Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

ABSTRACT: I review the empirical motivations and postulates for finding yet unknown mediums of physical spacetime interactivity. By studying several leading peer-reviewed publications, I consider how the disparity between electroweak and gravitational scales can perhaps be understood in the context of gravitational perturbations spread throughout a higher dimensional space. I investigate scenarios that suggest this discontinuity emerges from high-volume or strongly-curved extra dimensional space interacting with our own. To succeed in understanding and explaining these postulates, I briefly cover general relativistic principles, 5-dimensional Anti-de-Sitter space, and concepts of branes existing in bulks. In the process, I actively pursue and identify potential smoking guns that colliders could detect to prove or disprove these hypotheses. I take into account previous considerations on how astrophysical and cosmological observations constrain any extra dimensional theory. I conclude with a short summary of all of this.

CONTENTS:
Introduction and History Alternative Approach to the Hierarchy Problem General Relativistic Principles 5-Dimensional Anti de Sitter Space Bulk and Brane Spacetime Large Extra Dimensions Detecting Large Extra Dimensions Highly Warped Extra Dimensions Astrophysical & Cosmological Constraints Summary & Conclusions 1 2 3 4 5 6 8-10 11-12 13 14-15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY: The possible existence of higher dimensions beyond those that we have classically understood to exist has fascinated physicists for at least a century, while the distinct experimental possibility of confirming or dismissing certain theories of their existence have accelerated a minority of physicists through the past decade. In the historical context of scientific revolutions that have dramatically expanded and enhanced our understanding of space, time, matter and energy, it seems reasonable for us to assert that one must give serious and unprejudiced consideration to all such proposed physical explanations. String theorists and mathematicians have been exploring the consequences of extra dimensions for decades, potentially serving as the giants whom modern physicists stand on the shoulders of. But only very recently have the so-called experimentalists of the subject been making universally-measurable predictions regarding the data-oriented outcomes of ongoing experiments e.g., the LHC at CERN. Historically, this was how Einsteins special theory of relativity was ultimately introduced and accepted into the scientific and broader human community: he made bold theoretical assertions using equations and avant-garde insights from predecessors, in combination with strong mathematical analytics and courageous refutations of scientific consensus, such as the existence of the light-mediating luminiferous aether; his refutations of these well-established paradigms sustained substantial criticism for at least a decade following 1905, which prevented mainstream adoption at the protests of traditionalists, until finally, a diverse cadre of experimental data that confirmed predictions slowly shifted mainstream opinion past a critical mass [1], to the point that the reality of special relativity became indisputably accepted. The potential confirmation of extra dimensions could, in principle, be facing a similar process right now: some of the most compelling applications of extra dimensions attempting to explain major physical problems like the anomalous strength of gravity namely, those proposals by ArkaniHamed, Dimopoulos & Dvali [2], and Randall & Sundrum [3] have only been advanced within about the past decade. Most importantly, both of these paradigms of extra dimensional analysis offer measurable predictions to be probed within this following decade, on the basis of strict (albeit, wild) mathematical formalism. It is in this suggestive context that we begin examination of the motivations, background, methods, predictions, and conclusions surrounding the possibility of finding higher spacetime dimensions.

