{p}_i\times \stackrel{}{p}_j\right)`$, are T-odd observables, where $`\stackrel{}{s}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{p}_{i,j}`$ are the spin and momentum vectors of the final particles, respectively. There are a number of different sources that might give rise to these T-odd observables. The most important ones being the weak CPV such as the CKM phase of the SM. However, final state interactions such as QCD for non-leptonic decays or the electromagnetic (EM) interaction among the final state particles can also make contributions. These are usually less interesting and they could even hide the signals from the weak CPV. We note that the T-odd triple correlations do not need non-zero strong phases unlike some of CP violating observables, such as the rate asymmetry between a particle and its antiparticle.

In $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }l^+l^{}`$ decays, due to experimental concerns only one polarization state can be measured. We can use either the polarization of the lepton ($`s_l`$) or the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ baryon ($`s_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) to study the T-odd correlations. For the case with a polarized lepton, since the T-odd correlation such as the transverse lepton polarization is always associated with the lepton mass, we expect that the T violating effects are small for the light lepton modes CQ . Although the $`\tau `$ mode has less suppression due to its mass, the corresponding branching ratio which is $`O(10^7)`$ is about one order of magnitude smaller than that for the $`e`$ and $`\mu `$ ones. The above considerations plus the fact that the efficiency of spin measurements in general are not high make lepton polarization a poor choice. In our following analysis, we will concentrate on the search for the possibility of large T-odd term such as $`\stackrel{}{s}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(\stackrel{}{p}_{l^+}\times \stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }l^+l^{}`$ with $`l=e`$ and $`\mu `$, and we can set $`m_l=0`$ within the accuracy of our calculations.

We start with the effective Hamiltonian for $`bsl^+l^{}`$ by including the right-handed couplings in the hadronic sector are given by

$`\left(bsl^+l^{}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_F\alpha _{em}}{\sqrt{2}\pi }}V_{tb}V_{ts}^{}\left[H_{1\mu }L_V^\mu +H_{2\mu }L_A^\mu \right]`$ (1)
with

$`H_{1\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{s}\gamma ^\mu \left(C_9^LP_L+C_9^RP_R\right)b{\displaystyle \frac{2m_b}{q^2}}\overline{s}i\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu \left(C_7^LP_R+C_7^RP_L\right)b,`$
$`H_{2\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{s}\gamma ^\mu \left(C_{10}^LP_L+C_{10}^RP_R\right)b,`$
$`L_V^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\overline{l}\gamma ^\mu l,`$
$`L_A^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\overline{l}\gamma ^\mu \gamma _5l,`$ (2)
where $`C_i^L`$ and $`C_i^R\left(i=7,9,10\right)`$ denote the effective Wilson coefficients of left- and right-handed couplings, respectively. In the standard model,

$`C_9^L=C_9^{eff},`$ $`C_9^R=0,`$
$`C_{10}^L=C_{10},`$ $`C_{10}^R=0,`$
$`C_7^L=C_7^{eff},`$ $`C_7^R={\displaystyle \frac{m_s}{m_b}}C_7^{eff},`$ (3)
where $`C_9^{eff}`$, $`C_{10}`$, and $`C_7^{eff}`$ are the standard Wilson coefficients Buras .

To study the exclusive decays of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }l^+l^{}`$, one needs to know the form factors in the transition of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b})\mathrm{\Lambda }(p_\mathrm{\Lambda })`$, parametrized generally as follows:

