DOCSLIB.ORG

Two-Component Spinor Techniques and Feynman Rules for Quantum field Theory and Supersymmetry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Two-Component Spinor Techniques and Feynman Rules for Quantum field Theory and Supersymmetry BN-TH-2008-12 SCIPP-08/08 arXiv:0812.1594v5 [hep-ph] Modifications and corrections added Two-component spinor techniques and Feynman rules for quantum field theory and supersymmetry DRAFT version 2.16 March 3, 2016 Herbi K. Dreiner1, Howard E. Haber2 and Stephen P. Martin3 1Bethe Center for Theoretical Physics and Physikalisches Institut der Universit¨at Bonn, Nußallee 12, 53115 Bonn, Germany 2Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California, Santa Cruz CA 95064 3Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb IL 60115 and Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia IL 60510 Abstract Two-component spinors are the basic ingredients for describing fermions in quantum field theory in 3 + 1 spacetime dimensions. We develop and review the techniques of the two- component spinor formalism and provide a complete set of Feynman rules for fermions using two-component spinor notation. These rules are suitable for practical calculations of cross- sections, decay rates, and radiative corrections in the Standard Model and its extensions, including supersymmetry, and many explicit examples are provided. The unified treatment presented in this review applies to massless Weyl fermions and massive Dirac and Majorana fermions. We exhibit the relation between the two-component spinor formalism and the more traditional four-component spinor formalism, and indicate their connections to the spinor helicity method and techniques for the computation of helicity amplitudes. Contents 1 Introduction 5 2 Essential conventions, notations and two-component spinor identities 8 3 Properties of fermion fields 24 3.1 The two-component fermion field and spinor wave functions ........... 24 3.2 Fermion mass diagonalization in a general theory . ............ 31 4 Feynman rules with two-component spinors 38 4.1 Externalfermionandbosonrules . ....... 38 4.2 Propagators..................................... 39 4.3 Fermion interactions with bosons . ........ 44 4.4 General structure and rules for Feynman graphs . .......... 50 4.5 Basic examples of writing down diagrams and amplitudes . ............ 52 4.5.1 Scalar boson decay to fermion pairs . ..... 53 4.5.2 Fermion pair annihilation into a scalar boson . ......... 54 4.5.3 Vector boson decay into fermion pairs . ...... 56 4.5.4 Two-body scattering of a boson and a neutral fermion . ......... 57 4.5.5 Two-body scattering of a boson and a charged fermion . ......... 59 4.5.6 Two-body fermion–fermion scattering . ....... 62 4.5.7 Non-relativistic potential due to scalar or pseudoscalar exchange . 63 4.6 Self-energy functions and pole masses for two-componentfermions . 65 5 Conventions for fermion and antifermion names and fields 73 6 Practical examples from the Standard Model and its supersymmetric extension 77 6.1 Top quark decay: t bW + .............................. 77 → 6.2 Z0 vector boson decay: Z0 ff¯ ........................... 79 → 6.3 Bhabha scattering: e e+ e e+ ........................... 81 − → − 6.4 Polarizedmuondecay .............................. 83 6.5 Neutral MSSM Higgs boson decays φ0 ff¯, for φ0 = h0,H0, A0 ......... 84 → 6.6 Sneutrino decay ν C+e .............................. 86 e → i − + + 6.7 Chargino decay Ci νee .............................. 87 e → e 6.8 Neutralino decays N φ0N , for φ0 = h0,H0, A0 ................. 88 i → j 0 e e 6.9 Ni Z Nj ....................................... 89 → e e 6.10 Selectron pair production in electron-electron collisions............... 91 e e 6.10.1 e e e−e− .................................. 91 − − → L R e e 2 6.10.2 e e e−e− .................................. 93 − − → R R 6.10.3 e−e− eL−eL− .................................. 