DOCSLIB.ORG

Renormalization Group Invariants in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Renormalization Group Invariants in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model Renormalization Group Invariants in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model Master’s Thesis September 2014 Tom van Daal [email protected] Supervisor: Prof. dr. W.J.P. Beenakker Department of Theoretical High Energy Physics Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics Radboud University Nijmegen Contents 1 Introduction 5 1.1 Conventions........................................ 5 2 The Standard Model 7 2.1 IntroductiontotheStandardModel . 7 2.2 TheStandardModelfieldcontent. 7 2.3 The Standard Model Lagrangian . 8 2.4 Flavormixing....................................... 10 3 Symmetries of the Standard Model 15 3.1 Noether’stheorem .................................... 15 3.2 Poincar´esymmetries ................................... 16 3.3 Gaugesymmetries .................................... 16 3.4 Flavorsymmetries .................................... 17 3.4.1 Flavor group without flavor mixing . 17 3.4.2 Flavor group with flavor mixing . 21 4 Supersymmetry 25 4.1 Introductiontosupersymmetry . 25 4.2 Motivation for supersymmetry . 26 4.3 Supersymmetric Lagrangians . 29 4.3.1 Chiralsupermultiplets . 29 4.3.2 Gaugesupermultiplets.............................. 30 4.3.3 Chiral and gauge supermultiplets combined . 31 4.4 Supersymmetrybreaking................................. 32 5 The Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model 33 5.1 TheMSSMfieldcontent................................. 33 5.2 R-parity.......................................... 34 5.3 The MSSM Lagrangian . 34 5.4 Softsupersymmetrybreaking . 37 5.5 Countingindependentparameters . 38 5.6 SymmetriesoftheMSSM ................................ 42 6 Renormalization group techniques 45 6.1 What is renormalization? . 45 6.2 Renormalization group equations . 46 6.3 E↵ectivefieldtheories .................................. 46 6.4 Renormalization group invariants . 47 7 One-loop β-functions for MSSM scalar masses 51 7.1 The propagator for scalar fields . 51 7.1.1 Higgs doublets . 52 7.1.2 Scalarfields.................................... 52 7.2 One-loop corrections to scalar propagators . 53 7.2.1 Type 1 diagrams . 54 7.2.2 Type 2 diagrams . 55 7.2.3 Type 3 diagrams . 56 7.2.4 Type 4 diagrams . 58 7.3 Renormalization of scalar fields . 59 7.3.1 Field renormalization . 59 7.3.2 Mass renormalization . 60 7.4 Results........................................... 61 3 8 RG invariants in the MSSM 62 8.1 Constructing RG invariants in the canonical way . 62 8.2 RG invariants from a di↵erentperspective . 65 9 Conclusion 68 AIndices 69 B Unitary matrices 70 C Spinors 72 C.1 Diracspinors ....................................... 72 C.2 Weylspinors ....................................... 72 D Superpotential contributions to the MSSM Lagrangian 74 E Integrals 78 F One-loop mass counterterms for MSSM scalar fields 83 List of abbreviations 87 Acknowledgements 88 Bibliography 90 4 1 Introduction The experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN, among other experiments, are searching for physics beyond the Standard Model of particle physics, since we know that the Standard Model cannot be the final story. Experimentalists are looking for signals that do not fit well in the Standard Model framework. One job for theorists, on the other hand, is to come up with new models that describe physics at even smaller length scales (or, equivalently, higher energy scales) that solve the current problems with the Standard Model. Over the last decades, many new theories have been described in literature, all coming with both pros and cons. In this thesis we will focus on one particular beyond the Standard Model theory: the so-called Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM). This is the most minimal extension to the Standard Model that respects an additional spacetime symmetry, called supersymmetry. In short, the MSSM predicts that each Standard Model particle has a supersymmetric counterpart with exactly the same quantum numbers and mass (except for the spin that di↵ers by half a unit). We already know that even the MSSM could not be the “theory of everything” though. Namely, since supersymmetric particles have not been found yet, this means that either supersymmety is simply not implemented in nature, or that supersymmetric particles are much heavier (at least beyond the reach of the LHC) than their Standard Model counterparts, i.e. supersymmetry is a broken symmetry of nature. In this thesis, of course, we will assume the latter. At energy scales many orders of magnitude higher than the typical LHC collider scale of (10 TeV), even beyond the range of validity of the MSSM, new physics would provide boundary conditionsO to the MSSM. Say that supersymmetric particles are discovered at the LHC and that some relevant new parameters are measured, would there then be a way to check which of those boundary conditions could be realized in nature? The answer is yes: quite recently, a new method has been devised that could probe these boundary conditions by making clever use of so-called renormalization group (RG) invariants using low energy data only (i.e. the new data coming from particle accelerators). Constructing these RG invariants as probes for high scale physics models can be a very tedious and complicated job though, and this has not been done yet for (the scalar sector of) the MSSM, but only for heavily constrained supersymmetric models (in these models typically about 80% of the MSSM parameters are “thrown away”). In this thesis we will attempt to construct RG invariant quantities for the full MSSM, i.e. without any simplifications. In this thesis a thorough analysis of symmetries of the MSSM will be performed. Most of this analysis will be carried out for the Standard Model though (as this theory is a bit simpler) and the results will then be generalized to the MSSM. Finally, an attempt will be made to unify symmetries of the MSSM with the concept of RG invariant quantities. If such a relation would turn out to exist, then it would be much easier to tell for a given (supersymmetric) theory if RG invariants could exist at all, and, if the answer is positive, how to construct them. After all, simplifying a certain theory (i.e. setting parameters equal to each other or to zero) generally means that symmetry is added to its Lagrangian. Could this in turn mean that also the number of RG invariants increases? In the first section we will discuss the Standard Model, mostly focussing on its Lagrangian and mixing of fermionic flavors. In section 2 we will present a thorough analysis of symmetries of the Standard Model. The obtained results for family space will be most important for the remainder of this thesis. Subsequently, the basic concepts of supersymmetry will be discussed and a general supersymmetric Lagrangian will be constructed. In the next section we will consider the MSSM and perform a careful count of its independent parameters. Also the symmetry analysis for the Standard Model will then be generalized to the MSSM. In the subsequent section, the concept of renormalization and the utility of RG invariants will be discussed. Section 7 will be the most technical part of this thesis. Here the one-loop RG equations for the MSSM scalar masses will be derived. Finally, an attempt will be made to construct RG invariants in the MSSM from these obtained RG equations and we will consider the role of symmetries in this context. 1.1 Conventions Throughout this thesis we will make use of the following conventions: We adopt natural units where ~ = c = 1. With this choice, mass is the only dimension that • 5 is left, i.e.: 1 1 [mass] = [energy] = [length]− =[time]− , (1) where the square brackets denote the mass dimension. We make use of the Einstein summation convention, which means that all repeated indices • are summed over (unless explicitly stated otherwise). The various types of indices that are used in this thesis are defined in appendix A. For the Minkowski metric ⌘ we choose the convention ⌘ = diag(1, 1, 1, 1). • µ⌫ µ⌫ − − − We define the contravariant spacetime and energy-momentum four-vectors to be • xµ =(t, ~x) ,pµ =(E,p~ ) , (2) and the (ordinary) derivative is defined as @ @ . (3) µ ⌘ @xµ The n n identity matrix will be denoted by In, and the most important matrices in family • space will⇥ be indicated in boldface (to make the text more readable). It is important to be aware of the fact that the sections on the Standard Model make use • of Dirac spinors to describe the fermionic fields, while the sections on supersymmetry and renormalization group techniques use Weyl spinors instead. The di↵erences between Dirac and Weyl spinors are explained in appendix C. The abbreviation “h.c.” is short for “Hermitian conjugate”. • 6 2 The Standard Model The Standard Model of particle physics incorporates all known fundamental particles and their (non-gravitational) interactions and forms the heart of particle physics. In this section we briefly review the main aspects of the Standard Model. We will discuss its particle content and provide the most important mathematical structures. Much more on the Standard Model can be found in any textbook on quantum field theory or particle physics, e.g. in [1]. 2.1 Introduction to the Standard Model The Standard Model is a quantum field theory that describes the dynamics of all known funda- mental particles up to an incredible accuracy. It provides the framework for three out of the four (known) fundamental forces of nature: the electromagnetic, weak and strong interactions. The Standard Model was completed in the early 1970s, but not fully experimentally verified until the discovery of the Higgs boson at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in 2012 [2, 3]. Despite the great success of the Standard Model, there are also a couple of (significant) short- comings. One of them being the complete absence of gravity. It is expected that at the Planck scale gravity becomes comparable in strength to the other forces, which implies that quantum gravity e↵ects can no longer be ignored1. In other words, the Standard Model breaks down and a reconciliation of general relativity and quantum mechanics is needed. This is why the Standard Model cannot be the theory of everything; it provides an excellent e↵ective framework for “low” energy physics, but for higher energies (i.e.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Searches for Electroweak Production of Supersymmetric Gauginos and Sleptons and R-Parity Violating and Long-Lived Signatures with the ATLAS Detector
    Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric gauginos and sleptons and R-parity violating and long-lived signatures with the ATLAS detector Ruo yu Shang University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (for the ATLAS collaboration) Supersymmetry (SUSY) • Standard model does not answer: What is dark matter? Why is the mass of Higgs not at Planck scale? • SUSY states the existence of the super partners whose spin differing by 1/2. • A solution to cancel the quantum corrections and restore the Higgs mass. • Also provides a potential candidate to dark matter with a stable WIMP! 2 Search for SUSY at LHC squark gluino 1. Gluino, stop, higgsino are the most important ones to the problem of Higgs mass. 2. Standard search for gluino/squark (top- right plots) usually includes • large jet multiplicity • missing energy ɆT carried away by lightest SUSY particle (LSP) • See next talk by Dr. Vakhtang TSISKARIDZE. 3. Dozens of analyses have extensively excluded gluino mass up to ~2 TeV. Still no sign of SUSY. 4. What are we missing? 3 This talk • Alternative searches to probe supersymmetry. 1. Search for electroweak SUSY 2. Search for R-parity violating SUSY. 3. Search for long-lived particles. 4 Search for electroweak SUSY Look for strong interaction 1. Perhaps gluino mass is beyond LHC energy scale. gluino ↓ 2. Let’s try to find gauginos! multi-jets 3. For electroweak productions we look for Look for electroweak interaction • leptons (e/μ/τ) from chargino/neutralino decay. EW gaugino • ɆT carried away by LSP. ↓ multi-leptons 5 https://cds.cern.ch/record/2267406 Neutralino/chargino via WZ decay 2� 3� 2� SR ɆT [GeV] • Models assume gauginos decay to W/Z + LSP.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiative Corrections in Curved Spacetime and Physical Implications to the Power Spectrum and Trispectrum for Different Inflationary Models
    Radiative Corrections in Curved Spacetime and Physical Implications to the Power Spectrum and Trispectrum for different Inflationary Models Dissertation zur Erlangung des mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Doktorgrades Doctor rerum naturalium der Georg-August-Universit¨atG¨ottingen Im Promotionsprogramm PROPHYS der Georg-August University School of Science (GAUSS) vorgelegt von Simone Dresti aus Locarno G¨ottingen,2018 Betreuungsausschuss: Prof. Dr. Laura Covi, Institut f¨urTheoretische Physik, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren, Institut f¨urTheoretische Physik, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Prof. Dr. Dorothea Bahns, Mathematisches Institut, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Miglieder der Prufungskommission:¨ Referentin: Prof. Dr. Laura Covi, Institut f¨urTheoretische Physik, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Korreferentin: Prof. Dr. Dorothea Bahns, Mathematisches Institut, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Weitere Mitglieder der Prufungskommission:¨ Prof. Dr. Karl-Henning Rehren, Institut f¨urTheoretische Physik, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Prof. Dr. Stefan Kehrein, Institut f¨urTheoretische Physik, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Prof. Dr. Jens Niemeyer, Institut f¨urAstrophysik, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Prof. Dr. Ariane Frey, II. Physikalisches Institut, Universit¨atG¨ottingen Tag der mundlichen¨ Prufung:¨ Mittwoch, 23. Mai 2018 Ai miei nonni Marina, Palmira e Pierino iv ABSTRACT In a quantum field theory with a time-dependent background, as in an expanding uni- verse, the time-translational symmetry is broken. We therefore expect loop corrections to cosmological observables to be time-dependent after renormalization for interacting fields. In this thesis we compute and discuss such radiative corrections to the primordial spectrum and higher order spectra in simple inflationary models. We investigate both massless and massive virtual fields, and we disentangle the time dependence caused by the background and by the initial state that is set to the Bunch-Davies vacuum at the beginning of inflation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nobel Prize in Physics 1999
    The Nobel Prize in Physics 1999 The last Nobel Prize of the Millenium in Physics has been awarded jointly to Professor Gerardus ’t Hooft of the University of Utrecht in Holland and his thesis advisor Professor Emeritus Martinus J.G. Veltman of Holland. According to the Academy’s citation, the Nobel Prize has been awarded for ’elucidating the quantum structure of electroweak interaction in Physics’. It further goes on to say that they have placed particle physics theory on a firmer mathematical foundation. In this short note, we will try to understand both these aspects of the award. The work for which they have been awarded the Nobel Prize was done in 1971. However, the precise predictions of properties of particles that were made possible as a result of their work, were tested to a very high degree of accuracy only in this last decade. To understand the full significance of this Nobel Prize, we will have to summarise briefly the developement of our current theoretical framework about the basic constituents of matter and the forces which hold them together. In fact the path can be partially traced in a chain of Nobel prizes starting from one in 1965 to S. Tomonaga, J. Schwinger and R. Feynman, to the one to S.L. Glashow, A. Salam and S. Weinberg in 1979, and then to C. Rubia and Simon van der Meer in 1984 ending with the current one. In the article on ‘Search for a final theory of matter’ in this issue, Prof. Ashoke Sen has described the ‘Standard Model (SM)’ of particle physics, wherein he has listed all the elementary particles according to the SM.
    [Show full text]
  • Scalar Quantum Electrodynamics
    A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works. John Gall 17 Scalar Quantum Electrodynamics In nature, there exist scalar particles which are charged and are therefore coupled to the electromagnetic field. In three spatial dimensions, an important nonrelativistic example is provided by superconductors. The phenomenon of zero resistance at low temperature can be explained by the formation of so-called Cooper pairs of electrons of opposite momentum and spin. These behave like bosons of spin zero and charge q =2e, which are held together in some metals by the electron-phonon interaction. Many important predictions of experimental data can be derived from the Ginzburg- Landau theory of superconductivity [1]. The relativistic generalization of this theory to four spacetime dimensions is of great importance in elementary particle physics. In that form it is known as scalar quantum electrodynamics (scalar QED). 17.1 Action and Generating Functional The Ginzburg-Landau theory is a three-dimensional euclidean quantum field theory containing a complex scalar field ϕ(x)= ϕ1(x)+ iϕ2(x) (17.1) coupled to a magnetic vector potential A. The scalar field describes bound states of pairs of electrons, which arise in a superconductor at low temperatures due to an attraction coming from elastic forces. The detailed mechanism will not be of interest here; we only note that the pairs are bound in an s-wave and a spin singlet state of charge q =2e. Ignoring for a moment the magnetic interactions, the ensemble of these bound states may be described, in the neighborhood of the superconductive 4 transition temperature Tc, by a complex scalar field theory of the ϕ -type, by a euclidean action 2 3 1 m g 2 E = d x ∇ϕ∗∇ϕ + ϕ∗ϕ + (ϕ∗ϕ) .
    [Show full text]
  • Asymptotically Flat, Spherical, Self-Interacting Scalar, Dirac and Proca Stars
    S S symmetry Article Asymptotically Flat, Spherical, Self-Interacting Scalar, Dirac and Proca Stars Carlos A. R. Herdeiro and Eugen Radu * Departamento de Matemática da Universidade de Aveiro and Centre for Research and Development in Mathematics and Applications (CIDMA), Campus de Santiago, 3810-183 Aveiro, Portugal; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 14 November 2020; Accepted: 1 December 2020; Published: 8 December 2020 Abstract: We present a comparative analysis of the self-gravitating solitons that arise in the Einstein–Klein–Gordon, Einstein–Dirac, and Einstein–Proca models, for the particular case of static, spherically symmetric spacetimes. Differently from the previous study by Herdeiro, Pombo and Radu in 2017, the matter fields possess suitable self-interacting terms in the Lagrangians, which allow for the existence of Q-ball-type solutions for these models in the flat spacetime limit. In spite of this important difference, our analysis shows that the high degree of universality that was observed by Herdeiro, Pombo and Radu remains, and various spin-independent common patterns are observed. Keywords: solitons; boson stars; Dirac stars 1. Introduction and Motivation 1.1. General Remarks The (modern) idea of solitons, as extended particle-like configurations, can be traced back (at least) to Lord Kelvin, around one and half centuries ago, who proposed that atoms are made of vortex knots [1]. However, the first explicit example of solitons in a relativistic field theory was found by Skyrme [2,3], (almost) one hundred years later. The latter, dubbed Skyrmions, exist in a model with four (real) scalars that are subject to a constraint.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Mechanics Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD)
    Quantum Mechanics_quantum chromodynamics (QCD) In theoretical physics, quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is a theory ofstrong interactions, a fundamental forcedescribing the interactions between quarksand gluons which make up hadrons such as the proton, neutron and pion. QCD is a type of Quantum field theory called a non- abelian gauge theory with symmetry group SU(3). The QCD analog of electric charge is a property called 'color'. Gluons are the force carrier of the theory, like photons are for the electromagnetic force in quantum electrodynamics. The theory is an important part of the Standard Model of Particle physics. A huge body of experimental evidence for QCD has been gathered over the years. QCD enjoys two peculiar properties: Confinement, which means that the force between quarks does not diminish as they are separated. Because of this, when you do split the quark the energy is enough to create another quark thus creating another quark pair; they are forever bound into hadrons such as theproton and the neutron or the pion and kaon. Although analytically unproven, confinement is widely believed to be true because it explains the consistent failure of free quark searches, and it is easy to demonstrate in lattice QCD. Asymptotic freedom, which means that in very high-energy reactions, quarks and gluons interact very weakly creating a quark–gluon plasma. This prediction of QCD was first discovered in the early 1970s by David Politzer and by Frank Wilczek and David Gross. For this work they were awarded the 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics. There is no known phase-transition line separating these two properties; confinement is dominant in low-energy scales but, as energy increases, asymptotic freedom becomes dominant.
    [Show full text]
  • Structure of Matter
    STRUCTURE OF MATTER Discoveries and Mysteries Part 2 Rolf Landua CERN Particles Fields Electromagnetic Weak Strong 1895 - e Brownian Radio- 190 Photon motion activity 1 1905 0 Atom 191 Special relativity 0 Nucleus Quantum mechanics 192 p+ Wave / particle 0 Fermions / Bosons 193 Spin + n Fermi Beta- e Yukawa Antimatter Decay 0 π 194 μ - exchange 0 π 195 P, C, CP τ- QED violation p- 0 Particle zoo 196 νe W bosons Higgs 2 0 u d s EW unification νμ 197 GUT QCD c Colour 1975 0 τ- STANDARD MODEL SUSY 198 b ντ Superstrings g 0 W Z 199 3 generations 0 t 2000 ν mass 201 0 WEAK INTERACTION p n Electron (“Beta”) Z Z+1 Henri Becquerel (1900): Beta-radiation = electrons Two-body reaction? But electron energy/momentum is continuous: two-body two-body momentum energy W. Pauli (1930) postulate: - there is a third particle involved + + - neutral - very small or zero mass p n e 휈 - “Neutrino” (Fermi) FERMI THEORY (1934) p n Point-like interaction e 휈 Enrico Fermi W = Overlap of the four wave functions x Universal constant G -5 2 G ~ 10 / M p = “Fermi constant” FERMI: PREDICTION ABOUT NEUTRINO INTERACTIONS p n E = 1 MeV: σ = 10-43 cm2 휈 e (Range: 1020 cm ~ 100 l.yr) time Reines, Cowan (1956): Neutrino ‘beam’ from reactor Reactions prove existence of neutrinos and then ….. THE PREDICTION FAILED !! σ ‘Unitarity limit’ > 100 % probability E2 ~ 300 GeV GLASGOW REFORMULATES FERMI THEORY (1958) p n S. Glashow W(eak) boson Very short range interaction e 휈 If mass of W boson ~ 100 GeV : theory o.k.
    [Show full text]
  • A Solvable Tensor Field Theory Arxiv:1903.02907V2 [Math-Ph]
    A Solvable Tensor Field Theory R. Pascalie∗ Universit´ede Bordeaux, LaBRI, CNRS UMR 5800, Talence, France, EU Mathematisches Institut der Westf¨alischen Wilhelms-Universit¨at,M¨unster,Germany, EU August 3, 2020 Abstract We solve the closed Schwinger-Dyson equation for the 2-point function of a tensor field theory with a quartic melonic interaction, in terms of Lambert's W-function, using a perturbative expansion and Lagrange-B¨urmannresummation. Higher-point functions are then obtained recursively. 1 Introduction Tensor models have regained a considerable interest since the discovery of their large N limit (see [1], [2], [3] or the book [4]). Recently, tensor models have been related in [5] and [6], to the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model [7], [8], [9], [10], which is a promising toy-model for understanding black holes through holography (see also [11], [12], the lectures [13] and the review [14]). In this paper we study a specific type of tensor field theory (TFT) 1. More precisely, we consider a U(N)-invariant tensor models whose kinetic part is modified to include a Laplacian- like operator (this operator is a discrete Laplacian in the Fourier transformed space of the tensor index space). This type of tensor model has originally been used to implement renormalization techniques for tensor models (see [16], the review [17] or the thesis [18] and references within) and has also been studied as an SYK-like TFT [19]. Recently, the functional Renormalization Group (FRG) as been used in [20] to investigate the existence of a universal continuum limit in tensor models, see also the review [21].
    [Show full text]
  • PDF) of Partons I and J
    TASI 2004 Lecture Notes on Higgs Boson Physics∗ Laura Reina1 1Physics Department, Florida State University, 315 Keen Building, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4350, USA E-mail: [email protected] Abstract In these lectures I briefly review the Higgs mechanism of spontaneous symmetry breaking and focus on the most relevant aspects of the phenomenology of the Standard Model and of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model Higgs bosons at both hadron (Tevatron, Large Hadron Collider) and lepton (International Linear Collider) colliders. Some emphasis is put on the perturbative calculation of both Higgs boson branching ratios and production cross sections, including the most important radiative corrections. arXiv:hep-ph/0512377v1 30 Dec 2005 ∗ These lectures are dedicated to Filippo, who listened to them before he was born and behaved really well while I was writing these proceedings. 1 Contents I. Introduction 3 II. Theoretical framework: the Higgs mechanism and its consequences. 4 A. A brief introduction to the Higgs mechanism 5 B. The Higgs sector of the Standard Model 10 C. Theoretical constraints on the Standard Model Higgs bosonmass 13 1. Unitarity 14 2. Triviality and vacuum stability 16 3. Indirect bounds from electroweak precision measurements 17 4. Fine-tuning 22 D. The Higgs sector of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model 24 1. About Two Higgs Doublet Models 25 2. The MSSM Higgs sector: introduction 27 3. MSSM Higgs boson couplings to electroweak gauge bosons 30 4. MSSM Higgs boson couplings to fermions 33 III. Phenomenology of the Higgs Boson 34 A. Standard Model Higgs boson decay branching ratios 34 1. General properties of radiative corrections to Higgs decays 37 + 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2003.01034V1 [Hep-Th] 2 Mar 2020 Im Oe.Frta Esntelna Oe a Etogta Ge a Large As the Thought in Be Solved Be Can Can Model Models Linear These the One
    Inhomogeneous states in two dimensional linear sigma model at large N A. Pikalov1,2∗ 1Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Dolgoprudny 141700, Russia 2Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia (Dated: March 3, 2020) In this note we consider inhomogeneous solutions of two-dimensional linear sigma model in the large N limit. These solutions are similar to the ones found recently in two-dimensional CP N sigma model. The solution exists only for some range of coupling constant. We calculate energy of the solutions as function of parameters of the model and show that at some value of the coupling constant it changes sign signaling a possible phase transition. The case of the nonlinear model at finite temperature is also discussed. The free energy of the inhomogeneous solution is shown to change sign at some critical temperature. I. INTRODUCTION Two-dimensional linear sigma model is a theory of N real scalar fields and quartic O(N) symmetric interaction. The model has two dimensionful parameters: mass of the particles and coupling constant. In the limit of infinite coupling one can obtain the nonlinear O(N) arXiv:2003.01034v1 [hep-th] 2 Mar 2020 sigma model. For that reason the linear model can be thought as a generalization of the nonlinear one. These models can be solved in the large N limit, see [1] for a review. In turn O(N) sigma model is quite similar to the CP N sigma model. Recently the large N CP N sigma model was considered on a finite interval with various boundary conditions [2–8] and on circle [9–12].
    [Show full text]
  • Physics 215C: Particles and Fields Spring 2019
    Physics 215C: Particles and Fields Spring 2019 Lecturer: McGreevy These lecture notes live here. Please email corrections to mcgreevy at physics dot ucsd dot edu. Last updated: 2021/04/20, 14:28:40 1 Contents 0.1 Introductory remarks for the third quarter................4 0.2 Sources and acknowledgement.......................7 0.3 Conventions.................................8 1 Anomalies9 2 Effective field theory 20 2.1 A parable on integrating out degrees of freedom............. 20 2.2 Introduction to effective field theory.................... 25 2.3 The color of the sky............................. 30 2.4 Fermi theory of Weak Interactions..................... 32 2.5 Loops in EFT................................ 33 2.6 The Standard Model as an EFT...................... 39 2.7 Superconductors.............................. 42 2.8 Effective field theory of Fermi surfaces.................. 47 3 Geometric and topological terms in field theory actions 58 3.1 Coherent state path integrals for bosons................. 58 3.2 Coherent state path integral for fermions................. 66 3.3 Path integrals for spin systems....................... 73 3.4 Topological terms from integrating out fermions............. 86 3.5 Pions..................................... 89 4 Field theory of spin systems 99 4.1 Transverse-Field Ising Model........................ 99 4.2 Ferromagnets and antiferromagnets..................... 131 4.3 The beta function for 2d non-linear sigma models............ 136 4.4 CP1 representation and large-N ...................... 138 5 Duality 148 5.1 XY transition from superfluid to Mott insulator, and T-duality..... 148 6 Conformal field theory 158 6.1 The stress tensor and conformal invariance (abstract CFT)....... 160 6.2 Radial quantization............................. 166 6.3 Back to general dimensions......................... 172 7 Duality, part 2 179 7.1 (2+1)-d XY is dual to (2+1)d electrodynamics.............
    [Show full text]
  • Electro-Weak Interactions
    Electro-weak interactions Marcello Fanti Physics Dept. | University of Milan M. Fanti (Physics Dep., UniMi) Fundamental Interactions 1 / 36 The ElectroWeak model M. Fanti (Physics Dep., UniMi) Fundamental Interactions 2 / 36 Electromagnetic vs weak interaction Electromagnetic interactions mediated by a photon, treat left/right fermions in the same way g M = [¯u (eγµ)u ] − µν [¯u (eγν)u ] 3 1 q2 4 2 1 − γ5 Weak charged interactions only apply to left-handed component: = L 2 Fermi theory (effective low-energy theory): GF µ 5 ν 5 M = p u¯3γ (1 − γ )u1 gµν u¯4γ (1 − γ )u2 2 Complete theory with a vector boson W mediator: g 1 − γ5 g g 1 − γ5 p µ µν p ν M = u¯3 γ u1 − 2 2 u¯4 γ u2 2 2 q − MW 2 2 2 g µ 5 ν 5 −−−! u¯3γ (1 − γ )u1 gµν u¯4γ (1 − γ )u2 2 2 low q 8 MW p 2 2 g −5 −2 ) GF = | and from weak decays GF = (1:1663787 ± 0:0000006) · 10 GeV 8 MW M. Fanti (Physics Dep., UniMi) Fundamental Interactions 3 / 36 Experimental facts e e Electromagnetic interactions γ Conserves charge along fermion lines ¡ Perfectly left/right symmetric e e Long-range interaction electromagnetic µ ) neutral mass-less mediator field A (the photon, γ) currents eL νL Weak charged current interactions Produces charge variation in the fermions, ∆Q = ±1 W ± Acts only on left-handed component, !! ¡ L u Short-range interaction L dL ) charged massive mediator field (W ±)µ weak charged − − − currents E.g.
    [Show full text]