Arxiv:0803.4267V2 [Hep-Ph] 22 Jun 2008 SUL(4) × U(1) Model For

Home , Fayyazuddin

arXiv:0803.4267v2 [hep-ph] 22 Jun 2008 hc lohsrlvnet ayfilsohrta h atcephysic particle the has than This other cosmology. and fields astrophysics many physics, to nuclear particular, relevance has also which nrcn er nrospors a enmd nnurn phy neutrino in made been has progress enormous years recent In ainlCnr o hsc,QadIAa University Quaid-I-Azam Physics, for Centre National asrneaesuidi h oa ag group gauge local neutri the in sterile lig studied of the are existance and range masses possible mass neutrino mass, between fermion gap charged enormous the scales, mna eut n uuenurn experiments. neutrino like e future (MB) and experiments MiniBooNE results in and imental (LSND) itself Detector manifest Neutrino may Scintilation seesaw eV-scale The ns o etio,wt ih addnurn aoaama Majorana neutrino order handed of right be sees with normal ca Further neutrinos, spectrum for fermions. mass other anism the neutrino of that that shown from wi coupled is fermions It contain charges. not electric does which unification, electroweak SU oeo ai rbesi etiopyissc snwenergy new as such physics neutrino in problems basic of Some nfiainadseieneutrinos sterile and unification L (4) M ≫ × ainlCnr o Physics for Centre National eateto hsc and Physics of Department M ui--zmUniversity Quaid-i-Azam U weak saaa,Pakistan. Islamabad, saaa,Pakistan. Islamabad, 1 oe o electroweak for model (1) coe 0 2018 30, October swl e Vsaecnb accomodated. be can eV-scale new a well as Fayyazuddin Riazuddin Abstract 1 SU L (4) × o neV in nos wmech- aw hexotic th U ede- be n 1 for (1) ssto sses Liquid enmade been xper- htest ;in s; sics, possible by the quantum mechanical phenomena of interferometory which provides sensitive method to explore extremely small effects. This has re- sulted in the discovery of neutrino oscillations which imply that they have tiny but finite masses against the prediction of the standard model of particle physics. Thus they provide evidence for new physics which goes beyond the standard model. New physics requires new energy scale beyond that provided by the standard model but such a scale has not yet been pinned down. Thus there is a need to consider extensions of the electro-weak group which would provide a new scale between the elctroweak and grand unification. The neutrinos may also provide an understanding of the origin of matter (baryogenesis) through leptogenesis. For this purpose right handed neutrinos, which are seesaw partners of light neutrinos, with a mass scale of 1010 1011 GeV or even in TeV region may be needed. Further more one sees the enormous− gap between neutrino masses, revealed by neutrino oscillations, and the lightest charged fermion mass (me) in contrast to that between me and mt (top quark mass), which is populated by charged leptons and quarks. 6 Further (mν )max /me < 2 10− which needs to be undersood. This may be an indication of decoupling× of neutrino mass spectrum from other fermions. Morover while all neutrino data can be explained by flavor oscillations of three active neutrinos [1], the Liquid Scintilation Neutrino Detector (LSND) anomaly [2] stands out. This anomaly together with MiniBooNE (MB) ex- periment [3] may require atleast two sterile neutrinos [4],[5] that mix with the active neutrinos. Another possibility is by a decaying sterile neutrino, again in eV range [6]. Their mass is in the range of electrovolts. The purpose of this paper is a modest attempt towards understanding of some the problems mentioned above. We consider the extension of electroweak group SU (2) U (1) to SU (4) L × L × UX (1) as such an extension can answer some of the questions raised above as we shall see. In particular, it is shown that in addition to normal seesaw mechanism for neutrino masses, where right handed Majorana mass Mweak a new eV-scale can be accomodated. The latter may be a manifestat≫ ion of LSND and MB experiments. Further we show that neutrino mass spectrum can be decoupled from that of charged leptons. If one restricts oneself to only SUL(4)[7], one can not only accomodate known leptons nicely, but also a right handed Majorana neutrino. How- ever in order to accomodate the quarks, the group has to be extended to SUL(4) UX (1)[8], [9],[10]. In the original minimal version, where leptons c c × (l , νl , Nl,l)R form an SU(4) quartet, in order to cancel the anomalies, one

