# Baryogenesis and Low Energy 𝐶⁢𝑃 Violation

## 1 Baryogenesis in the MSSM

The squarks (scalar partners of the quarks) present in the MSSM get contributions to their masses from supersymmetry breaking, as well as from electroweak symmetry breaking via the Higgs mechanism. In particular, $`\stackrel{~}{t}_L`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ the scalar partners of the top quark get a large contribution from the Higgs mechanism due to the size of the top quark Yukawa coupling to the Higgs boson. If the supersymmetry breaking mass of the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ is negligible, and there is no $`\stackrel{~}{t}_L`$\- $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ mixing, (the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ is chosen to be light in order to avoid conflicts with the $`\rho `$ parameter if the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_L`$ were light), Eq. (2) gets modified to

$$\frac{H(T_0)}{T_0}\frac{2M_W^3+M_Z^3+2m_t^3}{2m_H^2v}3$$
(3)   
for $`m_t=175`$ GeV. Thus we see, the condition of Eq. (1) can be satisfied and we have a strongly first order phase transition. This simple relation is modified by the presence of supersymmetry breaking masses, $`\stackrel{~}{t}_L\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ mixing, and finite temperature effects. A detailed analysis  shows that an electroweak phase transition strong enough to allow baryogenesis is possible if $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_R}175`$ GeV and $`m_H115`$ GeV. Moreover, efficient baryogenesis requires rapid intraconversion between the particles and their supersymmetric partners. This means that most of the supersymmetric particles and especially the gauginos (fermionic partners of the gauge bosons) must also have masses of order $`T_0100`$ GeV, where $`T_0`$ is the critical temperature for the electroweak phase transition. Besides the obvious direct search implications of these light sparticles and Higgs boson, the light $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ and charginos also result in large contributions to $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing This is because the $`b_L\stackrel{~}{t}_R\stackrel{~}{h}`$ coupling, proportional to the top quark mass, removes the possibility of any GIM cancellation of its contribution .

The most effective way to generate a particle number asymmetry for some species is to arrange that, during the electroweak phase transition, a $`CP`$ violating space-time dependent phase appears in the mass matrix for that species. If this phase cannot be rotated away at subsequent points by the same unitary transformation, it leads to different propagation probabilities for particles and anti-particles, thus resulting in a particle number asymmetry. The existence of two Higgs fields in the MSSM makes this possible. If $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ (the ratio of the expectation values of the two Higgs fields) changes as one traverses the bubble wall separating the symmetric phase from the broken one, particle number asymmetries can be generated, which will be proportional to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\beta `$, the change in $`\beta `$ across the bubble wall .

It has been estimated that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\beta m_h^2/m_A^20.01`$ for the pseudoscalar Higgs boson mass $`m_A=200300`$ GeV . This can actually be turned into an upper bound for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\beta `$ using the relation $`m_{h_+}^2=m_A^2+m_W^2`$, where $`m_{h_+}`$ is the charged Higgs boson mass. Charged Higgs bosons make large positive contributions to the $`bs\gamma `$ decay rate. The current experimental value for $`Br(bs\gamma )`$ already sets the limit $`m_{h_+}\stackrel{>}{}300`$ GeV at the $`2\sigma `$ level . This then implies $`\mathrm{\Delta }\beta \stackrel{<}{}0.01`$ through the relations above.

Baryogenesis in the MSSM proceeds most efficiently through the generation of higgsino number or axial squark number in the bubble wall, which then diffuses to the symmetric phase. Here, they bias the Standard Model $`B+L`$ violation to produce a net baryon number . In this paper we present the special case of baryogenesis through the production of axial squark number, where the CKM phase responsible for kaon $`CP`$ violation is also directly responsible for baryogenesis .

