Hubbry Logo
search
logo
Mass generation avatar
Mass generation
Mass generation
current hub
M

Mass generation

logo
Community Hub0 Subscribers
Read side by side
Mass generation
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In theoretical physics, a mass generation mechanism is a theory that describes the origin of mass from the most fundamental laws of physics. Physicists have proposed a number of models that advocate different views of the origin of mass. The problem is complicated because the primary role of mass is to mediate gravitational interaction between bodies, and no theory of gravitational interaction reconciles with the currently popular Standard Model of particle physics.

There are two types of mass generation models: gravity-free models and models that involve gravity.

Background

[edit]

Electroweak theory and the Standard Model

[edit]

The Higgs mechanism is based on a symmetry-breaking scalar field potential, such as the quartic. The Standard Model uses this mechanism as part of the Glashow–Weinberg–Salam model to unify electromagnetic and weak interactions. This model was one of several that predicted the existence of the scalar Higgs boson.

Gravity-free models

[edit]

In these theories, as in the Standard Model itself, the gravitational interaction either is not involved or does not play a crucial role.

Technicolor

[edit]

Technicolor models break electroweak symmetry through gauge interactions, which were originally modeled on quantum chromodynamics.[1][2][further explanation needed]

Coleman-Weinberg mechanism

[edit]

Coleman–Weinberg mechanism generates mass through spontaneous symmetry breaking.[3]

Other theories

[edit]
  • Unparticle physics and the unhiggs[4][5] models posit that the Higgs sector and Higgs boson are scaling invariant.
  • UV-Completion by Classicalization, in which the unitarization of the WW scattering happens by creation of classical configurations.[6]
  • Symmetry breaking driven by non-equilibrium dynamics of quantum fields above the electroweak scale.[7][8]
  • Asymptotically safe weak interactions [9][10] based on some nonlinear sigma models.[11]
  • Models of composite W and Z vector bosons.[12]
  • Top quark condensate.

Gravitational models

[edit]
  • Extra-dimensional Higgsless models use the fifth component of the gauge fields in place of the Higgs fields. It is possible to produce electroweak symmetry breaking by imposing certain boundary conditions on the extra dimensional fields, increasing the unitarity breakdown scale up to the energy scale of the extra dimension.[13][14] Through the AdS/QCD correspondence this model can be related to technicolor models and to UnHiggs models, in which the Higgs field is of unparticle nature.[15]
  • Unitary Weyl gauge. If one adds a suitable gravitational term to the standard model action with gravitational coupling, the theory becomes locally scale-invariant (i.e. Weyl-invariant) in the unitary gauge for the local SU(2). Weyl transformations act multiplicatively on the Higgs field, so one can fix the Weyl gauge by requiring that the Higgs scalar be a constant.[16]
  • Preon and models inspired by preons such as the Ribbon model of Standard Model particles by Sundance Bilson-Thompson, based in braid theory and compatible with loop quantum gravity and similar theories.[17] This model not only explains the origin of mass, but also interprets electric charge as a topological quantity (twists carried on the individual ribbons), and colour charge as modes of twisting.
  • In the theory of superfluid vacuum, masses of elementary particles arise from interaction with a physical vacuum, similarly to the gap generation mechanism in superfluids.[18] The low-energy limit of this theory suggests an effective potential for the Higgs sector that is different from the Standard Model's, yet it yields the mass generation.[19][20] Under certain conditions, this potential gives rise to an elementary particle with a role and characteristics similar to the Higgs boson.

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Mass generation

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Mass generation in particle physics refers to the processes by which elementary particles acquire their rest masses. In the Standard Model, this is primarily achieved through the Higgs mechanism, independently proposed in 1964 by physicists including François Englert and Robert Brout, Peter Higgs, and others, which introduces a pervasive scalar field—the Higgs field—that interacts with particles to endow them with mass.[1] This mechanism resolves the challenge of massive weak force carriers (W and Z bosons) in an otherwise massless gauge theory by spontaneously breaking electroweak symmetry when the universe cooled after the Big Bang, allowing the Higgs field to acquire a nonzero vacuum expectation value.[2] Alternative mechanisms beyond the Standard Model, such as dynamical symmetry breaking and gravitational effects, are explored in theoretical models to address limitations or extensions of the Higgs framework.[3] In detail, the Higgs field fills all of space and exists in a state of excitation even in its lowest energy configuration, akin to a uniform background "molasses" that particles "wade through."[1] Gauge bosons like the W and Z gain mass through their direct coupling to this field during symmetry breaking, with the mass proportional to the strength of the interaction; in contrast, the photon remains massless as it does not couple to the Higgs field.[2] Fermions, such as quarks and leptons, obtain their masses via Yukawa couplings, where the Higgs field modulates the resonant frequencies of fermion fields, effectively "stiffening" them and preventing them from being purely massless waves— the top quark, for instance, has the strongest such coupling and thus the highest mass among fermions.[3] Without these interactions, all elementary particles would be massless, rendering atoms unstable and the universe as we know it impossible.[1] The existence of the Higgs field was experimentally verified through the discovery of the Higgs boson on July 4, 2012, by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations at CERN's Large Hadron Collider, with the particle's mass measured at approximately 125 GeV/c² and properties matching Standard Model predictions, including zero spin and decays into pairs of photons, W/Z bosons, and fermions.[2] This landmark confirmation not only validated the mass generation framework but also opened avenues for probing beyond-Standard-Model physics, such as potential extensions involving additional Higgs-like fields or supersymmetry, though no deviations have been observed to date.[1] Ongoing research at the LHC continues to refine measurements of Higgs interactions, testing the universality of mass generation across particle types.[2]

