A. Pich. IFIC, U. València - CSIC. TAE 2018, Centro de Física de Benasque Pedro Pascual, Benasque, Spain, 2-15 September,

Transcription

1 A. Pich IFIC, U. València - CSIC TAE 2018, Centro de Física de enasque Pedro Pascual, enasque, Spain, 2-15 September,

2 ounds on New Flavour Physics lulclt 0 * li Viq Vib Isidori, c L L O ( D) k eff = SM + D 4 D> 4 k Λ NP ( D) k Generic flavour structure [c NP ~O(1)] ruled out at the TeV scale Λ NP ~ 1 TeV requires c NP to inherit the strong SM suppressions (GIM) Minimal Flavour Violation: The up and down Yukawa matrices are the only source of quark-flavour symmetry breaking D Ambrosio et al, Chivukula-Georgi 2

3 3

4 Yukawa Interactions in 2HDMs L Y = Q' + ' ' + u' ( Γ ) ( ) 1φ1 Γ2φ2 d Q 1φ1 2φ2 L R L R SS v φ =, v = v + v 2 (0) i i i 2 2 i e θ LY = M Φ Y M Y v ( d ' 1+ d ' Φ2) R L ( u' Φ 1+ u' Φ 2) { Q' ' ' ' } L d Q u R M q and Y q unrelated FCNCs _ K 0 K 0 K 0 µ µ + Phenomenological disaster! 4

5 Pich-Tuzón, Only one φ a couples to f R (Glashow-Weinberg, Paschos 77) 5

6 Flavour Alignment (Aligned 2HDM) Pich-Tuzón Celis-Ilisie-Pich, , General setting without FCNCs & new sources of CP violation Y = ς M Y = ς M * dl, dl, dl,, u u u Rich LHC Altmannshofer et al, arger et al, Celis et al, Cervero-Gerard, López-Val et al... Many allowed possibilities Search for light H ±, H, A CP violation Flavour constraints fulfilled Celis et al, Jung et al, Li et al EDMs Jung-Pich, cos α > 0.80 (90% CL) Usual Z 2 models recovered in particular (CP-conserving) limits 6

7 Jung-Pich-Tuzón,

8 Flavour Anomaly 4 σ discrepancy RD (*) ( ) (*) r ( D τν τ ) (*) r ( D ν ) b W cu, 68% τ CL 95% CL ν τ elle, igi-gambino-schacht 8

9 b H cu, τ ν τ 9

10 LHCb, σ above SM prediction b W cu, τ ν τ ( J / ψ ) SM Yu et al, Ivanov et al, Kiselev, Hernández et al 10

11 Capdevila et al, ) New physics only contributes to the SM operator µ [ cγ Pb][ τγ Pν ] L µ L τ 2) At higher scales, it originates from (avoids b sνν constraints) [ Q γ Q ][ L γ L ] + [ Q γ σ Q ][ L γ σ L ] 2 [( c γ b )( τ γ ν ) + ( s γ b )( τ γ τ )] µ µ I I µ µ µ µ 3 L µ L L τ L L µ L L L Large r(b sτ + τ ) See also: Alonso et al, Crivellin et al,

12 Rare Decays s,d µ + µ Loop & CKM suppression NP sensitivity Sensitive to (pseudo) scalar contributions R sµ µµ ( ) 0 + ( s ) 0 + s µµ SM Li-Lu-Pich, LHCb, : W ± H ±, Z H 0, A 0 ( + 0.3) 1+ A y ( ) r( ) 0 + Γ q 0 + q µµ = 2 q µµ 1 yq ( µµ ) = 3.0 ± , ( µµ ) < s d exp exp (95% CL) SM: (3.65 ± 0.23) 10 9 S M: (1.06 ± 0.09) LHCb, : ( ) , ( ) ττ exp < ττ exp < (95% CL) s d

13 b s µ + µ Differential ranching Ratios 13

14 0 Κ 0 µ + µ Κ + π µ + µ 2 q s m m elle Descotes-Genon et al, m gm g O s Pb 9 L 14

15 elle, Q P P ' µ 'e i i i 15

16 Violations of Lepton Flavour R K *0 = 0 *0 + 0 *0 + r( K µµ ) r( K e e ) 0 *0 0 *0 K J + + ) ( K J ee r( / ψ ( µµ ) r / ψ ( )) σ deviation from SM LHCb,

17 New-Physics Fits with Effective Operators Capdevila et al, Altmannshofer et al, Geng et al, µ e µ e C C C C 4G α H = VV CO NP F * eff tb ts i i 2 4π i, 9 gm L m g gm L m g g O s Pb O s Pb

18 Geng et al, SM: C 9 (m b ) C 10 (m b ) = 4.27 C k = gm L m g gm L m g g O s Pb 10 5 O s Pb ' 9 gm R m g gm R m g g O s Pb ' 10 5 O s Pb 18

19 b Z µ + _ s µ (g-2) µ Di Chiara et al,

20 More possibilites Flavour conserving Z Kamenik et al, b LQ s b LQ s Leptoquarks Hiller- Nisandzic, D Amico et al, µ µ + µ µ + ecirevic-sumensari, New Fermions and Scalars D Amico et al,

21 K π ν ν T * 2 2 is i W FV V id, m / M nlg m nl p slg m dl K 11 r K p nn (7.80.8) r K p nn ( ) 10 L A A h (1.4 r) h uras et al Long- distance contributions are negligible T 0 ( K L π νν ) 0 NL-E949: few events! KEK-E391a: ( KL π νν ) ( K π νν ) = ( ) r r < (90% C.L.) Ongoing experiments: NA62, KOTO 21

22 10% exp. accuracy assumed 3σ observation 10% accuracy 22

23 LEPTON FLAVOUR VIOLATION 90 % CL Upper Limits on r(l X ) [MEG 16,SINDRUM 88, olton 88, AAR, ELLE, LHC] Decay U.L. Decay U.L. Decay U.L. µ e γ µ e e + e µ e γγ τ e γ τ e e + e τ e e + µ τ µ γ τ e µ + µ τ µ e + µ τ e e µ τ µ µ + µ τ e π τ µ π τ e η τ µ η τ e η τ µ η τ e Κ * τ e Κ S τ µ Κ S τ µ ρ τ e K + K τ e K + π τ e π + K τ µ K + K τ µ K + π τ µ π + K τ e π + π τ µ π + π τ µ ω τ µ Κ * τ e φ τ Λ π τ e + K K τ e + K π τ e + π π τ µ + K K τ µ + K π τ µ + π π

24 24

25 25

26 SM: r < New Physics? Exciting Prospects R. Sawada, ICHEP

27 SUMMARY Flavour Structure and Related to SS are major pending questions Scalar Sector (Higgs) Important cosmological implications (aryogenesis) is highly constrained in the SM: 1 phase only Sensitive to New Physics: Flavour Anomalies! etter control of QCD effects needed Challenging future ahead: elle-ii, LHC, NA62, J-Parc, ES-III Wait and see 27

28 Quarks Leptons osons up down electron neutrino e e photon µ gluon charm strange muon neutrino µ Z 0 W ± τ top beauty tau neutrino τ Higgs 28

29 ackup arxiv: th CERN Latin-American School of High-Energy Physics TAE 2018, Centro de Física de enasque Pedro Pascual, enasque, Spain, 2-15 September, 2018 Flavour Physics San Juan A. del Pich Rio México, TAE March,

30 CHARGED CURRENT UNIVERSALITY τ µ τ e π µ π e K µ K e K πµ K πe W µ τ W e τ τ µ µ τ W τ W e g g µ / ge ± ± ± ± ± τ / ge ± ± Γ Γ 2.4 σ τ τ e µ τ Γ τ π π µ Γ τ K K µ τ W τ W µ A. Pich, arxiv: g / g τ µ ± ± ± ± σ g τ anomaly cannot be accommodated with EFT Filipuzzi, Gonzalez-Alonso, Portoles,

31 CP Asymmetry in τ Decay A τ + + ( τ π KSντ ) ( τ π KSντ ) + + ( τ π KSντ ) ( τ π KSντ ) Γ Γ = ± ± Γ +Γ 3 ( ) 10 aar 11 0p t p n SM 3 A K S = igi-sanda, Grossman-Nir 2.8 σ discrepancy t t elle does not see any asymmetry at the 10-2 level CP A cos cos t t i b y cosb cosy i i bins ( i) of W Q 2 b K S direction in hadronic rest frame y t direction aar signal incompatible with other sets of flavour data Cirigliano-Crivellin-Hoferichter,

32 2006 τ ν Anomaly b _ u W τ _ ν elle 2006: (hadronic tag) τν = r( ) (1.7 ) 10 Large V ub Tension in CKM fit Confirmed by aar (2008, 2010, 2013) elle 2013: (hadronic tag) τν = ± 0.25 r( ) ( ) 10 Current status: CKM agreement. Tension between elle and aar 32

33 DIRECT in K π π η + T( KL π π ) T( K π π ) + + S ε K 0 0 T KL ππ T KS ππ ( ) + ε K η εk 2ε ( ) K 1 η Re K / K 1 ( ) 10 6 η ( ε ε ) = ± 2 NA48, NA31 KTeV, E731 Short-distance OPE Ciuchini et al, uras et al ( εk εk) ( 9 ) Re / = Th (15 ± 7) 10 Long-distance χpt Pallante-Pich-Scimemi Cirigliano-Ecker-Neufeld-Pich 2017 update Gisbert-Pich,

34 Recent K (ππ) I Lattice Results I = 1/2 Rule ω Re A2 1 Re A 22 0 Large phase shift ( ) δ0 δ2 = 47.5 ± 0.9 Anomaly? New-physics? (uras et al, Kitahara et al, Endo et al, Cirigliano et al ) emp ω Im A0 Im A2 3 Re( ε K / ε K ) SM = ( 1 Ωeff ) ( 1 ) 0 2 ε K Re A0 Re A Ω 2 (1/2) (3/2) { 6 eff.48 8 } Ω eff = ± Cirigliano-Ecker-Neufeld-Pich (2003) 34

35 Effective Field Theory: Long & Short distance dynamics Large logarithmic corrections OPE: α µ µ k n s( ) log ( MW ) χpt: log( µ m π ) Exp SM Gisbert-Pich, arxiv: ( ) Re( ε / ε ) = 15 ± 2 ± 2 ± 2Ω ± 6 10 K K SM µ m N ( ) = 15 ± 7 10 s 4 eff 1/ c 4 L 5 Lattice Large uncertainty, but no anomaly! 35

36 T abar ( l + X, l X) ( ) Flavour 0 0 and CP J/ ψk, J/ ψk tags + L Quantum Entanglement (añuls-ernabeu-martínez-villanueva) S e + e ϒ(4S) ( 1 (t 1 ) f 1, 2 (t 2 ) f 2 ) (f 1, f 2 ) ; t 2 > t S S = 1.37 ± 0.14 ± S S = 1.17 ± 0.18 ± T established at 14 σ 36

37 37

38 38