Pablo G. Cámara. with L. E. Ibáñez and F. Marchesano, arxiv: [hep-th].

Transcription

1 RR photons Pablo G. Cámara with L. E. Ibáñez and F. Marchesano, arxiv: [hep-th]. Cornell University, 31 August 2011

2 1. Motivation String theory compactifications with a semi-realistic spectrum generically lead to U(1) gauge symmetries beyond U(1) Y [Cremades, Ibanez, Marchesano 02]

3 1. Motivation Some of these extra U(1) gauge symmetries acquire masses via the Stückelberg mechanism L C 2 F 2 L Stk = 1 2 (dρ + qa)2 (dρ = 4 dc 2 ) M U(1)X M s global symmetries broken by non-perturbative effects to discrete subgroups (e.g. matter parity, baryon triality...) [Berasaluce et al. 11] Only detectable at experiments if M s ~ 1 TeV (WIMPs) [Ghilencea et al. 02] Other U(1) s however may remain massless or very light (WISPs) and lead to light hidden U(1) gauge symmetries.

4 1. Motivation Light hidden U(1) gauge g symmetries are a window of opportunity to hidden sector physics, even at large string scale [Jaeckel, Ringwald 10]

5 1. Motivation Hidden U(1) s are also a possible mechanism for mediating SUSY breaking in a flavor independent way: [Langacker et al 07] [Verlinde et al. 07] F V C 2 F H C 2 L 1 2 dρ + ea V + qa H 2 A Y ea V qa H A X ea V + qa H

6 1. Motivation In type II string theory compactifications there are two sources of hidden U(1) gauge symmetries: D-branes located far away from the MSSM D-brane sector Bulk U(1) s arising from KK reduction of the Ramond-Ramond closed string fields no massless matter charged under them It is therefore natural to ask: Can RR U(1) s mix with the hypercharge?? χ m γ 0 If so, can we compute and?? Can we obtain new phenomenological scenarios??

7 1. Motivation Can RR U(1) s mix with the hypercharge?? m χ m γ 0 If so, can we compute and?? Can we obtain new phenomenological scenarios?? Moreover, the distinction between RR and D-brane U(1) s is arbitrary at strong coupling: in M-theory / F-theory both correspond to KK U(1) s Another related question is therefore: Is there a geometric understanding of the Stuckelberg mechanism??

8 Outline of the talk 1. U(1) s in type IIA compactifications 2. Kinetic i mixing i with RR photons 3. Mass mixing i with RR photons 4. Some phenomenological implications 5. The unified M-theory picture 6. Concluding remarks

9 2. U(1) s in type IIA compactifications Type IIA string theory on a CY orientifold R 1,3 M 6 /Ω p ( 1) F L σ σj = J J, σω = Ω Closed string spectrum: one-to-one correspondence between massless 4d closed-string fields and harmonic forms h 1,1 + h 1,2 +1 N = 1 chiral multiplets h 1,1 + N = 1 vector multiplets

10 2. U(1) s in type IIA compactifications 1 h 1,1 + h 1,2 + 1 N = 1 chiral multiplets l t Scalar components parametrize compactification moduli space: J B + ij = T îωî Ω C + ire(cω) = N I c 2 i, c 3 ( ) α I Real parts of complex structure moduli axions Invariant under shift symmetries Can participate in Stückelberg mechanism Dual 2-forms: C 5 = X I X I I C I 2 β I +...

11 2. U(1) s in type IIA compactifications h 1,1 + + N = 1 vector multiplets RR U(1) gauge bosons from the expansions: C 3 = X I Re(N I )α I + X i A i ω i Dual magnetic d.o.f. from C 5 Gauge kinetic function [Grimm, Louis 04] f ij = ik ijˆkt ˆk Each massless U(1) RR has an element of associated to it. H + 2 (M 6, R)

12 2. U(1) s in type IIA compactifications D6-brane N = 1 vector & chiral multiplets D6-branes wrap special Lagrangian 3-cycles in the CY J πa =0, Im(Ω) πa =0 Standard Model located in this sector N a D6-branes SU(N a ) U(1) a f a = in a Ω c π a Deformations preserving slag parametrized by b 1 1( (π a ) open string moduli: [McLean 98] j j j i Φ j a = θ j a + λ j i φi a θ a = θ j aζ j, φ a = φ i ax i, ι Xi J c πa = λ j i ζ j

13 2. U(1) s in type IIA compactifications D6-brane N = 1 vector & chiral multiplets There is a Stückelberg mechanism for some of the D6-brane U(1) s: R 1,3 π a C 5 F a 2 = c I a C2 I F2 a Q I = X c I an a Q a is massive R 1,3 c I a = β I π a a Nice interpretation t ti geometric ti interpretation. t ti Each D6-brane U(1) a gauge symmetry has an element of H3 (M 6, R) associated to it, π a π a b = X n b a massless π b = X Q aq n b ana a a( (π π a a) trivial a b a ( Σ 4 = π b )

14 2. U(1) s in type IIA compactifications D6-brane N = 1 vector & chiral multiplets U(2) U(1) a U(1) b U(1) a U(1) b U(1) a + U(1) b massless massive...

15 3. Kinetic mixing with RR photons Can D6-brane ba eand RR U(1) s )smix kinematically atcay?? S 4d,mix = 4d,mix R 1,3 Re(fia )F i F a +Im(f )F i F a RR 4 2 ia RR 2 From the D6-brane CS action: F2 a C F 2 a F 2 a C 3 f ia = Φ j a π a ω i ζ j +... Requires non-trivial 2-cycle in π a and M 6 Well-defined for massless U(1) s: f i(a b) =(Φ j a Φ j b ) ρ j ω i +... f ib = Σ 4 (J c + F b 2 ) ω i

16 4. Mass mixing with RR photons We have seen the following U(1) charge assigment: H 3 (M 6, R) H + 2 (M 6, R) D6-brane U(1) s RR U(1) s But shouldn t be H r (M 6, ) the relevant classes?? H r (M 6, ) =... {z } b r k1... kn t Σ r+1 = kπ tor r H 1 (M, ) = 2 Torsional cycles cannot be detected by 4d massless fields because 1 π tor r ω r = 1 k Σ r+1 dω r =0

17 4. Mass mixing with RR photons Some useful results in algebraic topology (UCT + Poincaré duality): Tor H 3 (M 6, ) ' Tor H 2 (M 6, ) Tor H 1 (M 6, ) ' Tor H 4 (M 6, ) D2-brane wrapping π tor 2 4d particle D4-brane wrapping π tor 3 4d string Non-BPS objects in 4d, but stable mod k Aharanov-Bohm strings and particles [Alford, Krauss, Wilczek 89]

18 4. Mass mixing with RR photons df 4 = δ 5 k They satisfy holonomies: 1 2πi log hol(γ, [π2 tor ]) mod 1 = 1 F 4 = 1 δ 5 = p k k D Σ 3 k D kπ tor 2 Linking number mod 1 L([π tor 2 ], [π tor 3 ]) A-B strings and particles are the smoking gun of massive U(1) s higgsed down to a discrete gauge symmetry via the Stuckelberg k mechanism [Banks, Seiberg 10] We can see this more explicitly from dimensional reduction.

19 4. Mass mixing with RR photons For that we introduce the set of forms which correspond to the generators of Tor H 4 (M 6 ) ' Tor H 3 (M 6 ) and Tor H 3 (M 6 ) ' Tor H 2 (M 6 ) dω tor β tor tor,β k β ω tor,α tor α = k α α β, dβ = k α ω L([π 2,α ], [π 3 ]) (k ) α Expanding in these, 2 ] [π tor,β 3 ]) = (k 1 β ) α C 3 = X α Re(N α )α tor α + A α ω tor α +... dc β β α tor α tor 3 = [Re(dN ) + k α A ] α β + da ω α +... Massive RR U(1) gauge symmetries Electric charges: A-B particles Magnetic charges: A-B strings

20 4. Mass mixing with RR photons Massless RR U(1) s Massive RR U(1) s H + 2 (M 6, R) Tor H + 2 (M 6, ) Hodge duality: H 2 + (M 6, R) ' H M 4 (M 6, R) UCT+Poinc.: Tor H 2 + (M 6, ) ' Tor H3 (M M6, ) Intersection number Electric charges: D2 (4d particles) Magnetic charges: D4 (4d monopoles) U(1) gauge symmetry Linking number Electric charges: D2 (4d A-B particles) Magnetic charges: D4 (4d A-B strings) k gauge symmetry k H + 2 (M 6, )

21 4. Mass mixing with RR photons Can D6-brane and RR U(1) s mix through the Stuckelberg mechanism?? We have seen that a D4-brane wrapping a torsional 3-cycle develops a coupling, S 4d X c β b β [π b ]=X β C β 2 R 1,3 c β b [πtor,β 3 ] C β 2 tor,β π 3 Similarly, a D6-brane wrapping the same 3-cycle develops a Stuckelberg coupling in its worldvolume, X β c β b R 1,3 C β 2 F b 2 It can also be seen from dim. reduction of the CS D6-brane action Therefore, massive RR U(1) s couple to the same complex structure t axions than D6-branes do. C 5

22 4. Mass mixing with RR photons Massive RR U(1) s therefore may mix with D6-brane U(1) s. Q I = X a Q β = X α c I an a Q a k β αq α RR + X a c β an a Q a Each linear combination of D6-brane and torsional RR U(1) gauge symmetries has an element of H 3 (M 6, ) associated to it. Massless combinations of U(1) s are trivial elements in integer homology. = X Q n a Q a ň α Q α 0 aq + X αq RR a α massless X N a n a ([π a ] [π 2 a]) + X a α,γ ň α k α γ[π tor,γ 3 ]=0 Elements which h are also trivial i in de Rham do not mix with RR U(1) s

