New Physics CP Violation in b → s Transitions — From Hints to Proof —

NP b → s CPV George W.S. Hou (NTU) Moriond QCD, 3/9/08 1

New Physics CP Violation in b →→ s Transitions— From Hints to Proof —

March 9 2008, XLIII Moriond QCD @ La Thuile


I. Intro: BAU Need New Physics CPV➯

II. Hints in b →→ s

* * vs

III. New Large Yukawa Couplings: CPV in and

* kaon constraint * refinement

sb P

EW

s b

box Μ

sBmsBf

sBm

4th Generation

New Physics b →→ s CPV

0πππ 0 KBKBK AAA

and Largeand Large02sin

sB




* * vs



IV. Proof: (near) Future

* @ Tevatron & LHC(b) * BAU from Electroweak BaryogenesisElectroweak Baryogenesis

V. Discussion and Conclusion

sb P

EW

s b

box Μ

sBmsBf

sB2sin

sBm

4th Generation

New Physics b →→ s CPV

0πππ 0 KBKBK AAA


sB

and (distant) Past


I. Intro: BAU ➯ Need New Physics CPV

103.02.0 10)1.5(

n

nB

WMAP

2010 KM ~

Too Small in SM0

nnB



0πππ 0 KBKBK AAA

sBmsBfvs

• •


0πππ 0 KBKBK AAA

Experiment is Firm

A K ~ 0 expected

0.097 0.012 0.050 0.025

0.1470.147 0.0280.028 > 5> 5

Why a Puzzle ?

?

_d

d

Ku u

Bsb

Large C ?

Large EWPenguin ?

A lot of (hadronic) finesse

Need NP CPV Phase

PEW has practically no weak phase

in SM

t, ??

Baek, London, PLB653, 249 (2007)


sBmsBfvs

1ps 0.070.1017.77 sBm

Low-ish ?

4%) ~error (fitter; MeV 230 ~

)!! 1% error (Latt.; MeV 241~

4%) error (Expt; MeV 277 ~

~

sDf

Situation

Stone talk

Haas & Kronfeld talks

Likely larger (?)sBf Likely Higher

SM

sBm

ΙRΜ )( ibs sb Observation: 22 IR sBm

weakphase

Desirable NP Phase easy to accommodate

2NP

2NPSM )( IRR

Must Measure CPV Phase in Bs: sin2Bs !


III. New Large Yukawa Couplings: CPV in andsb P

EW

s b

box Μ

⟨* kaon constraint⟩ * refinement

sBm

4th Generation

sB2sinPredictPredict

Large and Large and << 0 0


On Boxes and Z Penguins

NondecouplingGIM , charm , K

small ’K , K (still waiting)

heavy top , sin2

Z dominance for heavy top1986 2002

All w/ 3-gen., Just wait if there’s 4th

D !D !

b’ , t ’ @ LHC

BBss

t, t’

∵ ∵ Large Yukawa


_d

d

Ku u

Bsb t, t’

WSH, Nagashima, Soddu, PRL’05LO PQCD ⊕ 4th Gen.

A 12% vs 15% (data)

NLO PQCD ⊕ 4th Gen.

A 15% S 0.11

SM3 input

vs 0.340.2x (data)

WSH, Li, Mishima, Nagashima, PRL’07

A = AK+ AK+~ 15% and

Joining C & PEW

Both and in Right Direction !A S

sb P

EW

ion)(illustrat

GeV 030t'm


• Fixed rsb ➯ Narrow sb Range destructivedestructive with top• For rsb ~ 0.02 – 0.03, [Vcb ~ 0.04

sb Range ~ 60 ° - 70

° Finite CPVCPV

Phase

Bs Mixing Measured @ Tevatron in 4/2006

?

Large CPV in BLarge CPV in Bss Mixing Mixing

WSH, Nagashima, Soddu, PRD’07

03.0

02.0

01.0rsb

CDF range

SM (high)

01.002.0

03.0sin2Bs ~ 0.5 - 0.7

Despite mBs, B(bsll) SM-likeWSH, Nagashima, Soddu, PRL’05


Sign Predicted !

sin2Bs ~ 0.5 - 0.7

Despite mBs, B(bsll) SM-like

03.0

02.0

01.0

CDF range

SM (high)

01.002.0

03.0

rsb

?

A K,

S

WSH, Nagashima, Soddu, PRL’05

Large CPV in BLarge CPV in Bss Mixing Mixing


Can Large CPV in Bs Mixing Be Measured @ Tevatron ?

Sure thing by LHCb ca. 2009


btst VV

tbtsVV

cbcsVV

cbcdVV-

ubudVV

ubusVV

OS

Q

b →→ d “Triangle” and b →→ s Quadrangle

b b →→ s s

b →→ s Quadrangle (almost Triangle) Area ~ ()30x b →→ d Triangle

( )

Strength and Size of sB2sin

~ SM3

negligible


IV. Proof: (near) Future and (distant) Past

* @ Tevatron & LHC(b)* BAU from Electroweak BaryogeElectroweak Baryogenesisnesis

sB2sin

“Evidence” (?) last week: UTfit on Bs

arXiv:0803.0659 [hep-ph]

Talks by Weber & Hicheur (tomorrow)


BBssProspect (short term)

Bs J/ analogous to Bd J/ KS

V V Angular & Vertex Resolved Analysis to disentangle CP components

• CDF/DØ : 8 fb projected

(sin 2BBss) ≃ 0.2 (?)/exp

similar • LHCb : 0.5 fb(2008 ?)

(sin 2BBss) ≃ 0.04

• ATLAS : 2.5 fb(2008 ?)

(sin 2BBss) ≃ 0.16

CMS ?

€ LHCb the winner if ~ SM

sin 2BBs s in SM

$$ Tevatron could get lucky

ifif sin 2BBss largelarge New Physics !New Physics !

Could Tevatron run beyond 2008 ?

But 2009 looks interesting !

Nakada @ fLHC 3/07

~ 6

sin2Bs ~ 0.5 - 0.7


103.02.0 10)1.5(

n

nB

WMAP

2010 KM ~

Too Small in SM

B.A.U. from Electroweak BaryogenesisElectroweak Baryogenesis ?

Why? Jarlskog Invariant in SM3 (need 3 generation in KM)

Normalize by T ~ 100 GeV

1033 ~ A is common (unique) area of trianglein SM

masses too small !

CPV


If shift by One Generation in SM4 (need 3 generation in KM)

103.02.0 10)1.5(

n

nB

WMAP

2010 KM ~

Too Small in SM

Only fac. 30 in CPV per se

~~ 10 101515 Gain Gain

Gain mostly in Large Yukawa Couplings !Gain mostly in Large Yukawa Couplings !

CPV



Order of Phase Transition


Too much equlibration in SM washes away B.A. at high T

Cubic term too smallExtra Heavy Bosons (usual approach)

Carena, Megevand, Quirós, Wagner, NPB’05

Upshot: relativistic d.o.f. g* become g*(), effective reheating by

F decoupling around Tc Stronger Transition

Fermion• Couple Strongly to Higgs Can “Boil” Higgs Soup• mF/T Not small Cannot use above m/T expansion Not too large Does not decouple too early




Upshot: relativistic d.o.f. g* become g*(), effective reheating by

F decoupling around Tc Stronger Transition

Fermion• Couple Strongly to Higgs Can “Boil” Higgs Soup• mF/T Not small Cannot use above m/T expansion Not too large Does not decouple too early

Used Higgsino/Wino Model w/ 12 d.o.f. >> 2.1

Comment that top (also 12 d.o.f.) w/ ≅ 1 is too smallCarena, Megevand, Quirós, Wagner, NPB’05

Observation: ∃∃ 4th Generation, then t < b’ < t’ ~ 300 GeV may be sufficient for ?!

If numerics of CMQW can be used




Can 4th Generation Restore Electroweak Baryogenesis ?

CPV

Can we use this to DemandDemand to see NP b → s CPV ?


V. Discussion and Conclusion

• 4th generation not in such great conflict with EWPrT Kribs, Plehn, Spannowsky, Tait, PRD’07

• Issue of “UV completion” for EWBG picture (vacuum stability)

• Heavy 4th generation above 600 GeV (unitarity limit) could lead to EWSB No Higgs ? Holdom, JHEP’06

• t’ & b’ can be discovered at LHC !t’ & b’ can be discovered at LHC !




* * vs



IV. Proof: (near) Future

* @ Tevatron & LHC(b) * BAU from Electroweak BaryogenesisElectroweak Baryogenesis

sb P

EW

s b

box Μ

sBmsBf

sB2sin

sBm

4th Generation

Conclusion on New Physics b →→ s CPV

0πππ 0 KBKBK AAA


sB

and (distant) Past

Experiment is Firm

Soon !


Backup


Smaller than bccs in almost all modes

Smaller than bccs in almost all modes

Naïve average of all b s modes

sin2eff = 0.56 ± 0.052.2.11 deviation (was 2.6) btwn

b sqq and b ccs

Naïve average of all b s modes

sin2eff = 0.56 ± 0.052.2.11 deviation (was 2.6) btwn

b sqq and b ccs

Theory Expect sin 21

> sin 21

s-penguin

cc(bar)s

New Physics !?

Need More Data !

SS = Ssqq Sccs < 0 “ Problem”

Probably Need Super B Factory to Resolve !

Even deviation of ~ few Even deviation of ~ few deg indicate NPdeg indicate NP Sinha, Misra, WSH, PRL 97, 131802 (2006)


tbtsVV

btst VV

cbcsVV ubusVV

“Typical” CKM Matrix

b s

Digression 4 x 4 Unitarity ➯ Z/K Constraints

tbtdVV

btdt VV

cbcdVV

ubudVV

x ~ 0.22

b d

Satisfy b d: ✓ Cannot tell trianglefrom quadrangle


s b

Z bb_

d s


Consistency and b s Predictions

BR OK ACP ~ 0 far away

beyond SuperB

PDG ’06

SM3

SM3

Heavy t’ effectdecoupledfor b s


dbibtdt dbVV

er

cb'ub'VV

PDG06

mb’ = 230 GeV

270310

From 4 x 4 Unitarity

x = m/ ~ 1 - 3 plausible

w/ Sizable (but not huge) CPV in Mixing ~ 15%

Short-distance Only

N.B. SM LD could generate y ~ 1, x ≈ y [Falk, Grossman, Ligeti, (Nir,) Petrov]

Documents

New Physics CP Violation in b → s Transitions — From Hints to Proof —