Page 1 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO THE HIERARCHY PROBLEM: The primary motivation that gives rise to extra dimensional theories of spacetime is solving the socalled hierarchy problem: the disparity between the energies needed to probe electroweak scales (~103 GeV) and scales of gravity (~1019 GeV). Over the last three decades, explaining this disparity has been one of the greatest driving forces behind the construction of theories beyond the Standard Model. An effective field solution, such as one that describes broken supersymmetry, could be revealed at the weak scale, perhaps explaining the origin of the hierarchy [2]. With the necessity and potential value of such investigations recognized, it is also equally important to acknowledge that the physics behind any quantum theory of gravity would be revealed only at the Planck scale. The many orders of magnitude of energies between these scales (known as a desert) could very well include any number of hidden dynamical paradigms that regulate the two domains [2], and so it could ultimately be fruitful to reframe this problem in a broader framework. Furthermore, it seems fair to assert that even upon a thorough exploration of the weak scale, we will still have not probed enough to have a direct experimental grasp on high energy gravitational physics. Amazing theoretical systems have been built on the assumption of the existence of two disparate fundamental energy scales: mEW (electroweak scale) and MPl (Planck scale). But there is one possibly significant distinction to keep in mind regarding our understanding of this alleged disparity: electroweak interactions have been accurately probed at distances mEW-1, while gravitational forces have not been studied at distances even close to MPl1 the strength of gravity has only been precisely measured in the 1cm range. Thus, popular interpretation of MPl as an energy scale where gravitational interactions become strong is then based on the assumption that gravity is unmodified over the 33 orders of magnitude, between where it is measured at 1cm all the way down to the Planck length 1033cm [2]. A novel approach to solving this problem eliminates this assumption and replaces it with the premise that the strength of the gravitational interaction may be similar to that of the electroweak interaction the only experimentally-verified fundamental strength. On this basis, those adopting the new approach examine the problem through a geometrical lens, starting from a general relativistic interpretation of spacetime, and introducing a new system of extra spatial dimensions through which gravitational field lines spread, thus modifying the behavior and strength of gravity as we can observe it. The first scenario of this type [2] suggests that a large volume of extra dimensions could explain the hierarchy, while another framework [3] points to the

Page 2 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

possibility of a disparity introduced by strongly curved higher dimensional space. If now-hidden dimensions are in fact the source of the hierarchy, then they would provide detectable signatures at the electroweak scale [2]. Measurable phenomenological predictions for high energy colliders and short-range gravity experiments could be extrapolated based on the mathematical formalisms that these experimental theorists are employing, while astrophysical and cosmological constraints could be placed on the precise nature of their existence. Indeed, this paper discusses all of that. GENERAL RELATIVISTIC PRINCIPLES: But in order to understand any framework for applying higher dimensions, a review of general relativistic principles and an introduction to Anti de Sitter space (next section) become essential, as they are the basis on which leading higher dimensional interpretations of space and time are built. General relativity is a theory of the nature of time, space and gravity, in which gravity is a curvature of space and time that results from the presence of matter or energy. While energy and matter are known to be equivalent by E=mc2, space and time can also be translated into equivalent units based on the speed of light: c in E=mc2. A common analogy involves the way that a dip in a flat sheet of rubber, caused by a heavy object sitting on it, influences the path taken by small objects rolling nearby, causing them to deviate inward from the path they would have followed had the heavy object been absent, as shown in Figure 1. Both objects mutually influence the curvature of spacetime; the larger object simply has a bigger effect than the smaller one. The attractive force of gravity created by matter here is then due to a negative curvature of spacetime, which is represented in the rubber sheet analogy by the negatively-curved dip in the sheet.

Figure 1: Visualizing Gravitys Effects on Spacetime

The analogy seen at left describes the curvature of a two dimensional space caused by gravity in general relativity in a three dimensional "superspace", in which the third dimension corresponds to the effect of gravity. The effects of the gravity in our real four-dimensional spacetime are geometrically projected at left onto a five dimensional "superspace", with the fifth dimension corresponding to the curvature in spacetime that is produced by gravitational effects in general relativity.

