Dark Matter as a Guide to Extend the Standard Model: Dirac Similarity Principle and the Minimum Higgs Hypothesis W-Y. Pauchy Hwang University Chair Professor Institute of Astrophysics National Taiwan University What I would like to do today? It’s an idea off and on in my mind, maybe over 30 years but I think it is mature lately. Neutrinos now are massive these days. But the minimal Standard Model tells us that they should be zero. Why is there so much dark matter (25\% of the Universe), compared to so little “visible” ordinary matter (5\% of the Universe) as described by the Standard Model. The mystery may lie with the neutrinos, which may “bridge” between the dark-matter world and the “visible” ordinary-matter world. Let’s begin with two remarks – “Dirac similarity principle” and why Higgs are so far not there. In this talk, we focus on two “rules”, two very strange “rules”. similarity principle – our struggle of eighty years to describe the point-like particle such as the electron. The “minimum Higgs hypothesis” is the other mysterious conjecture – because we are looking for Higgs particles for forty years, but so far none has been found. So, by “induction”, we obtain these two rules which may help in bringing in the “larger” dark matter world. Dirac Why could we use “dark matter as a guide to extend the Standard Model” ? As explained later, the “language” developed so far is likely to be the quantum field theory, and otherwise what else? Ordinary matter (5%) and dark matter (25%) are believed to clusterized similarly and obey the same “gravitational law”. Unlike the uniformly-distributed “dark energy”, ordinary matter and dark matter seems to follow the same laws, except the feeble interactions between them. What is the particle world which we are talking about? We were starting with the electrons – Dirac invented the Dirac equation for that. The first “point-like particle”. In it, the orbital angular momentum term is treated equivalently with a sigma matrix, relativistically. Now let’s look at the Standard Model. It’s a world of (point-like) Dirac particles, with interactions mediated by gauge fields and further modulated by Higgs fields. So, to begin with, I would assume, naturally, that neutrinos are also Dirac particles. Dirac may be the first “physicist” to formulate some equation for “point-like” particles. He tried to put in quantum mechanics (those matrices representing spins) and relativity simultaneously. It turns out that, for over eighty years, we recognize only a few point-like particles, those building blocks of the Standard Model. Maybe we should start with “quantized” Dirac fields or, equivalently, “point-like” Dirac particles. Maybe we shouldn’t question what “quantized” or “point-like” means to us, or rather instead of treating this as an “axiom”. Thus, we argue for the “Dirac similarity principle”. It’s a special way to put in quantum mechanics (those matrices representing spins) and relativity simultaneously. In fact, the “space-time” notion may be defined also. Apparently the way is so special. Why there is nothing else - a world of point-like Dirac particles, with interactions mediated by gauge fields and modulated slightly by Higgs fields. The axiom for “quantized Dirac fields” or “pointlike Dirac particles” – they are the same thing. We understand “Dirac similarity principle”: Our space-time “lattice” admits, or be compatible with, certain kind of “point-like” particles which at this point turns out to “quantized Dirac fields”. Our world is very special. Why there is nothing else - a world of point-like Dirac particles, with interactions mediated by gauge fields and modulated slightly by Higgs fields. “Quantized Dirac fields” or “point-like Dirac particles” turn out to be the same thing. Why don’t we see some Higgs after 40 years? Klein-Gordon (scalar) fields – in fact, our lesson in QFT. We use the scalar fields to “modulate” quite a number of things, SSB (the Higgs mechanisms), etc. But we still look for them, after 40 years. Maybe we should work with “the minimum Higgs hypothesis” or “conjecture”. Quantized Outline Language: Quantum Fields No. 1 Question: What is the Dark Matter? Dirac Similarity Principle: Observation to Proposal Different Ways to Extend Standard Model, all in the renormalizable way and in accord with “Dirac Similarity Principle” Discussions References The Language: Elementary Particles as Quantum Fields Classical Mechanical Systems dc Classical Fields Dirac CP Dirac CP dc Quantum Mechanical Systems Quantum Fields d → c: discreteness to continuum Dirac CP: Dirac Correspondence Principle Classical Mechanical System: “For a given system, we can find a function (lagrangian) of the coordinates and velocities such that the integral (action) between two instants is an extremum for the real motion.” Quantum Mechanical System: “For the coordinates we can find the conjugate momenta such that the basic (elementary) commutation