Anewempiricalapproachtoleptonandquarkmasses

Kevin Loch⇤ (Dated: 2017 February 27, updated November 11) A novel alternative to the and it’s extensions is presented. A new ratio with 2 3 asmalldimensionlessresidualke = mem⌧ /mµ and mass scaling factor ↵f =27me/m⌧ are used to construct empirical formulas for charged , left-handed and . The predicted masses are in excellent agreement with known experimental values and constraints.

PACS numbers: 14.60.Pq, 12.15.Ff, 12.10.Kt

I. INTRODUCTION to find factors that cancel out with this formula to learn more about the underlying structure. We can then at- One outstanding problem in modern physics is the tempt to apply those factors to search for similar struc- seemingly unrelated particle masses that exist as free tures in other sectors. parameters in the standard model. Numerous attempts Mac Gregor proposed using different exponents of the have been made over the years to derive a systematic QED coupling constant to explain fermion lifetimes and mathematical relationship between these masses, most mass relationships using the zero energy scale ↵QED(0) famously by Yoshio Koide with his charged lepton for- [25, 26]. While we have not found convincing relation- mula [1, 2] ships with ↵QED(0) we do find

me me + mµ + m⌧ 2 ↵f = 27 (3) K = 2 . (1) m⌧ (pme + pmµ + pm⌧ ) ' 3 1 interesting with a value ↵f 128.786. This is close While this approximation works for charged leptons, and ' 1 2 to the effective QED coupling constant ↵ (M )= appears to work for some combinations of quarks with QED Z running masses, it does not work for neutrinos or at- 128.944 [27]. Despite the similarity in value to an ef- tempt to relate all fundamental fermions in a consistent fective QED coupling constant we are assuming that ↵f manner. It does however hint at the possibility of find- is a separate parameter related only to mass generation ing other more fundamental relationships. Indeed, Koide and not electric charge. With (2) and (3) we can derive and others [1–24] have used it as inspiration for extended lepton formulas models to cover other fermions. m m =9 e , While these extended Koide models are interesting we µ 1 2 (4) k 3 ↵ 3 present an alternative structure for charged leptons that e f is easily applied to other sectors. we find these formu- las appear to relate all fundamental lepton and me m⌧ = 27 . (5) pole (physical) masses. This allows precise predictions ↵f of and quark pole masses. If correct this would significantly reduce the number of free parameters in the With our choice of definitions for ke and ↵f we have dis- standard model (extended for neutrinos with mass). covered an interesting and surprisingly simple charged lepton mass structure that could be used to look for sim- ilar patterns in other sectors. II. CHARGED LEPTONS

We begin by introducing a charged lepton formula with III. NEUTRINO SECTOR asmalldimensionlessresidualvalue We will now use ↵f and a sector structure formula similar to (2) to look for formulas for left handed neu- 2 mem⌧ trinos and predict mass state values for them. While ke = 3 1.37. (2) mµ ' neutrino mass states have not been directly measured yet numerous neutrino oscillation experiments have es- As with the Koide formula most of the mass differences tablished increasingly refined limits on neutrino squared cancel despite the input masses having a range of over mass differences [28]. Cosmological models also put con- 3500:1. If this is not just a coincidence we can attempt straints on the sum of the three mass states [29]. By looking for equations of similar form to (4) and (5) and testing against the experimental neutrino constraints we can identify candidate neutrino mass formulas. Given ⇤ [email protected] that the experimental bounds on the neutrino mass states 2

o have them much closer together than the charged leptons with ✓ke⌫ 24.42 . This is smaller than the weak mixing ' o ⇡ we assume the same exponent of ↵f would need to ap- angle ✓W 28.17 by approximately 48 radians. If the ' ⇡ pear in each formula. By also using the same integer relationship is exactly ✓W = ✓ke⌫ + 48 then it would be 2 coefficients as the charged lepton formulas we find a sur- possible to calculate sin ✓W =0.222928(26) and mW = prisingly close match to the experimental squared mass 80.3834(32) MeV,anorderofmagnitudemoreprecise differences when setting the neutrino residual k⌫ 6.64. than previously known. ' This results in left-handed neutrino sector formulas

IV. QUARK SECTOR 2 m1m3 k⌫ = 3 6.64. (6) m2 ' We will now attempt to apply the techniques we used relating masses in the lepton sector to quarks. The quark 4 3 2 sector residual formulas are m1 = ↵f me 1.86 10 eV/c , (7) ' ⇥ 2 mdmb kd = 3 , (17) 4 ms ↵f 3 2 m2 =9 1 me 8.90 10 eV/c , (8) 3 ' ⇥ k⌫ 2 mumtop k = . (18) u m 3 4 2 2 c m3 = 27↵f me 5.02 10 eV/c . (9) ' ⇥ While most attempts to find relationships between lep- These proposed masses give squared mass differences of tons and quarks use renormalized running masses we have surprisingly found the best overall results using pole 2 5 2 4 m 7.56 10 eV /c , (10) masses for the heavy quarks. The deconfined nature 21 ' ⇥ 2 3 2 4 of the top quark has enabled It’s mass to be measured m 2.51 10 eV /c , (11) 31 ' ⇥ through decay products in particle collision experiments. 2 3 2 4 m 2.44 10 eV /c , (12) m 32 ' ⇥ The best fit we have found to the global average top pole mass using ↵f and simple coefficients is and the sum of all three mass states me 2 2 2 mtop = 3 173.72 GeV/c . (19) ⌃m =6.09 10 eV/c . (13) 2⇡↵ ' ⌫ '⇥ f These predicted values are in excellent agreement with Several different analysis modes exists on data from the recent global analysis of oscillation experiments [28, 30] ongoing top quark experiments at the LHC with a com- prehensive summary in [31]. Our predicted pole mass is for normal mass ordering (m⌫1

If their sum is exactly 8 we can express the residuals with ku = 16 (22) an angle ✓ke⌫ such that These predicted pole masses are in excellent agreement 2 k = 8cos ✓ , (15) with recent pole mass evaluations of mb =4.78 ⌫ ke⌫ ± 0.06 GeV and m =1.67 0.07 GeV [30]. c ± For the light quarks perturbative QCD does not pro- k = 8sin2✓ , e ke⌫ (16) vide reliable pole masses so we are left to extrapolate 3 formulas from the heavy quarks. Having proposed for- pare them directly. The quark sector residuals can be mulas for m and m we can extract from (18) expressed in terms of an angle ✓ 19.47o such that top c kud ' 2 2 k = 144cos ✓ , ⇡ d kud (26) m = m 2.52 MeV/c2. u 2 e ' 2 ku = 144sin ✓kud . (27) While this value is close to the lattice theory derived MS mass commonly quoted m 2.2MeV/c2,wecaution Looking at different combinations of the lepton and quark u ' against comparing our predicted light quark pole masses residuals we find that to renormalized light quark masses directly. For the down kd quark we assume a similar structure to our up quark k` = =8, (28) formula and a ratio m /m 0.5.Withthatcriteria ku u d ' our proposed formulas for the down and strange quarks are ku =2. (29) k` m =⇡2m 5.04 MeV/c2, (23) d e '

1 V. COMBINED VIEW ⇡ 3 me 2 ms = 1 4 96.6MeV/c , (24) 3 3 ' kd ↵f While the preceding formulas in terms of me are conve- nient for calculating precision predicted values it is more interesting to view them together in terms of the Higgs kd = 128. (25) vacuum expectation value v 246.22 GeV [30]. With the ' top quark Yukawa coupling y = p2m /v 0.99779 we t top ' These are also close to the lattice theory MS masses can rewrite all of our proposed formulas in terms of yt though as mentioned before it is not appropriate to com- and v:

7 ytv 3 ytv 3 3 ytv 3 3 ytv m⌫ = 2⇡↵ ,me = 2⇡↵ ,md = 2⇡ ↵ ,mu = ⇡ ↵ , 1 f p2 f p2 f p2 f p2

