Physics Beyond the Standard Model the Electroweak sector and more...

Transcription

1 Physics Beyond the Standard Model the Electroweak sector and more... Tao Han Univ. of Wisconsin - Madison CTEQ Summer School, Madison (June 27, 2004)

2 Physics Beyond the Standard Model the Electroweak sector and more... Tao Han Univ. of Wisconsin - Madison CTEQ Summer School, Madison (June 27, 2004) The Standard Model as It Is The Need For Going Beyond SM Our Theory Bank Their Signals at the LHC

3 The Standard Model as a Low-Energy Effective Theory SUc(3) QCD as the theory of strong interactions:

4 The Standard Model as a Low-Energy Effective Theory SUc(3) QCD as the theory of strong interactions: QCD remarkably successfful: Perturbative QCD well tested and formed foundation for HEP; Significant progress in lattice gauge calculatioins.

5 mt [GeV] 800 MH [GeV] M W [GeV] all (90% CL) indirect (1σ) direct (1σ) 80.6 SU L (2) U Y (1) EW theory and precision measurements:

6 EW precision data: m H < 251 GeV at 95% CL with mt = 178 GeV mt [GeV] 800 MH [GeV] M W [GeV] all (90% CL) indirect (1σ) direct (1σ) 80.6 SU L (2) U Y (1) EW theory and precision measurements:

7 θ log 10 Λ [GeV] 0 EW vacuum is absolute minimum r M H [GeV/c 2 ] 300 EW Precision 400 Triviality 500 mh = 2λ v 600 V = µ 2 Φ 2 + λφ 4, < Φ >= v 2 = 2λ, v 2 = 2 G F µ 2 SM as an effective theory?

8 renormalizability... non-trivial interactions; a stable vacuum; All couplings g 2,3, sin 2 θ W, g f and masses g i v are in place. SM with a light H could be an effective theory to Λ M pl. θ log 10 Λ [GeV] 0 EW vacuum is absolute minimum r M H [GeV/c 2 ] 300 EW Precision 400 Triviality 500 mh = 2λ v 600 V = µ 2 Φ 2 + λφ 4, < Φ >= v 2 = 2λ, v 2 = 2 G F µ 2 SM as an effective theory?

9 Q: Would you need physics beyond the Standard Model? A: (The Garden of Aden)

10 The Need For Going Beyond SM? Vastly Separated Scales for Fundamental Interactions: QCD condensate: fπ At the scale Λ QCD, the interaction becomes non-perturbative: fπ q L q R 1/ MeV. Perfectly natural! We understand the dynamics.

11 The Need For Going Beyond SM? Vastly Separated Scales for Fundamental Interactions: QCD condensate: fπ At the scale Λ QCD, the interaction becomes non-perturbative: fπ q L q R 1/ MeV. Perfectly natural! We understand the dynamics. EW condensate: v Empirically (Fermi s weak interaction) and theoretically (EWSB): v = 1 ( 2 G F ) 1/2 = 2M W g 250 GeV. We do NOT know the underlining dynamics!

12 The Need For Going Beyond SM? Vastly Separated Scales for Fundamental Interactions: QCD condensate: fπ At the scale Λ QCD, the interaction becomes non-perturbative: fπ q L q R 1/ MeV. Perfectly natural! We understand the dynamics. EW condensate: v Empirically (Fermi s weak interaction) and theoretically (EWSB): v = 1 ( 2 G F ) 1/2 = 2M W g 250 GeV. We do NOT know the underlining dynamics! Quantum Gravity? M P l = hc GN GeV. We have NO clue about it...

