Berezhiani Università Di L’Aquila and LNGS, Italy

Uniﬁed picture of the dark matter and baryogenesis

Zurab Berezhiani Università di L’Aquila and LNGS, Italy

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 1/25 Cosmic Coincidence & Fine Tuning Problems

Todays Universe is flat (Ωtot ≈ 1) and multi-component: ■ ● Present Cosmology ΩB ≃ 0.04 observable matter – Baryons ! ● Visible vs. Dark matter ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning ■ dark matter: – WIMPS? Axions? .... demonstration ΩD ≃ 0.20 ● Unification ■ ● Carrol’s Alice... ΩΛ ≃ 0.75 dark energy: – Λ-term? 5th-essence? .... ● Mirror World ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM ● Interactions A. coincidence of matter ΩM=ΩD+ΩB and dark energy ΩΛ: ΩM/ΩΛ ≃ 0.3 ● B & L violation −3 ● Neutrino Mixing · ρΛ ∼ Const., ρM ∼ a ; why ρM/ρΛ ∼ 1 – just Today? ● BBN demands ● See-Saw Antrophic answer: if not Today, then it could be Yesterday or Tomorrow ... ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas B. Fine Tuning between visible ΩB and dark ΩD matter: ΩB/ΩD ≃ 0.2 ● VM and DM ● Epochs −3 −3 B D B D ● CMB · ρ ∼ a , ρ ∼ a ; why ρ /ρ ∼ 1 – Yesterday Today & Tomorrow? ● LSS ● Neutron mixing Difficult question ... popular models for the primordial Baryogenesis (GUT-B, ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment Lepto-B, Spont. B, Affleck-Dine B, EW B, ...) have no feeling for the popular ● Neutron mixing DM candidates (Wimp, Wimpzilla, axion, axino, gravitino ...)

– How Baryon Asymmetry could knew about Dark Matter? – again anthropic (landscaped) Fine Tunings in Particle Physics and Cosmology? Just for our good?

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 2/25 Visible vs. Dark matter

−9 • Visible matter: ρB = nBMB, MB ≃ 1 GeV – nucleons, η = nB/nγ ∼ 10

● Present Cosmology Sakharov’s conditions: B (B − L) & CP violation, Out-of-Equilibrium ● Visible vs. Dark matter ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration – in Baryogenesis models η depends on several factors, like CP-violating ● Uniﬁcation ● Carrol’s Alice... constants, particle degrees of freedom, mass scales, particle interaction ● Mirror World strength and goodness of out-of-equilibrium.... and in some models (e.g. ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM Afﬂeck-Dine) on the initial conditions as well ... ● Interactions ● B & L violation ● Neutrino Mixing • Dark matter: ρD = nX MX , but MX = ? , nX = ? ● BBN demands ● See-Saw ● Leptogenesis: diagrams – too wide spectrum of possibilities ... ● Boltzmann Eqs. −5 14 ● Leptogenesis: formulas Axion: MX ∼ 10 eV; Wimp: MX ∼ 1 TeV; Wimpzilla: MX ∼ 10 GeV ... ● VM and DM ● Epochs – in relative models nX depends on varios factors, like equilibrium status and ● CMB ● LSS particle degrees of freedom, particle masses and interaction strength ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing (production and annihilation cross sections).... and in some models (e.g. ● Experiment Axion or Wimpzilla) on the initial conditions as well ... ● Neutron mixing How then the mechanisms of Baryogenesis and Dark Matter synthesis, having different particle physics and corresponding to different epochs, could know about each-other? – How ρB = nBMB could match ρX = nX MX so intimately?

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 3/25 B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration

● Present Cosmology 40 B-genesisHΕCP...L 40 B-genesisHΕCP...L ● Visible vs. Dark matter ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration Ρ Ρ ● Uniﬁcation B B ● Carrol’s Alice... 20 20 ● Mirror World DM-freezingHΣann...L ● L Mirror Particles L 4 ● VM and DM 4 ● Interactions 0 0 GeV GeV ● B & L violation ΡDM -4 -4 Ρ Ρ Ρ ● Neutrino Mixing Ρrad~a DM Ρrad~a H H ● BBN demands Log ● See-Saw Log -20 -20 ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas -3 M=R -3 M=R Ρmat~a Ρmat~a ● VM and DM -40 ΡL -40 ΡL ● Epochs ● CMB ● LSS ● Neutron mixing -60 Today -60 Today ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 ● Neutron mixing LogHaa0L LogHaa0L

Evolution of the Baryon number ( ··· ) in e.g. Leptogenesis scenario confronted to the evolution of the Dark Matter density ( — ) in the scenarios of WIMP (left pannel ) and Axion (right pannel)

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 4/25 Uniﬁed origin of B and D? Both fractions at one shoot?

● Present Cosmology 40 B-genesisHΕCP...L ● Visible vs. Dark matter ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration Ρ ● Uniﬁcation B ● Carrol’s Alice... 20 ● Mirror World ● Mirror Particles L ● VM and DM 4 ● Interactions 0 GeV

● B & L violation ΡDM -4 ● Neutrino Mixing Ρ Ρrad~a H ● BBN demands

● See-Saw Log -20 ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas -3 M=R Ρmat~a ● VM and DM -40 ΡL ● Epochs ● CMB ● LSS ● Neutron mixing -60 Today ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 ● Neutron mixing LogHaa L 0 MX nX ∼ 1 dark gauge sector? MB nB

• DM masses/properties are similar to baryon ones: MX ∼ MB • DM & B asymmetries are generated by one process and nX ∼ nB

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 5/25 Alice & Mirror World Lewis Carroll, "Through the Looking-Glass"

‘Now, if you’ll only attend, Kitty, and not talk so much, I’ll tell you all my ideas about Looking-glass House. There’s the room you can see through the glass – that’s just the same ● Present Cosmology ● Visible vs. Dark matter as our drawing-room, only the things go the other way... the books are something like our ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration ● Unification books, only the words go the wrong way: I know that, because I’ve held up one of our books to ● Carrol’s Alice... ● Mirror World the glass, and then they hold up one in the other room. I can see all of it – all but the bit just ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM behind the fireplace. I do so wish I could see that bit! I want so to know whether they’ve a fire ● Interactions ● B & L violation in the winter: you never can tell, you know, unless our fire smokes, and then smoke comes up ● Neutrino Mixing ● BBN demands in that room too – but that may be only pretence, just to make it look as if they had a fire... ● See-Saw ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ‘How would you like to leave in the Looking-glass House, Kitty? I wander if they’d give you milk ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas in there? But perhaps Looking-glass milk isn’t good to drink? Now we come to the passage: ● VM and DM ● Epochs it’s very like our passage as far as you can see, only you know it may be quite on beyond. Oh, ● CMB ● LSS how nice it would be if we could get through into Looking-glass House! Let’s pretend there’s a ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing way of getting through into it, somehow ... Why, it’s turning into a sort of mist now, I declare! ● Experiment ● Neutron mixing It’ll be easy enough to get through ...’ –Alice said this, and in another moment she was through the glass... she was quite pleased to find that there was a real fire in the fireplace... ‘So I shall be as worm here as I was in my room,’ thought Alice: ‘warmer, in fact, there’ll be no one here to scold me away from the fire’.

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 6/25 ”Looking-Glass Universe” – Parallel “Mirror” World

Broken P can be restored by mirror fermions Lee & Yang ’56

● Present Cosmology Mirror sector hidden copy of our sector Kobzarev, Okun, Pomeranchuk ’66 ● Visible vs. Dark matter Alice strings A.S. Schwarz’ 82 ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration Blinnikov, Khlopov ’83 ● Unification Mirror dark matter (invisible stars) ● Carrol’s Alice... SU(3)×SU(2)×U(1) × SU(3)′ ×SU(2)′ ×U(1)′ Foot, Lew, Volkas ’91 ● Mirror World ● Mirror Particles ′ ● VM and DM Two identical gauge factors, G × G , with the identical field contents ● Interactions ′ ′ ● B & L violation and Lagrangians: Ltot = L + L + Lmix – SU(5) × SU(5) , etc . ● Neutrino Mixing ● BBN demands ● See-Saw • Can naturally emerge in string theory: O & M matter fields localized ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ′ ● Boltzmann Eqs. on two parallel branes with gravity propagating in bulk: e.g. E8 × E8 ● Leptogenesis: formulas ● VM and DM • Exact parity G ↔ G′: Mirror matter is dark (for us), but its particle ● Epochs ● CMB physics we know exactly – no new parameters! ● LSS ● Neutron mixing ′ ′ ● Neutron mixing • Spont. broken parity G ↔ G : MW ≫ MW - shadow dark matter: ● Experiment ′ ● Neutron mixing Particle spectrum rescaled by ζ = MW /MW ZB & Mohapatra ’95 Shadow DM, sterile neutrinos, Machos ZB, Dolgov, Mohapatra ’96 Strong CP and new axion (axidragon) ZB, Gianfagna, Giannotti ’00 SUSY little Higgs – accidental global U(4) ZB ’04

