07.01.2014 Views

PHYS08200604017 Manimala Mitra - Homi Bhabha National Institute

PHYS08200604017 Manimala Mitra - Homi Bhabha National Institute

PHYS08200604017 Manimala Mitra - Homi Bhabha National Institute

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Vertices Vertex factors F ab<br />

eµ H 1 ++ 2y 3 sinθCP L<br />

eµH ++<br />

2 2y 3 cosθCP L<br />

eτH ++<br />

1 2y 3 cosθCP L<br />

eτH 2 ++ 2y 3 sinθCP L<br />

eeH ++<br />

(sinθu<br />

1 y 1 +cosθu 2 )<br />

4 Λ<br />

(cosθu<br />

2 y 1 −sinθu 2 )<br />

4 Λ<br />

(sinθu<br />

1 y 1 +cosθu 2 )<br />

2 Λ<br />

(cosθu<br />

2 y 1 −sinθu 2 )<br />

2 Λ<br />

eeH ++<br />

µτH ++<br />

µτH ++<br />

ττH 1 ++ u<br />

y 1 1 Λ<br />

cosθCP L<br />

ττH ++<br />

2 y 1<br />

u 1<br />

Λ<br />

sinθCP L<br />

µµH ++<br />

1 y 1<br />

u 2<br />

Λ<br />

sinθCP L<br />

µµH ++<br />

2 y 1<br />

u 2<br />

Λ<br />

cosθCP L<br />

CP L<br />

CP L<br />

CP L<br />

CP L<br />

Table 6.2: Doubly charged Higgs triplet and lepton vertices and the corresponding vertex<br />

factors F ab , where a and b are generation indices. The charged lepton mass matrix is<br />

almost diagonal in our model. In this analysis we have considered that mass basis and<br />

flavor basis of the charged leptons are the same.<br />

The current experimental constraint on this decay mode is BR(τ → eeµ) < 2×10 −7 [25],<br />

which constrains our model parameter y 3 as (assuming M H<br />

++ ∼ 300 GeV)<br />

1,2<br />

|y 3 | ∼ < 10 −1 . (6.46)<br />

In our model y 3 is predicted to be large for the inverted hierarchy while it could betiny for<br />

the normal hierarchy. On the face of it then it appears that the bound given by Eq. (6.46)<br />

disfavors the inverted hierarchy for our model. However, recall that the allowed values<br />

of y 3 shown in Figs. 6.2 and 6.3 were presented assuming v1 2 to lie between 10−3 −10 −4<br />

eV 2 . However, v1 2 could be higher and since what determines the mass squared differences<br />

∆m 2 21 and ∆m2 31 is the product of v2 1 and the Yukawas, higher v2 1 would imply smaller<br />

values of the latter. For instance, we could have taken v1 2 ∼ 10−1 − 10 −2 eV 2 and in<br />

that case inverted hierarchy would still be allowed. The bound given by Eq. (6.46) has<br />

been obtained assuming M H<br />

++ ∼ 300 GeV. For more massive doubly charged Higgs the<br />

1,2<br />

braching ratio would go down. On the other hand, if one uses bounds from lepton flavor<br />

violating decays to constrain the Yukawas, then one would obtain corresponding limits<br />

on the value of v 1 . We conclude that with improved bounds on lepton flavor violating<br />

decay modes, one could test our model and/or the neutrino mass hierarchy predicted by<br />

our model.<br />

159

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!