Theoretical Foundations

Mass terms in field theories

In relativistic quantum field theories, mass terms play a crucial role in describing the dynamics of particles by introducing a scale that governs their propagation and interactions. The foundational framework emerged with Paul Dirac's 1928 formulation of a relativistic wave equation for the electron, which incorporated a mass parameter to reconcile quantum mechanics with special relativity.[4] This equation predicted the existence of antimatter and set the stage for quantum electrodynamics, but it also highlighted the need for consistent mass descriptions across particle types. Subsequent observations of massive particles, such as the muon discovered in cosmic rays in 1936 by Carl Anderson and Seth Neddermeyer, and the pion identified in 1947 by Cecil Powell's group using photographic emulsions exposed to cosmic rays, revealed a spectrum of particle masses that defied simple patterns. These findings, later confirmed and expanded in particle accelerators starting in the 1950s, underscored the mass puzzle: why do fundamental particles exhibit such disparate masses, ranging from near-zero for photons to hundreds of GeV for heavy quarks? For fermions, the mass term in the Lagrangian takes the Dirac form $ m \bar{\psi} \psi $, where $ \psi $ is a Dirac spinor field and $ m $ is the mass parameter. This term couples left-handed and right-handed chiral components of the fermion, $ \psi_L $ and $ \psi_R $, explicitly breaking chiral symmetry since the massless limit $ m = 0 $ allows independent evolution of these components under Lorentz transformations.[5] In the massless case, fermions behave as Weyl spinors, propagating at the speed of light with definite helicity, which is essential for theories with chiral fermions like the weak interaction. For scalar fields, the Klein-Gordon Lagrangian includes the mass term $ \frac{m^2}{2} \phi^2 $, derived from the 1926 work of Oskar Klein and Walter Gordon, which yields the relativistic wave equation $ (\square + m^2) \phi = 0 $ and describes spin-0 particles with dispersion relation $ E^2 = \mathbf{p}^2 + m^2 $. Vector bosons, such as those mediating short-range forces, acquire mass via the Proca Lagrangian term $ \frac{m^2}{2} A_\mu A^\mu $, introduced by Alexandru Proca in 1936, which enforces the massive Klein-Gordon equation for the field $ A_\mu $ while maintaining three polarization states.[6] The massless limits of these theories reveal symmetries that are broken by mass terms, setting the context for mechanisms to generate masses dynamically. In the absence of masses, fields often exhibit enhanced symmetries, such as scale invariance or continuous global symmetries, leading to gapless excitations. Goldstone's theorem, formulated in 1960, states that spontaneous breaking of a continuous global symmetry results in massless scalar modes, one for each broken generator, which serve as prerequisites for understanding how masses can arise without explicit symmetry violation in interacting theories. This theorem highlights the tension between massless Goldstone bosons and the observed massive spectrum, motivating later developments like the Higgs mechanism to resolve gauge invariance issues in mass generation.

Gauge invariance and symmetry breaking

In Yang-Mills theories, local gauge invariance requires the replacement of ordinary derivatives with covariant derivatives of the form $ D_\mu = \partial_\mu - i g A_\mu^a T^a $, where $ A_\mu^a $ are the gauge fields, $ g $ is the coupling constant, and $ T^a $ are the generators of the gauge group. This structure ensures that the kinetic term for gauge fields, $ -\frac{1}{4} F_{\mu\nu}^a F^{a\mu\nu} $ with $ F_{\mu\nu}^a = \partial_\mu A_\nu^a - \partial_\nu A_\mu^a + g f^{abc} A_\mu^b A_\nu^c $, propagates massless gauge bosons, as any explicit mass term like $ m^2 A_\mu^a A^{a\mu} $ would violate the invariance under infinitesimal gauge transformations $ \delta A_\mu^a = \partial_\mu \epsilon^a + g f^{abc} \epsilon^b A_\mu^c $.[7][8] Explicit mass terms for gauge bosons in non-Abelian gauge theories not only break local gauge invariance but also render the theory non-renormalizable, as demonstrated by arguments showing that such terms introduce non-invariant interactions that lead to uncompensated ultraviolet divergences beyond power-counting renormalizability. This issue was highlighted in the context of early attempts to formulate massive vector theories, where 't Hooft's analysis underscored that maintaining renormalizability requires strict adherence to gauge invariance without explicit breaking, paving the way for symmetry breaking mechanisms to generate masses consistently.[9][10][11] Spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB) resolves this by allowing a scalar field $ \phi $ to acquire a nonzero vacuum expectation value $ \langle \phi \rangle = v \neq 0 $, while the Lagrangian remains gauge invariant. In global theories, this generates massless Nambu-Goldstone bosons corresponding to the broken generators, but in local gauge theories, these modes are absorbed by the gauge fields, providing their longitudinal polarizations and masses. The paradigmatic example is the Mexican hat potential for a complex scalar field, $ V(\phi) = -\mu^2 |\phi|^2 + \lambda |\phi|^4 $ with $ \mu^2 > 0 $ and $ \lambda > 0 $, whose degenerate minima lie on a circle of radius $ v = \sqrt{\mu^2 / \lambda} $, breaking the symmetry spontaneously.[12][13][14] In the electroweak sector, the gauge group $ \mathrm{SU}(2)L \times \mathrm{U}(1)Y $ is spontaneously broken to $ \mathrm{U}(1){\mathrm{EM}} $ via SSB, generating masses for the charged $ W^\pm $ bosons and the neutral $ Z $ boson while leaving the photon massless as the unbroken combination. The Weinberg angle $ \theta_W $, defined by $ \sin^2 \theta_W = g'^2 / (g^2 + g'^2) $ where $ g $ and $ g' $ are the $ \mathrm{SU}(2)L $ and $ \mathrm{U}(1)Y $ couplings, determines the mixing of the neutral gauge fields $ W^3\mu $ and $ B\mu $ into the massless photon $ A\mu = \sin \theta_W W^3_\mu + \cos \theta_W B_\mu $ and massive $ Z_\mu = \cos \theta_W W^3_\mu - \sin \theta_W B_\mu $, ensuring the theory's consistency with observed particle masses.[15][16] The application of SSB to gauge theories for mass generation was developed in the mid-1960s through independent works: Englert and Brout showed in 1964 that a local gauge-invariant theory with a self-interacting scalar field leads to massive vector bosons via absorption of Goldstone modes; Higgs extended this to relativistic quantum field theory, emphasizing the massive scalar remnant; and Guralnik, Hagen, and Kibble provided a detailed gauge-invariant formalism, confirming unitarity and renormalizability in broken symmetries. These contributions, collectively known as the Higgs mechanism, established the framework for electroweak mass generation.[17])[18]

Standard Model Mechanism

Higgs mechanism overview

The Higgs mechanism provides the canonical explanation for mass generation in the Standard Model of particle physics, operating through spontaneous symmetry breaking in the electroweak sector. It introduces a complex scalar doublet field ϕ=(ϕ+v+h+iϕ02)\phi = \begin{pmatrix} \phi^+ \\ \frac{v + h + i \phi^0}{\sqrt{2}} \end{pmatrix}, where ϕ+\phi^+ and ϕ0\phi^0 represent charged and neutral components, hh is the Higgs boson field, and vv denotes the vacuum expectation value (VEV). The dynamics of this field are governed by the scalar potential V(ϕ)=−μ2∣ϕ∣2+λ(∣ϕ∣2)2V(\phi) = -\mu^2 |\phi|^2 + \lambda (|\phi|^2)^2, with μ2>0\mu^2 > 0 and λ>0\lambda > 0 ensuring a stable minimum at nonzero field values, which breaks the SU(2)L×_L \times U(1)Y_Y electroweak symmetry down to U(1)EM_\mathrm{EM}. This VEV is experimentally determined as v=μ2/λ≈246v = \sqrt{\mu^2 / \lambda} \approx 246 GeV, derived from the Fermi constant GFG_F via the relation v=(2GF)−1/2v = ( \sqrt{2} G_F )^{-1/2}. In the broken phase, the three would-be Goldstone bosons (ϕ+\phi^+, ϕ0\phi^0, and its conjugate) are absorbed into the longitudinal polarization modes of the massive electroweak gauge bosons in the unitary gauge, where the Goldstone fields are set to zero, leaving the physical Higgs boson hh as the sole remnant of the scalar sector. This gauge choice simplifies the Lagrangian by eliminating unphysical degrees of freedom while preserving the theory's predictive power. The mechanism ensures the Standard Model remains renormalizable, as the scalar interactions counter ultraviolet divergences that would otherwise plague higher-order electroweak processes. Furthermore, it restores perturbative unitarity in high-energy scattering amplitudes, such as those involving longitudinal electroweak bosons, which would violate unitarity bounds above ∼1\sim 1 TeV in the absence of the Higgs. The Higgs mechanism was independently proposed in 1964 by François Englert and Robert Brout, Peter Higgs, and Gerald Guralnik, Carl Hagen, and Tom Kibble, building on earlier ideas of spontaneous symmetry breaking in field theory. Their seminal works demonstrated how a scalar field could generate gauge boson masses without violating gauge invariance. Experimental confirmation came on July 4, 2012, when the ATLAS and CMS collaborations at the Large Hadron Collider observed a new scalar particle with a mass of approximately 125 GeV, consistent with the Standard Model Higgs boson and subsequent measurements refining its properties.[19]

