- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Gauge symmetries emerging from extra dimensions

J. L. Chkareuli and Z. Kepuladze

  • Center for Elementary Particle Physics, Ilia State University, 0162 Tbilisi, Georgia and E. Andronikashvili Institute of Physics, 0177 Tbilisi, Georgia

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 94, 065013 – Published 13 September, 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.94.065013

Abstract

We argue that extra dimensions with a properly chosen compactification scheme could be a natural source for emergent gauge symmetries. Actually, some proposed vector field potential terms or polynomial vector field constraints introduced in five-dimensional Abelian and non-Abelian gauge theory are shown to smoothly lead to spontaneous violation of an underlying 5D spacetime symmetry and generate pseudo-Goldstone vector modes as conventional 4D gauge boson candidates. As a special signature, there appear, apart from conventional gauge couplings, some properly suppressed direct multiphoton (multiboson, in general) interactions in emergent QED and Yang-Mills theories whose observation could shed light on their high-dimensional nature. Moreover, in emergent Yang-Mills theories an internal symmetry G also occurs spontaneously broken to its diagonal subgroups once 5D Lorentz violation happens. This breaking originates from the extra vector field components playing a role of some adjoint scalar field multiplet in the 4D spacetime. So, one naturally has the Higgs effect without a specially introduced scalar field multiplet. Remarkably, when being applied to grand unified theories (GUTs) this results in a fact that the emergent GUTs generically appear broken down to the Standard Model just at the 5D Lorentz violation scale M.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (37)

  1. Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122, 345 (1961); J. Goldstone, Nuovo Cimento 19, 154 (1961).
  2. J. D. Bjorken, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 24, 174 (1963).
  3. P. R. Phillips, Phys. Rev. 146, 966 (1966).
  4. T. Eguchi, Phys. Rev. D 14, 2755 (1976).
  5. M. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. D 37, 210 (1988).
  6. Y. Nambu, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. E68, 190 (1968).
  7. V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel, Phys. Rev. D 39, 683 (1989).
  8. J. L. Chkareuli, C. D. Froggatt, and H. B. Nielsen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 091601 (2001); Nucl. Phys. B609, 46 (2001).
  9. Per Kraus and E. T. Tomboulis, Phys. Rev. D 66, 045015 (2002).
  10. A. Jenkins, Phys. Rev. D 69, 105007 (2004).
  11. V. A. Kostelecky, Phys. Rev. D 69, 105009 (2004); R. Bluhm and V. A. Kostelecky, 71, 065008 (2005).
  12. V. A. Kostelecky and R. Potting, Phys. Rev. D 79, 065018 (2009).
  13. S. M. Carroll, H. Tam, and I. K. Wehus, Phys. Rev. D 80, 025020 (2009).
  14. J. L. Chkareuli, J. G. Jejelava, and G. Tatishvili, Phys. Lett. B 696, 124 (2011).
  15. J. L. Chkareuli, C. D. Froggatt, and H. B. Nielsen, Nucl. Phys. B848, 498 (2011).
  16. J. L. Chkareuli, On emergent gauge and gravity theories, in Low Dimensional Physics and Gauge Principles (World Scientific, Singapore, 2011), pp. 80–92.
  17. R. Bluhm, N. L. Gagne, R. Potting, and A. Vrublevskis, Phys. Rev. D 77, 125007 (2008).
  18. A. Hashimoto, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2008) 040.
  19. A. T. Azatov and J. L. Chkareuli, Phys. Rev. D 73, 065026 (2006).
  20. J. L. Chkareuli and Z. R. Kepuladze, Phys. Lett. B 644, 212 (2007).
  21. J. L. Chkareuli and J. G. Jejelava, Phys. Lett. B 659, 754 (2008).
  22. J. L. Chkareuli, C. D. Froggatt, J. G. Jejelava, and H. B. Nielsen, Nucl. Phys. B796, 211 (2008).
  23. J. L. Chkareuli, C. D. Froggatt, and H. B. Nielsen, Nucl. Phys. B821, 65 (2009).
  24. J. L. Chkareuli, Phys. Lett. B 721, 146 (2013); Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2906 (2014); Phys. Rev. D 90, 065015 (2014).
  25. S. Weinberg, The Quantum Theory of Fields (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000), Vol. 2.
  26. J. L. Chkareuli, Z. Kepuladze, and G. Tatishvili, Eur. Phys. J. C 55, 309 (2008); J. L. Chkareuli and Z. Kepuladze, 72, 1954 (2012).
  27. Ling-Fong Li, Eur. Phys. J. C 28, 145 (2003).
  28. J. L. Chkareuli, C. D. Froggatt, R. N. Mohapatra, and H. B. Nielsen, arXiv:hep-th/0412225.
  29. N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. Dvali, Phys. Lett. B 429, 263 (1998); I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. Dvali, 436, 257 (1998).
  30. An excellent review of this and related topics can be found in V. A. Rubakov, Phys. Usp. 44, 871 (2001).
  31. T. Appelquist, H. C. Cheng, and B. A. Dobrescu, Phys. Rev. D 64, 035002 (2001).
  32. A. Muck, A. Pilaftsis, and R. Ruckl, Phys. Rev. D 65, 085037 (2002).
  33. For a comprehensive review and phenomenological implementations, see also D. Hooper and S. Profumo, Phys. Rep. 453, 29 (2007).
  34. L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3370 (1999); 83, 4690 (1999).
  35. For some discussion, see A. Dobado and A. L. Maroto, Nucl. Phys. B592, 203 (2001).
  36. C. Dams and R. Kleiss, Eur. Phys. J. C 34, 419 (2004).
  37. R. N. Mohapatra, Unification and Supersymmetry (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 94, 065013– Published 13 September, 2016
  • Received 29 July 2016

© 2016 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation