DOCSLIB.ORG

Model Building and Phenomenology in Grand Unified

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Model Building and Phenomenology in Grand Unified Theories Tom´asE. Gonzalo Velasco University College London Submitted to University College London in fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2015 2 Declaration I, Tom´asE. Gonzalo Velasco, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Tom´asE. Gonzalo Velasco August 2015 3 4 Abstract The Standard Model (SM) of particle physics is known to suffer from several flaws, and the upcoming generation of experiments may shed some light onto their solution. Whether there is evidence of new physics or not, theories Beyond the SM (BSM) must be able to accommodate and explain the coming data. The lack of signs of BSM physics so far, calls for a exhaustive exploration beyond the minimal models, in particular Grand Unified theories, for they are able to solve some of the issues of the SM and can make testable predictions. Therefore, we attempt to develop a framework to build Grand Unified models, capable of generating and analysing general non-minimal models. In order to do so, first we create a computational tool to handle the group theoretical component, calculating properties of Lie Groups and their representations. Among them, those of interest to the model building process are the calculation of breaking chains from a group to a subgroup, the decomposition of representations of a group into those of a subgroup and the construction of group invariants. Using some of the capabilities of the group tool, and starting with a set of representations and a breaking chain, we generate all the conceivable models, classifying them to satisfy conditions such as anomaly cancellation and symmetry breaking. We then move on to study the unification of gauge couplings on the models and its consequences on the scale of unification and the scale of supersymmetry breaking, to later constrain them to match phenomenological observables, such as proton decay or current collider searches. We conclude by focusing the analysis on two specific models, a minimal supersymmetric SO(10) model, with some interesting predictions for future colliders, and a flipped SU(5) ⊗ U(1) model, which serves as the triggering mechanism for the end of the inflationary epoch in the early universe. 5 6 Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor, Frank Deppisch, for his support during the very long journey that has been my Ph.D. His expert guidance and sound advice have proven essential for my research and the writing of this thesis. In addition, I would like to thank John Ellis who provided the means and opportunity, and whose vast knowledge helped me greatly along the way. Also, I would like to express my gratitude to all my colleagues and friends at UCL, past and present, for the good times and fun these past years. My sincere gratitude to Luk´aˇsGr´af,Julia Harz and Wei Chih Huang, with whom it was a pleasure to work. Without their help and contribution this thesis would not be finished. I must also thank my family: my parents, Conchita and Tom´as,and my sisters, Conchi and Ester, who have always inspired and supported me, even from the dis- tance. Lastly, I would like to thank Angela,´ for the unwavering support and infinite patience, and for giving me the necessary strength to see this through to the end. 7 8 9 The history of science shows that theories are perishable. With every new truth that is revealed we get a better understanding of Nature and our conceptions and views are modified. - Nikola Tesla 10 Contents 1 Introduction 21 2 Gauge Models in Particle Physics 25 2.1 The Standard Model . 26 2.2 Grand Unified Theories . 32 2.2.1 Georgi-Glashow Model: SU(5) . 34 2.2.2 Flipped SU(5) ⊗ U(1) . 37 2.2.3 Pati-Salam Model . 40 2.2.4 Left-Right Symmetry . 43 2.2.5 SO(10) . 44 2.3 Supersymmetry . 51 2.3.1 Introduction to Supersymmetry . 52 2.3.2 Supersymmetry Breaking . 55 2.3.3 The MSSM . 57 3 Symmetries and Lie Groups 65 3.1 Definition . 66 3.2 Lie algebras . 67 3.3 Representations . 71 3.4 Cartan Classification of Simple Lie Algebras . 75 3.5 Group Theory Tool . 83 3.5.1 Roots and Weights . 85 3.5.2 Subgroups and Breaking Chains . 90 11 Contents 12 3.5.3 Decomposition of Representations . 96 3.5.4 Constructing Invariants . 102 3.6 Implementation and Example Run . 105 3.6.1 C++ Backend . 106 3.6.2 Mathematica Frontend . 110 3.6.3 Sample Session . 112 4 Automated GUT Model Building 117 4.1 Generating Models . 118 4.2 Model Constraints . 121 4.2.1 Chirality . 122 4.2.2 Cancellation of Anomalies . 122 4.2.3 Symmetry Breaking . 125 4.2.4 Standard Model . 126 4.3 Unification of Gauge Couplings . 126 4.3.1 Supersymmetry . 129 4.3.2 Abelian Breaking . 130 4.3.3 Solving the RGEs . 131 4.4 Results for Intermediate Left-Right Symmetry . 132 4.4.1 Proton Decay . 134 4.4.2 Direct and Indirect Detection Constraints . 136 4.4.3 Model Analysis . 138 5 Aspects of GUT Phenomenology 147 5.1 Minimal SUSY SO(10) . 149 5.1.1 The Model . 150 5.1.2 Renormalisation Group Equations . 154 5.1.3 Direct SUSY Searches at the LHC . 157 5.1.4 Phenomenological Analysis . 160 5.2 Flipped GUT Inflation . 170 13 Contents 5.2.1 Inflation . 171 5.2.2 Minimal GUT Inflation . 176 5.2.3 Embedding in SO(10) . 184 6 Conclusions and Outlook 187 A MSSM RGEs 191 A.1 Gauge Couplings . 191 A.2 Yukawa Couplings . 191 A.3 Gaugino Masses . 192 A.4 Trilinear Couplings . 192 A.5 Scalar Masses . 193 A.6 µH and B Terms . 195 A.7 Two-Loop Corrections . 196 Contents 14 List of Figures 1.1 RGE running of the Standard Model gauge couplings . 22 1.2 RGE running of the MSSM gauge couplings . 23 2.1 Breaking patterns of the Pati-Salam model . 41 2.2 Patters of symmetry breaking from SO(10) to the SM group . 46 2.3 One-loop contributions to the Higgs mass . 51 2.4 Searches for SUSY and current limits from the ATLAS collaboration 63 2.5 Searches for SUSY and current limits from the CMS collaboration . 64 3.1 Dynkin diagrams of simple Lie algebras . 81 3.2 Algorithm for obtaining the roots of a simple algebra . 86 3.3 Algorithm for calculating the weights of a representation . 88 3.4 Extended or affine Dynkin diagrams of simple Lie algebras . 90 3.5 Obtaining the SO(5) × SU(2) × U(1) subalgebra of SO(9) . 91 3.6 Algorithms for obtaining the maximal subalgebras of a Lie algebra . 92 3.7 Obtaining the SU(4) ⊗ SU(2) ⊗ SU(2) subalgebra of SO(10) . 92 3.8 Algorithm to obtain the breaking chains of a Lie algebra . 94 3.9 Example of breaking chains from SO(10) to SU(3) ⊗ SU(2) ⊗ U(1) . 95 3.10 Algorithms for calculating the projection matrix . 98 3.11 Algorithm for identifying the representations from the subweights . 100 3.12 Algorithm for calculating the direct product of representations . 103 3.13 Class diagram of the group theory tool . 106 3.14 File system for the group theory tool . 107 15 List of Figures 16 3.15 Properties of the group SU(4) ⊗ SU(2) ⊗ SU(2) . 115 3.16 Properties of some representations of SU(4) ⊗ SU(2) ⊗ SU(2) . 116 4.1 Algorithm for generating models . 121 4.2 Triangle diagram for Adler-Bell-Jackiw anomalies . 122 4.3 Feynman diagram for the main decay modes of protons through di- mension 6 operators . 134 4.4 Feynman diagram for the main decay modes of protons through di- mension 5 operators in a SUSY GUT . 135 4.5 Running of the gauge couplings in a sample scenario of the left-right symmetry model . 139 4.6 Dependence of the scales in a sample scenario of the left-right sym- metry model . 140 4.7 Histograms of models, no constraints . 141 4.8 Histograms of models, with respect to MLR ............... 143 4.9 Histograms of models, with respect to MSUSY ............. 144 4.10 Histograms of models, with respect to MGUT .............. 145 4.11 2D histogram of models in the (MSUSY ;MLR) plane . 146 5.1 Planck exclusion limits on inflationary models . 148 2 5.2 First generation sfermions masses as function of mD .......... 153 5.3 RGE running of 1st generation scalar, gaugino and Higgs doublet masses . 156 5.4 Comparison of exclusion limits on squark masses for the CMSSM and simplified scenarios with the ATLAS limit . 159 2 5.5 Sparticle masses as a function of mD for the scenario with light 3rd generation . 162 2 5.6 Exclusion areas for stau, sbottom and selectron masses in the (mD; m1=2) 2 and (mD;A0) planes for the scenario with light 3rd generation . 163 5.7 Sparticle spectrum for a scenario with light 3rd generation . 164 2 5.8 Sparticle masses as function of mD for the scenario with light 1st generation . 165 17 List of Figures 2 5.9 Exclusion areas for stau, sbottom and selectron masses in the (mD; m1=2) 2 and (mD;A0) planes for the scenario with 1st first generation . 166 5.10 Sparticle spectrum for a scenario with light 1st generation .
Recommended publications
  • Report of the Supersymmetry Theory Subgroup

    Report of the Supersymmetry Theory Subgroup

    Report of the Supersymmetry Theory Subgroup J. Amundson (Wisconsin), G. Anderson (FNAL), H. Baer (FSU), J. Bagger (Johns Hopkins), R.M. Barnett (LBNL), C.H. Chen (UC Davis), G. Cleaver (OSU), B. Dobrescu (BU), M. Drees (Wisconsin), J.F. Gunion (UC Davis), G.L. Kane (Michigan), B. Kayser (NSF), C. Kolda (IAS), J. Lykken (FNAL), S.P. Martin (Michigan), T. Moroi (LBNL), S. Mrenna (Argonne), M. Nojiri (KEK), D. Pierce (SLAC), X. Tata (Hawaii), S. Thomas (SLAC), J.D. Wells (SLAC), B. Wright (North Carolina), Y. Yamada (Wisconsin) ABSTRACT Spacetime supersymmetry appears to be a fundamental in- gredient of superstring theory. We provide a mini-guide to some of the possible manifesta- tions of weak-scale supersymmetry. For each of six scenarios These motivations say nothing about the scale at which nature we provide might be supersymmetric. Indeed, there are additional motiva- tions for weak-scale supersymmetry. a brief description of the theoretical underpinnings, Incorporation of supersymmetry into the SM leads to a so- the adjustable parameters, lution of the gauge hierarchy problem. Namely, quadratic divergences in loop corrections to the Higgs boson mass a qualitative description of the associated phenomenology at future colliders, will cancel between fermionic and bosonic loops. This mechanism works only if the superpartner particle masses comments on how to simulate each scenario with existing are roughly of order or less than the weak scale. event generators. There exists an experimental hint: the three gauge cou- plings can unify at the Grand Uni®cation scale if there ex- I. INTRODUCTION ist weak-scale supersymmetric particles, with a desert be- The Standard Model (SM) is a theory of spin- 1 matter tween the weak scale and the GUT scale.
  • Supersymmetry Searches at the Tevatron

    Supersymmetry Searches at the Tevatron

    SUPERSYMMETRY SEARCHES AT THE TEVATRON For CDF and DØ collaborations R. Demina Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester, Rochester, USA, 14627 CDF and DØ collaborations analyzed up to 200 pb-1 of the delivered data in search for different supersymmetry signatures, so far with negative results. We present results on searches for chargino and neutralino associated production, squarks and gluinos, sbottom quarks, gauge mediated SUSY breaking and long lived heavy particles. Supersymmetry1 is a popular extension of the Standard Model originally suggested over 25 years ago. It postulates the symmetry between fermionic and bosonic degrees of freedom. As a result a variety of hypothetical particles is introduced. With presently available experimental data physicists were able to prove that if supersymmetric particles exist they must be heavier than their Standard Model partners2. In other words the Supersymmetry is broken. One possible exception is supersymmetric top quark (stop), which still has a chance to be lighter or of the same mass as top quark. With 2-4 fb-1 of data Tevatron experiments will be able to extend the limit on stop mass above that of top quark or discover it and thus establish the Supersymmetry3. Theory suggests several possible scenarios of Supersymmetry breaking mediated by gravitational or gauge interactions. In gravity mediated scenarios the number of free parameters in the model is reduced to five because of the unification of masses and couplings imposed at the grand unification scale. These parameters are M0 (M½) – masses of all bosons (fermions) at GUT scale, A0- trilinear coupling and µ0 – something Higgs and tan(β) – ratio of vacuum expectations of the Higgs doublet.
  • Judicial Review of Uncertain Risks in Scientific Research

    Judicial Review of Uncertain Risks in Scientific Research

    Chapter 6 Judicial Review of Uncertain Risks in Scientific Research Eric E. Johnson Abstract It is difficult to neutrally evaluate the risks posed by large-scale leading- edge science experiments. Traditional risk assessment is problematic in this context for multiple reasons. Also, such experiments can be insulated from challenge by manipulating how questions of risk are framed. Yet courts can and must evaluate these risks. In this chapter, I suggest modes of qualitative reasoning to facilitate such evaluation. Keywords Risk · Risk scenarios · Law · Courts · Science · Scientific research · Particle physics · Black holes · LHC 6.1 Introduction In the world of engineering, uncertainty is anathema. Whether designing a nuclear power plant or planning a system of levees, engineers do not like surprises. Exper- imental scientific research, however, thrives on uncertainty. Reaching beyond the current state of knowledge is the whole point of the enterprise. Whether probing the planets or trying to create new particles, scientists would love to see a surprise around every corner. Uncertainty goes hand in hand with aspirations to explore and discover. This special role for uncertainty in scientific research makes questions of catastrophic risk from science experiments particularly interesting. What is more, 1See Hawai‘i County Green Party v. Clinton, 980 F. Supp. 1160, 1168-69 (D. Haw. 1997); Karl Grossman, The Risk of Cassini Probe Plutonium, The Christian Science Monitor (Oct. 10, 1997) http://www.csmonitor.com/1997/1010/101097.opin.opin.1.html; CNN, Cassini roars into space, CNN (Oct. 15, 1997) http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9710/15/cassini.launch/; Najmedin Meshkati, Probability, Plutonium Don’t Mix (op-ed), Los Angeles Times (Oct.
  • Theoretical and Experimental Aspects of the Higgs Mechanism in the Standard Model and Beyond Alessandra Edda Baas University of Massachusetts Amherst

    Theoretical and Experimental Aspects of the Higgs Mechanism in the Standard Model and Beyond Alessandra Edda Baas University of Massachusetts Amherst

    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014 2010 Theoretical and Experimental Aspects of the Higgs Mechanism in the Standard Model and Beyond Alessandra Edda Baas University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses Part of the Physics Commons Baas, Alessandra Edda, "Theoretical and Experimental Aspects of the Higgs Mechanism in the Standard Model and Beyond" (2010). Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014. 503. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.umass.edu/theses/503 This thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses 1911 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE HIGGS MECHANISM IN THE STANDARD MODEL AND BEYOND A Thesis Presented by ALESSANDRA EDDA BAAS Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE September 2010 Department of Physics © Copyright by Alessandra Edda Baas 2010 All Rights Reserved THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE HIGGS MECHANISM IN THE STANDARD MODEL AND BEYOND A Thesis Presented by ALESSANDRA EDDA BAAS Approved as to style and content by: Eugene Golowich, Chair Benjamin Brau, Member Donald Candela, Department Chair Department of Physics To my loving parents. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Writing a Thesis is never possible without the help of many people. The greatest gratitude goes to my supervisor, Prof. Eugene Golowich who gave my the opportunity of working with him this year.
  • Tcomposite Weak Bosons, Leptons and Quarks

    Tcomposite Weak Bosons, Leptons and Quarks

    Subnuclear Physics: Past, Present and Future Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Scripta Varia 119, Vatican City 2014 www.pas.va/content/dam/accademia/pdf/sv119/sv119-fritzsch.pdf TComposite Weak Bosons, Leptons and Quarks HARALD FRITZSCH University of Munich Faculty of Physics, Arnold Sommerfeld Center for Theoretical Physics, Abstract The weak bosons consist of two fermions, bound by a new confin- ing gauge force. The mass scale of this new interaction is determined. At energies below 0.5 TeV the standard electroweak theory is valid. AneutralisoscalarweakbosonX must exist - its mass is less than 1TeV.Itwilldecaymainlyintoquarkandleptonpairsandintotwo or three weak bosons. Above the mass of 1 TeV one finds excitations of the weak bosons, which mainly decay into pairs of weak bosons. Leptons and quarks consist of a fermion and a scalar. Pairs of leptons and pairs of quarks form resonances at very high energy. 280 Subnuclear Physics: Past, Present and Future COMPOSITE WEAK BOSONS, LEPTONS AND QUARKS In the Standard Model the leptons, quarks and weak bosons are pointlike particles. I shall assume that they are composite particles with a finite size. The present limit on the size of the electron, the muon and of the light quarks is about 10−17 cm. The constituents of the weak bosons and of the leptons and quarks are bound by a new confining gauge interaction. Due to the parity violation in the weak interactions this theory must be a chiral gauge theory, unlike quantum chromodynamics. The Greek translation of ”simple” is ”haplos”. We denote the con- stituents as ”haplons” and the new confining gauge theory as quantum hap- lodynamics ( QHD ).
  • On the Trace Anomaly of a Weyl Fermion in a Gauge Background

    On the Trace Anomaly of a Weyl Fermion in a Gauge Background

    On the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion in a gauge background Fiorenzo Bastianelli,a;b;c Matteo Broccoli,a;c aDipartimento di Fisica ed Astronomia, Universit`adi Bologna, via Irnerio 46, I-40126 Bologna, Italy bINFN, Sezione di Bologna, via Irnerio 46, I-40126 Bologna, Italy cMax-Planck-Institut f¨ur Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut) Am M¨uhlenberg 1, D-14476 Golm, Germany E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: We study the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion in an abelian gauge background. Although the presence of the chiral anomaly implies a breakdown of gauge invariance, we find that the trace anomaly can be cast in a gauge invariant form. In particular, we find that it does not contain any odd-parity contribution proportional to the Chern-Pontryagin density, which would be allowed by the con- sistency conditions. We perform our calculations using Pauli-Villars regularization and heat kernel methods. The issue is analogous to the one recently discussed in the literature about the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion in curved backgrounds. Keywords: Anomalies in Field and String Theories, Conformal Field Theory arXiv:1808.03489v2 [hep-th] 7 May 2019 Contents 1 Introduction1 2 Actions and symmetries3 2.1 The Weyl fermion3 2.1.1 Mass terms5 2.2 The Dirac fermion8 2.2.1 Mass terms9 3 Regulators and consistent anomalies 10 4 Anomalies 13 4.1 Chiral and trace anomalies of a Weyl fermion 13 4.1.1 PV regularization with Majorana mass 14 4.1.2 PV regularization with Dirac mass 15 4.2 Chiral and trace anomalies of a Dirac fermion 16 4.2.1 PV regularization with Dirac mass 16 4.2.2 PV regularization with Majorana mass 17 5 Conclusions 18 A Conventions 19 B The heat kernel 21 C Sample calculations 22 1 Introduction In this paper we study the trace anomaly of a chiral fermion coupled to an abelian gauge field in four dimensions.
  • The Algebra of Grand Unified Theories

    The Algebra of Grand Unified Theories

    The Algebra of Grand Unified Theories John Baez and John Huerta Department of Mathematics University of California Riverside, CA 92521 USA May 4, 2010 Abstract The Standard Model is the best tested and most widely accepted theory of elementary particles we have today. It may seem complicated and arbitrary, but it has hidden patterns that are revealed by the relationship between three ‘grand unified theories’: theories that unify forces and particles by extend- ing the Standard Model symmetry group U(1) × SU(2) × SU(3) to a larger group. These three are Georgi and Glashow’s SU(5) theory, Georgi’s theory based on the group Spin(10), and the Pati–Salam model based on the group SU(2)×SU(2)×SU(4). In this expository account for mathematicians, we ex- plain only the portion of these theories that involves finite-dimensional group representations. This allows us to reduce the prerequisites to a bare minimum while still giving a taste of the profound puzzles that physicists are struggling to solve. 1 Introduction The Standard Model of particle physics is one of the greatest triumphs of physics. This theory is our best attempt to describe all the particles and all the forces of nature... except gravity. It does a great job of fitting experiments we can do in the lab. But physicists are dissatisfied with it. There are three main reasons. First, it leaves out gravity: that force is described by Einstein’s theory of general relativity, arXiv:0904.1556v2 [hep-th] 1 May 2010 which has not yet been reconciled with the Standard Model.
  • John Ellis Sergerudaz

    John Ellis Sergerudaz

    SLAC-PUB-3101 April 1983 (T/E) SEARCH FOR SUPERSYMMETRY IN TOPONIUM DECAYS* JOHN ELLIS Stanjord Linear Accelerator Center Stanford Uniueraity, Stanford, California 9@05 and SERGERUDAZ School of Physics and Astronomy University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 ABSTRACT Although cosmology and unification suggest that the mass of the gluino is larger than about 14 GeV, in many theories of broken supersymmetry the photino 5, gluino S and one of the spin-zero partners i of the t quark can be lighter than mt. We calculate Z-T- the decay rates for toponium + 5 S, r 5 and t t and show that in many models they can be as large as, or larger than, the rate for toponium ---, e+e- decay. If it is kinematically accessible, the decay t --* t+q dominates the decays of toponium as well as those of naked top states. Submitted to Physics Letters B * Work supported by the Department of Energy, contracts DEAC03-76SF00515 and DEAC02-83ER40051. One obstacle to the experimental search [l] for supersymmetry (susy) is our the- oretical ignorance about the likely masses of supersymmetric particles. This means that we cannot be sure where susy will first appear, and must plan a broad-band search. The production and detection of supersymmetric particles in hadron-hadron collisions (21, lepton-hadron collisions [3,4] and e+e- annihilation [3,5,6] have been extensively discussed. In the case of e+e- annihilation, there have been discussions of the production of squarks and gluinos in the continuum and of gluinos in heavy quarkonium decays [3,5,6].
  • Supersymmetry Breaking and Inflation from Higher Curvature

    Supersymmetry Breaking and Inflation from Higher Curvature

    Prepared for submission to JHEP Supersymmetry Breaking and Inflation from Higher Curvature Supergravity I. Dalianisa, F. Farakosb, A. Kehagiasa;c, A. Riottoc and R. von Ungeb aPhysics Division, National Technical University of Athens, 15780 Zografou Campus, Athens, Greece bInstitute for Theoretical Physics, Masaryk University, 611 37 Brno, Czech Republic cDepartment of Theoretical Physics and Center for Astroparticle Physics (CAP) 24 quai E. Ansermet, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: The generic embedding of the R + R2 higher curvature theory into old- minimal supergravity leads to models with rich vacuum structure in addition to its well-known inflationary properties. When the model enjoys an exact R-symmetry, there is an inflationary phase with a single supersymmetric Minkowski vacuum. This appears to be a special case of a more generic set-up, which in principle may include R- symmetry violating terms which are still of pure supergravity origin. By including the latter terms, we find new supersymmetry breaking vacua compatible with single-field inflationary trajectories. We discuss explicitly two such models and we illustrate how arXiv:1409.8299v2 [hep-th] 22 Jan 2015 the inflaton is driven towards the supersymmetry breaking vacuum after the inflationary phase. In these models the gravitino mass is of the same order as the inflaton mass. Therefore, pure higher curvature supergravity may not only accommodate the proper inflaton field, but it may also provide the appropriate hidden sector for supersymmetry breaking after inflation has ended.
  • Interactions the Newsletter of the UB Department of Physics Volume 4, Issue 2 Fall 2011

    Interactions the Newsletter of the UB Department of Physics Volume 4, Issue 2 Fall 2011

    Interactions The Newsletter of the UB Department of Physics Volume 4, Issue 2 Fall 2011 established well formulated procedures for all the graduate studies. He continues to be a source of information and ad- vice for our graduate program. Our majors, headed by Alec Cheney, were instrumental in starting a new chapter of the Sigma Pi Sigma, the Phys- ics Honors Society, at UB. They collected signatures and petitioned the Society for a UB chapter. After successfully receiving approval, they also made arrangements for the installation. The President of the Sigma PI Sigma, Dr. Di- ane Jacobs, presided the chapter installation ceremony on November 4. Five students, Alec Cheney, Matthew Gorfien, Connor Gorman, Chun Kwan and Katherine Spoth, were in- Dear alumni and friends, ducted during the ceremony. It was very rewarding to see As I mentioned in the previous issue, the new President and our majors take charge, accomplish their goals and receive the Dean of CAS are now in office. The SUNY2020 legisla- recognition for their outstanding achievements. tion was passed and signed into law, which allows UB for This year’s Homecoming was made special by the return of the first time to plan on a five-year horizon. The new direc- our distinguished alumnus, Dr. Thomas Bogdan (featured tions and initiatives that are being implemented by the new in Alumni in Focus), to give an exciting public lecture on administration are therefore more tangible than symbolic. space weather. He has been the Director of the National This means opportunities for the Department. It is encour- Space Weather Prediction Center, and was recently named aging to see that the President’s plan for the University over- the President of the University Corporation for Atmospheric laps with some of the main concerns and aspirations of the Research, starting January 9, 2012.
  • TASI 2008 Lectures: Introduction to Supersymmetry And

    TASI 2008 Lectures: Introduction to Supersymmetry And

    TASI 2008 Lectures: Introduction to Supersymmetry and Supersymmetry Breaking Yuri Shirman Department of Physics and Astronomy University of California, Irvine, CA 92697. [email protected] Abstract These lectures, presented at TASI 08 school, provide an introduction to supersymmetry and supersymmetry breaking. We present basic formalism of supersymmetry, super- symmetric non-renormalization theorems, and summarize non-perturbative dynamics of supersymmetric QCD. We then turn to discussion of tree level, non-perturbative, and metastable supersymmetry breaking. We introduce Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model and discuss soft parameters in the Lagrangian. Finally we discuss several mech- anisms for communicating the supersymmetry breaking between the hidden and visible sectors. arXiv:0907.0039v1 [hep-ph] 1 Jul 2009 Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Motivation..................................... 2 1.2 Weylfermions................................... 4 1.3 Afirstlookatsupersymmetry . .. 5 2 Constructing supersymmetric Lagrangians 6 2.1 Wess-ZuminoModel ............................... 6 2.2 Superfieldformalism .............................. 8 2.3 VectorSuperfield ................................. 12 2.4 Supersymmetric U(1)gaugetheory ....................... 13 2.5 Non-abeliangaugetheory . .. 15 3 Non-renormalization theorems 16 3.1 R-symmetry.................................... 17 3.2 Superpotentialterms . .. .. .. 17 3.3 Gaugecouplingrenormalization . ..... 19 3.4 D-termrenormalization. ... 20 4 Non-perturbative dynamics in SUSY QCD 20 4.1 Affleck-Dine-Seiberg
  • Chiral Gauge Theories Revisited

    Chiral Gauge Theories Revisited

    CERN-TH/2001-031 Chiral gauge theories revisited Lectures given at the International School of Subnuclear Physics Erice, 27 August { 5 September 2000 Martin L¨uscher ∗ CERN, Theory Division CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland Contents 1. Introduction 2. Chiral gauge theories & the gauge anomaly 3. The regularization problem 4. Weyl fermions from 4+1 dimensions 5. The Ginsparg–Wilson relation 6. Gauge-invariant lattice regularization of anomaly-free theories 1. Introduction A characteristic feature of the electroweak interactions is that the left- and right- handed components of the fermion fields do not couple to the gauge fields in the same way. The term chiral gauge theory is reserved for field theories of this type, while all other gauge theories (such as QCD) are referred to as vector-like, since the gauge fields only couple to vector currents in this case. At first sight the difference appears to be mathematically insignificant, but it turns out that in many respects chiral ∗ On leave from Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY, D-22603 Hamburg, Germany 1 νµ ν e µ W W γ e Fig. 1. Feynman diagram contributing to the muon decay at two-loop order of the electroweak interactions. The triangular subdiagram in this example is potentially anomalous and must be treated with care to ensure that gauge invariance is preserved. gauge theories are much more complicated. Their definition beyond the classical level, for example, is already highly non-trivial and it is in general extremely difficult to obtain any solid information about their non-perturbative properties. 1.1 Anomalies Most of the peculiarities in chiral gauge theories are related to the fact that the gauge symmetry tends to be violated by quantum effects.