Gauge boson mass generation

In the electroweak sector of the Standard Model, the Higgs mechanism generates masses for the charged W bosons and the neutral Z boson through the spontaneous breaking of the SU(2)L×_L \times U(1)Y_Y gauge symmetry by the Higgs vacuum expectation value. This process endows the three massive gauge bosons with longitudinal degrees of freedom from the eaten Goldstone modes, while the photon remains massless as the unbroken U(1)EM_\text{EM} generator. The resulting mass spectrum aligns the weak interaction with observed parity violation and neutral currents. The origin of these masses lies in the Higgs kinetic term within the Lagrangian, ∣Dμϕ∣2|D_\mu \phi|^2, where ϕ\phi is the complex SU(2)L_L doublet Higgs field and Dμ=∂μ−igτ⃗2⋅W⃗μ−ig′Y2BμD_\mu = \partial_\mu - i g \frac{\vec{\tau}}{2} \cdot \vec{W}_\mu - i g' \frac{Y}{2} B_\mu incorporates the gauge fields W⃗μ\vec{W}_\mu (SU(2)L_L) and BμB_\mu (U(1)Y_Y), with couplings gg and g′g', Pauli matrices τ⃗\vec{\tau}, and hypercharge YY. Upon shifting ϕ\phi by its vacuum expectation value ⟨ϕ⟩=(0v/2)\langle \phi \rangle = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ v/\sqrt{2} \end{pmatrix} with v≈246v \approx 246 GeV, the expansion of this term produces quadratic contributions for the gauge fields, forming a mass matrix. The charged sector decouples, giving the W bosons W±=W1∓iW22W^\pm = \frac{W^1 \mp i W^2}{\sqrt{2}} the mass mW=gv2m_W = \frac{g v}{2}. In the neutral sector, the mass matrix for Wμ3W^3_\mu and BμB_\mu is diagonalized by the weak mixing angle θW=tan⁡−1(g′/g)\theta_W = \tan^{-1}(g'/g), yielding the orthogonal combinations for the photon Aμ=sin⁡θW Wμ3+cos⁡θW BμA_\mu = \sin \theta_W \, W^3_\mu + \cos \theta_W \, B_\mu (massless) and the Z boson Zμ=cos⁡θW Wμ3−sin⁡θW BμZ_\mu = \cos \theta_W \, W^3_\mu - \sin \theta_W \, B_\mu with mass mZ=vg2+g′22m_Z = \frac{v \sqrt{g^2 + g'^2}}{2}. These theoretical predictions have been confirmed experimentally through high-precision collider data. Measurements from the LEP and SLD experiments yield mW≈80m_W \approx 80 GeV and mZ≈91m_Z \approx 91 GeV, in excellent agreement with the Standard Model expectations derived from the Higgs mechanism.[20][21] At tree level, the mass relation mW=mZcos⁡θWm_W = m_Z \cos \theta_W is preserved by the approximate custodial SU(2)V_V symmetry, arising from the global SU(2)L×_L \times SU(2)R_R invariance of the Higgs sector (isospin doublet under both) that breaks to the vectorial diagonal subgroup SU(2)V_V after electroweak symmetry breaking. This symmetry protects the ρ\rho parameter, defined as ρ=mW2mZ2cos⁡2θW\rho = \frac{m_W^2}{m_Z^2 \cos^2 \theta_W}, ensuring ρ=1\rho = 1 and safeguarding the model against large corrections that would otherwise mismatch the weak neutral and charged current strengths. Experimental determinations confirm ρ≈1\rho \approx 1 to high precision, validating the custodial protection.