94 → e e 6.11 e e+ νν ....................................... 95 − → ∗ + e e 6.12 e−e NiNj ...................................... 97 → ee 6.13 N N ff¯ ....................................... 100 1 1 → + e e + 6.14 e e C−C ..................................... 110 − → i j e e + 6.15 ud¯ C Nj ....................................... 112 → i e e 6.16 Ni NjNkNℓ ..................................... 114 → e e 6.17 Three-body slepton decays ℓ− ℓ−τ ± τ ∓ for ℓ = e, µ ............... 116 e e e e R → 1 6.18 Neutralino decay to photon and Goldstino: Ni γG ................ 119 e e → 6.19 Gluino pair production from gluon fusion: gg gg ................. 121 → + + e e 6.20 R-parity violating stau decay: τR e ν¯µ ...................... 125 → ee 6.21 R-parity-violating neutralino decay: Ni µ−ud¯ .................. 126 e → 6.22 Top-quark condensation from a Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model gap equation . 129 e 6.23 Electroweak vector boson self-energies from fermion loops ............. 130 6.24 Self-energy and pole mass of the top quark . ......... 134 6.25 Self-energy and pole mass of the gluino . .......... 141 6.26 Triangle anomaly from chiral fermion loops . ........... 143 Acknowledgments 155 Appendix A: Metric and sigma matrix conventions 156 Appendix B: Sigma matrix identities and Fierz identities 160 B.1 Two-component spinor Fierz identities . ........... 160 B.2 Sigma matrix identities in d 6= 4 dimensions ..................... 164 Appendix C: Explicit forms for the two-component spinor wave functions 166 C.1Fixed-axisspinorwavefunctions . ......... 167 C.2 Fixed-axis spinors in the non-relativistic limit . ............... 172 C.3 Helicity spinor wave functions . ........ 174 Appendix D: Matrix decompositions for fermion mass diagonalization 177 D.1 Singular value decomposition . ........ 178 D.2 Takagi diagonalization . ....... 180 D.3 Relation between Takagi diagonalization and singular value decomposition . 182 D.4 Reduction of a complex antisymmetric matrix to real normalform. 184 3 Appendix E: Lie group theoretical techniques for gauge theories 187 E.1 Basic facts about Lie groups, Lie algebras and their representations . 187 E.2 The quadratic and cubic index and Casimir operator . ........... 189 Appendix F: Path integral treatment of two-component fermion propagators 192 Appendix G: Correspondence to four-component spinor notation 195 G.1 Dirac gamma matrices and four-component spinors . ........... 195 G.2 Free-field four-component fermion Lagrangians . ............. 207 G.3 Gamma matrices and spinors in spacetimes of diverse dimensions and signatures . 210 G.4 Four-component spinor wave functions . ......... 215 G.5 Feynman rules for four-component fermions . ........... 219 G.6 Applications of four-component spinor Feynman rules . .............. 224 G.7 Self-energy functions and pole masses for four-componentfermions. 230 Appendix H: Covariant spin operators and the Bouchiat-Michel formulae 233 H.1 The covariant spin operators for a spin-1/2 fermion . ............. 233 H.2 Two-component spinor wave function relations . ............ 235 H.3 Two-component Bouchiat-Michel formulae . .......... 236 H.4 Four-component Bouchiat-Michel formulae . ........... 240 Appendix I: Helicity amplitudes and the spinor helicity method 242 I.1 The helicity amplitude technique of Hagiwara and Zeppenfeld............ 243 I.2Thespinorhelicitymethod . 247 Appendix J: The Standard Model and its seesaw extension 258 J.1: Standard Model fermion interaction vertices . ............. 258 J.2: Incorporating massive neutrinos into the Standard Model.............. 265 Appendix K: MSSM fermion interaction vertices 271 K.1 Higgs-fermion interaction vertices in the MSSM . ............ 271 K.2 Gauge interaction vertices for neutralinos and charginos............... 275 K.3 Higgs interactions with charginos and neutralinos . .............. 278 K.4 Chargino and neutralino interactions with fermions and sfermions . 280 K.5SUSY-QCDFeynmanrules . 286 Appendix L: Trilinear R-parity-violating Yukawa interactions 288 References 290 4 1 Introduction A crucial feature of the Standard Model of particle physics is the chiral nature of fermion quan- tum numbers and interactions. According to the modern understanding of the electroweak interactions, the fundamental degrees of freedom for quarks and leptons are two-component Weyl-van der Waerden fermions [1], i.e. two-component Lorentz spinors that transform as irre- ducible representations under the gauge group SU(2) U(1) . Furthermore, within the context L× Y of supersymmetric field theories, two-component spinors enter naturally, due to the spinorial na- ture of the symmetry generators themselves, and the holomorphic structure of the superpoten- tial. Despite this, most pedagogical treatments and practical calculations in high-energy physics continue to use the four-component Dirac spinor notation, which combines distinct irreducible representations of the Lorentz symmetry algebra. Parity-conserving theories such as QED and QCD are well-suited to the four-component fermion methods. There is also a certain perceived advantage to familiarity. However, as we progress to phenomena at and above the scale of elec- troweak symmetry breaking, it seems increasingly natural to employ two-component fermion notation, in harmony with the irreducible transformation properties dictated by the physics. One occasionally encounters the misconception that two-component fermion notations are somehow inherently ill-suited or unwieldy for practical use. Perhaps this is due in part to a lack of examples of calculations using two-component language in the pedagogical literature. In this review, we seek to dispel this idea by presenting Feynman rules for fermions using two- component spinor notation, intended for practical calculations of cross-sections, decays, and radiative corrections. This formalism employs a unified
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Majorana Fermions in Condensed Matter Physics: the 1D Nanowire Case
    Majorana Fermions in Condensed Matter Physics: The 1D Nanowire Case Philip Haupt, Hirsh Kamakari, Edward Thoeng, Aswin Vishnuradhan Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 1Z1, Canada (Dated: November 24, 2018) Majorana fermions are fermions that are their own antiparticles. Although they remain elusive as elementary particles (how they were originally proposed), they have rapidly gained interest in condensed matter physics as emergent quasiparticles in certain systems like topological supercon- ductors. In this article, we briefly review the necessary theory and discuss the \recipe" to create Majorana particles. We then consider existing experimental realisations and their methodologies. I. MOTIVATION A). Kitaev used a simplified quantum wire model to show Ettore Majorana, in 1937, postulated the existence of how Majorana modes might manifest as an emergent an elementary particle which is its own antiparticle, so phenomena, which we will now discuss. Consider 1- called Majorana fermions [1]. It is predicted that the neu- dimensional tight binding chain with spinless fermions trinos are one such elementary particle, which is yet to and p-orbital hopping. The use of unphysical spinless be detected via extremely rare neutrino-less double beta- fermions calls into question the validity of the model, decay. The research on Majorana fermions in the past but, as has been subsequently realised, in the presence few years, however, have gained momentum in the com- of strong spin orbit coupling it is possible for electrons pletely different field of condensed matter physics. Arti- to be approximated as spinless in the presence of spin- ficially engineered low-dimensional nanostructures which orbit coupling as well as a Zeeman field [9].
