Clockwork solution to the Higgs hiearchy

[kodama]

LHC famously did not find any evidence of SUSY

other proposals such as Technicolor extradimensions compositeness have come up empty.

it seems natural SUSY is not the solution to the hierarchy problem

one solution to the higgs hierarchy

the clockwork theory : “A Clockwork Theory”, invented by Matthew McCullough and Gian Giudice

University of Bruxelles physicist Daniele Teresi
https://indico.in2p3.fr/event/13763/session/4/contribution/14/material/slides/0.pdf

is it plausible? if it works, what are its implications to SUSY and other BSM theories?

surely a nobel prize would be awarded to Matthew McCullough and Gian Giudice if their predictions on photons are bourne out.

since the purpose of this theory is to offer an explanation with no new particles
how does this impact supersymmetry?

i.e is clockwork theory compatible with all the new additional particles SUSY requires?

and since a major motivation of supersymmetry is to solve the naturalness problem
it seems nature has chosen something else entirely

how does the clockwork theory reconcile with
Shaposhnikov Wetterich AS prediction of a 126gev higgs

reference

A Clockwork Theory
Gian F. Giudice, Matthew McCullough
(Submitted on 20 Oct 2016)
The clockwork is a mechanism for generating light particles with exponentially suppressed interactions in theories which contain no small parameters at the fundamental level. We develop a general description of the clockwork mechanism valid for scalars, fermions, gauge bosons, and gravitons. This mechanism can be implemented with a discrete set of new fields or, in its continuum version, through an extra spatial dimension. In both cases the clockwork emerges as a useful tool for model-building applications. Notably, the continuum clockwork offers a solution to the Higgs naturalness problem, which turns out to be the same as in linear dilaton duals of Little String Theory. We also elucidate the similarities and differences of the continuum clockwork with large extra dimensions and warped spaces. All clockwork models, in the discrete and continuum, exhibit novel phenomenology with a distinctive spectrum of closely spaced resonances.
Comments: Body of text 26 pages
Subjects: High Energy Physics - Phenomenology (hep-ph); High Energy Physics - Theory (hep-th)
DOI: 10.1007/JHEP02(2017)036
Report number: CERN-TH-2016-223
Cite as: arXiv:1610.07962 [hep-ph]

 

[mitchell porter]

A paper this week says clockwork doesn't work for the hierarchy problem.

Around the same time, Wetterich put out a new quantum gravity paper.

 

[kodama]

do you think supersymmetry is still the solution to the hierarchy problem

 

[mitchell porter]

I think the hierarchy comes from the QCD confinement scale. The idea of technicolor is that the electroweak scale is the confinement scale of a new, QCD-like strong interaction. But I think it's the original QCD which is the prime mover here, and that the QCD confinement scale then somehow directly determines the energy scale at which electroweak symmetry gets broken.

 

[kodama]

I think the hierarchy comes from the QCD confinement scale. The idea of technicolor is that the electroweak scale is the confinement scale of a new, QCD-like strong interaction. But I think it's the original QCD which is the prime mover here, and that the QCD confinement scale then somehow directly determines the energy scale at which electroweak symmetry gets broken.

are there any papers on this?

what are the implications of hierarchy comes from the QCD confinement scale

 

[mitchell porter]

Arbuzov et al, but they don't really demonstrate a possible mechanism, they just say "maybe this happens". The original relaxion paper is not quite it, but it does have something from the QCD sector (axion) determining something from the electroweak sector (Higgs mass). I consider the idea in the spirit of @arivero's sbootstrap, in which the electroweak sector is emergent from SQCD. There might be other examples.

Everyone talks about the electroweak scale and why it is so small. That's the hierarchy problem. But the QCD scale is also small, yet it doesn't get the same attention, nor do people ask why the two scales are so close. One reason the QCD scale is treated differently, is that there's nothing like the Higgs finetuning problem (in which large quantum corrections due to physics from the higher energy scales should be overwhelming a small quantity). Instead, the stability of QCD was copied by technicolor theories, precisely in order to solve the finetuning problem (which doesn't apply to a composite Higgs).

But whatever your theory of electroweak symmetry breaking, there remains the relative coincidence of QCD and electroweak scales. There is no mainstream explanation for this, except anthropic arguments that this is good for making atoms. That's why it would be neat if the QCD scale could actually determine the electroweak scale - it would explain this coincidence of scales, as well as solving the hierarchy problem.

edit: I just re-read Arbuzov et al and it doesn't work how I thought. I thought they proposed a "loopback" between the top quark condensate of QCD, and the Higgs field vacuum state. However, it seems their top-condensate is due to the yukawa interaction between top and higgs, not the strong interaction of QCD. Though surely the strong interaction would play a role...