Fermilab and symmetry breaking
October 8, 2008 | 11:01 am
Yesterday we reported on the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics. Here is an article that connects Tuesday’s Nobel Prize with the work done at the Department of Energy’s Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Ill. See this story for information about SLAC’s connection to the Nobel Prize.
Fermilab and symmetry breaking
Yoichiro Nambu, Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa won the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work on symmetry breaking in the world of elementary particles and forces. The prize recognizes the pioneering development of a picture of nature that has had a major impact on physics at Fermilab and at other laboratories around the world. Nambu’s formulation of symmetry breaking allows physicists to explain why there is matter in the universe, while the work of Kobayashi and Maskawa provides the theoretical tools to explain why the universe contains no antimatter.
When physicists discuss symmetries, they refer to things that appear identical. Symmetry breaking is a way of explaining why things look different from each other. An example is gravity. Skaters have no problem gliding in any direction on an ice rink. But if they jump up, gravity pulls them back down. Gravity breaks the symmetry between left and right motion and up and down motion. Every time you jump up, you rediscover gravity through symmetry breaking.
Yoichiro Nambu incorporated what is known as spontaneous symmetry breaking into the theory of elementary particles to explain why different particles have different masses–why nature allows massive quarks and electrons and massless photons. When Weinberg, Glashow, and Salam earned the Nobel Prize in 1979 for unifying the electromagnetic and weak forces into the electroweak force, they needed to explain why the force carrier of the electromagnetic force, the photon, was massless, while the force carriers of the weak force were very heavy. The concept of spontaneous symmetry breaking allowed them to overcome this difficulty. Without this broken symmetry, matter as we know it would not exist. All particles would be massless and moving at the speed of light.
From the combination of spontaneous symmetry breaking and electroweak unification comes an exciting prediction: a new particle called the Higgs boson. The Higgs is the hammer that breaks the symmetry and gives different particles different masses. Currently, close to a thousand physicists from around the world are searching for the Higgs boson in collisions produced by the Tevatron accelerator at Fermilab.
Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa formulated a mechanism to explain symmetry breaking between matter and antimatter, typically called CP violation. In 1963, Nicola Cabibbo made a modification to Enrico Fermi’s theory of the weak interactions to explain the observed decay rates of heavy quarks into light quarks. Cabibbo showed that the strength of the weak force differs for different quarks. Kobayashi and Maskawa expanded upon these ideas and made further modifications to allow for a difference in the interactions between quarks and those between antiquarks. The combined picture, the Cabbibo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix, describes all the interactions of quarks.
The CKM picture of the universe allows for the difference in the behavior of matter and antimatter that allowed matter to survive after the Big Bang, while antimatter disappeared from the universe. It also tells us that there must be more sources of CP violation beyond those already discovered. Recent results from Tevatron experiments at Fermilab may point to new sources of symmetry breaking in the interactions of Bs mesons.
Besides helping to explain the absence of antimatter, Kobayashi and Maskawa’s theories make many other predictions that experimental discoveries at Fermilab have shown to be true. The KM mechanism predicted the existence of a third generation of elementary particles. Of the particles in this third generation, 75 percent have been discovered at Fermilab: the bottom quark, the top quark, and the tau neutrino.
In 1964, Cronin and Fitch discovered CP violation in K mesons. The KM mechanism, formulated to explain Cronin and Fitch’s discovery, also predicted still further differences in the way matter and antimatter relate to each other. This led to the discovery of a new type of CP violation in kaons at Fermilab and to the discovery of matter-antimatter oscillations in Bs mesons at the Tevatron. Another prediction pointed to a new way to produce heavy particles, a mechanism also discovered at Tevatron experiments through the observation of single top quarks.
As in the case of matter generation, physicists expect to find the Higgs boson at the heart of matter–antimatter asymmetry. With a lot of work and a little luck, the Higgs boson may be the next great discovery at Fermilab to grow out of the work of these latest Nobel laureates and many other great physicists of our times.
