fr/e) Tkcoftttltnl Porcpccttaea* o» Strata Phyal=c JOHN ELLIS* Sttnford Linttr Aettltrtttr Ctnltr Sltnfpri Onivtriiit, Stanford, Ctlijorni* 9J30S - PDF

II* SLAC-Pirj-aim April K^a fr/e) Tkcoftttltnl Porcpccttaea* o» Strata Phyal=c JOHN ELLIS* Sttnford Linttr Aettltrtttr Ctnltr Sltnfpri Onivtriiit, Stanford, Ctlijorni* 9J30S 1, Genera! Qnrrlnv Kaons are

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 20
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.

Food & Beverages

Publish on:

Views: 98 | Pages: 20

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

II* SLAC-Pirj-aim April K^a fr/e) Tkcoftttltnl Porcpccttaea* o» Strata Phyal=c JOHN ELLIS* Sttnford Linttr Aettltrtttr Ctnltr Sltnfpri Onivtriiit, Stanford, Ctlijorni* 9J30S 1, Genera! Qnrrlnv Kaons are beitjr enough to have an interesting range of decay modes available them, and light enough (o be produced in efficient numbers to explore rire node* with sstjsrying stttotics. Kaoni inj their 4c:ijs bavo provided at least two major breakthroughs in our knowledge ot fiidduaeatal phyaka. They have revealed to as CP violation, 1 end their lick offiimh changingneutral interactions warned Of to expect ehann. 3 In addition, /f R mixing baa provided us with one of our most etegut and sensitive laboratories for testing quantum mechanics, 3 There is every reason to expect that future generations of kson experiments with intense sources would add further to our knowledge of fundamental physics. This talk attempts to set future kaon experiments in * general theoretical context, tad indicate how they may bear mpon fundamental theoretical issues, Figure I eosapsulates some important trends in elementary particle physics. Two major philosophical approaches can be distinguished. The onioa-skic philosophy emphasises the search for more elementary constituents of matter as previous levels ere shown to be composite. Many authors believe 4 that the present elementary particles such as quarks, leptons, possibly gauge bosons ud maybe Him fields ere In fact composites of underlying preens oo a distance scale 0(10 '*) cm, The unification merchants, on the other band, emphasise* the common origin and form of the different fundamental forces. H now seem established that the weak and electromagnetic interaction* are at least partkaily unified in the Glashow-SeJam-Weinberg (GSW) model, and that the nuclear forces ate complicated manifestations of an underlying gauge theory QCD 7 which Is conceptually dose to the GSW model. Together they constitute the 'Standard Model* of elementary particles. Their family resemblance leads naturally to the hypothesis 8 of a grand unified theory of all gauge interactions. If this exists, its grand symmetry must be broken at a very high energy scale 0 within a few orders of magnitude of the Planck mass of O(1O 10 ) GeV. Al that scale there may be a fins! superunifloatiou* with gravity. The provocative prefix 'super* refi«ta tny belief that aucb a Goal unification probably employs aupersymmetry (SUS V ) in some form, 10 It may well be that SUSY makes an earlier appearance oa th stage of unification. As we will see later, technical difficulties with GUTa would be alleviated if SUSY was effectively restored at an energy scale os low os 1 TeV. ' MASTI *Work supported by the Department of Energy, contract DE-AC03-78SF Invited talk presented at the Theoretical Symposium on Intense Medium Energy Sources of Strangeness l)«lv*r*ity ot California., Santa Ctui, California, March 1083 ( It has avallab possibl vv L.