How do neutralino interactions differ in amplitude analysis between SM and SUSY?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisVer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interactions
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the interactions of neutralinos, specifically in the context of amplitude analysis comparing the Standard Model (SM) and Supersymmetry (SUSY). Participants explore the mathematical formulations of these interactions, including the derivation of amplitudes for various processes involving neutralinos and Higgs bosons.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks sources for understanding neutralino interaction processes and expresses difficulty in interpreting amplitudes without a Lagrangian.
  • Another participant shares figures related to the process χχ → ZZ and discusses the complexity of writing the amplitude for each case.
  • Concerns are raised about the correct form of the amplitude, with one participant suggesting the removal of the γμ term since neutralinos couple to a scalar rather than a vector.
  • Discussion includes the representation of currents and propagators, with a participant proposing a general form for the amplitude involving currents and propagators.
  • One participant attempts to derive the amplitude for the process χχ → h → W⁺ W⁻ and questions how to represent outgoing particles correctly.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the Higgs, being a scalar, cannot interact with a vector current, suggesting a specific form for the interaction involving fermion bilinears.
  • A participant questions whether self-couplings between gauge bosons differ between SM and SUSY, referencing a specific coupling formula from Peskin.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct formulation of amplitudes and interactions, particularly regarding the treatment of scalar versus vector couplings. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on the mathematical representations involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of deriving amplitudes and the necessity of understanding specific Feynman rules. There are unresolved questions regarding the correct forms of currents and the implications of SUSY on gauge boson self-couplings.

ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
Do you have any source where I can check for the neutralino (higgsino or chargino/bino -like) interaction processes?
In general I'm trying to find the amplitudes in the Appendix A of:
http://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.47.376
But without seeing a Lagrangian, I can't understand the possible contributing channels I think...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm sorry you are not generating any responses at the moment. Is there any additional information you can share with us? Any new findings?
 
Yes I am able to clear a lot of difficulties I've been having with it. But it's still a little bit complicated.
For example one can have the figures I attached for [itex]χχ \rightarrow ZZ[/itex]... which are 6 in number (n=1,2,3,4 for the neutralinos), and H,h are the two neutral scalar higgs bosons.
So in general I can write the amplitude for each one, right?
However I am not sure how is this kind of amplitudes written... Could someone check if the formula I'm using is correct for the small higgs?

[itex]M= [ \bar{u}_{χ} \gamma^{\mu} u_{χ}] \frac{1}{k^{2} -m_{h}^{2} +i m_{h} \Gamma_{h}} j_{\mu}^{ZZ}[/itex]

where u's are the spinors for the χ neutralinos... k is the momentum of the scalar higgs, [itex]m_{h}[/itex] its mass, [itex]\Gamma_{h}[/itex] its width and [itex]j_{\mu}^{ZZ}[/itex] the current of ZZ bosons (I don't know its form- any help?).
Thanks
 

Attachments

  • neutralinos.jpg
    neutralinos.jpg
    5.4 KB · Views: 387
I think that the [itex]\gamma^{\mu}[/itex] in the [itex]\bar{u}_{\chi}\gamma^{\mu}{u}_{\chi}[/itex] should be removed since the neutralinos couple to a scalar, not a vector. For the coupling of the higgs to the Z see feynman rules references, peskin for example. I think it it something like [itex]\frac{m_{Z}^{2}}{v}[/itex] .
 
I think in general the [itex]M[/itex] is the coupling of the one current with the other through the propagator.
[itex]M= j_{1}^{\mu} [prop]_{\mu \nu} j_{2}^{\nu}[/itex]
No?
A current then is supposed to have an index.
 
Well I tried to think of someway to do it, can someone check the amplitude please?
it's for: [itex]χχ \rightarrow h \rightarrow W^{+} W^{-}[/itex]
Can someone help me with how I can use the Feynman rules I've found?
For the coupling of [itex]χχh[/itex] I have:
[itex]-ig_{2} (c_{L} P_{L} + c_{R} P_{R} )[/itex]
So for this it's better to work with the left and right neutralinos separately and then add the amplitudes ([itex]M= M(χ_{L}χ_{L} \rightarrow W^{+}W^{-}) +M(χ_{R}χ_{R} \rightarrow W^{+}W^{-})[/itex] )

For the [itex]h W^{\pm}[/itex] vertex I found:
[itex]ig_{2} m_{W} n^{\mu \nu} \cos(\beta-\alpha)[/itex]

And the propagator is as given:
[itex]\frac{i}{k^{2}-m_{h}^{2} + i m_{h} \Gamma_{h}}[/itex]

What am I missing to get the [itex]M[/itex] is how to represent the outgoing particles...
is it fine to write for the fermionic neutralinos the [itex]\bar{u}_{χ} \gamma^{\mu} u_{χ'}[/itex] ?
I am not sure...
in any case it's like:

[itex]i M(χ_{j}χ_{j} \rightarrow W^{+}W^{-})= (-ig_{2} c_{j}) \frac{i }{k^{2}-m_{h}^{2} + i m_{h} \Gamma_{h}} ( ig_{2} m_{W} \cos(\beta-\alpha)) n^{\mu \nu} \epsilon_{\mu} \epsilon^{*}_{\nu}[/itex]

is that right?
 
Last edited:
The vertex for the ##\chi\chi h## interaction is what should be within the fermion bilinear. Basically you should have (given your Feynman rules)
$$
-ig_{2} \bar u_\chi (c_L P_L + c_R P_R) u_{\chi'} \frac{i }{k^{2}-m_{h}^{2} + i m_{h} \Gamma_{h}} ( ig_{2} m_{W} \cos(\beta-\alpha)) n^{\mu \nu} \epsilon_{\mu} \epsilon^{*}_{\nu}.
$$
Since the higgs is a scalar, it cannot interact with the vector current of the form ##\bar u \gamma^\mu u##. There is simply no way to contract the free Lorentz index.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Aha... so it's more like I'm having a RL and LR helicities.
 
do the self couplings between gauge bosons change from SM to SUSY?
eg the coupling of [itex]Z^0 _{\lambda} (q), W^+_{\mu}(k_+), W^-_{\nu}(k_-)[/itex] is it still
[itex]i g \cos(\theta_{w}) [g^{\mu \nu} (k_{-}-k_{+})^{\lambda}+ g^{\nu \lambda} (-q-k_-)^{\mu} + g^{\mu \lambda} (q+k_+)^{\nu}][/itex]
as given in Peskin Fig 21.9, or is it changed?
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
11K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
10K