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 7/25 Mirror Sector, Mirror Particles & Mirror Parity

SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1) × SU(3)′ × SU(2)′ × U(1)′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ● Present Cosmology gauge (g, W, Z, γ) gauge(g , W ,Z , γ ) ● Visible vs. Dark matter & Higgs ( ) fields & Higgs ( ′) fields ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning φ φ demonstration ● Unification ′ ′ ● Carrol’s Alice... quarks (B=1/3) leptons (L=1) | quarks (B =1/3) leptons (L =1) ● Mirror World ● Mirror Particles t t | ′ ′ ′ t ′ ′ ′ t ● VM and DM qL =(u,d)L lL =(ν, e)L qL =(u ,d )L lL =(ν , e )L ● Interactions ′ ′ ′ ● B & L violation uR dR eR | uR dR eR ● Neutrino Mixing ● BBN demands | ^ ^ ^ ′ ^ ′ ● See-Saw quarks (B=-1/3) leptons (L=-1) | quarks (B =-1/3) leptons (L =-1) ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs. ˜ t ˜ t | ′ ′ ˜′ t ˜′ ′ ′ t ● Leptogenesis: formulas q˜R = (˜u, d)R lR = (˜ν, e˜)R q˜R = (˜u , d )R lR = (˜ν , e˜ )R ● VM and DM ˜ ′ ˜′ ′ ● Epochs u˜L dL e˜L | u˜L dL e˜L ● CMB ● LSS ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing ˜ ˜ ∗ ˜ ′ ′ ′ ˜′ ′ ˜′ ′∗ ′ ˜′ ● Experiment − LYuk = fLY fLφ + fRY fRφ | LYuk = fLY fLφ + fRY fRφ ● Neutron mixing

• D-parity: L ↔ L′, R ↔ R′, φ ↔ φ′ : Y ′ = Y • identical xero copy • M-parity: L ↔ R′, R ↔ L′, φ ↔ φ˜′ : Y ′ = Y † • mirror (chiral) copy

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 8/25 ′ Broken M parity: MW >MW ?

Spont. broken M parity: v′ ≫ v Z.B., Dolgov & Mohapatra ’96

● Present Cosmology ● Visible vs. Dark matter 17.5 ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration ● Uniﬁcation 15 ● Carrol’s Alice... ● Mirror World 12.5 ● Mirror Particles

● VM and DM L ● Μ

Interactions H 10

● 1

B & L violation -

3 Α3 ● Neutrino Mixing Α 7.5 ● BBN demands ● See-Saw Α3' ● Leptogenesis: diagrams 5 ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas 2.5 ● VM and DM ● Epochs LL' L'SUSY ● CMB ● LSS 1 102 104 106 ● Neutron mixing ΜGeV ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment ● Neutron mixing ′ ′ ′ 0.28 ′ MN /MN ∼ Λ /Λ ∼ (MW /MW ) changes slowly with MW ′ ′ me/me ≃ MW /MW changes fastly with MW . ′ – Properties of MB’s get closer to CDM : MW ∼ 10 TeV ?

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 9/25 Possible interactions between O & M particles (besides gravity)

(but also model of mirror gravity can be constructed !) Can be at tree level, or induced by exchange of extra gauge singlet ● Present Cosmology ● Visible vs. Dark matter particles or common gauge ﬁelds acting with both O & M particles ... ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration another interesting story ! Z. Berezhiani, Phys. Lett. B 417, 287 (1998) ● Uniﬁcation ● Carrol’s Alice... ● Mirror World these interactions can induce particle mixing phenomena between O & M sectors: ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM any neutral particle (elementary or composite) can mix its mirror twin ● Interactions ● B & L violation exactly degenerate in mass ● Neutrino Mixing ● BBN demands ■ µν ′ Holdom ’86 ● See-Saw photon - mirror photon kinetic mixing εF Fµν ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ′ ● Boltzmann Eqs. mirror particles become ”millicharged” Q ∼ εQ relative to our photon ● Leptogenesis: formulas ● + − ′+ ′− VM and DM −→ positronium - mirror positronium mixing (e e → e e ) Glashow ’86 ● Epochs ● CMB −8 −9 ● LSS ... but BBN : ε< 10 , CMB+LSS : ε< 10 ● Neutron mixing ■ 0 0′ 0 0′ 0 0′ ● Neutron mixing meson - mirror meson mixing: π − π , K − K , ρ − ρ , etc. ● Experiment ′ ′ ● Neutron mixing 1 5 5 ′ 5 ′ 5 ′ 1 5 5 ′ M 2 (uγ u − dγ d)(u γ u − d γ d ), M 2 (dγ s)(d γ s ) (∆S = 1) 1 5 5 0 0 analogous to 2 ¯ ... M (dγ s)(dγ s) −→ K − K mixing (∆S = 2) Phenom. limits: M > 10 TeV (π0 − π0′), M > 100 TeV (K0 − K0′)

