PHYS08200604017 Manimala Mitra - Homi Bhabha National Institute
PHYS08200604017 Manimala Mitra - Homi Bhabha National Institute
PHYS08200604017 Manimala Mitra - Homi Bhabha National Institute
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
and ˜M H ˜M†<br />
H respectively. For M and m D with µ-τ symmetry and with the parameters<br />
given in Table 3.1, it turns out that<br />
⎛<br />
1 0 0<br />
U Σ ≃ Uh L ≃ UR h ≃ ⎝<br />
0<br />
1 √2 − 1 √<br />
2<br />
0<br />
1 √2 1<br />
√2<br />
⎞<br />
⎠, (3.48)<br />
thereby yielding<br />
U 22 ≃<br />
S 22 ≃<br />
T 22 ≃<br />
⎛<br />
1 0 0<br />
1<br />
⎝0 √2 −√ 1<br />
2<br />
⎠. (3.49)<br />
1<br />
0 √2 1<br />
√2<br />
⎞<br />
⎛ ⎞<br />
1 0 0<br />
1<br />
⎝0 √2 −√ 1<br />
2<br />
⎠. (3.50)<br />
1<br />
0 √2 √2 1<br />
⎛<br />
1 0 0<br />
⎝0<br />
0<br />
1 √2<br />
√<br />
1<br />
2<br />
−√ 1<br />
2<br />
1 √2<br />
⎞<br />
⎠. (3.51)<br />
To be more precise, the structure of the 3rd column of U Σ , Uh L and UR h (and hence of<br />
U 22 , S 22 and T 22 ), is an immediate consequence of the µ-τ symmetry in M and m D . The<br />
matrices U Σ , Uh L and UR h will be almost unit matrices, only if M 1 ≪ M 2 ≪ M 3 . Breaking<br />
of the µ-τ symmetry either in m D or in M, will destroy this non-trivial form for U Σ , Uh<br />
R<br />
and Uh L. But having µ-τ symmetry in both Y Σ and M is both theoretically as well as<br />
phenomenologically well motivated. We will see later that this non-trivial form of the<br />
matrices U Σ , Uh L and UR h will lead to certain distinctive signatures at LHC.<br />
Among the different mixing matrices, while U Σ , Uh L and UR h have the form given by<br />
Eq. (3.48), U l and U r ≃ I, though both M and Y l were taken as real and diagonal. The<br />
main reason for this drastic difference is the following. While we take exact µ-τ symmetry<br />
for M, for Y l we take a largedifference between Y µ andY τ values. This choice was dictated<br />
by the observed charged lepton masses.<br />
We comment very briefly regarding the extent of deviation from unitarity. From the<br />
discussion of the previous section and Eq. (3.20), it is evident that the deviation from<br />
unitarity of the light neutrino mixing matrix is ∝ m 2 D /M2 Σ ≃ m ν/M Σ , where m ν and M Σ<br />
are the light neutrino and heavy lepton mass scales respectively. Therefore, an important<br />
difference between our model with TeV scale triplet fermion and the usual GUT seesaw<br />
models (for example type-I) is that the extent of non-unitarity for our model is much<br />
larger. This will result in comparatively larger lepton flavor violating decays. Detailed<br />
47