A. Yu. Smirnov

1. Nu-HoRIzons III Closing talk A. Yu. Smirnov International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy Institute for Nuclear Research, RAS, Moscow, Russia Nu HoRIizons-III, Allahabad February 10, 2010

2. Evgeny has already covered the present and future. So, what is left for me is the Past new insight on what we are doing now

3. Two lessons In 30 ies: neutrinos will be never discovered. Technological and experimental developments allowed to detect neutrinos in 50ies 1 1926 Now several X 105 2n bb-decays which are of the second order in weak interactions Neutrinos have mass We learned this not from kinematical measurements but from discovery of for a long time ``exotic’’ hypothetical new process – neutrino oscillations 2 80 years Solution may come from unexpected side of Pauli’s original idea …

4. Few ``stories'' Which have certain connection to what we have discussed during this workshop 1. Phenomenology: before and now 2. Is TBM accidental? 3. Cosmic neutrinos and wiggles 4. Expanding nu horizons

5. Before and Now From To Anomalies and Hints, evidences and first discoveries Precision measurements; searches for New new physics; studies of sub-leading effects Combined fits Confronting high statistics data from different experiments Oscillations and Adiabatic conversion More complicated phenomena Anomalies: what is left? Unresolved problems?

6. Looking for mismatch Propagation in vacuum - matter Low - High energies Determination of the same neutrino parameters from different type of experiments Dm2 q Neutrino- antineutrino Different flavor channels Goals: Nature of neutrinos mass: its possible dependence on energy and density • Searches for new physics: • New interactions • New neutrino states • Violation of fundamental • symmetries (CPT, Lorentz) Test of theory of neutrino propagation Searches for sub-leading effects, e.g. due to 1-3 mixing

7. Solar neutrinos KamLAND vs. Features - Electron antineutrinos - Non-averaged vacuum oscillations - Small matter effect - Phase is crucial - Electron neutrinos - Strong matter effect - Adiabatic conversion - Averaged oscillations q12(solar) < q12(Kamland)

8. 12- and 13- mixings with some benchmarks T. Schwetz et al., 0808..2016 G.L. Fogli, et al 0805.2517, v3 sin2q13 = 0.016 +/- 0.010 1s sin2 2q13 ~ 0.06 + MINOS: 0.02 +/- 0.1 x x x QLCl TBM

9. Solar only SNO vs. Gallium Vacuum / low energies Matter / high energies P ~ cos4q13sin2q12 P ~ cos4q13(1 – ½ sin22q12) Lines of P = const q13 q12 q13 q12 If someone wants to give money for theta 1-3 … S. Goswami, A.S. (2004) sin2q13 = 0.017+/- 0.26

10. Atmospheric MINOS neutrinos K2K vs. • - Muon and electron neutrinos • - Neutrinos and antineutrinos • - Matter effects • Multilayer medium • Vacuum - matter • - Large base-lines • - Huge energy range • - Muon neutrinos or antineutrinos • - Vacuum mimicking • Oscillations phase • E ~ 1 – 10 GeV SK: Dm212 = 0 Matter effect? Dm232 (Atm) < Dm232 (MINOS)

11. What is left? Phenomenology of the standard scenario (SM + massive neutrinos) with standard sources and standard detectors is essentially elaborated Oscillations of very low energy (sub-sub-GeV) atmospheric neutrinos O. Peres, A.S. New neutrino sources New neutrino detectors New physics

12. Sub-subGeV neutrinos Enlarging the energy range Main features: • Two components: • directly produced by neand ne • from invisible muon decay Flavor ratio decrease with energy and deviates from 2 2.1  1.6 weaker screening effect Seasonal variations, variations with solar activity Background for diffuse SN fluxes O. Peres, A.S FLUKA

13. Oscillation effects O. Peres, A.S 5 - 10% spectrum distortion Effect of 1-3 mixing and CP-phase Effect of 2-3 mixing

14. Is TBM accidental?

15. Is TBM accidental? 1. Experiment: deviations from TBM mixing S. Goswami RGE-effect? 2. No simple and convincing model for TBM - Complicated structure, large number of assumptions and new parameters - Follows from certain correlation of unrelated sectors - Long chain of considerations ``symmetry building’’ However, if true – implies rich structure behind neutrino masses and mixing 3. Often: no connection between masses and mixing 4. Inclusion of quarks: further complication. GUT – additional requirements

16. Implications 1. TBM is not accidental: there is certain flavor symmetry behind. The symmetry is weakly broken by high order corrections, RGE effects, etc.. 2. The approximate TBM is not accidental but is a manifestation of some symmetries or other structures (which differ from what we consider now) 3. The TBM is accidental. It does not follow from symmetry immediately but results from interplay of different factors and contributions

17. TBM-violation M Abbas, A.S D sin2q12 ~ 0.02 D sin q13 ~ 0.15 D sin2q23 ~ 0.05 Experiment: TBM from symmetry of the mass matrix Deviation from TBM – violation of TBM structure of mass matrix Quantity TBM-conditions TBM violation parameters mem - met maximally mem = met D e = mem 2, \infty mmm - mtt Dmt = mmm = mtt mmm O(1) mee + mem - mmm - mmt O(1) mee + mem = mmm + mmt Dmt = mmm + mmt Strong deviation of mn from TBM is possible New structures, new approaches to explain

18. Masses and symmetries m = F(Y, v) Mechanism of mass generation VEV’s Yukawa couplings VEV alignment • different contributions • high order corrections follow from independent sectors Scalar potential Yukawa sector TBM tune by additional symmetries All these components should be correlated ``Natural’’ – consequence of symmetry? ``fine tuning’’ of symmetries

19. Masses and symmetries m = F(Y, v) Assume that one mechanism dominates High order corrections negligible VEV alignment only 6-plet Y = I C. Luhn The same origin (compactification on orbifolds with parities) M. A. Schmidt ? V = V0 Symmetry Unflavored higges

20. Symmery building Mixing appears as a result of different ways of the flavor symmetry breaking in neutrino and charged lepton sectors Symmetry is not broken completely; residual symmetries in the neutrino and charged lepton sectors are different Gf ``accidental’’ symmetry due to particular selection of flavon representations and configuration of VEV’s Residual symmetries determine structure of the mass matrices Gl Gn Amt Ml diagonal Mn TBM-type In turn, this split originates from different flavor assignments of the RH components of Nc and lc and different higgs multiplets String theory supports?

21. The simplest model? G. Altarelli D. Melone Yukawa sectors A4 Z4 Charged lepton Neutrinos 1 i -1 -i 3 L L 1 n k i i hd x’ hu fT i 1’ Nc i 1 i lc -1 at multiplets 1, i, -1 1’’ fS M < fT > = v S (0, 1, 0) x 1 k = 0, … n = 1, … 1 < fS > = v S (1, 1, 1) Particular selection of representations Flavon sector U(1)R x’ x fS fT 0 2 x0 fS0 fT0 Vacuum alignment Driving fields -1 1 1 GUT-scale or higher?

22. Alternatives Quark-lepton Quark-Lepton universality complementarity The same principle as in quark sector Weak Based on observation: lepton mixing = maximal mixing - quark mixing complementarity Large mixing is related to smallness of neutrino mass and weak mass hierarchy of neutrinos Cabibbo ``hase’’: corrections from high order interactions generate Cabibbo mixing and deviation from BM, GU is not necessary • - quark-lepton symmetry • existence of structure • which produces • bi-maximal mixing

23. Universality & Unification motivation: Correspondence: ur , ub , uj <-> n dr , db , dj <-> e Symmetry: Pati-Salam Leptons as 4th color Form multiplet of the extended gauge group, in particular, 16-plet of SO(10) Unification: Can it be accidental? GUT n MSM Minimalism in principles and not in number of degrees of freedom Unification of - quarks & leptons - couplings ``Minimalist approach’’ M. Shaposhnikov et al

24. Flavored GUT's Generic problem: In many models, flavor prescription required for explanation of differences of mass and mixing of quarks and leptons prevents from GU Relate this difference to spontaneous breaking of GUT symmetry SO(10) x G + ... New elements should be added flavor - Singlet fermions - 16H - flavons - 126 126 - pair vector-like: 16 16 matter fields - 10’ - Flavons - Zn B. Dutta , Y Mimura R. Mohapatra

25. String engineering Playing with geometry of internal space V .Bouchard, J J Heckman J Seo, C. Vafa Generic elements of the F-theory: In the lowest order: Yukawa couplings are given by overlap of the 6D fields localized on ``matter curves’’ . 1. SU(5) 10M 5H They appear at intersection of three matter curves which correspond to matter and Higgs fields. 5M 6D This leads to singular Yukawa matrices: Yij ~ zi zj Only one eigenvalue (mass) is non-zero

26. ... continued Masses of lighter quarks and leptons appear as result of corrections due to interactions with the background gauge fields. 2. Corrections are determined by the gauge coupling: e ~ aGUT ~ (M* Ri) -2 where Ri~ MGUT-1 M*4 = aGUT -1 MGUT4 Mass matrices appear then as powers of these parameters

27. ...continued Expansion parameters and powers for different fermions are different GUT symmetry is broken in the hypercharge direction 3. Origin of Yukawa structures is in the gauge sector! Large lepton mixing is related to weak mass hierarchy of neutrinos and originates from properties of RH neutrinos or objects which play role of the RH neutrinos 4. - Kaluza-Klein seesaw 1 LUV M = L Hu L Hu from integration of the KK modes: • e1/2 e • e1/2 1 e1/2 • e e1/2 1 up to coefficients of the order 1 UPMNS = sin qC ~ aGUT Froggatt-Nielsen is back?

28. Wiggles and cosmic neutrinos

29. 25 years of the MSW survival probability distance H-wiggles and L-wiggles Flavor of neutrino state follows density change

30. Hidden jet model Type Ib/c , II SNe M* < 30 Msun Helium (r < 1011 cm ) and Hydrogen envelope R* = 3 1012 cm central engine (BH) internal shocks parameters of jet: bulk jet Lorentz factor: Gb ~ 3 - 10 jet duration: t ~ 10 sec accretion disc rjet = 6 1010 cm half-angle of jet: ~ 1/Gb infall n = 3 1020 cm-1 shocks: stellar envelope Variability time scale: 0.1 sec S. Razzaque, P. Meszaros, E. Waxman ~50 internal shocks Slow jets which do not break through the envelope B ~ 108 Gauss

31. Conversion S. Razzaque, A.S. vacuum Earth envelope jet nb ni ni na I P*(nani) loss of coherence |Ubi|2 P(nanb) = Si P*(nani)|Ubi|2 For E < 10 GeV oscillations inside the Earth: P*(nani) = <|Sx Ajet(nanx) Aenv(nx ni)|2 >jet |Ubi|2  PE(ni nb) averaging over jet production region averaged vacuum oscillations MMS: P(nanb) = Sg P*(nang) < Pvac(ngnb) >

32. Energy profile of the effect P(ne nm) for transition probabilities: inverted asymptotics plateau L-wiggles dip P(nmne) H-wiggles ERL = cos 2q12 Dm212/2V0 plateau asymptotics ERH = cos 2q13 Dm312/2V0 V0 is the matter potential at the bottom of envelope ERL ERH

33. Conversion probabilities P(ne nb) Conversion probabilities as functions of the neutrino energy for two different values of initial density: n0 = 1023 cm-3 (red lines) and n0 = 2 1023 cm-3 (blue lines) P(nmnb)

34. H-wiggles Interference PH1/2 n3m n2m ne * n2m Projection in the initial state The amplitude of wiggles: W = sin 2q130 [ PH (1 – PH )] 1/2 Fadiab ~ Int H32 F ~ Fadiab

35. L-wiggles Interference PL1/2 (1 – PH )1/2 n2m n2m nm n1 n1m Projection in the initial state * (1 – PL )1/2 W = sin 2q23 [(1 – PH) PL (1 – PL )] 1/2 is large

36. Changing 1-3 mixing • Probabilities as functions • Of neutrino energy for • Different valies of 1-3 mixing • and two different initial • flavor contents: • : 1 : 0 (upper panel) 1 : 2 : 0 (bottom panel)

37. Changing CP-phase

38. Expanding Horizons

39. What are New ideas Major problems Beyond determination of neutrino parameters New experimental developments New areas of research Results in other field which can affect our field

40. MiniBooNE LSND #nu GSI Solar nu spectrum Ga Anomalies

41. Neutrinos & DE Relic neutrinos Cosmic neutrinos Neutrinos Frontiers & flavor SN neutrinos Neutrino & LHC LBL-technology

42. Cosmic neutrinos Fermi LAT: Gamma ray emission from the shell of SN remnant W44 Hint of acceleration of CR to E~ 1015 eV hadronic interactions  p0 p + /- n

43. Neutrino structure of the Universe Physics of relic neutrinos A. Ringwald, Y.Y. Y. Wong Clustering depending on masses Neutrino halos, neutrino stars S. Hannestad, J. Brandbyge Weak gravitational lensing Neutrino anisotropy Neutrino – Dark energy connections Possible new interactions accelerons J. I Kapusta J R Bhatt U. Sarkar Neutrino condensates Superfluidity

44. Multi-accelerator experiments Commercially developed high power compact proton cyclotrons 2 GeV, ~1023 pot.year J. M. Conrad and M Shaevitz 0912.4079 [hep-ex] Phase 2 8 km 20 km 1.5 km Study CP violation in DUSEL H2O nmne Gd from m decay at rest

45. In conclusion of closing What is the difference between nu-horizon and usual horizon? To expand usual horizons one needs to clime up above the surface of the Earth To expand nu horizons one needs to go down deep underground, underwater, under-ice Triveni Sangam

46. Neutrinos & LHC Expectations range from Identification of the mechanism of neutrino mass generation e.g. if the Higgs triplet with terascale mass and small VEV generates neutrino mass and mixing to Practically nothing with conclusion that some EW scale mechanisms with certain values of parameters are excluded

47. Discrete flavor symmetry The simplest with irreducible representation 3 Utbm = Umag U13(p/4) 3 w = 1 1 1 1 Umag = 1/ 3 1 w w2 1 w2 w w = exp(-2ip/3) E. Ma Symmetry: symmetry group of even permutations of 4 elements A4 representations: 3, 1, 1’, 1’’ tetrahedron Other possibilities: T7 , D4 , S4 ,D(3n2 ) … Deviation from TBM?

48. Possible realization Ubm = U23mU12m • - maximal 2-3 mixing • - zero 1-3 mixing • maximal 1-2 mixing • - no CP-violation ½ ½ -½ ½ ½ ½ -½ ½ 0 Two maximal rotations Ubm = F. Vissani V. Barger et al Bi-maximal mixing In seesaw: structure of Majorana mass matrix of RH neutrinos In the lowest approximation: Vquarks = I, Vleptons =Vbm m1 = m2 = 0 Corrections generate - mass split - CKM and - deviation from bi-maximal Dirac matrix + GUT or/and horizontal symmetry Deviation

49. Hint of non-zero 1-3 mixing with some theoretical benchmarks without RGE • difference of 1-2 mixing from solar data and Kamland • atmospheric: excess of sub-GeV e-like events Fogli et al ., 0806.2649 sin2q13 = 0.016 +/- 0.010 0.02 +/- 0.01 (with MINOS ) sin2q13 QLCn 2s QLCl TBM sin2q12

50. Tri/bimaximal mixing L. Wolfenstein P. F. Harrison D. H. Perkins W. G. Scott 2/3 1/3 0 - 1/6 1/3 1/2 1/6 - 1/3 1/2 Utbm = n3 is bi-maximally mixed n2is tri-maximally mixed - maximal 2-3 mixing - zero 1-3 mixing - no CP-violation Utbm = U23(p/4) U12 sin2q12= 1/3 Broken tri-bimaximal mixing? Best fit values: Implies symmetry sin2q13 ~ 0.02 TBM + corrections D sin2q23 ~ 0.05 or broken symmetry D sin2q12 ~ 0.02