- c fry* : SIAC-PIH DK? t iwzz 5 ' LfliCTi J ' Prtont? I Fig. 1. A genera) overview of the oaten ttkifi ud unification trends in elementary particle physics. The different theoretical ideas introduced above are developed la greater detail in Sec. 2 of this talk. Then Mows a survey of different experiments which would be done with an Intense Medium En«gy Source of Strangeness, Including rue K decays, probes or the nature of CP isolation, ft decays, bypeton dec'/s and neutrino physics. Each experiment will be assessed (or its interest u a test oi* the different theoretical ideas reviewed in Sec. i. Section 3 concludes v/itb personal list yf priorities for IMESS experiments. That terminates the physics content of this talk, and leaves us with two short sections of wariness, Section 4 discusses why and how quantum mechanics might be violated, find how nn«might test this in the K - R system. Finally, Sec. 5 asks the Unas table question: how best should one proceed to explore strange physics in the futuret 2. Surrey of Different Theories: 2.1 THE STANDARD MODEL By this name we denote the gauge theory based on the group 1/(3) (for the stung interactions) XSV{2) x U(l) (for the weak and electromagnetic is* teractioos), with just 3 for perhaps S 3) identical generations oi quarks and leptons, and with spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking furnished by a tingle doublet of Higgs fields. 11 As mandated by th suppression offlsvor-ehangtaeneutral interactions of kaons, the Standard Model incorporate* the GIM mechanism 3 so that neutral currents conserveflavorat the tree level, andflavor-changingneutral interactions at the one-loop level are suppressed by 0(o mj/m^r). The GIM mechanism is an automatic consequence of any theory 12 in which all quarks of the same charge and helicity have the same weak isoapin and get theif masses from the same Biggs doublet. The Standard Model provides not only 1 qualitative but also a quantitative explanation of the magnitudes offlavor-changingneutral interactions. For example, the magnitude of the AS «2 K** - R mass mixing was used 19 to give an experimentally verified upper limit ofl the sass of the NOTICE MS GF TlilS 8EP0RT ARE rlugible/ been reproduced Iron the best e copy lo permit the broadest e availability. 2 $mmm v it* wxm & m*my\ etaratd qaark, ud tht c qiufe coatribattontothe AS -1 * -» + nr decay tutrix element ii small taongh 13 to b* oamptswlt with tnatfimbt. Wt will (atom lata* tatbtjt eakvlatioo* lb thto-ojnatk KebeyaibVMaattw* 1 * attention oftht original 4-oaarh GIM modd.* They win provide at with atefal constraints oo tbt ugtea e\ (j M 1,9,3) chnteetfristog tbt charged weak bteractiona or qanrla, 1 ' ae wri) at on tb» mm of tbt 1park ud thereby eoaatet with the ofctm* which»titiokwmte of CP»W»tiMiJ»tki8UadMdMod«l Ttew b u loomtotantic adriag aaglae between leptew to tha Standard Modd, ml thtotntrino»ma» po»cdtopenn»«tab incau that tha nrobtril^ of tbt deferent Upton pneratfou ate eheolaltty toaiemd,» thai #/»*?, If 0 /»»*, etc Bttft if tht awftfto mimi an MMOO, appeffimita on their Ttlw tapprese At p* 0 reactionstovanbmnmytowrate* ofltaae thetaboonm phytic* beyond the Standard Modd. 2,2 MoBEtTsORMiOasT It natural to utertab tht ponribuity of extending the weak pap group ot tbt Standard Modd, pethaaa by making U mow tgrrunttife; SU(3) x 1/(1) becomes A/pfe X SUMR X & l with paritj broken spoatsneoaity, or perhaps by makingu moraistkd: SU[%)iXV[i)bteoiaeiStrftkort In tbtabetactof uy attractive unified wsak iatcrtttfaa noddt tbt uifi era* have pat on to pud naificatioa* at a leale 0(10 ) GeV. Uft-righttymmetric modeb are still *«y ratch with ««u evidenced by dhewrioni in tht CF-Ttolatton taction of thb meeting. 19 They predict two mow \f^ beyond tbt two H*J already dismrsrfid, ud two LMIIHI Z bosons. LefUriajhl symmetric modeb abo expect & rightbuded neutrino Bdd ud non-ieto neutrino nmw, Thi right-handed neutrino cu acquire u SU{i)i x U[U innriut Majorua mui and may will bt rather heavy. Tbert art eonitriinta 30 on tbe mamas of Wjf bowu ud tndr muiog wttb Wj beaut which an considerably mora restrictive i] tba I//J»lighter ihuakaoa.* 9 Why not ban toon Hnjp boaout Thty m atedtd ii tburita wltb Urpr po «pupa, ud enld caaily be incorporatedtotht uiaimal SU(l)iX.U{l) tbtory. With two Hjfgi doublets oseeu imptauent 83 a global C/(l)«ymin«try which wo«u *ahr«ttt acahlea^f «tioa«cp Tkirtioa is $CI Aioap (ht I parameter.* 4 SUSY theories actually reqoin aa tfts tonibet of rfigp doublets to order to oaocd ottt tsomafies and gira auaaea to ao ojmtha and leptoa«. tt Aattber nwairatim tor mm/h Wgpn waa to pt u tmttioml eo«m* of CP viohtrw* aa dbmofaed in fha CP twutioa tauion at thb amettog. 