- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Cobordism and deformation class of the standard model

Juven Wang1, Zheyan Wan2, and Yi-Zhuang You3

  • 1Center of Mathematical Sciences and Applications, Harvard University, Massachusetts 02138, USA
  • 2Yau Mathematical Sciences Center, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
  • 3Department of Physics, University of California, San Diego, California 92093, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 106, L041701 – Published 11 August, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.106.L041701

Abstract

’t Hooft anomalies of quantum field theories (QFTs) with an invertible global symmetry G (including spacetime and internal symmetries) in a dd spacetime are known to be classified by a d+1d cobordism group TPd+1(G), whose group generator is a d+1d cobordism invariant written as an invertible topological field theory (iTFT) with a partition function Zd+1. It has recently been proposed that the deformation class of QFTs is specified by its symmetry G and an iTFT Zd+1. Seemingly different QFTs of the same deformation class can be deformed to each other via quantum phase transitions. In this work, we ask which cobordism class and deformation class control the 4d standard model (SM) of ungauged or gauged (SU(3)×SU(2)×U(1))/Zq group for q=1, 2, 3, 6 with a continuous or discrete baryon minus lepton (B−L)-like symmetry. We show that the answer contains some combination of 5d iTFTs; two Z classes associated with (B−L)3 and (B−L)−(gravity)2 4d perturbative local anomalies, a Z16 class Atiyah-Patodi-Singer η invariant, a Z2 class Stiefel-Whitney w2w3 invariant associated with 4d nonperturbative global anomalies, and additional Z3×Z2 global anomalies involving higher symmetries whose charged objects are Wilson electric or ’t Hooft magnetic line operators. Out of the multiple infinite Z classes of local anomalies and 24576 classes of global anomalies, we pin down the deformation class of the SM labeled by (Nf,nνR, p′,q), the family number, the total “right-handed sterile” neutrino number, the magnetic monopole datum, and the mod q relation. We show that grand unification such as Georgi-Glashow su(5), Pati-Salam su(4)×su(2)×su(2), Barr’s flipped u(5), and the familiar or modified so(n) models of Spin(n) gauge group, e.g., with n=10, 18 can all reside in an appropriate SM deformation class. We show that ultra unification, which replaces some of sterile neutrinos with new exotic gapped/gapless sectors (e.g., topological or conformal field theory) or gravitational sectors with topological origins via cobordism constraints, also resides in an SM deformation class. Neighbor quantum phases near SM or their phase transitions, and neighbor gapless quantum critical regions naturally exhibit beyond SM phenomena.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (68)

  1. Gerard ’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking, in Recent Developments in Gauge Theories, NATO Advanced Study Institutes Series Vol. 59 (Springer, Boston, MA, 1980), pp. 135–157.
  2. Curtis G. Callan, Jr. and Jeffrey A. Harvey, Anomalies and fermion zero modes on strings and domain walls, Nucl. Phys. B250, 427 (1985).
  3. Edward Witten and Kazuya Yonekura, Anomaly inflow and the η-invariant, in Proceedings of the Shoucheng Zhang Memorial Workshop, Stanford, CA, 2019 (2019), arXiv:1909.08775.
  4. Anton Kapustin, Symmetry protected topological phases, anomalies, and cobordisms: Beyond group cohomology, arXiv:1403.1467.
  5. Anton Kapustin, Ryan Thorngren, Alex Turzillo, and Zitao Wang, Fermionic symmetry protected topological phases and cobordisms, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2015) 052.
  6. Juven C. Wang, Zheng-Cheng Gu, and Xiao-Gang Wen, Field Theory Representation of Gauge-Gravity Symmetry-Protected Topological Invariants, Group Cohomology and Beyond, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 031601 (2015).
  7. Daniel S. Freed and Michael J. Hopkins, Reflection positivity and invertible topological phases, Geom. Topol. 25, 1165 (2021).
  8. Zheyan Wan and Juven Wang, Higher anomalies, higher symmetries, and cobordisms I: Classification of higher-symmetry-protected topological states and their boundary fermionic/bosonic anomalies via a generalized cobordism theory, Ann. Math. Sci. Appl. 4, 107 (2019).
  9. Clay Cordova, Daniel S. Freed, Ho Tat Lam, and Nathan Seiberg, Anomalies in the space of coupling constants and their dynamical applications I, SciPost Phys. 8, 001 (2020).
  10. Clay Cordova, Daniel S. Freed, Ho Tat Lam, and Nathan Seiberg, Anomalies in the space of coupling constants and their dynamical applications II, SciPost Phys. 8, 002 (2020).
  11. Nathan Seiberg, Thoughts about quantum field theory, in Proceedings of Strings 2019, https://www.ias.edu/sites/default/files/sns/files/QFT.pdf.
  12. Juven Wang and Xiao-Gang Wen, A non-perturbative definition of the standard models, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 023356 (2020).
  13. Subir Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2011).
  14. Daniel Harlow and Hirosi Ooguri, Symmetries in quantum field theory and quantum gravity, Commun. Math. Phys. 383, 1669 (2021).
  15. Jacob McNamara and Cumrun Vafa, Cobordism classes and the Swampland, arXiv:1909.10355.
  16. H. Weyl, Elektron und Gravitation. I, Z. Phys. 56, 330 (1929).
  17. S. L. Glashow, Partial symmetries of weak interactions, Nucl. Phys. 22, 579 (1961).
  18. Abdus Salam and John Clive Ward, Electromagnetic and weak interactions, Phys. Lett. 13, 168 (1964).
  19. Abdus Salam, Weak and electromagnetic interactions, Conf. Proc. C 680519, 367 (1968).
  20. Steven Weinberg, A Model of Leptons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19, 1264 (1967).
  21. Ofer Aharony, Nathan Seiberg, and Yuji Tachikawa, Reading between the lines of four-dimensional gauge theories, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2013) 115.
  22. David Tong, Line operators in the standard model, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2017) 104.
  23. Frank Wilczek and A. Zee, Operator Analysis of Nucleon Decay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 1571 (1979).
  24. Davide Gaiotto, Anton Kapustin, Nathan Seiberg, and Brian Willett, Generalized global symmetries, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2015) 172.
  25. Daniel S. Freed, Pions and generalized cohomology, J. Diff. Geom. 80, 45 (2008).
  26. Inaki Garcia-Etxebarria and Miguel Montero, Dai-Freed anomalies in particle physics, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2019) 003.
  27. Joe Davighi, Ben Gripaios, and Nakarin Lohitsiri, Global anomalies in the Standard Model(s) and beyond, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2020) 232.
  28. Zheyan Wan and Juven Wang, Beyond standard models and grand unifications: Anomalies, topological terms, and dynamical constraints via cobordisms, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2020) 062.
  29. Zheyan Wan, Juven Wang et al., Higher anomalies, higher symmetries, and cobordisms IV: Beyond standard models, grand unification, and ultra unification.
  30. Juven Wang, Anomaly and cobordism constraints beyond the standard model: Topological force, arXiv:2006.16996.
  31. Juven Wang, Anomaly and cobordism constraints beyond grand unification: Energy hierarchy, arXiv:2008.06499.
  32. Juven Wang, Ultra unification, Phys. Rev. D 103, 105024 (2021).
  33. Stephen L. Adler, Axial vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. 177, 2426 (1969).
  34. J. S. Bell and R. Jackiw, A PCAC puzzle: π0→γγ in the σ model, Nuovo Cimento A 60, 47 (1969).
  35. Luis Alvarez-Gaume and Edward Witten, Gravitational anomalies, Nucl. Phys. B234, 269 (1984).
  36. Edward Witten, An SU(2) anomaly, Phys. Lett. 117B, 324 (1982).
