Wednesday, May 22, 2013

1305.4900 (F. del Águila et al.)

Neutrinoless double $β$ decay with small neutrino masses    [PDF]

F. del Águila, A. Aparici, S. Bhattacharya, A. Santamaria, J. Wudka
If the only contribution to neutrinoless double beta decay (NLDBD) are neutrino masses its discovery may be very difficult, especially if neutrinos present a normal hierarchy spectrum. However, this is not the only possibility; NLDBD can in general produce electrons of either chirality, in contrast with the neutrino induced NLDBD which predicts two left-handed electrons. Using an effective Lagrangian approach we classify the lepton number violating (LNV) effective operators with two leptons of either chirality but no quarks, ordered according to the magnitude of their contribution to NLDBD. We point out that, for each of the three chirality assignments, $e_{L}e_{L},e_{L}e_{R}$ and $e_{R}e_{R}$, there is only one LNV operator of the corresponding type to lowest order, and these have dimensions 5, 7 and 9, respectively. Neutrino masses are always induced by these extra operators but can be delayed to one (dimension 7) or two loops (dimension 9). Under the assumption that NLDBD is dominated by the operators of dimension 7 or 9 we find that the scale of new physics should be relatively low ($\lesssim 30$ TeV). We also list the SM additions generating these operators upon integration of the heavy modes, and discuss simple realistic examples of renormalizable theories for each case. The phenomenology of a model giving rise to the dimension 9 operator has been analyzed with some detail: if NLDBD is going to be seen in the next round of experiments, the doubly charged scalars of the model could be seen at the LHC and lepton flavour violating (LFV) rates could be at the reach of foreseen experiments. Moreover neutrino masses, which arise at two loops, display a very particular structure and are strongly constrained, in fact, $\sin^{2}\theta_{13}\gtrsim0.008$, when $\mu\rightarrow eee$ is required to lie below its present experimental limit.
View original: http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4900

No comments:

Post a Comment