0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

51 просмотров33 страницыTezpur University, Batch :2014-2016 :-)

May 28, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

Tezpur University, Batch :2014-2016 :-)

© All Rights Reserved

0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

51 просмотров33 страницыTezpur University, Batch :2014-2016 :-)

© All Rights Reserved

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 33

Tezpur University

A Final Semester project presented for the degree of Master of Science

Connecting Neutrino Mass and Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter in Inverse and Type II Seesaw

Submitted by Mallika P. Shivam

PHY14002

Supervised by Dr. Mrinal Kumar Das Department of Physics

May 20, 2016

Department of Physics

Tezpur University

Certificate

This is to certify that the project work "Connecting Neutrino Mass and Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter in Inverse and Type II Seesaw" is a bonaﬁde record of work done by Mallika P Shivam, Roll: PHY14002 under my guidance, submitted to the Department of Physics, Tezpur University, in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements for the award of the degree in Master of Science programme in Physics.

Date :-

Place :-

(Dr. Mrinal Kumar Das) Associate Professor Dept. of Physics Tezpur University

2

Acknowledgement

At the very onset, I would like to express my gratitude and thanks to Dr. Mrinal Kumar Das, Associate Professor, Department of Physics, Tezpur University for his supervision, encouragement and guidance throughout the semester and also for his support in completing the project. I would also like to thank my institution, my co-guide Ananya Mukherjee and Happy Borgohain for their help in every step and last but not the least; I thank my project partners, Pragyan Phukan and Papori Seal for their support and enthusiasm.

Date :-

Place :-

(Mallika Priyadarshini Shivam)

3

Abstract

We present a TeV scale Seesaw Model for exploring the sterile neutrino dark matter and neutrino phenomenology in the light of latest neutrino data. Using a special kind of Dirac neutrino mass matrix and Majorana neutrino mass matrix, we ﬁxed the sterile neutrino mass matrix in Tribimaximal form (TBM). We then use the Type II seesaw as a perturbation to generate non- vanishing reactor mixing angle θ _{1}_{3} without much disturbing the other neutrino oscillation parameters. Then we have studied the variation of neutrino parameters with Type II perturbation strength for diﬀerent values of sterile neutrino Yukawa coupling.

4

Contents

1 Introduction To Neutrino And Sterile Neutrino |
8 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

1.1 Introduction |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
8 |
|||

1.2 A Brief History of Neutrino . |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
8 |
||||||||||||

1.3 Current Status of Neutrino |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
10 |
|||||||||||

1.4 Neutrino Oscillation |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
11 |
|||||||

1.5 Neutrino Mass |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
13 |
||||

1.5.1 Seesaw Mechanism(Type I, Type II And Inverse) |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
13 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||

1.6 |
Sterile Neutrino and Dark Matter |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
16 |
||||||||||||||

2 Methodology |
17 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

3 Results, Analysis and Conclusion |
21 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

3.1 Results and Analysis . |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
21 |
||||||||

3.2 Conclusion |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
31 |
||

4 Reference |
32 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

5 |

List of Figures

3.1 Type II perturbation versus sin ^{2} θ _{1}_{3}

3.2 Type II perturbation versus sin ^{2} θ _{1}_{3}

.

.

3.3 Variation |
of |
sin |
with |
sin |
. |
. |

3.4 Variation |
of |
sin |
with |
sin |
. |
. |

3.5 Variation |
of |
sin |
with |
sin |
. |
. |

3.6 Variation |
of |
sin |
with |
sin |
. |
. |

3.7

3.8

3.9

3.10

Variation of ∆m _{2}_{3} ^{2} with sin ^{2} θ _{1}_{3} Variation of ∆m _{3}_{1} ^{2} with sin ^{2} θ _{1}_{3} Variation of ∆m _{2}_{1} ^{2} with sin ^{2} θ _{1}_{3}

sin ^{2} θ _{1}_{3}

Variation of ∆m _{2}_{1}

^{2}

with

.

.

.

6

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
26 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
26 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
27 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
27 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
28 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
28 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
29 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
29 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
30 |

. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
30 |

List of Tables

3.1 Neutrino Oscillation Data for Normal Hierarchy . |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
22 |
||||||||||||||

3.2 Neutrino Oscillation Data for Inverted Hierarchy |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
22 |
||||||||||||||

3.3 Value of x,y,z for t=0.3 |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
23 |

3.4 Value of x,y,z for normal hierarchy |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
24 |
||||||||

3.5 value of x,y,z for inverted hierarchy |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
24 |
|||||||

3.6 Summary of Results obtained from graphs |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
. |
31 |

7

Chapter 1

Introduction To Neutrino And Sterile Neutrino

1.1. Introduction

A neutrino is a lepton (an elementary particle with half-integer spin) that interacts only via the weak subatomic force and by gravity thereby making it very diﬃcult to detect. The mass of the neutrino is tiny compared to other subatomic particles.