relations hold.” – Now, they are operators. Classical Field: “For a given system, we can find a function (lagrangian) of the coordinates and velocities such that the integral (action) between two instants is an extremum for the real motion.” – except that quantities take continuum meaning. Quantum Field: “For the coordinates we can find the conjugate momenta such that the basic (elementary) commutation relations hold.” – except that quantities take continuum meaning and we also generalize the notion to include fermions (I.e. anti-commutation relations). Let’s Review what we have done: All the quarks and leptons are written in terms of Dirac equations on certain forms. And all the interactions are in the gauge fields. In reality, nothing more. Even so far no scalar (Higgs) fields. So it’s a world of “pointlike” Dirac particles (a Dirac world) with interactions. Maybe this is an important guideline to follow. (“Dirac Similarity Principle”.) So far only renormalizable Interactions are permitted. (“Renormalizability” means “calculability”.) In other words, we have so many ways to write things relativistically, but not all are equally “applicable” for some reasons. The SM can be viewed from a different angle: Dirac Similarity Principle Dirac tried to describe the electron by proposing Dirac equation. Then the quarks and leptons are written in terms of Dirac equations on certain forms. And all the interactions are in the gauge fields. In reality, nothing more. So far only renormalizable Interactions are permitted. Maybe some specialty about the Dirac equation exists in our space-time. Connecting Quarks with the Cosmos: Eleven Science Questions for the New Century • The report released initially on 4/17/2002 by National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. Cosmology as an Experimental Science for the New Century Eleven Science Questions for the New Century: The First Four Questions CPU/BPA/NRC Report, 4/17/2002 Q1: What is the dark matter? Our Universe has 25% in Dark Matter while only 5% in ordinary matter. How about 5% versus 25%, instead – it would be more comfortable if we looked for the “Standard Model” for the majority (25%). Q2: What is the nature of the dark energy? (The overwhelming 70% question !!) Q3: How did the universe begin? Q4: Did Einstein have the last word on gravity? (Is geometry everything?) Eleven Science Questions for the New Century: The Fifth Question Q5: What are the masses of the neutrinos, and how have they shaped the evolution of the universe? I would remind you of a theorem about the neutrino mass: The neutrinos should be massless in the minimum Standard Model. Eleven Science Questions for the New Century: The Seventh Question Q7: Are protons unstable? Another important question for symmetry. That means that the grand unified theory in certain form would be valid, if protons decay. In what follows, I assume that the gauge theory in the extended Standard Model should have two basic ingredients – the gauge sector and the Higgs mechanism, the latter ensuring that all particles in the dark sector are massive. Now, “What is the dark matter?” Could we describe it or them? If yes, what would be the language? The first guess would be to use the language which we set up for the Standard Model – a gauge theory with/without Higgs Mechanism. Generalizing the SU_c(3) x SU(2) x U(1) standard model via a renormalizable way by adding particles which we have not seen – it turns out that there are many ways. Note that the unknown dark matter occupies 25% of the current Universe while the visible ordinary matter 5%. Not the other way around – 5% dark matter while 25% ordinary matter. We can describe the 5% but 25% unknowns. Fortunately if we view the world from the symmetry point of view, it probably does not matter in this 25%-5% upside-down; but the symmetry of certain kind has to be there. First thought Neutrinos have tiny masses. => another Z’. It sounds strange, but it requires another Higgs, to be natural. How to add a Z’ but with a minimum number of Higgs fields? W-Y. P. Hwang, Phys. Rev. D36, 261 (1987). Consider 2+2 Higgs Scenario. The second, and “remote”, Higgs doublet could give neutrinos masses naturally. No Higgs after 40 years !! Maybe the associated Higgs structure should be minimal. After all, after 40 years or so, we haven’t found the signature of Higgs. We still ask the LHC for an answer. How to make a model with minimum Higgs structure? Important Question: How to add a Z’ but with a minimum number of Higgs fields? References: W-Y. P. Hwang, Phys. Rev. D36, 261 (1987). On the mass generation lambda’ ~ lambda x (vec / vec’)**2 My conjecture for the couplings to remote Higgs On the mass generation by the first Higgs doublet, the size are of the same order and of O(v), with v the vacuum expected value. For some reason, the mass generation for the second Higgs doublet is down by order O((v/v’)^alpha), with alpha greater than