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 10/25 Lepton & baryon number violating interactions

′ ■ neutrino - mirror neutrino mixing (ν − ν ) – effective operators :

● Present Cosmology Z. Berezhiani, R.N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D 52, 6607 (1995) ● Visible vs. Dark matter 1 ′ ′ ′ ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning (lφ)(l φ ) (∆L = 1, ∆L = 1) demonstration M ● Uniﬁcation ● 1 2 1 ′ ′ 2 Carrol’s Alice... analogous to lφ (∆L = 2), l φ (∆L′ = 2) ● Mirror World M ( ) M ( ) ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM – operators that generate neutrino Majorana masses via seesaw mechanism ● Interactions ● B & L violation constraints from active-sterile neutrino mixing ● Neutrino Mixing ● BBN demands ■ ′ ● See-Saw neutron - mirror neutron mixing (n − n ) – effective operators : ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ′ ′ ′ ● Boltzmann Eqs. 1 ′ 5 udd u d d , (∆B = 1, ∆B = 1) ● Leptogenesis: formulas M ( )( ) ● VM and DM ′ ′ ′ ● 1 2 1 2 ′ Epochs analogous operators 5 (udd) (∆B = 2), 5 (u d d ) (∆B = 2) ● CMB M M ● LSS ● Neutron mixing generate neutron - antineutron mixing ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment ■ hydrogen - mirror hydrogen mixing – effective operators : ● Neutron mixing 1 ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ M 8 (udde)(u d d e ), (∆B = 1, ∆L = 1; ∆B = 1, ∆L = 1) 1 c.f. operators 2 hydrogen - antihydrogen atom mixing M 8 (udde) −→

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 11/25 O & M neutrino mixing

Mixed D=5 effective operators Z.B. & Mohapatra ’95

● Present Cosmology ′ ● Visible vs. Dark matter A A ′ ′ ′ ′ D ′ ′ ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning llφφ(∆L=2) + l l φ φ(∆L′=2) + ll φφ(∆L=1,∆L′=1) demonstration M M M ● Uniﬁcation ● Carrol’s Alice... ′ ′ ′ ● Mirror World Substituting VEVs hφi = v and hφ i = v , we get ν − ν mixing ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM ● ′ 2 ′ Interactions mˆ ν mˆ νν 1 Av Dvv ● B & L violation = – active-sterile ν system ● t M t ′ ′ ′2 Neutrino Mixing mˆ ′ mˆ ′ D vv A v ● BBN demands νν ν ! ! ● See-Saw ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ′ ∗ † ′ t ● Boltzmann Eqs. [ M-parity: A = A , D = D ; D-parity: A = A, D = D ] ● Leptogenesis: formulas ● VM and DM ● ′ ◦ Epochs • v = v: m ′ = m and maximal mixing θ ′ = 45 ; Foot & Volkas ’95 ● CMB ν ν νν ● LSS ′ ′ 2 ′ ● Neutron mixing • v > v: mν′ ∼ (v /v) mν and small mixing θνν′ ∼ v/v ; ● Neutron mixing ′ 2 ● Experiment e.g. v /v ∼ 10 : ∼ keV sterile neutrinos as WDM Z.B., Dolgov, Mohapatra ’96 ● Neutron mixing

• A, A′ = 0 (L−L′ conserved) light – Dirac neutrinos Z.B. & Bento ’05 with L components in ordinary sector and R components in mirror sector

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 12/25 BBN demands : was Alice’s guess correct?

