DOCSLIB.ORG

Lecture 18 - Beyond the Standard Model

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Lecture 18 - Beyond the Standard Model Why is the Standard Model incomplete? • Grand Unification • Baryon and Lepton Number Violation • More Higgs Bosons? • Supersymmetry (SUSY) • Experimental signatures for SUSY • 1 Why is the Standard Model incomplete? The Standard Model does not explain the following: The relationship between different interactions • (strong, electroweak and gravity) The nature of dark matter and dark energy • The matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe • The existence of three generations of quarks and leptons • Conservation of lepton and baryon number • Neutrino masses and mixing • The pattern of weak quark couplings (CKM matrix) • 2 Grand Unification The strong, electromagnetic and weak couplings αs, e and g are 15 running constants. Can they be unified at MX 10 GeV? ≈ We would also like to include gravity at the Planck scale 19 MX 10 GeV. Is string theory a candidate for this? ≈ 3 SU(5) Grand Unified Theory (GUT) Simplest theory that unifies strong and electroweak interactions (Georgi & Glashow) 15 Introduces 12 gauge bosons X and Y at MX 10 GeV ≈ These are known as leptoquarks. They make charged and neutral couplings between leptons and quarks Explains why Qν Qe = Qu Qd − − Existence of three colors is related to fractional quark charges Predicts proton decay p π0e+ → 4 2 Prediction of sin θW Loop diagram with ff¯ pair couples a Z0 boson to a photon In electroweak theory the Z0 and γ are orthogonal states The sum of loop diagrams over all fermion pairs must be zero: 2 2 P QI3 X Q(I3 Q sin θW )=0 sin θW = 2 − P Q In a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) the sum is taken over a fermion supermultiplet [νe,e,dr,dg,db] 2 2 sin θW = 0.375, but at electroweak scale sin θW = 0.22! 2 GUT predicts the running of sin θW from 0.215 at √s = MW to 0.375 at 1015 GeV 5 Proton Decay The leptoquark couplings in GUTs do not conserve baryon and lepton number, only the combination B-L 4 0 + MX 31 Γ(p π e ) = 0 τp 2 5 10 years → 6 ∝ α mp ≈ This is age of universe - not a problem for our existence ≫ Large underground experiments (Kamiokande ...) have looked for 32 proton decays. None seen so τp > 2 10 years. × Minimal SU(5) GUT is ruled out by absence of proton decay signal Non-minimal SO(10) GUT is not ruled out. Predicts different decay modes, e.g. p K+ν¯. → 6 Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry The Sakharov conditions for generating the matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe: C and CP violation in quark or lepton decays. • Baryon number violation. • Departure from thermal equilibrium during the early universe. • Baryogenesis: Non-conservation of baryon number in quark decays and CP violation between quark and antiquark decays. Note that CP violation due to CKM matrix is too small by 109 × Leptogenesis: Non-conservation of lepton number and CP violation in the lepton sector. This leads to non-conservation of baryon number by conservation of B-L. Could be associated with neutrino masses and mixing 7 Multiple Higgs Doublets The Standard Model only requires one Higgs doublet, and one physical Higgs boson H0 It is straightforward to increase the number of doublets, e.g. A doublet that couples to d-type quarks and charged leptons A doublet that couples to u-type quarks Suppresses Higgs contributions to flavour-changing neutral currents In a two Higgs doublet model there are eight φ variables of which three get “eaten” during electroweak symmetry breaking. There are two vacuum expectation values v1, v2 with 2 2 2 tan β = v1/v2, and v1 + v2 = v where v = 246 GeV There are five physical Higgs bosons H+, H−, h0, H0, A0 N.B. there are no charged Higgs bosons in the Standard Model! 8 Experimental Signatures for Charged Higgs For a charged Higgs 100 < MH+ < 170 GeV: t bH+ H+ W +h0 h0 b¯b → → → For a light charged Higgs MH+ < 100 GeV: + − + − + − − e e H H H c¯b H τ ντ → → → Indirect constraints from + + rare decays B τ ντ → and b sγ. → Expressed as limits in + MH and tan β. 9 Supersymmetry (SUSY) Every Standard Model (SM) particle gets a supersymmetric (SUSY) partner: New S = 1/2 fermions New S = 0 bosons (sfermions) (neutralinos and charginos) Quarks Squarks Gluon Gluino ⇔ ⇔ Leptons Sleptons Photon Photino ⇔ ⇔ Neutrinos Sneutrinos W,Z bosons Wino,Zino ⇔ ⇔ Higgs boson Higgsino ⇔ 10 Pros and Cons of SUSY Solves mass hierarchy problem (GUT Electroweak scale) ≫ Higgs and fermion loop contributions cancel precisely with SUSY partners at all mass scales between 102 and 1014 GeV Suppresses flavour-changing neutral currents The lightest neutralino is a dark matter candidate No experimental evidence yet for SUSY particles SUSY particle masses and mixings are unknown Many new parameters compared to Standard Model String theories that include gravity are naturally supersymmetric 11 The Minimal Supersymmetric Model (MSSM) The MSSM requires two Higgs doublets: The masses of the lightest Higgs, h0 and H± are 100 GeV ≈ The MSSM conserves R-parity: The number of SUSY particles is conserved (can’t change SUSY particles into normal particles) The MSSM assumes minimal flavour violation (MFV) Flavour couplings of SUSY partners are same as Standard Model All data are consistent with MFV Indirect constraints on the allowed parameters of the MSSM ⇒ 12 SUSY masses from Direct Searches From not seeing anything at LEP-II: chargino masses > 100GeV sleptonmasses > 100 GeV From not seeing anything at the Tevatron: gluino mass > 300 GeV squark masses > 300 GeV ... but a light stop squark is still allowed > 100 GeV From these can infer a lower bound on the lightest SUSY particle neutralino masses > 50GeV (LSP) This still allows the LSP to be the dark matter of the universe! SUSY Higgs masses: 114 < mh < 150 GeV mH+ > 80 GeV mA > 90 GeV 13 Squarks and Gluinos at the Large Hadron Collider An example of a signature for SUSY at the LHC: Cascade from gluino to lightest neutralino (stable) gluino squark(+¯q) neutralino(+q) slepton(+ℓ¯) LSP (+ℓ) → → → → Can reconstruct gluino, squark and neutralino masses from measurements of leptons, quarks and missing energy 14 International Linear Collider (ILC) Reference Design http://www.linearcollider.org February 2007 500 GeV e+e− collider 30 km long Cost $ 6.9B e+e− sleptons The next thing after LHC? → 15.
Recommended publications
  • Trinity of Strangeon Matter

    Trinity of Strangeon Matter

    Trinity of Strangeon Matter Renxin Xu1,2 1School of Physics and Kavli Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China, 2State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China; [email protected] Abstract. Strangeon is proposed to be the constituent of bulk strong matter, as an analogy of nucleon for an atomic nucleus. The nature of both nucleon matter (2 quark flavors, u and d) and strangeon matter (3 flavors, u, d and s) is controlled by the strong-force, but the baryon number of the former is much smaller than that of the latter, to be separated by a critical number of Ac ∼ 109. While micro nucleon matter (i.e., nuclei) is focused by nuclear physicists, astrophysical/macro strangeon matter could be manifested in the form of compact stars (strangeon star), cosmic rays (strangeon cosmic ray), and even dark matter (strangeon dark matter). This trinity of strangeon matter is explained, that may impact dramatically on today’s physics. Symmetry does matter: from Plato to flavour. Understanding the world’s structure, either micro or macro/cosmic, is certainly essential for Human beings to avoid superstitious belief as well as to move towards civilization. The basic unit of normal matter was speculated even in the pre-Socratic period of the Ancient era (the basic stuff was hypothesized to be indestructible “atoms” by Democritus), but it was a belief that symmetry, which is well-defined in mathematics, should play a key role in understanding the material structure, such as the Platonic solids (i.e., the five regular convex polyhedrons).
  • The Five Common Particles