Page 3 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

An important point about general relativity related to our broader discussion on explaining gravitys weakness is that it describes gravity not as a conventional force, but as a change in the geometry of spacetime that results from the presence of matter or energy. As a result, in general relativity, the familiar Newtonian equation of gravity, g=Gm1m2 /r2 (gravitational pull between two objects equals the gravitational constant times the product of their masses divided by the square of the distance between them), is merely an approximation of the gravity-like effects seen in general relativity. This approximation is well-known to be inaccurate in extreme physical situations, such as when objects move at velocities approaching that of light. 5-DIMENSIONAL ANTI DE SITTER SPACE: The essence behind the mathematical formalism of de Sitter space, as we correlate it to our real space, is that it postulates the spacetime of general relativity to be intrinsically curved without the presence of matter or energy [4]. The relationship of classical spacetime as described by general relativity to the de Sitter space is analogous to the relationship between Euclidian geometry ( i.e. 2-D flat surfaces) and non-Euclidian geometry (i.e. 2-D curved surfaces). In our analogy of an object causing a dip in a flat cloth, de Sitter space has a curvature analogous to a flat cloth sitting atop a sphere with a slight curvature because it is so large. We can visualize de Sitter space as a general relativity like spacetime in which empty space itself has energy, causing this spacetime (i.e. the Universe) to expand at an ever greater rate. Anti de Sitter space, in contrast, has a curvature of a general relativity like spacetime that is naturally hyperbolic: matter and energy will collapse in on itself, as if moved by an intrinsic gravitational force. In our analogy, anti de Sitter space has a curvature like a cloth sitting on the inside of a sphere with a slight curvature (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: Visualizing 5-Dimensional Anti de Sitter Space

The analogy seen at right describes the curvature of a two dimensional space in a three dimensional "superspace", in which the third dimension corresponds to a measure of the natural bending. The effects of the gravity in our real four-dimensional space-time are geometrically projected at right onto a five dimensional "superspace", with the fifth dimension corresponding to the curvature in spacetime that is produced by gravitational effects in general relativity.

Page 4 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

One can have an anti de Sitter space (or a de Sitter space) in an arbitrary number of dimensions. The generality of the concepts of de Sitter space and anti de Sitter space make them useful in theoretical physics, particularly in string theory, as a platform for explaining (e.g.) the hierarchy problem [4]. BULK AND BRANE SPACETIME: The central idea is that the visible, four-dimensional Universe is restricted to a brane inside a higherdimensional space, called the "bulk". If the additional dimensions are compact, then the observed Universe contains the extra dimensions, and then no reference to the bulk is appropriate. In the bulk model, at least some of the extra dimensions are extensive (possibly infinite), and other branes may be moving through this bulk. Interactions with the bulk, and possibly with other branes, can influence our brane and thus introduce effects not seen in more standard spatial models. In the bulk-brane picture of higher dimensions, all forces but gravity are localized on the brane. Gravity has no such constraint, and so much of its attractive power "leaks" into the bulk, as demonstrated in Figure 3. As a consequence, the force of gravity should appear significantly stronger on small (subatomic or at least sub-millimeter) scales, where less gravitational force has "leaked". Various experiments are currently underway to test this [5].

Figure 3: Time Sequence of Interaction Between a Bulk and Brane in Space

The Universe may inhabit a 4+n dimensional bulk, while most of what we see is in our 4 dimensional brane. The bulk in this figure is the black void containing our brane, which is the represented by the box grid populated by familiar elementary particles. For a high energy collision of a proton and an antiproton (generic blue balls above), a graviton, which mediates the force of gravity on the brane, is produced along with other familiar elementary particles (smaller generic blue balls) and bulk excitation of the graviton, which flies out of the brane (z-axis on right image). Here, the graviton couples to the curvature of space-time and so is shown as ripples of the space-time grid. These images are snap shots of a movie by Liubo Borissov and Joe Lykken.

