Composite Higgs Models
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of S~aoPaulo Physics Institute Composite Higgs models Juan Pablo Hoyos Daza Dissertation submitted to the Physics Institute of the University of S~aoPaulo in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science. arXiv:1908.10204v1 [hep-ph] 25 Aug 2019 S~aoPaulo 2018 Acknowledgments I would like to thank the working people of Brazil, to share me his progress and wealth. I would also like to extend my gratitude to: • My family for all the collaboration provided; • The USP and IFUSP for hospitality, the amazing research environment and re- sources necessary for my academic education; • My research advisor, Dr. Enrico Bertuzzo for his great disposition and patience; • The brothers Gina Ordo~nezand Gustavo Ordo~nezfor their valuable collaboration; • The CNPq for a Master Scholarship. ii Abstract One of the solutions to the hierarchy problem of the Standard Model is the composite Higgs scenario, where the Higgs emerges as a composite pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone boson. In this work we present and study the basic characteristics of the composite Higgs sce- nario, based on the SO (5) =SO (4) and SO (6) =SO (5) cosets. We construct their effective Lagrangians through the Callan-Coleman-Wess-Zumino construction. The first coset does not differ much from the Standard Model and the second contains a singlet scalar in addi- tion to the Higgs doublet. In these models we study the gauge sector, the fermion sector and we estimate the composite Higgs potential. Keywords: Composite Higgs; Higgs boson; Callan-Coleman-Wess-Zumino construction; Standard Model. iii Notation In this work we will use the natural units ~ = c = 1 where ~ = h=2π with h the Planck constant and c the velocity of light. Greek indices µ and ν run over the four spacetime coordinate, usually taken as 0, 1, 2, 3. The Einstein's summation convention is used, i.e. indices that are repeated are summed over. L Lagrangian density, frequently called Lagrangian. "αβγ Levi -Civita symbol. The transpose of a matrix A is AT . The complex conjugate of a matrix A is A∗. The Hermitian adjoint of a matrix A is Ay = A∗T . a b abc (AAd)c = if is the adjoint representation. 1 is the identity matrix, or sometimes called a unit matrix. Dirac conjugation is expressed by = yγ0. +h:c is the addition of the Hermitian adjoint or complex conjugate. The Pauli matrix are given by 0 1 0 −i 1 0 σ = ; σ = ; σ = : 1 1 0 2 i 0 3 0 −1 iv Contents Notation iv 1 Introduction1 1.1 Hierarchy problem . .1 2 Composite Higgs models5 2.1 Vacuum misalignment . .6 2.2 The CCWZ construction . .8 3 The minimal composite Higgs model SO(5)/SO(4) 13 3.1 Group generators and dµ symbol . 13 3.2 Gauge Lagrangian . 15 3.3 Fermions in the model . 18 4 The Non-Minimal Composite Higgs Model SO(6)/SO(5) 25 4.1 From NBG's to Higgs doublet . 25 4.2 Kinetic and Gauge Lagrangians . 28 4.3 Embedding Fermions . 31 5 Estimation of the composite Higgs potential 37 5.1 Case MCHM5 .................................. 37 5.2 Case NMCHM6 ................................. 41 6 Conclusions 46 A The Standard Model 47 A.1 Electroweak Symmetry Breaking in the Standard Model . 50 A.2 Custodial symmetry . 52 v CONTENTS vi B The Goldstone matrix 54 B.1 Explicit computation of the Goldstone matrix . 54 B.2 Inverse and derived of the Goldstone matrix . 57 C Useful Taylor series. 58 Bibliography 61 Chapter 1 Introduction Experimental tests such as the discovery of the weak neutral interaction, the production of the W and Z bosons, the recent discovery of a Higgs-like boson [1,2], among another data sets [3], confirm the extraordinary success of the Standard Model (SM) to explain the interactions of the fundamental particles. However some drawbacks observed experimentally (neutrino masses, baryon asymmetry in the universe, dark matter), and other of theoretical type (strong Charge-Parity viola- tion, electric charge quantization and the hierarchy or \naturalness" problem) require an extension of the theory. We will focus on the Hierarchy problem 1, since in this thesis we will study a scenario which addresses this problem. 1.1 Hierarchy problem The problem stems out when we assume that the SM is an Effective Field Theory (EFT), where the Lagrangian of the SM is generated at a smaller scale than that of the funda- mental theory. If there is just the SM, then there is no naturalness problem, but as there is no description of gravity in the SM and we expect gravity to kick in at a certain energy 19 (around the Planck scale MP ≈ 10 GeV), we can consider the SM as an EFT. Almost everything we see in Nature is described by d = 4 operators of the SM Lagrangian (see AppendixA). In the SM however there is one operator of dimension d = 2, the Higgs mass term. The coefficients in front of operators of dimension d are proportional to d−4 2 1=ΛSM (Λ is the cut-off scale [4]). This means that the Higgs mass is enhanced by ΛSM , 1The first references to the problem are in [5] and [6,7]. 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 2 so we can write the Higgs mass term as 2 y kΛSM H H; (1.1) where k is a numerical coefficient. Currently we know that the coefficient in front of HyH 2 2 2 2 in the SM is µ = mH =2 = (89 GeV) , but if we take the SM cutoff as reference at 16 ΛSM ∼ MGUT ∼ 10 GeV then −28 k ∼ 10 n 1: (1.2) This enormous hierarchy is basically the Naturalness problem. This problem is sometimes presented also as a problem of quadratic divergences, due to the fact that if we use the cut- off regularization, the radiative corrections to the Higgs mass are quadratically divergent, a feature not present when applying the dimensional regularization method. This does not mean that the problem disappears (physics does not depend on the regularization method), rather that it is a problem of quadratic divergences in the sense that if we calculate the Renormalization Group Equation (RGE) for the running scalar mass3 we obtain dm2 3λ2 µ = − M 2 + ::: (1.3) dµ π2 It is apparent that a quadratic sensitivity to a heavy mass scale exists even in dimensional regularization. For comparison, for a running fermion mass we have dm µ f / m ; (1.4) dµ f that is to say, there is no dependence on the details of the high energy theory at low energy. On the other hand, effects analogous to Eq. (1.3) are obtained from the interactions with vectors and scalar particles, so that the running scalar mass receives contributions from the mass of all kinds of particle it couples to. In the Standard Model the problem is present because we have an elementary scalar in the theory (the Higgs boson). With λ and M constants we can write down a solution to (1.3), given by 2 2 2 3λ 2 Λ m (Λ) − m (ΛEW ) = − 2 M log : (1.5) π ΛEW 2This cutoff of reference is not necessarily the cutoff of the new physics. 3 1 µ m2 2 = We obtain this result from Lagrangian L = 2 @µφ∂ φ − 2 φ + λφ + i@ − M , with M m, but it is totally valid in the SM if this is considered as EFT. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 3 Let us see the consequences arising from the term M 2. In order to do that we must change a little bit the details pertaining to the high energy limit: M ! M +δM. Then we obtain 2 2 2 2 3λ 2 Λ 6λ Λ m (ΛEW ) !m (Λ) + 2 M log + 2 MδM log π ΛEW π ΛEW 2 (1.6) 2 6λ Λ = m (ΛEW ) old + 2 MδM log π ΛEW from which 2 2 2 2 6λ 2 Λ δM δm (ΛEW ) = m (ΛEW ) − m (ΛEW ) old = 2 M log : (1.7) π ΛEW M 2 In this way, we can define the sensitivity of the observable δm (mpole) with respect to the changes of the high energy, that is to say 2 δm (mpole) δM 2 = ∆ ; (1.8) mpole M where the sensitivity factor is 6λ2 M 2 Λ ∆ = 2 2 log : (1.9) π mpole mpole 2 2 We see that if ∆ 1 ) δm (mpole) =mpole 1, which means that to small changes in the high energy scale correspond large changes in the observables. This goes against the conception of the effective field theory, which should not depend on the details of the high energy theory. 2 6λ2 2 Λ The way to keep the large changes under control is by tuning m (Λ) against 2 M log π ΛEW (which are two unrelated quantities, in principle). This is the hierarchy problem in terms of fine tuning. In the case of SM, if we think of it as an effective field theory where we are integrating out some states with mass MP , the Higgs field interacts with these states and we will have a sensitivity factor given by 2 const MP MP 31 ∆ = 2 2 log ' 10 ; (1.10) 16π mh;P ole mh;P ole so we have a huge tuning. This is the so-called fine tuning problem of the Standard Model. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 4 The composite Higgs scenario [8,9] addresses the problem by considering the Higgs as a low energy bound state of some more fundamental degree of freedom, so the RGE is valid only up to the energy at which the more fundamental theory kicks in.