    The Five Common Particles

    The Five Common Particles The world around you consists of only three particles: protons, neutrons, and electrons. Protons and neutrons form the nuclei of atoms, and electrons glue everything together and create chemicals and materials. Along with the photon and the neutrino, these particles are essentially the only ones that exist in our solar system, because all the other subatomic particles have half-lives of typically 10-9 second or less, and vanish almost the instant they are created by nuclear reactions in the Sun, etc. Particles interact via the four fundamental forces of nature. Some basic properties of these forces are summarized below. (Other aspects of the fundamental forces are also discussed in the Summary of Particle Physics document on this web site.) Force Range Common Particles It Affects Conserved Quantity gravity infinite neutron, proton, electron, neutrino, photon mass-energy electromagnetic infinite proton, electron, photon charge -14 strong nuclear force ≈ 10 m neutron, proton baryon number -15 weak nuclear force ≈ 10 m neutron, proton, electron, neutrino lepton number Every particle in nature has specific values of all four of the conserved quantities associated with each force. The values for the five common particles are: Particle Rest Mass1 Charge2 Baryon # Lepton # proton 938.3 MeV/c2 +1 e +1 0 neutron 939.6 MeV/c2 0 +1 0 electron 0.511 MeV/c2 -1 e 0 +1 neutrino ≈ 1 eV/c2 0 0 +1 photon 0 eV/c2 0 0 0 1) MeV = mega-electron-volt = 106 eV. It is customary in particle physics to measure the mass of a particle in terms of how much energy it would represent if it were converted via E = mc2.
  • Lepton Flavor and Number Conservation, and Physics Beyond the Standard Model

    Lepton Flavor and Number Conservation, and Physics Beyond the Standard Model

    Lepton Flavor and Number Conservation, and Physics Beyond the Standard Model Andr´ede Gouv^ea1 and Petr Vogel2 1 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, 60208, USA 2 Kellogg Radiation Laboratory, Caltech, Pasadena, California, 91125, USA April 1, 2013 Abstract The physics responsible for neutrino masses and lepton mixing remains unknown. More ex- perimental data are needed to constrain and guide possible generalizations of the standard model of particle physics, and reveal the mechanism behind nonzero neutrino masses. Here, the physics associated with searches for the violation of lepton-flavor conservation in charged-lepton processes and the violation of lepton-number conservation in nuclear physics processes is summarized. In the first part, several aspects of charged-lepton flavor violation are discussed, especially its sensitivity to new particles and interactions beyond the standard model of particle physics. The discussion concentrates mostly on rare processes involving muons and electrons. In the second part, the sta- tus of the conservation of total lepton number is discussed. The discussion here concentrates on current and future probes of this apparent law of Nature via searches for neutrinoless double beta decay, which is also the most sensitive probe of the potential Majorana nature of neutrinos. arXiv:1303.4097v2 [hep-ph] 29 Mar 2013 1 1 Introduction In the absence of interactions that lead to nonzero neutrino masses, the Standard Model Lagrangian is invariant under global U(1)e × U(1)µ × U(1)τ rotations of the lepton fields. In other words, if neutrinos are massless, individual lepton-flavor numbers { electron-number, muon-number, and tau-number { are expected to be conserved.
  • Quantum Field Theory*

