Baryogenesis, Leptogenesis, and New Interactions
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Baryogenesis, Leptogenesis, and New Interactions • The baryon (matter) asymmetry • The Sakharov conditions • Possible mechanisms • A new very weak interaction Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Recent Reviews • A. Riotto and M. Trodden, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 49, 35 (1999) [arXiv:hep-ph/9901362]. • M. Trodden, Electroweak baryogenesis, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 1463 (1999) [arXiv:hep-ph/9803479]. • W. Bernreuther, CP violation and baryogenesis, Lect. Notes Phys. 591, 237 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0205279]. • M. Dine and A. Kusenko, The origin of the matter-antimatter asymmetry, arXiv:hep-ph/0303065. • A. D. Dolgov, Cosmological matter antimatter asymmetry and antimatter in the universe, arXiv:hep-ph/0211260. Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) The baryon (matter) asymmetry The baryon asymmetry: • Matter and antimatter are (almost) symmetric, but our part of the universe involves matter only • nB ∼ 6.1+0.7 ×10−10 (Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN)), nγ −0.5 6.14 ± 0.25×10−10 (WMAP) • nB¯ ∼ 0 (small amounts consistent with secondary production) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) − + BBN: νen ↔ e p and e n ↔ ν¯ep keep nn/np in equilibrium as long as it is rapid enough Freezeout at T? ∼ 1 MeV, when Γweak ∼ H nn −(mn−mp+µνe)/T? 4 = e → He (µν ∼ νe − ν¯e asymmetry) np e 4 4n4He He mass fraction: Yp = depends strongly on ξe ≡ nH nB µν /T?, weakly on η ≡ e nγ D nB +0.7 −10 Y2 = depends on η (baryometer) ⇒ ∼ 6.1 ×10 H nγ −0.5 Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Independent determination of η from CMB ⇒nB ∼ 6.14 ± nγ 0.25×10−10 Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Angular Scale 90° 2° 0.5° 0.2° 6000 TT Cross Power Spectrum 5000 Λ - CDM All Data WMAP 4000 CBI ) 2 ACBAR (µK π /2 3000 l +1)C l ( l 2000 1000 0 TE Cross Power 3 Reionization Spectrum ) 2 2 (µK π /2 l 1 +1)C l ( 0 -1 0 10 40100 200 400 800 1400 Multipole moment (l) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) • nB¯ ∼ 0 (small amounts consistent with secondary production) > ¯ • For T ∼ GeV, had nB ∼ nB¯ ∼ nγ; most BB pairs annihilated, −18 leaving small baryon excess (Otherwise, nB = nB¯ ∼ 10 nγ) n −n • Hence, need B B¯ ∼ 6×10−10 for T ∼> GeV nγ • Neutrality: ne− ∼ nB; ne+ ∼ 0 (up to secondary production) • Large neutrino-antineutrino asymmetry possible (important for BBN), but unlikely Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) (Barger, Kneller, Marfatia, PL, Steigman) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Origin: Where did the asymmetry come from? Prexisting asymmetry? Only if no inflation Domains of matter and antimatter? • Absence of annihilation radiation implies separation > 10 Mpc (probably much stronger by CMB) • Separation of symmetric plasma? No known mechanism. −6 Causality constraints imply regions contain less than 10 M • Domains by spontaneous CP breaking possible, but hard to avoid domain wall difficulties Baryogenesis: dynamical generation of asymmetry from initially symmetric conditions Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) The Sakharov conditions Basic ideas worked out by Sakharov in 1967, but no concrete model 1. Baryon number violation 2. CP violation: to distinguish baryons from antibaryons 3. Nonequilibrium of B-violating processes Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) 1. Baryon number violation • Processes involving black holes • Standard model: tunneling between vacua with different B (Rate 2 at T = 0 is ∼ e−4πsin θW /α ∼ 10−170!) • Grand unification (GUT): new interactions lead to proton decay Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) 2. CP violation: to distinguish baryons from antibaryons • Complex phases introduced by mass terms or interactions with spin-0 • Need interference of two amplitudes • Active programs in neutrino physics and heavy (b) quark decays to further explore CP violation Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) 3. Nonequilibrium of B-violating processes (or CPT violation due to expanding universe) • Out of equilibrium decays of heavy particles (n e−m/T ) • Phase transitions • Classical field dynamics (e.g., inflaton) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Grand Unification Pati-Salam, 73; Georgi-Glashow, 74 > Strong, weak, electromagnetic unified at Q ∼ MX MZ • Simple group G → SU(3)×SU(2)×U(1) MX • Gravity not included (perhaps not ambitious enough) • Couplings meet at MX ∼ 1014 GeV (w/o SUSY) (works much better with SUSY 16 →MX ∼ 10 GeV) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) 4 qX = 3 1 qY = 3 • q, q,¯ l, ¯l unified (in same multiplets)⇒ – Charge