PHYS 5326 – Lecture #9 & 10
description
Transcript of PHYS 5326 – Lecture #9 & 10
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
1
PHYS 5326 – Lecture #9 & 10
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003Dr. Jae Yu
1. Interpretation of Sin2W results
2. The link to Higgs3. Neutrino Oscillation
•Next makeup class is Friday, Mar. 14, 1-2:30pm, rm 200.
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
2
SM Global Fits with New ResultsWithout NuTeVdof=20.5/14: P=11.4%With NuTeVdof=29.7/15: P=1.3%Confidence level in upper Mhiggs limit weakens slightly.
LEP EWWG: http://www.cern.ch/LEPEWWG
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
3
Tree-level Parameters: and sin2W(on-shell)
• Either sin2W(on-shell) or 0 could agree with SM but both agreeing
simultaneously is unlikely
150GeV
Mln0.00032
50GeV
175GeVM0.00022θδsin
H
2
22tshell)(On
W2
0.0400.9983ρ
0.00310.2265θsin
0
W2
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
4
• R can be expressed in terms of quark couplings:
Model Independent Analysis
2R
2L-
--
grgR 1
XN
XN
Where
2
1
XνNσ
XNνσr
Paschos-Wolfenstein formula can be expressed as
2R
2L
νν
W22
νCC
νCC
νNC
νNC gg
r1
rRRθsin
2
1ρ
σσ
σσR
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
5
• Performed a fit to quark couplings (and gL and gR)– For isoscalar target, the N couplings are
Model Independent Analysis
W
4W
220
2L
2L
2L θsin
9
5θsin
2
1ρdug
0.00110.0310g2R
(SM: 0.3042 -2.6deviation)
(SM: 0.0301 Agreement)
expRexpR– From two parameter fit to and
0.00140.3005g2L
W42
02R
2R
2R θsin
9
5ρdug
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
6
Model Independent Analysis
Difficult to explain the disagreement with SM by:Parton Distribution Function or LO vs NLO or Electroweak Radiative Correction: large MHiggs
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
7
• R- technique is sensitive to q vsq differences and NLO effect– Difference in valence quark and anti-quark
momentum fraction • Isospin symmetry assumption might not be
entirely correct– Expect violation about 1% NuTeV reduces this
effect by using the ratio of and cross sections Reducing dependence by a factor of 3
What is the discrepancy due to (Old Physics)?
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
8
• s vss quark asymmetry– s and s needs to be the same but the momentum
could differ• A value of s=xs -xs ~+0.002 could shift sin2W by -
0.0026, explaining ½ the discrepancy (S. Davison, et. al., hep-ph/0112302)
• NuTeV di- measurement shows that s~-0.0027+/-0.0013
What is the discrepancy due to (Old Physics)?
Use opposite sign di- events to measure s and s.
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
9
• NLO and PDF effects– PDF, mc, Higher Twist effect, etc, are small changes
• Heavy vs light target PDF effect (Kovalenko et al.,
hep-ph/0207158)– Using PDF from light target on Iron target could make up the
difference NuTeV result uses PDF extracted from CCFR (the same target)
What is the discrepancy due to (Old Physics)?
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
10
es Oscillations with Large M• LSND result implicate a largem2 (~10 —
100eV2) solution for e oscillation MiniBooNe at FNAL is running to put the nail on the coffin
• How would this affect NuTeV sin2W?
r1
rRR
2
1θsin
νν
W2
Long
Short
N
NNR e
MCand
If es with seP
seeeeeeP1-NPNN MCMCthen
Thus, MC will subtract more than it is in nature, causing measured R to be smaller and thereby increasing sin2W
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
11
• Extra U(1) gauge group giving rise to interactions mediated by heavy Z’ boson (MZ’>>MZ)
• While couplings in these groups are arbitrary, E(6) gauge groups can provide mechanism for extra U(1) interaction via heavy Z’.
• Can give rise to gR but not gL which is strongly constrained by precision Z measurement
New Physics: Interactions from Extra U(1) – Z’
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
12
• Heavy non-SM vector boson exchange: Z’, LQ, etc– Suppressed Z (invisible)
coupling– LL coupling enhanced than LR
needed for NuTeV
What other explanations (New Physics)?
Both precision data are lower than SM
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
13
• Propagator and coupling corrections– Small compared to the effect
• MSSM : Loop corrections wrong sign and small for the effect
• Many other attempts in progress but so far nothing seems to explain the NuTeV results – Lepto-quarks– Contact interactions with LL coupling (NuTeV wants mZ’~1.2TeV, CDF/DØ:
mZ’>700GeV)– Almost sequential Z’ with opposite coupling to
What other explanations (New Physics)?
Langacker et al, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64 87; Cho et al., Nucl. Phys. B531, 65; Zppenfeld and Cheung, hep-ph/9810277; Davidson et al., hep-ph/0112302
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
14
Linking sin2W with Higgs through Mtop vs MW
150GeVM
ln0.0003250GeV
175GeVM0.00022θδsin H
2
22tshell)(On
W2
One-loop correction to sin2W
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
15
Neutrino Oscillation• First suggestion of neutrino mixing by B. Pontecorvo at the
K0, K0-bar mixing in 1957• Solar neutrino deficit in 1969 by Ray Davis in Homestake
Mine in SD. Called MSW effect• Caused by the two different eigenstates for mass and weak• Neutrinos change their flavor as they travel Neutrino
flavor mixing• Oscillation probability depends on
– Distance between the source and the observation point– Energy of the neutrinos– Difference in square of the masses
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
16
Neutrino Oscillation Formalism• Two neutrino mixing case:
21
21e
cossin
sincos
where and are weak eigenstates, while and are mass eigenstates, and is the mixing angle that give the extent of mass eigenstate mixture, analogous to Cabbio angle
e
1 2
2
1
cos sin
sin cos
eOR
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
17
Oscillation Probability• Let at time t=0 be the linear combination of 1 and 2
with masses m1 and m1, the wave function becomes:
21 cossin0 t
21
tEitEit
21 expcosexpsin
• Then later time t the wave function becomes:
• For relativistic neutrinos (E>>mi), the energies of the mass eigenstates are:
p
mpmpE k
kk 2
222
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
18
Oscillation Probability• Substituting the energies into the wave function:
E
tmiE
mpitt 2expcossin2exp22
121
where and .22
21
2 mmm pE • Since the ’s move at the speed of light, t=x/c, where x
is the distance to the source of .• The probability for with energy E oscillates to e at
the distance L from the source becomes
E
LmP e
222 27.1
sin2sin
Friday, Feb. 21, 2003 PHYS 5326, Spring 2003Jae Yu
19
Homework Assignments• Produce an electron ET spectrum of the highest ET electrons
in your samples– Due Wednesday, Feb. 26
• Complete the derivation of the probability for nm of energy E to oscillate to e at the distance L away from the source of .
• Draw the oscillation probability distributions as a function of– Distance L for a fixed neutrino beam energy E (=5, 50, 150 GeV)– E for a detector at a distance L (=1.5, 735, 2200km) away from
the source• Due Wednesday, Mar. 5