arXiv:0901.3958v2 [hep-ph] 29 Jan 2009 eul rkn SU(2) broken, neously information. experimental de- of it array mixing, vast lepton a and scribes masses neutrino incorporate to raigadissl-neatos ie ytepotential the scalar by symmetry given The V electroweak self-interactions, of its agent [3]. and the breaking self-interactions as its introduced is of field virtue by hyper- value, weak with doublet charge weak-isospin field (color-singlet) a scalar complex elementary h ag ru SU(3) group gauge the ttelvlo n e il ymn esrmns[2]. the measurements form the many to of interactions, by theory strong the mille theory chromodynamics, per field quantum quantum with one Joined a of level as pro- the tested a at nature, to of description promising law a visional from elevated been has where otevcu xetto value correspond expectation vacuum state—to the vacuum state to the energy—the choose minimum to freedom of the us gives invariance gauge aumsaecrepnst rknsmer solu- broken parameter spontaneously the broken-symmetry is if symmetry a electroweak The to tion. corresponds state vacuum ( nti itr,teeetoeksmer ssponta- is symmetry electroweak the picture, this In vrteps fenyas h lcrwa hoy[1] theory electroweak the years, fifteen past the Over φ † φ = ) v Y = φ µ cursanneovcu expectation vacuum nonzero a acquires 1 = p h 2 φ r raig w oesicroaetesadr SU(3) standard the introd are incorporate constructs models other Two or fields breaking. Higgs try no which in models hoyt nrissmwa bv h arncsae thir well-b A a scale. as hadronic serve the SU(3) can rem above right–symmetric somewhat QCD model energies that the to small and theory sufficiently breaking masses symmetry spontane electro fermion troweak of the bare source so adds only Th the class terms, is model. mass chromodynamics standard quantum bare the within of no that theory—contains to troweak similar content fermion and ul nSU(4) on built ASnmes 11.q 21-,12.60.-i 12.10-g, 11.15.-q, theor numbers: field PACS of application the stro contras in residual informative issues provide the intriguing only of consider not that models to th Higgs-free closer from The much stem is models interactions the weak of characteristics interesting Many ( − i φ 0 oilmnt o lcrwa ymtybekn hpsthe shapes breaking symmetry electroweak how illuminate To † µ φ .INTRODUCTION I. = µ 2 + ) / 2  | λ stknt engtv.I htevent, that In negative. be to taken is | | he ftefu ere ffree- of degrees four the of Three . λ c φ φ | ⊗ L ( + 0 SU(2) φ ⊗ em ainlAclrtrLbrtr,Btva Illinois Batavia, Laboratory, Accelerator National Fermi PS C-nue lcrwa ymtyBreaking Symmetry Electroweak QCD-Induced †  φ U(1) ) ⊗ tn ro nvriy tn ro,NwYr 19 USA 11794 York New Brook, Stony University, Brook Stony 2 0 r ragds htthe that so arranged are , L SU(2) = tnadmodel standard ⊗ Y nvri¨tKrsue -62 alrh,Germany Karlsruhe, D-76128 Universit¨at Karlsruhe,  U(1) c φ → ⊗ Gedanken v/ 3 L httasom as transforms that .N agIsiuefrTertclPhysics Theoretical for Institute Yang N. C. SU(2) ⊗ 0 Y √ U(1) 2 hi Quigg Chris ntttfu hoeiceTeilchenphysik Theoretische f¨ur Institut n augmented and , SU(2) 2  1 L em hoeia hsc Department Physics Theoretical , ⊗ hnan when , R SU(2) ae on based ag ymty etnnme stetda orhcolor. fourth a as treated is number lepton symmetry, gauge olswtotHiggs: without Worlds (1.1) ,2 1, R ⊗ n oetShrock Robert and U(1) IPS-83 FERMILAB–PUB–09/018–T YITP-SB-08-32 t asgvnsmoial by symbolically given mass its o of dom h ag bosons gauge the asv clrparticle scalar massive le on oaduicto ftesprt SU(3) separate the of fam- unification extended toward mat- into point dark leptons Theories ilies and of etc. quarks universe, nature the incorporate the of that asymmetry model: matter the the standard beyond ter, for- lie the that put di- of questions also scope spacetime to theories answers extra ambitious tentative of ward more influence These the exten- mensions. and those symme- breaking, of dynamical try supersymmetry, signatures include experimental which for sions, com- test more theory, to electroweak imagine the and to to extensions A predictive been and has plete corrections. campaign radiative Higgs great large the second against pre- Moreover, unstable not mixings. is does and sector but masses accommodates, fermion merely dict, it and metry, ayqetosuasee.I osntepanthe explain not does It choice unanswered. questions many hsc st dac u nesadn felectroweak of finding understanding by our breaking advance particle symmetry theoretical to and is experimental now physics both campaigns in great way the breaks under of mechanism One different some symmetry. electroweak whether fundamental or a such exists observed whether been field know standard not not do the has we boson and with directly, Higgs agreement the excellent However, in model. are [2] ments B − o l t ucse,teeetoekter leaves theory electroweak the successes, its all For ist nvreo lcrwa rcso measure- precision electroweak of universe a to Fits L ag ru.I orhcaso models, of class fourth a In group. gauge otera world. real the to y µ st h elwrd u lola sto us lead also but world, real the to ts φ atta h ffciesrnt fthe of strength effective the that fact e gitrcin hni h elworld. real the in than interactions ng c 2 eksmer raig h second The breaking. symmetry weak ls fmdl sbsdo h left- the on based is models of class d and ⊗ cdt nuesotnossymme- spontaneous induce to uced rtcaslk h tnadelec- standard the class—like first e < SU(2) hsclwrd eivsiaetoy investigate we world, physical istedmnn oreo elec- of source dominant the ains u raigo hrlsymmetry chiral of breaking ous hvdlweeg ffciefield effective low-energy ehaved eurdt ieteeetoeksym- electroweak the hide to required 0 φ † 3 eoetelniuia opnnsof components longitudinal the become L W ⊗ 01 USA 60510 + U(1) W , H − aldteHgsbsn with boson, Higgs the called , Y Z , ag symmetry gauge 0 h orheegsa a as emerges fourth The . H M H 2 risstand-in. its or = − 2 µ 2 = p 2 | λ | v c . ⊗ 2

SU(2)L U(1)Y gauge couplings. They may also provide previewing a few features here to indicate how differ- a rationale⊗ for charge quantization, open paths to rela- ent that SM Gedanken world would be. Eliminating the tionships among the masses of standard-model fermions, Higgs mechanism does nothing to alter the strong inter- and even determine the number of fermion generations. action, so QCD would still confine color-triplet quarks The aim of this study is more modest, and more ped- and color-octet gluons into color-singlet hadrons. agogical. We step back from the task of constructing If the electroweak symmetry remained unbroken, the a realistic model of particle physics valid to the TeV asymptotically free SU(2)L force would, in similar fash- scale and beyond, and address instead why electroweak ion, confine objects that carry weak isospin into weak- symmetry breaking matters for the physical world. Our isospin singlets. But as we shall recall in II, QCD spon- § approach is to analyze closely what the world would taneously breaks the chiral symmetry of the massless u be like in the absence of electroweak symmetry break- and d quarks, forming a quark condensate that hides the −1/4 −1/2 electroweak symmetry, even in the absence of a Higgs ing at the usual scale (v = 2 GF 246 GeV), whether by the conventional Higgs mechanism≈ or by any mechanism. Because the weak bosons have acquired mass of its alternatives, including dynamical symmetry break- by absorbing the would-be pions, the SU(2)L interaction ing and higher-dimensional formulations. Our labora- does not confine. Quarks and leptons would remain mass- tory will consist of four classes of toy models. Two are less, because QCD-induced electroweak symmetry break- drawn from the standard model by eliminating the Higgs ing has no analogue of the Higgs-boson Yukawa terms of sector, a third is derived from a left-right–symmetric the standard model. Without a Higgs boson, the interac- electroweak gauge symmetry, and the fourth joins a tions among weak gauge bosons become strongly coupled. left-right–symmetric electroweak symmetry to the Pati– Apart from the absent pions, the familiar light-hadron spectrum persists, but with crucial differences. In the Salam [4] symmetry SU(4)PS, in which lepton number is identified as a fourth color. SM, no quark masses means no u-d quark mass differ- ence to overcome the larger electromagnetic self-energy Note that the program reported here is quite distinct of the proton and make the neutron outweigh the pro- from the attempt to construct “Higgsless” models of the ton. Instead, the outcome depends on a competition real world [5], by introducing alternative mechanisms for between γ- and Z-induced mass shifts that leads to electroweak symmetry breaking. It is unrelated to at- M M a few MeV. A possible outcome is that tempts to quantify the extent to which parameters of the n p the| pattern− | ≈ of radioactive beta decay might be turned standard model might be environmentally selected [6]. on its head. In the real world, a free neutron decays, Our interest is to determine how certain Gedanken worlds n pe−ν¯ , with a mean life of 885.7 0.8 s, about fif- that follow well-defined rules differ from the real world. e teen→ minutes. If the n-p mass difference± changed sign Our approach therefore shares something of the inquis- and the W -boson mass were characteristic of the QCD itive spirit of varying the vacuum expectation value v scale, a free proton would decay in about 15 picoseconds: while holding fixed other parameters, such as the Yukawa p ne+ν . There would be no hydrogen atom, and the couplings that set fermion masses [7], or considering what e lightest→ “nucleus” would be one neutron. if? variations of standard-model parameters [8].1 How- ever, we use standard field-theoretic calculational meth- Straightforward modifications of big-bang nucleosyn- ods, rather than anthropic arguments, to reach our con- thesis hint that some light elements would be produced clusions. in the early no-Higgs universe [6, 7, 12]. But even if some nuclei were produced and survived, they would not form We designate the simplest class of models that we in- recognizable atoms. A massless electron means that the vestigate as the modified standard model, SM. Models in Bohr radius of an atom—half a nanometer in the real this class are built on the standard-model gauge group, world—would be infinite.2 In a world without compact SU(3) SU(2) U(1) , with gauge couplings similar c ⊗ L ⊗ Y atoms, valence chemical bonding would have no meaning. to the standard ones, and similar fermion content. The All matter would be insubstantial—and life as we know essential difference from the standard-model setup is the it would not exist! On top of all that, the vacuum would absence of a Higgs sector, or any other element contrived be unstable to the formation of a plasma of e+e− pairs. to hide the electroweak symmetry at the usual scale of The minimalist Gedanken world gives eloquent testimony 246 GeV. to the importance of electroweak symmetry breaking for Even a one-generation modified standard model pro- the properties of our world. vides a highly useful context for illustrating what an un- More can be learned, as we shall see, from a close anal- derstanding of the agent of electroweak symmetry break- ysis of the SM, but the vacuum instability for massless ing will reveal about the everyday world [11]. It is worth

2 Now, it is nearly inevitable that effects negligible in our world 1 This broad area of investigation has an abundant literature; would, in the Higgsless world, produce fermion masses many or- see [9] for a sampler. Some early related discussions that focus ders of magnitude smaller than those we observe. The Bohr on cosmological issues but also consider the variation of particle radius of a would-be atom would be macroscopic, sustaining the physics parameters are noted in [10]. conclusion that matter would lose its integrity. 3 electrons is a sign of pathological behavior. Moreover, We look first at the electroweak symmetry breaking me- we wish to regard the SM as a low-energy effective field diated by the strong interactions. Then we consider the theory that could be obtained by integrating out mas- hadron spectrum in the Gedanken world and examine sive degrees of freedom from a more ultraviolet-complete changes to the real-world pattern of β decay. In a model theory. It is natural then to imagine that generic higher- without a Higgs boson, scattering of weak gauge bosons dimension operators would induce bare fermion masses becomes strong at modest c.m. energies, below 1 GeV. that are hard on the QCD scale set by ΛQCD. Accord- We remark on changes to strong-interaction symmetries ingly, we consider a second class of Gedanken worlds, in the Gedanken world, and on the form of the long- the modified standard model with bare fermion masses, range nuclear interactions, which is very different from abbreviated SMm. Mass terms added by fiat must, of the one-pion-exchange potential of the real world. course, respect the surviving SU(3)c U(1)em gauge sym- Then we extend the model to include multiple genera- ⊗ metry of the low-energy standard model. tions of massless fermions. We derive scaling relations Specific mechanisms analogous to extended technicolor for electroweak observables and remark on qualitative can give rise to bare mass terms of the kind we wish to changes to the hadron spectrum that accompany the in- entertain, but we shall not specify the elements in the troduction of quarks beyond the first generation. ultraviolet completion that produce the fermion masses. To circumvent the infrared pathologies brought about The bare fermion mass terms break the electroweak sym- by massless charged fermions, we introduce explicit quark metry explicitly. The requirement that such models serve and lepton masses in III. We derive conditions on the as consistent low-energy effective field theories up to a magnitude of those masses,§ and note changes with re- specified energy places an upper bound on the admissible spect to the models with massless fermions. In IV we bare fermion masses. We note that judiciously combin- look briefly at generalizations to the number of§ quark ing small explicit symmetry breaking with spontaneous colors, particularly in the limit of large Nc. Section V symmetry breaking has been rewarded with insights in explores the implications of a left-right symmetric gauge the past, among them the realization that pions can group for a Gedanken world without the Higgs mecha- be understood as (what we now call) pseudo-Nambu– nism. The extension to an example left-right–symmetric Goldstone bosons [13]. unifying group occupies VI. A concluding VII summa- § § The third class of models we examine is based on rizes what we have learned. the left-right–symmetric SU(3) SU(2) SU(2) c ⊗ L ⊗ R ⊗ U(1)B−L gauge group, where B and L denote baryon number and lepton number, respectively. In the real- II. NO HIGGS MECHANISM, world context, this gauge group is motivated by the hy- NO BARE FERMION MASSES pothesis that the weak interactions are, at bottom, left- right symmetric, and that the observed parity violation Lessons from the superconducting phase transition is a consequence of the pattern of electroweak symmetry informed the understanding of spontaneous symmetry breaking. As we shall review in V, the electric charge breaking on the subatomic scale [14, 15] and led to the operator has a more symmetric form§ than in the standard insight that the spontaneous breaking of a local gauge SU(2) U(1) electroweak theory, and the seeming ar- L Y symmetry gives masses to gauge bosons [3]. The spon- bitrariness⊗ of fermion weak-hypercharge assignments is taneous symmetry breaking in the standard electroweak removed. In the left-right–symmetric Gedanken world, both leptons and quarks are confined, so there is no theory [1] is modeled on the Ginzburg–Landau descrip- tion of superconductivity [16].3 In the Ginzburg–Landau pathology associated with vanishing lepton masses. phenomenology, the macroscopic order parameter, which The final example we study is a prototype unified the- corresponds to the wave function of superconducting ory, in which the SU(3) and U(1) symmetries are c B−L charge carriers, acquires a nonzero vacuum expectation combined into an SU(4)PS “Pati-Salam” symmetry. The value in the superconducting state. Within a supercon- SU(4)PS SU(2)L SU(2)R model explains the quanti- ~ ⊗ ⊗ ductor, the photon picks up a mass Mγ = /λL, where zation of electric charge. We will show in VI that in λ is the London penetration depth that characterizes Gedanken § L the Pati-Salam world, all the fermions pick the exclusion of magnetic flux by the Meissner effect. In up dynamical masses at the SU(4)PS confinement scale. like manner, the auxiliary scalars introduced to hide the There is no infrared pathology provoked by the existence electroweak symmetry acquire a nonzero vacuum expec- of massless deconfined particles. The low-energy effective tation value. The weak gauge bosons become massive in field theory exhibits a residual exact SU(2)V gauge sym- the process. metry that confines, producing a spectrum of light coun- In the case of superconductivity, we have an example terparts of QCD glueballs. No exact Abelian symmetry emerges, so the low-energy effective theory contains no analogue of electromagnetism.

We explore the SM class of models in II. We shall de- 3 § See Ref. [17] for a brief, authoritative account of the path from vote most of our analysis to the simplest modified stan- symmetry breaking in superconductivity to massive gauge bosons dard model with a single generation of massless fermions. in relativistic quantum field theory. 4 of a gauge-symmetry–breaking mechanism that does not symmetry to the familiar isospin flavor symmetry,4 rely on introducing an ad hoc order parameter. The mi- SU(2) SU(2) SU(2) . (2.3) croscopic Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer theory [18] reveals L ⊗ R → V a dynamical origin of the order parameter through the Three Nambu–Goldstone bosons appear, one for each formation of correlated states of elementary fermions, broken generator of the original chiral invariance. These the Cooper pairs of electrons. This suggests that the were identified by Nambu [13] as three massless pions. electroweak symmetry might also be broken dynamically, The qq¯ = q¯LqR +¯qRqL condensate links left-handed without the need to introduce scalar fields. Indeed, quan- and right-handedh i h quarks, whichi transform differently un- tum chromodynamics can be the source of electroweak der SU(2)L U(1)Y . It follows from the weak-isospin symmetry breaking. and weak-hypercharge⊗ quantum numbers of the left- and right-handed u and d quarks that the condensate transforms as a weak isodoublet with weak hypercharge Y = 1, and hence breaks SU(2)L U(1)Y U(1)em. A. One fermion generation | The| broken generators correspond⊗ to three→ axial cur- rents whose couplings to pions are measured by the pion decay constant f , which is defined through the matrix Let us consider first, as a low-energy effective field the- π element ory, a modified standard model SM1 with a single gen- ν ν eration of massless fermions and no scalar sector: an 0 Jj πk(q) = iδjkfπq , (2.4) SU(3)c SU(2)L U(1) theory of massless up and down h | | i ⊗ ⊗ Y ν quarks, plus massless electron and neutrino. The chiral by which the charged weak current Jj connects the pion quark fields are to the vacuum. The measured value of the charged- pion lifetime determines the real-world value of the decay constant, f 92.4 MeV [20]. Within chiral perturba- ua π ≈ Qa = , ua , da , (2.1) tion theory, Gasser and Leutwyler [21] have estimated L da R R  L that fπ would decrease by about 6% relative to its ex- perimental value if the u and d quark masses were re- 3 2 1 with (SU(3)c, SU(2)L)Y quantum numbers ( , )1/3, duced to zero from the real-world value, 2 (mu + md) = (3, 1)4/3, and (3, 1)−2/3, respectively, and color index 2.5 to 5 MeV [20]. We adopt f¯π 87 MeV as an esti- ≈ 5 a =1, 2, 3. The chiral lepton fields are mate of the corresponding parameter in the SM1. When we turn on the SU(2)L U(1)Y electroweak in- ⊗′ ν teraction with couplings g and g , the electroweak gauge L = , e , (2.2) L e R bosons couple to the axial currents and acquire masses L   of order gf¯π. In the interplay between the electroweak gauge interactions∼ and QCD, the would-be massless pi- 1 2 1 1 with quantum numbers ( , )−1 and ( , )−2, respec- ons disappear from the hadron spectrum, having become tively. Electroweak-singlet “sterile” neutrinos NR, with the longitudinal components of the weak gauge bosons. 1 1 ( , )0 quantum numbers may be added at will. The mass-squared matrix, Provided that the SU(3) color gauge interaction is c g2 0 0 0 dominant, so that we may treat the SU(2) U(1) inter- L Y 0 g2 0 0 f¯2 actions as a perturbation, these models have⊗ the striking 2 = π , (2.5)  0 0 g2 gg′  property that the QCD quark condensates dynamically M 4 0 0 gg′ g′2 break electroweak symmetry.     (where the rows and columns correspond to the three weak-isospin gauge bosons b1, b2, b3, and the weak- hypercharge gauge boson ) has the same structure as A 1. Electroweak symmetry breaking the mass-squared matrix for gauge bosons in the stan- dard electroweak theory. Diagonalizing the matrix (2.5), we find that the pho- For vanishing quark masses (and with electroweak ton, corresponding as in the standard model to the com- interactions turned off), QCD displays an exact ′ 2 ′2 bination A = (g + g b3)/ g + g , emerges mass- SU(2)L SU(2)R chiral symmetry. At an energy scale A ± ⊗ less. Two charged gauge bosons, W = (b1 ib2)/√2, ΛQCD, the strong interactions become strong and p ∓ ∼ Nc a a qq¯ a=1 q¯ q quark condensates appear. Vacuum- halignmenti ≡ h argumentsi [19] imply that the condensates are notP only color-neutral, but also electrically neutral, 4 The chiral symmetry breaking is associated with the dynamical of the form uu¯ and dd¯ . In the limit of vanishing h i h i generation of equal “constituent” masses for the up and down SU(2)L U(1) interactions, uu¯ = dd¯ . Formation quarks. ⊗ Y h i h i of the quark condensates spontaneously breaks the chiral 5 A superior bar denotes quantities in the SM Gedanken world. 5

2 2 ¯2 acquire mass-squared M W = g fπ/4, and the neutral between electroweak symmetry breaking and the gener- ′ 2 ′2 gauge boson, Z = ( g + gb3)/ g + g , obtains ation of gauge-boson masses on the one hand, and the 2 − A generation of fermion masses on the other hand is to be M = (g2 + g′2)f¯2/4.The ratio, Z π p kept in mind as we explore the TeV scale.