23 5. Some phenomenological implications Some examples: Type IIA orientifold of the Enriques CY Freely-acting T 6 /( 2 2 ) 1 [Aspinwall 95] RR U(1) s allow for new phenomenological scenarios: Two stacks of fractional D6-branes which differ by π tor 3 Massless: U(1) Y 2U(1) a 2U(1) b + U(1) RR Massive: U(1) G1 U(1) G2 U(1) a + U(1) b U(1) a U(1) b 4U(1) RR f YG2 = 4i r (N 0 T ˆ1 )

24 5. Some phenomenological implications Two mutualy hidden brane sectors which comunicate via RR photons Massless: Massive: U(1) Yk 2U(1) ak 2U(1) bk + U(1) RR, k = 1, 2 U(1) Gk U(1) ak + U(1) bk U(1) G3 U(1) a1 U(1) b1 + U(1) a2 U(1) b2 4U(1) RR f Y1 Y 2 = i 80 (8T ˆ1 9f 1 9f 2 )

25 5. Some phenomenological implications RR U(1) s may also lead to new scenarios in the context of GUT models: Similar results for type IIB orientifolds with magnetized D7-branes (or their F-theory extension). RR photons arise from reduction of the RR 4-form on H 3 + (MM 6, ) Let us consider SU(5) GUT models [Beasley, Heckman, Vafa 08] [Donagi, Wijnholt 08] SU(5) 7-brane wraping 4-cycle S, matter fields localized at intersections... Hypercharge flux breaking SU(5) SU(3) SU(2) U(1) C 4 F Y F Y R 1,3 S C Y 2 S C 4 F Y = R 1,3 C Y 2 ρ Y C 4 F Y

26 5. Some phenomenological implications ρ Y 2-cycle trivial in the CY 3 in order U(1) Y to remain massless. Thresholds (F 4 ) lead to wrong ordering of fine structure constants at M s : s 1 < 1 < 1 [Blumenhagen 08] α 3 α 1 α 2 The above condition can be relaxed. We can take to be trivial in H 2 + (M 6, R) but still non trivial in H 2 + (M 6, ) I.e, ρ Y can be a torsional 2-cycle of the CY 3. ρ Y Mixing of the hypercharge with a U(1) RR L 1 2 µ Re(dT )+k RR A RR + 5k Y A Y 3 2

27 5. Some phenomenological implications Mass eigenstates: Massless: Massive: A 1 =cos(θ)ãy A X =sin(θ)a Y sin(θ)ãrr + cos(θ)a RR sin(θ) g Y k p Y g 2 2 k 2 RR krr 2 + g2 Y k2 Y The inverse fine structure constant of the massless U(1) is 1 = 3 ky 2 + α 1 5α SU(5) krr 2 α RR Could explain the known few percent discrepancy in MSSM gauge coupling unification. Similar to [Tatar, Watari 08]

28 6. The unified M-theory picture M-theory provides a unifying picture for D-brane and RR U(1) gauge symmetries. ti We consider M-theory on a G 2 manifold perturbative IIA CY 3 orientifold limit ˆM 7 admitting at least one MˆM 1 7 (M 6 S )/ˆσ )/σ ˆσ = (σ,, 1) ) b 2 massless U(1) s and b 3 massless complex scalars: A 3 =Re(M I )φ I + A α ω α Φ 3 =Im(M I )φ I I =1,...,b 3 ( ˆM 7 ) α =1,...,b 2 ( ˆM 7 ) In the IIA perturbative limit they become the massless D6-brane and RR U(1) s and the massless closed and open string moduli. If admits several IIA perturbative limits, open / closed string ˆM 7 dualities may exchange D6-brane and RR U(1) s. [Kachru, McGreevy 01]

29 6. The unified M-theory picture Gauge kinetic function described geometrically by the triple intersection numbers of MˆM 7 f αβ = M I ˆM 7 φ I ω α ω β M 7 [Papadopoulos, Townsend 99] Massive U(1) gauge symmetries spontaneoulsy broken to discrete gauge symmetries arise from Tor H 2 ( ˆM 7, ) ' Tor H 4 ( ˆM 7, ) M2-branes wrapping torsional 2-cycles 4d Aharanov-Bohm particles M5-branes wrapping torsional 4-cycles kˆk β tor α φ β = dω to dωα tor 4d Aharanov-Bohm strings α ˆk da α tor tor 3 = ³Re(dM β ) + k β A φ α + da β ω β In the IIA perturbative limit they become the massive D6-brane and RR U(1) s. Thus in a general compactification massless U(1) s and discrete Thus, in a general compactification massless U(1) s and discrete gauge symmetries are both classified by H 2 ( ˆM 7, )

30 7. Concluding remarks We have considered the interplay between open and closed string U(1) gauge symmetries. RR U(1) s can play a prominent role. Mixing with the hypercharge can occur either via direct kinetic mixing or via the mass terms induced by Stückelberg couplings. Interesting gphenomenological implications. We have provided a geometric description of mass mixing in terms of the torsional homology of the CY, and developped the right tools to compute the mixing parameters in specific models. As a byproduct, we have provided a stringy realization a of dsc discrete e gauge symmetries and 4d A-B strings and particles in terms of the torsional homology. In particular Tor H 2 ( ˆM 7, ) should contain the MSSM discrete symmetries of any semi-realistic model.