Neutrinos are the only identiﬁed candidate for dark matter , speciﬁcally warm dark matter. Neutrinos come in three ﬂavors: electron neutrinos (ν _{e} ), muon neutrinos (ν _{µ} ), and tau neutrinos (ν _{Γ} ). Each ﬂavor is also associated with an antiparticle, called anti neutrino , which also has no electric charge and half-integer spin. They are the least understood and the most elusive elementary particle known to exist. Not only it passes easily through matter undetected and unimpeded but also changes its ﬂavor on the way. Contrary to the most successful theory of Particle Physics .ie. Standard Model, later convincing evidence that neutrinos have oscillation among its ﬂavor and mass eigen states was repeatedly reported.Their number far exceeds the count of all the atoms of the entire universe. Although they hardly interact at all, they helped forge the elements of the early universe, they tell us how the sun shines and they may even cause the titanic explosion of a dying star or may be the reason behind the mysterious dark matter or why we live in a universe ﬁlled with matter.

1.2. A Brief History of Neutrino

• 1931 - A hypothetical particle is predicted by the theorist Wolfgang Pauli. Pauli based his prediction on the fact that energy and momentum did not appear to be conserved in certain radioactive decays. Pauli suggested that this missing energy might be carried oﬀ, unseen, by a neutral particle which was escaping detection.

• 1934 - Enrico Fermi develops a comprehensive theory of radioactive decays, including Pauli’s hypothetical particle, which Fermi coins the neutrino (Italian: "little neutral one"). With inclusion of the neutrino, Fermi’s theory accurately explains many

8

experimentally observed results.

• 1959 - Discovery of a particle ﬁtting the expected characteristics of the neutrino is announced by Clyde Cowan and Fred Reines. This neutrino is later determined to be the partner of the electron.

• 1962 - Experiments at Brookhaven National Laboratory and CERN, the European Laboratory for Nuclear Physics make a surprising discovery: neutrinos produced in association with muons do not behave the same as those produced in association with electrons. They have, in fact, discovered a second type of neutrino (the muon neutrino).

• 1968 - The ﬁrst experiment to detect (electron) neutrinos produced by the Sun’s burning (using a liquid Chlorine target deep underground) reports that less than half the expected neutrinos are observed. This is the origin of the long-standing "solar neutrino problem." The possibility that the missing electron neutrinos may have transformed into another type (undetectable to this experiment) is soon suggested, but unreliability of the solar model on which the expected neutrino rates are based is initially considered a more likely explanation

• 1978 - The tau particle is discovered at SLAC, the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. It is soon recognized to be a heavier version of the electron and muon, and its decay exhibits the same apparent imbalance of energy and momentum that led Pauli to predict the existence of the neutrino in 1931. The existence of a third neutrino associated with the tau is hence inferred, although this neutrino has yet to be directly observed.

• 1985 - The IMB experiment, a large water detector searching for proton decay but which also detects neutrinos, notices that fewer muon-neutrino interactions than expected are observed. The anomaly is at ﬁrst believed to be an artifact of detector ineﬃciencies.

• 1985 - A Russian team reports measurement, for the ﬁrst time, of a non-zero neutrino mass. The mass is extremely small (10,000 times less than the mass of the electron), but subsequent attempts to independently reproduce the measurement do not succeed.

• 1988 - Kamiokande, another water detector looking for proton decay , able to distin- guish muon neutrino interactions from those of electron neutrino, reports that they observe only about 60% of the expected number of muon-neutrino interactions.

• 1989 - Experiments at CERN’s Large Electron-Positron (LEP) accelerator determine that no additional neutrinos beyond the three already known can exist.

• 1989 - Kamiokande becomes the second experiment to detect neutrinos from the Sun, and conﬁrms the long-standing anomaly by ﬁnding only about 1/3 the expected rate.

• 1994 - Kamiokande ﬁnds a deﬁcit of high-energy muon-neutrino interactions. Muon- neutrinos travelling the greatest distances from the point of production to the detector exhibit the greatest depletion.