    [Show full text]
  • $ Z $ Boson Mediated Dark Matter Beyond the Effective Theory
    MCTP-16-27 FERMILAB-PUB-16-534-T Z boson mediated dark matter beyond the effective theory John Kearney Theoretical Physics Department, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL 60510 USA Nicholas Orlofsky and Aaron Pierce Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics (MCTP) Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 (Dated: April 11, 2017) Direct detection bounds are beginning to constrain a very simple model of weakly interacting dark matter|a Majorana fermion with a coupling to the Z boson. In a particularly straightforward gauge-invariant realization, this coupling is introduced via a higher-dimensional operator. While attractive in its simplicity, this model generically induces a large ρ parameter. An ultraviolet completion that avoids an overly large contribution to ρ is the singlet-doublet model. We revisit this model, focusing on the Higgs blind spot region of parameter space where spin-independent interactions are absent. This model successfully reproduces dark matter with direct detection mediated by the Z boson, but whose cosmology may depend on additional couplings and states. Future direct detection experiments should effectively probe a significant portion of this parameter space, aside from a small coannihilating region. As such, Z-mediated thermal dark matter as realized in the singlet-doublet model represents an interesting target for future searches. I. INTRODUCTION Z, and their spin-dependent (SD) couplings, which at tree level arise from exchange of the Z. The latest bounds on SI scattering arise from PandaX Weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) re- [1] and LUX [2]. DM that interacts with the Z main an attractive thermal dark matter (DM) can- boson via vectorial couplings, g (¯χγ χ)Zµ, is very didate.
    [Show full text]
  • 10. Electroweak Model and Constraints on New Physics
    1 10. Electroweak Model and Constraints on New Physics 10. Electroweak Model and Constraints on New Physics Revised March 2020 by J. Erler (IF-UNAM; U. of Mainz) and A. Freitas (Pittsburg U.). 10.1 Introduction ....................................... 1 10.2 Renormalization and radiative corrections....................... 3 10.2.1 The Fermi constant ................................ 3 10.2.2 The electromagnetic coupling........................... 3 10.2.3 Quark masses.................................... 5 10.2.4 The weak mixing angle .............................. 6 10.2.5 Radiative corrections................................ 8 10.3 Low energy electroweak observables .......................... 9 10.3.1 Neutrino scattering................................. 9 10.3.2 Parity violating lepton scattering......................... 12 10.3.3 Atomic parity violation .............................. 13 10.4 Precision flavor physics ................................. 15 10.4.1 The τ lifetime.................................... 15 10.4.2 The muon anomalous magnetic moment..................... 17 10.5 Physics of the massive electroweak bosons....................... 18 10.5.1 Electroweak physics off the Z pole........................ 19 10.5.2 Z pole physics ................................... 21 10.5.3 W and Z decays .................................. 25 10.6 Global fit results..................................... 26 10.7 Constraints on new physics............................... 30 10.1 Introduction The standard model of the electroweak interactions (SM) [1–4] is based on the gauge group i SU(2)×U(1), with gauge bosons Wµ, i = 1, 2, 3, and Bµ for the SU(2) and U(1) factors, respectively, and the corresponding gauge coupling constants g and g0. The left-handed fermion fields of the th νi ui 0 P i fermion family transform as doublets Ψi = − and d0 under SU(2), where d ≡ Vij dj, `i i i j and V is the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa mixing [5,6] matrix1.
    [Show full text]
  • Basics of Thermal Field Theory
    September 2021 Basics of Thermal Field Theory A Tutorial on Perturbative Computations 1 Mikko Lainea and Aleksi Vuorinenb aAEC, Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Bern, Sidlerstrasse 5, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland bDepartment of Physics, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 64, FI-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland Abstract These lecture notes, suitable for a two-semester introductory course or self-study, offer an elemen- tary and self-contained exposition of the basic tools and concepts that are encountered in practical computations in perturbative thermal field theory. Selected applications to heavy ion collision physics and cosmology are outlined in the last chapter. 1An earlier version of these notes is available as an ebook (Springer Lecture Notes in Physics 925) at dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31933-9; a citable eprint can be found at arxiv.org/abs/1701.01554; the very latest version is kept up to date at www.laine.itp.unibe.ch/basics.pdf. Contents Foreword ........................................... i Notation............................................ ii Generaloutline....................................... iii 1 Quantummechanics ................................... 1 1.1 Path integral representation of the partition function . ....... 1 1.2 Evaluation of the path integral for the harmonic oscillator . ..... 6 2 Freescalarfields ..................................... 13 2.1 Path integral for the partition function . ... 13 2.2 Evaluation of thermal sums and their low-temperature limit . .... 16 2.3 High-temperatureexpansion. 23 3 Interactingscalarfields............................... ... 30 3.1 Principles of the weak-coupling expansion . 30 3.2 Problems of the naive weak-coupling expansion . .. 38 3.3 Proper free energy density to (λ): ultraviolet renormalization . 40 O 3 3.4 Proper free energy density to (λ 2 ): infraredresummation .