Fermion mass generation

In the Standard Model, the masses of fermions arise from Yukawa interactions that couple the left-handed and right-handed fermion fields to the Higgs doublet. The relevant portion of the Lagrangian is
LY=−yfψˉLϕψR+h.c., \mathcal{L}_Y = - y_f \bar{\psi}_L \phi \psi_R + \text{h.c.},
where $ y_f $ denotes the dimensionless Yukawa coupling for a given fermion species $ f $, $ \psi_L $ and $ \psi_R $ represent the left- and right-handed chiral fermion components, respectively, and $ \phi $ is the Higgs scalar doublet.[15] Following electroweak symmetry breaking, the Higgs field develops a nonzero vacuum expectation value $ \langle \phi \rangle = v / \sqrt{2} $, with $ v \approx 246 $ GeV, which induces Dirac mass terms for the fermions through the replacement $ \phi \to \langle \phi \rangle + h / \sqrt{2} $, yielding $ m_f = y_f v / \sqrt{2} $.[15] This process explicitly breaks the chiral symmetry of the massless fermion sector, mixing the left- and right-handed components to form massive Dirac spinors for all quarks and charged leptons.[15] In the minimal formulation, no such mechanism exists for neutrinos, as the model includes only left-handed neutrino fields with no right-handed counterparts or Majorana mass terms, resulting in exactly massless neutrinos.[15] For the six quark flavors, the up-type and down-type Yukawa matrices $ Y_u $ and $ Y_d $ are independent 3×3 complex matrices that are generally not diagonal in the same basis. Diagonalizing these matrices separately introduces a mismatch in the weak eigenstates, manifesting as flavor mixing in charged-current weak interactions via the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix $ V_\text{CKM} = U_u^\dagger U_d $, where $ U_u $ and $ U_d $ are the respective unitary diagonalization matrices.[22] This structure, essential for incorporating CP violation, parametrizes the mixing among quark generations. A convenient approximation exploiting the hierarchy in mixing angles is the Wolfenstein parametrization, expanding $ V_\text{CKM} $ in powers of the small Cabibbo parameter $ \lambda \approx 0.225 $:
VCKM≈(1−λ22λAλ3(ρ−iη)−λ1−λ22Aλ2Aλ3(1−ρ−iη)−Aλ21), V_\text{CKM} \approx \begin{pmatrix} 1 - \frac{\lambda^2}{2} & \lambda & A \lambda^3 (\rho - i \eta) \\ -\lambda & 1 - \frac{\lambda^2}{2} & A \lambda^2 \\ A \lambda^3 (1 - \rho - i \eta) & -A \lambda^2 & 1 \end{pmatrix},
with $ A $, $ \rho $, and $ \eta $ of order unity; higher-order terms refine this expansion but preserve the hierarchical pattern. The minimal Standard Model predicts zero neutrino masses, incompatible with experimental evidence of neutrino oscillations requiring tiny but nonzero masses. Extensions such as the type-I seesaw mechanism introduce right-handed neutrino singlets with large Majorana masses, suppressing the effective light neutrino masses via $ m_\nu \approx - m_D^T M_R^{-1} m_D $, where $ m_D $ is the Dirac mass matrix from Yukawa couplings and $ M_R $ is the heavy Majorana scale. This proposal addresses the disparity between neutrino masses (on the order of 0.01–0.1 eV) and those of charged fermions. Historically, the neutrino itself was hypothesized by Pauli in 1930 to explain the continuous energy spectrum observed in beta decay, which otherwise violated apparent energy and angular momentum conservation in nuclear transitions.[23] A prominent unresolved issue in the Standard Model is the flavor problem, concerning the vast hierarchy and specific patterns in the Yukawa couplings that produce fermion masses spanning more than five orders of magnitude—from the electron at approximately 0.5 MeV to the top quark at about 173 GeV—without any underlying dynamical principle or symmetry explanation.[24] This arbitrariness in the 13 flavor parameters (nine masses, three mixing angles, and one CP phase for quarks, plus analogous lepton parameters in extensions) motivates ongoing searches for flavor symmetries or higher-scale origins beyond the model.[24]

Non-Gravitational Alternatives

Dynamical symmetry breaking models

Dynamical symmetry breaking models propose that the electroweak symmetry is broken through strong non-perturbative interactions among new fermions, analogous to chiral symmetry breaking in quantum chromodynamics (QCD), without invoking an elementary Higgs boson.[25] These models emerged in the late 1970s as alternatives to the Higgs mechanism, addressing the hierarchy problem by generating masses dynamically at the electroweak scale.[26] Steven Weinberg first outlined the implications of such dynamical breaking for intermediate vector boson masses in 1976, suggesting that new strong dynamics could replace the scalar sector.[26] Leonard Susskind formalized the technicolor framework in 1979, proposing a QCD-like gauge theory with technifermions that condense to break electroweak symmetry. In technicolor theories, a new gauge group, typically SU(N)_{TC} with N > 3, confines technifermions at a scale around 1 TeV, leading to a chiral condensate ⟨TˉT⟩∼−(4πfT)3(4π)2\langle \bar{T} T \rangle \sim -\frac{(4\pi f_T)^3}{(4\pi)^2} that provides the effective vacuum expectation value for electroweak symmetry breaking, with the technipion decay constant fT≈246f_T \approx 246 GeV matching the Fermi scale.[25] This condensate generates masses for the W and Z bosons through the exchange of technigluons, while pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons (technipions) emerge as longitudinal components of these gauge bosons.[25] Simple technicolor models, however, face challenges from electroweak precision measurements, particularly the Peskin-Takeuchi S parameter, which quantifies new physics contributions to oblique corrections and is often predicted to be larger than experimental bounds in minimal implementations. Extended technicolor (ETC) models extend the technicolor gauge group to a larger structure that includes ordinary quarks and leptons, bridging the techniscale to the QCD scale and generating light fermion masses via technifermion exchange at scales around 10-1000 TeV. Proposed by Dimopoulos and Susskind in the early 1980s, ETC interactions induce effective four-fermion operators that yield quark masses proportional to the techncondensate, but these models suffer from excessive flavor-changing neutral currents (FCNC) due to non-universal contributions across generations, violating experimental limits unless additional flavor symmetries are imposed.[25] Walking technicolor variants address some limitations of standard technicolor by featuring near-conformal dynamics, where the gauge coupling runs slowly over a wide energy range, leading to an anomalous mass dimension γm≈1\gamma_m \approx 1 for the technifermion bilinear. This "walking" behavior, first explored in the 1980s, suppresses the S parameter through large cancellations in loop contributions and enhances fermion mass generation in ETC extensions by making condensates more sensitive to explicit breaking terms.[25] Models like those with SU(2) gauge groups and adjoint technifermions exemplify this regime, potentially evading precision electroweak constraints while predicting lighter technipions.[27] Topcolor models focus on strong top-quark dynamics at an intermediate scale of about 1 TeV to explain the large third-generation masses, with a tilted condensate favoring top-bottom pairing over lighter generations. Introduced by Bardeen, Hill, and Lindner in 1990, topcolor employs an extra U(1) gauge interaction that breaks a flavor symmetry, inducing a top-condensate ⟨tˉt⟩\langle \bar{t} t \rangle that contributes to the Higgs mechanism dynamically and assists in electroweak breaking. These models often combine with technicolor elements to fully generate the electroweak scale while accommodating the top quark's mass hierarchy.[28]

