1 / 40

Makiko Nagashima (NTU)

Large electroweak penguin effects in B and K physics. Makiko Nagashima (NTU). HEP seminar at IOPAS, Oct. 28 (2005). Theory seminar KEK, Sep. 6 (2005). Contents. K π DCPV puzzle within 4 th generation model W.S.Hou, M.N, A. Soddu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 141601(2005).

khuong
Download Presentation

Makiko Nagashima (NTU)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Large electroweak penguin effects in B and K physics Makiko Nagashima (NTU) HEP seminar at IOPAS, Oct. 28 (2005) Theory seminar KEK, Sep. 6 (2005)

  2. Contents Kπ DCPV puzzle within 4th generation model W.S.Hou, M.N, A. Soddu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 141601(2005) 4th generation model and indications from Kπ and K physics W.S.Hou, M.N, A. Soddu, hep-ph/0508237, to appear in PRD An enhanced

  3. Introduction Standard Model and CKM mechanism 3generation 3mixing angles 1 CP phase Quark sector SU(2) doublet CKM matrix SU(2) singlet Unitarity Triangle Study of CPV / Test of SM / Search for NP

  4. Three sides are comparable B physics has success in studying of CP violation In this talk, We will see and for Bs system

  5. B f B Only for neutral meson We focus on DCPV in this talk Observables of CP Violation Time dependent CP asymmetry Direct CP asymmetry see directly the difference of yield ( Direct CPV ) ( Mixing-induced CPV )

  6. b u W u u u u s W s u b u u sub-dominant W b s d d d d d d Z,γ u Terminology: TREE and PENGUIN diagrams Tree diagram > 1/Nc Penguin diagram W > b s g u

  7. Part I Large EWP effects on B→Kπ Direct CP PDG2002

  8. Result on DCPV in Kπ PUZZLE

  9. Lepton-Photon Symposium ‘05 The large discrepancy still persists

  10. Theoretical calculations in 2001 QCDF by M. Beneke et al., NPB606(2001)245 PQCD by Keum, Li and Sanda, PRD63(2001)054008 Two of DCPV behaves similar

  11. Improved calculations Beneke and Neubert, NPB675(2003)333 Annihilation contributions H-n. Li, S. Mishima and A.I. Sanda, hep-ph/0508041

  12. vs Direct CP Violation (DCPV) Difference of Yields given by single term no relative phases DCPV goes away CP

  13. In K pi amplitudes sub-dominant If one neglects EWP and C, No phase differences SM up to leading order calculation QCDF (BBNS) kT PQCD (KLS) contradiction (2001) away (2003)

  14. How to explain deviation ? The SM can explain the different pattern of DCPVs in Kpi modes completely Of course, it is fine !! This does not mean THERE IS NO NEW PHYSICS IN OUR NATURE THE SM and THE NP can not be distinguished in Kpi DCPVs From this aspect, The different pattern of DCPVs remains a crucial hint of New Physics. New Physics exists, its contribution appear in other processes, and can be tested. What can we learn for New Physics from Experimental results ?

  15. We call for Large with an extra weak phase extra comparable contributions bringing phase differences toward must not be negligible Assemble New physics penguin 4th generation scenario We employ kTPQCD approach naturally explain large

  16. At leading process a hard gluon kicks spectator is introduced to cure the endpoint singularities kTPQCD approach Large strong phase comes from annihilation process

  17. T. Yanir, JHEP06, 044 A. Arhrib and W-S. Hou, EPJC27,555 4th generation scenario A sequential 4th generation in addition to the SM particles same quantum number well-known unknown Minimum Setup ( meaning to be clear in Part II ) follows WS parameterization

  18. Our assumption The low energy operators are the same as the SM Neither Scalar OPE nor Tensor OPE. R.H. dynamics is suppressed by ms/mb New physics enters though loop processes, and changes the short distance effects Buras, et al. Minimal flavor violation Barger, et al. Z’ model Baek, et al. Generic EWP

  19. Tree QCD Penguin EW/EM Penguin Effective Hamiltonian Dividing ΔCi by QCD penguin Large enhancement Wilson coefficient Natural ability of 4th generation to large enhancement of EWP t' effects well-satisfy b → sγrate and DCPV

  20. PDG04 Belle(04) PDG04 Constraint B(b→sll) gets greatly enhanced Δm is lower than EXP. bound 4th generation effects are not excluded!!

  21. Result kTPQCD in the SM + 4th generation sizable splitting between Roughly, described as It naturally generates the phase diff. and sizable mag. of the extra term

  22. Remark Our result is at leading order in kTPQCD. A recent result finds a much larger color-suppressed tree (C) at next-to-leading order. is less negative (H-n. Li, S. Mishima and A.I. Sanda, hep-ph/0508041) Comparably large C would allow more parameter space for the 4th generation

  23. Some Curiosities

  24. MICPV is rather little sensitive to strong phases Specially, MICPV due to b→s transition behaves like naïve factorization + 4th gene.

  25. Naïve Factorization ⊗ Final StateRescattering OtherwiseDouble Counting Another framework: extra strong phase from Final State Interaction George W.S. Hou, BCP JC, Oct. 14 (2002) No Rescattering

  26. ICHEP04 We followed Mod.Phys.Lett. A18,1763 by C-K. Chua, W-S. Hou and K-C. Yang It accounts for (strong phase) problem (strong phase)

  27. EW penguin would be brought into amplitude from We performed analysis by incorporating t’ effects There is no solution re-scattering happens between This FSI picture doesn’t help for resolving the puzzle

  28. Naively assumed One may have suspicion that b→s would spill over into s→d is not necessarily ~ 0 Part II Explore s→d and b→d implications did not care about

  29. should be all intertwined … PLB 192 441 (1987) by W.S. Hou et al.

  30. We have some constraint on from From K pi study, we learned Keep Be moderate Impose be close to the Cabibbo angle

  31. (1) (2) Allowed region from K processes (shaded region) (elliptic rings) depends on hadronic parameter R6 and R8 is less stringent standard (1) Bijnens (2) (simulated dots) We found

  32. Outcome for We find enhancing to or even higher !! we take Current Upper Bound It is very hard to measure but challenging… It might be even larger than !!

  33. Unfortunately, US government cancelled the KOPIO experiment We will have to wait longer to see whether such effects is really present… Let us hope this stimulates the program at JPARC !!

  34. Furthermore….. We also checked the impact on Bd and D system

  35. Summary Starting point → Direct CP Violation in B→Kπ 4th generation is possible to generate Large EWP Extend our study to Bd and K system ( to, phenomenologically, understand the possibilities of having still fourth generation ) ( )

  36. BACKUP SLIDE

  37. Our anxiety FROM PDG04

  38. We now know neutrinos have mass, will have CPV, and more to be revealed. # of neutrino =3 is just one piece of info. The rho parameter is less of a problem. The S parameter is the real problem (it ‘s so for most NP models.) What the situation changes if the Higgs is not seen and actually heavy ?

  39. Extra generation vs. EW precision data V.A. Novikov et al., PLB529, 111 mH>113 GeV, mD=130 GeV mD=200, mU=220, mE=100 [GeV] mN [GeV] Δm=sqrt(mU^2-mD^2) [GeV] Ng Ng

  40. 2D plots in different way

More Related