    Quantum Field Theory*

    Quantum Field Theory y Frank Wilczek Institute for Advanced Study, School of Natural Science, Olden Lane, Princeton, NJ 08540 I discuss the general principles underlying quantum eld theory, and attempt to identify its most profound consequences. The deep est of these consequences result from the in nite number of degrees of freedom invoked to implement lo cality.Imention a few of its most striking successes, b oth achieved and prosp ective. Possible limitation s of quantum eld theory are viewed in the light of its history. I. SURVEY Quantum eld theory is the framework in which the regnant theories of the electroweak and strong interactions, which together form the Standard Mo del, are formulated. Quantum electro dynamics (QED), b esides providing a com- plete foundation for atomic physics and chemistry, has supp orted calculations of physical quantities with unparalleled precision. The exp erimentally measured value of the magnetic dip ole moment of the muon, 11 (g 2) = 233 184 600 (1680) 10 ; (1) exp: for example, should b e compared with the theoretical prediction 11 (g 2) = 233 183 478 (308) 10 : (2) theor: In quantum chromo dynamics (QCD) we cannot, for the forseeable future, aspire to to comparable accuracy.Yet QCD provides di erent, and at least equally impressive, evidence for the validity of the basic principles of quantum eld theory. Indeed, b ecause in QCD the interactions are stronger, QCD manifests a wider variety of phenomena characteristic of quantum eld theory. These include esp ecially running of the e ective coupling with distance or energy scale and the phenomenon of con nement.
  • Accessible Lepton-Number-Violating Models and Negligible Neutrino Masses

    Accessible Lepton-Number-Violating Models and Negligible Neutrino Masses

    PHYSICAL REVIEW D 100, 075033 (2019) Accessible lepton-number-violating models and negligible neutrino masses † ‡ Andr´e de Gouvêa ,1,* Wei-Chih Huang,2, Johannes König,2, and Manibrata Sen 1,3,§ 1Northwestern University, Department of Physics and Astronomy, 2145 Sheridan Road, Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA 2CP3-Origins, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark 3Department of Physics, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, California 94720, USA (Received 18 July 2019; published 25 October 2019) Lepton-number violation (LNV), in general, implies nonzero Majorana masses for the Standard Model neutrinos. Since neutrino masses are very small, for generic candidate models of the physics responsible for LNV, the rates for almost all experimentally accessible LNV observables—except for neutrinoless double- beta decay—are expected to be exceedingly small. Guided by effective-operator considerations of LNV phenomena, we identify a complete family of models where lepton number is violated but the generated Majorana neutrino masses are tiny, even if the new-physics scale is below 1 TeV. We explore the phenomenology of these models, including charged-lepton flavor-violating phenomena and baryon- number-violating phenomena, identifying scenarios where the allowed rates for μ− → eþ-conversion in nuclei are potentially accessible to next-generation experiments. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.075033 I. INTRODUCTION Experimentally, in spite of ambitious ongoing experi- Lepton number and baryon number are, at the classical mental efforts, there is no evidence for the violation of level, accidental global symmetries of the renormalizable lepton-number or baryon-number conservation [5]. There Standard Model (SM) Lagrangian.1 If one allows for are a few different potential explanations for these (neg- generic nonrenormalizable operators consistent with the ative) experimental results, assuming degrees-of-freedom SM gauge symmetries and particle content, lepton number beyond those of the SM exist.
  • Beyond the Standard Model Physics at CLIC

    Beyond the Standard Model Physics at CLIC

    RM3-TH/19-2 Beyond the Standard Model physics at CLIC Roberto Franceschini Università degli Studi Roma Tre and INFN Roma Tre, Via della Vasca Navale 84, I-00146 Roma, ITALY Abstract A summary of the recent results from CERN Yellow Report on the CLIC potential for new physics is presented, with emphasis on the di- rect search for new physics scenarios motivated by the open issues of the Standard Model. arXiv:1902.10125v1 [hep-ph] 25 Feb 2019 Talk presented at the International Workshop on Future Linear Colliders (LCWS2018), Arlington, Texas, 22-26 October 2018. C18-10-22. 1 Introduction The Compact Linear Collider (CLIC) [1,2,3,4] is a proposed future linear e+e− collider based on a novel two-beam accelerator scheme [5], which in recent years has reached several milestones and established the feasibility of accelerating structures necessary for a new large scale accelerator facility (see e.g. [6]). The project is foreseen to be carried out in stages which aim at precision studies of Standard Model particles such as the Higgs boson and the top quark and allow the exploration of new physics at the high energy frontier. The detailed staging of the project is presented in Ref. [7,8], where plans for the target luminosities at each energy are outlined. These targets can be adjusted easily in case of discoveries at the Large Hadron Collider or at earlier CLIC stages. In fact the collision energy, up to 3 TeV, can be set by a suitable choice of the length of the accelerator and the duration of the data taking can also be adjusted to follow hints that the LHC may provide in the years to come.
  • Baryon and Lepton Number Anomalies in the Standard Model

    Baryon and Lepton Number Anomalies in the Standard Model

    Appendix A Baryon and Lepton Number Anomalies in the Standard Model A.1 Baryon Number Anomalies The introduction of a gauged baryon number leads to the inclusion of quantum anomalies in the theory, refer to Fig. 1.2. The anomalies, for the baryonic current, are given by the following, 2 For SU(3) U(1)B , ⎛ ⎞ 3 A (SU(3)2U(1) ) = Tr[λaλb B]=3 × ⎝ B − B ⎠ = 0. (A.1) 1 B 2 i i lef t right 2 For SU(2) U(1)B , 3 × 3 3 A (SU(2)2U(1) ) = Tr[τ aτ b B]= B = . (A.2) 2 B 2 Q 2 ( )2 ( ) For U 1 Y U 1 B , 3 A (U(1)2 U(1) ) = Tr[YYB]=3 × 3(2Y 2 B − Y 2 B − Y 2 B ) =− . (A.3) 3 Y B Q Q u u d d 2 ( )2 ( ) For U 1 BU 1 Y , A ( ( )2 ( ) ) = [ ]= × ( 2 − 2 − 2 ) = . 4 U 1 BU 1 Y Tr BBY 3 3 2BQYQ Bu Yu Bd Yd 0 (A.4) ( )3 For U 1 B , A ( ( )3 ) = [ ]= × ( 3 − 3 − 3) = . 5 U 1 B Tr BBB 3 3 2BQ Bu Bd 0 (A.5) © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 133 N. D. Barrie, Cosmological Implications of Quantum Anomalies, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94715-0 134 Appendix A: Baryon and Lepton Number Anomalies in the Standard Model 2 Fig. A.1 1-Loop corrections to a SU(2) U(1)B , where the loop contains only left-handed quarks, ( )2 ( ) and b U 1 Y U 1 B where the loop contains only quarks For U(1)B , A6(U(1)B ) = Tr[B]=3 × 3(2BQ − Bu − Bd ) = 0, (A.6) where the factor of 3 × 3 is a result of there being three generations of quarks and three colours for each quark.
  • 1 Drawing Feynman Diagrams

    1 Drawing Feynman Diagrams

    1 Drawing Feynman Diagrams 1. A fermion (quark, lepton, neutrino) is drawn by a straight line with an arrow pointing to the left: f f 2. An antifermion is drawn by a straight line with an arrow pointing to the right: f f 3. A photon or W ±, Z0 boson is drawn by a wavy line: γ W ±;Z0 4. A gluon is drawn by a curled line: g 5. The emission of a photon from a lepton or a quark doesn’t change the fermion: γ l; q l; q But a photon cannot be emitted from a neutrino: γ ν ν 6. The emission of a W ± from a fermion changes the flavour of the fermion in the following way: − − − 2 Q = −1 e µ τ u c t Q = + 3 1 Q = 0 νe νµ ντ d s b Q = − 3 But for quarks, we have an additional mixing between families: u c t d s b This means that when emitting a W ±, an u quark for example will mostly change into a d quark, but it has a small chance to change into a s quark instead, and an even smaller chance to change into a b quark. Similarly, a c will mostly change into a s quark, but has small chances of changing into an u or b. Note that there is no horizontal mixing, i.e. an u never changes into a c quark! In practice, we will limit ourselves to the light quarks (u; d; s): 1 DRAWING FEYNMAN DIAGRAMS 2 u d s Some examples for diagrams emitting a W ±: W − W + e− νe u d And using quark mixing: W + u s To know the sign of the W -boson, we use charge conservation: the sum of the charges at the left hand side must equal the sum of the charges at the right hand side.
  • Properties of Baryons in the Chiral Quark Model

    Properties of Baryons in the Chiral Quark Model

    Properties of Baryons in the Chiral Quark Model Tommy Ohlsson Teknologie licentiatavhandling Kungliga Tekniska Hogskolan¨ Stockholm 1997 Properties of Baryons in the Chiral Quark Model Tommy Ohlsson Licentiate Dissertation Theoretical Physics Department of Physics Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, Sweden 1997 Typeset in LATEX Akademisk avhandling f¨or teknologie licentiatexamen (TeknL) inom ¨amnesomr˚adet teoretisk fysik. Scientific thesis for the degree of Licentiate of Engineering (Lic Eng) in the subject area of Theoretical Physics. TRITA-FYS-8026 ISSN 0280-316X ISRN KTH/FYS/TEO/R--97/9--SE ISBN 91-7170-211-3 c Tommy Ohlsson 1997 Printed in Sweden by KTH H¨ogskoletryckeriet, Stockholm 1997 Properties of Baryons in the Chiral Quark Model Tommy Ohlsson Teoretisk fysik, Institutionen f¨or fysik, Kungliga Tekniska H¨ogskolan SE-100 44 Stockholm SWEDEN E-mail: [email protected] Abstract In this thesis, several properties of baryons are studied using the chiral quark model. The chiral quark model is a theory which can be used to describe low energy phenomena of baryons. In Paper 1, the chiral quark model is studied using wave functions with configuration mixing. This study is motivated by the fact that the chiral quark model cannot otherwise break the Coleman–Glashow sum-rule for the magnetic moments of the octet baryons, which is experimentally broken by about ten standard deviations. Configuration mixing with quark-diquark components is also able to reproduce the octet baryon magnetic moments very accurately. In Paper 2, the chiral quark model is used to calculate the decuplet baryon ++ magnetic moments. The values for the magnetic moments of the ∆ and Ω− are in good agreement with the experimental results.
  • Introduction to Supersymmetry

    Introduction to Supersymmetry

    Introduction to Supersymmetry Pre-SUSY Summer School Corpus Christi, Texas May 15-18, 2019 Stephen P. Martin Northern Illinois University [email protected] 1 Topics: Why: Motivation for supersymmetry (SUSY) • What: SUSY Lagrangians, SUSY breaking and the Minimal • Supersymmetric Standard Model, superpartner decays Who: Sorry, not covered. • For some more details and a slightly better attempt at proper referencing: A supersymmetry primer, hep-ph/9709356, version 7, January 2016 • TASI 2011 lectures notes: two-component fermion notation and • supersymmetry, arXiv:1205.4076. If you find corrections, please do let me know! 2 Lecture 1: Motivation and Introduction to Supersymmetry Motivation: The Hierarchy Problem • Supermultiplets • Particle content of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model • (MSSM) Need for “soft” breaking of supersymmetry • The Wess-Zumino Model • 3 People have cited many reasons why extensions of the Standard Model might involve supersymmetry (SUSY). Some of them are: A possible cold dark matter particle • A light Higgs boson, M = 125 GeV • h Unification of gauge couplings • Mathematical elegance, beauty • ⋆ “What does that even mean? No such thing!” – Some modern pundits ⋆ “We beg to differ.” – Einstein, Dirac, . However, for me, the single compelling reason is: The Hierarchy Problem • 4 An analogy: Coulomb self-energy correction to the electron’s mass A point-like electron would have an infinite classical electrostatic energy. Instead, suppose the electron is a solid sphere of uniform charge density and radius R. An undergraduate problem gives: 3e2 ∆ECoulomb = 20πǫ0R 2 Interpreting this as a correction ∆me = ∆ECoulomb/c to the electron mass: 15 0.86 10− meters m = m + (1 MeV/c2) × .
  • The Standard Model and Beyond Maxim Perelstein, LEPP/Cornell U

    The Standard Model and Beyond Maxim Perelstein, LEPP/Cornell U

    The Standard Model and Beyond Maxim Perelstein, LEPP/Cornell U. NYSS APS/AAPT Conference, April 19, 2008 The basic question of particle physics: What is the world made of? What is the smallest indivisible building block of matter? Is there such a thing? In the 20th century, we made tremendous progress in observing smaller and smaller objects Today’s accelerators allow us to study matter on length scales as short as 10^(-18) m The world’s largest particle accelerator/collider: the Tevatron (located at Fermilab in suburban Chicago) 4 miles long, accelerates protons and antiprotons to 99.9999% of speed of light and collides them head-on, 2 The CDF million collisions/sec. detector The control room Particle Collider is a Giant Microscope! • Optics: diffraction limit, ∆min ≈ λ • Quantum mechanics: particles waves, λ ≈ h¯/p • Higher energies shorter distances: ∆ ∼ 10−13 cm M c2 ∼ 1 GeV • Nucleus: proton mass p • Colliders today: E ∼ 100 GeV ∆ ∼ 10−16 cm • Colliders in near future: E ∼ 1000 GeV ∼ 1 TeV ∆ ∼ 10−17 cm Particle Colliders Can Create New Particles! • All naturally occuring matter consists of particles of just a few types: protons, neutrons, electrons, photons, neutrinos • Most other known particles are highly unstable (lifetimes << 1 sec) do not occur naturally In Special Relativity, energy and momentum are conserved, • 2 but mass is not: energy-mass transfer is possible! E = mc • So, a collision of 2 protons moving relativistically can result in production of particles that are much heavier than the protons, “made out of” their kinetic
  • 6 STANDARD MODEL: One-Loop Structure

    6 STANDARD MODEL: One-Loop Structure

    6 STANDARD MODEL: One-Loop Structure Although the fundamental laws of Nature obey quantum mechanics, mi- croscopically challenged physicists build and use quantum field theories by starting from a classical Lagrangian. The classical approximation, which de- scribes macroscopic objects from physics professors to dinosaurs, has in itself a physical reality, but since it emerges only at later times of cosmological evolution, it is not fundamental. We should therefore not be too surprised if unforeseen special problems and opportunities emerge in the analysis of quantum perturbations away from the classical Lagrangian. The classical Lagrangian is used as input to the path integral, whose eval- uation produces another Lagrangian, the effective Lagrangian, Leff , which encodes all the consequences of the quantum field theory. It contains an infinite series of polynomials in the fields associated with its degrees of free- dom, and their derivatives. The classical Lagrangian is reproduced by this expansion in the lowest power of ~ and of momentum. With the notable exceptions of scale invariance, and of some (anomalous) chiral symmetries, we think that the symmetries of the classical Lagrangian survive the quanti- zation process. Consequently, not all possible polynomials in the fields and their derivatives appear in Leff , only those which respect the symmetries. The terms which are of higher order in ~ yield the quantum corrections to the theory. They are calculated according to a specific, but perilous path, which uses the classical Lagrangian as input. This procedure gener- ates infinities, due to quantum effects at short distances. Fortunately, most fundamental interactions are described by theories where these infinities can be absorbed in a redefinition of the input parameters and fields, i.e.