19 However, to modeb with a C/(l) cymmatry andfaisusv tbeorke witb two N^pooobkii. At qwarka of «barge + 3/3 pt their maam from est Higp doublet and tbe ooarke of cbsrp - 1/3 from another. Thua tbeta modab incorporate ihv GIM roeebubn, 3 the neutral Higp coapliap eouemflaror,and then b oo extra. Higp aouree M of CP violation- la general, theories with t' «higp doublet* contain two charged barest H* ud tbrea ntntrabtoelodu.t*two aeabua H and ifl and oat pawdoiealar «wbieh baennet the tight uion if a thbal l/(i) aupenymnietry* b implemented. S 3.3 DYNAMICAL SYMMETRY BREAKING Muy people regard Hjgga Bddi as as onaitractivtwart on the fata of gauge theory which they would prefer lo burn out. On suggestion 37 b thai HUM an in fact composites of fermlou bound together by HW new technicolor pap Interaction which confine* them within * rang* of (Ajp OjlTW)]- 1. The rolt of the jpofitueotu ayumetry breaking ffwifoudy associated with the vaenam expectation of elementary HiggsffeMa now nanrpcdbydytiejaiealeyjnmfrtoy hvenkng associated with coadensatea 0 ^Ftt of4hen a t«ehn9ennkns. # Thto mechanisa gives maase* to the vector boson* in vary economical way, bat»»icytkefaor6^t «^intjeeetoo td»ane1leplo»». Offttpmi was to intradvte new 'extended technicolor* (ETC)toteracMoos ti infig. *. Fig.?- f» A tbgp-/? vertex metamorphoses into (b) composite,\ 4 A ^ ^v/^ f\ A M se*larf r -//vertex which roqnina. t/ J_ A.,/V U.JP- (c) fc fofr.fermioayerteithtid!ir '' ^ fe, w 6? be ceoerated either by jd)ecalar w W w w exchange or ( ) vector ETC (B) *** exchange. Tfae convention*! elementary Higp-n vertex b lepbeed by the composite Htgga-9f vertex which embodies a foar-ttnxuoo QQQf interaction generated by the exchange of mantra ETC gauge boaona. One then haa quark and lepton masses lb » enabting the ETC bora masse* to be eatfanated in terms of the knows Tension mu spectrum, b a favored ets*» w of ETC oodeb there b one tecboiganentioa IU,D,B, /V) of tecbstauarki and ieptosi In parallel to the conventional generations («, J, t,v\ etc. They are coupled to the convanuonal fermkmi by ssveral different classes of ETC bosons, namely at leut one per feneration at indicated in Fig. 3a, In addition to these gang* boaona, a non-abdiaa gauge theory of ETC tmnt contain boaona coupling the different conventional generations to one another aa eeea i* Fig, 36. These 'tariaontat ETC bosons have the same properties as the boriaootaj gauge bosons oftee postulated in the absence of aa ETC motivation. However, m ETC theoria the masses of these horizontal boaona are similar to throe of the ETC basona a*d can be estimated* sang lot* mula(lk There are other deniteoa of thotcchaieolor too, com* of whose masse* an less tightly constrained. The theory contains 39 many technlpions which ere partneis of the composite Higgs that escape being eaten by the IK* and Z. They include color triplet bound states of tcchnie,tiaras and techntleptotts called ptieudoacejar leptoquarka PIQ whose masses tire expected 9 to be 0(150) GeV. There are also color singlet charged psetidoseslara P* which should 31 have mauea 0(5 to U) GeV and have not been seen at FEP or PETRA,** to the embarrassment of technicolor tbcorbta, There should abo be even lighter neutral JJ» 4 o«. -1/3 Pig. 3. (a) Askelrb of the 0 group structure of the simplest extended technicolor theories., and (b a typical flavor-changing neutral interaction mediated by horizontal i:tc boson exchange Ho-io-itm bosons P ' z whose masses can only 33 eonw from other interactions tbml we hare, not yet mentioned. One candidate 31 b vector leptoquwk interactions of tbe Pati- Salam 34 type. These are ex peeled 3136 to yield and tbe n»h-oli*er*atiou of K* fr*/* 0 ' 3 decay tells* as that Mpot O(3S0) MeV (3) which suggests vj 3 )vq. (2) an upper bound on mr*c of order 3000 TeV in such extended ETC theories. Tliese vector Ivptoquarks will be met again in tbe discussion of rare K aad E decays, along with the pseudoscalar (eptoquarks. Befon- leaving ETC theories, we should emphasize that models of the type described have severe problems with flavor-changing neutral interactions, especially tbe magnitude of the t\s = 2 interaction responsible for K R mixing, and the absence so Tar of o. AC = 2 interaction leading to D D mixing. These problem-j ran In- traced 3 - 38,37 to the failure of ETC theories to satisfy tbe usual conditions' ' f»( natural flavor cnnjervjtioo. People have not abandoned hope or solving thene problems. 38 IT and when a full solution is found, it may well affect some of ihi- order of magnitude estimates of rare A' decays that we make later. However, tln- r estimates do apply to the models,:l7 with partial solutions that do exist. 5 2.4 SUPERSVMMETRY This is another response to the puzzles posed by Higgs fields. In order for the IV* and Z bosons to have required masses of 0(100) GeV, there must be at least some Higgs bosons with comparable masses. However, elementary scalar fields are believed lo receive contributions to their masses Sntff = 0\mp ~ lu 10 GeV) when propagating (Fig. 4a) through the space-time foam that is believed to constitute the quantum gravitational vacuum.** 9 More prosaically, they acquire c m// = 0( *x 10 1S GeV) from interactions (Fig. 4b) witb other Higgses in the grand uniged theory vacuum. 10 { (oom J Kig. 4. A scalar 5eld acquires large mass by propagating either through (a) space-time foam or (b( through the GUT vacuum. 9 (ol (b) Even if these contributions to the light Htggs mass were to vanish or cancel miraculously, there would be radiative corrections as in Fig. $a which would give bmy = 0(a l2 )(mj. or ml). These must be cancelled out through 0(o 12 ), which requires some quite powerful magic. This can be provided cither by dissolving Higgses so that they become composite on distance scales OJlTeV -1 ), as in technicolor theories, 37 or else by imposing superaymmetry (SUSY), la SUSY theories 10 there are bosons and fermions with similar couplings...ince their quantum loops have opposite signs as indicated in Fig. Sb, fermions and bosons lend to cancel so that _ A--rnjr or m/, ^ ID order for im^ to be less than the required Higgs masses 0(100 GeV) we sec from Eq. (4) that one needs [m%-m\) 0{\ TeV 2 ). (5) fl Fig. S. (a) Diagrams reticrmaliiing c~ J - the scalar mass, tod (b) the diagrams I*I--V^ (-)-- _ which almost cancel them in a SUSY (b) theory, with sujns indicated in parentheses. (ill v t-) ?- M.JUL.,., 0 . Thus the unseen SUSY partners of known particles cannot be very heavy. The basic building blocks of the simplest SUSY theories 10 are supermultiplets containing pain of particles differing in belicity by ± 1/2: AWuge boson A\ quark 4, leptone*, shiggsw 1 \l) gaugino ' \0/ iquark q, elepton, Higgs H ] ' Of this zoo of DEW particles, tbe tightest gaugino is likely to be the photino 7, while there may Mso be light neutral shiggs particles H 41 The sameflavor-changingneutral interactions that were the Nemesis 30 nf technicolor theories also impose strong constraints on SUSY theories.* 2 The tree level couplings of all the new neutral particles must conserve flavor, and loop contributions to AF / 0 interactions must be very small. The first requirement implies that tbe squark aad slepton mass eigenstates must be spartnera of pure quark and lepton mass eigenstates, and hence that the SUSY analogues of tbe Cabibbo-Kobayaaht-Mukswa charged weak current mixing angles must' e identical with tbe familiar quark mixing angles. Tbe suppression of loop marrams requires 3 super-gim mechanism, for example in the super-box diagram of Fig. 6 which U of order only if mf or mi \mfa) At first blush, these AF ^ 0 neutral interaction conditions may seem difficult to satisfy, but in foci they emerge naturally in models with SUSY broken spontaneously. There all the squarks acquire universal m? of order (30 GeV) 2 or more, while all differences Am? in squared masses are ?(AmJ) =w 0(1) GeV 1 in the ease of the first two generations. In these spoatsneously broken SUSY theories super-loop contributions to A/* j 0 processes can be comparable 43 to tbe usual Standard Model contributions, and there may also be observable decays'*'* 0 '* 6 into light SUSY particles such iw the ^ and H, AS we shall see later. 