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left|\overline{s}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu b\right|\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ $`=`$ $`f_1^{(T)}\overline{u}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\gamma _\mu u_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}+f_2^{(T)}\overline{u}_\mathrm{\Lambda }i\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu u_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}+f_3^{(T)}q_\mu \overline{u}_\mathrm{\Lambda }u_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b},`$
$`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left|\overline{s}\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu \gamma _5b\right|\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ $`=`$ $`g_1^{(T)}\overline{u}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\gamma _\mu \gamma _5u_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}+g_2^{(T)}\overline{u}_\mathrm{\Lambda }i\sigma _{\mu \nu }q^\nu \gamma _5u_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}+g_3^{(T)}q_\mu \overline{u}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\gamma _5u_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b},`$ (4)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu =\gamma _\mu (i\sigma _{\mu \nu })`$, and $`f_i^{(T)}`$ and $`g_i^{(T)}`$ are the form factors of vector (tensor) and axial-vector (axial-tensor) currents, respectively. In the heavy quark effective theory (HQET) MR , the form factors in Eq. (4) can be simplified by using

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }(p_\mathrm{\Lambda })\left|\overline{s}\mathrm{\Gamma }b\right|\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b})=\overline{u}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(F_1(q^2)+/vF_2(q^2))\mathrm{\Gamma }u_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b},`$ (5)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ denotes the Dirac matrix, $`v=p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}/M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}`$ is the four-velocity of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$, and $`q=p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}p_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the momentum transfer, and the relations among the form factors can be found in Ref. chen-prd63 . Explicitly, under the HEQT, we have

$`f_1`$ $`=`$ $`g_2=f_2^T=g_2^T=F_1+\sqrt{r}F_2,`$
$`\rho `$ $``$ $`M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_2+g_2}{f_1+g_1}}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}}{q^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_1^T+g_1^T}{f_1+g_1}}\right)={\displaystyle \frac{F_2}{F_1+\sqrt{r}F_2}}.`$ (6)
In order to study the T violating effects using the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ spin polarization, we write the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ four-spin vector in terms of a unit vector, $`\widehat{\xi }`$, along the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ spin in its rest frame, as

$`s_0={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\widehat{\xi }}{M_\mathrm{\Lambda }}},\stackrel{}{s}=\widehat{\xi }+{\displaystyle \frac{s_0}{E_\mathrm{\Lambda }+M_\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda },`$ (7)
and choose the unit vectors along the longitudinal, normal, transverse components of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization, to be

$`\widehat{e}_L`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\left|\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right|}},`$
$`\widehat{e}_N`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\times \left(\stackrel{}{p}_l^{}\times \stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)}{\left|\stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\times \left(\stackrel{}{p}_l^{}\times \stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)\right|}},`$
$`\widehat{e}_T`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_l^{}\times \stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\left|\stackrel{}{p}_l^{}\times \stackrel{}{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right|}},`$ (8)
respectively. Hence, the differential decay rates with polarized $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is given by

$`d\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}d\mathrm{\Gamma }^0\left[1+\stackrel{}{P}\widehat{\xi }\right],`$ (9)
$`d\mathrm{\Gamma }^0\left(t\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_F^2\alpha _{em}^2\lambda _t^2}{96\pi ^5}}M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}^5\sqrt{t^2r}f_1^2R_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}\left(t\right)dt,`$ (10)
where $`\stackrel{}{P}`$ is the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization vector, defined by

$`\stackrel{}{P}=P_L\widehat{e}_L+P_N\widehat{e}_N+P_T\widehat{e}_T,`$ (11)
and

$`R_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}\left(t\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\left(3\left(1+r\right)t2r4t^2\right)+s\rho ^2\left(3\left(1+r\right)t4r2t^2\right)+6\rho \sqrt{r}s\left(1t\right)\right]`$ (12)
$`\times \left(\left|C_9^R\right|^2+\left|C_9^L\right|^2+\left|C_{10}^R\right|^2+\left|C_{10}^L\right|^2\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{4\widehat{m}_b}{s}}\left(3\left(1+r\right)t4r2t^2\right)\left(\left|C_7^R\right|^2+\left|C_7^L\right|^2\right)`$
$`6\sqrt{r}s\left[1+2\left(tr\right)\rho +s\rho ^2\right]\left(\mathrm{ReC}_9^\mathrm{R}\mathrm{C}_9^\mathrm{L}+\mathrm{ReC}_{10}^\mathrm{R}\mathrm{C}_{10}^\mathrm{L}\right)`$
$`+12\widehat{m}_b\left[2\rho \left(r+t^2\left(1+r\right)t\right)\sqrt{r}\left(1t\right)\left(1+s\rho ^2\right)\right]\left(\mathrm{ReC}_9^\mathrm{R}\mathrm{C}_7^\mathrm{L}+\mathrm{ReC}_9^\mathrm{L}\mathrm{C}_7^\mathrm{R}\right)`$
$`+12\widehat{m}_b\left[2\rho \sqrt{r}s+\left(tr\right)\left(1+s\rho ^2\right)\right]\left(\mathrm{ReC}_9^\mathrm{R}\mathrm{C}_7^\mathrm{R}+\mathrm{ReC}_9^\mathrm{L}\mathrm{C}_7^\mathrm{L}\right),`$
with $`\lambda _t=V_{tb}V_{ts}^{}`$, $`t=E_\mathrm{\Lambda }/M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}`$, $`r=M_\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}^2`$, $`\widehat{m}_b=m_b/M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}`$, and $`s=1+r2t`$. The kinematic ranges for $`t`$ and $`s`$ are

$`\sqrt{r}t`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(1+r\right),`$
$`0s`$ $``$ $`\left(1\sqrt{r}\right)^2.`$ (13)
With the T odd transverse $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarizations defined by

$$P_T=\frac{d\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\widehat{\xi }\widehat{e}_T=1\right)d\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\widehat{\xi }\widehat{e}_T=1\right)}{d\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\widehat{\xi }\widehat{e}_T=1\right)+d\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\widehat{\xi }\widehat{e}_T=1\right)},$$

and from Eq. (9) we obtain

$`P_T`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{4R_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}\left(t\right)}}\sqrt{s\varphi }\left(1s\rho ^2\right)`$ (14)
$`\times \left[\left(\mathrm{ImC}_9^\mathrm{R}\mathrm{C}_{10}^\mathrm{L}\mathrm{ImC}_9^\mathrm{L}\mathrm{C}_{10}^\mathrm{R}\right){\displaystyle \frac{2\widehat{m}_b}{s}}\left(1t\right)\left(\mathrm{ImC}_7^\mathrm{L}\mathrm{C}_{10}^\mathrm{R}\mathrm{ImC}_7^\mathrm{R}\mathrm{C}_{10}^\mathrm{L}\right)\right],`$
where $`\varphi \left(s\right)=\left(1r\right)^22s\left(1+r\right)+s^2`$.

To understand Eq. (14), we first examine the hadronic currents with $`V\pm A`$ types of interactions. From Eq. (1), there are three possible sources which could lead to $`T`$-odd correlations:

1. $`H_{i\mu }H_{i\nu }^{}L_{V(A)}^\mu L_{V(A)}^\nu ,(i=1,2)`$
2. $`H_{1\mu }^{L(R)}H_{2\nu }^{L(R)}L_V^\mu L_A^\nu `$,
3. $`H_{1\mu }^{L(R)}H_{2\nu }^{R(L)}L_V^\mu L_A^\nu `$,