2 4 5 has to have quarks with exotic electric charges 3 and 3 . In this paper we shall consider other versions, which do not involve quarks with exotic charges[11]. The electric charge operator can, in general be deﬁned as a linear combi- nation of diagonal generators of the group [I, being the unit matrix]

1 b 2c YX b Q = [λ3 + λ8 + λ15]+ I 2 √3 √6 2 1 b c Y 1 bb c Y 2b c Y c Y = diag[ + + + X , + + + X , + + X , + X ] 2 6 6 2 − 2 6 6 2 − 6 6 2 − 2 2 1 YX = (λ3 + Y1)+ I (1) 2 2 b b where YX is the hypercharge associated with UX and b + c b + c 2b + c Y1 = diag[ , , − , c] (2) 3 3 3 − Now b 1 1 1 2 = 2 + 2 e g g′ 1 1 1 2 = 2 + 2 g′ g1 gX where in the SUL(4) limit

2 1 2 g1 = 2 g C1 b2 +2c2 C2 = (3) 1 3 This gives 1 b2 +2c 1 2 = 2 + 2 g′ 3g gX g′ Since g = tan θW , one obtains 2 2 gX sin θW (mX ) = 2 2 (4) g2 1 3+b +2c sin2 θ (m ) − 3 W X In the minimal version, b =1, c =2 g2 sin2 θ (m ) X = W X (5) g2 1 4 sin2 θ (m ) − W X 3 YX and Q = (1, 0, 0, 1)+ 2 (1, 1, 1, 1), so that for leptons, YX =0,where as in − 2 order to accomodate quarks we take, YX = 3 for the ﬁrst two generations 1 − of quarks and YX = 3 for the third generation. This is because in order to cancel the anomalies,− one generation is to be treated diﬀerently from the 4 other two. In this case we have quarks with exotic electric charges 3 and 5 − 3 respectively. − In order to accomodate known isospin doublets of left-handed quarks and leptons in the two upper components of 4 and 4∗(or 4∗, 4) representations b+c 1 of SU(4) and to forbid exotic electrical charges, we must have 6 = 4 , 2b+c c ± − 6 = 2 so that b =2c = 1. We thus consider the version with b =2c = − ± 2 1 1 (the other choice is equivalent). This choice gives [C1 = 2 ]

g2 sin2 θ (m ) X = W X (6) g2 1 3 sin2 θ (m ) − 2 W X A straight forward application of renormalization group equations gives[8] 2 2 [sin θW = sin θW (mZ )]

1 2 2 αX− (mZ ) 1 (1 + C1 ) sin θW 1 − − α− (mZ ) α(mZ) 2 22 4 nf 4 nf 2 mX = 2 [ C1 ( + )+ C1 ] ln 4π − − 3 3 2 3 2 mZ α(mZ ) 44 2 mX = C1 ln 4π 3 mZ

2 1 For our case C1 = 2 and we obtain

3 2 α(mZ ) 22 α(mZ ) mX 1 sin θW = ln − 2 − αX (mZ ) 3 4π mZ

2 1 where sin θW (mZ )=0.23122 and α− (mZ ) = 128. The uniﬁcation scale mX 3 6 10 16 is not very sensitive to αX .For mX = 10 GeV, 10 GeV, 10 GeV, 10 GeV, 2 2 2 2 αX =1.22 10− , 1.28 10− , 1.37 10− , 1.54 10− respectively. To put × × × × α 2 it in proper perspective, we note that the coupling α′ = cos θw associated 2 with U(1) of the Standard Model is 1.30α 1.02 10− .Before we give the anomaly free fermion content, we≃ note that≃ for our× choice b =2c =1, 3 Y 1 Y 1 Y 1 Y Q = diag[ + X , + X , + X , + X ] 4 2 −4 2 −4 2 −4 2