Consider the mass squared matrix for the up-type squarks:

$$M_{\stackrel{~}{u}}^2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}M_{\stackrel{~}{u}_{LL}}^2& M_{\stackrel{~}{u}_{LR}}^2\\ M_{\stackrel{~}{u}_{LR}}^2& M_{\stackrel{~}{u}_{RR}}^2\end{array}\right)$$
(4)   
where

$`M_{\stackrel{~}{u}_{LL}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_Q^2A_{U_{LL}}+(F,D)\mathrm{terms},`$   
$`M_{\stackrel{~}{u}_{RR}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_U^2A_{U_{RR}}+(F,D)\mathrm{terms},`$   
$`M_{\stackrel{~}{u}_{LR}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_Av_2\lambda _UA_{U_{LR}}+\mu v_1\lambda _U.`$ (5)   
where $`M_Q`$, $`M_U`$, and $`M_A`$ are supersymmetry breaking masses $`\lambda _U`$ is the Yukawa coupling matrix for up-type quarks, and the $`A_U`$’s are dimensionless matrices. Concentrating only on the production of $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$, and using $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_R}=175`$ GeV, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_L}=300`$ GeV, and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta 1`$ we obtain the result

$$\frac{n_B}{s}10^8\frac{\kappa \mathrm{\Delta }\beta }{v_w}\frac{m_A}{T_0}\frac{|\mu |}{T_0}Im[e^{i\varphi _B}A_{U_{LR}}^{}\lambda _U^{}\lambda _U]_{(3,3)}$$
(6)   
$`\kappa `$ is related to the rate of anomolous $`B+L`$ violation, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{B+L}=\kappa \alpha _w^4T`$. There is a large uncertainty in its precise value, with current estimates giving $`\kappa =10.03`$ . $`v_w0.1`$ is the velocity of the wall separating the phase where electroweak symmetry is broken (the Higgs field has an expectation value) from where it is unbroken (the Higgs field has no expectation value). $`\mathrm{\Delta }\beta \stackrel{<}{}0.01`$, and $`T_0m_A|\mu |100`$ GeV. The approximations made in deriving Eq. (6) and their validity our outlined in . If $`\stackrel{~}{t}_L`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ have very different masses there is a suppression of the baryon asymmetry by $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_R}^2/m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_L}^2`$ that is not explicit in their work. Thus the estimate of Eq. (6) would be modified if $`m_{\stackrel{~}{t}_L}300`$ GeV.

Consider the possibility that the supersymmetric parameters $`A_{U_{LR}}`$ and $`\mu `$ are real, with all the $`CP`$ violation being in the quark mass matrix . Notice that $`\lambda _U^{}\lambda _U`$ in Eq. (6) is Hermitian, hence the phase is on one of the off-diagonal terms. One then requires $`A_{U_{LR}}`$ to have off diagonal entries in order to move this phase to the (3,3) element of the product $`A_{U_{LR}}^{}\lambda _U^{}\lambda _U`$. These large off-diagonal terms in $`A_{U_{LR}}`$ always lead to large $`D\overline{D}`$ mixing due to gluino mediated box diagrams. The magnitude of the mixing is generically about an order of magnitude lower than the current experimental bound $`\mathrm{\Delta }(m_D)<1.3\times 10^{13}`$ GeV. Further, given the hierarchical structure of the quark masses and mixings, one expects the largest off-diagonal entry in $`\lambda _U^{}\lambda _U`$ to be $`\theta _C^20.04`$. For example the ansatz $`\lambda _U=V_{CKM}^{}\widehat{\lambda }_UV_{CKM}`$ where $`V_{CKM}`$ is the CKM matrix, and $`\widehat{\lambda }_U`$ is the diagonal matrix of up-type Yukawa couplings can lead to

$$Im[A_{U_{LR}}^{}\lambda _U^{}\lambda _U]_{(3,3)}=\lambda _t^2|V_{cb}|\mathrm{sin}\gamma $$
(7)   
for

$$A_{U_{LR}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 1\\ 0& 1& 1\end{array}\right),$$
(8)   
where $`\gamma 1`$ is the phase in the CKM matrix. Thus, we see that the baryon asymmetry is directly related to the phase responsible for $`CP`$ violation in $`K\overline{K}`$ mixing. We can obtain a large enough baryon asymmetry \[cf Eq. (6)\] for $`\kappa =1,\mathrm{\Delta }\beta =0.01`$.

## 2 Baryogenesis via Leptogenesis

The idea that one can obtain a baryon asymmetry by first generating a lepton asymmetry was first proposed in , and subsequently explored in several papers . As mentioned earlier, $`B+L`$ is anomously violated in the Standard Model, and the rate for this process is large at high temperatures. However, $`BL`$ is conserved. Thus given enough time for the $`B+L`$ violating processes to act, we obtain the relations:

$`(BL)_f`$ $`=`$ $`(BL)_i`$   
$`(B+L)_f`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (9)   
where the subscripts $`f`$ and $`i`$ stand for final and initial respectively. Thus if one started with zero initial baryon number, but non-zero initial lepton number one would obtain the final condition $`B_f=L_i`$ (this relationship is slightly modified by a careful consideration of all the Standard Model interactions . The initial lepton number asymmetry is obtained by the $`CP`$ and lepton number violating decay of heavy right-handed Majorana neutrinos.

Consider a model with right-handed Majorana neutrinos $`N_R`$. By definition these fields are self conjugate, $`N_R^c=N_R`$ where the superscript $`c`$ denotes the charge conjugated field. Thus given the Yukawa interaction

$$_Y=h_{ij}\overline{l}_L^iN_R^jH+h.c.$$
(10)   
where $`h_{ij}`$ is the matrix of Yukawa couplings, the $`l_L`$ are left-handed Standard Model leptons and $`H`$ is the Higgs field one finds that $`N_R`$ can decay into both light leptons and anti-leptons. If these decays are $`CP`$ violating they will generate an excess of one over the other. Let us define an asymmetry

$$\delta =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{CP}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }+\mathrm{\Gamma }^{CP}}$$
(11)   
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the decay rate into leptons, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{CP}`$ into anti-leptons. In the case that the heavy neutrinos are not degenerate in mass, which is the case we study here, it is sufficient to consider only $`CP`$ violation in the decays of the heavy neutrinos (direct $`CP`$ violation). One then obtains the result 

$$\delta =\frac{1}{2\pi (h^{}h)_{11}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{6}{}}\mathrm{Im}[(h^{}h)_{1j}]^2f(m_j^2/m_1^2),$$
(12)   
where $`f(x)`$ is a kinematic function of order one for reasonable choices of the masses . The subscript 1 in the terms above is due to the fact that the lepton asymmetry is generated by the decay of the lightest of the right-handed neutrinos (any asymmetry generated by the heavier right-handed neutrinos will be washed out by the decays of the lightest). 

The first constraint on the mass scale of the $`N_R`$ is obtained by insisting that it be out of thermal equilibrium with the rest of the universe when it decays. This will hold if it lives till the universe has cooled to a temperature below the mass of the particle. This condition is encoded in the requirement that

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_RH(T=m_R)$$
(13)   
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R`$ is the decay rate of the right-handed neutrino with mass $`m_R`$, and $`H`$ is the Hubble constant. This translates to

$$\frac{(h^{}h)_{11}m_R}{8\pi }\stackrel{<}{}\frac{20m_R^2}{M_P}\frac{(h^{}h)_{11}}{m_R}\stackrel{<}{}10^{16}\mathrm{GeV}^1$$
(14)   
if the dominant decay is via the Yukawa coupling of Eq. (10). The second constraint is obtained by insisting that the heavy Majorana mass scale explain the solar and atmospheric neutrino data. If we assume that the observed deficit in $`\nu _e`$’s from the sun is due to $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ mixing, then the mass squared difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^210^6\mathrm{eV}^2`$, preferred by the data, implies $`m_{\nu _\mu }10^3`$ eV. Similarly, assuming the deficit in atmospheric $`\nu _\mu `$’s is due to $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing, then the preferred mass squared difference, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^210^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$, implies $`m_{\nu _\tau }3\times 10^2`$ eV. The see-saw mass relations

$$m_{\nu _\mu }\frac{m_\mu ^2}{m_R};m_{\nu _\tau }\frac{m_\tau ^2}{m_R}$$
(15)   
then imply that $`m_R10^{10}10^{11}`$ GeV. Eq. (14) then tells us that $`h_{11}10^210^3`$ (assuming a hierarchical matrix of Yukawa couplings). Note, that if the electron gets its mass at tree level from the Yukawa coupling $`h`$ as in the Standard Model, one would obtain $`m_e=h_{11}v=1`$ GeV, for $`v=246`$ GeV, which is too large by several orders of magnitude. In order for this model to work, one has to impose symmetries such that the Standard Model fermions only get their masses at the loop level. In such a case the fermion masses would be proportional to the squares of the Yukawa coupling constants, and one obtains $`m_e=h_{11}^2v=0.2`$ MeV for $`h_{11}=10^3`$ which is the correct order of magnitude. It is indeed possible to construct a model that incorporates all these requirements . Moreover, in this model, the $`CP`$ violation responsible for baryogenesis is related in a calculable way to the $`CP`$ violation present in the CKM matrix.