Radiative mass generation

Radiative mass generation refers to mechanisms in quantum field theories where particle masses emerge from quantum loop corrections rather than explicit tree-level mass terms or spontaneous symmetry breaking at the classical level. In these approaches, the effective potential receives contributions from one-loop diagrams involving virtual particles, leading to a non-trivial vacuum structure that induces a vacuum expectation value (vev) and thereby generates masses. This process relies on dimensional transmutation, where a scale is generated dynamically through the running of couplings, avoiding the need for fundamental mass parameters in the Lagrangian. The paradigmatic example is the Coleman-Weinberg mechanism, introduced in the context of scalar electrodynamics, a theory of a complex scalar field coupled to electromagnetism without tree-level masses. At one loop, the effective potential takes the form
Veff(ϕ)=λ4!ϕ4+β64π2ϕ4log⁡(ϕ2μ2), V_\text{eff}(\phi) = \frac{\lambda}{4!} \phi^4 + \frac{\beta}{64\pi^2} \phi^4 \log\left(\frac{\phi^2}{\mu^2}\right),
where ϕ\phi is the scalar field, λ\lambda is the tree-level quartic coupling, μ\mu is the renormalization scale, and β\beta is a coefficient related to the beta function from loops involving gauge bosons and scalars. For small positive λ\lambda, the logarithmic term dominates at large ϕ\phi, creating a minimum at ϕ∼μexp⁡(−8π2/(3λ))\phi \sim \mu \exp(-8\pi^2 / (3\lambda)), which breaks the symmetry and generates a vev. This vev imparts masses to the scalar and, through interactions, to other fields. The mechanism was originally formulated in 1973 for massless scalar quantum electrodynamics, demonstrating how radiative corrections can originate spontaneous symmetry breaking. In the context of electroweak symmetry breaking, the Coleman-Weinberg mechanism was explored in the 1970s as an alternative to the tree-level Higgs potential in the Standard Model, positing a massless Higgs at tree level with breaking induced radiatively by loops from top Yukawa couplings or gauge interactions. However, direct application to the minimal Standard Model fails because the large negative contribution from top quark loops renders the potential unbounded from below, preventing stable symmetry breaking. Formulations from that era highlighted the potential for gauge loops to drive breaking but required fine-tuned couplings to match observed masses.[29][29] Supersymmetric extensions adapt radiative generation to address hierarchy issues. In the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM), electroweak symmetry breaking occurs radiatively through renormalization group evolution: the up-type Higgs soft mass squared starts positive at high scales but runs negative due to large top Yukawa couplings in loops, inducing a vev without tree-level tuning. Variants also generate the supersymmetric Higgs mixing parameter μ\mu radiatively, for instance, via loops in U(1)' extensions or next-to-minimal models, solving the μ\mu-problem. Gaugino masses can arise at one-loop level in gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking scenarios, where soft terms are induced by messenger fields. These mechanisms ensure naturalness by tying the electroweak scale to supersymmetry breaking without excessive fine-tuning. Despite these advantages, radiative mechanisms face significant challenges. The smallness of the tree-level quartic λ\lambda in Coleman-Weinberg models introduces fine-tuning to achieve the correct vev, as higher-order loops can destabilize the potential. In non-supersymmetric cases, instability arises at high scales due to the top Yukawa coupling driving λ\lambda negative around 101010^{10} GeV, conflicting with unitarity and perturbativity. The observed Higgs mass of approximately 125 GeV exceeds predictions from pure radiative breaking in the Standard Model, which yields a much lighter scalar (around 10-20 GeV), necessitating additional physics like extra scalars or modified loops. These issues constrain viability, particularly post-Higgs discovery, though supersymmetric variants mitigate some instabilities via cancellation between bosonic and fermionic contributions.[29]

Other gravity-free theories

In the top seesaw model, electroweak symmetry breaking arises from a seesaw mechanism involving the condensation of top quarks with additional vector-like quarks, which serve as heavy partners to suppress the top quark mass and generate the observed hierarchy between the top and lighter quarks.[30] This approach introduces extra vector-like top partners at the TeV scale, leading to a composite Higgs-like state while maintaining perturbative unitarity up to higher energies.[30] Composite Higgs models treat the Higgs boson as a pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone boson (pNGB) emerging from the spontaneous breaking of a global symmetry, such as SO(5) to SO(4), in a strongly coupled sector at the TeV scale. In these frameworks, partial compositeness mixes elementary Standard Model fermions with composite operators from the strong sector, naturally explaining the fermion mass hierarchies through mixing angles without fine-tuning. The Higgs potential is generated non-perturbatively by explicit breaking of the global symmetry, ensuring the electroweak scale remains stable against ultraviolet completions. Little Higgs models address the hierarchy problem through collective symmetry breaking, where the Higgs mass is protected by multiple approximate global symmetries broken only when combined, suppressing quadratic divergences up to a cutoff of approximately 10 TeV.[31] In the littlest Higgs variant, based on the [SU(5)/SO(5)] coset, the Higgs arises as a pNGB, with new gauge bosons and fermions contributing to the collective protection mechanism.[31] This setup delays the onset of strong coupling, allowing a light Higgs consistent with electroweak precision data.[32] During the 1980s and 2000s, these non-supersymmetric models gained prominence as alternatives to address the hierarchy problem without invoking supersymmetry, focusing on dynamical or composite origins for the Higgs to stabilize its mass against Planck-scale corrections. Developments in this era emphasized four-dimensional effective theories with TeV-scale new physics to resolve naturalness issues, building on earlier ideas of technicolor while incorporating pNGB structures. Large Hadron Collider (LHC) searches since the 2010s have imposed stringent constraints on these scenarios, requiring vector-like quarks, additional gauge bosons, and composite resonances to reside above roughly 1-3 TeV, depending on quantum numbers and couplings, based on analyses of diboson, single-lepton, and multijet final states. These bounds have narrowed parameter spaces but leave viable regions for models with minimal flavor violation and aligned Higgs couplings. Asymptotically safe theories propose that quantum field theories, including extensions of the Standard Model without gravity, can reach a non-Gaussian fixed point in the renormalization group flow, rendering couplings predictively finite at all scales and generating effective masses through fixed-point behavior. Such scenarios maintain perturbative control while providing a ultraviolet-complete description of mass generation via interacting fixed points.

Gravitational Models

Compactification and extra dimensions

In higher-dimensional theories of gravity and particle physics, compactification of extra spatial dimensions provides a geometric mechanism for generating effective four-dimensional (4D) masses for particles that are massless in the full higher-dimensional spacetime. When an extra dimension is compactified on a manifold with finite size, such as a circle of radius RR, fields propagating in the extra dimension decompose into a tower of 4D Kaluza-Klein (KK) modes, each acquiring a mass inversely proportional to the compactification scale. The metric in the higher-dimensional spacetime, gMNg_{MN}, where M,NM, N run over all dimensions and the extra coordinate is denoted yy, leads to a momentum quantization in the compact direction, resulting in a discrete mass spectrum for the KK excitations.[33] The mass of the nn-th KK mode for a field in a flat extra dimension compactified on a circle is given by
mn=nR, m_n = \frac{n}{R},
where nn is an integer labeling the mode, and the zero mode (n=0n=0) remains massless, corresponding to the standard 4D field. This spectrum arises from the Fourier expansion of the higher-dimensional field in terms of the compact coordinate y∈[0,2πR)y \in [0, 2\pi R), with the effective 4D Lagrangian containing kinetic terms for each mode weighted by their masses. For non-flat geometries or multiple extra dimensions, the spectrum can be modified, but the tower structure persists, providing a natural hierarchy of massive states.[33] The foundational idea of compactification dates to the 1920s, when Theodor Kaluza proposed a five-dimensional (5D) generalization of general relativity to unify gravity and electromagnetism, with the extra dimension compactified to reproduce 4D physics. Oskar Klein later provided a quantum interpretation, arguing that the compactification scale should be on the order of the Planck length to make the extra dimension unobservable, while generating charged particle interactions from the 5D metric components. This early Kaluza-Klein framework demonstrated how compact extra dimensions could induce effective 4D gauge symmetries and masses without additional fields.[34] In modern applications, compactification on orbifolds—such as the S1/Z2S^1/Z_2 interval—extends these ideas to electroweak unification by breaking higher-dimensional gauge symmetries through boundary conditions, generating KK modes for electroweak bosons with masses at the compactification scale. For instance, in 5D models on an orbifold, parity assignments localize the zero-mode Higgs or gauge fields on branes, while KK modes acquire electroweak-scale masses, addressing hierarchy problems without fine-tuning. These setups preserve 4D gauge invariance for the zero modes while the higher-dimensional gauge structure unifies forces.[35] Deconstruction offers a 4D lattice interpretation of extra-dimensional compactification, modeling the extra dimension as a discrete "moose" diagram of linked gauge groups, where link fields (e.g., scalars or vectors) generate mass hierarchies for KK-like states through spontaneous symmetry breaking. Introduced as a duality between 5D continuum theories and 4D moose models, deconstruction explains mass gaps in electroweak sectors as arising from the finite lattice spacing, analogous to 1/R1/R, and has been applied to build realistic models with hierarchical fermion masses.[36] Fermion masses in these frameworks arise from localization profiles in the extra dimension, where bulk fermions couple to brane-localized Higgs via Yukawa interactions, with the effective 4D Yukawa couplings determined by the overlap integrals of wavefunctions. On domain walls—topological defects in higher dimensions—orbifold intervals, fermions can be localized exponentially near the wall or fixed points through bulk mass terms or boundary conditions, leading to hierarchical masses for different generations without ad hoc parameters. This mechanism naturally explains the observed fermion mass spectrum by varying localization parameters across flavors.[37] Experimental constraints on these models come primarily from searches for KK gravitons at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), where the first KK excitation would mediate gravitational-strength interactions, producing events with high-mass dileptons, dijets, or missing energy. As of 2024, analyses of LHC Run 2 data (∼140 fb^{-1} at √s = 13 TeV) exclude KK graviton masses below ∼4.8 TeV in warped (Randall-Sundrum) scenarios (e.g., diphoton channel) and fundamental scales M_D ≳ 2–4 TeV in flat (ADD) cases, depending on the number of extra dimensions (n=2–6) and coupling.[38] Ongoing Run 3 searches as of November 2025 continue to tighten these limits with additional integrated luminosity, probing compactification radii up to R ∼ 10^{-19} m.

Induced mass from gravity

In induced gravity models, the Einstein-Hilbert term describing gravitational curvature is not fundamental but emerges dynamically from quantum fluctuations of matter fields, particularly through the expectation value of a scalar field χ\chi that generates an effective action of the form ⟨χ2⟩R\langle \chi^2 \rangle R, where RR is the Ricci scalar. This concept was originally proposed by Andrei Sakharov in 1967, positing that gravity arises as an induced long-range interaction from vacuum fluctuations in curved spacetime, with the Planck scale set by the strength of these quantum effects rather than a bare parameter.[39] In such frameworks, particle masses can be influenced by the scalar field's dynamics, as its vev modulates couplings to matter fields, effectively inducing mass terms without invoking a traditional Higgs sector. Brane-world scenarios extend this idea by embedding our universe as a lower-dimensional brane in a higher-dimensional bulk with warped geometry, where gravitational interactions across the extra dimension directly generate hierarchical mass scales for particles localized on the brane. In the Randall-Sundrum (RS) model, formulated in 1999, the five-dimensional anti-de Sitter (AdS_5) spacetime features an exponential warp factor that suppresses masses relative to the fundamental curvature scale kk, yielding effective four-dimensional masses m∼ke−kym \sim k e^{-k y} for fields separated by a distance yy along the extra dimension, with kk the AdS curvature. This geometric warping provides a gravitational origin for fermion masses, such as quark hierarchies, by positioning different generations at varying positions in the bulk, naturally explaining observed mass patterns through localization effects.[40] Dilaton fields, arising from spontaneously broken scale invariance, further illustrate gravitational induction of masses by coupling universally to the trace of the energy-momentum tensor, with the dilaton's vacuum expectation value (vev) establishing the Planck scale and modulating effective particle masses via non-minimal interactions. In scale-invariant theories, the dilaton ϕ\phi transforms under scale transformations to compensate for symmetry breaking, and its vev ⟨ϕ⟩∼MPl\langle \phi \rangle \sim M_{\rm Pl} sets the gravitational coupling G∼1/⟨ϕ⟩2G \sim 1/\langle \phi \rangle^2, while Yukawa-like terms ϕψˉψ\phi \bar{\psi} \psi induce fermion masses proportional to the vev. This mechanism ensures that particle masses inherit their scale from gravitational dynamics, avoiding fine-tuning by tying electroweak scales to Planck-scale physics through the dilaton's potential. Developments in the 1980s, inspired by emerging string theories, incorporated induced gravity concepts by treating the dilaton as the string coupling modulus, whose vev dynamically generates both the gravitational constant and matter couplings, addressing mass hierarchies through flux compactifications. The large extra dimensions (ADD) model of 1998 built on these ideas, proposing that gravity propagates into compactified dimensions of size R∼(MPl/M∗2)1/nR \sim (M_{\rm Pl}/M_*^2)^{1/n} (where M∗M_* is the fundamental scale and nn the number of extra dimensions), diluting gravitational strength at short distances and solving the hierarchy problem by allowing weak-scale masses to emerge from Planck-scale gravity without exponential warping. This approach links particle masses to geometric dilution of gravitational flux, providing a classical induction mechanism. Cosmologically, these models imply time-varying particle masses in the early universe, as evolving scalar fields or warp factors alter couplings during inflationary or post-big-bang phases, potentially affecting nucleosynthesis and structure formation. For instance, dilaton dynamics can lead to mass variations scaling with the Hubble rate, influencing expansion history and relic abundances without conflicting with current observations if the variations freeze out by recombination. KK modes may arise as a related geometric effect in these setups.

Quantum gravity effects

In quantum gravity, mass generation can arise from quantum corrections that introduce effective potentials and scales not present in classical general relativity (GR). These effects often manifest through loop diagrams or non-perturbative dynamics, leading to spontaneous symmetry breaking or stabilization of otherwise massless fields. Unlike classical gravitational induction, these mechanisms rely on the ultraviolet (UV) completion of gravity, where quantum fluctuations resolve singularities and generate dimensionful parameters like masses. Higher-order gravity theories, which extend the Einstein-Hilbert action with quadratic curvature terms such as $ S = \int d^4x \sqrt{-g} \left( R + \alpha R^2 + \beta R_{\mu\nu} R^{\mu\nu} \right) $, exhibit renormalizability and unitarity issues but allow for effective mass generation via one-loop quantum corrections akin to the Coleman-Weinberg mechanism. In these models, the curvature-squared terms induce a logarithmic effective potential for the metric fluctuations, potentially triggering dynamical mass terms for gravitons or scalar modes without invoking a fundamental Higgs field. This was first demonstrated in the context of renormalizable quantum gravity, where the higher-derivative terms absorb divergences and yield finite, non-zero masses at the one-loop level.[41] The asymptotic safety program proposes that quantum gravity possesses a non-Gaussian UV fixed point in the renormalization group flow, rendering the theory predictive and free of divergences without a cutoff. At this fixed point, dimensionless couplings approach constants, but relevant operators can generate dimensionful scales, such as particle masses, determined solely by the Planck scale $ M_{\rm Pl} $, avoiding fine-tuning. For instance, the fixed-point value of the cosmological constant or Newton's constant can induce effective masses for matter fields through interactions with the gravitational sector, as evidenced in functional renormalization group studies of the Einstein-Hilbert truncation. This mechanism provides a natural origin for the hierarchy between electroweak and Planck scales in asymptotically safe gravity-matter models.[42] In string theory, flux compactifications on Calabi-Yau manifolds stabilize moduli fields—volume and shape parameters of extra dimensions—through potentials generated by background fluxes and non-perturbative effects. Fluxes, such as three-form H-fluxes in type IIB string theory, induce a superpotential $ W = \int G_3 \wedge \Omega $, where $ G_3 $ is the flux and $ \Omega $ the holomorphic three-form, leading to masses for complex structure moduli of order $ m_{\rm mod} \sim 1/\ell_s $, with $ \ell_s $ the string length. Kähler moduli are further stabilized by non-perturbative contributions, like gaugino condensation on D7-branes or worldsheet instantons, which generate exponential terms in the potential, $ V \sim e^{-a \rho} $, yielding masses around the supersymmetry-breaking scale while preserving the overall compactification. These masses ensure a de Sitter vacuum and address the moduli problem in string phenomenology.[43][44] Holographic duality, particularly the AdS/CFT correspondence, illustrates how bulk gravitational dynamics in anti-de Sitter (AdS) space induce masses for operators in the dual conformal field theory (CFT) on the boundary. The mass $ m $ of a bulk scalar field corresponds to the conformal dimension $ \Delta $ of the dual operator via $ \Delta = \frac{d}{2} + \sqrt{\left( \frac{d}{2} \right)^2 + m^2 \ell_{\rm AdS}^2 } $, where $ d $ is the boundary dimension and $ \ell_{\rm AdS} $ the AdS radius; for $ m \ell_{\rm AdS} > 0 $, this breaks conformal invariance, generating a mass gap in the CFT spectrum. Bulk gravitons or metric perturbations thus map to stress-energy tensor operators with anomalous dimensions, effectively massifying them through gravitational interactions in the higher-dimensional bulk. This duality has been used to model quark masses in strongly coupled plasmas via holographic QCD. Recent studies in the 2020s have explored dynamical mass generation from GR corrections incorporating UV/IR mixing, where ultraviolet quantum gravity effects influence infrared physics, such as the hierarchy problem. In effective field theories with quantum GR, loop corrections from graviton exchanges can trigger Coleman-Weinberg-like potentials that dynamically generate fermion or scalar masses, resolving UV divergences through mixing with infrared modes. For example, non-local form factors in infinite-derivative gravity suppress UV singularities while inducing mass terms via IR-modified propagators, as analyzed in models addressing black hole remnants and cosmology. These approaches also yield non-renormalization theorems from UV/IR mixing, protecting mass scales in four-dimensional theories.[45]

Recent Developments

Symmetric mass generation

Symmetric mass generation (SMG) refers to a non-perturbative mechanism in which gapless fermions acquire a mass gap through interactions without spontaneous symmetry breaking, thereby preserving all global and gauge symmetries of the theory. This contrasts with traditional mechanisms like the Higgs mechanism, which rely on symmetry breaking to generate masses. The concept emerged in the late 2010s, initially in condensed matter physics contexts involving lattice models of fermions, and has since been extended to high-energy physics applications. Early proposals demonstrated SMG in low-dimensional systems using specific interactions that maintain discrete symmetries such as Z_2. For instance, in 1+1 dimensions, staggered fermions coupled via four-fermion interactions in the chiral fermion 3-4-5-0 model exhibit a gapped phase at strong coupling without breaking the chiral U(1) symmetry, as confirmed by density matrix renormalization group simulations showing an excitation gap scaling as the inverse system size. Similarly, in the bilayer Hubbard model on a square lattice, interlayer interactions induce a mass gap for Dirac fermions while preserving Z_2 interlayer symmetry, linking the transition to a bosonic topological phase on the dual lattice. These lattice examples illustrate how SMG can trivialize symmetry-protected topological orders, closing the gap without introducing symmetry-breaking order parameters. In applications to the Standard Model, SMG offers a pathway for electroweak symmetry breaking without Goldstone bosons, potentially realized through multi-layer technicolor models or SYK-like random interactions. In multi-layer technicolor, multiple layers of strongly interacting fermions generate masses for electroweak gauge bosons via composite operators that preserve SU(2)_L × U(1)_Y, avoiding the need for a Higgs doublet. SYK-inspired models, featuring all-to-all random four-fermion couplings, similarly produce a conformal mass gap for chiral fermions, enabling symmetry-preserving realizations of the electroweak sector. These approaches address challenges in lattice regularization of chiral gauge theories by gapping mirror fermions without symmetry breaking.[46] Topologically, SMG connects to symmetry-protected topological (SPT) phases, where the gapped state corresponds to a trivial SPT phase despite the presence of protected gapless modes in the free theory; interactions drive the system to this trivial phase without violating symmetry-protected obstructions. This is evident in models where 't Hooft anomalies are canceled by the interactions, ensuring the mass gap is consistent with symmetry constraints. Progress in the 2020s has extended SMG to 3+1 dimensions, with numerical evidence from quantum Monte Carlo simulations showing gapped phases in models with four continuum Dirac fermions under SO(4) symmetry, free of sign problems. In 2025, lattice simulations provided strong evidence for an SMG phase in SU(2) gauge theory with four massless staggered fermions in the fundamental representation, using nHYP smearing; finite-size scaling confirmed a confining gapped phase with unbroken chiral symmetry.[47] For neutrino masses, SMG provides an alternative to the seesaw mechanism by generating Majorana masses through strong dynamics in extended sectors that preserve lepton number modulo 2, as explored in anomaly-free embeddings of right-handed neutrinos. Experimental probes may leverage mixed anomalies, such as axial-vector couplings in collider signatures or lattice artifacts in anomaly matching, to detect SMG phases indirectly through symmetry-consistent gap generation.[46]