• 1994 - The Kamiokande and IMB groups collaborate to test the ability of water detec- tors to distinguish muon- and electron-neutrino interactions, using a test beam at the

9

KEK accelerator laboratory. The results conﬁrm the validity of earlier measurements. The two groups will go on to form the nucleus of the Super-Kamiokande project.

• |
1996 - The Super-Kamiokande detector begins operation. |

• |
1997 - The Soudan-II experiment becomes the ﬁrst iron detector to observe the disappearance of muon neutrinos. The rate of disappearance agrees with that observed by Kamiokande and IMB. |

• |
1997 - Super-Kamiokande reports a deﬁcit of cosmic-ray muon neutrinos and solar electron neutrinos, at rates agreeing with measurements by earlier experiments. |

• |
1998 - The Super-Kamiokande collaboration announces evidence of non-zero neutrino mass at the Neutrino ’98 conference. |

• |
2000- The DONUT Collaboration working at Fermilab announces observation of tau particles produced by tau neutrinos, making the ﬁrst direct observation of the tau neutrino. |

• |
2000 -SuperK announces that the oscillating partner to the muon neutrino is not a sterile neutrino, but the tau neutrino. |

• |
2001 and 2002– SNO announces observation of neutral currents from solar neutrinos, along with charged currents and elastic scatters, providing convincing evidence that neutrino oscillations are the cause of the solar neutrino problem. |

• |
2002– Masatoshi Koshiba and Raymond Davis win Nobel Prize for measuring solar neutrinos(as well as supernova neutrinos). |

• |
2002– KamLAND begins operations in January and in November announces detection of a deﬁcit of electron anti-neutrinos from reactors at a mean distance of 175 km in Japan. The results combined with all the earlier solar neutrino results establish the correct parameters for the solar neutrino deﬁcit. |

• |
2004– SuperKamiokande and KamLAND present evidence for neutrino disappear- ance and reappearance, eliminating non-oscillations models. |

• |
2005– KamLAND announces ﬁrst detection of neutrino ﬂux from the earth and makes ﬁrst measurements of radiogenic heat from earth. |

1.3. |
Current Status of Neutrino |

In the last two decades experiments have established the existence of neutrino oscillations and most of the related parameters have by now been measured with reasonable accuracy. At present neutrino physics is a most vital domain of particle physics and cosmology. The Nobel Prize in Physics 2015 was awarded jointly to Takaaki Kajita and Arthur B. McDonald "for the discovery of neutrino oscillations, which shows that neutrinos have mass". This discovery has changed our understanding of the innermost workings of matter and showed that the Standard Model cannot be the complete theory of the fundamental constituents of the universe. Now the experiments continue and intense activity is underway worldwide in order to capture neutrinos and examine their properties. Current experimental constraints on the neutrino mass spectrum and the mixing parameters, including the recent observation

10

of non- zero mixing angle θ _{1}_{3} by reactor neutrino disappearance experiments has initiated the precision era of lepton ﬂavor physics. Therefore it is timely to identify strategies to determine the remaining parameters of the three active neutrinos, such as the neutrino mass hierarchy and hints for one or more sterile neutrinos and their phenomenology need to be assessed. In the astrophysics domain, the IceCube discovery of neutrino events at the highest neutrino energies yet measured (∼PeV) may have initiated neutrino astronomy as a new discipline for research.

1.4. Neutrino Oscillation

Neutrinos are created or detected with a well- deﬁned ﬂavor( electron or muon or tau).However in a phenomenon called as neutrino Flavour Oscillation,neutrinos are able to oscillate be- tween the three available ﬂavours while they propagate through space. Speciﬁcally, this occurs because the neutrino ﬂavor eigen states are not the same as the neutrino mass eigen states. This allows for the neutrino that was produced as an electron neutrino at a given location to have a calculable probability to be detected as either a muon or tau neutrino after it has travelled to diﬀerent location. This quantum mechanical eﬀect was ﬁrst hinted by the discrepancy between the number of electron neutrinos detected from the sun core failing to match the expected numbers called as the Solar Neutrino Problem. In the Standard Model the existence of ﬂavor oscillations implies the nonzero diﬀerences between the neutrino masses because the amount of mixing between neutrino ﬂavours at a given time depends on the diﬀerences in their squared –masses. Neutrino Oscillation is a quantum mechanical phenomenon predicted by Bruno Pontecorvo whereby a neutrino created with a speciﬁc ﬂavor can later be measured with a diﬀererent ﬂavor. The probability of measuring a particular ﬂavor for a neutrino varies periodically as it propagates .Neutrino Oscillation is of theoretical importance since observation of the phenomenon implies that the neutrino has a non zero mass, which is not part of the original