7 4 5 7 3 3 3 2⇡↵f ytv 2⇡↵f ytv 2⇡ ↵f ytv ⇡↵f ytv m⌫2 =9 1 ,mµ =9 1 ,ms = 1 ,mc = 1 , 3 p2 0 3 1 p2 0 3 1 p2 3 p2 k⌫ ! ke kd ku ! @ A @ A

7 ytv 2 ytv 1 ytv ytv m⌫ = 27 2⇡↵ ,m⌧ = 27 2⇡↵ ,mb = 2⇡ 2 ↵f ,mtop = . (30) 3 f p2 f p2 p2 p2 ⇣ ⌘

There are many interesting patterns in these expressions, VI. CONCLUSION only some of which are enforced by the sector residual equations (2), (6) , (17) and (18). Despite these patterns In conclusion, we have presented a novel way to view there does not appear to be any relationship between fermion mass relationships with ↵f showing potential as them and electric charge or other properties besides gen- a scaling factor relating the widely differing magnitudes eration, sector and mass. The unexpected appearance of different masses across all sectors. While the predicted of the sector residuals on only the second generation is masses are all within experimental bounds many of those puzzling and may indicate these are just approximations bounds are relatively wide. Lower uncertainty of the ref- of more exact formulas yet to be found. The top quark erence masses would help greatly in validating and fur- Higgs Yukawa coupling appearing in every formula also ther developing this model. The most exciting area of ex- may be an approximation of slightly different values for perimental confirmation would be refinement of the neu- each fermion. In table I we provide a summary of the pre- trino oscillation parameters and especially measurement dicted masses and parameters derived from these equa- of the neutrino mass states directly. The KATRIN exper- tions. iment [34] will search for neutrino mass signatures in de- cay from tritium -decay but has a minimum sensitivity 4

Parameter THIS WORK Reference Value Ref.

me 0.5109989461(31) MeV CODATA 2014 [33] mµ 105.6583745(24) MeV CODATA 2014 [33] m⌧ 1776.86 0.12 MeV PDG 2017 [30] Model Inputs ± k` = ke + kv 8 (exact) ku 16 (exact) kd 128 (exact)

↵f 0.00776481(52) 1 ↵ 128.7862 0.0087 f ± Model Parameters ke 1.36777(18) k⌫ =8 ke 6.63223(18) 2 sin ✓ke⌫ 0.170972(23) 3 m1 1.85756 0.00050 10 eV ± ⇥ 3 m2 8.8981 0.0023 10 eV ± ⇥ 2 m3 5.0154 0.0014 10 eV 2 ± ⇥ 5 2 5 2 Neutrinos m21 7.5626 0.0039 10 eV 7.53 0.18 10 eV PDG 2017 [30] 2 ± ⇥ 3 2 ±+0.038 ⇥ 3 2 m31 2.5120 0.0014 10 eV 2.524 0.041 10 eV Esteban 2016 [28] 2 ± ⇥ 3 2 ⇥ 3 2 m32 2.4363 0.0013 10 eV 2.45 0.05 10 eV PDG 2017 [30] ± ⇥ 2 ± ⇥2 m⌫ 6.0910 0.0016 10 eV < 9.68 10 eV Giusarma 2016 [29] ± ⇥ ⇥ +0.5 Pmd 5.043357447(31) MeV 4.7 0.4 MeV PDG 2017 [30] +8 Down-type ms 96.5812 0.0087 MeV 96 4 MeV PDG 2017 [30] ± mb 4.78172 0.00065 GeV 4.78 0.06 GeV PDG 2017 [30] ± ± +0.6 mu 2.521678724(15) MeV 2.2 0.4 MeV PDG 2017 [30] mc 1.68173 0.00023 GeV 1.67 0.07 GeV PDG 2017 [30] Up-type ± ± mtop 173.719 0.035 GeV 173.5 1.1GeV PDG 2017 [30] ± ± yt 0.99779 0.00020 ± 2 md/me ⇡ (exact) 2 mu/me ⇡ /2 (exact) mu/md 0.5 (exact) 0.38 0.58 PDG 2017 [30] Ratios +0.7 m =(mu + md)/23.782518086(23) MeV 3.5 0.3 MeV PDG 2017 [30] ms/md 19.1502(17) 17-22 PDG 2017 [30] ms/m 25.5336(23) 27.3 0.7 PDG 2017 [30] ± 2 ⇡ sin ✓W (if ✓W = ✓ke⌫ + 48 ) 0.222928(26) 0.22290(33) PDG 2017 [30] ⇡ Electroweak mW /mZ (if ✓W = ✓ke⌫ + 48 ) 0.881517(14) 0.88153 0.00017 PDG 2017 [30] ⇡ ± mW (if ✓W = ✓k + ) 80.3834(32) GeV 80.385 0.015 GeV PDG 2017 [30] e⌫ 48 ±