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1407.4336V2 [Hep-Ph] 10 May 2016 I.Laigtrelo Orcin Otehgsmass Higgs the to Corrections Three-Loop Leading III
    Higgs boson mass in the Standard Model at two-loop order and beyond Stephen P. Martin1,2 and David G. Robertson3 1Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb IL 60115 2Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia IL 60510 3Department of Physics, Otterbein University, Westerville OH 43081 We calculate the mass of the Higgs boson in the Standard Model in terms of the underlying Lagrangian parameters at complete 2-loop order with leading 3-loop corrections. A computer program implementing the results is provided. The program also computes and minimizes the Standard Model effective po- tential in Landau gauge at 2-loop order with leading 3-loop corrections. Contents I. Introduction 1 II. Higgs pole mass at 2-loop order 2 III. Leading three-loop corrections to the Higgs mass 11 IV. Computer code implementation and numerical results 13 V. Outlook 19 arXiv:1407.4336v2 [hep-ph] 10 May 2016 Appendix: Some loop integral identities 20 References 22 I. INTRODUCTION The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has discovered [1] a Higgs scalar boson h with mass Mh near 125.5 GeV [2] and properties consistent with the predictions of the minimal Standard Model. At the present time, there are no signals or hints of other new elementary particles. In the case of supersymmetry, the limits on strongly interacting superpartners are model dependent, but typically extend to over an order of magnitude above Mh. It is therefore quite possible, if not likely, that the Standard Model with a minimal Higgs sector exists 2 as an effective theory below 1 TeV, with all other fundamental physics decoupled from it to a very good approximation.
    [Show full text]
  • Relation Between the Pole and the Minimally Subtracted Mass in Dimensional Regularization and Dimensional Reduction to Three-Loop Order
    SFB/CPP-07-04 TTP07-04 DESY07-016 hep-ph/0702185 Relation between the pole and the minimally subtracted mass in dimensional regularization and dimensional reduction to three-loop order P. Marquard(a), L. Mihaila(a), J.H. Piclum(a,b) and M. Steinhauser(a) (a) Institut f¨ur Theoretische Teilchenphysik, Universit¨at Karlsruhe (TH) 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany (b) II. Institut f¨ur Theoretische Physik, Universit¨at Hamburg 22761 Hamburg, Germany Abstract We compute the relation between the pole quark mass and the minimally sub- tracted quark mass in the framework of QCD applying dimensional reduction as a regularization scheme. Special emphasis is put on the evanescent couplings and the renormalization of the ε-scalar mass. As a by-product we obtain the three-loop ZOS ZOS on-shell renormalization constants m and 2 in dimensional regularization and thus provide the first independent check of the analytical results computed several years ago. arXiv:hep-ph/0702185v1 19 Feb 2007 PACS numbers: 12.38.-t 14.65.-q 14.65.Fy 14.65.Ha 1 Introduction In quantum chromodynamics (QCD), like in any other renormalizeable quantum field theory, it is crucial to specify the precise meaning of the parameters appearing in the underlying Lagrangian — in particular when higher order quantum corrections are con- sidered. The canonical choice for the coupling constant of QCD, αs, is the so-called modified minimal subtraction (MS) scheme [1] which has the advantage that the beta function, ruling the scale dependence of the coupling, is mass-independent. On the other hand, for a heavy quark besides the MS scheme also other definitions are important — first and foremost the pole mass.