2 2 2 ′2 2 2 The observation that QCD dynamically breaks elec- M Z /M W = (g + g )/g =1/cos θW , (2.6) troweak symmetry (but at too low a scale) inspired the invention of analogous no-Higgs theories in which dynam- where θ is the weak mixing angle, echos the standard- W ical symmetry breaking is accomplished by the formation model result, because the SU(2) U(1) transforma- L Y of a condensate of new fermions subject to a new, asymp- tion properties of the quark condensate⊗ ensure a custo- totically free, vectorial gauge interaction (often called dial SU(2) symmetry. technicolor) that becomes strongly coupled at the TeV Here the symmetry breaking is dynamical and au- scale [23]. The technifermion condensates that dynami- tomatic; it can be traced, through spontaneous chiral cally break the electroweak symmetry produce masses for symmetry breaking and confinement, to the asymptotic the W ± and Z0 bosons but do not directly give masses freedom of QCD. Electroweak symmetry breaking deter- to the standard-model fermions. To endow the quarks mined by pre-existing dynamics stands in contrast to the and leptons with mass, it is necessary to embed techni- standard electroweak theory, in which spontaneous sym- color in a larger extended technicolor framework contain- ad hoc 2 metry breaking results from the choice of µ < 0 ing degrees of freedom that communicate the broken elec- for the coefficient of the quadratic term in the Higgs po- troweak symmetry to the (technicolor-singlet) standard- tential. model fermions [24, 25].8 A longstanding mystery of how Despite the structural similarity to the standard extended technicolor could produce suitably small neu- model, the chiral symmetry breaking of QCD does not trino masses was resolved recently [27]. yield a satisfactory theory of the weak interactions. To Let us now explore the SM Gedanken world in illustrate this statement quantitatively, we must specify 1 greater detail. The gross properties of nucleons de- the values of the gauge couplings. In the case of QCD, rived from QCD would be little changed if the u and d we have already assumed that the scale Λ retains its QCD quark masses were reduced to zero. Chiral-perturbation- real-world value, which corresponds to α (M ) 0.118, 3 Z theory calculations suggest that the isoscalar nucleon i.e., g (M ) 1.22. In that spirit, we shall take≈ the 3 Z mass would decrease from 939 MeV to approximately values of the SU(2)≈ U(1) couplings at M to be the L Y Z 870 MeV [21, 28, 29]. A small real-world contribution same as those measured⊗ in the real world at M : g 0.65 Z from the strange-quark sea would be absent. and g′ 0.34 [20].6 ≈ The very low scale of electroweak symmetry break- The≈ masses acquired by the intermediate bosons are ing (at the scale of confinement and spontaneous chiral some 2 800 times smaller than required for a successful symmetry breaking in QCD) brings with it a number low-energy phenomenology, because their scale is set by ¯ of important consequences. In the standard electroweak fπ 87 MeV, instead of v 246 GeV [22]: −1/2 ≈ ≈ theory, we choose the value of v = (GF√2) 246 GeV to reproduce the low-energy phenomenology of≈ M W 28 MeV; M Z 32 MeV. (2.7) ≈ ≈ the charged-current weak interactions. In the SM1, the analogue of the Fermi constant is now a prediction, The change in scale from the real-world values of MW = 80.398 0.025 GeV and MZ = 91.1876 0.0021 GeV [20] ± ± 1 −2 6 has many far-reaching implications. GF = 93.4 GeV 8 10 GF. (2.8) f¯2√2 ≈ ≈ × The modified standard model SM1 serves as a reminder π that hiding the electroweak symmetry and generating masses for W ± and Z0 masses does not, by itself, confer As a consequence, the strength of weak interactions in masses on the fermions.7 The possible division of labor this Gedanken world is much closer to the strength of the residual strong interactions than in the real world. For processes involving momentum transfers q small | | compared with M W , M Z , cross sections and decay rates 2 6 From the perspective of a unified theory, the low-energy values would be scaled up by the prodigious factor (GF/GF) 13 ≈ of the gauge couplings are determined by renormalization-group 6.4 10 . This factor applies, for example, to nuclear × evolution down from the unification scale. We do not specify beta decay in the SM1 Gedanken world. Outside the an ultraviolet completion for the SM, so the low-energy values regime of negligible momentum transfers, the coupling- of g and g′ are not specified unambiguously. Our qualitative conclusions do not depend sensitively on the precise values we adopt. 7 To be sure, quarks do gain the usual dynamical (“constituent”) masses from their color interactions and associated confinement. hard masses, i.e., masses that persist for momenta large com- The constituent masses are soft, i.e., the associated running pared with ΛQCD. The charged leptons and neutrinos remain masses decay to zero at Euclidean momenta far above the scale massless in every sense, to this approximation. of confinement and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking, set 8 See Ref. [26] for some recent reviews of technicolor and extended by ΛQCD 200 MeV. However, the quarks do not acquire any technicolor. ≃ 6 constant amplification is tempered by the damping influ- the ingredients of the analysis in Appendix A. ence of the gauge-boson propagator. In the case of in- verse beta decay, ν n ep, the scaling factor is still large e → enough to increase the real-world cross section (roughly 3. Accelerated radioactive β decay 10−38 cm2) to the level of a few millibarns. Since the weak interactions are close in strength to the strong interactions in the SM1 Gedanken world, the 2. The hadron spectrum beta decay of the heavier member of the nucleon dou- blet is much more rapid than in the real world, for a In addition to the gauge bosons and massless elec- given value of the n-p mass difference. The rate for neu- tron and neutrino, the low-energy spectrum of the SM1 tron β-decay in the real world scales approximately as contains color-singlet hadrons composed of the massless Γ G2 M M 5, so the corresponding expression for ∝ F | n − p| up and down quarks and gluons. The pions (would-be the β-decay rate of the heavier nucleon in the SM1 is 2 5 Nambu–Goldstone bosons) are absent from the physi- Γ G M M . If as a simple illustration we take cal spectrum, having been absorbed as the longitudinal ∝ F p − n M M = M M , then the lifetime of the heav- components of the electroweak gauge bosons in a sort p − n | n − p| ier nucleon in the SM would be of merger of the strong and electroweak degrees of free- 1 ± dom. Small mixings may occur between the massive W 4 ± ± f¯ bosons and the charged spin-1 mesons ρ , a1 and be- τ¯ π τ 15 ps . (2.9) tween the Z0 boson and the neutral spin-1 mesons ρ0, ω, ≈ v n ≈ 0   a1. The real-world decays of mesons into pions would be replaced in the SM1 by decays into weak gauge bosons, If the proton outweighs the neutron, then protons present such as ρ+ W +Z, ρ0 W +W −, ω W +W −Z. in the early universe would decay extremely rapidly, so As in the real→ world, the meson→ spectrum would→ include that the dominant species present at late times (temper- superpositions of qq¯ and glueball states, including some ature well below the QCD confinement phase transition) that are primarily glueballs. would be neutrons, neutrinos and antineutrinos, and a The chromomagnetic hyperfine interaction elevates the plasma of electron-positron pairs. There would be no 3 3 1 protons, and so no possibility of hydrogen atoms. On isospin- 2 , spin- 2 ∆ states above the spin- 2 nucleon isodoublet. The real-world decays of ∆(1232) Nπ this scenario, the lightest nucleus would be a single neu- ± → would be replaced in the SM1 by ∆ N(W ,Z,γ). tron which, being neutral, could not bind any electrons We have already remarked that the→ nucleon mass in to it. the SM1 Gedanken world with massless quarks would be decreased from its real-world value by less than 10%, be- cause the great bulk of the nucleon masses arises not from 4. A classic unitarity bound revisited quark masses, but from confinement energy. The small masses of the up and down quarks are an inessential ele- Partial-wave unitarity has provided important guid- ment of the big picture. An interesting—and delicate— ance about the range of applicability of low-energy ef- question concerns the relative masses of the neutron and fective theories and the path to more comprehensive proton, for which the u and d quark masses do play an theories. A classic example is the analysis of inverse essential role in shaping the real world. muon decay in the four-fermion (current-current) de- If electromagnetic self-energy corrections were the only scription of the charged-current weak interactions [30]. relevant factor in determining the neutron-proton mass The invariant amplitude for a reaction may be de- difference, it would be intuitively obvious that the elec- M composed into partial-wave amplitudes aJ according to trically charged proton should outweigh its electrically (s,t) = 16π (2J + 1)aJ (s)PJ (cos θ), where s and neutral partner, the neutron. However, that conclusion M J t are Mandelstam invariants, the PJ are Legendre poly- is false in the real world: M M 1.293 MeV [20]. P n − p ≈ nomials, and θ is the c.m. scattering angle. Partial-wave The electromagnetic contribution to the nucleon masses, 9 unitarity requires that aJ 1. larger for the proton (uud) than for the neutron (udd), | |≤ is more than compensated by the fact that the current- quark mass of the down-quark exceeds that of the up: md > mu. It is natural to guess that in the SM1, with 9 Several forms of the unitarity constraint appear in the literature; massless up and down quarks, the proton should out- aJ 1 is the least restrictive, and the one we adopt. The partial | |≤ 2iδ weigh the neutron. The issue is considerably more subtle, wave amplitude aJ can be written as aJ = (ηJ e J 1)/(2i), − because in the Gedanken world—in contrast to the real where ηJ measures the inelasticity and δJ the phase shift. A general expression of unitarity for the full amplitude is Im(aJ ) world—weak-interaction contributions to the n-p mass 2 π ≥ aJ (which is saturated if ηJ = 1 and δJ = 2 , for which aJ = difference are not negligible, and these tend to make the | | 2 2 2 i). Using aJ = (Re(aJ )) + (Im(aJ )) , one can derive the | | 1 neutron outweigh the proton. We cannot make a definite condition Re(aJ ) . However, the tree-level Born amplitude | |≤ 2 statement about which nucleon is the lighter; we describe aJ is real, and hence it actually violates the lower bound on 7

In Fermi’s current-current theory, the s-wave ampli- all asymptotically constant (i.e., well-behaved) and pro- tude for ν e µν is portional to G M 2 . In the high-energy limit,10 µ → e F H

a0 = GFs/π√2, (2.10) 1 1/√8 1/√8 0 2 GFMH 1/√8 3/4 1/4 0 lim (a0) − . so partial-wave unitarity implies that the theory can only 2   s≫MH → 4π√2 · 1/√8 1/4 3/4 0 be valid for  0 0 01/2    1/2  (2.13) π√2 Requiring that the largest eigenvalue respect the partial- √s 620 GeV. (2.11) ≤ G ≈ wave unitarity condition a0 1 yields F ! | |≤ 1/2 This is a sign that the structure of the theory must change 8π√2 below 620 GeV. Nature’s choice, exhibited in the stan- MH =4v π/3 = 1 TeV (2.14) ≤ 3GF ! dard electroweak theory, is to introduce the W boson, p which softens the four-fermion coupling. The observed as a condition for perturbative unitarity. mass, M 80.4 GeV, shows that new physics does W ≈ If this (standard-model) bound is respected, weak in- appear below the critical c.m. energy. teractions remain weak at all energies, and perturba- To make the analogous calculation in the SM, we must tion theory is everywhere reliable. If the bound is vi- Gedanken look ahead to the two-generation world dis- olated, perturbation theory breaks down, and weak in- cussed in II B, for which we find [cf. Eq. (2.33)] that ± § teractions among W , Z, and H become strong on the GF scales inversely with the number of generations. The TeV scale. This means that the features of strong inter- corresponding point-coupling theory could only be valid actions at GeV energies will come to characterize elec- up to troweak gauge boson interactions at TeV energies. The 1/2 bound (2.14) means that new phenomena—either a Higgs π√2 √ boson or strong dynamics—are to be found in real-world s (n =2) 310 MeV. (2.12) ≤ G g ! ≈ electroweak interactions at energies not much larger than F 1 TeV.11 This bound is consistent with the appearance of the W The models we are considering have no Higgs boson, boson with mass M W 40 MeV in the SM2 Gedanken but it is informative to write down the formal analogue of world [cf. Eq. (2.30)]. ≈ the unitarity bound Eq. (2.14) on the Higgs-boson mass in the SM1 Gedanken world. It is

1/2 5. Strong scattering of electroweak gauge bosons 8π√2 M H =4f¯π π/3 350 MeV. (2.15) ≤ 3GF ! ≈ In addition to hiding the electroweak symmetry in the p standard model, the Higgs boson plays an important role This condition is of course violated in the world without in regulating the high-energy behavior of scattering am- Higgs, which resembles the standard model in the limit plitudes. A Gedanken experiment that illuminates that of MH . We would therefore expect to see strong role [31] leads to a conditional upper bound on the Higgs- scattering→ among∞ weak bosons as in the ordinary strong boson mass that sets a key target for experiment in the interactions among pions. real world. A relevant detailed analysis was carried out in the con- It is straightforward to compute the amplitudes for text of the standard electroweak theory (with a heavy M gauge boson scattering at high energies, and to make Higgs boson) by Chanowitz and Gaillard [35]. We evalu- a partial-wave decomposition. Most channels “decou- ate the amplitudes for electroweak gauge-boson scatter- ple,” in the sense that partial-wave amplitudes are small 2 2 ing in the limit of squared-c.m.-energy s MW ,MZ , at all energies (except very near the particle poles, or with the Higgs-boson mass formally taken to≫ infinity. In at exponentially large energies), for any value of the Higgs boson mass MH . Four channels are interesting: W +W − , ZZ/√2 , HH/√2 , and HZ , where all the | i | i | i | i gauge bosons are understood as the longitudinal polar- 10 It is convenient to calculate these amplitudes by means of ization states, and the factors of √2 account for identical the Goldstone-boson equivalence theorem [32], which reduces particle statistics. For these, the s-wave amplitudes are the dynamics of longitudinally polarized gauge bosons to a scalar field theory with interaction Lagrangian given by int = λvh(2w+w− + z2 + h2) (λ/4)(2w+w− + z2 + h2)2L, with − 2 −2 1/v = GF√2 and λ = GFMH /√2. 11 In the standard-model context there are also upper bounds on Im(aJ ). The different versions of the unitarity conditions reflect (i) the quartic coupling λ and hence the Higgs mass [33], and the fact that the lowest-order amplitude in perturbation theory (ii) Yukawa couplings and hence fermion masses generated by is only an approximation to the exact amplitude. Yukawa interactions [34], arising from triviality constraints. 8 this limit, the J = 0 partial-wave amplitudes for the nor- 6. Strong-interaction symmetries malized states W +W − and ZZ/√2 are given by | i | i An outstanding challenge in real-world quantum chro- s 1 √2 modynamics is to understand why CP and T are observed a0 = , (2.16) 32πv2 √2 0 to be good symmetries of the strong interaction. The is-   sue arises because of the generic presence in the QCD max 2 for which the larger eigenvalue is a0 = s/16πv . The Lagrangian of the term, ⋆ unitarity condition a0 1 is saturated for √s = | | ≤ 2 4√πv 1.74 TeV in the standard model with a very θgs a a µν ≈ θ = Gµν G , (2.20) heavy Higgs boson. In the SM1 Gedanken world, the L 32π2 requirement that amax 1 is saturated for 0 a | |≤ where gs is the strong coupling, eGµν is the gluon field- ⋆ a µν √s =4√πf¯π 620 MeV. (2.17) strength tensor with color-index a, G is its dual, and ≈ the implied sum over a runs over the adjoint representa- The SM1 is a theory of strongly coupled electroweak tion of the color gauge group. Becausee of the nontrivial gauge bosons—as expected for a Higgsless model—that topology of the color gauge fields, it is not possible to becomes strongly coupled on the hadronic scale. In the remove θ as a total derivative. If one or more of the L SM context, the equivalence theorem [32] noted in Foot- quarks has zero hard mass, the argument of the quark note 10 states that scattering among weak gauge bosons mass matrix becomes a free parameter, and the physical 2 value of the θ-parameter can be tuned to zero. In the at energies s M W,Z is dominated by amplitudes for longitudinal polarization≫ states, which are equivalent, SM, all of the fermions have zero bare masses, so there is 2 no strong CP problem due to instantons. There is strong up to terms of order M /s, to the amplitudes for W,Z evidence that all the quark masses (and, in particular, scattering among the corresponding Nambu–Goldstone the up-quark mass) are nonzero in the real world [40]. bosons. Consequently, we can examine the strongly cou- In the real world, color-singlet hadrons experience pled gauge boson scattering in the Gedanken world in residual strong interactions that can be modelled at long the light of experimental and theoretical knowledge of ππ distances (> 1 fm) by one-pion exchange, and at shorter scattering in the real world, suitably rescaled in mass. distances by∼ the exchange of ρ and ω vector mesons and As in the standard model, the (I = 0, J = 0) and effects due to overlapping quark wavefunctions, which (I = 1, J = 1) channels and their Regge recurrences are yield a repulsive hard-core component to the nucleon- attractive, while the (I = 2, J = 0) channel is repul- nucleon interaction. The SM1 Gedanken world lacks sive. When the partial-wave amplitudes approach their physical pions, because the corresponding degrees of free- bounds, resonances will form and multiple production of dom have become the longitudinal components of W ± gauge bosons will ensue, in emulation of phenomena seen and Z0. The long-range part of the NN interaction in ππ scattering in the real world. The (nonperturbative) is supplied by the exchange of the electroweak gauge resonant contributions unitarize the partial-wave ampli- bosons themselves, because of their small masses and tudes. the enhanced strength of the weak interactions in the In real-world ππ scattering, strongly coupled reso- SM. The consequence for strong-interaction symmetries nances include the isovector vector meson ρ(775), the is dramatic: in the Gedanken world, parity (P) and isoscalar tensor meson f2(1270), and the isoscalar scalar charge conjugation (C) are violated, because the long- meson f0(980), all of which decay dominantly into range “strong” force is derived from the SU(2)L U(1)Y ππ. Similar structures could be expected in the SM1 chiral gauge theory! ⊗ Gedanken world. Theoretical tools developed to address ππ dynamics can be applied there [36]. Scaling argu- ments derived in the context of the minimal (QCD-like) 7. Quantitative changes to the nuclear force technicolor model [37, 38] suggest that Calculations of nuclear properties have reached an M ρ = (f¯π/fπ)Mρ 730 MeV, (2.18) ≈ advanced—and, overall, very satisfying—state, through and the systematic application of semi-empirical nuclear po- tential models guided by fundamental principles [41]. It 2 2 3/2 would be excessively ambitious to attempt to character- Γ(ρ W +W −) M 1 4M /M → = ρ − W ρ 170 MeV. ize the nature of binding among nucleons in any variant Γ(ρ π+π−) M 1 4M 2/M 2 ≈ → ρ " − π ρ # of the SM. A few simple observations are revealing. (2.19) As we have just noted, the long-range force of the two- Investigations of different unitarization schemes to the nucleon interaction is governed in the SM1 by the ex- heavy-Higgs version of the standard model, which were change of electroweak gauge bosons. The virtual emis- informed by the experience of ππ scattering, would find sion and reabsorption of W ± and Z0 is the analogue in ready application to the Gedanken world [39]. this Gedanken world of the pion cloud in the real world. 9

Accordingly, the size of a hadron, measured in the real effect at temperatures T much lower than the electroweak world by r 1/mπ 1.4 fm, is given in the SM1 by scale v 246 GeV, because their contributions to physi- r¯ 1/M ≃ 7 fm, about≈ five times greater. cal processes≈ are suppressed by the factor exp( 8π2/g2) ≃ W,Z ≈ − In the real world, of course, the one-pion-exchange am- at zero temperature, where g is the SU(2)L gauge cou- plitude between nucleons involves strong couplings with pling [42]. For T > v, the sphalerons tend to erase a pre- strength given by gπNN 14 at each πNN vertex. In existing baryon asymmetry∼ of the universe, and could un- the limit of low momentum≈ transfer, der some conditions generate a significant baryon asym- metry [43, 44, 45]. The analogous statement is true in g2 πNN the SM1 Gedanken world, with the critical temperature A(N1N2 N3N4) . (2.21) → ∼ m2 rescaled from v f¯ . π → π The corresponding W -exchange amplitude in the SM1 is (g2) 1 A(N1N2 N3N4) . (2.22) 9. (Nearly) massless fermions → ∼ 2 ∼ 2f¯2 8M W π Hence, the ratio of the Gedanken-world amplitude to the We have emphasized that in the SM, leptons are mass- real-world amplitude is less, even after the gauge symmetry is broken as a conse- quence of the spontaneous breaking of the chiral symme- m2 A/A¯ = π =0.0065 . (2.23) try of massless quarks within QCD. Zero or extremely ¯2 2 2fπgπNN small masses for the neutrinos do not have any neg- ative consequences. However, the masslessness of the Thus, although the range of the NN interaction is con- electron in the SM1 undermines the integrity of mat- siderably longer in the SM1 than in the real world, ter, and also makes the SM vacuum unstable against the strength is considerably weaker, at zero momentum the spontaneous production of charged-lepton pairs. The transfer. However, this does not mean that a bound-state presence of even very small electromagnetic fields with spectrum would be entirely absent. µν 2 2 Fµν F = 2( B E ) < 0, for which one could trans- A reasonable simplified description of NN binding in form to a Lorentz| | − frame| | in which B = 0, would lead, the real world can be had by solving the Schr¨odinger through the Schwinger mechanism [46], to decay by pro- equation in a square-well potential with a radial size duction of e+e− pairs. The rate for this production is a 1.4 fm and depth V0. The occurrence of bound states E > 2 ≈ sizeable for e me. is the determined by the value of the dimensionless pa- | | ∼ rameter, In the real world, a recombination of free electrons and protons takes place when the age of the universe is about 2µV a2 380000 years, when the mean temperature is a fraction ξ = 0 , (2.24) ~2π2 of an electron volt. It is hard to imagine anything of the sort occurring in the e+e− plasma of the Gedanken world. where µ is the reduced mass, equal to MN /2 for the two- Moreover, the presence of zero-mass unconfined charged nucleon problem. When ξ exceeds a minimal number particles leads to a pathology associated with the infinite of order unity, a first bound state appears, and as ξ in- acceleration to which they would be subjected under the creases, more bound states appear in the discrete spec- influence of an electric field [47]. trum of the Hamiltonian. The relevant figure of merit is 2 If we regard the SM as a low-energy effective the- V0a . ory, then an ultraviolet completion will in general induce To compare one-pion exchange in the real world with nonzero fermion masses. Consider a minimalist scenario electroweak-gauge-boson exchange in the SM1, we mea- in which the SM1 is embedded in a unified theory gov- sure V0 by the strength of the amplitude A and set a erned at high energies by some simple gauge group. As- equal to the Yukawian range of the force. The ratio sume that at the unification scale MU, the common value m2 m2 of the gauge couplings is αU. The extended quark-lepton ξ/ξ¯ = π π 1/6 (2.25) families in a unified theory mean that proton-positron 2f¯2g2 · 2 ≈ π πNN M W mixing is a logical consequence. is smaller, but not grossly smaller, than unity. This ob- A tree-level process that contributes to proton decay servation would have to inform studies of nucleosynthesis is u + u X4/3 e+dc, where dc corresponds to the → → in the Gedanken world. d antiquark and X4/3 is a leptoquark gauge boson. At energies very low compared with MX MU, we can es- timate the matrix element of the uude≈four-fermion op- 8. Weak instantons (Sphalerons) erator between p and e+ as | i | i

In the real world, weak SU(2) instantons, which vio- 4παU L ε (p e+) Λ3 . (2.26) late B and L, conserving B L, have a negligibly small ≡M ↔ ≈ M 2 QCD − X 10

It follows that the (e+,p) mass matrix is given by world would be changed if there were no Higgs mecha- nism. The results are similar in character for n 2 g ≥ 0 ε fermion generations, subject to the constraint that ng is M = ∗ (2.27) ε Mp not so large as to change the qualitative character of the   QCD sector. It is well known that QCD remains asymp- Diagonalizing this matrix, we find a negligibly small totically free so long as (33 4n ) > 0, assuming 2n − g g shift in the proton mass, a tiny ε/MX positron admix- active quark flavors, so that up to eight generations are ture in the proton wave function (and vice versa), and a permitted. For our purposes, we must be more demand- nonzero but exquisitely small positron mass given (after ing and require that, as in the real world, QCD confine a field redefinition to eliminate a physically insignigicant and spontaneously break chiral symmetry. minus sign) by a seesaw-type formula,

ε 2 1. Electroweak symmetry breaking me = | | . (2.28) Mp With ng fermion generations, the modified standard 17 With illustrative values 1/αU 24 and MX 10 GeV, model SMng displays a global SU(2ng)L SU(2ng)R chi- −36 ≈ ≈ −72 ⊗ we find that ε 10 GeV and so me 10 GeV. ral symmetry, reflecting the presence of 2ng massless | | ≈ ≈ 12 Independent of the infinitesimal result, it is fascinating quarks. So long as ng < 6, QCD confines the mass- to contemplate the possibility of mass eigenstates that less quarks at an energy scale∼ that, for given ng, we de- mix elementary and composite fermions. note as ΛQCD. It forms color-singlet qq¯ condensates Analogous arguments apply to neutron–(anti)neutrino that spontaneously break SU(2n ) hSU(2i n ) to an g L ⊗ g R mixing and a similar induced mass for the neutrino. SU(2ng)V flavor symmetry that is exact in the absence Richer ultraviolet completions that populate lower mass of electroweak interactions [48, 49, 50]. scales could well lead to larger induced masses for the Leaving implicit the trace over colors to make color neutrino and electron. singlets, the generalized pions are

ng + 1 Π = uid¯i 10. A variant: SU(2)L dominant | i n | i √ g i=1 X ng We chose to investigate Gedanken worlds in which the 0 1 Π = (uiu¯i did¯i) (2.29) | i 2n | − i hierarchy of the gauge interactions is like that of the real g i=1 world, with QCD the strongest of the interactions at low nX p1 g energies. This protocol is sufficient for our purpose of Π− = d u¯ . | i n | i ii inquiring what the world would be like in the absence of √ g i=1 a mechanism introduced to hide the electroweak symme- X try. Other deviations could be considered, of course. One These are three of the 4n2 1 Nambu–Goldstone bosons13 g− that immediately suggests itself is to ask what the out- of the SMng , before the SU(2)L U(1)Y interactions are come would be if, in a world without a Higgs mechanism, turned on. ⊗ the SU(2)L interaction were stronger than the SU(3)c in- As before, we treat the SU(2)L U(1)Y interactions teraction. as a perturbation on the situation created⊗ by QCD. The The consequences are very dramatic: if the charged- Π± and Π0 are absorbed as the longitudinal components current weak interaction, which is asymptotically free, is of the massive W ± and Z0, for which the masses are now the first to become strong, it produces SU(2)L-singlet given as condensates involving two quark fields, or two lepton 2 2 ¯2 fields, or one quark field and one lepton field. These con- M W = ng g fπ/4 (2.30) densates break the color gauge group SU(3) SU(2) , c c and break weak hypercharge and electric charge,→ and break baryon number and lepton number! At a lower scale, 2 2 ′ 2 ¯2 M Z = ng(g + g )fπ /4, (2.31) the residual color interaction confines colored objects into mesons, bosonic baryons, and glueballs. This Gedanken so that in the SMng , world has so little in common with the real world that M W 28√ng MeV; M Z 32√ng MeV. (2.32) we shall not pursue it further. ≈ ≈

B. Multiple massless generations 12 The global U(1)A symmetry is broken by SU(3)c instantons. 13 The flavor-singlet pseudoscalar meson, the generalized η′ corre- With the one-generation toy model as background, we sponding to the U(1)A generator is massive, since this symmetry now turn our attention to how the three-generation real is anomalous. 11

The custodial-symmetry relation (2.6) remains in force. SM Gedanken world, we have noted the estimates that

In the SMng Gedanken world, the counterpart of the real- the pion decay constant and the nucleon mass would be world Fermi constant is slightly reduced with respect to their real-world values, and we expect little change in the axial charge gA. We 1 v2 GF = = GF . (2.33) can therefore infer that the SM-value ofg ¯πNN gπNN ¯2 ¯2 ≈ ngfπ√2 · ngfπ in the real world. The SU(2ng) flavor symmetry implies that this coupling strength applies to all the NGB–baryon The scaled-down value of GF 1/ng relative to what interactions. ∝ we found in the SM rescales the constraints derived from The size of hadrons is determined by the radius of the partial-wave unitarity in IIA5. In the more general NGB cloud, which would be far greater than the 1.4 fm § SMng , the tipping point (2.15) for the mass of the (nonex- size of the pion cloud in the real world. Similarly, the istent) Higgs boson would come for range of the baryon-baryon interaction would be very great. In practice, this would mean that the wavefunc- 1/2 tions of different baryons would overlap. This, in turn, 8π√2 4f¯π π/3 360 MeV M H = . (2.34) could lead to pairing effects that would produce integral- ≤ 3G ng ≈ ng F ! √p √ spin dibaryon correlations, perhaps analogous to Cooper pairs in a superconductor, with consequent macroscopic Gedanken Of greater relevance, in the SMng world, the coherent quantum effects, including, perhaps, macro- electroweak-gauge-boson scattering amplitudes saturate scopic occupation numbers of ground states when the partial-wave unitarity, in the sense that amax = 1, for | 0 | nucleon number density is sufficiently high and the tem- (cf. (2.17)) perature sufficiently low. The structure of the baryon spectrum in the SM is fa- ⋆ √s =4√πngf¯π 620 √ng MeV. (2.35) ≈ miliar from what we observe in the real world, with one important modification. In the absence of quark mass differences, all states in a representation are highly de- 2. The hadron spectrum generate and consequently the SU(nq) flavor symmetry, with nq = 2ng, is essentially exact. In the context of Let us consider the fate of the (4n2 1) Nambu– g − QCD based on the SU(3)c gauge group, the baryons are Goldstone bosons of the SMng Gedanken world in greater composed of three quarks. They can be classified accord- 2 detail. There are ng NGBs with charge +1 and an equal ing to the Clebsch-Gordan decomposition of the threefold number with charge 1. These are the counterparts of product of nq, the fundamental representation of SU(nq), ± − ± ± ± the real-world π for ng = 1, plus K , D , and Ds nq nq nq = S3 M1 M2 A3 (2.37) for ng = 2, etc. Next, there are 2ng(ng 1) electrically ⊗ ⊗ ⊕ ⊕ ⊕ neutral NGBs that carry nonvanishing− flavor quantum where A3, S3, and M denote the totally antisymmetric numbers. No such particles exist in the real world with and symmetric rank-3 tensor representations, and M has one generation; for ng = 2, the corresponding particles mixed symmetry. These have dimensions are K0, K¯ 0, and D0, D¯ 0. Finally, there are 2n 1 self- g − conjugate neutral, but flavor-nonsinglet, particles. The nq(nq + 1)(nq + 2) dim(S ) = , real-world analogues are π0 at one generation, plus η and 3 3! 2 ηc in the second generation. nq(nq 1) When the SU(2) U(1) interactions are turned on, dim(M) = − , (2.38) L ⊗ Y 3 the generalized pions disappear from the hadron spec- n trum, leaving (4n2 4) NGBs.14 That is to say, the dim(A ) = q . g − 3 3 SMng ≥2 Gedanken worlds exhibit massless (or very light)   strongly interacting Nambu-Goldstone bosons. To esti- In the real world, the lowest-lying states are the spin- 1 mate the coupling of the NGBs to baryons, we note that 2 nucleon doublet, baryon octet, etc., for nq = 2, 3,..., an analogue of the Goldberger-Treiman relation [51] corresponding to the mixed representation, and the spin- 3 2 ∆ quartet, baryon decimet, etc., corresponding to the gA MN = fπgπNN , (2.36) | | symmetric representation. As in the SM1 case, chromo- 3 magnetic interactions would raise the spin- 2 states above where gA = 1.2695 0.0029 is the axial charge of the 1 neutron [20],− should hold± in the SM. This equality holds the spin- 2 ground state by an amount of order ΛQCD. within 15% in the real world, with g 14. In the πNN ≈ III. INCLUDING EXPLICIT FERMION MASSES

14 2 The persistence of ng 1 massless charge +1 bosons and their oppositely charged partners− constitutes a new source of vacuum As we have noted, the SM theory in isolation has an in- instability not present in the SM1. frared pathology resulting from the massless unconfined 12

charged leptons. Even if one takes into account a nonzero for the top quark is √st 3 TeV. The fact that a hard mass that is generated in a grand-unified ultraviolet com- electron mass would only≈ imply a saturation of partial- pletion of the SM theory, this is still so small that the wave unitarity at a prodigiously high energy means that late-time, low-temperature universe would still be in the the celebrated gauge cancellation observed in the reac- radiation-dominated era with a plasma of charged lep- tion e+e− W +W − at LEP [56] validates the gauge ton pairs. Additional problems arise with the presence symmetry of→ the electroweak theory, but does not estab- of massless charged scalars in multigeneration versions lish that the theory is renormalizable [52, 53]. of the SM. The instabilities that beset the SM with zero In the SMm, electroweak symmetry breaking is in- fermion bare masses motivate us to investigate the prop- duced by QCD at the QCD scale. If we choose the up- erties of the corresponding modified standard model with and down-quark masses equal to the real-world values, bare fermion masses, which we designate SMm. It is free then the appropriate scale should be close to the real- of the infrared pathology and provides a different inter- world value of fπ. Consequently, perturbative unitarity esting theoretical laboratory in which to study the be- would be violated by bare fermion mass terms at a criti- havior of scattering cross sections in a theory without a cal c.m. energy fundamental Higgs field. 2 8πngfπ We add to the low-energy effective Lagrangian explicit √sf : (3.3) fermion mass terms that appear hard (persist) on scales ≃ 3ηf mf 15 well above ΛQCD. Mass terms for up quarks, down the greater the bare fermionp mass, the lower the critical quarks, and charged leptons are of the Dirac form energy. If the SMm is to be a useful construct, it must make n g sense up to energies above the scale of low-lying mesons, m = u¯nLUnn′ un′R + d¯nLDnn′ dn′R L − baryons, and glueballs, say, up to √sf = 50fπ n,n′=1 ≈ X  4.6 GeV. That can be achieved provided that + ℓ¯nLLnn′ ℓn′R + h.c. (3.1) 4πngfπ 27 ng MeV (leptons) mf < (3.4) U D L  25 3η ≈ 15 ng MeV (quarks) , where , , are fermion mixing matrices and ng is the ∼ f  number of fermion generations. (Dirac and Majorana conditions thatp would generously accommodate the real- mass terms can be written for neutrinos as well.) By world values of the u, d, and e masses. bringing the n n mass matrices to diagonal form, one g × g If we impose the more modest requirement that the obtains the mass eigenstates and the mixing matrices for fermion sector of the SMm respect unitarity up to the quarks and leptons. energy at which the gauge-boson scattering saturates Explicit Dirac mass terms link the left-handed and ⋆ partial-wave unitarity, √s =4√πngfπ 655 √ng MeV right-handed fermions, and thus violate the SU(2)L cf. ≈ ⊗ ( (2.35)), then the requirements on bare fermion U(1)Y gauge symmetry of the electroweak theory. Ac- masses relax to cordingly, at lowest order in perturbation theory, scat- 2√πngfπ 190 √ng MeV (leptons) tering amplitudes for the production of pairs of longitu- mf < (3.5) 3η ≈ 110 √ng MeV (quarks) . dinally polarized gauge bosons in fermion-antifermion an- ∼ f  nihilations grow with c.m. energy roughly as GFmf Ecm. Not onlyp do the hard fermion masses implied by (3.1) For a fermion with bare mass m , the resulting partial- f explicitly break the SU(2)L U(1) gauge symmetry, wave amplitudes saturate partial-wave unitarity for the ⊗ Y they also break the SU(2ng)L SU(2ng)R chiral symme- standard model with a Higgs mechanism at a critical c.m. try that attends massless fermions.⊗ Just as in Nambu’s energy [53, 54, 55], classic construction [13] of light, but not massless, pions by the spontaneous breaking of an approximate chiral 2 4π√2 8πv symmetry, the QCD-induced spontaneous breaking of the √sf = , (3.2) ≃ 3ηf GFmf 3ηf mf SU(2)L U(1)Y symmetry does not yield exactly massless spin-zero⊗ particles, but light pseudo-Nambu–Goldstone p p where ηf = 1(Nc) for leptons (quarks). As usual, the pa- bosons (pNGBs). We recall that in the Nambu–Jona- rameter v sets the scale of electroweak symmetry break- Lasinio example [57] a bare nucleon mass of a few MeV ing. If the electron mass were hard, the critical energy sufficed to generate a realistic pion mass. Unlike their 9 would be √se 1.7 10 GeV; the corresponding energy massless counterparts in the SMng >1 Gedanken world, ≈ × the charged pNGBs of SMm do not create a vacuum in- stability problem. As is the case for the standard model, the electroweak 15 What here appear as hard masses could be seen as soft (in- sector of the SMm is CP-conserving for one and two duced by some spontaneous symmetry breaking) on substantially fermion generations. For ng 3, the (ng 1)(ng 2)/2 higher scales. Provided they are dynamically generated at some ≥ − − ⋆ unremovable phases in the quark mixing matrix for the high scale Λ ΛQCD in the ultraviolet-complete theory, the ≫ ⋆ 3 2 associated running fermion masses will fall off as mf Λ /p charged-current interactions provides a mechanism for for Euclidean momenta p Λ⋆ [52]. ∝ CP violation [58]. ≫ 13

IV. BEYOND THREE COLORS The scaling of the electroweak gauge couplings (in par- ticular g) compensates for the growth f √N of the π ∝ c In the modified standard models we have considered, pion decay constant, which we recall is defined through the scale of electroweak symmetry breaking is linked di- the matrix element Eq. (2.4) by which the charged weak rectly to the confinement scale of quantum chromody- current connects a generalized pion to the vacuum in namics. This circumstance makes it interesting to ex- leptonic decays. The foregoing discussion applies to the N = 3 generalizations of both the standard model (with amine generalizations of the SM in which the number of c 6 16 spontaneous SU(2) U(1) symmetry breaking induced colors, Nc, differs from the real-world value of 3. L ⊗ Y The large-Nc limit holds particular interest, because by the Higgs sector) and of the SM. it has yielded a number of insights into the structure of The same interplay between the fπ √Nc increase ′ ∝ ± 0 QCD in two and four dimensions [60, 61]. This limit is and the g,g 1/√Nc decrease makes the W and Z ∝ masses independent of Nc in the SM (cf. II A). The 2 § Nc , with g3 Nc = finite constant =0, (4.1) Fermi constant is related to the SU(2)L gauge coupling → ∞ 6 2 2 and the W -boson mass as GF = g /(4√2 MW ). If we re- −1/2 2 so that the strong coupling g 0 as Nc . gard the value of G =1/(v √2) as a constant of Nature 3 → F The large-Nc limit was originally applied to QCD in within the framework of the standard model, then the isolation, neglecting the electroweak interactions. The scaling law (4.4) means that MW 1/√Nc. In contrast, requirement that the SU(2) U(1) gauge interactions M is independent of N in the SM,∝ so G 1/N . L ⊗ Y W c F ∝ c be free of anomalies imposes restrictions on the electric For odd values of Nc > 3, the spectrum of low-lying charges of the fermions in the theory. Expressing the hadrons in the SM would consist of (qNc ) baryons [64] 1 3 Nc quark charges Qu and Qd in terms of the electron charge with spins 2 , 2 ,... 2 , plus glueballs and (qq¯) states that Qe, we find [62] include (4n 4) Nambu–Goldstone bosons (pNGBs in g − the SMm) and vector mesons including W ± and Z. The Q = Q +1= 1 [1 (2Q + 1)/N ] (4.2) u d 2 − e c baryons lie in SU(nq)flavor representations contained in Nc the product ( nq) , and have masses Nc. With the canonical choice Qe = 1 (for which Qν = 0), ⊗ ∝ the condition becomes [63] −

1 V. LEFT-RIGHT–SYMMETRIC Qu = Qd +1= 2 (1+1/Nc) , (4.3) GEDANKEN WORLD 2 which reproduces the familiar assignment Qu = + 3 for Nc = 3. Up to this point, we have considered modified versions Once the electroweak interactions are included, the of the standard model based on SU(3)c SU(2)L U(1)Y electroweak coupling constants must be rescaled in the gauge symmetry, and investigated how different⊗ the⊗ world manner of Eq. (4.1) to compensate for the growing num- would be if electroweak symmetry breaking were accom- ber of chiral fermion degrees of freedom: plished not by a special agent, but as an induced ef- fect of the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry in 2 ′ 2 2 g Nc , g Nc, e Nc constants as Nc . (4.4) QCD. Since the standard model may well emerge as the → → ∞ low-energy limit of a more comprehensive theory, it is Without this rescaling, the theory would have unphysical worth examining where some theories beyond the stan- properties in the Nc limit: (i) the SU(2)L U(1) dard model would lead if the Higgs mechanism were ab- → ∞ ⊗ Y interactions would become infinitely strong relative to the sent. As before, our aim is not to find alternative paths SU(3)c interaction and (ii) various qualitative properties, to the real world, but to explore how the world might such as the stability of mesons, would be spoiled. To cite have been different. 0 2 2 one example, the decay rate Γ(π γγ) α(Qu Qd)Nc We consider first a left-right–symmetric extension of →2 ∝ − would grow unacceptably, if α = e /4π were independent the standard-model gauge group [65], of Nc. SU(3) SU(2) SU(2) U(1) , (5.1) c ⊗ L ⊗ R ⊗ B−L for which QCD will once again be the agent that induces 16 To build specific models, we will confine our attention to odd electroweak symmetry breaking. It is a characteristic of values of Nc. This restriction maintains baryons as fermions, since the simplest body plan for a multiquark color singlet is qNc . such models that the observed maximal parity violation A second motivation for keeping Nc odd is the requirement that in the weak interactions does not reflect a fundamen- the theory should be free of a global Witten π4 anomaly [59] tal asymmetry of the laws of nature, but a circumstance for arbitrary values of the number of fermion generations, ng, based on the pattern of electroweak symmetry breaking. lest the SU(2)L gauge theory be mathematically inconsistent. To respect real-world limits on right-handed charged cur- This means that the number of chiral components of left-handed doublets [= (Nc + 1)ng ] must be even. Hence, for general values rents and a B L gauge force, the SU(2)R U(1)B−L − ⊗> of ng, Nc must be odd. symmetry must be broken to U(1)Y at a scale 1 TeV. ∼ 14

This means that the right-handed W ±-bosons must ac- then M would be a factor √2 larger than the SM value of quire a much higher mass than the known left-handed M W . The corresponding triplet of SU(2)V gauge bosons W ±, so the low-energy charged-current interaction would remains massless, and couples to (vectorial) weak isospin be left-handed to the high accuracy established experi- with a gauge coupling mentally. Furthermore, the mixing among the neutral- g g gauge–boson eigenstates must be such as to reproduce g = L R . (5.5) V 2 2 the neutral-current properties of the standard model to gL + gR high precision. If g g , then g g/√p2 0.46. As before, because An appealing feature of the left-right–symmetric the- R ≈ L V ≈ ≈ ory is that the electric charge operator takes an elegant of the confinement and chiral symmetry breaking, the form in terms of generators of both of the weak-isospin quarks pick up effective “constituent” masses of order gauge groups and the fundamental quantities B and L, ΛQCD, and the physical states are color-singlet mesons, namely baryons, and glueballs. Below the QCD scale, the gauge symmetry has been Q = I + I + 1 (B L). (5.2) 3L 3R 2 − broken to What the standard model identifies as weak hypercharge SU(3)c SU(2)V U(1)B−L, (5.6) is given, in the SU(3)c SU(2)L SU(2)R U(1)B−L ⊗ ⊗ 1 ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ world, by Y = I3R (B L), an expression that makes but since only color-singlet degrees of freedom persist be- − 2 − sense of the curious weak hypercharge assignments [cf. low the confinement scale, it suffices to classify the states the discussion around Eq. (2.1) and Eq. (2.2)] in the according to their (SU(2)V)B−L quantum numbers. The ν SU(2)L U(1) electroweak theory. lepton Dirac field L = transforms as (2) , the nu- ⊗ Y e −1 To be specific, let us consider a left-right symmet- cleon doublet p as (2) , and the V-gluons as (3) . n 1
0 ric Gedanken world with a single generation of massless The leptons remain massless to this stage, so the ef- fermions and no scalar sector. We shall see presently that fective low-energy
theory, with hadrons integrated out, this LR model exhibits a number of properties that differ (ℓ) (ℓ) exhibits a global SU(2) SU(2) leptonic chiral sym- in interesting ways from the SM models discussed in II L R metry. The SU(2) interaction⊗ is asymptotically free, and III.17 Now the chiral quark fields are § V and hence the associated coupling gV increases as the a a a u a u energy scale decreases below ΛQCD. At a sufficiently low QL = a , QR = a , (5.3) 2 d d energy scale ΛV, where αV g /4π approaches unity,  L  R ≡ V the SU(2)V interaction confines and breaks the leptonic with (SU(3)c, SU(2)L, SU(2)R)B−L quantum numbers chiral symmetry. Because the running of α , calculated 3 2 1 3 1 2 V ( , , )1/3 and ( , , )1/3, respectively, and color index by standard renormalization group methods, is logarith- a =1, 2, 3. The chiral lepton fields are mic, the scale ΛV is exponentially smaller than ΛQCD, ν ν provided that the couplings gL(ΛQCD) and gR(ΛQCD) are L = , L = , (5.4) L e R e small, as we assume. We adopt the QCD (and techni-  L  R color) criterion that chiral symmetry breaking occurs in with quantum numbers (1, 2, 1)−1 and (1, 1, 2)−1. In the a channel r ¯r 1 when αVC2(r) 1, where C2(r) gauge-covariant derivative specifying the interactions, is the quadratic× → Casimir operator , of≈ the fermion rep- the normalization of the SU(2)R gauge coupling gR is de- resentation r under the gauge group, [48, 49]. With the fined in a manner analogous to that for the SU(2)L gauge illustrative value gV 0.46 given above, we estimate −24 ≈ coupling gL. Again we will take the SU(3)c and SU(2)L that Λ 10 Λ . Maximally-attractive-channel V ≈ QCD couplings g3 and gL = g to retain their standard-model and vacuum-alignment arguments point to the formation values, and we assume that the SU(2)R and U(1)B−L of a lepton condensate, gauge couplings are similar in magnitude to gL. As in the SM, at a scale near Λ , QCD confines col- LL¯ = (¯ee +¯νν) , (5.7) QCD h i h i ored objects and spontaneously breaks the global chiral that respects the SU(2) U(1) gauge symmetry, SU(2)L SU(2)R symmetry associated with the massless V ⊗ B−L quarks,⊗ leaving a residual SU(2) isospin symmetry. The but breaks the leptonic chiral symmetry to a “leptonic V (ℓ) three would-be pions become the longitudinal compo- isospin” symmetry SU(2)V . In the process, the electron nents of gauge bosons that correspond to the broken (ax- and neutrino acquire equal dynamical masses, of order ial) generators, endowing the massive states with a com- ΛV. At least in principle, therefore, this model avoids 2 2 2 2 the massless deconfined charged fermion pathology of the mon mass given by M = (g + g )f¯ /4. If gL = gR = g, L R π SM. The process by which the leptons pick up dynami- cal masses at the scale ΛV is analogous to the one by 17 It is straightforward to extend this model, as we have done for which the confining SU(3)c interaction produces dynam- the SM models, to several fermion generations, and to consider ical quark masses at the scale ΛQCD. The SU(2)V-singlet the large-Nc limit or to admit bare fermion masses. bound states are of three types: leptonic mesons, of the 15

form (¯ee +νν ¯ ) , with lepton number L = 0; leptonic finement scales and yields no deconfined massless charged baryons,| with Li = 2, and V-glueballs.18 The confine- fermions. > −1 ment of SU(2)V charge means that at distances r ΛV Considered as a description of the real world, the hadrons will be (very lightly) bound into SU(2)V singlets.∼ SU(4) SU(2) SU(2) model must be broken to the PS ⊗ L ⊗ R On the same scale there would also be SU(2)V-singlet standard-model gauge group SU(3)c SU(2)L U(1)Y at combinations of nucleons and leptons, including an er- a high scale of order 1 TeV. That step⊗ is required⊗ to sat- satz (e p) Hydrogen atom bound by both the SU(2)V isfy the stringent upper bounds on right-handed charged- and U(1)B−L gauge interactions. If the second confine- current interactions, and also to suppress decays such as + + + − ment scale ΛV is indeed extremely tiny, then the Bohr K π µ e that are allowed in the unbroken theory radius of a putative atom would be macroscopic, and the with→ three fermion generations. The symmetry is con- integrity of matter would again be lost. ventionally broken by the Higgs mechanism, but it may In the limit of low energies (< ΛV), all the physical also be broken dynamically [27]. states are SU(2)V singlets, and∼ so we can express the The PS model accounts for the quantization of electric electric charge operator as charge. The (B L) operator is proportional to the fourth diagonal generator− of the SU(4) Lie algebra, and so the Q = 1 (B L). (5.8) analogue of Eq. (5.2) defines the electric charge operator 2 − as the sum of three generators, one for each of the non- In this sense, the surviving Abelian symmetry at low en- Abelian groups in SU(4) SU(2) SU(2) . PS ⊗ L ⊗ R ergies is not U(1)em, but U(1)B−L. This circumstance The chiral quark and lepton fields defined in Eq. (5.3) is a reminder that the emergence of electromagnetism as and Eq. (5.4) are joined into the fermion representations a low-energy, long-range interaction is not automatic; it depends not only on the choice of gauge group, but also a a FL = (Q , L) , FR = (Q , R) , (6.1) on the pattern of symmetry breaking. L L As a final comment on the LR Gedanken world, let which transform as the (4, 2, 1) and (4, 1, 2) representa- us note that three Nambu–Goldstone bosons appear as tions of SU(4) SU(2) SU(2) , respectively. PS ⊗ L ⊗ R a consequence of the breaking of the global symmetry In light of what has gone before, we can quickly enu- (ℓ) (ℓ) (ℓ) SU(2) SU(2) SU(2) . These massless bosons merate the major characteristics of the one-generation PS L ⊗ R → V do not cause any infrared pathology, because they are Gedanken world. The SU(4)PS interaction is asymptoti- neutral under the surviving U(1)B−L long-range force. cally free, so as the energy scale decreases through a char- Moreover, the NGBs have derivative couplings, so that acteristic scale ΛPS, the gauge coupling becomes strong, they become noninteracting in the limit of vanishing en- the theory confines and produces equal fermion conden- ergy. sates (¯uu+¯νν) and (dd¯ +¯ee) that respect the SU(4) h i h i PS symmetry, but break SU(2)L SU(2)R SU(2)V. Just as in the LR model, this breaking⊗ confers→ a common mass VI. PATI-SALAM GEDANKEN WORLD on the gauge bosons corresponding to the broken axial generators, with the difference that the mass scale is set ¯ Our focus in this study has been on Gedanken worlds by the SU(4)PS counterpart of fπ. All the fermions gain in which electroweak symmetry breaking is dominantly a common dynamical mass, of order ΛPS. caused by the formation of a quark condensate in QCD. Below the PS scale, the gauge symmetry has been bro- Here we take up a generalization of that scenario in the ken to setting of a prototype unified theory of the strong, weak, SU(4) SU(2) , (6.2) and electromagnetic interactions, in which the provoca- PS ⊗ V teur of electroweak symmetry breaking is not SU(3)c, but a larger gauge group in which QCD is embedded. but since only SU(4)PS-singlet degrees of freedom per- Specifically, we consider an extension of the SU(3) sist below the confinement scale, it suffices to classify c ⊗ SU(2) SU(2) U(1) explored in V, identify- the states according to their SU(2)V quantum numbers. L ⊗ R ⊗ B−L § ing lepton number as the fourth color, and so combining These include the SU(4)PS mesons, bosonic baryons, and glueballs. There are no light fermions below the con- SU(3)c and U(1)B−L into the SU(4)PS introduced by Pati & Salam [4]. In the resulting SU(4) SU(2) SU(2) finement scale ΛPS. As the SU(2)V interaction becomes PS ⊗ L ⊗ R Gedanken world, it is the unbroken SU(4)PS, rather than strong at very low energies, it produces a spectrum of SU(3)c, that produces a fermion condensate that breaks V-glueballs with masses set by its confinement scale, ΛV. the electroweak gauge symmetry. Like the LR exam- Using the coupling constant gV given in Eq. (5.5), we −21 ple, this PS model exhibits two widely separated con- estimate ΛV 10 ΛPS. In this case, no exact Abelian symmetry remains,≈ so the low-energy effective PS theory has no long-range force. Again a gauge symmetry that might have given rise to low-energy electromagnetism 18 The lowest-lying leptonic mesons are pseudoscalars and vectors; does not, because of the pattern of “electroweak” sym- the ground-state leptonic baryons have spin 0 and 1. metry breaking. 16

VII. CONCLUSION of models, one that has, in isolation, no fermion bare mass terms and pathological infrared behavior due to In this paper we have studied toy models built upon the unconfined massless leptons, and another that has bare fermion mass terms, with magnitudes bounded by the SU(3)c SU(2)L U(1)Y standard-model gauge group and fermion⊗ content⊗ similar to that of the standard the requirement that the model can serve as a reason- model, but without any Higgs field. The electroweak able effective theory up to energies somewhat above the symmetry is hidden, so that SU(2) U(1) U(1) , hadronic scale. L ⊗ Y → em through the quark condensates that spontaneously break The generalization to Nc = 3 exposes another con- 6 chiral symmetry in quantum chromodynamics with mass- nection between quantum chromodynamics and the elec- less quarks. In these modified standard models, the troweak sector. In the standard model, with the Fermi quarks and leptons do not acquire any masses as a con- constant a fixed parameter, the weak-boson masses scale sequence of electroweak symmetry breaking. The agent as 1/√Nc, whereas in the SM, weak-boson masses are that endows the fermions with mass need not be the same independent of the number of colors, but GF 1/Nc. ∝ one responsible for hiding the SU(2)L U(1)Y symmetry Two no-Higgs modifications of extensions to the and giving mass to the weak bosons. Nor⊗ is it guaranteed standard-model gauge group display interesting charac- that all fermion masses have a common origin. teristics. In the first of these, we considered a left-right– In the absence of (hard) quark masses, the good- symmetric theory based on SU(3)c SU(2)L SU(2)R ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ness of the vectorial SU(nq) flavor symmetry is en- U(1)B−L gauge symmetry. The spontaneous breaking of hanced, but the broad outlines of the hadron spectrum the chiral symmetry associated with massless quarks that are left unchanged, with one important exception. In occurs near the color-confinement scale ΛQCD breaks the the one-generation modified standard model SM , the gauged SU(2)L SU(2)R to a residual exact SU(2)V gauge 1 ⊗ pions disappear from the physical spectrum to become symmetry, and gives masses to the SU(2)L SU(2)R ⊗ the third (longitudinal) components of the electroweak weak bosons. The SU(2)V gauge symmetry is asymp- gauge bosons W ± and Z0. The vanishing of up- and totically free, and so confines leptons at a characteris- down-quark masses may leave the proton heavier than tic scale, ΛV ΛQCD. The two scales of confinement ≪ the neutron, in which case it would be unstable against and chiral symmetry breaking are widely separated pro- p ne+ν β decay, leaving a Gedanken world without vided that the weak gauge couplings are small enough → e hydrogen atoms. In any case, the integrity of matter is that SU(2)L SU(2)R U(1) may be considered as a ⊗ ⊗ B−L compromised in Gedanken worlds that contain leptons perturbation on the SU(3)c strong interaction. Because with vanishing or infinitesimal masses. leptons are confined, this model avoids the problem of In the SM, the electroweak symmetry breaking scale massless deconfined charged particles. A long-range in- is set by the QCD scale, which leads to many inter- teraction coupled to B L, rather than electric charge, re- − esting and striking differences with respect to the real mains after the confining interactions have accomplished world. Lacking a Higgs boson, the SM exhibits strong their symmetry breaking. Electromagnetism is thus not dynamics in W W , WZ, and ZZ scattering at c.m. ener- an automatic outcome. gies below 1 GeV. Electroweak symmetry breaking on Our final example was a prototype unified theory that the QCD scale implies a very significant reduction in incorporates SU(4)PS gauge symmetry, in which SU(3)c the weak-boson masses, so that M W 30 MeV in the and U(1)B−L are joined by regarding lepton number as Gedanken world. This makes the low-energy≈ weak inter- the fourth color. One of the virtues of the resulting actions comparable to the electromagnetic interactions. SU(4)PS SU(2)L SU(2)R gauge symmetry is that it A corresponding increase in the SM value of the Fermi provides a⊗ natural explanation⊗ of the quantization of elec- constant dramatically accelerates β decay and enhances tric charge. At a characteristic scale ΛPS, the SU(4)PS in- neutrino-nucleon cross sections. Moreover, weak inter- teraction confines and induces the breaking of the gauged actions and residual strong interactions are of compa- SU(2)L SU(2)R to a residual exact SU(2)V gauge sym- rable strength, so the systematics of nuclear forces are metry. Since⊗ both quarks and leptons are confined, this changed in important ways. In particular, nuclear forces model avoids the pathology of massless charged decon- of weak origin would be P- and C-violating. On the other fined fermions. The residual SU(2)V is asymptotically hand, vanishing quark masses would obviate the strong free, so at a (very low) characteristic scale ΛV it con- CP problem. fines the gauge bosons of this interaction, V-gluons, into Models with vanishing or infinitesimal masses for un- SU(2)V-singlet V-glueballs. In contrast to the no-Higgs confined charged leptons are pathological, being unstable versions of the standard model and the left-right sym- against the breakdown of the vacuum and the creation metric theory, no U(1) gauge symmetry survives, and of a plasma of electron-positron pairs. It is therefore so—leaving aside gravity—there is no long-range force appealing to consider the modified standard model as a at all. low-energy effective field theory, and to investigate ultra- One of the goals of this study was to explore how differ- violet completions that induce fermion mass terms that ent the physical world would be, if there were nothing like are hard on the QCD scale. the Higgs mechanism to hide the electroweak symmetry. In particular, we contrasted the properties of two types We regard that as important preparation for interpreting 17 the insights we hope to derive from experiments at the Anti-de Sitter/conformal field theory connection [69] and Large Hadron Collider. The SM provides an explicit the- lattice gauge theory computations [70]. With respect oretical laboratory in which to study how properties of to so-called electromagnetic mass differences—splittings our world would change if the scale of electroweak sym- within an isospin multiplet—there has been parallel metry breaking varied from its real-world value. The progress from the Cottingham formula [71] to ab initio approach taken here complements studies that retained calculations in lattice QCD [72, 73]. a Higgs mechanism but allowed variations in the weak Our modest goal in this Appendix is to expose two dif- scale v. ferences between the real world and the SM Gedanken Gedanken worlds also help us to take a fresh look at the world: the absence in the SM of quark masses, and real world and the way we have understood it. Since we the appearance in the SM of weak contributions to the have not definitively established the source of electroweak neutron-proton mass difference that are negligible in the symmetry breaking, it is useful to ask how it might devi- real world. In the real world, the difference between up- ate from the standard hypothesis. The early technicolor and down-quark masses increases the neutron mass rela- models were based on a close analogy with QCD, and the tive to the proton mass. The weak-interaction contribu- general idea of dynamical electroweak symmetry break- tions have a similar effect in the SM. ing merits continued study. Even when we do include a It will be sufficient for our purposes to examine the Higgs mechanism that gives rise to a realistic scale for sources of the n-p mass difference within the quark electroweak symmetry breaking, it is important to bear model, using as a starting point the SU(6) flavor-spin in mind that there are at least two contributing sources— wave functions, even if the QCD source is but a tiny effect. This serves as a reminder that there can be several contributions, p = (1/√18)(2u↑d↓u↑ u↓d↑u↑ u↑d↑u↓ | ↑i − − at quite different mass scales, to the breaking of a given d↑u↓u↑ +2d↓u↑u↑ d↑u↑u↓ symmetry. − − u↑u↓d↑ u↓u↑d↑ +2u↑u↑d↓) , − − (A1) n = (1/√18) (2d↑u↓d↑ d↓u↑d↑ d↑u↑d↓ Acknowledgments | ↑i − − − u↑d↓d↑ +2u↓d↑d↑ u↑d↑d↓ − − d↑d↓u↑ d↓d↑u↑ +2d↑d↑u↓) , We thank Peter Arnold, James Bjorken, Stan Brod- − − sky, Robert Cahn, Gerard ’t Hooft, Andreas Kronfeld, here written for proton and neutron with spin up. Gerald Miller, Shmuel Nussinov, Mary Hall Reno, Bert Within a multiplet, a standard analysis identifies three Schellekens, and Nikolai Uraltsev for stimulating com- distinct contributions to mass differences: (i) a differ- ments, discussions, questions, and advice. Fermilab is ence between the masses of the up and down quarks, (ii) operated by the Fermi Research Alliance under contract pairwise Coulomb interactions among the valence quarks, no. DE-AC02-07CH11359 with the U.S. Department of and (iii) pairwise hyperfine or magnetic-moment interac- Energy. The research of RS was partly supported by tions among quarks. A plausible expression for particle NSF-PHY-06-53342. Part of this research was performed masses within a real-world multiplet is then (cf. [74]) during his visit to the Fermilab theory group. He thanks α the theory group for hospitality and the Universities Re- M = M + n (m + δ )+ n (m + δ )+ Q Q 0 d d d u u u r i j search Association for support as a URA Visiting Scholar. iW and Z bosons. In the spirit ticles with no dynamically generated masses [76]. With of the quark model, these arise from the difference be- such caveats in mind, we proceed with the analysis. tween constituent-quark mass shifts due to Z emission Without appealing to a specific dynamical model to and reabsorption for the d and u quarks and the differ- −1 2 compute the mean quark separation r and Ψij (0) , ence between Z-exchange diagrams for dd scattering in we may recast Eq. (A2) in terms ofh Coulombi and| mag-| the neutron and uu scattering in the proton, all other W - netic contributions δMC and δMM as and Z-exchange contributions being in common. The two contributions (viz., Z exchange between different quark 1 4 M = M0 + nd(md + 9 δ)+ nu(mu + 9 δ) (A3) lines and corrections to individual quark propagators due to Z emission and reabsorption) share some similarities. +δM Q Q + δM Q Q ~σ ~σ , Accordingly, we can anticipate the character of a detailed C i j M i j i · j i 0, out- M M = h x (1 2x ) h . (A8) − n p Z−ex ¯2 W W ¯2 weighs the negative contribution of the other three terms, − 3fπ − ≈ 24fπ leading to the observed Mn Mp 1.293 MeV [20]. If we − ≈ 1 were to set mu and md to zero, but otherwise retain all where we approximated xW = 4 , close to the real-world the features of the real world, the proton would outweigh value, in the last step. This contribution is positive and the neutron. plausibly measured in MeV, so could well tip the bal- Simply erasing the current-quark masses from Eq. (A5) ance back in favor of the neutron as the heavier nucleon. is not sufficient to describe the n-p mass difference in the That electromagnetic and weak contibutions have oppo- 1 SM, in which the strength of weak interactions is greatly site sign, so long as xW < 2 , was noted long ago in the enhanced over the real-world level. In the Gedanken context of the Cottingham formula for real-world mass world, we must take into account contributions due to differences [77].

[1] S. L. Glashow, Nucl. Phys. 22, 579 (1961); S. Wein- Lett. 13, 508 (1964); G. S. Guralnik, C. R. Hagen and berg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19, 1264 (1967); A. Salam, “Weak T. W. B. Kibble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 585 (1964). and electromagnetic interactions,” in Elementary Par- [4] J. C. Pati and A. Salam, Phys. Rev. D 10, 275 (1974) ticle Theory: Relativistic Groups and Analyticity: Pro- [Erratum-ibid. D 11, 703 (1975)]. ceedings of the 8th Nobel Symposium, ed. N. Svartholm, [5] C. T. Hill, S. Pokorski and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 64, (Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm, 1968), pp. 367-377. 105005 (2001) [arXiv:hep-th/0104035]; R. S. Chivukula, [2] S. de Jong, PoS HEP2005, 397 (2006) [arXiv:hep- D. A. Dicus and H. J. He, Phys. Lett. B 525, 175 (2002) ex/0512043]; J. Alcaraz et al. [LEP Collaborations and [arXiv:hep-ph/0111016]; C. Csaki, C. Grojean, L. Pilo LEP Electroweak Working Group], “Precision Elec- and J. Terning, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 101802 (2004) troweak Measurements and Constraints on the Stan- [arXiv:hep-ph/0308038]; H. J. He et al., Phys. Rev. D dard Model,” arXiv:0712.0929 [hep-ex]; LEP Elec- 78 (2008) 031701 [arXiv:0708.2588 [hep-ph]], and refer- troweak Working Group, http://lepewwg.web.cern. ences therein. ch/LEPEWWG/. [6] C. J. Hogan, Rev. Mod. Phys. 72, 1149 (2000) [3] F. Englert and R. Brout, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 321 (1964); [arXiv:astro-ph/9909295]. P. W. Higgs, Phys. Lett. 12 (1964) 132; Phys. Rev. [7] V. Agrawal, S. M. Barr, J. F. Donoghue and 19

D. Seckel, Phys. Rev. D 57, 5480 (1998) [arXiv:hep- ical Electroweak Symmetry Breaking, Odense, Denmark ph/9707380]; Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 1822 (1998) (September 2008) at http://hep.sdu.dk/dewsb. [arXiv:hep-ph/9801253]. [27] T. Appelquist and R. Shrock, Phys. Lett. B 548, 204 [8] R. N. Cahn, Rev. Mod. Phys. 68, 951 (1996). (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0204141]; Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, [9] See, e.g., J. D. Bjorken, Phys. Rev. D 67, 043508 (2003) 201801 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0301108]. [arXiv:hep-th/0210202]; R. Harnik, G. D. Kribs and [28] N. Fettes and U. G. Meissner, Nucl. Phys. A 676, G. Perez, Phys. Rev. D 74, 035006 (2006) [arXiv:hep- 311 (2000) [arXiv:hep-ph/0002162]; V. Bernard and ph/0604027]; C. J. Hogan, Phys. Rev. D 74, 123514 U. G. Meissner, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 57, 33 (2007) (2006) [arXiv:astro-ph/0602104]; R. L. Jaffe, A. Jenk- [arXiv:hep-ph/0611231]. ins and I. Kimchi, “Quark Masses: An Environmental [29] S. R. Beane and M. J. Savage, Nucl. Phys. A 717, 91 Impact Statement,” arXiv:0809.1647 [hep-ph]. (2003) [arXiv:nucl-th/0208021]. [10] B. J. Carr and M. J. Rees, Nature 278, 605 (1979); [30] T. D. Lee and C. S. Wu, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 15, J. D. Barrow and F. J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmolog- 381 (1965). ical Principle (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986); [31] B. W. Lee, C. Quigg and H. B. Thacker, Phys. Rev. D G. Cohen-Tannoudji, Universal Constants in Physics 16, 1519 (1977); Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 883 (1977). (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1992); M. Rees, Just Six Num- [32] J. M. Cornwall, D. N. Levin and G. Tiktopoulos, Phys. bers (Basic Books, New York, 2001). Rev. D 10, 1145 (1974) [Erratum-ibid. D 11, 972 (1975)]. [11] C. Quigg, Rept. Prog. Phys. 70, 1019 (2007) [33] Early papers include R. F. Dashen and H. Neuberger, [arXiv:0704.2232 [hep-ph]]. Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1897 (1983); J. Kuti, L. Lin and [12] J. J. Yoo and R. J. Scherrer, Phys. Rev. D 67, 043517 Y. Shen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 678 (1988). (2003) [arXiv:astro-ph/0211545]. [34] Early papers include L. Maiani, G. Parisi and [13] Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 380 (1960). R. Petronzio, Nucl. Phys. B 136, 115 (1978); N. Cabibbo, [14] Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. 117, 648 (1960). L. Maiani, G. Parisi and R. Petronzio, Nucl. Phys. B 158, [15] J. Goldstone, Nuovo Cim. 19, 154 (1961); J. Goldstone, 295 (1979); I. H. Lee, J. Shigemitsu and R. E. Shrock, A. Salam and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. 127, 965 (1962). Nucl. Phys. B 330, 225 (1990), ibid. 334, 265 (1990). [16] V. L. Ginzburg and L. D. Landau, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. [35] M. S. Chanowitz and M. K. Gaillard, Nucl. Phys. B 261, 20, 1064 (1950); [English translation: Men of Physics: 379 (1985). L. D. Landau, ed. D. ter Haar (New York: Pergamon, [36] J. L. Basdevant and B. W. Lee, Phys. Lett. B 29, 437 1965), Vol. I, pp. 138-167.] (1969); Phys. Rev. D 2, 1680 (1970); K. S. Jhung and [17] T. W. B. Kibble “Englert-Brout-Higgs-Guralnik-Hagen- R. S. Willey, Phys. Rev. D 9, 3132 (1974). K. H. Chung Kibble mechanism (history),” Scholarpedia 4(1), 8741 and R. S. Willey, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1339 (1977); (2009); http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/ B. R. Martin, D. Morgan, and G. Shaw, Pion-Pion Inter- Englert-Brout-Higgs-Guralnik-Hagen-Kibble actions in Particle Physics (Academic, New York, 1976). mechanism (history). [37] S. Dimopoulos, Nucl. Phys. B 168, 69 (1980). [18] J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper and J. R. Schrieffer, Phys. Rev. [38] S. Dimopoulos, S. Raby and G. L. Kane, Nucl. Phys. B 108 (1957) 1175. 182, 77 (1981). [19] R. F. Dashen, Phys. Rev. D 3, 1879 (1971). [39] A. Dobado, M. J. Herrero and J. Terron, Z. Phys. C 50, [20] C. Amsler et al. [Particle Data Group], Phys. Lett. B 205 (1991). D. A. Dicus and W. W. Repko, Phys. Rev. D 667, 1 (2008). 42, 3660 (1990), ibid. D 44, 3473 (1991); R. Rosenfeld, [21] J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Nucl. Phys. B 250, 465 Phys. Rev. D 42, 126 (1990); T. N. Truong, Phys. Rev. (1985). Lett. 67, 2260 (1991); K.-i. Hikasa and K. Igi, Phys. Lett. [22] M. Weinstein, Phys. Rev. D 8, 2511 (1973). B 261, 285 (1991) [Erratum-ibid. B 270, 128 (1991)]. [23] S. Weinberg, ibid. D 19, 1277 (1979); L. Susskind, Phys. [40] A. V. Manohar and C. T. Sachrajda, “Quark Masses,” in Rev. D 20, 2619 (1979). See also S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. [20], http://pdg.lbl.gov/2008/reviews/quarks q000. D 13, 974 (1976); pdf. [24] S. Dimopoulos and L. Susskind, Nucl. Phys. B 155, 237 [41] See, e.g., S. R. Beane, P. F. Bedaque, W. C. Haxton, (1979); E. Eichten and K. D. Lane, Phys. Lett. B 90, 125 D. R. Phillips and M. J. Savage, arXiv:nucl-th/0008064. (1980). U. G. Meissner, Nucl. Phys. A 790, 129 (2007). [25] T. Appelquist, M. Piai and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 69, [42] G. ’t Hooft, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 8 (1976); Phys. Rev. D 015002 (2004) [arXiv:hep-ph/0308061]; T. Appelquist, 14, 3432 (1976) [Erratum-ibid. D 18, 2199 (1978)]. N. D. Christensen, M. Piai and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. [43] V. A. Kuzmin, V. A. Rubakov and M. E. Shaposhnikov, D 70, 093010 (2004) [arXiv:hep-ph/0409035]. Phys. Lett. B 155, 36 (1985). [26] R. S. Chivukula, “Technicolor and compositeness,” [44] A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan and A. E. Nelson, Ann. Rev. arXiv:hep-ph/0011264; K. Lane, “Two lectures on Nucl. Part. Sci. 43, 27 (1993) [arXiv:hep-ph/9302210]. technicolor,” arXiv:hep-ph/0202255; C. T. Hill and [45] C. Balazs, M. S. Carena, A. Freitas and C. E. M. Wagner, E. H. Simmons, Phys. Rept. 381, 235 (2003) JHEP 0706, 066 (2007) [arXiv:0705.0431 [hep-ph]]. [Erratum-ibid. 390, 553 (2004)] [arXiv:hep-ph/0203079]. [46] J. S. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 82, 664 (1951). R. Shrock, “Some recent results on models of dynami- [47] K. M. Case and S. G. Gasiorowicz, Phys. Rev. 125, 1055 cal electroweak symmetry breaking,” in The Origin of (1962); S. Weinberg and E. Witten, Phys. Lett. B 96, 59 Mass and Strong Coupling Gauge Theories (SCGT06), (1980). eds. M. Harada, M. Tanabashi, and K. Yamawaki [48] T. W. Appelquist, D. Karabali and L. C. R. Wijeward- (World Scientific, Singapore, 2008), p. 227, http:// hana, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 957 (1986); T. Appelquist dx.doi.org/10.1142/9789812790750 0023 [arXiv:hep- and L. C. R. Wijewardhana, Phys. Rev. D 35, 774 ph/0703050]. See also talks at the Workshop on Dynam- (1987); T. Appelquist, J. Terning and L. C. R. Wije- 20

wardhana, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1214 (1996) [arXiv:hep- R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D 12, 1502 (1975). ph/9602385]. [66] J. J. J. Kokkedee, The Quark Model (Benjamin, New [49] T. Appelquist, K. D. Lane and U. Mahanta, Phys. Rev. York, 1969). Lett. 61, 1553 (1988). S. J. Brodsky and R. Shrock, Phys. [67] A. Chodos, R. L. Jaffe, K. Johnson, C. B. Thorn and Lett. B 666, 95 (2008) [arXiv:0806.1535 [hep-th]], and V. F. Weisskopf, Phys. Rev. D 9, 3471 (1974); T. A. De- “On Condensates in Strongly Coupled Gauge Theories,” Grand, R. L. Jaffe, K. Johnson and J. E. Kiskis, Phys. arXiv:0803.2541 [hep-th]. Rev. D 12, 2060 (1975). [50] T. Appelquist, G. T. Fleming and E. T. Neil, Phys. [68] E. E. Salpeter and H. A. Bethe, Phys. Rev. 84, Rev. Lett. 100, 171607 (2008) [arXiv:0712.0609 [hep- 1232 (1951). For applications to hadronic physics, see ph]]; A. Deuzeman, M. P. Lombardo and E. Pallante, the review articles by R. Alkofer and L. von Smekal, Phys. Lett. B 670, 41 (2008) [arXiv:0804.2905 [hep-lat]]. Phys. Rept. 353, 281 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0007355] and [51] M. L. Goldberger and S. B. Treiman, Phys. Rev. 110, P. Maris and C. D. Roberts, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 12, 1178 (1958). 297 (2003) [arXiv:nucl-th/0301049], as well as M. Ku- [52] N. D. Christensen and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, rachi and R. Shrock, JHEP 0612, 034 (2006) [arXiv:hep- 241801 (2005) [arXiv:hep-ph/0501294]. ph/0605290], and references therein. [53] T. Appelquist and M. S. Chanowitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, [69] G. F. de Teramond and S. J. Brodsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2405 (1987) [Erratum-ibid. 60, 1589 (1988)]. 94, 201601 (2005) [arXiv:hep-th/0501022]; S. J. Brod- [54] F. Maltoni, J. M. Niczyporuk and S. Willenbrock, Phys. sky and G. F. de Teramond, ibid. 96, 201601 (2006) Rev. D 65, 033004 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0106281]. [arXiv:hep-ph/0602252]. [55] D. A. Dicus and H. J. He, Phys. Rev. D 71, 093009 (2005) [70] Lattice 2008, The XXVI International Symposium on [arXiv:hep-ph/0409131]. Lattice Field Theory: http://conferences.jlab.org/ [56] LEP Electroweak Working Group, http: lattice2008. //lepewwg.web.cern.ch/LEPEWWG/lepww/4f/Winter05/ [71] W. N. Cottingham, Ann. Phys. (NY), 25, 424 (1963). wwxsec nocouplings 2005.eps. [72] A. Duncan, E. Eichten and H. Thacker, Phys. Lett. B [57] Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 124, 246 409, 387 (1997) [arXiv:hep-lat/9607032]. (1961). [73] S. R. Beane, K. Orginos and M. J. Savage, Nucl. Phys. [58] M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys. 49, B 768, 38 (2007) [arXiv:hep-lat/0605014]. 652 (1973). [74] C. Quigg, “Models For Hadrons,” lectures given at [59] E. Witten, Phys. Lett. B 117, 324 (1982). l’Ecole´ d’Et´ede´ Physique Th´eorique, Les Houches, in [60] G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B 72, 461 (1974); ibid. 75, 461 Gauge Theories in High Energy Physics, edited by M. (1974). K. Gaillard and R. Stora (North-Holland, Amsterdam, [61] E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 160, 57 (1979). 1983), p. 645. [62] R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 53, 6465 (1996) [arXiv:hep- [75] A. De Rujula, H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. ph/9512430]. D 12, 147 (1975); S. Gasiorowicz and J. L. Rosner, Am. [63] A. Abbas, Phys. Lett. B 238, 344 (1990); C. K. Chow J. Phys. 49, 954 (1981). For a modern fit, see M. Kar- and T. M. Yan, Phys. Rev. D 53, 5105 (1996) [arXiv:hep- liner and H. J. Lipkin, Phys. Lett. B 650, 185 (2007) ph/9512243]. [arXiv:hep-ph/0608004]. [64] R. F. Dashen, E. E. Jenkins and A. V. Manohar, Phys. [76] S. Nussinov and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 79, 016005 Rev. D 51, 3697 (1995) [arXiv:hep-ph/9411234]. (2009) [arXiv:0811.3404 [hep-ph]]. [65] R. N. Mohapatra and J. C. Pati, Phys. Rev. D 11, [77] A. Love and G. G. Ross, Nucl. Phys. B 56, 440 (1973). 566 (1975), ibid. D 11, 2558 (1975); G. Senjanovic and