Standard Model of Particle Physics. The ﬂavor eigen states of neutrino is

ν

e

µ

τ

ν

ν

mass eigen states is

ν

ν

ν

1

2

3

_{} . The two states are related by a 3×3 mixing matrix :

And,

ν

e

µ

τ

ν

ν

_{}

^{=} ^{(}^{U} PMNS )

U PMNS =

U

U

U

e1

ν1

τ1

U e2

U ν2

U τ2

ν

ν

ν

1

2

3

_{}

U e3

U ν3

U τ3

_{}

and the

_{}

(1.1)

(1.2)

11

Taking two generations,

ν µ =

ν

e

cosθ

−sinθ

cosθ ν

sinθ

1

_{ν} 2

(1.3)

At t=0, we have an electron neutrino and muon neutrino which are both mixtures of ν _{1} and ν _{2} .

ν _{e} (t = 0) = cosθν _{1} + sinθ

ν _{2}

ν _{µ} (t = 0) = cosθν _{2} − sinθ ν _{1}

At t=t

ν _{e} _{(}_{t}_{)} = cosθ

ν _{1} e ^{−}^{i}^{E} ^{1} ^{t} + sinθν _{2} e ^{−}^{i}^{E} ^{2} ^{t}

ν _{µ} _{(}_{t}_{)} = cosθ ν _{2} e ^{−}^{i}^{E} ^{2} ^{t} − sinθν _{1} e ^{−}^{i}^{E} ^{1} ^{t}

Taking approximations

E _{1} = _{} m ^{2}

1

+ p ^{2}

1

p + m ^{2} /2p,

1

E _{2} = m ^{2}

_{2} + p ^{2}

_{2} p + m _{2}

^{2} /2p

(1.4)

(1.5)

(1.6)

(1.7)

(1.8)

(1.9)

Where we consider the momentum of the neutrino to be large enough so that p _{1} = p _{2} =p

Now, from the above equations it can be shown that:

ν _{e} _{(}_{t}_{)} = ν _{e} _{(}_{0}_{)} [cos ^{2} θν _{1} e ^{−}^{i}^{E} ^{1} ^{t}

+ sin ^{2} θν _{2} e ^{−}^{i}^{E} ^{2} ^{t} ] + ν _{µ} _{(}_{0}_{)} [e ^{−}^{i}^{E} ^{1} ^{t} +e ^{−}^{i}^{E} ^{2} ^{t} ]cosθsinθ (1.10)

Therefore,the probability of having ν _{e} → ν _{µ} oscillation in time t is

And,

Where,

P(ν _{e} →

ν _{µ} ) = [ sin2θ

sin

( ^{E} ^{1} 2h ^{−} ^{E} ^{2} t)] ^{2}

P( ν _{µ} →

E _{2} − E _{1} ≈

ν _{µ} ) = 1 - P( ν _{e} →

ν _{µ} )

m _{2} ^{2} − m ^{2}

1

2p

c ^{3} ≈

m _{2} ^{2} − m ^{2}

1

2E

c ^{4}

(1.11)

(1.12)

Thus neutrino oscillation implies that there must be neutrino masses because the probability of oscillation depends on the diﬀerence of their squared masses.

12

1.5. Neutrino Mass

In the standard model , neutrinos have exactly zero mass. This is a consequence of the standard model containing only left handed neutrinos .With no suitable right handed partner, it is impossible to add a renormalizable mass term to the standard model. Measurments indicated that neutrinos spontaneously change ﬂavours implying neutrinos do have a mass.

1.5.1. Seesaw Mechanism(Type I, Type II And Inverse)

Type I Seesaw

One approach to add masses to the neutrinos, the so called Seesaw Mechanism is to add right-handed neutrinos and have these couple to left handed neutrinos with a Dirac mass term. Since neutrinos have non zero electric charge, Majorana terms are also possible and the Majorana mass of the RH neutrino is much larger than SM symmetry breaking scale. Once we consider Right Handed neutrinos by hand, we have a number of neutrino mass terms –

1. Dirac Mass Term—

L _{m}_{a}_{s}_{s} = m _{D} ν¯ _{R} ν _{L} + h.c = ^{1} _{2} _{(}_{m} _{D} ν¯ _{R} ν _{L} _{+} m _{D} ν ν¯ ) + h.c