Page 5 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

An observer on the brane shown in Figure 3 who is witnessing the outcome of the collision would see the usual particles produced in such experiments, a graviton, and missing energy attributed to the distribution of excited states of the graviton throughout the higher dimensional bulk. The only way to infer the existence of such excited states would be to precisely measure and account for all events in the collision, with the conclusion that the final energy does not equal the initial energy, because the missing energy has exited our brane. In this case, the Standard Model fields maintain their usual behavior, while the gravitational field spreads throughout the full 3+n spatial volume. Initially, physicists worked on the premise that if the additional dimensions are too large, this would result in observable deviations from Newtonian gravity, and so the extra dimensional space must then be compactified, i.e, made finite. Over time, it became apparent through some alternative theories [6,7] that if extra dimensions are infinite then the gravitational deviations can suppressed by other means. Alternatively, if the additional dimensions are small enough, the Standard Model fields are allowed to propagate in the bulk. As will be seen throughout following sections of this paper, the field content which is allowed to propagate in the bulk, as well as the size and geometry of the bulk itself, varies greatly between different models. As a result of compactification, fields propagating in the bulk expand into a series of states known as a Kaluza-Klein (KK) tower. The boundary conditions of the finite bulk create a situation similar to that of a particle in a box, with the momentum of the bulk field becoming quantized in the compactified dimensions. In other words, compactified dimensions give rise to discrete mathematical solutions to what particles can and cannot exist. These solutions can, in principle, be calibrated to generate observed Standard Model particles in addition to the constraints of the observed strength of gravity. For an observer trapped on the brane, each quanta of momentum in the compactified volume appears as a KK excited state, which builds a KK tower of states, where each state carries identical spin and gauge quantum numbers [8]. LARGE EXTRA DIMENSIONS: The large extra dimensional scenario posited by Arkani-Hamed, Dimopoulos and Dvali (ADD) [2] describes a basis where Standard Model gauge and matter fields are confined to a 3-dimensional brane that exists within a higher dimensional bulk. In this model, gravity alone propagates in the n extra spatial dimensions which are compactified. Gauss Law relates the Planck scale of the effective

Page 6 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

4 dimensional low-energy theory, MPl, to the scale where gravity becomes strong in the 4+ndimensional spacetime, MD, through the volume of the compactified dimensions Vn by MPl2 = Vn MD2+n (1)

ADD works on the assumption that MD TeV, which eliminates the hierarchy between MPl and the electroweak scale. MPl is generated by the large volume of the higher dimensional space. The hierarchy problem is now translated to the question of why the compactification scale of the extra dimensions is large [8]. If the compactified dimensions are flat and equally-sized, then Vn =(2Rc)n. Then, for MD TeV, the radius Rc of the extra dimensions ranges from a fraction of a millimeter to 10 fermi for n varying between 2 and 6. The compactification scale (1/Rc) associated with these parameters then ranges from 104 eV to tens of MeV. The case of one extra dimension is excluded as the corresponding dimension (of size Rc 1011 m) would directly alter Newtons law at Solar-System distances [2]. Our knowledge of the electroweak and strong forces extends with great precision down to distances of order 1015 mm, corresponding to (100 GeV)1. Thus the Standard Model fields do not feel the effects of the large extra dimensions present in this scenario and must be confined to the 3brane. Therefore in this model only gravity probes the existence of the extra dimensions [2]. An extra dimension of size Rc >10 fermi is considered a large one. So if such dimensions are present and quantum gravity actually becomes strong at the TeV scale, then observable signatures at colliders operating at TeV energies must be induced. Since only gravity probes the existence of the bulk, is it possible that such effects are observable in particle collisions on the brane by means of the interactions of the bulk graviton with the Standard Model fields? Well, questions certainly arise as to how such effects can be observable at colliders since the coupling strength is so weak [8]. In the ADD scenario, there are (ERc)n massive Kaluza-Klein modes that are kinematically accessible in a collider process with energy E. For n = 2 and E = 1TeV, that totals 1030 graviton KK states which may individually contribute to a process. The interactions of the massive Kaluza-Klein graviton modes can then be observed in collider experiments either through missing energy signatures or through their virtual exchange in Standard Model processes [2].

