# Electroweak Unification and Electroweak scale

+ 1 like - 0 dislike
80 views
1. We said that the EM and weak interactions are unified as Electroweak Unification. However, for usual Grand Unification, it requires that the gauge group G is simple Lie group -- which means the G has no nontrivial normal subgroup other than itself.

However, neither $$U(1) \times SU(2)$$ nor $$U(2)$$ are simple Lie groups. So why do we call Electroweak Unification? They are still two different forces with two different couplings in Weinberg model?

1. There are many energy scales related to Electroweak scale: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroweak_scale
• Higgs mass 125GeV.

• the temperature of electroweak symmetry breaking - 159.5±1.5 GeV

• Fermi scale: vacuum expectation value $$v = (G_F \sqrt{2})^{-1/2}-$$ 246 GeV

What are these 3 scales so close to each other around 200 GeV? Are they related in some way or they are totally independent in the parameters of models? e.g. in Electroweak Unification, GUT or other models? For example, the Higgs potential has two parameters, the quadratic and quartic terms, so they seem not need to be so close in 200 GeV scales?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart

+ 4 like - 0 dislike
1. I don't know where that "we" came from, but the SM "unification" is partial, more of a Weinberg-angle tilt: It involves EM and WI inextricably linked and mixed. The different masses of W and the Z mirror the two couplings. For vanishing Weinberg angle, there would be no mixing and e=g'. The question then is just a matter of terminology, loose as is often in physics.

2. The SSB scale is the standard textbook Fermi scale, v = 246 GeV. The mass of the Higgs, 125 GeV is conceptually different, and, "in principle" could be very different; as different as the huge range of guesses/"predictions" covered, before the discovery of the Higgs, not to mention Higgsless models. Its value being so close to the Fermi scale is still a "mystery" to the hyper-ambitious.

• The thermal QFT crossover scale (between the symmetric and SSB phases), 159.5±1.5 GeV, utilizes both of the above scales into effectively modeling the thermal theory and checks by lattice simulation that it is in the same order of magnitude, almost certainly not coincidental. D’Onofrio, Rummukainen, & Tranberg (2014). Phys Review Lett 113 (14), 141602. It is the temperature/energy scale below which the universe slips into the SSB phase, ultimately with the above v.
This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user Cosmas Zachos
answered Jul 17, 2020 by (370 points)
thanks so much for the expertise

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
Maybe interesting physics.stackexchange.com/questions/566668/breaking-tumbling‌​-gauge-theory-and-co‌​mposite-fermions

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
that question is evolved to a better one: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/566796/light-composite-f‌​ermion-as-a-bound-st‌​ate-formed-by-su4-ga‌​uge-force-attraction‌​s

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
Can you give a good ref on attempts to answer this question --- "Its value being so close to the Fermi scale is still a "mystery" to the hyper-ambitious." thanks!?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
@annie heart Sorry, I have no good or intro ref. There are literally hundreds of papers. First they predicted the Higgs mass to be light, then heavy, then infinite, then meaningless, and when it turned out to be medium and below WW threshold, they started exclaiming: "but why"??? Getting into the cottage industry might net you something usable...

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user Cosmas Zachos
thanks, accepted - can you shed light on this in more details ----physics.stackexchange.com/q/567976/42982 ?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart
Not, really, there are better reviews around than what I'd come up with...

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user Cosmas Zachos
If you can make any comments on this physics.stackexchange.com/q/567976/ still very helpful !! thanks!!

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2020-11-30 18:54 (UTC), posted by SE-user annie marie heart

 Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead. To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL. Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post. This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button. Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview Your name to display (optional): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications. Anti-spam verification: If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:p$\hbar$ysicsOve$\varnothing$flowThen drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds). To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.