Running Constants: Unifying Gaugino Masses in SUSY

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ChrisVer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constants Running
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the concept of running constants in Supersymmetry (SUSY), particularly the unification of gaugino masses (m_{\bar{g}}, m_{\bar{W}}, m_{\bar{B}}) at the Grand Unified Theory (GUT) scale (~MGUT) and their ratios at lower energy scales, such as 2 TeV. Participants highlight that if SUSY breaking occurs below MGUT, the gauginos would remain massless, making discussions of their masses irrelevant. The conversation also touches on the Higgs mechanism and the implications for fermion masses in the Standard Model, emphasizing that Yukawa couplings are the primary focus above the Electroweak Symmetry Breaking (EWSB) scale.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Supersymmetry (SUSY) concepts
  • Familiarity with Gaugino masses and their significance in SUSY
  • Knowledge of the Higgs mechanism and Electroweak Symmetry Breaking (EWSB)
  • Basic principles of particle physics and mass generation
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of SUSY breaking on gaugino masses and their ratios
  • Study the role of Yukawa couplings in the Standard Model above EWSB
  • Explore the Higgs mechanism and its effects on particle masses in high-energy collisions
  • Investigate the mathematical framework of running constants in quantum field theory
USEFUL FOR

Particle physicists, theoretical physicists, and students interested in Supersymmetry and the Standard Model, particularly those exploring mass generation and symmetry breaking in high-energy physics.

ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
Well I am having some difficulty in understanding the running constants... I am not sure if this applies to the Standard Model as well, but I saw that in SUSY recently...
If we take the value of the gaugino masses m_{\bar{g}},m_{\bar{W}},m_{\bar{B}} (by bar I mean Gluino,W-ino and B-ino) to be equal at some energy scale (~MGUT) then we can go to lower energy scales (let's say at TeV) to find their ratio:
m_{\bar{g}}:m_{\bar{W}}:m_{\bar{B}}≈6:2:1
I guess this ratio depends on the model.

My problem is that I don't understand how we can do that, in the case the SuSy breakdown occurs at lower energies than M_GUT... While SuSy is unbroken, the gauginos will have to be massless, right? If the breakdown occurs at around 2TeV let's say, then it's meaningless to speak about their masses...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The same thing happens with fermion masses in the Standard Model. Typically it is just a matter of sloppy wording and what really is running are the Yukawa couplings (at least above EWSB). I am no SUSY expert, but I suspect there is something similar at work here.
 
ChrisVer said:
My problem is that I don't understand how we can do that, in the case the SuSy breakdown occurs at lower energies than M_GUT... While SuSy is unbroken, the gauginos will have to be massless, right? If the breakdown occurs at around 2TeV let's say, then it's meaningless to speak about their masses...

In SUSY models where you have some unification of masses etc. at the GUT scale, then it is at the GUT scale where the SUSY breaking is hypothesised to be happening. So no, that sort of unification doesn't make any sense if the SUSY breaking scale is way below the GUT scale.
 
Orodruin said:
The same thing happens with fermion masses in the Standard Model. Typically it is just a matter of sloppy wording and what really is running are the Yukawa couplings (at least above EWSB). I am no SUSY expert, but I suspect there is something similar at work here.

yes, the same question I could ask for the Standard Model as well for above the EWSB...
For example do the W and Z bosons we know become massless? I think they do (at least effectively) because you will have energies above the vev energy...
 
ChrisVer said:
yes, the same question I could ask for the Standard Model as well for above the EWSB...
For example do the W and Z bosons we know become massless? I think they do (at least effectively) because you will have energies above the vev energy...

Yeah actually I'd like to know the details of this too. Does anyone have a good reference? The whole point of the Higgs mechanism is that the fermions have no mass before symmetry breaking, but how literally can this be "undone" in high energy collisions? What is happening? If we calculate say the running top mass in some renormalisation scheme or other, does it go to zero above the symmetry breaking scale? What will happen experimentally to reflect this?
 
Be careful here, it is possible to have a supersymmetric theory of scalars and fermions which does not have gauge interactions. In this case, a supersymmetric multiplet necessarily have the same mass because supercharges commute with the momentum operator, so a supercharge acting on a state does not alter the eigenvalue of pμpμ.

The equality of masses is a result of presence of auxiliary field which has no kinetic term and eliminating it by EOM yields the constraints on fermion boson masses and coupling constant.
 
I can't say that I understand what your point is.
 
andrien said:
Be careful here, it is possible to have a supersymmetric theory of scalars and fermions which does not have gauge interactions. In this case, a supersymmetric multiplet necessarily have the same mass because supercharges commute with the momentum operator, so a supercharge acting on a state does not alter the eigenvalue of pμpμ.
It is meaningful to talk about masses of particles in a supersymmetric theory even when the SUSY breaking has not taken place if you don't have requirement of gauge invariance.
 
andrien said:
It is meaningful to talk about masses of particles in a supersymmetric theory even when the SUSY breaking has not taken place if you don't have requirement of gauge invariance.

Ahh I see. Interesting.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K