4 We can have two possibilities; which are given in Table 1 below.

TableI Anomaly free fermion content(i is the generation index, a is the color index and c stands for charge conjugation) SU(4)quartet : SU(4) singlet: I νi l l  ei−  FiR Ni ei− Ei− Fi− R FiL = i =1, 2, 3 ≡ E− Y : 0 2 2 2  i  X − − −  Fi−  = 3  L, YX 2 a − u1 a q a a a a q  d1  F1R u1 d1 D1 H1 R F1L = a ≡ 4 2 2 2 D1 YX : 3 3 3 3  a  − − −  H1  = 1  L, YX 6 ac − di ac q ac ac ac ac q  ui  FiR di ui Ui Ti R FiR = ac i =2, 3 ≡ 2 4 4 4 Ui YX : 3 3 3 3  ac  − − − T 5  i R, YX =   − 6 II c ei c l  νi  c F1R = eiL,YX =2 Ni  s   Ni  = 1  R, YX 2 ac d1 ac q a a a ac q  u1  F1L d1 u1 U1 T1 L F1R = ac ≡ 2 4 4 4 U1 YX : 3 3 3 3  ac  − − −  T1  = 5  R, YX 6 a − ui a q a a a a q  di  FiR ui di Di Hi R FiL = a i =2, 3 ≡ 4 2 2 2 Di YX : 3 3 3 3  a  − − − H 1  i L, YX =   − 6 The second alternative is very attractive, as it can naturally accomodate more than one right handed neutrinos per generation, some of which can be identiﬁed with sterile neutrinos when the SUL(4) UX (1) symmetry is suitably broken in the lepton sector. ×

5 We ﬁrst note that SU(4) lepton multiplet split as follows under the sub group SU (2) U (1) of SU(4) as a doublet L × Y1 c ei 1 c ,Y1 = νi R 2 and two singlets s 1 Ni N , Y1 = i R −2 After breaking the group SU(4) UX (1) to SUL(2) UY (1) of the standard c × × ei c model, we have a doublet c with Y =1, a singlet eiL with Y = 2 and νi R s two singlets Ni Ni R with Y =0. It is clear that two extra neutrinos are decoupled from the group SUL(2) UY (1). The interaction Lagrangian is given× by (suppressing the generation index i)

g c µ c I = [e γ ν W − + h.c.] L −√2 R R µ g c µ c g1 gX c µ c g1 gX [e γ e (W3µ + B1µ + Vµ)+ ν γ ν ( W3µ + B1µ + Vµ) −√2 R R 2g 2g R R − 2g 2g µ 1 g1 gX s µ s 1 g1 gX +N γ N (U3 B1 + V )+ N γ N ( U3 B1 + V )] R R µ − 2 g µ 2g µ R R − µ − 2 g µ 2g µ g c µ c µ 0 c µ s c µ s 0 µ s [e γ NeRX− + ν γ NRX + e γ N Y − + ν γ N Y + N Rγ N U)+ h.c.](7) −√2 R µ R µ R R µ R R µ R

2 1 where the vector boson B1µ = 3 W8µ + 3 W15µ is coupled to UY1 (1) and q q 1 2 U3µ = 3 W8µ + 3 W15µ. Note that in the symmetry limit g1 = √2g. −q q Further we note that the vector boson Bµ corresponding to UY (1) is given by B B1 V µ = µ + µ (8) g′ g1 gX Thus e e e Aµ = W3µ + B1µ + Vµ g g′ gX e e = W3µ + Bµ g g′ e e Zµ = W3µ Bµ (9) g′ − g

6 There are two more vector bosons, which we deﬁne as follows

g1 gX Z′ = B1 + V µ − g µ g µ

Zµ′′ = U3µ (10)

Hence rewriting the interaction Lagrangian in terms of vector bosons Aµ,Zµ, Zµ′ and Zµ′′ we have

neutral c µ c c µ c g c µ c c µ c I = g sin θ[eRγ eR + eLγ eL]Aµ [(eRγ eR νRγ νR) L − − 2 cos θW − 2 sin2 θ (ec γµec + ec γµec )]Z − W R R L L µ 1 1 s g[ (ec γµec + νc γµνc + N γµN + N γµN s ) −2 2 R R R R R R R R 2 g 2 c µ c c µ c c µ c 2 tan θW (eRγ eR 2eLγ eL + νRγ νR)]Zµ′ (11) −g1 − 1 µ s µ s g[N γ N N γ N ]Z′′ −2 R R − R R µ

Ni From Eqs. (7) and (11), it is clear that the doublet s belongs Ni R to fundamental representation of the U-spin SU(2) subgroup of SU(4) (the other subgroup being SU (2)) with vector bosons U, U, U3 , Z′′ belonging L µ ≡ µ to the adjoint representation of this group. To break the symmetry and at the same time give Dirac masses to fermions which have both left handed and right handed components viz charged leptons and quarks, the minimally required Higgs are given in Table 2:

7 Table II Higgs quartets. 3 YX = −20 χ u  χ−   0  χ = ′ <χ>= χ − 0  ′′     χ −   0   1    Y =+ X 2 ρ+ η+ ξ+ 0 0 0  ρ   η   ξ  ρ = ′0 η = ′0 ξ = ′0 ρ η ξ  ′′   ′′   ′′   ρ 0   η 0   ξ 0        0 0 0  u′   0   0  <ρ>= <η>= <ξ>= 0 V 0      ′   0   0   V        The following comments are in order: ρ and χ correspond to Higgs ﬁeld + v φ 0 φ0∗ √2 φ = 0 ,<φ>0= v , φ = iτφ = ,< φ > = . φ φ− 0 √2 − Thus <ρ> and <χ> give massese to the vector bosonse of the standard model gauge group and masses to the charged leptons and quarks of the standard model. For charged leptons only <χ> contributes. The other Higgs are needed to break the group SU(4) U(1) so as to give superheavy masses to the extra vector bosons and extra× quarks outside the standard model. With the symmetry breaking pattern discussed above, the mass Lagrangian for vector bosons is given by

2 W 1 2 2 + 1 1 g 2 2 + + mass = g u [2W W − +( Z + (1 6 2 tan θW )Z′) +2X X− +2Y Y −] L 2 cos θW 2 − g1 2 1 2 2 + 1 1 g 2 2 0 0 0 0 + g u′ [2W W − +( Z + (1 2 tan θW )Z′) +2X X +2Y Y ] 2 cos θW 2 − g1 1 2 + 0 0 1 2 + gV [2X X− +2X X +2UU +( Z′ + Z′′) ] 2 2 1 2 + 0 0 1 2 + gV ′ [2Y Y − +2Y Y +2UU +( Z′ Z′′) ] (12) 2 2 −

8 u2 Since V V ′ u u′, therefore neglecting the terms of order V 2 , we can write ≈ ≫ ≈

W 1 2 2 2 + 1 2 1 2 2 + 0 0 mass g [(u + u′ )(2W W − + 2 Z )] + g [V (2X X− +2X X +2UU) L ≈ 2 cos θW 2 1 2 2 1 2 + 0 0 +( Z′ + Z′′) )+ V ′ (( Z′ Z′′) +2Y Y − +2Y Y +2UU)] (13) 2 2 − This gives the gauge boson masses

2 2 1 2 2 2 mZ mW = g (u + u′ )= 2 2 cos θW 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 m = g V , m = g V ′ , m = m + m X 2 Y 2 U X Y V 2+V ′2 V 2 V ′2 2 1 2 4 −2 mZ′Z′′ = g V 2 V ′2 2 2 2 −2 V + V ′ So far we have introduced essentially two energy scales, represented by the vacuum expectation values u( u′) and V ( V ′) the former corrsponds to the SM scale ( 175GeV) and the≃ latter although≃ not ﬁxed, but much higher, ≃ an intersting one would be an intermediate energy scale (between SM and GUT) 1010GeV. Lagrangian≃ (11) explicitly shows the decoupling of extra leptons from the standard model. Only connection with the standard model is through the u2 mixing of Z with Z′ (involving terms of order V 2 ) when the symmetry is broken to give masses to the gauge bosons. Since extra bosons other than the standard bosons are very heavy, the mixing term only give a negligible contribution to the standard model observables. Similarly Z′ being very heavy, its contribution to standard model observables is also negligible. We now discuss SU (4) U (1) Yukawa interaction in the charged lepton L × X sector, which is c c HY = hij(F iRχjeiL)+ h.c. so that Ml = hij(eiLujeiR)+ h.c. (14)

For simplicity we may take ue = uµ = uτ = u. It is important to note that we have no new charged leptons, other than those of the standard model. As far as new quarks are concerned, their masses will be determined essentially by hiQV , hiQ being the corresponding Yukawa coupling constant, Q stands

9 for U, T, D and H quarks. If Yukawa couplings are of order unity, masses of new quarks will be of same order as those of vector bosons X etc. The above scalars do not give masses to neutrinos. In a way this is a great advantage as neutrinos have a completely diﬀerent mass spectrum from other fermions. To give Majorana masses to neutrinos, we introduce Higgs scalars Sαβ [α, β are SU(4) indices] belonging to the symmetric representation 10 of SU(4) with YX =1. The electric charge matrix for this representatin is

2111  1000  Q = 1000   b  1000   

Thus charged leptons can not get any masses from the Higgs Sαβ nor the quarks. In order to make N heavy and N s light ( eV) we introduce ∼ ′ ′′ S , S , and S with Y = 1 αβ αβ αβ X − with their expectation values in Table 3.

Table III Vacuum expectation values of Higgs belonging to rep. 10 of SU(4) 00 0 0 00 00 ′′  0 0 κ′ 0   00 0 κ′  < S′ >= < S >= s αβ 0 κ 0 0 αβ 00 00  ′     00 0 0   0 κ′ 0 κs     s  000 0  000 0  < S >= αβ 0 0 κ 0  R   000 0    where κ , κ′ κ′ κ . We wish to remark that we have selected three s s ≪ ≪ R different Higgs scalars Sβα with the same YX = 1 , just as we selected three Higgs quartets ρ, η, ξ with Y = 1 , for the reason− that with one S the X − 2 βα vacuum expectation values κ′, κR, κs, κs′ as different components of the same Higgs scalar would have been critically alligned.They, now belonging to three different Higgs scalars, are of course very hierarchical to accomodate different energy scales. However, the problem of hierarchy is there for models which go beyond the standard model and has no easy solution as is well known.

10 These additional Higgs give an extra contribution to W in Eq. (13) [only Lmass κR is important]

1 2 2 + 0 0 1 2 g κ [X X− + X X + 2( Z′ + Z′′) 2 R 2 so that only X and Z′and Z′′ gauge bosons get extra contribution, giving further splitting between these and Y and U bosons. The Yukawa couplings of these scalars to leptons are b T 1 b fijFiαC− FjβSβα (15) Xb where b = no prime, prime and double prime. Then the neutrino mass matrix is given by T 1 sT 1 s s MN = fij(κRNi C− Nj)+fij′ κ′νiNj +fij′′ (κsNi C− Nj +κs′ νiNj )+h.c (16) Eq. (16) gives 9 9 neutrino mass matrix in the weak eigenstates basis: × s 0 mD mD T MνN =  mD M 0  (17) msT 0 ms  D  s s where (mD)ij = fij′ κ′, (M)ij = fijκR,(mD)ij = fij′′ κs′ , (m )ij = fij′′ κs. s s Since κs, κs′ << κ′, κR, therefore in the limit mD, m 0, the diago- nalization gives ≪ → A 0 0

MνN =  0 M 0  (18) 00 0   1 T where A = m M − m . However, by introducing a unitary matrix U: − D D 1 b 0 U =  bT 1 0  , −0 01   1 T 1 T b = m M − , b = M − m (19) − D − D we obtain the mass matrix s A 0 mD T 1 UMνN U =  0 M 0  + O( 2 ) sT M m 0 m  D s  0 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 ms D 1 = M  0 1 0  +  0 00  +  0 00  + O( (20)2 ) sT M 0 0 0 0 00 m 0 m      D s  11 This gives the effective 6 6 light neutrino mass matrix × 1 T s mDM − mD mD Mν = − sT (21) mD ms The phenomenology of this 6 6 matrix already exist in the literature ×1 T [4,5,12,13]. In Eq. (21) mDM − mD gives the normal see saw mechanism. Here M >> m and may− be of order 1010 1012GeV a scale which may D − be relevant for thermal, non-degenerate leptogenesis. Now a word about 10 energy scales: κR is of order of 10 GeV while κ′ is of order 1GeV so that if all Yukawa coupling constants in Eq.(16) are of order unity, active neutrinos mass is of order 0.1eV to satisfy the constraint from WMAP data 2 Σmνi < (0.4 0.7)eV while atmospheric data give mν > 5 10− eV.κs is of order a few− eV so that sterile neutrinos are to be relevant× for “short” baseline oscillation searches. Finally in order to have active-sterile mixing small( 0.1)[see ref 11, 12]κ′ 0.1κ . For other approaches for possible ex- ∼ s ≃ s istance of sterile neutrinos in eV scale range whithin the framework of higher order gauge groups beyond the standard model., see ref [13,14,15]. In summary we have shown (i) intermediate mass scales between electroweak mass scale and that of grand unification can be accommodated, relevent for leptogeneses (ii) one can naturally accommodate more than one right handed neutrino per generation, some of which can be identified with sterile neutrinos that mix with active ones (iii) neutrinos mass spectrum is decoupled from other fermions (iv) both the normal seesaw mechanism with right handed neutrino Majorana mass M Mweak, which may be relevant for leptogenesis and an eV-scale which may≫ manifest itself in “short” baseline oscillation searches neutrino experiments. One of the authors(R) would like to thank Prof. K Sreenivasan for hos- pitality at Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, where most of this work was done. The other author (F) acknowledges a research grant provided by the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan to him as a Distinguished National Professor.

References

[1] For recent discussion and many references, see A. de Gouvea, arXiv. hep-ph/0411274 [2] A. Aguilar et al., [LSND Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D64, 112007 (2001).

12 [3] A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. [MiniBooNE Coll.], arXiv: hep-px/0704.1500; W. Louis and J. Conard [Mini- BooNE Coll.], talk at Fermilab, April 11, 2007, http://www-boone.fnal.gov/publicpages.First Results.pdf.

[4] M. Maltoni and T. Schwetz, arXiv: hep-ph/0705.0107v2.

[5] M.Maltoni, arXive:hep-ph 0711.2018. v1.

[6] S.Palomares, S.Pascoli, T.Schwertz. arXiv: hep-ph/0505216 v2.

[7] Fayyazuddin and Riazuddin, Phys. Rev. D30, 1041 (1982).

[8] R.Foot, H. N. Long, and T. A. Tran, Phys. Rev. D50, R34 (1994) [arXiv: hep-px/9402243].

[9] F. Pisano and V. Pleites, Phys. Tev. D51 (1995) 3865-3869 [arXiv: hep-px/9401272].

[10] Fayyazuddin and Riazuddin JHEP 0412 (2004) 013.

[11] For a model based on SUL(3) UX (1) with fermions without exotic electric charges, see for example,× F. Yin, Phys. Rev. D75, 073010 (2007).

[12] Riazuddin, Phys.Rev. D77, 013005 (2008).

[13] B.Brahamachari and R.N. Mohapatra, arXiv: hep-ph/9805429v2.

[14] K.S. Babu and G. Seidl, arXiv: hep-ph/0405197.

[15] R.N. Mohapatra and A.Y. Smirnov, arXiv: hep-ph/0603118v2.