–Brendan Casey, Joe Lykken, and Judy Jackson
Guest author
Posted in Uncategorized |



October 8th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Nice synopsis, Brendan, Joe, & Judy…
Was hoping you could help me understand the `dirty little secret’ of the Higgs: Why it does nothing to confer mass on all 3 neutrinos, for which there is near universal consensus that they are all massive, because of flavor changing. Is this not an Achilles heel of the SM ?
Also, the D0 group about one year ago, posted a news release about their measurement of the B_s switching rate, and that it was measured to be at significant variance with that predicted by the MSSM. No number was given. Is it a factor of 2, 10, or just a hefty percentage ?
Thanx,
Jimbo
October 8th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
“which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind.” from the Will of Alfred Nobel.
Is understanding how the fundamental symmetries of nature are broken will benefit most of mankind? I don’t think 99.9% of mankind will benefit in the foreseeable future. But other branch of Physics effecting all mankind in this generation and generations for the next millennium GEOPHYSICS. The discoveries and improvements in the field of CLIMATE CHANGE can (with political will) benefit all mankind.
For Nobel to Charles Keeling we are to late so maybe Jim Hansen maybe someone else from the field. But the cosmic microwave background radiation is much less important then the radiation balance of Earth.
In this reply I don’t suggest to stop basic physics research but I hope the Grid will be available also to climate modeling for considerable time and the next Nobel will be connect to more pressing problems.
October 8th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Hi Jimbo,
Great question. We submitted a search for the Higgs boson to Physical Review Letters a few weeks ago. The paper talked about how the higgs gives mass to charged fermions. During the review, I asked “what about the neutral fermions?” i.e. neutrinos.
I think the answer is no one knows. But the current prejudice in the community is that while the higgs is a tera scale object, we think the secret to neutrino mass is closer to the scale of grand unification. Theorists then have ways of generating the small masses through whats called a see-saw mechanism. Check it out on wikipedia, that what I did last week to remind myself what the see-saw mechanism is.
This summer new results came out on the switching rate of Bs mesons from both D0 and CDF. What we are looking for is a difference in the switching rate between matter going to antimatter and antimatter going back to matter.
BOTH experiments see the same effect. The results are still compatible with no new physics at between the 5 and 10% level. The exciting thing is we already have almost twice as much data on tape already so if there is something there, we will know soon.
Its a big effect. The expectation is zero and the effect is very large. But the statistical statement is there is still a 5-10% chance it is just a fluctuation. Again here the interesting thing is that both experiments are seeing the same fluctuation in the same direction.
Brendan
October 11th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Brendan,
Thanx for your rapid reply !
Just to make sure I understand it thoroughly…You say “Its a big effect..and very large”. How large (even tho its only 2-3 sigma) is it, in other words how badly did the MSSM err in lieu of the SM prediction for the B_s rate ?
Jimbo
October 17th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Hi Jimbo,
Here are some numbers. We typically parameterize
matter-antimatter asymmetries in terms of angles
or phases. If you plug in some experimental inputs
into Kobayashi and Maskawa’s formalism, it predicts
a phase in Bs mixing of about 2 degrees. So a matter-antimatter asymmetry is expected, but it should be
really small and undetectable by current experiments. However, Dzero, for example, is measuring a phase of
33 degrees. That’s what I mean by a big difference.
The 2 degrees is what we call the Standard Model
prediction. I don’t believe there is a firm super
symmetry or MSSM prediction.
The 33 degrees is a measure of the difference in
the mixing rate between matter oscillating into
antimatter versus antimatter oscillating back into matter. The overall rate averaged over the two cases agrees
pretty well with what we would expect based on the Kobayashi-Maskawa mechanism.
You can take a look at when these measurements were
featured as Results of the Week on Fermilab Today:
The CDF result:
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/today/archive_2008/today08-01-17.html
The Dzero result:
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/today/archive_2008/today08-02-28.html
Or if you are more ambitious, take a look at the publications:
CDF’s publication:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0712.2397
Dzero’s publication:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0802.2255
Enjoy!
Brendan