• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

KCL-PH-TH/2020-42, CERN-TH-2020-131 An Electroweak Monopole, Dirac Quantization and the Weak Mixing Angle John Ellis a,b, P. Q. Hung c and Nick E. Mavromatos a aTheoretical Particle Physics and Cosmology Group, Physics Department, King’s College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, UK. b Theoretical Physics Department, CERN, CH-1211 Gen`eve 23, Switzerland; National Institute of Chemical Physics & Biophysics, R¨avala 10, 10143 Tallinn, Estonia b Department of Physics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4714, USA Abstract We consider an extension of the Standard Model that was proposed recently by one of the current authors (PQH), which admits magnetic monopoles with a mass of order of a few TeV. We impose, in addition to topological quantization in the SU(2) sector of the model, the Dirac Quantization Condition (DQC) required for consistency of the quantum theory of a charged electron in the 2 presence of the monopole. This leads to the prediction sin θW = 1/4, where θW is the weak mixing angle at the energy scale set by the monopole mass. A leading-order renormalization-group analysis 2 yields the value of sin θW ≃ 0.231 at the Z-boson mass, as measured by experiment, under suitable conditions on the spectrum of the extra particles in the model. INTRODUCTION topy properties of the SU(2) group. We show that this condition is not sufficient by itself The electroweak mixing angle θW is a free parame- to guarantee satisfaction of the Dirac Quantization Con- ter within the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics. dition (DQC), However, it becomes possible to predict its value within m g e = , m Z , (2) extensions of the SM, e.g., by embedding the SM in a M 2 ∈ Grand Unified Theory (GUT), where the magnitude of θW is controlled by the details of unification [1–3], or in with gM the magnetic charge, which is required for con- string theory [4]. In SU(5) GUT theories, for instance, sistency of the quantum theory of a charged particle such there is a characteristic tree-level prediction that as the electron in the monopole’s magnetic field [9, 10]. In the model of [7] the DQC must be imposed as an extra 2 sin θW =3/8 (1) condition [11], which leads to the prediction at the GUT scale. This is renormalized by quantum loop 2 sin θW =1/4 (3) effects in the SM that yield the prediction sin2θ 0.20 W ≃ at the Z-boson mass [2], which is close to, but different at the monopole mass scale in the model. This value is 2 arXiv:2008.00464v3 [hep-ph] 8 Jul 2021 from, the experimental value sin θ 0.231 in the MS renormalized by extra particles with masses between m W ≃ Z prescription [5]. The experimental value can be recovered and the monopole mass that appear in the model, and the 2 by including the quantum corrections due to new particle experimental value sin θW 0.231 [5] is recovered under degrees of freedom in the renomalization calculation. For suitable conditions on the spectrum≃ of these particles. example, including the supersymmetric partners of SM particles in the SU(5) GUT calculation reproduces very accurately the experimental value [6]. LIGHT MONOPOLES IN THE MODEL OF [7] 2 In this article we make a different prediction for sin θW in an extension of the SM that is not a high-scale GUT, We now review briefly the main features of the model but rather a theory, proposed by one of the current au- proposed in [7]. It involves non-sterile right-handed neu- thors (PQH) in [7], that includes a topologically non- trinos with masses of the order of the electroweak scale, trivial magnetic monopole with a mass of a few TeV. This which participate in a seesaw mechanism for light neu- magnetic monopole is associated with a real scalar triplet trinos that is testable in principle at colliders, e.g., by of the SU(2) group, in a spirit similar to the Georgi- searching for like-sign dileptons with displaced vertices. Glashow model [8], and obeys a topological quantization For brevity, in what follows we term this model the EW- condition that stems from the known non-trivial homo- νR model. 