Can String Theory Explain the Anomalous Muon Magnetic Moment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter selfAdjoint
  • Start date Start date
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
6,843
Reaction score
11
This new paper, http://www.arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0506/0506190.pdf , contains a stringy explanation of the latest unexplained difference, of order 31X10^-10, in the anomalous muon magnetic moment. The explanation is based on the Randall-Sundrum brane-world model, using a particular ("ADD") specialization of it. The author, Konosuke Sawa, assumes the brane the standard model physics lies on can fluctuate, and therefore stretch, and that these fluctuations are stationary in time (this is his big extra assumption). Then he can calculate the contribution of the stretching to the AMM spread of the muon, and Lo! it matches pretty well. There is an undetermined parameter that he could tune to make it exact, but the parameter has cosmological consequences too, which constrain it. In any case he gets the 10^-10 right.

By itself this isn't falsifiable, since it's a proposed explanation, not a prediction. But in his conclusion Sawa proposes to apply the same method to Lorentz symmetry breaking, an unresolved question at this time. There is a possible chance for him to make a prediction that could later be checked at LHC.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
selfAdjoint said:
This new paper, http://www.arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/0506/0506190.pdf , contains a stringy explanation of the latest unexplained difference, of order 31X10^-10, in the anomalous muon magnetic moment...

could be worth some here looking into.
here is the abstract
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0506190

Muon anomalous magnetic moment due to the brane stretching effect
Konosuke Sawa
16 pages, 1 figure

"We investigate the contribution of extra dimensions to the muon anomalous magnetic moment by using a 6-dimensional model. This approach analyzes the extent of the influence of small brane fluctuations on the magnetic moment. In particular, we assume that the fluctuations are static in time, and they add new potential terms to the schrödinger equation through the induced vierbein. This paper shows that the brane fluctuation is responsible for the brane stretching effect. This effect would be capable of reproducing the appropriate order for recent BNL measurements of the muon (g-2) deviation."
 
Last edited by a moderator:


This new paper presents an interesting stringy explanation for the anomalous muon magnetic moment. The use of the Randall-Sundrum brane-world model and the assumption of fluctuating and stationary branes is certainly a unique approach. The fact that the author is able to match the observed value with a certain undetermined parameter is promising, and the cosmological constraints on this parameter add further credibility to the proposed explanation.

However, as you mentioned, this is not a falsifiable prediction but rather a proposed explanation. It would be beneficial for the author to explore further applications of this method, such as in the case of Lorentz symmetry breaking, as it could potentially lead to a testable prediction at the LHC. This would add more weight to the validity of the model and its assumptions.

Overall, this is a promising new paper that offers a unique perspective on the unresolved difference in the anomalous muon magnetic moment. It will be interesting to see how this method can be applied in other areas of research and if it can lead to any testable predictions in the future.
 
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...
I'm trying to understand the relationship between the Higgs mechanism and the concept of inertia. The Higgs field gives fundamental particles their rest mass, but it doesn't seem to directly explain why a massive object resists acceleration (inertia). My question is: How does the Standard Model account for inertia? Is it simply taken as a given property of mass, or is there a deeper connection to the vacuum structure? Furthermore, how does the Higgs mechanism relate to broader concepts like...
Back
Top