7 Fig. 6. A typical super-box diagram contributing * to AF? 0 neutral interactions in a SUSY theory which requires a super-gim cancellation. i There are also SUSY models which have additional sources of symmetry violation beyond those in the Standard Model. For example, there exbt possible additional sources of CP violation. 47 There is also the possibility of spontaneous lepton number violation due to vacuum expectation values for the spin-zero partners if neutrinos, whose effects are currently heing investigated. Indeed, we cannot even be sure that the photino and gluioo couplings conserveflavorat the tree level. This is strongly suggested by the phenomenological constraints,* 4 ' 45 '*' but it can be argued 49 that one should t^ka a more agnostic phenomenological viewpoint. 2.5 PREONS It seems natural to suppose that the particles we currently regard as fundamental and elementary are in fact composite. 4 We have already removed so many layers or the onion why not one more? Moreover, we now know such an untidy profusion of quark and lepton flavors that it is very appealing to seek a simpler description of nature with fewer fundamental elements. We have already loyed with the idea of composite Higgs fields, so perhaps Quarks, leptons and even gauge bosons are composite also on a distance scateo(a - *) which may be as large as 0[\ TeV -1 ). Suppose for example that the only preoos are fermionic, with quarks and leptons containing at least three, while bosons contain two preons. Then one can visualize the observed interactions as being due to exchange forces as in Fig. 7, with the dominant forces of longest range occurring in channels corresponding to the lightest bosooic bound states with masses in A. This is similar to the way IT exchange is important in nuclear interactions because m t 1 GeV. We would expect there to be additional forces in other channels corresponding to the exchanges of other bosons with masses m = 0[A) analogous to the p, w and tensor meson exchanges of tbe conventional strong interactions. Ftg 7. An exchange diagram which yields new effective interaction in a preon theory. This analogy with the conventional strong interactions is too glib and glosses over many technical puzzles. 1 Why are the lightest bound states fermions with m «O(A), whereas the fermionic bound stales of QCD, the baryons, are heavy with masses 0(1 GeVJT The underlying dynamic? must obey consistency conditions 50 which are very difficult So satisfy. Why are there light bosons of spin 1, whereas the only light bosons in QCD have spin 0? It b very difficult to see how light gauge bosons would emerge unless the underlying dynamics already possessed the corresponding gauge icvariance. If we suspend our disbelief for a moment, we might expect that the exchanges of heavy bosons, or other dynamics on a scale of 0(1 TeV* 1 ] might generate all manner of novel interactions: and more generally nm 0(1) - -f n B m [Mb) In general, we would not expect these new interactions to conserve conventional quantum numbers such as lepton Dumber L, baryon number B, etc., since presumably differeot quark and lepton flavors share some preonic constituents in common, though some of the interactions (9) might be suppressed by some approximate cbiral symmetry. The low-energy phenomenology of preon theories may in many ways resemble that of ETC theories, since observable new interactions of the form (9) probably involve the transformation of horizontal generation quantum numbers or the exchange of leptoquark quantum numbers. 3.1 RARE AT DECAYS 3. Survey of Experimental Probe* There has been a lot of discussion 40 at this meeting of the whole gamut of rare K decays. Hei e I will only select a few possible experiments and concentrate on a subset of theories, treating composite model* only cursorily and models with multiple gauge or Higgs bosons not at all. Each experiment will be discussed in turn for its interest within different
Related Search
Similar documents
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks