Has proton decay falsified SO(10) GUT?

In summary, the conversation discusses the falsification of the SU(5) model due to proton decay and the viability of other models such as SUSY SU(5) and SUSY SO(10). It also mentions the potential for proton lifetime to be as high as 10^42 years in SUSY GUTs and the research being done to explore the possibility of dropping GUT altogether. It also brings up different ways of breaking down SO(10) to the Standard Model and the implications on proton lifetime. The conversation also includes a link to a source on particle physics and mentions the limitations of using outdated sources.
  • #1
ensabah6
695
0
I know that proton decay has falsified SU(5) based around 10e30 years.

What proton decay of SO(10)?

Are SUSY SU(5) and SUSY SO(10) still viable?

If the experiment continues with a null result, what models are next in line to be falsified?

Could protons last forever and thus falsfy ALL GUT approaches?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
ensabah, have you checked the limits in the "particle data group" current review?
 
  • #3
arivero said:
ensabah, have you checked the limits in the "particle data group" current review?

no, do you have a link? thank :)
 
  • #4
www-pdg.lbl.gov

the particle physicist's almanac!
 
  • #6
blechman said:
www-pdg.lbl.gov

the particle physicist's almanac!

Argh, I forgot to request the 2010 calendar :frown:
 
  • #7
Bob S said:

You need pages 10 and 11. Besides, that's an outdated source.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.0676

increases the limit on the observed partial mean life via [itex]p \rightarrow e^+ \pi^0[/itex] channel (the one predicted by common GUTs) by a factor of 5, to 8.8 x [itex]10^{33}[/itex] years.

The original non-supersymmetric SU(5) prediction was, I think, somewhere around [itex]10^{30}[/itex] years, and that has been ruled out.

However, mean life is extremely sensitive to the structure of the unified theory. It scales roughly as the fourth power of the unification energy (or, more accurately, as the fourth power of mass of the massive boson responsible for the decay, which is probably near unification energy). We already know that naive (minimal) non-supersymmetric SU(5) does not result in clean unification, because all three coupling constants fail to meet at the same point. If we allow additional particles beyond those needed to construct minimal SU(5), all hell breaks loose, the unification energy can be anywhere below Planck mass, and proton lifetime can potentially be as high as [itex]10^{42}[/itex] years.

That is, in fact, the way SUSY GUTs "deal" with the problem - contributions from superparticles distort running couplings just enough to raise the unification energy by a couple of orders of magnitude, and lifetime becomes high enough to agree with observations. But that approach is by no means exclusive to SUSY.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
hamster143 said:
You need pages 10 and 11. Besides, that's an outdated source.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.0676

increases the limit on the observed partial mean life via [itex]p \rightarrow e^+ \pi^0[/itex] channel (the one predicted by common GUTs) by a factor of 5, to 8.8 x [itex]10^{33}[/itex] years.

The original non-supersymmetric SU(5) prediction was, I think, somewhere around [itex]10^{30}[/itex] years, and that has been ruled out.

However, mean life is extremely sensitive to the structure of the unified theory. It scales roughly as the fourth power of the unification energy (or, more accurately, as the fourth power of mass of the massive boson responsible for the decay, which is probably near unification energy). We already know that naive (minimal) non-supersymmetric SU(5) does not result in clean unification, because all three coupling constants fail to meet at the same point. If we allow additional particles beyond those needed to construct minimal SU(5), all hell breaks loose, the unification energy can be anywhere below Planck mass, and proton lifetime can potentially be as high as [itex]10^{42}[/itex] years.

That is, in fact, the way SUSY GUTs "deal" with the problem - contributions from superparticles distort running couplings just enough to raise the unification energy by a couple of orders of magnitude, and lifetime becomes high enough to agree with observations. But that approach is by no means exclusive to SUSY.

What about non-SUSY SO(10)? I understand that SO(10) is the most highly favored GUT.

That's fascinating. I know there are talks of building Hyper-Kak...
I know that 10^30 protons is doable, and that 10^31 represents a 10x increase.

I'd imagine it'd take well beyond our lifetimes for Super-Kak to get those kind of proton half-lifes.

Isn't the current experimental upper bounds around 10^35 years?

Has there been serious research into the possibility that the absence of proton decay and magnetic monopoles is suggestive evidence that GUT are wrong? The "unified" gauge couplings at 10^16 GEV is just a coincidence? In other words, are GUT are "fact" and only details matter?
 
  • #9
ensabah6 said:
Has there been serious research into the possibility that the absence of proton decay and magnetic monopoles is suggestive evidence that GUT are wrong? The "unified" gauge couplings at 10^16 GEV is just a coincidence? In other words, are GUT are "fact" and only details matter?


What about the series of papers by Nicolai and Meissner? They dispense with GUT, also with low-energy SUSY and with extra dimensions. That surely qualifies as serious research.
You can tell from his tone of voice that Nicolai is quite skeptical of GUT
as he says "since the proton so far has refused to decay."

Shaposhnikov is another whose research explores the possibility of dropping GUT.
 
  • #10
marcus said:
What about the series of papers by Nicolai and Meissner? They dispense with GUT, also with low-energy SUSY and with extra dimensions. That surely qualifies as serious research.
You can tell from his tone of voice that Nicolai is quite skeptical of GUT
as he says "since the proton so far has refused to decay."

Shaposhnikov is another whose research explores the possibility of dropping GUT.

Which paper?

The latest paper builds on two earlier Meissner Nicolai papers
3. arXiv:0907.3298 [ps, pdf, other]
Title: Conformal invariance from non-conformal gravity
Authors: Krzysztof A. Meissner, Hermann Nicolai
Comments: 18 pages
Journal-ref: Phys.Rev.D80:086005,2009
Subjects: High Energy Physics - Theory (hep-th)


Since string based TOE is predicated on GUT, skepticism of GUT and extra dimensions is skepticism of string theory unification.
 
  • #11
What about non-SUSY SO(10)? I understand that SO(10) is the most highly favored GUT.

There are different ways to break SO(10) down to SM. One way is to go SO(10) -> SU(5) x U(1), in which case there's essentially no difference from SU(5) case. One other way is to go via SU(4) x SU(2) x SU(2) (Pati-Salam), in which case there's more freedom and we can have proton lifetime up to 10^37 years.
 
  • #12
hamster143 said:
There are different ways to break SO(10) down to SM. One way is to go SO(10) -> SU(5) x U(1), in which case there's essentially no difference from SU(5) case. One other way is to go via SU(4) x SU(2) x SU(2) (Pati-Salam), in which case there's more freedom and we can have proton lifetime up to 10^37 years.

thanks,

does the gauge couplings meet in both SUSY SU(5) and SUSY SO(10)?

Can we experimentally test up to 10^37 years? I infer that SUSY-SO(10) increases proton lifetime by order of magnitude.
 
  • #13
ensabah6 said:
Which paper?
Since string based TOE is predicated on GUT, skepticism of GUT and extra dimensions is skepticism of string theory unification.

The best exposition of Nicolai and Meissner's work is Nicolai's talk at the July Planck Scale conference. He gives references there. Great talk. He is repeatedly explicit about dispensing with GUT, for the purposes of this program. Doesn't need it and doesn't want it. Anyone who hasn't watched the talk really ought to.
http://www.ift.uni.wroc.pl/~rdurka/planckscale/index-video.php
This gives the menu of all the talks. both the slides PDF and the video.
Just select Nicolai's talk, which is near the top of the menu.

Does your computer not get videos? I forget. If you have a bandwidth problem let me know and I will suggest an alternative.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #14
marcus said:
The best exposition of Nicolai and Meissner's work is Nicolai's talk at the July Planck Scale conference. He gives references there. Great talk. He is repeatedly explicit about dispensing with GUT, for the purposes of this program. Doesn't need it and doesn't want it. Anyone who hasn't watched the talk really ought to.
http://www.ift.uni.wroc.pl/~rdurka/planckscale/index-video.php
This gives the menu of all the talks. both the slides PDF and the video.
Just select Nicolai's talk, which is near the top of the menu.

Does your computer not get videos? I forget. If you have a bandwidth problem let me know and I will suggest an alternative.

http://www.ift.uni.wroc.pl/~planckscale/lectures/1-Monday/3-Nicolai.pdf

thx, if true it obviously spells problems for SUSY
 
Last edited by a moderator:

1. What is proton decay and why is it important in SO(10) GUT?

Proton decay is a hypothetical process in which a proton, one of the building blocks of matter, decays into lighter particles. It is important in SO(10) GUT because this theory predicts that protons should decay at a specific rate, which can be tested through experiments.

2. How does SO(10) GUT explain proton decay?

SO(10) GUT, or the Special Orthogonal group of rank 10 Grand Unified Theory, is a theoretical model that attempts to unify all fundamental forces of nature. It predicts that protons decay through the exchange of heavy particles called X and Y bosons, which mediate the decay process.

3. Have there been any experiments to test the prediction of proton decay in SO(10) GUT?

Yes, there have been several experiments conducted to test the prediction of proton decay in SO(10) GUT. Some of these experiments include the Super-Kamiokande detector in Japan and the Soudan Mine experiment in the United States. So far, no evidence of proton decay has been found, which has led to further refinement of the theory.

4. Has the lack of evidence for proton decay falsified SO(10) GUT?

No, the lack of evidence for proton decay does not necessarily falsify SO(10) GUT. It simply means that the predicted rate of proton decay has not been observed in experiments. This could be due to various factors such as the limitations of current technology or the need for more precise experiments. Scientists continue to study and refine the theory in light of new evidence and data.

5. What are the implications if proton decay is eventually observed in experiments?

If proton decay is observed in experiments and found to be consistent with the predictions of SO(10) GUT, it would provide strong evidence for the theory and support the idea of unifying all fundamental forces. It would also have significant implications for our understanding of the universe and the fundamental laws that govern it.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top