1 large electroweak penguin effects in b and k physics in b and k physics makiko nagashima (ntu)...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Large electroweak penguin effects Large electroweak penguin effects in B and K physicsin B and K physics
Makiko Nagashima (NTU)Makiko Nagashima (NTU)
Theory seminar KEK, Sep. 6 Theory seminar KEK, Sep. 6 (2005)(2005)
HEP seminar at IOPAS, Oct. 28 HEP seminar at IOPAS, Oct. 28 (2005)(2005)
2
Contents
Kπ DCPV puzzle within 4th generation model W.S.Hou, M.N, A. Soddu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 141601(2005)
4th generation model and indications from Kπ and K physics W.S.Hou, M.N, A. Soddu, hep-ph/0508237, to appear in PRD
An enhanced
3
IntroductionIntroductionStandard Model and CKM mechanism
3 generation
SU(2) doublet
SU(2) singlet
Quark sector
3 mixing angles
1 CP phase
CKM matrix
Unitarity Triangle Study of CPV / Test of SM / Search for NP
4
Three sides are comparable
B physics has success in studying of CP violation
In this talk, We will see
and for Bs system
5
Observables of CP Violation
Direct CP asymmetryDirect CP asymmetry
We focus on DCPV in this talk
see directly the difference of yield
Time dependent CP asymmetryTime dependent CP asymmetry
BB f
( Direct CPV )
( Mixing-induced CPV )
Only for neutral meson
6
Terminology: TREE and PENGUIN diagrams
Tree diagram
su
u
d d
bW
b
u
u
u
u
s
W>1/Nc
b
d
W
g u
s
d
u
Penguin diagram
b
d
u
s
d
u
W
Z,γ
>
sub-dominant
7
Part IPart ILarge EWP effects on B→Kπ Direct CP
PDG2002
8
Result on DCPV in Kπ
PUZZLE
9
The large discrepancy still persists
Lepton-Photon Symposium ‘05Lepton-Photon Symposium ‘05
10
PQCD by Keum, Li and Sanda, PRD63(2001)054008PQCD by Keum, Li and Sanda, PRD63(2001)054008
Theoretical calculations in 2001Theoretical calculations in 2001
QCDF by M. Beneke et al., NPB606(2001)245QCDF by M. Beneke et al., NPB606(2001)245
Two of DCPV behaves similarTwo of DCPV behaves similar
11
Improved calculations
Beneke and Neubert, NPB675(2003)333Beneke and Neubert, NPB675(2003)333
Annihilation contributionsAnnihilation contributions
H-n. Li, S. Mishima and A.I. Sanda, hep-ph/0508041H-n. Li, S. Mishima and A.I. Sanda, hep-ph/0508041
12
Direct CP Violation (DCPV)
Difference of Yields
vs given by single term
no relative phases
DCPV goes away
CP
13
QCDF (BBNS)
SM
kT PQCD (KLS)
away
sub-dominant
If one neglects EWP and C, No phase differences
(2003) (2001)
contradiction
up to leading order calculation
In K pi amplitudesIn K pi amplitudes
14
How to explain deviation ?
The SM can explain The SM can explain the different pattern of DCPVs the different pattern of DCPVs in Kpi modes completelyin Kpi modes completely
Of course, it is fine !!Of course, it is fine !!
From this aspect,From this aspect,The different pattern of DCPVs remains a crucial hint of New Physics.The different pattern of DCPVs remains a crucial hint of New Physics.
New Physics exists, its contribution appear in other processes, New Physics exists, its contribution appear in other processes, and can be tested. and can be tested.
This does not mean THERE IS NO NEW PHYSICS IN OUR NATUREThis does not mean THERE IS NO NEW PHYSICS IN OUR NATURE
THE SM and THE NP can not be distinguished in Kpi DCPVsTHE SM and THE NP can not be distinguished in Kpi DCPVs
What can we learn for New Physics from Experimental results ? What can we learn for New Physics from Experimental results ?