Mirror particle physics ≡ ordinary particle physics

● Present Cosmology but .... mirror cosmology =6 ordinary cosmology ● Visible vs. Dark matter ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning ■ SM demonstration at the BBN epoch, T ∼ 1 MeV, g∗ = g∗ = 10.75 ● Unification ± ● Carrol’s Alice... as contributed by the γ, e and 3 ν species : Nν = 3 ● Mirror World ■ ′ ● Mirror Particles if T = T , mirror world would give the same contribution: ● VM and DM eff SM ● Interactions g∗ = 2 × g∗ = 21.5 – equivalent to ∆Nν = 6.14 !!! ● B & L violation ● ′ eff SM 4 ′ 4 Neutrino Mixing ■ If T

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 13/25 Mixed Seesaw and Leptogenesis between O & M sectors

■ Heavy gauge singlet fermions Na, a =1, 2, 3, ... with large Majorana mass terms M = g M, can equally talk with both O and M leptons ● Present Cosmology ab ab ● Visible vs. Dark matter ′ ′ ′ 1 ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning LYuk = yiaφliNa + yiaφ liNa + MgabNaNb + h.c. ; demonstration 2 ● ′ † ′ Uniﬁcation (M-parity: y = y ; D-parity: y = y) ● Carrol’s Alice... ′ ● Mirror World ■ A A ′ ′ ′ ′ D ′ ′ ● Mirror Particles D=5 effective operators M llφφ + M l l φ φ + M ll φφ emerge after ● VM and DM ● Interactions integrating out heavy states N, where ● B & L violation −1 t ′ ′ −1 ′t −1 ′t ● Neutrino Mixing A = yg y , A = y g y , D = yg y ● BBN demands ● See-Saw ■ ˜′ ˜′ ′ ′ ˜˜ ● Leptogenesis: diagrams They generate also processes like lφ → l φ (l φ ) (∆L =1) and lφ → lφ ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas (∆L =2) satisfying Sakharov’s 3 conditions for baryogenesis ● VM and DM ● Epochs A. violate B-L – by deﬁnition ● CMB ● LSS ● Neutron mixing B. violate CP – complex Yukawa constants yia ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment C. out-of-equilibrium – already implied by the BBN ● Neutron mixing and thus generate B-L=6 0 ( → B=6 0 by sphalerons) for ordinary matter ′ ′ ′ ■ The same reactions generate B -L =6 0 ( → B =6 0) in Mirror sector. Both matter fractions: observable and dark, can be generated at one shoot !!

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 14/25 CP violation in ∆L=1 and ∆L=2 processes

L. Bento, Z. Berezhiani, PRL 87, 231304 (2001)

● Present Cosmology

● Visible vs. Dark matter Æ ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning

demonstration ¡ ¢

● ¼ Uniﬁcation

Ð Ð

Ð ● Carrol’s Alice... ● Mirror World

● Mirror Particles

● VM and DM

Æ ● Interactions

● B & L violation Æ Æ Æ

Æ Æ

£ ¤ ● Ð Ð Neutrino Mixing ¼ ¼

¡ ¢

Ð Ð

Ð ● BBN demands

Ð Ð ● See-Saw

¼ ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs.

● Leptogenesis: formulas Ð Æ Ð

● VM and DM Æ Æ

● Epochs ● CMB ¥ ¦

Ð Ð ● LSS Ð ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment † ∗ −1 ′† ′ −2 † −1 Ð ′ ● Neutron mixing εCP = ImTr[(y y) g (y y )g (y y)g ] εCP → εCP

′ ′† ′ ∗ −1 † −2 ′† ′ −1 ′

¼ ¼ εCP = ImTr[(y y ) g (y y)g (y y )g ] when y → y

Æ Æ

′ Æ ′ † Æ

¼ ¼ -parity: £ -parity: ¤ • D y = y, εCP = 0, but M Ð y = y εCP Ð 6= 0

Ð Ð

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 15/25 Boltzmann Eqs.

′ Evolution for (B-L) and (B-L) TR ≪ M

● Present Cosmology dnB−L 3 2 ● Visible vs. Dark matter dt + 3HnB−L +ΓnB−L = 4 ∆σ neq ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration ′ ● Uniﬁcation dnB−L ′ ′ ′ 3 ′ 2 ● Carrol’s Alice... dt + 3HnB−L +Γ nB−L = 4 ∆σ neq ● Mirror World ● Mirror Particles ′ 2 ′ ′ ● VM and DM Γ ∝ neq/M is the effective reaction rate of ∆L = 1 and ∆L = 2 ● Interactions ● B & L violation processes ● Neutrino Mixing ● BBN demands Γ′/Γ ≃ n′ /n ≃ x3 ; x = T ′/T ● See-Saw eq eq ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs. ′ 3εCP S 2 4 ● Leptogenesis: formulas ∆σ = −∆σ = 32π M ● VM and DM ● Epochs 2 ● CMB where S ∼ 16T is the c.m. energy square, ● LSS ● Neutron mixing † ∗ −1 ′† ′ −2 † −1 ● Neutron mixing εCP = ImTr[(y y) g (y y )g (y y)g ] ● Experiment ● Neutron mixing (0) ′ 3 (0) YBL = D(k) · YBL ; YBL = D(kx ) · YBL 3 (0) −3 εCP MP lTR Y ≈ 2 × 10 3/2 4 . BL g∗ M