unity. In what follows, we take alpha = 2. In short, the details for the Higgs mechanism need to be worked out. “Minimal Higgs Hypothesis” !! “The Minimum Higgs Hypothesis” No.1. On the coupling strengths. lambda’ ~ lambda x (vec / vec’)**2 My conjecture for the couplings to remote Higgs No. 2. On the choice of Higgs multiplets There is no redandant Higgs multiplet.. It is a useful “empirical” rule. Another Thought SU_c(3) × SU_L(2) ×SU_R(2) x U(1) : The missing right-handed sector !! R.N. Mohapatra and J.C. Pati, Phys. Rev. D11, 2558 (1975). Here we also have an extra Z’ but with another right-handed doublet almost eaten up via SSB. Mohapatra, Pati, and Salam in fact have many models (by choice of Higgs multiplets) but the “minimum Higgs hypothesis” selects the unique one. More on the left-right symmetry Why the weak interactions break the leftright symmetry is one of the deepest questions. Don’t forget to ask…. Mass generation: (by the image of the left) lambda (v/v’)**2 varphi* nu_L (nu_R, e_R) Make sure that it is renormalizable. I’m talking about three options, in fact three nice options: × SU(2) × U(1) × G How to add a Z’ but with a minimum number of Higgs fields? References: W-Y. P. Hwang, Phys. Rev. D36, 261 (1987). To make Mohapatra-Pati-Salam left-right model minimal in the Higgs sector. G = SU_family(3) is also possible. See later. SU_c(3) In what follows, we talk about the possibility of adding an SU(3) family gauge theory - the SU_c(3) × SU(2) × U(1) × SU_f(3) standard model. SU_f(3) defines the body of the dark matter. In this model, (nu_e, nu_mu, nu_tau) could serve as the only “bridge” for ordinary matter. Why do we have three generations? In this model, we are forced to have three generations. I think that most symmetry may have something to do with some interactions, maybe too weak to be detected. Maybe this is the origin of “dark matter”. Different Options: Left-right symmetric model; SU_c(3) x SU(2) x U(1) X U(1) with extra Z^0; SU_c(3) x SU(2) x U(1) x SU_f(3). For this extra SU_f(3) gauge theory, should it exist and we suppose that it is coupled to neutral fermions, i.e. neutrinos, in the sector of ordinary matter. Family symmetry => Family gauge symmetry Proposing a gauge theory, it means some kind of new interactions. Maybe there is another gauge theory beyond the Standard Model … More than twenty years ago I was curious by the absence of the Higgs mechanism in the strong interactions but not in the weak interaction sector[1] – a question still remains unanswered till today. A renormalizable gauge theory that does not have to be massless is already reputed by ‘t Hooft and others, for the standard model. Maybe our question should be whether the electromagnetism would be massless. In fact, this is a deep question – how to write down a renormalizable theory. During old days, a massive gauge theory is used to be believed as a nonrenormalizable theory. Here I try to set up the view that the only visible massless particle is the photon – and the gluons, if massless, are permanently confined (then it is meaningless to have mass). That is, all particles in the dark sector are massive. In the sector of ordinary matter, the neutrinos could serve as the direct messengers with the dark sector (i.e. neutrinos are also one kind of dark matter). Another clue comes from neutrinos – they are neutral, massive and mixing/oscillating. These particles are barely “visible” in the Particle Table. Maybe these are avenues that connect to those unknowns, particularly the dark matter in the Universe. In fact, the neutrino sector, with the current knowledge of masses and mixings[2], presents a serious basic problem[3] – that is, a theorem that neutrinos are massless in the minimal standard model. Any model with at least one massive neutrino have to be some sort of extended standard model (i.e. not minimal). I assume that the whole Dirac neutrinos could be used in the neutrino triplet. If only the right-handed neutrinos are used in this context, the dark sector would be completely dark, making the story a little boring. (But it may be right.) If the coupling would involve gamma-5, then we have to worry about the anomaly. Note that in family gauge theory: The masses of the neutrino triplet come from the coupling to some Higgs field - a pair of complex scalar triplets, as worked out in the previous publication[1]. Note that the “radiative” corrections due to gauge bosons serve as a correction to mass. Note that the neutrino masses do not come from the minimal Standard Model, mainly from the Higgs in the dark sector. More on family gauge theory: If we think of the role of gauge theories in quantum field theory, we still have to recognize its unique and important role. If the standard model is missing something, a gauge theory sector would be one at the first guess. I believe that something missing may be a gauge sector, owing to the successes of SU_c(3) × SU(2) × U(1) standard