Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes Greg Landsberg UCSC HEP Seminar December 6, 2005 Outline A Word on Hierarchies Standard Model: Beauty and the Beast How to Make Gravity Strong? Looking for Extra Dimensions… Production of Black Holes at Accelerators and in Cosmic Rays Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 2 N.B. Large Hierarchies Tend to Collapse... The eighties Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 3 Gravitational Hierarchy Collapse With thanks to Chris Quigg and the B44 restaurant in San Francisco Human Castles in Catalonia Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 4 More Large Hierarchies Collapse of the Soviet Union The nineties… Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 5 Note: Some Hierarchies are Surprisingly Stable… Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 6 And Keep in Mind… Fine tuning (required to keep a large hierarchy stable) exists in Nature: Solar eclipse: angular size of the sun is the same as the angular size of the moon within 2.5% (pure coincidence!) Politics: Florida recount, 2,913,321/2,913,144 = 1.000061 Numerology: 987654321/123456789 = 8.000000073 (HW Assignment: is it really numerology?) But: beware the anthropic principle Fall 2005 Properties of the universe are special because we exist Don’t give up science for philosophy: so far we have been able to explain how the universe works entirely by science. Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 7 Hierarchy of the Standard Model Beauty … and the Beast RGE evolution Inverse Strength Gravitational Force EM/Hypercharge Force Weak Force Strong Force vev 102 MGUT MPl 1016 1019 E [GeV] Extra dimensions might get rid of the beast while preserving the beauty! Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 8 Math Meets Physics Math physics: some dimensionalities are quite special Example: Laplace equation in two dimensions has a logarithmic solution; for any higher number of dimensions it obeys the power law Some of these peculiarities exhibit themselves in condensed matter physics, e.g. diffusion equation solution allows for long-range correlations in 2Dsystems (cf. flocking) Modern view in topology: one dimension is trivial; two and three spatial dimensions are special (properties are defined by the topology); any higher number is not Do we live in a special space, or only believe that we are special? Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 9 The ADD Model SM fields are localized on the (3+1)-brane; gravity is the only force that “feels” the bulk space What about Newton’s law? V r 1 m1m2 1 MPl2 r MPl3n n2 Fall 2005 1 M 3 n n 2 Pl G’N = 1 / MPl[ 3n ] 1/MD2; MD 1 TeV 2 m1m2 r n1 Ruled out for infinite extra dimensions, but does not apply for sufficiently small compact ones V r Gravity is fundamentally strong force, bit we do not feel that as it is diluted by the volume of the bulk m1m2 for r R n R r M Dn 2 M Pl2 R n More precisely, from Gauss’s law: 1 MPl R 2 MD MD 2/n 8 1012 m, n 1 0.7 mm, n 2 3 nm, n 3 6 1012 m, n 4 Amazing as it is, but no one has tested Newton’s law to distances less than 1mm (as of 1998) Thus, the fundamental Planck scale could be as low as 1 TeV for n > 1 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 10 Longitudinal ED Simultaneously, another idea has appeared: Gravitational Force Inverse Strength Real GUT Scale EM/Hypercharge Force Virtual Image Weak Force MPl=1/GN Strong Force L ~ 1 TeV MZ Fall 2005 MS M’Pl M’GUT MGUT logE Explore modification of the RGE in (4+n)-dimensions to achieve low-energy unification of the gauge forces [Dienes, Dudas, Gherghetta, PL B436, 55 (1998)] To achieve that, allow gauge bosons (g, g, W, and Z) to propagate in an extra dimension, which is “longitudinal” to the SM brane and compactified on a “natural” EW scale: R ~ 1 TeV-1 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 11 Randall-Sundrum Scenario Randall-Sundrum (RS) scenario [PRL 83, 3370 (1999); PRL 83, 4690 (1999)] AdS + brane – no low energy effects +– branes – TeV Kaluza-Klein modes of graviton Low energy effects on SM brane are given by L; for krc ~ 10, L ~ 1 TeV and the hierarchy problem is solved naturally 2 kr 2 AdS5 ds e r k: AdS curvature SM brane ( ) Fall 2005 Planck brane ( = 0) G x5 dx dx r d 2 2 L M Pl e kr Reduced Planck mass: M Pl M Pl 8 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 12 Differences Between the Models TeV-1 Scenario: ADD Model: Pro: “Eliminates” the hierarchy problem by stating that physics ends at a TeV scale Only gravity lives in the “bulk” space Size of ED’s (n=2-7) between ~100 m and ~1 fm Black holes at the LHC and in the interactions of UHE cosmic rays Con: Doesn’t explain why ED are so large Pro: Lowers GUT scale by changing running of the couplings Only gauge bosons (g/g/W/Z) “live” in ED’s Size of ED’s ~1 TeV-1 or ~10-19 m Con: Gravity is not in the picture RS Model: Pro: A rigorous solution to the hierarchy problem via localization of gravity Gravitons (and possibly other particles) propagate in a single ED, w/ special metric Con: Size of ED as small as ~1/MPl or ~10-35 m G x5 Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 13 Kaluza-Klein Spectrum TeV-1 Scenario: ADD Model: Winding modes with energy spacing ~1/r, i.e. 1 meV – 100 MeV Can’t resolve these modes – they appear as continuous spectrum Gravitational coupling per mode; many modes Winding modes with nearly equal energy spacing ~1/r, i.e. ~TeV Can excite individual modes at colliders or look for indirect effects Mi M i r 2 0 E E ~1 TeV 2 2 RS Model: “Particle in a box” with a special metric Energy eigenvalues are given by zeroes of Bessel function J1 Light modes might be accessible at colliders M 0 0; M i M 1 xi x1 M 1 , 1.83M 1 , 2.66 M 1 , 3.48M 1 , 4.30 M 1 , ... E ~MGUT GN for zero-mode; ~1/L for others … ge … Mi M0 Fall 2005 ~MPl Mi M1 M0 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 14 Using the ED Paradigm EWSB from extra dimensions: Hall, Kolda [PL B459, 213 (1999)] (lifted Higgs mass constraints) Antoniadis, Benakli, Quiros [NP B583, 35 (2000)] (EWSB from strings in ED) Cheng, Dobrescu, Hill [NP B589, 249 (2000)] (strong dynamics from ED) Mirabelli, Schmaltz [PR D61, 113011 (2000)] (Yukawa couplings from split leftand right-handed fermions in ED) Barbieri, Hall, Namura [hep-ph/0011311] (radiative EWSB via tquark in the bulk) Flavor/CP physics from ED: Fall 2005 Arkani-Hamed, Hall, Smith, Weiner [PRD 61, 116003 (2000)] (flavor/CP breaking fields on distant branes in ED) Huang, Li, Wei, Yan [hep-ph/0101002] (CP-violating phases from moduli fields in ED) Neutrino masses and oscillations from ED: Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, Dvali, March-Russell [hep-ph/9811448] (light Dirac neutrinos from right-handed neutrinos in the bulk or light Majorana neutrinos from lepton number breaking on distant branes) Dienes, Dudas, Gherghetta [NP B557, 25 (1999)] (light neutrinos from right-handed neutrinos in ED or ED see-saw mechanism) Dienes, Sarcevic [PL B500, 133 (2001)] (neutrino oscillations w/o mixing via couplings to bulk fields) Many other topics from Higgs to dark matter Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 15 Tabletop Gravity Experiments [J. Long, J. Price, hep-ph/0303057] E.Adelberger et al. PRL 86, 1418 (2001) Sub-millimeter gravity measurements could probe only n=2 case only within the ADD model The best sensitivity so far have been achieved in the U of Washington torsion balance experiment – a hightech “remake” of the 1798 Cavendish experiment R< ~ 0.16 mm (MD > 1.7 TeV) Sensitivity vanishes quickly with the distance –~ can’t push limits further down significantly Started restricting ADD with 2 extra dimensions; can’t probe any higher number Ultimately push the sensitivity by a factor of two in terms of the distance No sensitivity to the TeV-1 and RS models Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 16 Astrophysical and Cosmological Constraints Supernova cooling due to graviton emission – an alternative cooling mechanism that would decrease the dominant cooling via neutrino emission Tightest limits on any additional cooling sources come from the measurement of the SN1987A neutrino flux by the Kamiokande and IMB Application to the ADD scenario [Cullen and Perelstein, PRL 83, 268 (1999); Hanhart, Phillips, Reddy, and Savage, Nucl. Phys. B595, 335 (2001)]: MD > 25-30 TeV (n=2) MD > 2-4 TeV (n=3) Distortion of the cosmic diffuse gamma radiation (CDG) spectrum due to the GKK gg decays [Hall and Smith, PRD 60, 085008 (1999)]: Fall 2005 MD > 100 TeV (n=2) MD > 5 TeV (n=3) Overclosure of the universe, matter dominance in the early universe [Fairbairn, Phys. Lett. B508, 335 (2001); Fairbairn, Griffiths, JHEP 0202, 024 (2002)] MD > 86 TeV (n=2) MD > 7.4 TeV (n=3) Neutron star g-emission from radiative decays of the gravitons trapped during the supernova collapse [Hannestad and Raffelt, PRL 88, 071301 (2002)]: MD > 1700 TeV (n=2) MD > 60 TeV (n=3) Caveat: there are many known (and unknown!) uncertainties, so the cosmological bounds are reliable only as an order of magnitude estimate Still, n=2 is largely disfavored Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 17 Collider Signatures for Large ED Kaluza-Klein gravitons couple to the energy-momentum tensor, and therefore contribute to most of the SM processes For Feynman rules for GKK see: [Han, Lykken, Zhang, PRD 59, 105006 (1999)] [Giudice, Rattazzi, Wells, NP B544, 3 (1999)] Since graviton can propagate in the bulk, energy and momentum are not conserved in the GKK emission from the point of view of our 3+1 space-time Depending on whether the GKK leaves our world or remains virtual, the collider signatures include single photons/Z/jets with missing ET or fermion/vector boson pair production Graviton emission: direct sensitivity to the fundamental Planck scale MD Virtual effects: sensitive to the ultraviolet cutoff MS, expected to be ~MD (and likely < MD) The two processes are complementary Fall 2005 Real Graviton Emission Monojets at hadron colliders q g g g q GKK g GKK Single VB at hadron or e+e- colliders V GKK GKK V GKK GKK V V Virtual Graviton Effects Fermion or VB pairs at hadron or e+e- colliders f f GKK f V GKK f Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes V 18 L’EPilogue (Large ED) ee gG ee ZG Experiment n=2 n=3 n=4 n=5 n=6 n=2 n=3 n=4 n=5 n=6 Color coding ALEPH 1.28 0.97 0.78 0.66 0.57 0.12 184 GeV DELPHI 1.38 1.02 0.84 0.68 0.58 L3 1.02 0.81 0.67 0.58 0.51 OPAL 1.09 0.86 0.71 0.61 0.53 Experiment ee tt ALEPH 1.04 0.81 L3 OPAL Fall 2005 0.98 1.06 1.15 1.00 0.22 0.17 0.14 189 GeV 0.60 0.38 0.29 0.24 0.21 qq 0.65 0.60 0.53/0.57 0.67 0.62 0.46/0.46 (bb) 0.59 0.56 0.73 0.65 0.56 0.58 0.49 0.69 0.54 0.49 0.62 0.66 ff gg 1.05 0.84 0.60 0.76 0.84 1.00 0.62 0.66 0.81 0.82 0.83 0.91 0.99 0.84 0.89 0.83 WW >200 GeV l=-1 GL Virtual Graviton Exchange All limits are in TeV DELPHI 0.35 ZZ l=+1 Combined 0.75/1.00 (<189) 0.60/0.76 (ff) (<202) 0.68 0.79 1.0/1.1 (<202) 0.63 1.17/1.03 (<209) 0.74 LEP Combined: 1.2/1.1 TeV Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 19 Monojets: Tainted History [PL, 139B, 115 (1984)] •These monojets turned out to be due to unaccounted background •The signature was deemed doomed and nearly forgotten •It took 20 years for the first successful monojet analysis at a hadron collider to be completed (at CDF and DØ) Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 20 Colliders: Graviton Emission ee g + GKK at LEP g + MET final state MP > 1.4-0.5 TeV (ADLO), for n=2…7 qq/gg q/g + GKK at the Tevatron Fall 2005 jets + MET final state Z()+jets is irreducible background Challenging signature due to large instrumental backgrounds from jet mismeasurement, cosmics, etc. DØ pioneered this search and set limits [PRL, 90 251802 (2003)] MP > 1.0-0.6 TeV for n=2…7 Later, CDF achieved slightly better limits Expected reach for Run II/LHC: n MD reach, Run I MD reach, Run II MD reach, LHC 100 fb-1 2 1100 GeV 1400 GeV 8.5 TeV 3 950 GeV 1150 GeV 6.8 TeV 4 850 GeV 1000 GeV 5.8 TeV 5 700 GeV 900 GeV 5.0 TeV Theory: [Giudice, Rattazzi, Wells, Nucl. Phys. B544, 3 (1999) and corrected version, hep-ph/9811291] [Mirabelli, Perelstein, Peskin, PRL 82, 2236 (1999)] 85 pb-1 [PRL 90, 251802 (2003)] q g q GKK Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 21 Tevatron: Virtual Graviton Effects f f GKK f V Expect an interference with the SM fermion or boson pair production V d 2 d 2SM d cos q* dM d cos q* dM a n bn * f cos q , M f 2 cos q* , M 1 4 8 MP MP GKK f Run II, 200 pb-1 High-mass, low |cosq*| tail is a characteristic signature of LED [Cheung, GL, PRD 62 076003 (2000)] Best limits on the effective Planck scale come from new DØ Run II data: MPl > 1.1-1.6 TeV (n=2-7) Combined with the Run I DØ result: MPl > 1.1-1.7 TeV – tightest to date Sensitivity in Run II and at the LHC: Run II, 2 fb-1 LHC, 100 fb-1 e+e- + +gg 1.3-1.9 TeV 6.5-10 TeV 1.5-2.4 TeV 7.5-12 TeV e+e- + +- + gg 1.5-2.5 TeV 7.9-13 TeV Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 22 Interesting Candidate Events While the DØ data are consistent with the SM, the two highestmass candidates have anomalously low value of cosq* typical of ED signal: Event Callas: Mee = 475 GeV, cos* = 0.01 Event Farrar: Mgg = 436 GeV, cos* = 0.03 Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 23 TeV-1 Extra Dimensions Intermediate-size extra dimensions with TeV-1 radius Introduced by Antoniadis [PL B246, 377 (1990)] in the string theory context; used by Dienes, Dudas, Gherghetta [PL B436, 55 (1998)] to allow for low-energy unification Expect ZKK, WKK, gKK resonances at the LHC energies At lower energies, can study effects of virtual exchange of the Kaluza-Klein modes of vector bosons Antoniadis, Benaklis, Quiros [PL B460, 176 (1999)] ZKK Current indirect constraints come from precision EW measurements: 1/r ~ 6 TeV No dedicated experimental searches at colliders to date Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 24 First Dedicated Search for TeV-1 Extra Dimensions 200 pb-1, e+eEvent Callas Interference effect 1/R = 0.8 TeV While the Tevatron sensitivity is inferior to indirect limits, it explores the effects of virtual KK modes at higher energies, i.e. complementary to those in the EW data DØ has performed the first dedicated search of this kind in the dielectron channel based on 200 pb-1 of Run II data (ZKK, gKK e+e-) The 2D-technique similar to the search for ADD effects in the virtual exchange yields the best sensitivity in the DY production [Cheung, GL, PRD 65, 076003 (2002)] Data agree with the SM predictions, which resulted in the following limit: Fall 2005 1/R > 1.12 TeV @ 95% CL R < 1.75 x 10-19 m Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 25 Randall-Sundrum Model Observables Need only two parameters to define the model: k and rc Equivalent set of parameters: The mass of the first KK mode, M1 Dimensionless coupling k / MPl To avoid fine-tuning and nonperturbative regime, coupling can’t be too large or too small 0.01 ≤ k / MPl≤ 0.10 is the expected range Gravitons are narrow Expected Run II sensitivity in DY k / MPl Drell-Yan at the LHC M1 Davoudiasl, Hewett, Rizzo [PRD 63, 075004 (2001)] Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 26 First Search for RS Gravitons Already better limits than sensitivity for Run II, as predicted by phenomenologists! [PRL 95, 091801 (2005)] Assume fixed K-factor of 1.3 for the signal The tightest limits on RS gravitons to date Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 27 Black Holes on Demand NYT, 9/11/01 Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 28 Black Holes in General Relativity Black Holes are direct prediction of Einstein’s general relativity theory, established in 1915 (although they were never quite accepted by Einstein!) In 1916 Karl Schwarzschild applied GR to a static non-spinning massive object and derived famous metric with a singularity at a Schwarzschild radius r = RS 2MGN/c2 : Albert Einstein space } time If the radius of the object is less than RS, a black hole with the event horizon at RS is formed The term “black-hole” was introduced only around 1967 by John Wheeler Fall 2005 Karl Schwarzschild Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 29 Black Hole Evolution Naїvely, black holes would only grow once they are formed In 1975 Steven Hawking showed that this is not true [Commun. Math. Phys. 43, 199 (1975)], as the black hole can evaporate by emitting pairs of virtual photons at the event horizon, with one of the pair escaping the BH gravity These photons have a perfect black-body spectrum with the Hawking temperature: c TH 4 kRS Stephen Hawking In natural units ( = c = k = 1), one has the following fundamental relationship: RSTH = (4)1 If TH is high enough, massive particles can also be produced in evaporation Information paradox: if we throw an encyclopedia in a black hole, and watch it evaporating, where would the information disappear? This paradox is possibly solved in the only quantum theory of gravity we know of: string theory Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 30 Black Hole Evaporation As the BH evaporates, its mass becomes smaller, RS decreases, and Hawking temperature increases Consequently, as the BH evolves, the radiation spectrum becomes harder and harder, until the BH evaporates completely in a giant flash of light Ergo, the BH spends most of its time at the lowest temperature, when the radiation is soft Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 31 Looking for Black Holes While there is little doubt that BHs exist, we don’t have an unambiguous evidence for their existence so far Many astronomers believe that quasars are powered by a BH (from slightly above the Chandrasekhar limit of 1.5 M to millions of M), and that there are supermassive (~106 M) black holes in the centers of many galaxies, including our own The most crucial evidence, Hawking radiation, has not been observed (TH ~ 100 nK, l ~ 100 km, P ~ 10-27 W: ~1014 years for a single g to reach us!) The best indirect evidence we have is spectrum and periodicity in binary systems Astronomers are also looking for “flares” of large objects falling into supermassive BHs LIGO/VIRGO hope to observe gravitational waves from black hole collisions Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 32 Theoretical Framework Based on the work done with Dimopoulos two years ago [PRL 87, 161602 (2001)] and a related study by Giddings/Thomas [PRD 65, 056010 (2002)] Extends previous theoretical studies by Argyres/Dimopoulos/March-Russell [PL B441, 96 (1998)], Banks/Fischler [JHEP, 9906, 014 (1999)], Emparan/Horowitz/Myers [PRL 85, 499 (2000)] to collider phenomenology Big surprise: BH production is not an exotic remote possibility, but the dominant effect! Main idea: when the c.o.m. energy reaches the fundamental Planck scale, a BH is formed; cross section is given by the black disk approximation: 