Electroweak Symmetry Breaking

Similar documents
Where are we heading?

Little Higgs Models Theory & Phenomenology

Scenarios with Composite Higgs Bosons

Where are we heading? Nathan Seiberg IAS 2016

T -Parity in Little Higgs Models a

Dynamical Electroweak Symmetry Breaking from Extra Dimensions

Where are we heading? Nathan Seiberg IAS 2014

CalcHEP2.5: new facilities and future prospects

SUSY Breaking, Composite Higgs and Hidden Gravity

Composite Higgs Overview

Mysteries of the Standard Model

The Standard Model Part. II

Composite Higgs, Quarks and Leptons, a contemporary view

Outlook Post-Higgs. Fermilab. UCLA Higgs Workshop March 22, 2013

Possible compositeness of the 125 GeV Higgs boson

Lecture 03. The Standard Model of Particle Physics. Part III Extensions of the Standard Model

Beyond Standard Models Higgsless Models. Zahra Sheikhbahaee

The mass of the Higgs boson

Mass. Chris Quigg Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

The Standard Model and Beyond

Composite gluino at the LHC

Electroweak Symmetry Breaking via Strong Dynamics in the Precision Higgs Era: Extra Dimension and Composite Higgs.

STANDARD MODEL and BEYOND: SUCCESSES and FAILURES of QFT. (Two lectures)

The Super-little Higgs

What Shall We Learn from h^3 Measurement. Maxim Perelstein, Cornell Higgs Couplings Workshop, SLAC November 12, 2016

Lecture 4 - Beyond the Standard Model (SUSY)

Electroweak Symmetry Breaking

Electroweak and Higgs Physics

Heavy quarks within electroweak multiplet

XIV Frascati Spring School Bruno Touschek

Naturalness & Compositeness Riccardo Rattazzi, EPFL

Composite Higgs/ Extra Dimensions

Precision (B)SM Higgs future colliders

Proton Decay and Flavor Violating Thresholds in the SO(10) Models

Beyond the Standard Model

Buried Higgs Csaba Csáki (Cornell) with Brando Bellazzini (Cornell) Adam Falkowski (Rutgers) Andi Weiler (CERN)

New Models. Savas Dimopoulos. with. Nima Arkani-Hamed

Particle Physics Today, Tomorrow and Beyond. John Ellis

Naturalizing Supersymmetry with the Relaxion

Curriculum Vitae Markus Amadeus Luty

New Phenomenology of Littlest Higgs Model with T-parity

How to tell apart non-standard EWSB mechanisms. Veronica Sanz CERN and YORK Moriond 2012

Lattice calculations for Physics Beyond the Standard Model

Kiwoon Choi (KAIST) 3 rd GCOE Symposium Feb (Tohoku Univ.)

Theory of the ElectroWeak Interactions

The Standard Model of particle physics and beyond

Physics at TeV Energy Scale

solving the hierarchy problem Joseph Lykken Fermilab/U. Chicago

arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 19 Nov 2004

Composite Higgs models with the works

The Standard Model of Electroweak Physics. Christopher T. Hill Head of Theoretical Physics Fermilab

DARK MATTER CANDIDATES IN COMPOSITE HIGGS MODELS

Standard Model & Beyond

PHYSICS BEYOND SM AND LHC. (Corfu 2010)

New Solutions to the Hierarchy Problem

Sreerup Raychaudhuri TIFR

Naturalness Under Stress: SUSY after 5 fb 1

Viability of strongly coupled scenarios with a light Higgs like boson

FLAVOUR IN WARPED EXTRA DIMENSIONS

Golden SUSY, Boiling Plasma, and Big Colliders. M. Perelstein, Cornell University IPMU LHC Workshop talk, 12/18/07

Twin Higgs Theories. Z. Chacko, University of Arizona. H.S Goh & R. Harnik; Y. Nomura, M. Papucci & G. Perez

Higgs Signals and Implications for MSSM

Gauge-Higgs Unification on Flat Space Revised

Origin of Mass of the Higgs Boson

Introduction to the Standard Model of particle physics

Beyond the MSSM (BMSSM)

Perspectives Flavor Physics beyond the Standard Model

S. Su 1 from CPNSH website

Who is afraid of quadratic divergences? (Hierarchy problem) & Why is the Higgs mass 125 GeV? (Stability of Higgs potential)

Technicolored Strong Dynamics. Fermion masses ETC FCNC Walking Isospin Topcolor Other lurking challenges - Conclusions

750GeV diphoton excess and some explanations. Jin Min Yang

Physics 662. Particle Physics Phenomenology. February 21, Physics 662, lecture 13 1

Higgs or Higgsless? From a unitarity viewpoint

Le Modèle Standard et ses extensions

The Dilaton/Radion and the 125 GeV Resonance

The Standard Model. The Standard Model combines the electromagnetic, weak, and strong forces (= interactions).

UV Completions of Composite Higgs Models with Partial Compositeness

Physics at e + e - Linear Colliders. 4. Supersymmetric particles. M. E. Peskin March, 2002

Accidental SUSY at the LHC

A Domino Theory of Flavor

The ILC and its complementarity to the LHC

Fundamental Forces. David Morrissey. Key Concepts, March 15, 2013

Lecture 39, 40 Supplement: Particle physics in the LHC era

Solutions to gauge hierarchy problem. SS 10, Uli Haisch

Lecture 03. The Standard Model of Particle Physics. Part II The Higgs Boson Properties of the SM

Metastability. Michael Dine. In collaboration with J. Feng, J. Mason, and E. Silverstein; current collaboration with N. Seiberg

Boundary Conditions in AdS Life Without a Higgs

Theory Perspective of Top Production: Top Resonances. Tim M.P. Tait

Skyrmions in Composite Higgs Models

Lattice: Field theories beyond QCD

Family Replicated Gauge Group Models

Top quark effects in composite vector pair production at the LHC

Extra Dimensional Signatures at CLIC

Higgs Physics, after July 2012

The Constrained E 6 SSM

E 6 Spectra at the TeV Scale

Dynamical supersymmetry breaking, with Flavor

Astronomy 182: Origin and Evolution of the Universe

Top Seesaw, Custodial Symmetry and the 126 GeV (Composite) Higgs

String Theory in the LHC Era

Transcription:

YITP workshop Electroweak Symmetry Breaking Mar. 11-17, 2011 Ryuicihro Kitano (Tohoku U.) Opening talk at YITP workshop, Mar 11, 2011

Two of the most important questions in particle physics: Who broke SU(2)xU(1)? Who gave masses to fermions? Higgs boson? Techinicolor? Something else?

LHC is running... As theorists, we should know at least * What kind of models are there? * Are they viable models? * What's good about each model? * What's the predictions? Predictability? Not just for our knowledge, I hope serious considerations of those will be helpful to get a new ideas on EWSB. This will tell us what we should really look for or measure at the LHC.

Rule #1: In this workshop, we concentrate on electroweak symmetry breaking and fermion masses. Of course, there are related topics which is essential for EWSB. There will be a session of those topics on the last day of the workshop.

Now Let's go to physics. The minimal model of EWSB [Glashow '61] Just explicitly break SU(2)xU(1) and add fermion masses by hand. The SU(2)xU(1) structure is confirmed experimentally. All the particle predicted are found. Question: What's wrong?

What's wrong? This model can be thought of as a of the Standard Model. limit Predictability is limited with the precision of with and we naively expect contributions to S,T parameters (times ), and also to the SU(2)xU(1) structure. This is too big.

If you don't think this is a problem. There is nothing to discuss. Rule #2: All the models we discuss must be better than the Glashow's model.

The Next to Minimal Models 1. Add a scalar field (the Higgs field) -- The Standard Model [Weinberg '67][Salam '68] This makes the theory be calculable. And the predicted values of S,T parameters are in good agreement with data for a relatively light Higgs boson. Also, fermions can obtain masses through Yukawa interactions. But, the existence of the Higgs field needs some explanation. Especially, we need to consider the consistency of the large Yukawa interaction of the top quark. (the Hierarchy problem) The naive estimation of the cut-off scale is again a few TeV.

2. add massive vector fields the Higgsless model [Casalbuoni, De Curtis, Dominici, Feruglio, Gatto '89] [Csaki, Grojean, Murayama, Pilo, Terning '03] One can make the cut-off scale to a higher value, and S,T parameter can be tuned to be small. [Cacciapaglia, Csaki, Grojean, Terning '04] 3. add interacting fermions -- Technicolor models [Weinberg '76 '79, Suskind '79] Make as in QCD. be responsible for the electroweak symmetry breaking S,T parameter is calculable (in principle), but it seems that the naive estimation (O(1)) is correct in many cases, and moreover, the sign of S seems problematic. Also, one needs some mechanism for fermion masses, especially, for the top quark.

4. add a new interaction -- the top condensation [Miransky, Tanabashi, Yamawaki '89] [Bardeen, Hill, Linder '90] Adding a four-top quark interaction. This is the Nambu-Jona-Lasino model. The top-quark pair condenses, and break electroweak symmetry breaking. Top quark obtains a mass by themselves. Need a full description of the theory to discuss the viability and predictions. 5. Yet unknown scenarios. [...]...

The option 1. (the Standard Model) is data friendly but need more stuff to be a whole story. (maybe) Examples are the supersymmetric standard model, and the little Higgs model [Arkani-hamed, Cohen, Georgi '01]. Probably 2 and 4 are low energy descriptions of 3 (+ mechanism for fermion masses) and all share the problems of S,T parameters and flavor changing processes, i.e., data unfriendly. We should list the viable models of this kind.

Viable? What do we mean by viable? Rule #3: In any discussion, we should check the predictability. We should ignore meaningless calculations.

Review talks: Review 1: EWSB in strongly coupled theories (Tanabashi) Review 2: EWSB in SUSY models (Ibe) Review 3: EWSB in RS model and gauge-higgs unification (Oda) Review 4: Little Higgs models (Kurachi) Let's learn what's good about each model!

Discussion sessions: Session 1: Technicolor (leader: Asano) Session 2: SUSY (leader: Hamaguchi) Session 3: Composite Higgs models (leader: Matsumoto) (RS, LH, GH models etc) Session 4: Related topics (leader: Kanemura) We will reconsider those models/topics carefully and make a brief presentation at the discussion sessions. All the participants should help leaders before the discussion session. For this purpose, please pick up a group you'd like to join. After lunch, we form groups and each group should separately work on making presentations.

Approach (example) * I think in each category, there are different or common problems. e.g., flavor problem, etc.. * I think it's important to 1, identify the problems. We need a reason. 2, discuss the seriousness of the problems. (in regards to the LHC physics. Possible to postpone?) 3, discuss or summarize possible solutions to the problems. 4, discuss (LHC) predictions associated to each solutions. 5, discuss future situations (1.5 years later).