D

C

R

C

L

2.Majorana Mass term—

L

L

mass ^{=}

L

^{R}

mass ^{=}

1

C

m L ν

ν L + h.c

L

2

1

C

m R ν

ν R + h.c

R

2

(1.13)

(1.14)

(1.15)

Now we write the total mass lagrangian in the form of a mass matrix

L = L

D

mass ^{+} ^{L} mass ^{+} ^{L} ^{R}

L

mass ^{=}

C

^{ν} L

ν R

0

m ^{T} _{D}

m _{D}

m _{R}

ν

L

C

R

ν

After diagonalizing the matrix the following mass eigen states are obtained

m _{2}

≈ m _{R} ≈ 10 ^{1}^{4} GeV.

m _{1} ≈

2

m D

m R

m _{D} m

−1

R

_{m} _{T} D _{=} 10 ^{2} × 10 ^{2}

10

^{1}^{4}

≈ 0.1 eV

(1.16)

13

Thus we see that light neutrinos of sub ev scale are naturally generated due to the large scale suppression of the other heavy scale RH Majorana neutrino, hence this is named as Seesaw Mechanism.

Type II Seesaw

Several BSM framewoks have been proposed to explain the tiny neutrino mass and the pattern of neutrino mixing. Tiny neutrino mass can be explained by seesaw mechanisms which broadly fall into three classes: Type I , Type II and Inverse ,whereas the pattern of neutrino mixing can be understood by incorporating ﬂavor symmetries. The SM is extended by three right handed singlet neutrinos and one higgs triplet such that both Type I and Type II Seesaw can contribute to neutrino mass. Type I seesaw is assumed to give rise to a symmetric neutrino mass matrix with θ _{1}_{3} = 0 whereas Type II Seesaw acts as a perturbation which breaks the symmetry resulting in non zero θ _{1}_{3} .Type I seesaw is the simplest possible realization, and is implemented by the inclusion of three additional right handed neutrinos (ν _{R} , i=1,2,3 ) as SU(2) _{L} singlets with zero U(1) _{Y} charges. On the other hand ,in Type II Seesaw , the Standard Model is extended by the inclusion of an additional SU(2) _{L} ∆ triplet scalar ﬁeld having U(1) _{Y} charge twice that of lepton doublets with its 2×2 matrix representation as

i

∆ =

∆

^{+}

^{√} 2

_{∆} ++

∆ ^{0} − ^{∆} ^{+}

^{√}

2

Thus the gauge invariant lagrangian for Type I and Type II seesaw mechanism is given below

(1.17)

With Vacuum expectation value of the SM Higgs ^{} φ ^{0} ^{} = √ _{2} , the trilinear mass term gener-

ates an induced VEV for the Higgs triplet as ^{} ∆ ^{0} ^{} = mass matrix after electroweak symmetry breaking—

L = _{(}_{D} _{µ} φ) ^{+} _{(}_{D} ^{µ} φ) +

Tr(D _{µ} ∆) ^{+} _{(}_{D} ^{µ} ∆) − L ^{l}^{e}^{p}^{t}

Y

ν

ν ∆

^{√} 2

− V(φ, ∆)

, thus resulting in 6×6 neutrino

M _{ν} =

m LL

T

LR

m

M RR

m LR

where, m _{L}_{R} = the Dirac Neutrino mass

nos and M _{R}_{R} is the bare mass term for the heavy sterile majorana neutrinos. With the mass hierarchy M _{R}_{R} m _{L}_{R} m _{L}_{L} , the seesaw formula for light neutrino mass is given by

, m _{L}_{L} = Majorana mass for the light active neutri-

m _{ν} = m _{L}_{L} =

m

^{I}

LL ^{+} ^{m} ^{I}^{I}

LL

where, the formula for Type I Seesaw is given by

m

^{I}

_{L}_{L} = −m _{L}_{R} M RR ^{m} LR

−1

T

14

Whereas the Type II Seesaw mechanism contribution to light neutrino mass is given by

_{m}

II

_{L}_{L} = f _{ν}

ν _{∆}

ν _{∆} ≡ ^{} ∆ ^{0} ^{} = ^{µ} ^{φ}^{∆} ^{ν} ^{2}

2

M

∆

where,

In the low scale Type II mechanism operative at TeV scale, one can consider a very small value of trilinear mass parameter to be µ _{φ}_{∆} 10 ^{−}^{8} GeV.

The tiny trilinear mass

µ _{φ}_{∆} parameter controls the neutrino overall mass scale.

Inverse Seesaw Model

In spite of explaining the smallness of neutrino mass, such Type 1 Seesaw mechanisms are not phenomenologically testable because the new Physics engendered by them will manifest at 10 ^{1}^{4} GeV scale which is completely out of the range of the current accelerator experiment. So recently a new kind of seesaw was proposed ie. Inverse Seesaw Mechanism (ISS) where small neutrino masses arise as a result of new Physics at TeV scale which may be probed at LHC experiment. The implementation of ISS mechanism requires the addition of three right handed neutrinos N _{R} and the three extra SM gauge singlet neutral fermions S to the three active neutrinos ϑ _{L} . After SSB the overall neutrino mass terms turn out to be

L mass = ^{1}

_{2} ν L

C

N

R

S ^{C} ^{}

0

m ^{T} _{D}

0

m _{D}

0

T

M

RS

0

M _{R}_{S}

^{µ}

ν

C

L

N R

S

_{}

(1.18)

Where µ is the mass of the neutrino singlet, also neutrino singlet has no Yukawa coupling to left handed neutrino but couple to N _{R} . A diagonalisation of the above 9×9 matrix leads to the eﬀective light neutrino mass matrix i.e.

(1.19)

Or

m _{ν} = m ^{T} _{D} (M

T

_{R}_{S} ) ^{−}^{1} µ(M _{R}_{S} ) ^{−}^{1} m ^{T} _{D}

eV ^{=} 100 GeV 2 1 keV 10 T _{e}_{V} ^{−}^{2}

m

ν

0.1

m

D

µ

M

RS

(1.20)

Thus we see that Standard neutrinos with mass at sub eV scale are obtained for m _{D} at electroweak scale and M _{R}_{S} at TeV scale. The core of the ISS is that the smallness of the neutrino masses are guaranteed by assuming that µ scale is small and in order to bring the RH neutrinos at TeV scale, it has to be at KeV scale. ISS is also called double seesaw because as seen from the above equation m _{D} is doubly suppressed by M _{R}_{S} .

15

1.6. Sterile Neutrino and Dark Matter

Mass eigen states that are dominantly linear combinations of LH neutrinos are called Active Neutrinos and those are dominated by right handed neutrino components are called STERILE neutrinos. Sterile neutrinos are hypothetical particles that interact only via gravity and do not interact via any of the of the Standard Model. The term sterile neutrino is used to distinguish them from the known active neutrinos in the Standard Model, which are charged under the weak interaction.This term usually refers to neutrinos with right-handed chirality which may be added to the Standard Model. The existence of right-handed neutrinos is theoretically well-motivated, as all other known fermions have been observed with left and right chirality, and they can explain the observed active neutrino masses in a natural way. The mass of the right-handed neutrinos themselves is unknown and could have any value between 10 ^{1}^{5} GeV and less than one eV. The number of sterile neutrino types is unknown. The search for sterile neutrinos is an active area of particle physics. If they exist and their mass is smaller than the energies of particles in the experiment, they can be produced in the laboratory, either by mixing between active and sterile neutrinos or in high energy particle collisions. If they are heavier, the only directly observable consequence of their existence would be the observed active neutrino masses. They may, however, be responsible for a number of unexplained phenomena in physical cosmology and astrophysics, including dark matter, baryogenesis or dark radiation. Dark matter can be divided into cold, warm and hot categories. If the dark matter is composed of abundant light particles which remain relativistic until shortly before recombination, then it may be termed "hot". The best candidate for hot dark matter is a neutrino.But HDM cannot explain how individual galaxies formed from the big bang, so active neutrinos are generally not well motivated Dark Matter candidates. Whereas Sterile Neutrinos with masses around the KeV can be viable warm dark matter candidates(WDM).They can potentially solve, even if providing only a fraction of the total dark matter relic density.In addition a sterile neutrino at this scale could in general decay into an ordinary neutrino and a photon which could be detected in cosmic rays. This last possibility has recently triggered an interest in view of the indication ( yet to be conﬁrmed) of an unidentiﬁed photon line in galaxy cluster at an energy 3.5 KeV. Sterile Neutrino can mix with active neutrinos and in that case, oscillations of the active neutrinos into the sterile neutrinos in the early universe can populate the number density of sterile neutrino and by this mechanism, it is possible to explain observed relic density of DM. But the same mechanism would make sterile neutrinos decay into photon and a neutrino. Such a monochromatic photon line can potentially be observed. Favoured mass range of sterile neutrino is 1- 50 KeV, thus the photon line is predicted to fall into x-ray domain. Thus a sterile neutrino with a mass of 7 KeV could be a viable DM candidate for explaining the recent detection of a 3.5 KeV x-ray emission line of the galaxy cluster.

16

Chapter 2

Methodology

The “ (2,3) ISS “ Framework

The (2,3) ISS Realisation corresponds to an extension of the SM by two Right Handed neutrinos and three sterile states and this realization can provide a WDM candidate ( for a mass of the sterile state in the KeV range). The lagrangian representing the neutrino mass is

C

R

L _{m} = dν¯ _{L} ν _{R} + mν¯

C

R

ν _{R} + nν¯

¯

S + µ S S

Here the neutrino mass matrix M has the form:

M =

0

d ^{T}

0

d

m

n ^{T}

0

n

µ

_{}

(2.1)

The dirac mass matrix d arises from the Yukawa couplings to the SM Higgs boson

Y αi

¯

l

α

L

˜

Hν _{R} + h.c

i

where,

(l

α

L

_{)}

_{=} ^{} ν ^{α} _{L} e

α

L

Which gives after electroweak symmetry breaking d αi =

^{}

ν ^{√} _{2} Y αi

(2.2)

(2.3)

The mass m and µ represent Majorana mass terms for , respectively , right handed and sterile fermions. Finally the matrix n represents lepton number conserving interactions between right handed and new sterile fermions. The physical neutrino states are obtained upon diagonal- ization of the mass matrix M and feature the following mass pattern:

• 3 light active states with masses of the form

17

m _{ν} ≈ O(µ)

k ^{2} k 2 _{,}_{k} _{≈} O(d)

1 +

O(n)

(2.4)

• Pairs of heavy Dirac heavy neutrinos with masses O(n) + O (d).

• Light sterile states with masses O(µ)

In order to be phenomenologically viable the matrix M associated to this (2,3) ISS realization must exhibit upon diagonalization three light ≤ O _{(}_{e}_{V}_{)}_{,}_{a}_{c}_{t}_{i}_{v}_{e} eigen states with mass diﬀerences in agreement with oscillation data and a mixing pattern compatible with the experimental determination of the PMNS matrix. As we will see, a good ﬁt is provided by the (2,3) ISS realization ( 2 right handed and 3 additional sterile fermions); also an additional intermediate state with mass m _{4} = m _{s} = O(µ) appears in the mass spectrum. However in order to comply with all constraints from neutrino oscillations and laboratory experiments ,the coupling of this new state must be highly suppressed, thus leading to a dominantly sterile state named as the Sterile Neutrino

with a mass ranging from eV to tens of KeV. As a consequence of its weak interactions the lifetime of the sterile neutrino largely exceeds the lifetime of the Universe and it thus play a relevant role in Dark Matter. Since it is a (2,3) Realisation, we proceed to ﬁnd the texture of the individual matrices in the mass matrix M as follows:–

• d ( 3×2 matrix) =

• µ ( 3×3 matrix ) =

• n ( 3×2 matrix) =

ν R1Le

ν R1Lµ

ν R1Lτ

S

S

S

11

21

31

ν R1S1

ν R1S2

ν R1S3

ν R2Le

ν R2Lµ

ν R2Lτ

S 12

S 22

S 32

S 13

S 23

S 33

ν R2S1

ν R2S2

ν R2S3

Due to discrete ﬂavour symmetry like Z _{2} , the coupling term of the Right Handed fermions does not come in the ﬁnal expresssion and so – The mass matrix M is now

0

d ^{T}

0

d

0

0

n

n ^{T}

µ

This is a 8×8 leptonic mass matrix and considering the hierarchy µ d n, the block diagonalisation of this matrix provides the following eﬀective neutrino mass matrix for the standard neutrinos.

18

m _{ν} = dn ^{−}^{1} µ ^{} n ^{T} ^{} ^{−}^{1} d ^{T}

(2.5)

We carry out the Block Diagonalisation as follows

where

M =

0

^{=} R ^{T}

n

0

d ^{T}

0

d

0

n ^{T}

0

µ

R= ^{} d

0

n ^{T}

P=

0 ^{}

n

µ

R

_{P}

(2.6)

If λ is the eﬀective neutrino mass matrix ( lightest neutrino mass eigen value) representing

the the three active states, then

where

= − ^{} d

0 ^{}

P ^{−}^{1} =

λ ^{2} - Pλ – RR ^{T} = 0 Or λ = - RP ^{−}^{1} R ^{T} m _{ν} = - RP ^{−}^{1} R ^{T}

−nn ^{T}

1

−nn ^{T}

1

µ

−n

µ

−n

−n ^{T}

0

−n ^{T}

0

d _{T}

0

So the value of the eﬀective neutrino matrix comes out to be m _{ν} = −RP ^{−}^{1} R ^{T}

We can write it also as,

= −nn ^{T}

_{−} ^{} d

0 ^{}

^{1}

µ

−n

−n ^{T}

0

= −nn ^{T}

_{−} ^{} d

0 ^{}

^{1}

µd ^{T}

−nd

T

_{=}

(dµd ^{T} )

nn ^{T}

= dn ^{−}^{1} µ ^{} n ^{T} ^{} ^{−}^{1} d ^{T}

m _{ν} = m _{d} M ^{−}^{1} µ ^{} M ^{T} ^{} ^{−}^{1} m

T

d

d _{T}

0

Therefore the resultant mass matrix m _{ν} is a 3× 3 mixing matrix,like the PMNS matrix which is considered as leading order contribution to the neutrino mass.

are both

identity matrix I

The texture of the constituent matrices are taken such that m _{d} M ^{−}^{1} and ^{} M ^{T} ^{} ^{−}^{1} m

T

d

This

can be framed in the following way—

m _{d} M ^{−}^{1} =

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

0 _{} = ^{} M ^{T} ^{} ^{−}^{1} m

1

T

d

We take the µ matrix as a TBM ( Tribimaximal mixing) since it is compatible with all veriﬁed neutrino oscillation experiments until recently and may be used as a zeroth order

19

approximation to more general forms of PMNS matrix. So the ﬁnal matrix m _{ν} being the product of two identity matrices and a TBM matrix; is also a TBM matrix. Therefore we get light neutrino mass matrix of TBM Type, namely

m _{ν} = t

x

y

y

y x + z y − z

y y − z x + z

_{} ; where t is the Yukawa coupling.

Next we proceed with the calculations for studying the neutrino phenomenology relating to known mixing angles and squared mass diﬀerences of the active neutrinos. If we can somehow restrict the eigenmass of the sterile neutrino µ to 0.1 KeV or less, then it can be considered a potential dark matter candidate; as discussed by authors Asmaa Abada [5]. This is the prime objective of the proposed studies.The well known neutrino mixing matrix TBM predict the mixing angle angle θ _{1}_{3} = 0.The non zero and relatively large mixing angle have already been reported by MINOS, Double Chooz„ Daya Bay, and RENO collaborations. In order to accommodate non zero mixing angle θ _{1}_{3} , we modify the Tribimaximal mixing matrix (TBM) by introducing a simple perturbation matrix to perturb TBM matrix. Then we determine the neutrino mass spectrum in both normal and inverted hierarchy from the modiﬁed TBM matrix, keeping the sterile neutrino mass µ of the order of 0.1 KeV or less; which can be achieved by varying the Yukawa coupling in order of 0.1. By considering the diﬀerent Yukawa coupling of sterile neutrino, we have studied the neutrino phenomenology.

20

Chapter 3

Results, Analysis and Conclusion

3.1. Results and Analysis

We are actually trying to establish a connection between neutrino phenomenology and dark matter. The µ matrix in the above light neutrino mass matrix m _{ν} representing sterile fermion will be a viable Dark Matter candidate if we can show that even after taking the sterile fermion into account we can reproduce the known neutrino parameters. We start with the TBM form of the mass matrix

m _{ν} = t

x

y

y

y x + z y − z

y y − z x + z

_{} ; where t is the Yukawa coupling

The following rigorous calculations are done using the Mathematica Software.

• Finding the eigensystem of the above matrix—

t _{(}_{x} − y) {−2, 1, 1}

t _{(}_{x} + 2y) {1, 1, 1}

• The mass eigen values are

m _{1} =t(x-y) m _{2} =t(x+2y) m _{3} =t(x-y+2z)

t _{(}_{x} − y + 2z) {0, −1, 1}

We take the Yukawa coupling value from 0.1 to 0.5 and run the following calculations separately for each case

• The Yukawa coupling actually represents the mass of the sterile fermion and so we are analyzing neutrino spectrum by varying the mass of µ.

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.