    [Show full text]
  • Electrical Probes of the Non-Abelian Spin Liquid in Kitaev Materials
    PHYSICAL REVIEW X 10, 031014 (2020) Electrical Probes of the Non-Abelian Spin Liquid in Kitaev Materials David Aasen,1,2 Roger S. K. Mong,3,4 Benjamin M. Hunt,5,4 David Mandrus ,6,7 and Jason Alicea 8,9 1Microsoft Quantum, Microsoft Station Q, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106-6105 USA 2Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106, USA 3Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260, USA 4Pittsburgh Quantum Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260, USA 5Department of Physics, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA 6Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996, USA 7Materials Science and Technology Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831, USA 8Department of Physics and Institute for Quantum Information and Matter, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA 9Walter Burke Institute for Theoretical Physics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA (Received 5 March 2020; revised 12 May 2020; accepted 19 May 2020; published 17 July 2020) Recent thermal-conductivity measurements evidence a magnetic-field-induced non-Abelian spin-liquid phase in the Kitaev material α-RuCl3. Although the platform is a good Mott insulator, we propose experiments that electrically probe the spin liquid’s hallmark chiral Majorana edge state and bulk anyons, including their exotic exchange statistics. We specifically introduce circuits that exploit interfaces between electrically active systems and Kitaev materials to “perfectly” convert electrons from the former into emergent fermions in the latter—thereby enabling variations of transport probes invented for topological superconductors and fractional quantum-Hall states.
    [Show full text]
  • 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) × .
    [Show full text]
  • Quark Mass Renormalization in the MS and RI Schemes up To
    ROME1-1198/98 Quark Mass Renormalization in the MS and RI schemes up to the NNLO order Enrico Francoa and Vittorio Lubiczb a Dip. di Fisica, Universit`adegli Studi di Roma “La Sapienza” and INFN, Sezione di Roma, P.le A. Moro 2, 00185 Roma, Italy. b Dip. di Fisica, Universit`adi Roma Tre and INFN, Sezione di Roma, Via della Vasca Navale 84, I-00146 Roma, Italy Abstract We compute the relation between the quark mass defined in the min- imal modified MS scheme and the mass defined in the “Regularization Invariant” scheme (RI), up to the NNLO order. The RI scheme is conve- niently adopted in lattice QCD calculations of the quark mass, since the relevant renormalization constants in this scheme can be evaluated in a non-perturbative way. The NNLO contribution to the conversion factor between the quark mass in the two schemes is found to be large, typically of the same order of the NLO correction at a scale µ ∼ 2 GeV. We also give the NNLO relation between the quark mass in the RI scheme and the arXiv:hep-ph/9803491v1 30 Mar 1998 renormalization group-invariant mass. 1 Introduction The values of quark masses are of great importance in the phenomenology of the Standard Model and beyond. For instance, bottom and charm quark masses enter significantly in the theoretical expressions of inclusive decay rates of heavy mesons, while the strange quark mass plays a crucial role in the evaluation of the K → ππ, ∆I = 1/2, decay amplitude and of the CP-violation parameter ǫ′/ǫ.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward (Finally!) Ruling out Z and Higgs Mediated Dark Matter Models
    IFIC/16-66 FERMILAB-PUB-16-370-A Prepared for submission to JCAP Toward (Finally!) Ruling Out Z and Higgs Mediated Dark Matter Models Miguel Escudero,a;b Asher Berlin,c Dan Hooperb;d;e and Meng-Xiang Lind aInstituto de F´ısicaCorpuscular (IFIC); CSIC-Universitat de Val`encia; Apartado de Correos 22085; E-46071 Valencia; Spain bFermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Center for Particle Astrophysics, Batavia, IL 60510 cUniversity of Chicago, Department of Physics, Chicago, IL 60637 dUniversity of Chicago, Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Chicago, IL 60637 eUniversity of Chicago, Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics, Chicago, IL 60637 E-mail: miguel.escudero@ific.uv.es, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. In recent years, direct detection, indirect detection, and collider experiments have placed increasingly stringent constraints on particle dark matter, exploring much of the parameter space associated with