If susy were unbroken, should we need a higgs?

In summary, the conversation discusses the role of mass terms in electroweak bosons and the use of auxiliary scalar fields to organize them. In SUSY, the scalar fields are included through the susy generators in any massive vector multiplet. However, it is unlikely to achieve realistic EWSB with an adjoint Higgs as there are no gauge invariant Yukawa couplings between the left and right-handed fermions. Additionally, obtaining a massless photon from a component of a massive vector superfield is a bigger problem. This leads to the suggestion of considering the winos and their partners as a type of adjoint Higgs. Overall, it is acknowledged that maintaining SUSY at the EW scale is not a realistic scenario.
  • #1
arivero
Gold Member
3,430
140
reading the light-heart book of Aitchison, "an informal intro...", we see that the problem with mass terms in the electroweak bosons is not that they spoil gauge invariance, but that they spoil gauge invariance in a way that it is not recovered when their mass goes to zero.

After one has been forced to introduce these auxiliary scalar fields, it seems that they only way to organize them is via the Higgs field.

Now, in susy, the scalar fields are not an extra. They come included, via the susy generators, in any massive vector multiplet. So they natural... do they need to come from a higgs, at all. I mean, it seems that the limit M--->0 works perfectly in this case, just separating the massive multiplet in a massless vector plus a massless chiral.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Trying to accomplish realistic EWSB with an adjoint Higgs seems a bit unlikely. There are no gauge invariant Yukawa couplings between the left and right-handed fermions (assuming the usual chiral [tex]SU(2)_W[/tex] charges) so fermion masses don't appear to be generated naturally. To maintain the SUSY of the massive supermultiplet, the scalar field can only couple to the fermions the same way that the gauge bosons do, namely left to left and right to right.

A much bigger problem is that you can never get a massless photon from a component of a massive vector superfield.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
fzero said:
Trying to accomplish realistic EWSB (...)
Well, of course, to consider SUSY unbroken at EW scale is not a realistic scenary (it is for my own purposals, as I do not believe on fundamentel squarks and sfermions... but in general we can consider it a theoretical exercise) . Similarly, fermion mases are not a requisite in this scenary. One could consider a plus if some mechanism incorporates a mass for the top.

with an adjoint Higgs seems a bit unlikely.
So my first bet was "no higgs at all", but yes, possibly we can consider the winos and their partners as a kind of adjoint higgs.

A much bigger problem is that you can never get a massless photon from a component of a massive vector superfield.

Hmm I had not though on the mixing, damn!
 

1. What is Susy and why is it important in particle physics?

Susy stands for Supersymmetry, which is a proposed theory in particle physics that suggests every fundamental particle has a superpartner particle. It is important because it could help explain some of the mysteries in physics, such as dark matter, and could potentially unify the four fundamental forces.

2. What does it mean for Susy to be unbroken?

In the context of particle physics, Susy being unbroken means that the superpartner particles have the same mass as their corresponding fundamental particles. This would suggest that Susy is a symmetry of nature, which is an important concept in theoretical physics.

3. How does Susy relate to the Higgs boson?

If Susy were unbroken, it would mean that the Higgs boson would not be necessary to give mass to particles. This is because in Susy, the superpartners would have the same mass as their corresponding particles, making the Higgs mechanism unnecessary.

4. Would we still need the Large Hadron Collider if Susy were unbroken?

Yes, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) would still be important even if Susy were unbroken. The LHC is not only used to search for the Higgs boson, but it also allows us to test other theories, such as Susy, by colliding particles at high energies.

5. What evidence do we have for or against Susy being unbroken?

Currently, there is no evidence for Susy being unbroken. In fact, recent data from the LHC suggests that the superpartner particles do not have the same mass as their corresponding particles, which goes against the idea of Susy being unbroken. However, the search for evidence of Susy is ongoing and further research may provide more insights.

Similar threads

A Why is the Higgs mechanism needed?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
5
Views
1K
I Does the Higgs Field Consist of Higgs Bosons?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
8
Views
1K
B Why is the Higgs boson considered a boson?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Why Do We Need Multiple Higgs Bosons?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
Are there scalar partners for the Z and W particles in massive SUSY multiplets?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
3K
A "Monstrous Higgs and Leech Spacetime"
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
1K
Continuous symmetries as particles
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
Massive Majorana fermions - nontrivial gauge multiplets?
    • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
1
Views
2K
I LHC run 2, does Supersymmetry worsen hierarchy fine tuning
    • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
A Implications of a new 17 Mev vector boson on Higgs, SUSY
    • Beyond the Standard Models
3
Replies
74
Views
9K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top