Table I. Predicted parameters, pole masses and derived values. threshold of 0.2eV,100timeshigherthanourpredicted ther refinement of the heavy quark experimental masses m1 and 25 times higher than our predicted m3.Fur- is another important confirmation opportunity.

[1] Y. Koide, Nuovo Cim. Lett. 34, 201 (1982). [7] Nan Li, Bo-Qiang Ma, Estimate of neutrino masses [2] Y. Koide, A Fermion- Composite Model of quarks from Koide’s relation, Phys.Lett. B609 (2005) 309-316, and leptons, Phys. Lett. B 120 (1983) 161. arXiv:hep-ph/0505028. [3] Y. Koide, Phys. Rev. D 28 (1983) 252. [8] A. Rivero, A. Gsponer, The strange for- [4] R. Foot (1994), A note on Koide’s lepton mass relation, mula of Dr. Koide, arXiv:hep-ph/0505220. arXiv:hep-ph/9402242. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.01.066, [5] Y. Koide and M. Tanimoto, U(3)-Family Nonet Higgs [9] W. Krolikowski (2005), Excellent approximate solution Boson and its Phenomenology, Z.Phys.C72:333-344,1996, to the mysterious mass equation by Koide, arXiv:hep- doi:10.1007/s002880050253, arXiv:hep-ph/9505333. ph/0508039. [6] Y. Koide and H. Fusaoka, Analytical Expressions [10] J. M. Gerard, F. Goffinet, and M. Herquet, A New of Masses and Mixings in a Democratic Seesaw Look at an Old Mass Relation, Phys.Lett. B633 (2006) Mass Matrix Model, Prog.Theor.Phys.97:459-478,1997, 563-566, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.12.054, arXiv:hep- doi:10.1143/PTP.97.459, arXiv:hep-ph/9612322. ph/0510289 5

[11] C. Brannen, The Lepton Masses, [24] Yoshio Koide, Hiroyuki Nishiura, Flavon VEV Scales in http://brannenworks.com/MASSES2.pdf, (2006). U(3)×U(3)￿ Model, arXiv:1701.06287 [hep-ph] [12] Yoshio Koide, Tribimaximal Neutrino Mixing and a [25] M. H. Mac Gregor, Electron generation of leptons Relation Between Neutrino- and Charged Lepton-Mass and hadrons with reciprocal a-quantized lifetimes Spectra, J.Phys.G34:1653-1664,2007, doi:10.1088/0954- and masses, Int.J.Mod.Phys. A20 (2005) 719- 3899/34/7/006, arXiv:hep-ph/0605074. 798, doi:10.1142/S0217751X05021117, arXiv:hep- [13] Y. Koide, Charged Lepton Mass Relations in a Supersym- ph/0506033. metric Yukawaon Model, Phys.Rev.D79:033009,2009, [26] M. H. Mac Gregor, A "Muon Mass Tree" with alpha- doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.033009, arXiv:0811.3470 [hep- quantized Lepton, Quark and Hadron Masses, arXiv:hep- ph]. ph/0607233 [14] Yukinari Sumino, Family Gauge Symmetry and [27] K. Hagiwara, R. Liao, A.D. Martin, Daisuke No- Koide’s Mass Formula, Phys.Lett.B671:477-480,2009, mura, T. Teubner, (g-2)_mu and alpha(M_Z^2) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.12.060, arXiv:0812.2090 re-evaluated using new precise data, J. Phys. G [hep-ph] 38 (2011) 085003, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/38/8/085003, [15] Y. Sumino, Family Gauge Symmetry as an Ori- arXiv:1105.3149 [hep-ph]. gin of Koide’s Mass Formula and Charged Lep- [28] Ivan Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, Michele Maltoni, ton Spectrum, JHEP 0905:075,2009, doi:10.1088/1126- Ivan Martinez-Soler, Thomas Schwetz, Updated fit to 6708/2009/05/075, arXiv:0812.2103 [hep-ph]. three neutrino mixing: exploring the accelerator-reactor [16] Y. Sumino, Family Gauge Symmetry as an Origin of complementarity, IFT-UAM/CSIC-16-114, YITP-SB-16- Koide’s Mass Formula and Charged Lepton Spectrum, 45, arXiv:1611.01514 [hep-ph]. arXiv:0903.3640 [hep-ph]. [29] Elena Giusarma, Martina Gerbino, Olga Mena, Sunny [17] Yoshio Koide, Yukawaon Approach to the Sumino Re- Vagnozzi, Shirley Ho, Katherine Freese, On the improve- lation for Charged Lepton Masses, Phys.Lett.B687:219- ment of cosmological neutrino mass bounds, Phys. Rev. 224,2010, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2010.03.019, D94,083522(2016),doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.083522, arXiv:1001.4877 [hep-ph]. arXiv:1605.04320 [astro-ph.CO]. [18] A. Kartavtsev, A remark on the Koide relation for [30] C. Patrignani et al. (Particle Data Group), Chin. Phys. quarks, arXiv:1111.0480 [hep-ph]. C, 40, 100001 (2016). [19] Werner Rodejohann, He Zhang, Extended Empirical [31] Giorgio Cortiana, Top-quark mass measurements: review Fermion Mass Relation, Phys.Lett.B698:152-156,2011, and perspectives, arXiv:1510.04483 [hep-ex]. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.03.007, arXiv:1101.5525 [32] G. Aad, et al.(ATLASCollaboration),Determina- [hep-ph]. tion of the top-quark pole mass using $t \bar{t}+1$- [20] Jerzy Kocik, The Koide Lepton Mass Formula and Ge- jet events collected with the ATLAS experiment ometry of Circles, arXiv:1201.2067 [physics.gen-ph]. in 7 TeV $pp$ collisions, JHEP 10 (2015) 121, [21] Guan-Hua Gao, Nan Li, Explorations of two empirical doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2015)121, arXiv:1507.01769 [hep- formulas for fermion masses, Eur. Phys. J. C (2016) ex]. 76:140, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3990-3. [33] Peter J. Mohr, David B. Newell, Barry N. [22] Yoshio Koide, Hiroyuki Nishiura, Quark and Lepton Taylor, CODATA Recommended Values of Mass Matrix Model with Only Six Family-Independent the Fundamental Physical Constants: 2014, Parameters, Phys. Rev. D 92, 111301 (2015), doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.88.035009, arXiv:1507.07956 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.111301, arXiv:1510.05370 [physics.atom-ph]. [hep-ph]. [34] R. G. H. Robertson, for the KATRIN Collaboration, [23] Yoshio Koide, Hiroyuki Nishiura, Quark and Lepton J.Phys.Conf.Ser.120:052028,2008, doi:10.1088/1742- Mass Matrices Described by Charged Lepton Masses, 6596/120/5/052028, arXiv:0712.3893 [nucl-ex]. doi:10.1142/S021773231650125X, arXiv:1512.08386 [hep- ph].