quantization (no U(1) factors) – Proton decay mediated by new gauge bosons, e.g. p→e+π0 (other modes in SUSY GUTS) 4 MX 30 14 – τp ∼ 2 5 ∼ 10 yr for MX ∼ 10 GeV α mp (1038 yr in SUSY, but faster p→νK¯ +) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Possible mechanisms for generating the asymmetry GUT baryogenesis (Yoshimura, 1979) • Out of equilibrium decay of heavy (M ∼> 1013 GeV) colored spin-0 particle H (grand unification partner of Higgs boson): H→q¯q¯ or ql; H¯ →qq orq ¯¯l • Equal total rates (CPT conservation) but unequal partial rates (CP violation) • Large enough asymmetry generated (for nonminimal model) • B − L conserved ⇒B = L Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) • Hard to combine with inflation unless very high reheating T • Electroweak baryon number unsuppressed at T ∼> 100 GeV (electroweak scale); wipes out asymmetry with B = L Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Leptogenesis: (Fukugita, Yanagida) CDHSW • Seesaw model of neutrino CHORUS NOMAD mass: mixing between light 100 KARMEN2 NOMAD LSND CHORUS and heavy neutrino Bugey BNL E776 SuperK 2 CHOO mD 10–3 Z PaloVerde mlight ∼ mD m heavy ] LMA 2 KamLAND SMA [eV where mD is similar to 2 –6 m 10 quark or charged lepton ∆ 12 LOW mass, and mheavy ∼ 10 νe↔νX νµ↔ντ GeV ν ↔ν 10–9 e τ νe↔νµ VAC • Successful for neutrino mass scales, but mixings –12 10 –4 –2 0 2 problematic 10 10 10 10 tan2θ Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Leptonic CP violating Phases • Weak charge-raising current 3 µ† X 0 µ 5 0 0 µ 5 0 JW = ν¯mγ (1 − γ )em +u ¯mγ (1 − γ )dm m=1 e− µ 5 − = (¯ν1ν¯2ν¯3)γ (1 − γ )VMNS µ τ − d µ 5 + (¯u c¯ t¯)γ (1 − γ )VCKM s b u† d – VCKM = AL AL is 3×3 unitary Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix from mismatch between weak and Yukawa interactions Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) ν† e – VMNS = AL AL is leptonic analogue f – AL relates weak and mass eigenstate left-handed fields • VCKM has 3 angles and 1 CP-violating phase • For Dirac neutrinos, VMNS also has one CP-violating phase, measurable in oscillations, e.g., νµ→νe vs ν¯µ→ν¯e • For Majorana neutrinos, VMNS has additional factor diag (eiφ1, eiφ2, 1) (Majorana phases, due to fewer physical fields with unobservable phases) – Observable in principle in neutrinoless double beta decay, which P3 2 depends on i=1 Veimνi – Probably impossible in practice due to nuclear matrix element uncertainties (Barger, Glashow, PL, Marfatia) • Leptogenesis has 3 additional phases from Yukawa couplings to heavy right-handed neutrinos Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) • Out of equilibrium decays of Nheavy→l + Higgs 6= Nheavy→¯l + Higgs created a lepton asymmetry • Electroweak tunneling (actually thermal fluctucation) then converts some of the lepton asymmetry into a baryon asymmetry! • Difficulties in supersymmetric version: gravitino problem suggests reheating temperature too low (unless Nheavy produced nonthermally) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Electroweak baryogenesis Utilize the electroweak (B-violating) tunneling to generate the asymmetry at time of electroweak phase transition (Kuzmin, Rubakov, Shaposhnikov) Off the wall scenario (Cohen, Kaplan, Nelson) V eff T = T 2 > TC • Strong first order phase transition from electroweak symmetry unbroken (massless W , Z, fermions) to broken phase T = TC (massive W , Z, fermions) T = T < T proceeds by nucleation and 1 C 0 φ φ expansion of bubbles crit (Figures: W. Bernreuther, hep-ph/0205279) Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) • CP violation by asymmetric reflection/transmission of quarks and leptons from the wall (e.g. quarks transmitted, antiquarks reflected) • Electroweak B violation in unbroken phase outside wall > • Scenario requires strong first order transition, v(Tc)/Tc ∼ 1−1.3 and adequate CP violation in expanding bubble wall v Wall unbroken phase broken phase q φ = 0 q q q becomes our world CP Γ Sph ~_ 0 CP B + L _ _ q q _ _ q q Γ Sph >> H B + L Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) Implementation of “off the wall” Standard model: no strong first order for Mh > 114.4 GeV; CP violation too small Minimal supersymmetric extension (MSSM): small parameter space for light Higgs and stop NMSSM (extension to include extra Higgs fields): can have strong first order but cosmological domain walls Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) A new very weak interaction? Extended gauge symmetry: (extra Z boson with mass ∼ TeV) (M. Cvetiˇc, PL, et al; J. Erler, PL, T. Li) • Expected in many string theories, grand unification, dynamical symmetry breaking • Solves supersymmetric mass (µ) problem Germantown (December 3, 2003) Paul Langacker (Penn) MZ [GeV] 2500 • Typically MZ0 > 500 − 800 Zχ GeV (Tevatron, LEP 2, WNC), 2000 −3 |θZ−Z0| < few