15
extra comparable contributionsbringing phase differencestoward
We call for Large with an extra weak phase
We employ kTPQCD approach
must not be negligible
Assemble
4th generation scenariopenguinNew physics
naturally explain largenaturally explain large
16
kTPQCD approach
Large strong phase comes from annihilation process
a hard gluon kicks spectator
At leading process
is introduced to cure the endpoint singularities
17
A. Arhrib and W-S. Hou, EPJC27,555
T. Yanir, JHEP06, 044
Minimum Setup ( meaning to be clear in Part II )
4th generation scenarioA sequential 4th generation in addition to the SM particles
well-known
unknown
same quantum number
follows WS parameterization
18
Our assumption
Neither Scalar OPE nor Tensor OPE.R.H. dynamics is suppressed by ms/mb
The low energy operators are the same as the SM
New physics enters though loop processes,and changes the short distance effects
Buras, et al. Minimal flavor violationBuras, et al. Minimal flavor violation
Barger, et al. Z’ modelBarger, et al. Z’ model
Baek, et al. Generic EWP Baek, et al. Generic EWP
19
Effective Hamiltonian
Tree
QCD Penguin
EW/EM Penguin
t' effects well-satisfy b → sγrate and DCPV
Large enhancement
Wilson coefficient
Dividing ΔCi by QCD penguin
Natural ability of 4th generation to large enhancement of EWP
20
Constraint
PDG04
PDG04
Belle(04)
B(b→sll) gets greatly enhanced
Δm is lower than EXP. bound
4th generation effects are not excluded!!
21
Result
kTPQCD in the SM
4th generation+
sizable splitting between
Roughly,
described as
It naturally generates the phase diff. and sizable mag. of the extra term
22
Our result is at leading order in kTPQCD.
A recent result finds a much larger color-suppressedtree (C) at next-to-leading order. is less negative (H-n. Li, S. Mishima and A.I. Sanda, hep-ph/0508041)
Remark
Comparably large C would allow more parameter space for the 4th generation
23
Some CuriositiesSome Curiosities
24
MICPV is rather little sensitive to strong phases Specially, MICPV due to b→s transition behaves like
naïve factorization + 4th gene.
25
No Rescattering
Another framework:extra strong phase from Final State Interaction
Naïve Factorization ⊗ Final State RescatteringOtherwise Double Counting
George W.S. Hou, BCP JC, Oct. 14 (2002)
26
We followed Mod.Phys.Lett. A18,1763 by C-K. Chua, W-S. Hou and K-C. Yang
It accounts for
(strong phase)
ICHEP04
(strong phase)
problem
27
This FSI picture doesn’t help for resolving the puzzle
There is no solution
We performed analysis by incorporating t’ effects
re-scattering happens between
EW penguin would be brought into amplitude from
28
Part IIPart IIExplore s→d and b→d implications
Naively assumed
did not care about
One may have suspicion that b→s would spill over into s→d is not necessarily ~ 0
29
should be all intertwined …PLB 192 441 (1987) by W.S. Hou et al.
30
Be moderate
From K pi study, we learned
Keep
We have some constraint on from
Imposebe close to the Cabibbo angle
31
Allowed region from K processes
standard (1) is less stringent
(simulated dots)
(shaded region) (elliptic rings)depends on hadronic parameter R6 and R8
Bijnens (2)
We found(1)
(2)
32
Outcome for
Current Upper Bound
It is very hard to measure but challenging…
We find enhancing to or even higher !!
It might be even larger than !!
we take
33
Unfortunately, US government cancelled the KOPIO experiment
We will have to wait longer to see whether such effects is really present…
Let us hope this stimulates the program at JPARC !!
34
Furthermore….. We also checked the impact on Bd and D system
35
Summary
Starting point → Direct CP Violation in B→Kπ
4th generation is possible to generate Large EWP
Extend our study to Bd and K system( to, phenomenologically, understand the possibilities of having still fourth generation )
( )
36
BACKUP SLIDEBACKUP SLIDE
37
FROM PDG04Our anxiety
38
We now know neutrinos have mass, will have CPV, andmore to be revealed. # of neutrino =3 is just one piece of info.
The rho parameter is less of a problem.The S parameter is the real problem (it ‘s so for most NP models.)
What the situation changes if the Higgs is not seen and actually heavy ?
39
Extra generation vs. EW precision data V.A. Novikov et al., PLB529, 111
Ng
Δm
=sq
rt(m
U^2
-mD
^2)
[GeV
]
mH>113 GeV, mD=130 GeV
mN
[G
eV]
Ng
mD=200, mU=220, mE=100 [GeV]
40
2D plots in different way