Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byClare Cummings Modified over 9 years ago
1
Open questions in physics : mechanism & EFT III. Neutrinos
2
New “ Periodic Table ” Courtesy: R.D. McKeown Not physical states
3
Missing Solar Neutrinos … Courtesy: R.D. McKeown
4
Neutrino Oscillations: What We’ve Learned & What’s Unknown The status of the present knowledge of the neutrino oscillation phenomena is schematically depicted in this slide. Three quantities are unknown at present: a)The mass m 1 b)The angle 13 c)Whether the normal or inverted hierarchy is realized. Courtesy: P. Vogel
5
Neutrino Masses and Mixing: Scales Courtesy: R.D. McKeown
6
Maki – Nakagawa – Sakata Matrix CP violation Future Reactor Experiment! Courtesy: R.D. McKeown
7
“Seesaw mechanism” M The Mass Puzzle Courtesy: R.D. McKeown Very heavy neutrino } Familiar light neutrino {
8
The Mixing Angle Puzzle Why so different??? Courtesy: R.D. McKeown
9
What is the absolute value of m ? Why is m so tiny ? What is the mass hierarchy ? Is the neutrino its own antiparticle? What is 13 ? Do neutrinos violate CP? How do neutrinos affect/reflect astrophysical phenomena ? Open Questions
10
-Decay: LNV? Mass Term? Dirac Majorana -decay Long baseline ? ? Theory Challenge: matrix elements+ mechanism m EFF & neutrino spectrum NormalInverted See-saw mechanism Leptogenesis L L R HH Lepton Asym -> Baryon Asym GERDACUORE EXOMajorana
11
Majorana or Dirac Or equivalently, is the total lepton number conserved? Courtesy: P. Vogel
12
& Lepton Number Violation 0 e–e– e–e– uddu ( ) R L WW Whatever processes cause , its observation would imply the existence of a Majorana mass term: Schechter and Valle,82 By adding only Standard model interactions we obtain ( ) R ( ) L Majorana mass term Courtesy: P. Vogel
13
Decay vs. Decay virtual state of the intermediate nucleus Courtesy: P. Vogel
14
Decay vs. Decay assumed 2% resolution ratio 1:100 ratio 1:10 6 Courtesy: P. Vogel
15
-Decay: Theoretical Challenges Dirac Majorana Theory Challenge: matrix elements+ mechanism Light M exchange: can we determine m Shell Model vs. QRPA Configs near Fermi surface Levels above Fermi surface Vogel et al: reduce QRPA spread by calibrating g PP to T 2
16
Decay Matrix Elements Why it is difficult to calculate the matrix elements accurately? Contributions of different angular momenta J of the neutron pair that is transformed in the decay into the proton pair with the same J. Note the opposite signs, and thus tendency to cancel, between the J = 0 (pairing) and the J 0 (ground state correlations) parts. The same restricted s.p. space is used for QRPA and NSM. There is a reasonable agreement between the two methods Courtesy: P. Vogel
17
Decay Matrix Elements Full estimated range of M within QRPA framework and comparison with NSM (higher order currents now included in NSM) Courtesy: P. Vogel
18
-Decay: Theoretical Challenges Dirac Majorana Theory Challenge: matrix elements+ mechanism Mechanism: does light M exchange dominate ? How to calc effects reliably ? How to disentangle H & L ? O(1) for ~ TeV
19
-Decay: Mechanism & m signal equivalent to degenerate hierarchy Loop contribution to m of inverted hierarchy scale
20
-Decay: Theoretical Challenges Dirac Majorana Theory Challenge: matrix elements+ mechanism Mechanism: does light M exchange dominate ? How to calc effects reliably ? How to disentangle H & L ? O(1) for ~ TeV Prezeau, R-M, Vogel: EFT Does operator power counting suffice?
21
- decay Mechanism: EFT 4 quark operator: low energy EFT How do we compute & separate heavy particle exchange effects?
22
- decay in EFT I We have a clear separation of scales L-violating new physics Non-perturbative QCD Nuclear dynamics
23
Effective Field Theory Systematically and effectively organizing our ignorance Weak: M W Hadronic: Nuclear: k F Scale separation “Low-energy constants” parameterizing non- perturbative QCD Nuclear operators reflecting symmetries of short distance physics Power counting
24
- decay in EFT II Tractable nuclear operatorsSystematic operator classification
25
- decay in EFT III K , K NN, K NNNN can be O ( p 0 ), O ( p 1 ), etc.
26
- decay in EFT IV Operator classification Spacetime & chiral transformation properties L (q,e) L ,N,e
27
- decay in EFT V Operator classification L (q,e) = e.g. - decay: a = b = +
28
- decay in EFT VI Operator classification Chiral transformations: SU(2) L x SU(2) R Parity transformations: q L q R - decay: a = b = +
29
- decay in EFT VI Hadronic basis,, Chiral transformations No derivatives K ~ O (p 0 )
30
- decay in EFT VIII Hadronic basis Chiral transformations Two derivatives K ~ O (p 2 )
31
- decay in EFT: Implications Prezeau, R-M, & Vogel L (q,e) = Chiral properties of O j ++ determine p-dependence of K K NN, K NNNN K ~ O (p 0 ) K ~ O (p 2 ) No W R - W L mixing W R - W L mix RPV SUSY
32
An open question Is the power counting of operators sufficient to understand weak matrix elements in nuclei ? 76 Ge 76 Se
33
An open question Is the power counting of operators sufficient to understand weak matrix elements in nuclei ? e.g. etc.
34
-Decay: Interpretation Dirac Majorana Theory Challenge: matrix elements+ mechanism If the existence of the decay is established: What mechanism? Which additional isotopes ?
35
-Decay: Mechanism & m - SM extensions with low ( TeV) scale LNV ** ** In absence of fine-tuning or hierarchies in flavor couplings. Important caveat! See: V. Cirigliano et al., PRL93,231802(2004) Left-right symmetric model, R-parity violating SUSY, etc. possibly unrelated to m 2 R ~ O( R = B e /B e » 10 -2 B e = ( e )/ ( e e ) (Z,A) e - + (Z,A)) (Z,A) + (Z,A)) B e =
36
Lepton Flavor & Number Violation Present universeEarly universe Weak scalePlanck scale MEG: B ->e ~ 5 x 10 -14 Mu2e: B ->e ~ 5 x 10 -17 ?? R = B ->e B ->e Also PRIME
37
Lepton Flavor & Number Violation MEG: B !e ~ 5 x 10 -14 Mu2e: B !e ~ 5 x 10 -17 Logarithmic enhancements of R Low scale LFV: R ~ O(1) GUT scale LFV: R ~ O 0 decay Light M exchange ? Heavy particle exchange ? Raidal, Santamaria; Cirigliano, Kurylov, R- M, Vogel k11 / ~ 0.09 for m SUSY ~ 1 TeV ->e LFV Probes of RPV: k11 / ~ 0.008 for m SUSY ~ 1 TeV ->e LFV Probes of RPV:
38
What is the absolute value of m ? Why is m so tiny ? What is the mass hierarchy ? Is the neutrino its own antiparticle? What is 13 ? Do neutrinos violate CP? How do neutrinos affect/reflect astrophysical phenomena ? Open Questions
39
Precision Neutrino Property Studies Neutrino Mass: Terrestrial vs Cosmological WMAP & Beyond KATRIN, Mare Energy DensityPower Spectrum Beacom, Bell, Dodelson New interactions
40
Precision Neutrino Property Studies Mixing, hierarchy, & CPV Mini Boone Long baseline oscillation studies: CPV? Normal or Inverted ? Daya Bay Double Chooz T2K
41
Precision Neutrino Property Studies Solar Neutrinos KamLANDBorexinoSNO+LENS Ice Cube High energy solar s DM + EWB EM vs. luminosity: MNSP unitarity? Solar model?
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.