13 Mass Spectrum in a Wide Range:

14 Mass Spectrum in a Wide Range: EW scale: v O(1 TeV); mν : down? M pl : up?.

15 The Large Hierarchy: all way up to M pl Due to quantum corrections, the Higgs mass is quadratically sensitive to the cutoff scale: Λ 2. t h h h W,B t c h h h h (a) (b) (c) m 2 H = m2 H0 3 8π 2y2 t Λ π 2g2 Λ π 2λ2 Λ 2 (200 GeV) 2 = m 2 H0 + [ (2000 GeV) 2 + (700 GeV) 2 + (500 GeV) 2] ( Λ 10 TeV )2

16 The Large Hierarchy: all way up to M pl Due to quantum corrections, the Higgs mass is quadratically sensitive to the cutoff scale: Λ 2. t h h h W,B t c h h h h (a) (b) (c) m 2 H = m2 H0 3 8π 2y2 t Λ π 2g2 Λ π 2λ2 Λ 2 (200 GeV) 2 = m 2 H0 + [ (2000 GeV) 2 + (700 GeV) 2 + (500 GeV) 2] ( Λ 10 TeV )2 If Λ M pl, it would need a level cancellation! If requiring less than 90% cancellation, Λ < 3 TeV ( 4πv).

17 The Large Hierarchy: all way up to M pl Due to quantum corrections, the Higgs mass is quadratically sensitive to the cutoff scale: Λ 2. t h h h W,B t c h h h h (a) (b) (c) m 2 H = m2 H0 3 8π 2y2 t Λ π 2g2 Λ π 2λ2 Λ 2 (200 GeV) 2 = m 2 H0 + [ (2000 GeV) 2 + (700 GeV) 2 + (500 GeV) 2] ( Λ 10 TeV )2 If Λ M pl, it would need a level cancellation! If requiring less than 90% cancellation, Λ < 3 TeV ( 4πv). Naturalness requirement: New physics appears at or below 3 TeV.

18 Yet Another Large Hierarchy: all way down to mν The simplest (Majorana) neutrino mass term yν Λ HLHL y ν v2 Λ (ν L) c ν L. Taking mν < 1 ev, = Λ yν 2v2 mν > y ν (10 14 GeV). It implies a large scale, even we take yν ye 10 6.

19 Yet Another Large Hierarchy: all way down to mν The simplest (Majorana) neutrino mass term yν Λ HLHL y ν v2 Λ (ν L) c ν L. Taking mν < 1 ev, = Λ yν 2v2 mν > y ν (10 14 GeV). It implies a large scale, even we take yν ye The smaller the fermion masses are, the larger the new physics scale is! Physics way beyond the SM!

20 The Little Hierarchy : 4πv Λnew On the one hand, the naturalness argument prefers Λew < 4πv, just like in QCD: Λ QCD < 4πf π. On the other hand, EW precision data indicate decoupling behavior Λew > 2 10 TeV. (based on generic dim-6 operators.) FCNC (K 0 K 0 mixing etc.) constraints set Λ flavor > TeV. (based on generic strong dynamics, or generic MSSM ) Barbieri, Strumia, hep-ph/ Chivukula, Evans, Simmons. Bagger, Feng, Polonsky, Zhang.

21 The Little Hierarchy : 4πv Λnew On the one hand, the naturalness argument prefers Λew < 4πv, just like in QCD: Λ QCD < 4πf π. On the other hand, EW precision data indicate decoupling behavior Λew > 2 10 TeV. (based on generic dim-6 operators.) FCNC (K 0 K 0 mixing etc.) constraints set Λ flavor > TeV. (based on generic strong dynamics, or generic MSSM ) = imply special structure or symmetry. Physics just beyond the SM! Barbieri, Strumia, hep-ph/ Chivukula, Evans, Simmons. Bagger, Feng, Polonsky, Zhang.

22 Theoretical issues to address: Vastly different mass scales: EW gauge symmetry breaking; charged fermion masses; neutrino masses. Nontrivial fermion structure: three fermion generations; quark small mixing; neutrino (nearly) maximal mixing; CP violation. Unified description: gauge interactions; Yukawa couplings; mass relations.

23 Theoretical issues to address: Vastly different mass scales: EW gauge symmetry breaking; charged fermion masses; neutrino masses. Nontrivial fermion structure: three fermion generations; quark small mixing; neutrino (nearly) maximal mixing; CP violation. Unified description: gauge interactions; Yukawa couplings; mass relations. Gravitation and cosmology: gravity and Planck scale physics; particle cosmology: inflation; baryogenesis; dark matter; dark energy...

