A model behind the Standard Model?

selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
6,843
Reaction score
11
Two interesting papers by Chan and Tsou on the hep-th arxiv:

hep-ph/0611363

Title: Higgs Fields as Vielbeins of Internal Symmetry Space
Authors: H.M. Chan, S.T. Tsou
Comments: 24 pages
An earlier suggestion that scalar fields in gauge theory may be introduced as frame vectors or vielbeins in internal symmetry space, and so endowed with geometric significance, is here sharpened and refined. Applied to a $u(1) \times su(2)$ theory this gives exactly the Higgs structure of the standard electroweak theory. Applied to an $su(3)$ theory, it gives a structure having much in common with a phenomenological model previously constructed to explain fermion mixing and mass hierarchy. The difference in physical outcome for the two theories is here traced to the difference in structure between the two symmetry groups.


hep-ph/0611364

Title: A Model Behind the Standard Model
Authors: H.M. Chan, S.T. Tsou
Comments: 62 pages
In spite of its many successes, the Standard Model makes many empirical assumptions in the Higgs and fermion sectors for which a deeper theoretical basis is sought. Starting from the usual gauge symmetry $u(1) \times su(2) \times su(3)$ plus the 3 assumptions: (A) scalar fields as vielbeins in internal symmetry space, (B) the ``confinement picture'' of symmetry breaking, (C) generations as ``dual'' to colour, we are led to a scheme which offers: (I) a geometrical significance to scalar fields, (II) a theoretical criterion on what scalar fields are to be introduced, (III) a partial explanation of why $su(2)$ appears broken while $su(3)$ confines, (IV) baryon-lepton number (B - L) conservation, (V) the standard electroweak structure, (VI) a 3-valued generation index for leptons and quarks, and (VII) a dynamical system with all the essential features of an earlier phenomenological model which gave a good description of the known mass and mixing patterns of quarks and leptons including neutrino oscillations. There are other implications the consistency of which with experiment, however, has not yet been systematically explored.

Any comments?
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top