the WIMP paradigm. In this paper, we focus on the subset of WIMP models in which the dark matter annihilates in the early universe through couplings to either the Standard Model Z or the Standard Model Higgs boson. Considering fermionic, scalar, and vector dark matter candidates within a model-independent context, we find that the overwhelming majority of these dark matter candidates are already ruled out by existing experiments. In the case of Z mediated dark matter, the only scenarios that are not currently excluded are those in which the dark matter is a fermion with an axial coupling and with a mass either within a few GeV of the Z resonance (mDM m =2) or ' Z greater than 200 GeV, or with a vector coupling and with mDM > 6 TeV.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1003.1912V2 [Hep-Ph] 30 Jun 2010 Fermion and Complex Vector Boson Dark Matter Are Also Disfavored, Except for Very Specific Choices of Quantum Numbers
    Preprint typeset in JHEP style - HYPER VERSION UMD-PP-10-004 RUNHETC-2010-07 A Classification of Dark Matter Candidates with Primarily Spin-Dependent Interactions with Matter Prateek Agrawal Maryland Center for Fundamental Physics, Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 Zackaria Chacko Maryland Center for Fundamental Physics, Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 Can Kilic Department of Physics and Astronomy, Rutgers University, Piscataway NJ 08854 Rashmish K. Mishra Maryland Center for Fundamental Physics, Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 Abstract: We perform a model-independent classification of Weakly Interacting Massive Particle (WIMP) dark matter candidates that have the property that their scattering off nucleons is dominated by spin-dependent interactions. We study renormalizable theories where the scattering of dark matter is elastic and arises at tree-level. We show that if the WIMP-nucleon cross section is dominated by spin-dependent interactions the natural dark matter candidates are either Majorana fermions or real vector bosons, so that the dark matter particle is its own anti-particle. In such a scenario, scalar dark matter is disfavored. Dirac arXiv:1003.1912v2 [hep-ph] 30 Jun 2010 fermion and complex vector boson dark matter are also disfavored, except for very specific choices of quantum numbers. We further establish that any such theory must contain either new particles close to the weak scale with Standard Model quantum numbers, or alternatively, a Z0 gauge boson with mass at or below the TeV scale. In the region of parameter space that is of interest to current direct detection experiments, these particles naturally lie in a mass range that is kinematically accessible to the Large Hadron Collider (LHC).
    [Show full text]
  • MS-On-Shell Quark Mass Relation up to Four Loops in QCD and a General SU
    DESY 16-106, TTP16-023 MS-on-shell quark mass relation up to four loops in QCD and a general SU(N) gauge group Peter Marquarda, Alexander V. Smirnovb, Vladimir A. Smirnovc, Matthias Steinhauserd, David Wellmannd (a) Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, DESY 15738 Zeuthen, Germany (b) Research Computing Center, Moscow State University 119991, Moscow, Russia (c) Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics of Moscow State University 119991, Moscow, Russia (d) Institut f¨ur Theoretische Teilchenphysik, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany Abstract We compute the relation between heavy quark masses defined in the modified minimal subtraction and the on-shell schemes. Detailed results are presented for all coefficients of the SU(Nc) colour factors. The reduction of the four-loop on- shell integrals is performed for a general QCD gauge parameter. Altogether there are about 380 master integrals. Some of them are computed analytically, others with high numerical precision using Mellin-Barnes representations, and the rest numerically with the help of FIESTA. We discuss in detail the precise numerical evaluation of the four-loop master integrals. Updated relations between various arXiv:1606.06754v2 [hep-ph] 14 Nov 2016 short-distance masses and the MS quark mass to next-to-next-to-next-to-leading order accuracy are provided for the charm, bottom and top quarks. We discuss the dependence on the renormalization and factorization scale. PACS numbers: 12.38.Bx, 12.38.Cy, 14.65.Fy, 14.65.Ha 1 Introduction Quark masses are fundamental parameters of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and thus it is mandatory to determine their numerical values as precisely as possible.
    [Show full text]