2 ~ RS ~ 1 TeV 2 ~ 10 2 m ~ 100 pb M2 = ^s parton RS Fall 2005 38 parton Geometrical cross section approximation was argued in early follow-up work by Voloshin [PL B518, 137 (2001) and PL B524, 376 (2002)] More detailed studies showed that the criticism does not hold: Dimopoulos/Emparan – string theory calculations [PL B526, 393 (2002)] Eardley/Giddings – full GR calculations for high-energy collisions with an impact parameter [PRD 66, 044011 (2002)]; extends earlier d’Eath and Payne work Yoshino/Nambu - further generalization of the above work [PRD 66, 065004 (2002); PRD 67, 024009 (2003)] Hsu – path integral approach w/ quantum corrections [PL B555, 29 (2003)] Jevicki/Thaler – Gibbons-Hawking action used in Voloshin’s paper is incorrect, as the black hole is not formed yet! Correct Hamiltonian was derived: H = p(r2 – M) ~ p(r2 – H), which leads to a logarithmic, and not a powerlaw divergence in the action integral. Hence, there is no exponential suppression [PRD 66, 024041 (2002)] Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 33 Assumptions and Approximation Fundamental limitation: our lack of knowledge of quantum gravity effects close to the Planck scale Consequently, no attempts for partial improvement of the results, e.g.: Grey body factors BH spin, charge, color hair Relativistic effects and time-dependence The underlying assumptions rely on two simple qualitative properties: The absence of small couplings; The “democratic” nature of BH decays We expect these features to survive for light BH Use semi-classical approach strictly valid only for MBH » MP; only consider MBH > MP Clearly, these are important limitations, but there is no way around them without the knowledge of QG Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 34 Black Hole Production Schwarzschild radius is given by Argyres et al., hep-th/9808138 [after Myers/Perry, [Dimopoulos, GL, PRL 87, 161602 (2001)] Ann. Phys. 172 (1986) 304]; it leads to: tot = 0.5 nb 2 (MP = 2 TeV, n=7) n 3 n 1 8 1 M BH 2 2 2 ( sˆ M BH ) RS 2 MP MP n2 LHC n=4 Hadron colliders: use parton luminosity tot = 120 fb w/ MRSD-’ PDF (valid up to the VLHC (MP = 6 TeV, n=3) energies) d pp BH X dL ˆ ab BH sˆ M 2 BH dM BH dM BH dL 2M BH dM BH s 2 M BH dxa f a xa f b xa sxa 1 a ,b M 2 BH s Note: at c.o.m. energies ~1 TeV the dominant contribution is from qq’ interactions Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 35 Black Hole Decay Hawking temperature: RSTH = (n+1)/4 (in natural units = c = k = 1) BH radiates mainly on the brane [Emparan/Horowitz/Myers, hepth/0003118] l ~ 2/TH > RS; hence, the BH is a point radiator, producing s-waves, which depends only on the radial component The decay into a particle on the brane and in the bulk is thus the same Since there are much more particles on the brane, than in the bulk, decay into gravitons is largely suppressed [Dimopoulos, GL, PRL 87, 161602 (2001)] Note that the formula for N is strictly valid only for N » 1 due to the kinematic cutoff E < MBH/2; If taken into account, it increases multiplicity at low N Democratic couplings to ~120 SM d.o.f. yield probability of Hawking evaporation into g, l±, and ~2%, 10%, and 5% respectively Averaging over the BB spectrum gives average multiplicity of decay products: N Fall 2005 M BH 2TH Stefan’s law: t ~ 10-26 s Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 36 Black Hole Factory [Dimopoulos, GL, PRL 87, 161602 (2001)] Black-Hole Factory n=2 n=7 Drell-Yan g+X Spectrum of BH produced at the LHC with subsequent decay into final states tagged with an electron or a photon Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 37 Shape of Gravity at the LHC log TH 1 log M BH const n 1 [Dimopoulos, GL, PRL 87, 161602 (2001)] Relationship between logTH and logMBH allows to find the number of ED, This result is independent of their shape! This approach drastically differs from analyzing other collider signatures and would constitute a “smoking cannon” signature for a TeV Planck scale Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 38 Black Hole Events First studies already initiated by ATLAS and CMS ATLAS –CHARYBDIS HERWIG-based generator with more elaborated decay model [Harris/Richardson/Webber] CMS – TRUENOIR [GL] Simulated black hole event in the Simulated black hole event in the ATLAS detector [from ATLAS-Japan Group] CMS detector [A. de Roeck & S. Wynhoff] Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 39 Black Holes in the Cosmic Rays Discussed by Feng/Shapere [PRL 88 (2002) 021303]; Anchordoqui/ Goldberg [hep-ph/0109242]; Emparan/ Massip/Rattazzi [hep-ph/0109287], … Proton primaries have very high SM interaction rate; consider BH production by quasi-horizontal UHE neutrinos MBH = 1 TeV, n=1-7 Detect them, e.g. in the Pierre Auger fluorescence experiment or AGASA A few to a hundred BHs can be detected before the LHC turns on Might be possible to establish the uniqueness of the signature by comparing several neutrino-induced processes Auger, 5 years of running [Feng & Shapere, PRL 88 (2002) 021303] Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 40 New Physics in BH Decays Example: Higgs with the mass of 130 GeV decays predominantly into a bb-pair Example: 130 GeV Higgs boson – tag BH events with leptons or photons, and look at the dijet invariant mass; does not even require b-tagging! Use typical LHC detector response to obtain realistic results = 15 nb MP = 1 TeV, 1 LHC-hour (!) W/Z h t GL, PRL 88, 181801 (2002) Fall 2005 boost t W Higgs observation in the black hole decays is possible at the LHC as early as in the first day of running even with the incomplete and poorly calibrated detectors! For MP = 1, 2, 3, and 4 TeV one needs 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, or 1 year of running to find a 5 signal Higgs is just an example – this applies to most of the new particles with the mass ~100 GeV Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 41 Conclusions http://www.extradimensions.com On 2/15/00 patent 6,025,810 was issued to David Strom for a "hyper-light-speed antenna." The concept is deceptively simple: "The present invention takes a transmission of energy, and instead of sending it through normal time and space, it pokes a small hole into another dimension, thus sending the energy through a place which allows transmission of energy to exceed the speed of light." According to the If you still"allows thinkenergy that gravity is patent, this portal from another weak force, you plant maygrowth." be spending dimension to accelerate too much time in the lab! from the AIP’s “What’s New”, 3/17/00 Fall 2005 Stay tuned – next generation of collider experiments has a good chance to solve the mystery of large extra dimensions! If large extra dimensions are realized in nature, black hole production at future colliders is likely to be the first signature for quantum gravity at a TeV Many other exciting consequences from effects on precision measurements to detailed studies of quantum gravity If any of these new ideas is correct, we might see a true “Grand Unification” – that of particle physics, astrophysics and cosmology – in just a few years from now! Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 42 Universal Extra Dimensions The most “democratic” ED model: all the SM fields are free to propagate in extra dimension(s) with the size Rc = 1/Mc ~ 1 TeV-1 [Appelquist, Cheng, Dobrescu, PRD 64, 035002 (2001)] Instead of chiral doublets and singlets, model contains vector-like quarks and leptons Gravitational force is not included in this model The number of universal extra dimensions is not fixed: it’s feasible that there is just one (MUED) the case of two extra dimensions is theoretically attractive, as it breaks down to the chiral Standard Model and has additional nice features, such as guaranteed proton stability, etc. Every particle acquires KK modes with the masses Mn2 = M02 + Mc2, n = 0, 1, 2, … Kaluza-Klein number (n) is conserved at tree level, i.e. n1 n2 n3 … = 0; consequently, the lightest KK mode cold be stable (and is an excellent dark matter candidate [Cheng, Feng, Matchev, PRL 89, 211301 (2002)]) Hence, first level KK-excitations are produced in pairs, similar to SUSY particles Consequently, current limits (dominated by precision electroweak measurements, particularly T-parameter) are sufficiently low (Mc ~ 300 GeV for one ED and of the same order, albeit more model-dependent for >1 ED) Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 43 UED Phenomenology Naively, one would expect large clusters of nearly degenerate states with the mass around 1/RC, 2/RC, … Cheng, Feng, Matchev, Schmaltz: not true, as radiative corrections tend to be large (up to 30%); thus the KK excitation mass spectrum resembles that of SUSY! Minimal UED model with a single extra dimension, compactified on an S1/Z2 orbifold Fall 2005 Q, L (q, l) are SU(2) doublets (singlets) and contain both chiralities [Cheng, Matchev, Schmaltz, PRD 66, 056006 (2002)] MC = 1/RC = 500 GeV Odd fields do not have 0 modes, so we identify them w/ “wrong” chiralities, so that they vanish in the SM Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 44 UED Spectroscopy First level KK-states spectroscopy [CMS, PRD 66, 056006 (2002)] Decay: B(g1→Q1Q) ~ 50% B(g1→q1q) ~ 50% B(q1→qg1) ~ 100% + B(t1→W1b, H1 b) ~ B(Q1→QZ1:W1:g1) ~ 33%:65%:2% B(W1→L1:1L) = 1/6:1/6 (per flavor) B(Z1→1:LL1) ~ 1/6:1/6 (per flavor) B(L1→g1L) ~ 100% B(1→g1) ~ 100% ± B(H1 →gg1, H *g1) ~ 100% Production: q1q1 + X → MET + jets (~had/4); but: low MET Q1Q1+ X→ V1V’1 + jets → 2-4 l + MET (~had/4) Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 45 Production Cross Section Reasonably high rate up to M ~ 500 GeV Q1Q1, q1q1 Run II, s = 2 TeV [Rizzo, PRD 64, 095010 (2001)] Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 46 Sensitivity in the Four-Lepton Mode Only the gold-plated 4leptons + MET mode has been considered in the original paper Sensitivity in Run IIb can exceed current limits Much more promising channels: dileptons + jets + MET + X (x9 cross section) trileptons + jets + MET + X (x5 cross section) Detailed simulations is required: would love to see this in, e.g. PYTHIA One could use SUSY production with adjusted masses and branching fractions as a quick fix Fall 2005 [Cheng, Matchev, Schmaltz, PRD 66, 056006 (2002)] L is per experiment; (single experiment) Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 47 A Word on Anthropic Principle From Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2020 ed. Main Entry: an·throp·ic prin·ci·ple Pronunciation: an-'thrä-pik prin(t)-s(&-)p&l Function: noun Etymology: Greek anthrOpikos, from anthrOpos bad science : A pseudoscientific view of the first decade of the XXI century related to the explanation of the ‘unlikeliness’ of the Universe not via fundamental laws of nature, but due to the existence of human life in it. Particularly popular in the Bible-Belt states along with creationism. Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 48 Fine Tuning Explained… Fine tuning explained: Numerology: 987654321/123456789 = 8.000000073 ? Numerology it is not! NML... 987654321 lim N2 N 123456789...LMN Seeing is believing: In hexadecimal system, FEDCBA987654321/123456789ABCDEF = 14.000000000000000183 Fall 2005 Greg Landsberg - Out-of-this-World Physics: From Particles to Black Holes 49