The model is based on the $`SU(4)\times SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R`$ group. The Standard Model fermions transform in the usual representations:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_L^i(4,2,1)^i\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_1& u_2& u_3& \nu \\ d_1& d_2& d_3& e^{}\end{array}\right)_L^i$$
(16)   
$$\mathrm{\Psi }_R^i(4,1,2)^i\left(\begin{array}{cccc}u_1& u_2& u_3& N\\ d_1& d_2& d_3& e^{}\end{array}\right)_R^i$$
(17)   
where $`i=1,2,3`$ is a generation index, and we have included a right handed neutrino $`N`$. We add to this three generations of (right-handed) sterile neutrinos

$$s^i(1,1,1)^i.$$
(18)   
The matter spectrum is supersymmetric, so the scalars $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_L^i`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_R^i`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{s}^i`$ in the model transform in exactly the same way. We will impose a discrete $`Z_3`$ symmetry on the gauge singlets (broken by the interactions of the Standard Model particles) under which $`s^je^{i(j\pi )/3}s^j`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{s}^je^{i(2j\pi )/3}\stackrel{~}{s}^j`$. This permits us to make the Lagrangian $`CP`$ invariant, with the vacuum expectation values of the $`\stackrel{~}{s}^j`$ breaking $`CP`$ spontaneously. We can choose parameters for the scalar potential such that it is minimized when

$$\stackrel{~}{s}_j=\frac{v_0}{\sqrt{2}}e^{i\alpha _j};\stackrel{~}{N}_j=\frac{v_R}{\sqrt{2}}\delta _{1j};\stackrel{~}{\nu }_j=\frac{v_L}{\sqrt{2}}\delta _{1j}$$
(19)   
with $`|v_0|>|v_R||v_L|`$. This provides the correct pattern of symmetry breaking.

The Yukawa interactions are given by

$$_𝒴=y_i(\overline{s}^c)^is^i\stackrel{~}{s}^i(\kappa _L^a)_{ij}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_L^is^j\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_L^a(\kappa _R^a)_{ij}^T\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_R^i(s^c)^j\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_R^a+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.,$$
(20)   
with all of the coupling constants real. However, the mass matrix of the $`s_i`$ will contain the phases $`\alpha `$ due to the spontaneous breaking of $`CP`$ invariance when the $`\stackrel{~}{s}_i`$ obtain a vacuum expectation value. Note that since $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_L\mathrm{\Psi }_R`$ transforms as $`(1,2,2)`$ and there are no scalars in this representation, none of the Standard Model fermions get masses at tree level. Their masses are generated at one loop by diagrams involving the $`(s_i)`$ on the internal lines. The $`CP`$ violating phases in the quark mass matrices and hence in the CKM matrix are a function of the phases $`\alpha `$ in the masses of the $`s_i`$.

The out of equilibrium decays of the $`s_i`$ generate the lepton (and hence baryon) asymmetry. It is this same phase $`\alpha `$ that is responsible for the $`CP`$ violation in these decays. Thus one obtains a relationship between the CKM phase and the phase responsible for the baryon asymmetry.

## 3 Conclusions

We have presented an overview of two models of baryogenesis that also have other low energy experimental consequences. Baryogenesis in the MSSM is possible if the Higgs and $`\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ are light. Moreover, one expects large contributions to the $`bs\gamma `$ rate, and the $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing amplitude. Baryogenesis via the decay of heavy neutrinos can be constrained by insisting that they be at the see-saw scale implied by the solar and atmospheric neutrino data. We have presented specific implementations of these models where the CKM phase responsible for $`CP`$ violation in the neutral kaons is related to the phase responsible for the baryogenesis.

Acknowldegements This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant PHY-95-147947 and by the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC03-76SF00098.