  37. Edward Witten, Global gravitational anomalies, Commun. Math. Phys. 100, 197 (1985).
  38. Juven Wang, Xiao-Gang Wen, and Edward Witten, A new SU(2) anomaly, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 60, 052301 (2019).
  39. Steven Weinberg, The Quantum Theory of Fields. Vol. 2: Modern Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2013).
  40. Nathan Seiberg and Edward Witten, Gapped boundary phases of topological insulators via weak coupling, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2016, 12C101 (2016).
  41. M. F. Atiyah, V. K. Patodi, and I. M. Singer, Spectral asymmetry and Riemannian geometry 1, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 77, 43 (1975).
  42. Yuji Tachikawa and Kazuya Yonekura, Why are fractional charges of orientifolds compatible with Dirac quantization?, SciPost Phys. 7, 058 (2019).
  43. Chang-Tse Hsieh, Discrete gauge anomalies revisited, arXiv:1808.02881.
  44. Meng Guo, Kantaro Ohmori, Pavel Putrov, Zheyan Wan, and Juven Wang, Fermionic finite-group gauge theories and interacting symmetric/crystalline orders via cobordisms, Commun. Math. Phys. 376, 1073 (2020).
  45. Itamar Hason, Zohar Komargodski, and Ryan Thorngren, Anomaly matching in the symmetry broken phase: Domain walls, CPT, and the Smith isomorphism, SciPost Phys. 8, 062 (2020).
  46. T. Senthil, Symmetry-protected topological phases of quantum matter, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 6, 299 (2015).
  47. Meng Guo, Pavel Putrov, and Juven Wang, Time reversal, SU(N) Yang-Mills and cobordisms: Interacting topological superconductors/insulators and quantum spin liquids in 3+1D, Ann. Phys. (Amsterdam) 394, 244 (2018).
  48. Harald Fritzsch and Peter Minkowski, Unified interactions of leptons and hadrons, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 93, 193 (1975).
  49. Zheyan Wan, Juven Wang, and Xiao-Gang Wen, 3+1d boundaries with gravitational anomaly of 4+1d invertible topological order for branch-independent bosonic systems, Phys. Rev. B 106, 045127 (2022).
  50. Juven Wang and Yi-Zhuang You, Gauge enhanced quantum criticality beyond the Standard Model, Phys. Rev. D 106, 025013 (2022).
  51. Juven Wang and Yi-Zhuang You, Gauge enhanced quantum criticality between grand unifications: Categorical higher symmetry retraction, arXiv:2111.10369.
  52. Frank Wilczek and A. Zee, Families from spinors, Phys. Rev. D 25, 553 (1982).
  53. H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 438 (1974).
  54. Jogesh C. Pati and Abdus Salam, Lepton number as the fourth color, Phys. Rev. D 10, 275 (1974); Erratum, 11, 703 (1975).
  55. Stephen M. Barr, A new symmetry breaking pattern for SO(10) and proton decay, Phys. Lett. 112B, 219 (1982).
  56. T. Senthil, Ashvin Vishwanath, Leon Balents, Subir Sachdev, and Matthew P. A. Fisher, Deconfined quantum critical points, Science 303, 1490 (2004).
  57. Zheyan Wan, Juven Wang, and Yunqin Zheng, Higher anomalies, higher symmetries, and cobordisms II: Lorentz symmetry extension and enriched bosonic/fermionic quantum gauge theory, Ann. Math. Sci. Appl. 5, 171 (2020).
  58. Mohamed M. Anber and Erich Poppitz, Nonperturbative effects in the Standard Model with gauged 1-form symmetry, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2021) 055.
  59. Miguel Montero, Juven Wang et al. (to be published).
  60. Hiroyuki Shimizu and Kazuya Yonekura, Anomaly constraints on deconfinement and chiral phase transition, Phys. Rev. D 97, 105011 (2018).
  61. Yuya Tanizaki, Yuta Kikuchi, Tatsuhiro Misumi, and Norisuke Sakai, Anomaly matching for the phase diagram of massless ZN-QCD, Phys. Rev. D 97, 054012 (2018).
  62. Clay Cordova and Thomas T. Dumitrescu, Candidate phases for SU(2) adjoint QCD4 with two flavors from N=2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, arXiv:1806.09592.
  63. Zheyan Wan and Juven Wang, Higher anomalies, higher symmetries, and cobordisms III: QCD matter phases anew, Nucl. Phys. B957, 115016 (2020).
  64. A. A. Belavin, Alexander M. Polyakov, A. S. Schwartz, and Yu. S. Tyupkin, Pseudoparticle solutions of the Yang-Mills equations, Phys. Lett. 59B, 85 (1975).
  65. Juven Wang, Zheyan Wan, and Yi-Zhuang You, Proton stability: From the standard model to ultra unification, Phys. Rev. D 106, 025016 (2022).
  66. Juven Wang, Xiao-Gang Wen, and Edward Witten, Symmetric Gapped Interfaces of SPT and SET States: Systematic Constructions, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031048 (2018).
  67. Clay Cordova and Kantaro Ohmori, Anomaly obstructions to symmetry preserving gapped phases, arXiv:1910.04962.
  68. Clay Cordova and Kantaro Ohmori, Anomaly constraints on gapped phases with discrete chiral symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 102, 025011 (2020).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 106, L041701– Published 11 August, 2022
  • Received 30 December 2021
  • Accepted 29 June 2022
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation