ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
There are two canonical approaches to treating the Standard Model as an Effective Field Theory (EFT): Standard Model EFT (SMEFT), expressed in the electroweak symmetric phase utilizing the Higgs doublet, and Higgs EFT (HEFT), expressed in the broken phase utilizing the physical Higgs boson and an independent set of Goldstone bosons. HEFT encompasses SMEFT, so understanding whether SMEFT is sufficient motivates identifying UV theories that require HEFT as their low energy limit. This distinction is complicated by field redefinitions that obscure the naive differences between the two EFTs. By reformulating the question in a geometric language, we derive concrete criteria that can be used to distinguish SMEFT from HEFT independent of the chosen field basis. We highlight two cases where perturbative new physics must be matched onto HEFT: (i) the new particles derive all of their mass from electroweak symmetry breaking, and (ii) there are additional sources of electroweak symmetry breaking. Additionally, HEFT has a broader practical application: it can provide a more convergent parametrization when new physics lies near the weak scale. The ubiquity of models requiring HEFT suggests that SMEFT is not enough.
It depends: While we find within holography that the lifetime of the magnetic field for collider energies like the ones achieved at RHIC is long enough to build up the chiral magnetic current, the lifetime of the magnetic field at LHC seems to be too
The Standard Model Effective Field Theory (SMEFT) offers a powerful theoretical framework for parameterizing the low-energy effects of heavy new particles with masses far above the scale of electroweak symmetry breaking. Additional light degrees of f
Pulsar glitches are traditionally viewed as a manifestation of vortex dynamics associated with a neutron superfluid reservoir confined to the inner crust of the star. In this Letter we show that the non-dissipative entrainment coupling between the ne
We propose a version of chaotic inflation, in which a fundamental scale M, well below the Planck scale M_P, fixes the initial value of the effective potential. If this scale happens to be the scale of grand unified theories, there are just enough e-f
Irreversible processes are frequently adopted to account for the entropy increase in classical thermodynamics. However, the corresponding physical origins are not always clear, e.g. in a free expansion process, a typical model in textbooks. In this l