Beyond-Standard-Model integrations

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has imposed stringent constraints on beyond-Standard-Model (BSM) extensions of mass generation mechanisms through measurements of Higgs boson properties and searches for new particles. Analyses of Higgs couplings to vector bosons and fermions show deviations from Standard Model (SM) expectations limited to less than 10% at 95% confidence level, based on combined ATLAS and CMS data from Run 2 and early Run 3.[48] Bounds on technicolor models, which generate masses via strong dynamics, exclude technifermion masses below approximately 0.8-1.2 TeV in minimal models from dilepton and jet searches, tightening previous limits from electroweak precision data.[49] Similarly, extra-dimensional models predicting Kaluza-Klein modes for mass generation face exclusion of compactification scales below 6-10 TeV for 2-6 extra dimensions in the ADD model, with particularly strong limits for scenarios involving six or more dimensions from monojet and dilepton events.[50] Precision electroweak measurements further restrict BSM mass generation by probing radiative corrections through the oblique parameters S, T, and U, which quantify new physics contributions to gauge boson self-energies. Global fits to Z-pole data, W mass, and Higgs observables yield S = -0.04 ± 0.10, T = 0.01 ± 0.12, and U = -0.01 ± 0.09 (with U free), consistent with SM values of zero and disfavoring many dynamical symmetry breaking alternatives that predict larger deviations.[51] Updates in the 2020s from Higgs self-coupling measurements, including limits on the trilinear λ_{hhh} (or modifier κ_λ) from di-Higgs production, have set observed limits allowing deviations from approximately -3 to +11 times the SM prediction, enhancing sensitivity to composite or extended Higgs sectors.[52] Links between mass generation and dark matter (DM) arise in BSM frameworks where composite structures provide stable candidates. In composite Higgs models, pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons or technipions can serve as thermal relic DM, with viable parameter spaces yielding relic densities Ωh² ≈ 0.12 for masses around 100 GeV to TeV, while evading direct detection bounds through suppressed couplings.[53] Symmetric mass generation (SMG) mechanisms, which produce masses without spontaneous symmetry breaking, extend to sterile neutrinos as DM candidates, where confinement-like dynamics generate keV-scale masses and mixings consistent with X-ray signals and Lyman-α constraints.[54] Persistent open problems in mass generation include the origin of neutrino masses, which remain unexplained in the SM and require BSM seesaw or radiative mechanisms, with ongoing tensions in flavor hierarchies from mixing angle discrepancies and unification challenges in grand unified theories (GUTs) where proton decay limits push scales above 10^{15} GeV.[55] As of 2025, perspectives from the proposed Future Circular Collider (FCC) emphasize its potential to probe these issues at 100 TeV, offering discovery reach for BSM particles up to 20-30 TeV and precision Higgs measurements to 1% accuracy, which could resolve unification-scale implications for mass hierarchies.[56] Interdisciplinary analogies to mass generation appear in condensed matter systems, such as graphene, where Coulomb interactions between massless Dirac fermions induce dynamical mass gaps via excitonic pairing, opening Dirac masses of order 0.1-1 meV and mimicking chiral symmetry breaking observed in high-energy theories.[57]

References

  1. The Higgs boson - CERN
  2. The Higgs boson: a landmark discovery - ATLAS Experiment
  3. How the Higgs Field (Actually) Gives Mass to Elementary Particles
  4. The quantum theory of the electron - Journals
  5. Axial gravity, massless fermions and trace anomalies
  6. Alexandru Proca \(1897-1955\) and his equation of the massive ...
  7. [PDF] 2. Yang-Mills Theory - DAMTP
  8. [PDF] Yang Mills Theories - ScholarWorks @ UTRGV
  9. Reflections on the renormalization procedure for gauge theories
  10. [PDF] THE DISCOVERY OF THE RENORMALIZABILITY OF NON ...
  11. What goes wrong if we add a mass term for gauge bosons without ...
  12. [PDF] DAMTP - 2 Broken Symmetries
  13. [PDF] PHYS 528 Lecture Notes #4 1 Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking
  14. [PDF] Spontaneous symmetry breaking in the Higgs mechanism
  15. [PDF] The Standard Model of electroweak interactions
  16. [PDF] 2 The Electroweak Standard Model - ICTP – SAIFR
  17. Englert-Brout-Higgs-Guralnik-Hagen-Kibble mechanism (history)
  18. The History of the Guralnik, Hagen and Kibble development ... - arXiv
  19. Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS ...
  20. [PDF] 54. Mass and Width of the W Boson - Particle Data Group
  21. [PDF] 55. Z Boson - Particle Data Group
  22. [PDF] CP-Violation in the Renormalizable Theory of Weak Interaction
  23. [PDF] Dear Radioactive Ladies and Gentlemen, …
  24. [2308.14811] The problem of flavour - arXiv
  25. [hep-ph/9401324] An introduction to technicolor - arXiv
  26. Implications of dynamical symmetry breaking | Phys. Rev. D
  27. [1305.6352] Discovering Walking Technicolor at LHC and Lattice
  28. Symmetry breaking and generational mixing in top-color-assisted ...
  29. The next-to-minimal Coleman-Weinberg model - ScienceDirect.com
  30. [hep-ph/9809470] Top Quark Seesaw Theory of Electroweak ... - arXiv
  31. [hep-ph/0206021] The Littlest Higgs - arXiv
  32. [hep-ph/0512128] Little Higgs Models and Their Phenomenology
  33. [2207.09817] The Asymptotically Safe Standard Model - arXiv
  34. [PDF] Kaluza-Klein Gravity - arXiv
  35. [1803.08616] On the Unification Problem in Physics - arXiv
  36. Unification of Weak and Hypercharge Interactions at the TeV Scale
  37. [hep-th/0104005] (De)Constructing Dimensions - arXiv
  38. Fermions, scalars and Randall-Sundrum gravity on domain-wall ...
  39. [PDF] Vacuum quantum fluctuations in curved space and the theory of ...
  40. [hep-ph/0006256] Gravitational Origin of Quark Masses and Mixings ...
  41. Renormalization of higher-derivative quantum gravity | Phys. Rev. D
  42. Further evidence for asymptotic safety of quantum gravity
  43. Flux compactification | Rev. Mod. Phys.
  44. [hep-th/0509003] Flux compactifications in string theory - arXiv
  45. New nonrenormalization theorem from UV/IR mixing | Phys. Rev. D
  46. [2204.14271] Symmetric Mass Generation - arXiv
  47. [PDF] J = 0 H MASS https://pdg.lbl.gov Page 1 Created: 5/31/2024 10:16
  48. Any room left for technicolor? Dilepton searches at the LHC and ...
  49. [PDF] 85. Extra Dimensions - Particle Data Group
  50. [PDF] 10. Electroweak Model and Constraints on New Physics
  51. Constraints on the Higgs boson self-coupling from the combination ...
  52. [1703.06903] Composite Dark Matter and Higgs - arXiv
  53. [2403.17488] Dynamical origin of neutrino masses and dark matter ...
  54. [PDF] Theories of neutrino masses - Indico
  55. CERN releases report on the feasibility of a possible Future Circular ...
  56. Dynamical fermion mass generation and exciton spectra in graphene
User Avatar
No comments yet.