2 2 2 The central reason why the EW-νR model admits the sphere S , for which π2(S ) = Z. Thus the EW-νR monopoles with masses at the electroweak scale, ΛEW , is model makes an interesting connection between the light that its right-handed neutrinos acquire [12] electroweak- neutrino masses and the existence of magnetic monopole scale Majorana masses MR ΛEW 246 GeV through solutions. their coupling to a complex Higgs∝ triplet∼ χ ˜. It was noted in [7] that, since S2 is associated with the Because the νRs are not sterile, consistency with the vacuum manifold of the real triplet ξ, topological quan- measured width of the Z-boson requires M 46 GeV, tization would involve the SU(2) coupling g, rather than R ≥ which implies χ˜ = vM ΛEW . Such non-sterile neu- the electromagnetic coupling e, leading to the following trinos would seriouslyh i affect∝ the experimentally-verified quantization condition for the magnetic chargeg ˜ of the relationship between the W - and Z-boson masses MW = monopole: M cos θ in the SM, in the absence of an additional Z W gg˜ real triplet of (Higgs-like) scalar fields ξ with ξ = χ˜ = = n, n Z . (6) h i h i ~ c ∈ vM [13], which realize a custodial symmetry in the EW- ~ νR model [12]. The ξ triplet is hypercharge-neutral and From now on we work in units with = c = 1. The gives rise to a finite-energy electroweak monopole so- fact that the quantization condition (6) is in terms of lution of the classical Euler-Lagrange equations of the the monopole chargeg ˜ and the weak charge g instead of model [7], following the pattern of the SO(3) monopole in the electric charge e appearing in the standard DQC is a the Georgi-Glashow model [8], discovered by ‘t Hooft [14] characteristic feature of the model of [7]. It distinguishes and Polyakov [15] (the ’tHP monopole). In that model the monopole in the model of [7] from the ’tHP magnetic the electromagnetic Uem(1) gauge group is embedded monopole or the Cho-Maison monopole [17] and its fi- into the SO(3) gauge group, whose algebra is isomorphic nite energy extensions [18], to which the standard DQC to that of the SU(2) appearing in the model of [7, 12]. applies. However, in the model of [7] Uem(1) is a combination of It is easy to see that the condition (6) follows from 2 the SU(2) and UY(1) of the SM, parametrized by sin θW the equation of motion for the field strength of the µν µ ν ν µ in the usual way. W3 SU(2) gauge boson, W3 = ∂ W3 ∂ W3 + 1 a µ b ν c − 3 εabcξ ∂ ξ ∂ ξ : We now review the topological arguments [7] for the vM g existence of the monopole, clarifying the independence µν ν of the topological quantization condition from the DQC ∂µW˜3 = K , (7) that we explore subsequently. The EW-νR model con- µν where W˜ 1 ε W σρ and K 1 ǫ ∂ν W σρ is tains [7, 12]. In addition to the real triplet ξ and the 3 ≡ 2 µνσρ 3 µ ≡ 2 µνσρ 3 SM a topological current that is automatically conserved by complex tripletχ ˜, four complex Higgs doublets, φi (which couple to SM fermions only), and φM (which cou- definition. The topological charge, gM , is defined as gM = i 3 ple to mirror fermions (MF ) [16], each with i = 1, 2 d xK0. Carrying out the integration, one obtains the topologicalR quantization condition (6). and some Higgs singlets φS that are not relevant to the magnetic monopole solution. The vacuum alignment Including the full electroweak gauge group structure SU(2) U (1), which is broken down to the electromag- that guarantees the custodial electroweak symmetry has × Y χ˜ = ξ = v [12]. The vacuum manifold of the Higgs netic Uem(1) by the complex Higgs doublets and the h i h i M 3 sector is tripletχ ˜ of the EW-νR model [7], one sees that the Wµ gauge field of the SU(2) subgroup is a mixture of the Z- 2 5 3 3 Svac = S S SSMi SMi . (4) boson and photon fields, parametrized as usual by the × × × 3 iX=1,2 iX=1,2 weak mixing angle θW : Wµ = cos θW Zµ + sin θW Aµ, with sin θ = g′/ g2 + g′2 where g′ is the U (1) cou- where an n-sphere Sn is described by the equation W Y pling. It should bep stressed that, under the breaking x2 + x2 + .. + x2 = constant. Here, the x denote 1 2 n+1 i U(1) U(1) , corresponding to some v.e.v. v , which the various scalar field values, and the constant radii of W Y 2 symbolically× represents the contribution of the other the various spheres correspond to the vacuum expecta- Higgs fields of the model, the W 3 is no longer a mass tion values of the various Higgs field components. The µ eigenstate, but the Z and A are the correct, physical, second homotopy group of the vacuum manifold of the µ µ mass eigenstates. EW-ν model (4) is therefore [7] R The corresponding field strengths are 2 5 3 π2(Svac) = π2(S ) π2(S ) i=1,2 π2(SSMi,Mi ) (5) 3 ⊕ ⊕ Wij = cos θW Zij + sin θW Fij , (8) 2 = π2(S )= Z, where Fij is the usual electromagnetic field-strength ten- which is the standard topological argument for the ex- sor and Zij is the Z field-strength tensor.

Load more

  8

Copy Link