About R-parity and the Supersymmetric Standard Model
read the original abstract
We recall the obstacles which seemed, long ago, to prevent one from viewing supersymmetry as a possible fundamental symmetry of Nature. Is spontaneous supersymmetry breaking possible ? Where is the spin-1/2 Goldstone fermion of supersymmetry, if not a neutrino ? Which bosons and fermions could be related ? Can one define conserved baryon and lepton numbers in such theories, although they systematically involve self-conjugate Majorana fermions ? If we have to postulate the existence of new bosons carrying B and L (the new spin-0 squarks and sleptons), can we prevent them from mediating new unwanted interactions ? We then recall how we obtained the three basic ingredients of the Supersymmetric Standard Model: 1) the SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1) gauge superfields; 2) the chiral quark and lepton superfields; 3) the two doublet Higgs superfields responsible for the electroweak breaking, and the generation of quark and lepton masses. The original continuous ``R-invariance'' of this model was soon abandoned in favor of its discrete version, R-parity, so that the gravitino, and gluinos, can acquire masses - gluinos getting their masses from supergravity, or radiative corrections. R-parity forbids unwanted squark and slepton exchanges, and guarantees the stability of the ``lightest supersymmetric particle''. It is present only since we restricted the initial superpotential to be an even function of quark and lepton superfields (so as to allow for B and L conservation laws), as made apparent by the formula re-expressing R-parity as (-1)^2S (-1)^(3B+L). Whether it turns out to be absolutely conserved, or not, R-parity plays an essential role in the phenomenology of supersymmetric theories, and the experimental searches for the new sparticles.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.