24 Theoretical issues to address: Vastly different mass scales: EW gauge symmetry breaking; charged fermion masses; neutrino masses. Nontrivial fermion structure: three fermion generations; quark small mixing; neutrino (nearly) maximal mixing; CP violation. Unified description: gauge interactions; Yukawa couplings; mass relations. Gravitation and cosmology: gravity and Planck scale physics; particle cosmology: inflation; baryogenesis; dark matter; dark energy... = All indicate the need for physics beyond the SM.

25 Our theory bank Let s focus on the EWSB sector.

26 Our theory bank Let s focus on the EWSB sector. (A). Dynamical approach for mass generation: Technicolor: a lesson from QCD SU(N T C ) gauge theory, TC fermions Q = U, D,... EWSB by TC-fermion condendation at Λ T C : v Q L Q R 1/3 246 GeV.

27 Our theory bank Let s focus on the EWSB sector. (A). Dynamical approach for mass generation: Technicolor: a lesson from QCD SU(N T C ) gauge theory, TC fermions Q = U, D,... EWSB by TC-fermion condendation at Λ T C : v Q L Q R 1/3 246 GeV. no elementary scalar, like Higgs. theory natural: Λ T C dynamical. predicts new strong dynamics at the TeV scale: π T, η T, ρ T, ω T...

28 Our theory bank Let s focus on the EWSB sector. (A). Dynamical approach for mass generation: Technicolor: a lesson from QCD SU(N T C ) gauge theory, TC fermions Q = U, D,... EWSB by TC-fermion condendation at Λ T C : v Q L Q R 1/3 246 GeV. no elementary scalar, like Higgs. theory natural: Λ T C dynamical. predicts new strong dynamics at the TeV scale: π T, η T, ρ T, ω T... leads to too large radiative corrections: S 0.25N T C, while Sexp 0.07 ± no fermion masses.

29 Extended Technicolor: for fermion mass generation G ET C gauge theory, ETC fermions: U, D,..., u, d... After intrgrating out ETC gauge bosons at the scale Λ ET C, with TC-fermion condensate,sm fermion mass generated: mf Q L Q R /Λ 2 ET C Λ3 T C /Λ2 ET C. Eichten and Lane; For a review, Hill and Simmons

30 Extended Technicolor: for fermion mass generation G ET C gauge theory, ETC fermions: U, D,..., u, d... After intrgrating out ETC gauge bosons at the scale Λ ET C, with TC-fermion condensate,sm fermion mass generated: mf Q L Q R /Λ 2 ET C Λ3 T C /Λ2 ET C. theory natural: Λ ET C dynamical. predicts new fermion flavor physics at the TeV scale... Eichten and Lane; For a review, Hill and Simmons

31 Extended Technicolor: for fermion mass generation G ET C gauge theory, ETC fermions: U, D,..., u, d... After intrgrating out ETC gauge bosons at the scale Λ ET C, with TC-fermion condensate,sm fermion mass generated: mf Q L Q R /Λ 2 ET C Λ3 T C /Λ2 ET C. theory natural: Λ ET C dynamical. predicts new fermion flavor physics at the TeV scale... a devastating problem: On the one hand: small FCNC: 1 Λ < ET C TeV. on the other hand, heavy quark mc 1 GeV Λ ET C < 30 Λ T C 1 TeV Eichten and Lane; For a review, Hill and Simmons

32 Extended Technicolor: for fermion mass generation G ET C gauge theory, ETC fermions: U, D,..., u, d... After intrgrating out ETC gauge bosons at the scale Λ ET C, with TC-fermion condensate,sm fermion mass generated: mf Q L Q R /Λ 2 ET C Λ3 T C /Λ2 ET C. theory natural: Λ ET C dynamical. predicts new fermion flavor physics at the TeV scale... a devastating problem: On the one hand: small FCNC: 1 Λ < ET C TeV. on the other hand, heavy quark mc 1 GeV Λ ET C < 30 Λ T C 1 TeV = Non-QCD like: Walking TC TC gauge coupling running very slowly. Q L Q R almost constant over Λ T C Λ ET C. Q L Q R ET C enhanced by Eichten and Lane; For a review, Hill and Simmons

33 Topcolor/Top-seesaw : Top quark special? mt v/ 2 = 174 GeV.

34 Topcolor/Top-seesaw : Top quark special? mt v/ 2 = 174 GeV. Introducing an additional fermion pair χ L, χ R : (1) topcolor generates the condensation H ( χ R t L, χ R b L ) EWSB and a heavy Higgs m H 1 TeV. (2) topseesaw leads to a SM t, and a heavy state χ, with Mχ 4 TeV. C. Hill. B. Dobrescu and C. Hill.

35 Topcolor/Top-seesaw : Top quark special? mt v/ 2 = 174 GeV. Introducing an additional fermion pair χ L, χ R : (1) topcolor generates the condensation H ( χ R t L, χ R b L ) EWSB and a heavy Higgs m H 1 TeV. (2) topseesaw leads to a SM t, and a heavy state χ, with Mχ 4 TeV TeV T 0.0 M χ 8.0 TeV m = 1000 GeV Higgs fit EW precision data well! C. Hill. B. Dobrescu and C. Hill. H.-J. He, C. Hill, T. Tait S

36 A less ambitious approach: Little Higgs Models Accept the existence of a light Higgs; keep the Higgs boson naturally light (at 1-loop level). Higgs is a pseudo-goldstone boson from global symmetry breaking (at scale 4πf) Higgs acquires a mass radiatively at the EW scale v, by collective explicit breaking Consequently, quadratic divergences absent at one-loop level W, Z, B W H, Z H, B H ; t T ; H Φ. (cancellation among same spin states!) Dimopoulos, Preskill, 1982; H.Georgi, D.B.Kaplan, 1984; T. Banks, Arkani-Hamed, Cohen, Georgi, hep-ph/

37 A less ambitious approach: Little Higgs Models Accept the existence of a light Higgs; keep the Higgs boson naturally light (at 1-loop level). Higgs is a pseudo-goldstone boson from global symmetry breaking (at scale 4πf) Higgs acquires a mass radiatively at the EW scale v, by collective explicit breaking Consequently, quadratic divergences absent at one-loop level W, Z, B W H, Z H, B H ; t T ; H Φ. (cancellation among same spin states!) top W W h λt λt g 2 _ g 2 x χ L χ R λt λt 2f h h f x χ R χ L h φ λ _ λ An alternative way to keep H light (naturally) Dimopoulos, Preskill, 1982; H.Georgi, D.B.Kaplan, 1984; T. Banks, Arkani-Hamed, Cohen, Georgi, hep-ph/

38 New heavy states in the littlest Higgs: Heavy particles Mass T λ λ2 2 f Z H m 2 w f 2 s 2 c 2 v 2 W H m 2 w f 2 s 2 c 2 v 2 φ 0, ±, ±± 2m 2 H f 2 v (4v f/v 2 ) 2 A H m 2 z s 2 w f 2 5s 2 c 2 v 2 (m h 115 GeV)

39 (B). Weak-scale Supersymmetry: A natural cancellation mechanism: Symmetry between opposite spin & statistics t versus t W versus W H versus H Hd versus Hu,

40 (B). Weak-scale Supersymmetry: A natural cancellation mechanism: Symmetry between opposite spin & statistics t versus t W versus W H versus H Hd versus Hu, m 2 H (M 2 SUSY M 2 SM ) λ2 f 16π 2 ln ( Λ M SUSY ). Weak scale SUSY stabilizes the hierarchy M W M pl only if the soft-susy breaking : M SUSY O(M SM ).

41 predict TeV scale new physics: light Higgs bosons H 0, A 0, H ± ; SUSY partners W ±..., g, q, l ±...

42 predict TeV scale new physics: light Higgs bosons H 0, A 0, H ± ; SUSY partners W ±..., g, q, l ±... radiative EWSB by the large top Yukawa coupling: M 2 Z /2 = m2 H d m 2 Hu tan2 β tan 2 β 1 µ 2.

43 log 10 (µ/1 GeV) 10 α α 1-1,α2-1,α α imply a (possible) grand desert in M SUSY M GUT, and gauge coupling unification. α M 2 Z /2 = m2 H d m 2 Hu tan2 β tan 2 β 1 µ 2. radiative EWSB by the large top Yukawa coupling: predict TeV scale new physics: light Higgs bosons H 0, A 0, H ± ; SUSY partners W ±..., g, q, l ±...

44 The LSP is a good dark matter candidate χ 0 B log 10 (µ/1 GeV) 10 α α 1-1,α2-1,α α imply a (possible) grand desert in M SUSY M GUT, and gauge coupling unification. α M 2 Z /2 = m2 H d m 2 Hu tan2 β tan 2 β 1 µ 2. radiative EWSB by the large top Yukawa coupling: predict TeV scale new physics: light Higgs bosons H 0, A 0, H ± ; SUSY partners W ±..., g, q, l ±...

45 What about M SUSY? Supersymmetry breaking mechanism is unknown. Merely (124?) free parameters; most part of the parameter-space ruled out.

46 Q (GeV) M m m ~ τl m ~ τr M 2 m 1/2 300 m 2 mass (GeV) 400 \ / m µ 2 m m ~ tr 600 m ~ ~ br,q L 700 M Evolution of sparticle masses Assumption on the parameters: SUSY breaking in a hidden sector (*) msugra scenario: m0, m 1/2, A, tan β, and sign(µ) (*) Gauge mediation scenario: M, F, tan β, nm. Supersymmetry breaking mechanism is unknown. Merely (124?) free parameters; most part of the parameter-space ruled out. What about M SUSY?

47 (C). Extra-dimensions: A new approach to the hierarchy problem Large Extra-dimension Scenario; ADD In a world with D = 4 + n dimensions, the 4-dim Planck scale is related to the D-dim one M D as M P 2 L M D n+2 V n. x t y i N. Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, Dvali

48 (C). Extra-dimensions: A new approach to the hierarchy problem Large Extra-dimension Scenario; ADD In a world with D = 4 + n dimensions, the 4-dim Planck scale is related to the D-dim one M D as M P 2 L M D n+2 V n. x t y i Thus the fundamental scale: M D (M pl 2 /V n) n+2 O(1 TeV). or the radius: R M 2/n pl M 2/n+1 D { O(0.1 mm) for n = 2 O(1.0 fm) for n = 7 N. Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, Dvali

49 Warped Extra-dimension Scenario; the Randall-Sundrum model In a 5-dim space, Randall and Sundrum found a static solution of the form: ds 2 e 2ky ηµν dx µ dx ν dy 2, where k is the curvature scale in the 5 th -dim. L. Randall, R. Sundrum.

50 L. Randall, R. Sundrum. Randall-Sundrum M = e ky M pl. gravity planck brane The extra dimension y is warped. where k is the curvature scale in the 5 th -dim. ds 2 e 2ky ηµν dx µ dx ν dy 2, Warped Extra-dimension Scenario; the Randall-Sundrum model In a 5-dim space, Randall and Sundrum found a static solution of the form:

51 New ideas with extra-dimensions: Symmetry breaking by boundary conditions/terms

52 New ideas with extra-dimensions: Symmetry breaking by boundary conditions/terms SUSY GUTs with extra-dimensions: 5d SUSY GUTs model, with SUSY/GUT symmetry breaking by orbifolding on the boundary. Higgsless model in extra-dimensions: 5d non-susy model, with gauge symmetry breaking by orbifolding/boundary condition. Bulk KK states serve as pseudo-glodstone bosons, no Higgs left. Hall, Nomura; Nomura, Smith. C. Csaki et al.; Y. Nomura,

53 New ideas with extra-dimensions: Symmetry breaking by boundary conditions/terms SUSY GUTs with extra-dimensions: 5d SUSY GUTs model, with SUSY/GUT symmetry breaking by orbifolding on the boundary. Higgsless model in extra-dimensions: 5d non-susy model, with gauge symmetry breaking by orbifolding/boundary condition. Bulk KK states serve as pseudo-glodstone bosons, no Higgs left. Particularly interesting: AdS/CFT correspondence 5d AdS theory 4d strongly interacting walking TC! Hall, Nomura; Nomura, Smith. C. Csaki et al.; Y. Nomura,

54 Observable signatures for extra-dim models: At low energies very low : E 1/R, M D : 4d effective theory: as the Standard Model; weak effects from gravity.

55 Observable signatures for extra-dim models: At low energies very low : E 1/R, M D : 4d effective theory: as the Standard Model; weak effects from gravity. march into the extra-dimensions: 1/R < E M D, (4 + n) dim physics directly probed, and gravity effects observable: mainly via light KK gravitons of mass mkk 1/R, or whatever propagate there an effective theory (SM+KK). N. Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, Dvali (1998); Giudice, Rattazzi, Wells (1999); Han, Lykken, Zhang. (1999); Mirabelli, Peskin, Perelstein (1999); J. Hewett (1999); T. Rizzo (1999)....

56 Observable signatures for extra-dim models: At low energies very low : E 1/R, M D : 4d effective theory: as the Standard Model; weak effects from gravity. march into the extra-dimensions: 1/R < E M D, (4 + n) dim physics directly probed, and gravity effects observable: mainly via light KK gravitons of mass mkk 1/R, or whatever propagate there an effective theory (SM+KK). Intermediate energy regime E M D : stringy states significant: s-channel poles as resonances: t M(s, t), s M n 2 Mn = nms. N. Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos, Dvali (1998); Giudice, Rattazzi, Wells (1999); Han, Lykken, Zhang. (1999); Mirabelli, Peskin, Perelstein (1999); J. Hewett (1999); T. Rizzo (1999).... G. Shui and H. Tye (1998); K. Benakli (1999). Accomando, Antoniadis, Benakli (2000); Cullen, Perelstein, Peskin (2000).

57 At trans Planckian energies E > M D, M S : (4 + n) dim physics directly probed; gravity dominant: black hole production s = MBH > M D for b < r bh. T. Banks and W. Fischler (1999); E. Emparan et al. (2000); S. Giddings and S. Thomas (2002); S. Dimopoulos and G. Landsberg (2001).

58 At trans Planckian energies E > M D, M S : (4 + n) dim physics directly probed; gravity dominant: black hole production s = MBH > M D for b < r bh. r bh = σ = πr 2 bh. 1 M BH 8Γ ( n+3 2 πmd M D n + 2 ) 1 n+1 M BH /M 2 pl in 4d i j 3-brane r (s) h T. Banks and W. Fischler (1999); E. Emparan et al. (2000); S. Giddings and S. Thomas (2002); S. Dimopoulos and G. Landsberg (2001).

59 We are entering a data-rich era:

60 We are entering a data-rich era: Electroweak precision constraints;

61 We are entering a data-rich era: Electroweak precision constraints; muon g 2; µ eγ...; neutron/electron EDMs;

62 We are entering a data-rich era: Electroweak precision constraints; muon g 2; µ eγ...; neutron/electron EDMs; Neutrino masses and mixing;

63 We are entering a data-rich era: Electroweak precision constraints; muon g 2; µ eγ...; neutron/electron EDMs; Neutrino masses and mixing; K/B rare decays and CP violation: B Xsγ; J/ψK S, φk S, η K S ;

64 We are entering a data-rich era: Electroweak precision constraints; muon g 2; µ eγ...; neutron/electron EDMs; Neutrino masses and mixing; K/B rare decays and CP violation: B Xsγ; J/ψK S, φk S, η K S ; Nucleon stability;

65 We are entering a data-rich era: Electroweak precision constraints; muon g 2; µ eγ...; neutron/electron EDMs; Neutrino masses and mixing; K/B rare decays and CP violation: B Xsγ; J/ψK S, φk S, η K S ; Nucleon stability; Dark matter constraint on stable particles (M LSP );

66 We are entering a data-rich era: Electroweak precision constraints; muon g 2; µ eγ...; neutron/electron EDMs; Neutrino masses and mixing; K/B rare decays and CP violation: B Xsγ; J/ψK S, φk S, η K S ; Nucleon stability; Dark matter constraint on stable particles (M LSP ); Cosmology constraints on mν, and dark energy (?).

67 We are entering a data-rich era: Electroweak precision constraints; muon g 2; µ eγ...; neutron/electron EDMs; Neutrino masses and mixing; K/B rare decays and CP violation: B Xsγ; J/ψK S, φk S, η K S ; Nucleon stability; Dark matter constraint on stable particles (M LSP ); Cosmology constraints on mν, and dark energy (?). Yet more to come: Tevatron: EW, top sector, Higgs (?), new particle searches... LHC: Higgs studies, comprehensive new particle searches... LC: more on top sector, precision Higgs and new light particles... Other complementary experiments: non-accelerators...

68 mh (GeV) L dt = 100 fb -1 (no K-factors) ATLAS 5 σ 10 Signal significance Total significance 10 2 H ZZ llνν H WW lνjj H ZZ (*) 4 l H WW (*) lνlν H γ γ + WH, tth (H γ γ ) tth (H bb) Higgs fully covered at the LHC: For any scenario beyond SM, LHC WILL contribute: New Physics at Future Hadron Colliders

69 Baer, Balazs, Belyaev, O Farrill, hep-ph/ fσ(z ~ 1 p) 1011 pb Br(B s µ + µ - ) <Ωh 2 <0.129 stage 3 mh LEP2 limit a µ SUSY 1010 Br(b sγ) 10 4 m0 (TeV) no REWSB LEP2 m 1/2 (TeV) 5 Z ~ 1 not LSP LHC, E T miss msugra: tanβ=45, A 0 =0, µ<0 m0 > 4000 GeV, m 1/2 > 1400 GeV, tan β > 45. LHC will have great chance for SUSY discovery:

70 LH: The heavy T signal at LHC gg T T phase-space suppression; qb q T via t-channel W L b T.

71 G. Azuelos et al.: hep-ph/ Reach M T 1 (2) TeV for x λ = 1 (2). Invariant Mass (GeV) Invariant Mass (GeV) Events/40 GeV/300 fb ATLAS -1 Events/40 GeV/300fb ATLAS ATLAS simulations for T tz, bw :

72 Perelstein, Peskin, Pierce: hep-ph/ G. Azuelos et al.: hep-ph/ Reach M T 1 (2) TeV for x λ = 1 (2). Cross-sectiions measure coupling x λ. Mass peak M T determines f : v/f = mt/m T (x λ + x 1 λ ) = check consistency with f from M ZH. Invariant Mass (GeV) Invariant Mass (GeV) Events/40 GeV/300 fb ATLAS -1 Events/40 GeV/300fb ATLAS ATLAS simulations for T tz, bw :

73 Deep into extra-dimensions at the LHC: Large extra-dim ADD & warped extra-dim RS: left: ADD with M = 20, 25, 30, 35 TeV; right: RS with MKK = 16 TeV. T. Rizzo

74 Greg Landsberg MBH, GeV 1 MP = 5 TeV M P = 7 TeV dn/dm BH 500 GeV MP = 1 TeV MP = 3 TeV Black hole to l and γ events at the LHC:

75 Recap:

76 Recap: The SM is incomplete: Naturalness/hierarchy problem with m h Many free parameters

77 Recap: The SM is incomplete: Naturalness/hierarchy problem with m h Many free parameters Many ideas to go beyond: new strong dynamics weak-scale SUSY extra-dimensions......

78 Recap: The SM is incomplete: Naturalness/hierarchy problem with m h Many free parameters Many ideas to go beyond: new strong dynamics weak-scale SUSY extra-dimensions Only experiments can tell. Go For The LHC!