Higgs Field with SB but without Higgs Boson?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the theoretical possibility of a Higgs field where all components are absorbed by vector gauge fields, resulting in no remaining Higgs boson. Participants explore models such as the Georgi-Glashow model and question the relationship between massless gauge bosons and the presence of Higgs bosons, as well as the implications of symmetry breaking in various gauge groups.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires whether it is a generic result that a Higgs boson always exists after symmetry breaking.
  • Another participant suggests that the presence of a massless photon implies the existence of a Higgs boson.
  • There is a proposal to consider a completely broken version of the Georgi-Glashow model that would not yield a photon or a Higgs boson.
  • Concerns are raised about the relationship between the number of Higgs bosons and unbroken symmetries, with an example of using a two-doublet Higgs field leading to multiple massive bosons.
  • One participant asserts that complete gauge multiplets must be inserted to avoid leftover degrees of freedom, questioning whether this holds for any gauge group breaking.
  • Another participant posits that it may be possible to break the remaining U(1) symmetry in SU[N] models to avoid leftover degrees of freedom.
  • Discussion includes the physical implications of parameters related to the Weinberg angle and their connection to gauge boson masses.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the physical meaning of certain quantities derived from the symmetry breaking process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between gauge bosons and Higgs bosons, as well as the implications of symmetry breaking. There is no consensus on whether a Higgs boson is always present or on the nature of leftover degrees of freedom in various models.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of different symmetry breaking mechanisms and the resulting particle masses, indicating that the discussion is highly technical and dependent on specific theoretical frameworks.

arivero
Gold Member
Messages
3,485
Reaction score
188
Hi,

I was searching for some example of a theory where all the components of the higgs field are "eaten" by the vector gauge fields and no Higgs boson is left. I have just checked Georgi-Glashow SO(3) --> U(1), but they use a triplet Higgs so at the end again a Higgs Boson does appear.

Is it a generic result that you always will have a Higgs Boson?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you have a massless photon you will.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
If you have a massless photon you will.

So, is it possible, say, to produce a completely broken version of the Georgi-Glashow model, without photon but then also without Higgs Boson?

And realy, I am not sure of the connection between "massless photon" and "higgs boson". The number of Higgs Bosons getting mass after symmetry breaking is not equal to the number of unbroken symmetries, isn't it? For instance I could break with a two-doublets higgs field, and I would get five massive bosons.
 
You need to insert complete gauge multiplets. If you leave a "space" for the photon, you will have a leftover degree of freedom. You can always have more.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
You need to insert complete gauge multiplets. If you leave a "space" for the photon, you will have a leftover degree of freedom. You can always have more.
Yeah, I see it in the standard model. But 1) is is true for any breaing G ---> U(1), for any gauge group G, that we always will have a leftover? and 2) are there "leftovers" if we completely break the gauge group?
 
I think you can if you procceed in breaking the (since you are working with SU[N] ) remaining U(1) too...
 
I should try :-) Davelock (not sure if this is his nick here in PF) asked me some days ago about role for the third mass in the SU(2)xU(1) breaking. I mean, when the vacuum takes a value <v>, we define a coupling g0 and a angle of Weinberg th, so that mass of Z is g0 v / 2, and mass of W is g0 cos th v /2, and then it is a very obvious thing to ask if the quantity g0 sin th v/2 could have a physical incarnation too.
 
I am not sure...but the sinθ_w is as much meaningful as the cosθ_w... and the definition of Weinberg's angle comes from the ratio M_w over M_z... So what's the "physical" meaning of that?
 
ChrisVer said:
I am not sure...but the sinθ_w is as much meaningful as the cosθ_w... and the definition of Weinberg's angle comes from the ratio M_w over M_z... So what's the "physical" meaning of that?
Well, not exactly. The theoretical success of GWS model is its prediction that M_w over M_z is equal to the angle. The definition of the angle is really that it produces separately the constants of SU(2) and U(1) from an unique constant "g0". If you add other breaking mechanism beyond doublet you can still recover the low energy phenomenology but the prediction of M_w over M_z changes. The "rho parameter" and all such stuff... there was usually a pretty detailed description in the Particle Data Group reviews.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
8K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K