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 16/25 ′ ′ MB = MB ... but nB >nB

3 (0) ′ 3 (0) (0) εCP MP lTR −3 B = D(k) · Y , B = D(kx ) · Y ; Y ≈ 3/2 4 · 10 g∗ M ● Present Cosmology ● Visible vs. Dark matter ′ ● 1/4 B vs. D – Fine Tuning k = [Γeﬀ /H]T =TR , x = T /T ≈ 1.2(k/g∗) (TR = TReheating) demonstration ● Uniﬁcation ● Carrol’s Alice... ● Mirror World 1 ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM ● Interactions 0.8 ● B & L violation ● Neutrino Mixing ● BBN demands 0.6 ● See-Saw ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas 0.4 ● VM and DM ● Epochs ● CMB 0.2 ● LSS ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 ● Neutron mixing Z.B. ’03 BBN: x< 0.5 → k ≤ 4; LSS: x< 0.2 → k ≤ 1.5

ΩB Thus Ordinary/Mirror matter ratio can vary within ′ = D(k) ≃ 0.2 − 1 ΩB

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 17/25 ′ ′ nB = nB .... but MB >MB

Spont. broken M parity: v′ ≫ v Z.B., Dolgov & Mohapatra ’96

● Present Cosmology ● Visible vs. Dark matter 17.5 ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration ● Uniﬁcation 15 ● Carrol’s Alice... ● Mirror World 12.5 ● Mirror Particles

● VM and DM L ● Μ

Interactions H 10

● 1

B & L violation -

3 Α3 ● Neutrino Mixing Α 7.5 ● BBN demands ● See-Saw Α3' ● Leptogenesis: diagrams 5 ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas 2.5 ● VM and DM ● Epochs LL' L'SUSY ● CMB ● LSS 1 102 104 106 ● Neutron mixing ΜGeV ● Neutron mixing ● ′ Experiment n ≃ nB k < 1 (robust non-equilibrium) ● Neutron mixing B ′ ′ ′ MN /MN ≃ (Λ /Λ) changes slowly with MW ′ ′ me/me ≃ MW /MW changes fastly with MW . ′ – Properties of MB’s get closer to CDM : MW ∼ 10 TeV ?

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 18/25 Mirror Baryons as Dark Matter

As far as Mirror Baryons are dark (in terms of ordinary photons), they could constitute Dark Matter of the Universe [Z.B., Comelli & Villante ’01] ● Present Cosmology ● Visible vs. Dark matter ′ 1 ● Once , mirror photons decouple earlier than our photons: B vs. D – Fine Tuning • x< 1 zdec ≃ x zdec demonstration ● Uniﬁcation However, if the DM is entirelly due to mirror baryons, then the large scale structure ● Carrol’s Alice... ● Mirror World (LSS) formation requires that mirror photons must decouple before Matter-Radiation ● Mirror Particles 2 −1 ● VM and DM Equality epoch: x < xeq = 0.05(ΩM h ) ≃ 0.3 ● Interactions ′ ● B & L violation • then mirror Jeans scale λ becomes smaller than the Hubble horizon before ● Neutrino Mixing J ● BBN demands Matter-Radiation Equality ● See-Saw ● Leptogenesis: diagrams mirror Silk scale is smaller than the one for the normal baryons: ● Boltzmann Eqs. • ● 5/4 Leptogenesis: formulas ′ 3/2 2 −3/4 Mpc ● VM and DM λS ∼ 5xeq (x/xeq) (ΩM h ) ● Epochs ● CMB Hence the structures formation at 1 Mpc scales (galaxies) implies x< 0.2 ● LSS ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing N.B. Since mirror baryons constitute dissipative dark matter, the formation of the ● Experiment extended halos can be problematic, but perhaps possible if the star formation in the ● Neutron mixing mirror sector is rather fast due to different temperature and chemical content (in fact, fast freezout of BBN in mirror sector is much faster, and it is dominated by Helium).

MACHOs as mirror stars – microlensing: Mav = 0.5 M⊙

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 19/25 CMB & LSS power spectra

80 Ω M=0.25, ω b=0.023, h=0.73, n=0.97 x=0.5, no CDM ● Present Cosmology x=0.3, no CDM ● Visible vs. Dark matter x=0.2, no CDM ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning 60

demonstration (µΚ) 1/2 ● ] Uniﬁcation π

● /2

Carrol’s Alice... l ● Mirror World 40 ● Mirror Particles l(l+1)C ● VM and DM [ ● Interactions ● B & L violation 20 WMAP ACBAR ● Neutrino Mixing ● BBN demands 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 ● See-Saw l ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs. 10 5 ● Leptogenesis: formulas ● VM and DM ● Epochs 2df bin. ● CMB 4 ) ● LSS 3 10 ● Neutron mixing

● Neutron mixing (Mpc

3 ● Experiment ● Neutron mixing P(k)h 10 3

10 2 0.01 0.10 k/h (Mpc −1)

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 20/25 LSS power spectra

Z.B., Ciarcelluti, Comelli & Villante, ’03

● Present Cosmology 4 ● Visible vs. Dark matter 10 ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration ● Uniﬁcation 10 2 ● Carrol’s Alice...

● Mirror World ) 3 ● Mirror Particles 0 ● VM and DM 10 (Mpc

●

Interactions 3 ● B & L violation ● Neutrino Mixing -2 P(k)h 10 ● BBN demands Ω ω ● See-Saw M =0.30, b=0.001,h=0.70,n=1.00 Ω ω ● Leptogenesis: diagrams M =0.30, b=0.02,h=0.70,n=1.00 -4 Ω M =0.30, ω b=0.02,h=0.70,x=0.2,no CDM,n=1.00 ● Boltzmann Eqs. 10 Ω M =0.30, ω b=0.02,h=0.70,x=0.1,no CDM,n=1.00 ● Leptogenesis: formulas Ω M =0.30, ω b=0.02,h=0.70,x=0.2, ω b’=ω CDM ,n=1.00 ● VM and DM -6 ● Epochs 10 ● CMB 0.01 0.1 1.0 10 −1 ● LSS k/h (Mpc ) ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment ● Neutron mixing

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 21/25 Leptogenesis or Baryogenesis?

1 ′ ′ D=5 operator M ll φφ (∆L=1) induced by heavy singlet N ”seesaw” exchange ′ ′ ● Present Cosmology (l,φ and l ,φ ordinary and mirror lepton and Higgs doublets) – can generate B-L ● Visible vs. Dark matter ′ ′ ′ ′ ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning (and B -L ) asymmetry via processes lφ → l φ Z.B. and Bento ’01 demonstration ′ ● Uniﬁcation φ φ ● Carrol’s Alice... ● Mirror World ● Mirror Particles M ● VM and DM × ● ′ Interactions N N

● B & L violation ¡ ● Neutrino Mixing l ′ ● BBN demands l ● See-Saw ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ′ ● Boltzmann Eqs. d d ● Leptogenesis: formulas M ● VM and DM × ′ ● Epochs S ′ S ● CMB N N ′ ● LSS d d ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing

● Experiment ¢ ● ′ Neutron mixing u u Z.B. and Bento ’05 1 ′ ′ ′ D=9 operator M5 (udd)(u d d ) (∆B =1) induced by heavy singlet N ”seesaw” (u,d and u′,d′ ordinary and mirror R-quarks, S,S′ color triplet scalars (squarks?)) – can generate B-L (and B′-L′) asymmetry via processes dS → d′S′

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 22/25 Neutron - Mirror neutron mixing

1 ′ ′ ′ 1 ′ ′ ′ Operators like M5 (udd)(u d d ) and M5 (qqd)(q q d ) induce the neutron - 5 ● ′ ′ 10 TeV − Present Cosmology mirror neutron mass mixing δm (nn + n n), with δm∼ ·10 15 eV ● Visible vs. Dark matter M ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration ′ ● Uniﬁcation • n − n oscillation in vacuum: 5 ● Carrol’s Alice... maximal mixing ◦ and oscillation time −1 M ● Mirror World θ = 45 τosc = δm ∼ 10 TeV s ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM ... similar to neutron - antineutron oscillation Kuzmin ’70, Glashow ’79 ● Interactions ● B & L violation Marshak & Mohapatra ’80 ● Neutrino Mixing ′ ● BBN demands but experimental limits on n − n¯ are strong: τnn¯ > 10 yr , while n − n is ● See-Saw ′ ● Leptogenesis: diagrams still allowed to be rather fast, faster then neutron decay: τnn < 10 min ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas 4 1/5 ● VM and DM Can be interesting if M∼ (MSMN ) ∼ 10 TeV In the ”seesaw” model – ● Epochs 12 ● CMB E.g. if MS, MN ∼ 10 TeV, or MN ∼ 10 TeV and MS ∼ 100 GeV ● LSS (see diagram of the previous page) ● Neutron mixing ● Neutron mixing !!! N.B. Nuclear Stability ● Experiment ● Neutron mixing • n − n˜ destabilizes nuclei: (A, Z) → (A − 1,Z, n˜) → (A − 2,Z)+ π’s τnn˜ > 10 yr or so ... • n − n′ does not: (A, Z) → (A − 1,Z)+ n′ not allowed by phase space ! gives no restriction for τnn′ !

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 23/25 Experimental limits & and future search

− • ILL experiment for n − n˜ oscillation search in flight: t ≃ 0.1s, B < 10 4G 8 ● Present Cosmology – no n˜ event found, τnn˜ > 10 s (or > 3 yr) Baldo Ceolin et al. ’94 ● Visible vs. Dark matter ′ ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning as for n − n : about 5% neutron deficit was observed, so taking demonstration 2 −2 −15 ● Unification Pnn′ (t) ≃ (t/τ) < 10 , τnn′ > 1s → δm < 10 eV ● Carrol’s Alice... ′ −6 −15 ● Mirror World • n − n – anomalous UCN loses, η < 2 · 10 → δm < 3 · 10 eV ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM ′ ● Interactions • Nuclear Stability gives no limit for τnn Z.B. & Bento ’05 ● B & L violation ● Neutrino Mixing Recent Experimental search: ● BBN demands ● See-Saw ● Leptogenesis: diagrams • τ > 2.7 s Munich, Schmidt et al, Feb. 2007 (unpubl.) ● Boltzmann Eqs. ● Leptogenesis: formulas • τ > 103 s ILL Grenoble, Ban et al. May 2007, axXiv:0705.2336 [nucl-ex] ● VM and DM ● Epochs • τ > 414 s ILL Grenoble, Serebrov et al. June 2007, axXiv:0706.3600 [nucl-ex] ● CMB ● LSS 4 ● Neutron mixing Future experiments can reach sensitivity τ ∼ 10 s (DUSEL ??) ● Neutron mixing ● ′ ′ Experiment n − n oscillations can have very different experimental implications if n and n ● Neutron mixing states are not exactly degenerate at B=0. E.g. gravity is not quite universal between O and M matters, or there exist non-universal 5th forces of non-gravitational origin, or the mirror magnetic field is non-zero. Opposite effect is possible: magnetic field could enhance the oscillation instead of suppressing it.

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 24/25 Neutron - Mirror neutron mixing in astrophysics

• primordial baryon asymmetry can be generated via ∆B = 1 processes like ′ ′ ′. The same (and possibly somewhat larger) baryon asymmetry would ● Present Cosmology udd → u d d ● Visible vs. Dark matter be generated in the Mirror sector, wich could naturally explanain the origin of the ● B vs. D – Fine Tuning demonstration baryonic and dark matter balance in the Universe: . ● Unification ΩD ∼ ΩB ● Carrol’s Alice... ′ ● Mirror World N.B. This mechanism does not require that n − n oscillation time should be ● Mirror Particles ● VM and DM necessarily small, within the present experimental reach. However, it requires that ● Interactions processes like ¯¯should be also active though could be much ● B & L violation ∆B = 2 udd → u¯dd ● ′ 4 Neutrino Mixing slower. Hence, should the n − n oscillation detected at the level τnn′ < 10 s, ● BBN demands ● See-Saw (i.e. Mnn′ ∼ 10 TeV) it would give a strong argument that n − n¯ oscillation should ● Leptogenesis: diagrams ● Boltzmann Eqs. also exist at the experimentally accessible level, with the relevant cutoff scale ● Leptogenesis: formulas 9 ● VM and DM Mnn¯ ∼ 100 TeV and thus τnn¯ ∼ 10 s. ● Epochs ● CMB ′ If ′ 3 s, oscillation provides an elegant mechanism for the ● LSS • τnn < 10 n − n ● Neutron mixing transport of the ultra high energy cosmic rays at the large cosmological distances ● Neutron mixing ● Experiment without suffering significant energy depression, and could be of interest in the search ● Neutron mixing of the UHECR above the GZK cutoff and their correlation with the far distant astrophysical objects (BL Lacs, GRB’s etc.) Z.B. & Bento ’05 • Fast n − n′ oscillation could have interesting implications also for the neutrons from the solar flares Mohapatra,Nasri, Nussinov ’05

′ ENTApP Dark Matter 09, 1-6 Feb 2009 n − n oscillations etc ... - p. 25/25