where $`H_{i\mu }^{L(R)}`$ involve only left-handed (right-handed) currents. By summing all the lepton spin degrees of freedom, we get $`L_V^\mu L_V^\nu =L_A^\mu L_A^\nu =(p_l^\mu p_{\overline{l}}^\nu +p_l^\nu p_{\overline{l}}^\mu g^{\mu \nu }p_lp_{\overline{l}})`$, which are symmetric with respect to $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$. Since $`H_{i\mu }H_{i\nu }^{}\epsilon _{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }s_\mathrm{\Lambda }^\alpha p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}^\beta `$ is antisymmetric between $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$, it is clear that no T-odd terms can be constructed from (i). For the case in (ii), even though $`L_V^\mu L_A^\nu =4i\epsilon ^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }p_{l\alpha }p_{\overline{l}\beta }`$ is antisymmetric, $`H_{1\mu }^{L(R)}H_{2\nu }^{L(R)}`$
$`M_\mathrm{\Lambda }Tr(/s_\mathrm{\Lambda }\gamma _\mu /p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}\gamma _\nu )=4M_\mathrm{\Lambda }(s_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu }p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\nu }+s_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\nu }p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mu }g_{\mu \nu }s_\mathrm{\Lambda }p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b})`$ is symmetric in $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ and thus, the possible terms in (ii) also vanish. However, T-odd correlations can arise from (iii) by observing that $`H_{1\mu }^{L(R)}H_{2\nu }^{R(L)}M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}Tr(\overline{)}p_\mathrm{\Lambda }\overline{)}s_\mathrm{\Lambda }\gamma _\mu \gamma _\nu )=4M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}\left(p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu }s_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\nu }+p_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\nu }s_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu }\right)`$ is antisymmetric. Hence, in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }l^+l^{}`$ decays, the non-vanished T-odd terms can be induced from $`\left(VA\right)\times \left(V+A\right)`$ hadronic currents. This is, explicitly shown in Eq. (14). The TV quantity is related to Im$`C_9^RC_{10}^L`$ and Im$`C_9^LC_{10}^R`$, respectively. Similarly, with the dipole operators, we expect that T-odd observables are proportional to Im$`C_7^RC_{10}^L`$ and Im$`C_7^LC_{10}^R`$.

As seen in Eq. (14), to have a non-zero value of $`P_T`$, it is necessary to have conditions of (i) the existence of $`C_k^R`$ and (ii) a phase of $`C_i^LC_j^R(ij)`$. These conditions are clearly different from those of the T odd transverse lepton polarizations in both inclusive decay of $`bsl^+l^{}`$ Tin  and exclusive ones, such as $`BK^{()}l^+l^{}`$ TexM  and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }l^+l^{}`$ TexB , and other CP violating asymmetries as well CQ ; HK . Such property distinguishes the T odd transverse $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarizations from various other T odd observables. In the standard model, since there are no $`C_9^R`$ and $`C_{10}^R`$ as seen from Eq. (3),

$`P_T^{SM}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_s}{m_b}}Im\left(C_7^{eff}C_{10}\right),`$ (15)
which is suppressed. We note that the contribution to $`P_T`$ from the EM final state interaction is $`<O(10^3)`$. Moreover, the long-distance (LD) effects in the one-loop matrix elements of $`O_{1,2}`$ Buras  and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ with $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }l^+l^{}`$ are absorbed to $`C_9^L`$. On the other hand, it is clear that a large value of $`P_T`$, according to Eq. (14), can be obtained if a theory contains $`C_9^R`$ or $`C_{10}^R`$ or a large $`C_7^R`$, with a non-zero phase. Many theories beyond the standard model could give rise to $`C_9^R`$ or $`C_{10}^R`$; examples are the left-right symmetric and supersymmetric models.

To illustrate our result, we use SUSY models both with and without R-parity. For a SUSY model with R-parity, we take the one given by Ref. Masiero , denoted as $`M1`$, in which

$`C_7^{LM1}`$ $`=`$ $`1.75\left(\delta _{23}^u\right)_{LL}0.25\left(\delta _{23}^u\right)_{LR}10.3\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{LR},`$
$`C_9^{LM1}`$ $`=`$ $`0.82\left(\delta _{23}^u\right)_{LR},`$
$`C_{10}^{LM1}`$ $`=`$ $`9.37\left(\delta _{23}^u\right)_{LR}+1.4\left(\delta _{23}^u\right)_{LR}\left(\delta _{33}^u\right)_{RL}+2.7\left(\delta _{23}^u\right)_{LL},`$
$`C_7^{RM1}`$ $`=`$ $`10.3\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RL},`$
$`C_9^{RM1}`$ $`=`$ $`1.32\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RL}\left(\delta _{33}^d\right)_{LR},`$
$`C_{10}^{RM1}`$ $`=`$ $`17.6\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RL}\left(\delta _{33}^d\right)_{LR},`$ (16)
where the values of parameters $`\delta _{ij}^q`$ are as follows :

$`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{LR}`$ $``$ $`\left(\delta _{23}^d\right)_{RL}3\times 10^2e^{i\theta _1},`$
$`\left(\delta _{33}^d\right)_{LR}`$ $``$ $`\left(\delta _{33}^u\right)_{RL}\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}0.5},`$
$`\left(\delta _{23}^u\right)_{LR}`$ $``$ $`0.7e^{i\theta _2},`$
$`\left(\delta _{23}^u\right)_{LL}`$ $``$ $`0.1,`$ (17)
with taking the phases of $`\theta _1`$ and $`\theta _2`$ to be $`\pi /4`$ and $`\pi /10`$, respectively.

To demonstrate the difference we study a SUSY model without R-parity ($`M2`$, see Ref. Nardi ). In this case we have

$`C_9^{RM2}`$ $`=`$ $`C_{10}^{RM2}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\sqrt{2}G_F\alpha _{em}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{V_{tb}V_{ts}^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{ij3}^{}\lambda _{ij2}^{}}{2M_{\stackrel{~}{u}_j}^2}}`$ (18)
where

$`\left|\lambda _{ijk}^{}\right|`$ $``$ $`\left(2\sqrt{2}G_F\mathrm{tan}^2\beta \right)^{1/2}\zeta _im_{d_j}\lambda ^2`$ (19)
and

$`\lambda _{ij3}^{}\lambda _{ij2}^{}`$ $``$ $`2\sqrt{2}G_F\mathrm{tan}^2\beta \zeta _i^2m_{d_j}^2\lambda ^4e^{i\theta _{\mathit{}}}`$ (20)
with the parameters $`\lambda 0.22`$, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta 10`$, $`\zeta _i0.9`$, and $`\theta _{\mathit{}}=2\pi /5`$. We note that the parameters we have chosen for the two models satisfy various experimental constraints Masiero ; Nardi .

By using the parameters in Eqs. (16)-(20), the values for the form factors in Refs. CQ ; chen-prd63 , and Eq. (10), we give the differential branching ratios (BRs) of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu ^+\mu ^{}`$ with respect to $`E_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in Figure 1 with and without including resonant states of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$, and we find that the integrated BRs for the latter are $`(2.10,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1.66},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4.41})\times 10^6`$ for the standard and SUSY with and without R-parity models, respectively.

In Figures 2 and 3, we show $`P_T(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu ^+\mu ^{})`$ as a function of $`E_\mathrm{\Lambda }/M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}`$ for $`M1`$ and $`M2`$, with and without the LD contributions, respectively. As seen from the figures, even though the derivations of BRs to the standard model result are insignificant, the transverse $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization asymmetries can be over $`50\%`$ in both SUSY models with and without R-parity. Similar results are also expected the decay of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }e^+e^{}`$. We remark that measuring a large $`P_T`$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }l^+l^{}`$ is a clean indication of T violation as well as new CP violation mechanism beyond the standard model.

Finally, we note that to measure $`P_T(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu ^+\mu ^{})10\%`$ at $`3\sigma `$ level, at least $`4.5\times 10^7`$ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ decays are required if we use $`BR(\mathrm{\Lambda }_b\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu ^+\mu ^{})2\times 10^6`$. Clearly, the measurement could be done in the second generation of B-physics experiments, such as LHCb, ATLAS, and CMS at the LHC, and BTeV at the Tevatron, which produce $`10^{12}b\overline{b}`$ pairs per year BB . This is certainly within reach of a super B factory under discussion now SuperB .

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the National Center for Theoretical Science, National Science Council of the Republic of China under Contract Nos. NSC-90-2112-M-001-069 and NSC-90-2112-M-007-040, and National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada.