Arxiv:2007.15563V3 [Hep-Ph] 6 May 2021 Discovery Opportunities for Phenomena Beyond the Stan- Considered in Refs
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CERN-TH-2020-130, MITP/20-041 The Neutrino Magnetic Moment Portal: Cosmology, Astrophysics, and Direct Detection Vedran Brdar,1,a Admir Greljo,2,b Joachim Kopp,2, 3,c and Toby Opferkuch2,d 1Max Planck-Institut f¨urKernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany 2Theoretical Physics Department, CERN, 1 Esplanade des Particules, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland 3PRISMA Cluster of Excellence & Mainz Institute for Theoretical Physics, Johannes Gutenberg University, Staudingerweg 7, 55099 Mainz, Germany We revisit the physics of neutrino magnetic moments, focusing in particular on the case where the right-handed, or sterile, neutrinos are heavier (up to several MeV) than the left-handed Standard Model neutrinos. The discussion is centered around the idea of detecting an upscattering event mediated by a transition magnetic moment in a neutrino or dark matter experiment. Considering neutrinos from all known sources, as well as including all available data from XENON1T and Borex- ino, we derive the strongest up-to-date exclusion limits on the active-to-sterile neutrino transition magnetic moment. We then study complementary constraints from astrophysics and cosmology, performing, in particular, a thorough analysis of BBN. We find that these data sets scrutinize most of the relevant parameter space. Explaining the XENON1T excess with transition magnetic mo- ments is marginally possible if very conservative assumptions are adopted regarding the supernova 1987 A and CMB constraints. Finally, we discuss model-building challenges that arise in scenarios that feature large magnetic moments while keeping neutrino masses well below 1 eV. We present a successful ultraviolet-complete model of this type based on TeV-scale leptoquarks, establishing links with muon magnetic moment, B physics anomalies, and collider searches at the LHC. I. INTRODUCTION only now experiments are reaching the sensitivity to set meaningful constraints [19]. When dark matter detection using nuclear recoils was In view of these new experimental opportunities, our first proposed by Goodman and Witten in 1985 [1], the goals in this paper are the following: in section II, we idea was presented as a parasitical measurement in a neu- discuss the event spectra for solar neutrinos recoiling trino detector proposed a few months earlier [2]. Since against electrons and nuclei in the presence of large neu- then, direct dark matter searches have turned into a vast trino magnetic moments. Unlike much of the previous field of research in its own right, with numerous advanced literature, we allow the mass of the right-handed neutri- experiments and with a community numbering in the nos to be much larger than the mass of their left-handed thousands. With the current generation of detectors, the partners, so that magnetic moment-induced scattering − − A A circle closes as dark matter experiments are becoming processes νL + e ! NR + e and νL + XZ ! NR + XZ sensitive probes of low-energy neutrino physics. In par- can be inelastic. Here, NR denotes the right-handed A ticular, experimental sensitivities are approaching the so- (sterile) neutrinos, and XZ is an atomic nucleus. This called \neutrino floor", an unavoidable background due well-motivated possibility opens up significant new pa- to scattering of solar and atmospheric neutrinos [3{5]. rameter space. We use our event spectra to derive lim- The resulting nuclear and electronic recoils are in gen- its from XENON1T and Borexino data [19, 20], and to eral indistinguishable from a dark matter signal, and predict the sensitivity of future observatories like DAR- are therefore often characterized as a severe limitation WIN. We also show that the excess electron recoil events to dark matter searches. On the other hand, precision reported in ref. [19] can be explained by neutrino tran- measurements of the neutrino floor also offer tremendous sition magnetic moments. This possibility has also been arXiv:2007.15563v3 [hep-ph] 6 May 2021 discovery opportunities for phenomena beyond the Stan- considered in refs. [17, 21], but compared to these pa- dard Model (SM) in neutrino physics [4]. pers, we will employ a much more detailed fit, including In this work, we focus in particular on neutrino a more sophisticated treatment of backgrounds and cov- magnetic moments, which are predicted to be tiny (< ering a much larger recoil energy range. We find qual- −19 10 µB) in the SM [6{13], but can be substantially itative differences compared to the results of ref. [21], larger in theories beyond the SM [10, 12, 14{18]. The and we will discuss their origin. It is worth mentioning possibility that neutrino magnetic moments enhance the that after the announcement of the XENON1T excess neutrino floor in direct dark matter detection experi- in ref. [19], an avalanche of papers has appeared offer- ments has been discussed for quite some time [4], but ing various explanations of the anomaly. Without being exhaustive, let us mention a couple of promising scenar- ios, namely dark photons [22{24]), inelastic dark matter a down-scattering [25{27] and light dark matter decay [28]. [email protected] A proposed explanation in terms of solar axions is more b [email protected] c [email protected] difficult to realize, though see [23, 29, 30]. d [email protected] We will also go well beyond refs. [17, 21] in section III, 2 where we discuss a comprehensive set of constraints on where F µν is the electromagnetic field strength tensor, α neutrino magnetic moments. In particular, we show NR is a right-handed neutrino gauge singlet, and νL is how astrophysical observations (stellar cooling, super- the SM neutrino field of flavor α. In this paper, we will nova 1987A), cosmological measurements (BBN, CMB), assume transition magnetic moments between νµ and NR and terrestrial experiments (neutrino scattering) disfavor unless otherwise stated. This is motivated by the UV vast regions of parameter space, while nevertheless leav- completions we consider in sectionIV. To simplify our ing large swathes open. We present in particular detailed notation, we will omit the superscript α in the follow- 1 simulations of Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) in the ing. The factor 2 in eq. (1) is a convention usually presence of neutrino magnetic moments. We also outline adopted in the literature. We imagine that the opera- model-building strategies for avoiding these constraints, tor in eq. (1) originates from short-distance new physics showing that some options are quite simple, while oth- above the electroweak scale which generates the following ers are fairly exotic. In the final part of the paper, sec- gauge-invariant operators tionIV, we depart from the effective field theory (EFT) description of neutrino magnetic moments and discuss cB cW L ⊃ g0B L¯ Hσ~ µν N + gW a L¯ σaHσ~ µν N : ultraviolet (UV) completions. Typically, large neutrino Λ2 µν L R Λ2 µν L R magnetic moments require fine-tuning to avoid large cor- (2) rections to the neutrino masses. We show explicit models 0 featuring TeV-scale leptoquarks, partially motivated by Here g (g ) is the SU(2)L (hypercharge) gauge coupling, various anomalies in B physics, which elegantly avoid Λ is the cutoff scale, LL denotes a SM lepton doublet, this problem. a Wµν (Bµν ) is the SU(2)L (hypercharge) field strength We will summarize our results and conclude in sec- tensor, σa are Pauli matrices, and H~ ≡ iσ2H∗ is the con- tionV. jugate Higgs field. After electroweak symmetry breaking, the neutrino magnetic moment becomes II. NEUTRINO MAGNETIC MOMENTS AND p 2e v DIRECT DARK MATTER SEARCHES µ = H (c + c ) ; (3) ν Λ2 B W with the Higgs vacuum expectation value v and the A. Modified Solar Neutrino Spectrum H electromagnetic gauge coupling e. The operator in eq. (1) − mediates neutrino{electron scattering, νL + e ! NR + Neutrino magnetic moments are described at low en- − A e , as well as neutrino{nucleus scattering, νL + XZ ! ergies by the effective operator, A NR + XZ . Since the masses of νL and NR can in general µα be different, the scattering may be inelastic. The differ- L = ν F ν¯ασµν N + h.c. ; (1) ential scattering rates for the two processes are [4, 31{35] µ 2 µν L R dσ (ν e ! N e) 1 1 E − 2E − m E − m µ L R = αµ2 − + M 2 r ν e + M 4 r e (4) ν N 2 N 2 2 2 dEr Er Eν 4Eν Erme 8Eν Er me and dσ (ν XA ! N XA) 1 1 E − 2E − m E − m µ L Z R Z = αµ2 Z2F 2(E ) − + M 2 r ν X + M 4 r X ν 1 r N 2 N 2 2 2 dEr Er Eν 4Eν ErmX 8Eν Er mX 2m E − 4E 1 + αµ2 µ2 F 2(E ) X (2E − E )2 − 2E m + M 2 r ν + M 4 : (5) ν X 2 r 2 ν r r X N 2 N 2 Eν Eν Eν Er Here, MN is the right-handed neutrino mass, α is the energies, the substructure of the nucleus is partly re- electromagnetic fine structure constant, Eν is the neu- solved and coherence is broken. This is described by trino energy, Er is the electron or nuclear recoil energy, the nuclear charge and magnetic form factors F1(Er), and Z is the nuclear charge in units of e. Also, mX F2(Er). The charge form factor can be parameterized and µ are the nuclear mass and magnetic moment, −κ2s2=2 3 X as F1(Er) = 3pe [sin(κr) − κr cos(κr)]=(κrp) , with respectively, while A is the number of nucleons. The 2 2 1=3 s = 1 fm, r = R − 5s , R = 1:2A fm, κ = 2mX Er term in the first line of eq.