model. In fact, an octet of gauge bosons plus a pair of complex scalar triplets turns out to be the simplest choice as long as all gauge bosons become massive while the remaining Higgs are also massive. This is the basic framework. The standard model is the gauge theory based on the group SU_c(3) × SU(2) × U(1). Now the simple extension is that based on SU_c(3) × SU(2) × U(1) × SU_f(3). So, the following story is rather simple. In the model, the couplings to ordinary matter is only through the neutrinos, the only charged/ neutral fermions that are interacting weakly. This would make some loop diagrams, involving neutrinos and familons, very interesting and, albeit likely to be small, should eventually be investigated[6]. For example, in the elastic quark (or charged lepton) - neutrino scattering, the loop corrections would involve the Z^0 and in addition the familon loops and if the masses of the familons were less than that of Z^0 then the loop corrections due to familons would be bigger. Thus, we may assume that the familon masses would be greater than the Z^0 mass, say ≧ 1 TeV. The above argument also implies that we cannot have the massless familon(s) or massless family Higgs particle(s). Otherwise, the loop corrections in some cases would be dominated by those with familons. The other important point is the coupling between the neutrino triplet and the family Higgs triplets: , (9) resulting a mass matrix which is off diagonal (but is perfectly acceptable). In other words, the mass matrix, being proportional to -\bar{\nu}_e(v_{+} + \epsilon v_-)\nu_\tau + \bar{\nu}_e(u_{+} + \epsilon u_-)\nu_\mu + \bar{\nu}_\tau (v_{+} + \epsilon v_-)\nu_e -\bar{\nu}_\mu(u_{+} + \epsilon u_-)\nu_e , is off-diagonal, in the form similar to the Zee matrix[5], and can easily be fitted to the observed data[2]. (And i is needed to make it hermitian.) In other words, the “source” of the neutrino masses comes from the family Higgs and is different from those for quarks and charged leptons, a nice way to escape the theorem mentioned earlier[3]. The neutrino masses are obtained from the dark sector, but in a renormalizable way. This is a very interesting solution. Unlike the story with extra Z or the leftright model, in which the details of the Higgs doublets may need some fine-tuning, the problem of neutrino masses in the present model is solved much more naturally. In any case, it is possible to solve the problems through a renormalizable way. What is surprising about our model? There is no unwanted massless particle - so, no disaster anticipated. It is another renormalizable extension of the standard model idea. Coming back to the neutrino sector, we now introduce the mass terms in a renormalizable way (with the help from SU_f(3) gauge theory). Furthermore, there is no major modification of the original Standard Model. Maybe a “solution” to the family problem. Discussions on SU_f(3) The neutrino mass problem is solved nicely since neutrinos couple with the dark-matter Higgs – contrary to the ordinary Higgs in the context of quarks or charge leptons. This solution implies the existence of interactions in the 25% dark-matter sector. We may think more about “family”. One important consequence of the SU_c(3) × SU(2) × U(1) × SU_f(3) standard model is that in addition to QCD and electroweak (EW) phase transitions there is other SU_f(3) family phase transition occurring near the familon masses, maybe above the EW scale (that is, above 1 TeV). The exact scale is hard to decide, for the moment. In the early universe, the temperature could be as high as that for the familons such that the Universe could be populated with these (selfinteracting) particles - just like that for QCD. In other words, our Universe would be full of these particles as the dark matter. References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. W-Y. P. Hwang, Phys. Rev. D32 (1985) 824; on the “colored Higgs mechanism”. Particle Data Group, “Review of Particle Physics”, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 33 (2006) 1; on neutrino mass and mixing, see pp. 156 - 164. For example, see Stuart Raby and Richard Slansky, Los Alamos Science, No. 25 (1997) 64. For notations, see T-Y. Wu and W-Y. Pauchy Hwang, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Fields (World Scientific, Singapore, 1991). A. Zee, Phys. Lett. B93 (1980) 389; Phys. Lett. B161 (1985) 141; Nucl. Phys. B264 (1986) 99; on the Zee model. Ling-Fong Li, private communications. I would like to thank my colleagues, Tony Zee, Ling-Fong Li, Xiao-Gang He, and Pei-Ming Ho for useful conversations, but the errors remain to be mine. Conclusion So, under “Dirac similarity principle” and the “minimum Higgs hypothesis”, we could at least work on “three” Standard Models – the extra Z’, the left-right symmetry model, and the family gauge theory. All being renormalizable. The knowledge about 25% dark-matter may be pivotal in deciding this.