DOCSLIB.ORG

Elementary Particle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Elementary Particle AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education Page 1 of 21 www.accessscience.com Elementary particle Contributed by: Frank E. Close Publication year: 2015 Key Concepts • Elementary particles—including protons, neutrons, and electrons—were conventionally considered to be fundamental particles of matter, although some of these are now known to be compounds of other particles. • Other elementary particles include neutrinos (which result from the decay of unstable neutrons), quarks (fundamental constituents of protons and neutrons), photons and other bosons, muons and taus (types of leptons), and mesons (a type of hadron). • Fundamental forces that act on elementary particles are gravity, the electromagnetic force, the strong force, and the weak force, all of which act through the exchange of gauge bosons. • Interactions of elementary particles may cause scattering and transformations (decays and reactions) of particles. • Characteristics of elementary particles include mass, spin, charge, strangeness, charm, and bottomness. • The standard model explains the mass of elementary particles as being due to their interactions with the Higgs field, as manifested by Higgs bosons. A label usually applied to protons, neutrons, electrons, and related subatomic particles that were previously considered to be fundamental, although some of these are now known to be compounds of other particles. Our identification of the elementary particles has evolved with our understanding of matter. The idea that everything is made from a few basic elements originated in ancient Greece. In the nineteenth century, the elementary pieces of matter were believed to be the atoms of the chemical elements, but in the first half of the twentieth century, atoms were found to be made up of electrons, protons, and neutrons. These became known as elementary particles, that is, particles that are not compounds of other particles. Today, however, many such particles (including the proton and neutron) are known to be compounds of quarks. All of these are conventionally, if illogically, known as elementary particles. See also: ELECTRON ; NEUTRON ; PROTON . AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education Page 2 of 21 www.accessscience.com Historical overview The electrical attraction of opposite electric charges is what grips negatively charged electrons around the positively charged atomic nucleus; it is the protons that give a nucleus its charge. The amount of positive charge on a proton is equal in magnitude but opposite in sign to that on an electron. This is crucial for the fact that matter in bulk is electrically neutral, with the result that gravity controls the motion of planets and our attraction to the Earth’s surface. However, why these two particles carry such precisely counterbalanced electric charges is a mystery. See also: COULOMB’S LAW ; ELECTRIC CHARGE ; GRAVITATION . 2 A proton is some 1836 times as massive as an electron, their masses being, respectively, 938.3 and 0.511 MeV ∕ c, , 2 where c is the speed of light. A neutron has a mass of 939.6 MeV ∕ c , and is very similar to a proton. In the immediate aftermath of its discovery in 1932, the neutron was thought to be a version of a proton with no electric charge; however, today their relationship is understood to be more profound. An electron or a proton is stable, at least on time scales longer than the age of the universe. When neutrons are in the nuclei of atoms such as iron, they too may survive unchanged for billions of years. However, an isolated neutron is unstable, with a mean life of 886 s. Neutrons can also be unstable when large numbers of them are packed into a nucleus with protons; this leads to natural radioactivity of many elements. Such neutrons undergo beta decay, a result of the weak force, which converts a neutron into a proton and emits an electron and a neutrino. See also: BETA PARTICLES ; RADIOACTIVITY . Neutrinos have no electric charge and masses that are too small to measure with present techniques. The 2 neutrino emitted in the neutron beta decay has a mass that is less than 2 eV ∕ c , , that is, less than 1 ∕ 100,000 the mass of the electron. See also: NEUTRINO . In the 1930s, the known elementary particles were the four just named and the photon ( γ ), the quantum particle of electromagnetic radiation. The electron and the neutrino are known as leptons and are still recognized as elementary in the sense that they are not composed of more fundamental constituents, whereas the proton and the neutron are built from quarks. Two varieties, or flavors, of quark are required to make protons and neutrons. 2 They are the up quark (denoted u ), with an electric charge that is a fraction + ∕3 of a proton’s charge, and the 1 down quark ( d ), whose fractional charge is − ∕3 . The combination uud is sufficient to make a proton, and ddu makes a neutron. See also: LEPTON ; PHOTON ; QUARKS . The up and down quarks, together with the electron and the neutrino, form a basic family of what is known as the standard model of fundamental particles. These particles are fermions, defined by having an intrinsic angular ,1 momentum or spin of ∕, 2 in units of Planck’s quantum. The photon is a boson, with an integer spin of 1. The exchange of photons between electrically charged particles transmits the electromagnetic force. See also: ANGULAR MOMENTUM ; ELECTROMAGNETISM ; QUANTUM STATISTICS ; SPIN (QUANTUM MECHANICS) ; STANDARD MODEL . AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education Page 3 of 21 www.accessscience.com This simple picture began to break down around 1950 with the discoveries of new forms of particles, first in cosmic rays and then in experiments at high-energy particle physics accelerators. With modern hindsight, it is possible to classify the discoveries into two classes: leptons and hadrons. See also: COSMIC RAYS ; PARTICLE ACCELERATOR . The muon is a lepton with the same spin and electric charge as an electron, but some 207 times more massive at 2 105.7 MeV ∕ c , . Today, six members of the lepton family are known: three that are electrically charged—the 2 electron ( e ), muon ( μ), and tau ( τ) [mass 1777 MeV ∕ c , ]—and three varieties of neutrino known as the ν ν ν electron-neutrino ( ,e ), the muon neutrino ( ,μ ), and the tau neutrino ( ,τ ) [ Table 1 ]. The masses of the neutrinos have not yet been directly measured, but it is known from neutrino oscillations that at least two neutrinos have nonzero masses. All of these are fundamental particles. Leptons are unaffected by the strong (nuclear) force but feel the weak force and, if electrically charged (the electron, muon, and tau), the electromagnetic force. See also: STRONG NUCLEAR INTERACTIONS ; WEAK NUCLEAR INTERACTIONS . Particles that feel the strong force are known as hadrons. The cosmic rays revealed the existence of unstable hadrons, some of which became known as strange particles, such as the K meson and the lambda hyperon ( Λ). Experiments at particle accelerators enabled such particles to be produced when the kinetic energy of particles colliding with atomic nuclei was converted into ephemeral particles, which were revealed by their trails in bubble chambers (or nowadays by electronic detectors). Among these were short-lived heavier versions of the −23 proton and the neutron, known as resonances, whose lifetimes of the order of 10, s are similar to the time it takes a beam of light to traverse a proton. All of these hadrons are composed of quarks. See also: HADRON ; PARTICLE DETECTOR . 2 There are six flavors of quark. The up ( u ), charm ( c ), and top ( t ) have electric charge + ∕3 ; the down ( d ), strange 1 ( s ), and bottom ( b ) have charge − ∕3 ( Table 1 ). As individual quarks cannot appear in isolation, a direct measure of their mass is not possible, but approximate scales of mass have been determined. When they are trapped inside hadrons, the up and down quarks have energies of around 300 MeV; most of this is due to their motion, 2 2 their masses being at most 6 MeV ∕ c , . The strange quark is some 100 MeV ∕ c , more massive, the charm quark 2 2 2 mass is around 1.3 GeV ∕ c , (1300 MeV ∕ c , ), the bottom quark mass is around 4.5 GeV ∕ c , , and the top quark 2 mass is around 175 GeV ∕ c , . The reason behind these values, or even their qualitative pattern, is not understood. Strange hadrons contain one or more strange quarks. Hadrons containing charm or bottom quarks are known as charm and bottom hadrons (including a special category known as charmonium and bottomonium). Top quarks are so heavy that no hadrons containing them have been identified. It is even possible that top hadrons cannot → ν form, as the top quark is so unstable that it decays (in a form of beta decay, t be ,e ) before it can grip to other quarks to make observable hadrons. AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education Page 4 of 21 www.accessscience.com WIDTH:D Fundamental particles and interactions The fundamental forces that act on the particles are gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the strong and weak forces. These forces act through the exchange of particles known as gauge bosons ( Table 1 ). For the electromagnetic, strong, and weak forces, these have been identified, respectively, as the photon, gluon, and weak bosons; the graviton, the quantum of the gravitational force, is firmly predicted by theory, but the prospect of direct observation is exceedingly remote. The gravitational force between individual particles is so feeble that it can be ignored for all practical purposes. See also: FUNDAMENTAL INTERACTIONS ; GLUONS ; GRAVITON . The interactions of particles are responsible for their scattering and transformations (decays and reactions). Because of interactions, an isolated particle may decay into other particles. Two particles passing near each other may be transformed, perhaps into the same particles but with changed momenta (elastic scattering) or perhaps AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education Page 5 of 21 www.accessscience.com into other particles (inelastic scattering).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Searches for Electroweak Production of Supersymmetric Gauginos and Sleptons and R-Parity Violating and Long-Lived Signatures with the ATLAS Detector
    Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric gauginos and sleptons and R-parity violating and long-lived signatures with the ATLAS detector Ruo yu Shang University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (for the ATLAS collaboration) Supersymmetry (SUSY) • Standard model does not answer: What is dark matter? Why is the mass of Higgs not at Planck scale? • SUSY states the existence of the super partners whose spin differing by 1/2. • A solution to cancel the quantum corrections and restore the Higgs mass. • Also provides a potential candidate to dark matter with a stable WIMP! 2 Search for SUSY at LHC squark gluino 1. Gluino, stop, higgsino are the most important ones to the problem of Higgs mass. 2. Standard search for gluino/squark (top- right plots) usually includes • large jet multiplicity • missing energy ɆT carried away by lightest SUSY particle (LSP) • See next talk by Dr. Vakhtang TSISKARIDZE. 3. Dozens of analyses have extensively excluded gluino mass up to ~2 TeV. Still no sign of SUSY. 4. What are we missing? 3 This talk • Alternative searches to probe supersymmetry. 1. Search for electroweak SUSY 2. Search for R-parity violating SUSY. 3. Search for long-lived particles. 4 Search for electroweak SUSY Look for strong interaction 1. Perhaps gluino mass is beyond LHC energy scale. gluino ↓ 2. Let’s try to find gauginos! multi-jets 3. For electroweak productions we look for Look for electroweak interaction • leptons (e/μ/τ) from chargino/neutralino decay. EW gaugino • ɆT carried away by LSP. ↓ multi-leptons 5 https://cds.cern.ch/record/2267406 Neutralino/chargino via WZ decay 2� 3� 2� SR ɆT [GeV] • Models assume gauginos decay to W/Z + LSP.
    [Show full text]
  • Wimps and Machos ENCYCLOPEDIA of ASTRONOMY and ASTROPHYSICS
    WIMPs and MACHOs ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS WIMPs and MACHOs objects that could be the dark matter and still escape detection. For example, if the Galactic halo were filled –3 . WIMP is an acronym for weakly interacting massive par- with Jupiter mass objects (10 Mo) they would not have ticle and MACHO is an acronym for massive (astrophys- been detected by emission or absorption of light. Brown . ical) compact halo object. WIMPs and MACHOs are two dwarf stars with masses below 0.08Mo or the black hole of the most popular DARK MATTER candidates. They repre- remnants of an early generation of stars would be simi- sent two very different but reasonable possibilities of larly invisible. Thus these objects are examples of what the dominant component of the universe may be. MACHOs. Other examples of this class of dark matter It is well established that somewhere between 90% candidates include primordial black holes created during and 99% of the material in the universe is in some as yet the big bang, neutron stars, white dwarf stars and vari- undiscovered form. This material is the gravitational ous exotic stable configurations of quantum fields, such glue that holds together galaxies and clusters of galaxies as non-topological solitons. and plays an important role in the history and fate of the An important difference between WIMPs and universe. Yet this material has not been directly detected. MACHOs is that WIMPs are non-baryonic and Since extensive searches have been done, this means that MACHOS are typically (but not always) formed from this mysterious material must not emit or absorb appre- baryonic material.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Reality of Quantum Collapse and the Emergence of Space-Time
    Article On the Reality of Quantum Collapse and the Emergence of Space-Time Andreas Schlatter Burghaldeweg 2F, 5024 Küttigen, Switzerland; [email protected]; Tel.: +41-(0)-79-870-77-75 Received: 22 February 2019; Accepted: 22 March 2019; Published: 25 March 2019 Abstract: We present a model, in which quantum-collapse is supposed to be real as a result of breaking unitary symmetry, and in which we can define a notion of “becoming”. We show how empirical space-time can emerge in this model, if duration is measured by light-clocks. The model opens a possible bridge between Quantum Physics and Relativity Theory and offers a new perspective on some long-standing open questions, both within and between the two theories. Keywords: quantum measurement; quantum collapse; thermal time; Minkowski space; Einstein equations 1. Introduction For a hundred years or more, the two main theories in physics, Relativity Theory and Quantum Mechanics, have had tremendous success. Yet there are tensions within the respective theories and in their relationship to each other, which have escaped a satisfactory explanation until today. These tensions have also prevented a unified view of the two theories by a more fundamental theory. There are, of course, candidate-theories, but none has found universal acceptance so far [1]. There is a much older debate, which concerns the question of the true nature of time. Is reality a place, where time, as we experience it, is a mere fiction and where past, present and future all coexist? Is this the reason why so many laws of nature are symmetric in time? Or is there really some kind of “becoming”, where the present is real, the past irrevocably gone and the future not yet here? Admittedly, the latter view only finds a minority of adherents among today’s physicists, whereas philosophers are more balanced.
    [Show full text]
  • Particle Physics Dr Victoria Martin, Spring Semester 2012 Lecture 12: Hadron Decays
    Particle Physics Dr Victoria Martin, Spring Semester 2012 Lecture 12: Hadron Decays !Resonances !Heavy Meson and Baryons !Decays and Quantum numbers !CKM matrix 1 Announcements •No lecture on Friday. •Remaining lectures: •Tuesday 13 March •Friday 16 March •Tuesday 20 March •Friday 23 March •Tuesday 27 March •Friday 30 March •Tuesday 3 April •Remaining Tutorials: •Monday 26 March •Monday 2 April 2 From Friday: Mesons and Baryons Summary • Quarks are confined to colourless bound states, collectively known as hadrons: " mesons: quark and anti-quark. Bosons (s=0, 1) with a symmetric colour wavefunction. " baryons: three quarks. Fermions (s=1/2, 3/2) with antisymmetric colour wavefunction. " anti-baryons: three anti-quarks. • Lightest mesons & baryons described by isospin (I, I3), strangeness (S) and hypercharge Y " isospin I=! for u and d quarks; (isospin combined as for spin) " I3=+! (isospin up) for up quarks; I3="! (isospin down) for down quarks " S=+1 for strange quarks (additive quantum number) " hypercharge Y = S + B • Hadrons display SU(3) flavour symmetry between u d and s quarks. Used to predict the allowed meson and baryon states. • As baryons are fermions, the overall wavefunction must be anti-symmetric. The wavefunction is product of colour, flavour, spin and spatial parts: ! = "c "f "S "L an odd number of these must be anti-symmetric. • consequences: no uuu, ddd or sss baryons with total spin J=# (S=#, L=0) • Residual strong force interactions between colourless hadrons propagated by mesons. 3 Resonances • Hadrons which decay due to the strong force have very short lifetime # ~ 10"24 s • Evidence for the existence of these states are resonances in the experimental data Γ2/4 σ = σ • Shape is Breit-Wigner distribution: max (E M)2 + Γ2/4 14 41.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nobel Prize in Physics 1999
    The Nobel Prize in Physics 1999 The last Nobel Prize of the Millenium in Physics has been awarded jointly to Professor Gerardus ’t Hooft of the University of Utrecht in Holland and his thesis advisor Professor Emeritus Martinus J.G. Veltman of Holland. According to the Academy’s citation, the Nobel Prize has been awarded for ’elucidating the quantum structure of electroweak interaction in Physics’. It further goes on to say that they have placed particle physics theory on a firmer mathematical foundation. In this short note, we will try to understand both these aspects of the award. The work for which they have been awarded the Nobel Prize was done in 1971. However, the precise predictions of properties of particles that were made possible as a result of their work, were tested to a very high degree of accuracy only in this last decade. To understand the full significance of this Nobel Prize, we will have to summarise briefly the developement of our current theoretical framework about the basic constituents of matter and the forces which hold them together. In fact the path can be partially traced in a chain of Nobel prizes starting from one in 1965 to S. Tomonaga, J. Schwinger and R. Feynman, to the one to S.L. Glashow, A. Salam and S. Weinberg in 1979, and then to C. Rubia and Simon van der Meer in 1984 ending with the current one. In the article on ‘Search for a final theory of matter’ in this issue, Prof. Ashoke Sen has described the ‘Standard Model (SM)’ of particle physics, wherein he has listed all the elementary particles according to the SM.
    [Show full text]
  • MASTER THESIS Linking the B-Physics Anomalies and Muon G
    MSc PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY GRAVITATION, ASTRO-, AND PARTICLE PHYSICS MASTER THESIS Linking the B-physics Anomalies and Muon g − 2 A Phenomenological Study Beyond the Standard Model By Anders Rehult 12623881 February - October 2020 60 EC Supervisor/Examiner: Second Examiner: prof. dr. Robert Fleischer prof. dr. Piet Mulders i Abstract The search for physics beyond the Standard Model is guided by anomalies: discrepancies between the theoretical predictions and experimental measurements of physical quantities. Hints of new physics are found in the recently observed B-physics anomalies and the long-standing anomalous magnetic dipole moment of the muon, muon g − 2. The former include a group of anomalous measurements related to the quark-level transition b ! s. We investigate what features are required of a theory to explain these b ! s anomalies simultaneously with muon g − 2. We then consider three kinds of models that might explain the anomalies: models with leptoquarks, hypothetical particles that couple leptons to quarks; Z0 models, which contain an additional fundamental force and a corresponding force carrier; and supersymmetric scenarios that postulate a symmetry that gives rise to a partner for each SM particle. We identify a leptoquark model that carries the necessary features to explain both kinds of anomalies. Within this model, we study the behaviour of 0 muon g − 2 and the anomalous branching ratio of Bs mesons, bound states of b and s quarks, into muons. 0 ¯0 0 ¯0 The Bs meson can spontaneously oscillate into its antiparticle Bs , a phenomenon known as Bs −Bs mixing. We calculate the effects of this mixing on the anomalous branching ratio.
    [Show full text]
  • The Messenger
    THE MESSENGER No. 35-March 1984 Report on the First ESO-CERN Symposium on "Large Scale Structure of the Universe, Cosmology and Fundamental Physics" G. Setti, ESO The first ESO-CERN Symposium was held at CERN, deuterium, were produced when the age of the Universe was Geneva, from 21 st to 25th November 1983 and was attended only about 100 seconds, the temperature about one billion by approximately 200 participants. The discussions concen­ degrees and the density of the order of the density of water, in trated on the general field of Cosmology, where the progress a phase that lasted about 8 minutes. At that moment the made in the past twenty years, both in elementary particles Universe was essentially a gaseous mixture composed of and astronomy, has shown that these two fields of basic protons, neutrons, electrons, positrons, neutrinos and anti­ research are merging toward a new and fundamental under­ neutrinos (and perhaps some other exotic particles, such as standing of the laws that govern our Universe. A detailed photinos) immersed in a heat bath of photons. The equilibrium account is contained in the Proceedings of the Symposium between these components is maintained by the weak which will be available in a few months. interaction, one of the four fundamental forces wh ich are The meeting was started with an introductory lecture by believed to govern all natural phenomena.* The weak force D. W. Sciama (Oxford and Trieste) who highlighted the numer­ together with the "hot big-bang" model allows definite predic­ ous and fundamental problems the understanding of which tions about the abundances of primordial elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Gravitino Dark Matter
    GRAVITINO DARK MATTER Wilfried Buchm¨uller DESY, Hamburg LAUNCH09, Nov. 2009, MPK Heidelberg Why Gravitino Dark Matter? Supergravity predicts the gravitino, analog of W and Z bosons in electroweak theory; may be LSP, natural DM candidate: m < 1keV, hot DM, (Pagels, Primack ’81) • 3/2 1keV < m3/2 < 15keV, warm DM, (Gorbunov, Khmelnitsky, Rubakov ’08) • ∼ ∼ 100keV < m < 10MeV, cold DM, gauge mediation and thermal • 3/2 leptogenesis∼ (Fuji, Ibe,∼ Yanagida ’03); recently proven to be correct by F-theory (Heckman, Tavanfar, Vafa ’08) 10GeV < m < 1TeV, cold DM, gaugino/gravity mediation and • 3/2 thermal leptogenesis∼ ∼ (Bolz, WB, Pl¨umacher ’98) Baryogenesis, (gravitino) DM and primordial nucleosynthesis (BBN) strongly correlated in cosmological history. 1 Gravitino Problem Thermally produced gravitino number density grows with reheating temperature after inflation (Khlopov, Linde ’83; Ellis, Kim, Nanopoulos ’84;...), n3/2 α3 2 TR. nγ ∝ Mp For unstable gravitinos, nucleosynthesis implies stringent upper bound on reheating temperature TR (Kawasaki, Kohri, Moroi ’05; ...), T < (1) 105 GeV, R O × hence standard mSUGRA with neutralino LSP incompatible with baryogenesis via thermal leptogenesis where T 1010 GeV !! R ∼ Possible way out: Gravitino LSP, explains dark matter! 2 Gravitino Virtue Can one understand the amount of dark matter, ΩDM 0.23, with Ω = ρ /ρ , if gravitinos are dominant component, i.e. Ω≃ Ω ? DM DM c DM ≃ 3/2 Production mechanisms: (i) WIMP decays, i.e., ‘Super-WIMPs’ (Covi, Kim, Roszkowski ’99; Feng, Rajaraman, Takayama ’03), m3/2 Ω3/2 = ΩNLSP , mNLSP independent of initial temperature TR (!), but inconsistent with BBN constraints; (ii) Thermal production, from 2 2 QCD processes, → 2 TR 100GeV mg˜(µ) Ω3/2h 0.5 10 .
    [Show full text]
  • Super-Higgs in Superspace
    Article Super-Higgs in Superspace Gianni Tallarita 1,* and Moritz McGarrie 2 1 Departamento de Ciencias, Facultad de Artes Liberales, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Santiago 7941169, Chile 2 Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, DESY, Notkestrasse 85, 22607 Hamburg, Germany; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected] Received: 1 April 2019; Accepted: 10 June 2019; Published: 14 June 2019 Abstract: We determine the effective gravitational couplings in superspace whose components reproduce the supergravity Higgs effect for the constrained Goldstino multiplet. It reproduces the known Gravitino sector while constraining the off-shell completion. We show that these couplings arise by computing them as quantum corrections. This may be useful for phenomenological studies and model-building. We give an example of its application to multiple Goldstini. Keywords: supersymmetry; Goldstino; superspace 1. Introduction The spontaneous breakdown of global supersymmetry generates a massless Goldstino [1,2], which is well described by the Akulov-Volkov (A-V) effective action [3]. When supersymmetry is made local, the Gravitino “eats” the Goldstino of the A-V action to become massive: The super-Higgs mechanism [4,5]. In terms of superfields, the constrained Goldstino multiplet FNL [6–12] is equivalent to the A-V formulation (see also [13–17]). It is, therefore, natural to extend the description of supergravity with this multiplet, in superspace, to one that can reproduce the super-Higgs mechanism. In this paper we address two issues—first we demonstrate how the Gravitino, Goldstino, and multiple Goldstini obtain a mass. Secondly, by using the Spurion analysis, we write down the most minimal set of new terms in superspace that incorporate both supergravity and the Goldstino multiplet in order to reproduce the super-Higgs mechanism of [5,18] at lowest order in M¯ Pl.
    [Show full text]
  • Gravitino Dark Matter with Constraints from Higgs Boson Mass …
    Vol. 44 (2013) ACTA PHYSICA POLONICA B No 11 GRAVITINO DARK MATTER WITH CONSTRAINTS FROM HIGGS BOSON MASS AND SNEUTRINO DECAYS∗ L. Roszkowskiy, S. Trojanowski National Centre for Nuclear Research, Hoża 69, 00-681, Warszawa, Poland K. Turzyński Institute of Theoretical Physics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw Hoża 69, 00-681, Warszawa, Poland K. Jedamzik Laboratoire de Physique Theorique et Astroparticules, UMR5207-CRNS Université Montpellier II, 34095 Montpellier, France (Received October 21, 2013) We investigate gravitino dark matter produced thermally at high tem- peratures and in decays of a long-lived sneutrino in the framework of the Non-Universal Higgs Model (NUHM). We apply relevant collider and cos- mological bounds. Generally, we find allowed values of the reheating tem- 9 perature TR below 10 GeV, i.e. somewhat smaller than the values needed for thermal leptogenesis, even with a conservative lower bound of 122 GeV on the Higgs boson mass. Requiring mass values closer to 126 GeV implies 7 TR below 10 GeV and the gravitino mass less than 10 GeV. DOI:10.5506/APhysPolB.44.2367 PACS numbers: 14.80.Ly, 14.80.Da, 95.35.+d, 26.35.+c Gravitino as the lightest supersymmetric particle is a well-motivated dark matter (DM) candidate. It is extremely weakly interacting and hence can escape detection in direct searches. Scenarios with gravitino DM can be, however, strongly constrained by the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN). ∗ Presented at the XXXVII International Conference of Theoretical Physics “Matter to the Deepest” Ustroń, Poland, September 1–6, 2013. y On leave of absence from the University of Sheffield, UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Structure of Matter
    STRUCTURE OF MATTER Discoveries and Mysteries Part 2 Rolf Landua CERN Particles Fields Electromagnetic Weak Strong 1895 - e Brownian Radio- 190 Photon motion activity 1 1905 0 Atom 191 Special relativity 0 Nucleus Quantum mechanics 192 p+ Wave / particle 0 Fermions / Bosons 193 Spin + n Fermi Beta- e Yukawa Antimatter Decay 0 π 194 μ - exchange 0 π 195 P, C, CP τ- QED violation p- 0 Particle zoo 196 νe W bosons Higgs 2 0 u d s EW unification νμ 197 GUT QCD c Colour 1975 0 τ- STANDARD MODEL SUSY 198 b ντ Superstrings g 0 W Z 199 3 generations 0 t 2000 ν mass 201 0 WEAK INTERACTION p n Electron (“Beta”) Z Z+1 Henri Becquerel (1900): Beta-radiation = electrons Two-body reaction? But electron energy/momentum is continuous: two-body two-body momentum energy W. Pauli (1930) postulate: - there is a third particle involved + + - neutral - very small or zero mass p n e 휈 - “Neutrino” (Fermi) FERMI THEORY (1934) p n Point-like interaction e 휈 Enrico Fermi W = Overlap of the four wave functions x Universal constant G -5 2 G ~ 10 / M p = “Fermi constant” FERMI: PREDICTION ABOUT NEUTRINO INTERACTIONS p n E = 1 MeV: σ = 10-43 cm2 휈 e (Range: 1020 cm ~ 100 l.yr) time Reines, Cowan (1956): Neutrino ‘beam’ from reactor Reactions prove existence of neutrinos and then ….. THE PREDICTION FAILED !! σ ‘Unitarity limit’ > 100 % probability E2 ~ 300 GeV GLASGOW REFORMULATES FERMI THEORY (1958) p n S. Glashow W(eak) boson Very short range interaction e 휈 If mass of W boson ~ 100 GeV : theory o.k.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Progressing Beyond the Standard Models
    i i “proc16” — 2016/12/12 — 10:17 — page 177 — #193 i i BLED WORKSHOPS Proceedings to the 19th Workshop IN PHYSICS What Comes Beyond ::: (p. 177) VOL. 17, NO. 2 Bled, Slovenia, July 11–19, 2016 10 Progressing Beyond the Standard Models B.A. Robson ? The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia Abstract. The Standard Model of particle physics (SMPP) has enjoyed considerable success in describing a whole range of phenomena in particle physics. However, the model is con- sidered incomplete because it provides little understanding of other empirical observations such as the existence of three generations of leptons and quarks, which apart from mass have similar properties. This paper examines the basic assumptions upon which the SMPP is built and compares these with the assumptions of an alternative model, the Generation Model (GM). The GM provides agreement with the SMPP for those phenomena which the SMPP is able to describe, but it is shown that the assumptions inherent in the GM allow progress beyond the SMPP. In particular the GM leads to new paradigms for both mass and gravity. The new theory for gravity provides an understanding of both dark matter and dark energy, representing progress beyond the Standard Model of Cosmology (SMC). Povzetek. Standardni Model elektrosibkeˇ in barvne interakcije zelo uspesnoˇ opiseˇ veliko pojavov v fiziki osnovnih delcev. Model imajo kljub temu za nepopoln, ker ne pojasni vrste empiricnihˇ dejstev, kot je obstoj treh generacij leptonov in kvarkov, ki imajo, razen razlicnihˇ mas, zelo podobne lastnosti. V prispevku obravnavamo osnovne predpostavke, na katerih so zgradili ta model in jih primerjamo s predpostavkami alternativnega modela, generacijskega modela.
    [Show full text]