Hiding a Z'

Just five days ago I posted about results on how the Higgs Boson decayed, and suggested extra pairs of vector like quarks to make the photon signal match. Since then a paper by Radovan Dermisek, Sung-Gi Kim, Aditi Raval has come out showing that a Z' hiding very near in mass to the standard models Z (the neutral particle of the weak force), solves the problem of the forward backward asymmetry in bottom quark creation. The Z' is around 92.5 GeV (just 1GeV more missing than the ordinary Z), interacts with right handed button quarks, and vector like heavy down quarks. Such a particles seem to fit all existing measurement, and improve the fit for forward backward asymmetry, they also need a 0.005 coupling to left handed electron to fit data.

I'm liking this because I need the extra pair of quarks if the axial force is going to exist. When a proton reversing its spin, it axial force charge shouldn't reverse, and that means its right handed version at the same mass can't be the ordinary P reversed quark. That P reverse quark must also exist though and have a different mass. The Higgs decay signal and confirmation of the Z' boson, then are very helpful to the idea of an axial force.

LHC Higgs Boson 125 GeV, and not standard model

On December the 13th 2011, the LHC released the first ever figures showing a Higgs Boson. This the particle (or set of particles) which give rise the mass of all the elementary particles in the universe. The signal was only around 3 sigma, after 5 femtobarnes of collisions, and woundn't ordinarily have been reguards has a proof of exists of the particle, except for the fact the physicists where already so sure that a Higgs Boson does exist. But the Higgs Boson they found does look like one from either the standard model or supersymmetry. The branching ratios for the different decays are different from the predicted values. According to the theory, the rate of the Higgs decay to a particular particle should be proportional to the mass of that particle. Instead CMS found

$$ σ(H) x {B(H → bb)} / {σ(B_{sm})} ∼ 0.5 $$
$$ σ(H) x {B(H → ττ)} / {σ(B_{sm})} ∼ 1 $$
$$ σ(H) x {B(H → γγ)} / {σ(B_{sm})} ∼ 1.7 $$
$$ σ(H) x {B(H → WW)} / {σ(B_{sm})} ∼ 0.6 $$
$$ σ(H) x {B(H → ZZ)} / {σ(B_{sm})} ∼ 0.5 $$

A factor of a half to the electroweak bosons, and ordinary quarks. About 1.7 for electromagnetic radiation and the standard factor for leptons. If you look back at Axitronics you'll find we quoted a prediction for a mirror-matter Higgs from Robert Foot, for the Mirror-Matter model, that predicted a factor of a half for Higg Boson branches across the board. Well the data we got is similar to that for more complicated, can we find a model to fit it. In fact the data, seems to match my E6 model. Which has as well as 15 particles of the standard model, and additional 12 vector-like quarks in the group.

The number of Leptons is the same so tau figures are identical. This Higgs would decay equally to either the quarks in the 12 or the 15 of E6, so the figure for bottom quarks would be half. There would be an additional W and Z just for the decays to the vector like 12 of E6, so again this figure would be a half. Finally the photonic decays (found by summing the squares of the charges of any pair of particles a Higgs could produce which then annihilate to a pair of photons is.

$$γγ = 3 generations * ( ee + 3 colors * [ dd +uu + DD+ UU])$$
$$B(γγ) = 3 + 9 * (1/9 + 4/9) = 8 [Standard Model] $$
$$B(γγ) = 3 + 9 * (2/9 + 8/9) = 13 [E6 (12+15)] $$

So $$B(γγ) = 1.625$$ Very close the observed figure. Including the normal W its 14/9 or 1.555. Finally if (and we expect one) there's any extra leptophobic right handed W and Z in E6, that will change to 1.666, the closest to the CMS figure.

During 2012, the amount of data with triple, and the mass and branching ratios will get much more accurately. The cross-section compared with the standard model will be known, and we might start seeing invisible decays to mirror matter or SUSY particles, so a deeply interesting year to come for particle physics. The Higgs Boson for a model with additional vector like quarks has been looked at byChacko et al, and would mean SUSY is unnecessary for stabilizing the Higgs Boson mass all the way up to 5+ TeV, so SUSY might well not be found in the 7TeV LHC runs.

Finally the Higgs might be composite, in fact if the color interaction between normal and vector-like quarks, is double the strength of the normal interaction, then these combinations have the right sort of energies for technicolor stuff composites to make up the Higgs.

Axitronics Isn't Moving

I'm now writing on Science 2.0 as well as this blog, at science 2.0 I may get actually readers, but I decided to right columns in both places. The reason being that Science 2.0 is general science site suitable for physics that is generally believed to be true. So when I write about my own ideas which may or may not be truth physics I'll place them here.

Axial force the lost years

The key discoveries in the Axial force actually where done in time period 1970 to 1990, the period before the Internet and exist on paper in science libraries for journals at the time.So when I wrote a paper on the Axial force, it ended up in Vixra the crank science Internet library, because not one person would give me an endorsement for using ArXiv's the mainstream science internet library. Somewhere in lost papers lives or dies the reasons thought at the time, why and axial can't exist. It cannot exist between electrons because of the Axial Anomaly as calculate by Alder. I think it can exist because its adds symmetry, and allows us to explain several so far unexplained facts. John Ellis (Current Head of Cern) paper, think it could exists between neutrinos with a Lifshifz factor fixing a background metric to explain why neutrino travel faster than light. An axial force may exists weather or not neutrino travel faster than light. Somewhere in does Journal are a few papers on the neutrinos with or without an Axial force. I'm going to have to rejoin the British Library to get access to the journals at the time, and scan them onto camera, read them there, to know the thinking on the Axial force from that time period.

Axitronics Is Moving

I'm now posting over at Science 2.0

Axial force and Mirror Matter: Stellar Formation

There are two controversial theories I often write about here: The first, The Axial Force, a force possible between neutrinos which have opposite charges on left and right handed particles. Matter or anti-Matter doesn't seem to matter to the axial force. This follows from the CPT theorem. Combining the three operations, C (swapping matter and anti-matter), P (swapping left and right), T (reversing the direction of time, or equivalently the velocities of all particles), must result in no change to any picture of what has happened. Since most diagrams of an interactions are inverted by time reversal, either C or P but not both are also reversed. I've documented the Axial force in the paper linked from my blog, written here often about its consequences. As far as I know I'm the only current active researcher in the axial force, although the idea may date back to the 1970s. I happen to think the axial force will lead to a good theory of dark energy.

The second theory I often report on is Mirror Matter. Mirror Matter theory, posits a second of copy of mirror versions of all the known particles. Its was introduced because of the bizarre fact that weak nuclear force, between known particle, always acts in a left handed fashion. If there is a righted handed weak force its force carrier is very heavy, to heavy to have been observed. Mirror Matter solves restores the symmetry because its weak force is right handed. The theory also gives a good candidate of dark matter and fitting in with the recent observations from DAMA, COGENT. There are a number of researchers working on Mirror Matter, although only a minority, including Robert Foot and Paulo Cirarcelluti

So what happens between the two theories, are they compatible, indeed do they together lead to further explanations of the universe? Assuming both the axial force and mirror matter are real, we have eight copies of every particle, Matter versus Anti-Matter, Left-Handed versus, Right-Handed, and Mirror versus Ordinary Particles. The Known forces are also copied, with an electromagnetic force, and an mirror-electromagnetic force. Because the mirror-electromagnetic force is invisible to ordinary particles, dark matter stays dark. Is they're a also a mirror axial force. Quite possibly, if the standard model plus axial force, works, then so would a mirror copy. But what more interesting if you combine the axial and the mirror axial force, you can mixed them produce two copies, A+A' and A-A'. We may assume that A-A' breaks and gains an mass, while the total axial force remains massless. If in ordinary matter right handed neutrinos are heavy, then in the mirror world left handed neutrinos are heavy. If the heavy neutrinos and mirror neutrinos are bound by some interaction to a heavy composite particle, this is exactly the breaking we'll see. We'd also see a split in mass between to the ordinary light neutrinos and they mirror partners, these could also would mix, to form a very light set of neutrinos and a second set in the keV range, that would decay down to the lightest version.

A Consequences of add the axial force to the mirror matter model is then, we'd see only 3 light neutrinos at the time of nucleosynthesis, saving mirror matter theory from over counting the light of masses number of degrees of freedom, as reported below.

One problem with the mirror matter theory is that although mirror and ordinary matter may both make up a galaxy, when it comes to individual stars or planets we don't seem to see mixed objects containing varying amounts of each. What separates the two forms of matter> Gravity should attract both equally. I have thought of an effect, that would lead to the separation of ordinary and mirror matter. Imagine a collapsing cloud of gas, containing a mix of ordinary and mirror matter in some proportion. As it condenses it will be resisted by the Fermi pressure of the neutrinos needed to cancel out the axial force of the most populous gas (normal or mirror), at some stage the Fermi energy will rise above the mass of the a sneutrino or vectrino (a light supersymmetric boson carring the axial force), at this stage the gas will pair produce the vectrinos the with the opposite charge to the most populous gas which will rapidly condense, the vectrinos matching the less populus gas will stream out of the area carrying the less populous gas with it. This would lead to visible outflows of gas in interstellar clouds forming stars. These are indeed observed, even from area with no visable protostar, and called Herbig-Haro objects.

The shared axial force also helps explaining the different proportions of mirror and ordinary matter. Observation show that there is four to five times as much dark matter as ordinary matter.
We might expect equal proportion of mirror and ordinary matter. However with the A-A' axial force broken, we will have two species of heavy neutrinos, mirror plus ordinary, and mirror minus ordinary with some mass difference between the two. The heavy state would then decay to the lighter version, leaving an differing total of mirror and ordinary states, depending on the decay rates and branching ratios to matter and anti-matter.

It would seem that the axial force and mirror-matter theory, work well together aiding each other
to produce an nearly complete theory of the universe, together explaining both dark matter, dark energy, the breaking of parity, and predominance of matter over anti-matter.

Finally It is possible that mirror matter may be directly detected soon, in Higgs experiments. Robert Foot et al, have speculated that recent signs of a Higgs boson at the Tevetron but with half its expected cross section, may be due to Higgs mirror Higgs mixing, leaving a summed state around 140GeV, and a differenced state around 120GeV. Both states would have half the usual cross section and decay half the time in detectable particles, and half the time into mirror matter which would show up in the cross sections.

Veracity of axial scarnhorst effect as the cause of superluminal neutrinos

Because I have studied the effect of an possible axial force on neutrinos for nearly five years, and spent nearly 17 years digesting as much of the ArXiv physics preprints as possible, I've been very quick to find an explanation of the the faster than light neutrinos measured at OPERA. Indeed with that many papers in mind, its always going to be quick to find some appropriate prior art to solve almost anything. Since my readership is too small to expect much criticism, it falls to me to take a step backwards and check the solution against all the other possibilities.

For the Axial Force Scarnhorst effect to be the cause of OPERAs neutrino velocity, we require:

1. The Velocity Measurement to be correct.

We will leave this experimentalists to eventually prove or disprove, currently the evidence is officially 6 sigma, or has a 99.99966% probability of being correct, plus previous evidence from MINOS. However the possibility of systematic errors or mistakes can easily remove such claim precision

2. The existence of an axial force between neutrinos

This is what I've been discussing regularly through this blog, but as yet, have yet to get
any other qualified researchers to look at in depth. It is a however a simple copying of QED to
the neutrino, and explains, the chirality of the neutrino, how the neutrino and lepton number stay conserved once over taken by a accelerating particle, and how the weak force may have different strengths (symmetry breaking), for left and right handed particles.

3. The Correctness of the Scarnhorst effect

The Scarnhorst effect, is the modification of the speed of light, in the vacuum of QED, due to the energy of background electromagnetic fields. Normal Fields and any scattering will slow done light. However negative energy density such as in the Casimir effect will result in photon that travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.

4. Given 2. and 3. The Axi-photon and high speed neutrino may be superluminal

The Scarnhorst effect also will carry over axial force. An minor correction to our article below, is that the strength of speed up depends, on mass of the lightest left handed neutrino squared times its right handed partner (these masses will in general be different).
$$ v = 1 - {44/135} α^2 {ρ/{m_l^2m_r^2}} $$

5. The existence of axially charge background fluid in matter

We have already show that one of the baryons needs to have a axial charge in the neutrino does, and the charge is conversed. Further this has to be the proton, as neutron scattering shows no long range forces. Fermi pressure means that in terrestrially density matter (rock, water), this fluid must mainly be bosons carrying the axial charge which are so far undetected. This is a generic prediction of our axial force, but this background fluid will be bound to matter, and lead to a negative energy density in matter only, which leads to the Scarnhorst superluminal neutrinos recorded at CERN. Below we predict at binding energy of 1 keV per litre of water, which in fact isn't bound at all at terrestrial temperatures. However we neglected to use the right handed neutrino mass. For a 1 keV right hand neutrino the binding energy is more like $10^{18}$ eV per litre or about a tenth of a Joule, in the right range not to have be measured, but to resist thermal effects. Using the Bohr formule as an approximation for the binding energy, this gives a axially charged bosons with a mass around 500eV. In general, we have approximately.
$$ M_{bos} = 1/2 M_{right}* (M_{right}/1000) (eV) $$

6. Relativity and Causality

We require in general, that the speeds of all massless particles, be the same in the vacuum, so that Einstein relativity which has been measured very accurately still applies. In fact Anber and Donoghue, seem to have demonstrated this will in deed occur, when multiple fields theories interact with some common particles. The presence of matter provides a preferred frame, so that relativity is not effected by the result. However sending signals between the CERN OPERA type experiment, and a second neutrino experiment that happened be to aboard a star ship traveling extremely near the speed of light, could send signals backwards in time. This violation of causality does not seem to be a problem for Quantum Mechanics though. D. Deutsch. Phys. Rev. D, 44:3197–3217, has show that, at least in the many worlds interpretation, that closed time like loops are admissible.

7. Other Solutions for superluminal neutrinos

Purely tachyonic neutrinos would travel faster than light in the vacuum, and would be faster at low energy, which would be contrary to supernova observation particularly SN1987A. Mixing between badyonic and tachyonic (faster and slower than light) neutrinos, might be possible. But is a field theory with a 120 * sqrt(-1) MeV right handed neutrino viable or not? Matter scattering effects should in general slow any particle, not accelerate it. Any tachyon solution would also lead to the neutrino radiating its energy alway, which also does not seem to happen.

The Scarnhorst effect on neutrino would be general to any field theory of interacting neutrinos, in which normal matter contains a negative or binding energy in that field. What other classes of fifth force, felt by the neutrino are possible? Broken symmetries would lead to massive force carriers, which would in general slow neutrinos. Thus we require a hidden or chameleonic force, not detected to date but which interacs with neutrinos. Baryon minus Lepton numbers theories are common, but would show up in modified hydrogen atoms and neutron scattering. Intergenerational forces between neutrinos would seem to lead to flavour changing neutral currents which have not be observed at particle accelerates. Our axial force seems to be only solution for superluminal neutrinos at present, but a absence of other ideas, does not mean an absence of other solution.