Page 7 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

To gain physical insight from this paradigm, let us consider a simple thought experiment, as proposed in [9]. We posit a couple of particles of masses m1 and m2, respectively, located on a hypersurface ya = 0, and separated from each other by a distance r. The gravitational flux among both particles would spread all over the whole (4 + n) dimensional space. But the extra dimensions here are compact, so the net strength of the gravity interaction would have two clear limits: 1. If the test particles are separated by a distance r R, the torus (i.e. surface of revolution generated by revolving a circle in three dimensional space about an axis coplanar with the circle) would disappear for the four dimensional observer; the gravitational flux would be diluted by the extra volume, the observer would see the usual 4 dimensional potential. 2. If r R, then the 4 dimensional observer in the brane could feel the presence of the bulk through the flux that goes into the extra space, and thus, the potential between each particle would appear to be stronger than one would expect. It is the volumetric factor Vn from Equation (1) which dictates the nature of both regimes of the theory. The change in the short distance behavior of the Newtons gravity law should be observable in the experiments when measuring the gravitational potential for distances below R [9]. DETECTING LARGE EXTRA DIMENSIONS: We now consider the two types of collider detection signatures for large extra dimensions. The first involves the emission of Kaluza-Klein graviton states through the scattering processes e+e (Z)+Gn, and p p g+Gn, or in Z f f +Gn. The produced graviton behaves like massive, noninteracting, stable particle: it only appears as missing energy. Upon integrating over the effective density of states in the correlated large dimension equations [2], the radiated graviton is found to have a continuous mass distribution, which corresponds to the probability of emitting gravitons with different extra dimensional momenta [8]. Graviton productions observable signatures, which include the /Z angular and energy distributions in e+e collisions, are then distinct from those of other physics processes involving fixed masses for the undetectable particles. That is important for the results to be verified as authentic and not fanciful impositions on other processes by idealistic theorists. Searches for direct KK graviton production in the reaction e+e (Z)+Gn at LEP II, using the characteristic final states of missing energy plus a single photon or Z boson, have excluded fundamental scales up to 1.45 TeV for two

Page 8 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

extra compactified dimensions and 0.6 TeV for six extra dimensions [10]. The ensuing data analyses apply total cross section measurements and fits to angular distributions to derive explicit limits on the spectrum of graviton production rates over a range of extra dimensions. The emission process at hadron colliders results in a monojet (i.e. a single quark or gluon spotted in a particle detector, appearing to recoil against nothing), plus missing transverse energy signature. With more extra dimensions, the density of the KK states apparently increases faster, and the KK mass distribution is shifted to higher values [11]. An ATLAS simulation of the missing transverse energy in signal and background events at the LHC with 100 fb1 is presented in Figure 4 for various key values of MD and (where is number of extra dimensions). Only at large missing energies ETMISS does the signal emerge from the background. The signal distributions reflect the predicted scaling of the cross section as a function of MD2, should the dimensions exist [11].

Figure 4: Missing Transverse Energy Signatures for Various Dimensional Values

Distribution of the missing transverse energy in background events and in signal events after the selection and for 100 fb1. The contribution of the three main kinds of background is shown as well as the distribution of the signal for several values of (, MD). This plot and information is from [11].

Page 9 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

The constraints on violations of the inverse-square law, another class of prescient detection signatures, are delineated in Figure 6. The results yield a model-independent upper limit on the size of a compact extra dimension [12], in the context of the formalism behind the ADD model.

Figure 5: Constraints on Violations of the 1/r2 Law

The shaded region is excluded at 95% confidence, while heavy lines labeled Eot-Wash 2006, Eot-Wash 2004, Irvine, Colorado and Stanford show experimental constraints from [12] and works referenced therein. This figure and corresponding information from [12].

But if the additional dimensions are infinite instead of being compactified [6,7], the n-dimensional momentum and resulting KK spectrum is continuous, just as in quantum mechanics where a penetrable finite square well can enable a full spectrum of solutions. As with the finite extra dimensions, the gravitons KK towers arise as a solution to the equations of motion of the metric field in the background. The resulting 4-dimensional fields are referred to as the Kaluza-Klein modes [6,7]. Detection could proceed in similar ways described already, while more complexities in the data analysis would arrive in trying to discern any structure in the dimensions themselves.

Page 10 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

In summary, existing experiments have searched for large extra dimensions and excluded their existence for fundamental scales up to at least TeV. Ongoing and future experiments will extend this reach to a sensitivity of 10 TeV [8]. So if extra dimensions are in fact the source of the hierarchy, then this fact should be discovered within the current decade and probably sooner [13]. Future experiments would have the capability to actually map the geometry of higher dimensional space, such as the size and number of extra dimensions, as well as the tension across the brane(s). HIGHLY WARPED EXTRA DIMENSIONS: The warped extra dimensions scenario originally proposed by Randall and Sundrum (RS) [3] can be mathematically found to be more flexible and very different than the ADD model. The original RS model (which is, to be sure, the simplest, among many) postulates the existence of only one extra dimension which is compactified. In this paradigm, there are two branes: the Planck brane and the TeV/SM brane. In the simplest version, it is assumed, like in the ADD case, that the Standard Model fields live on the so-called TeV brane while gravity lives everywhere [13]. Solving the dimensional equations as done with the ADD model provides a unique solution for the key dimensional factors. There exists a warping factor that looks like exp{-pkr}, where k is a measure of the constant curvature of space. This model is the Anti de Sitter space in 5 dimensions that we looked at previously. The exponential warping factor leads many to call it a model of warped space. In contrast, a space with a constant metric is flat; the original ADD model is an example with flat extra dimensions. The 14 TeV LHC is believed to have an excellent chance of probing the entire RS range, as it reaches ~100 fb1 of integrated luminosity [13]. Figure 6 shows the known constraints.

Figure 6: Constraints on RS Model

Allowed region in the RS model implied by theoretical and experimental constraints. The regions to the left of the horizontal lines are excluded by direct searches at colliders. The dashed(solid) line for the 14 TeV LHC corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 10(100) fb1. The present anticipated parameter space is inside the triangular region. Figure and analysis from [13].

Page 11 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

Upon analysis, one finds that KK graviton masses are of all of a similar magnitude, with comparable but unequal spacing; they have approximately TeV-scale masses, in contrast to the ADD model. We therefore have weak scale graviton KKs with weak scale couplings that should be produced as spin-2 resonances at colliders. These KK graviton resonances should be observable in many processes by the generalizability of gravity. The process of discovering a new resonance requires intricate mathematical derivations, and will not be covered in this lower-level review. Nonetheless, the process is explicit and leading scientists have been employing variations of it on existing data [13]. Upon the discovery of a new resonance at the LHC or ILC, how can we verify whether or not it is a graviton KK state? The first thing to do is to determine the spin of the state. Then, to identify a spin-2 resonance as gravitons, we need to demonstrate that they couple universally, as predicted by General Relativity. The only way to do this is to measure the final state branching fractions, most easily done at the ILC. Figure 7 shows the expected branching fractions for a graviton KK as a function of its mass assuming only decays to SM particles with a Higgs mass of 120 GeV [13].

Figure 7: Branching Fractions for RS Graviton KK State as a Function of Mass

From top to bottom on the right hand side of the figure the curves correspond to the following final states: j j, W+W, ZZ, tt, l+l, and hh, respectively. This figure is from [13].

Page 12 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

ASTROPHYSICAL & COSMOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS: There are several astrophysical and cosmological scenarios that place strict limits on the nature of any alleged extra dimensional spacetime. These will only be briefly discussed and hardly covered in any comprehensive fashion. In the case of large extra dimensions, among the processes that theorists and analysts must take into account are: core collapse in supernovae, neutron star heating as a result of graviton decays, WMAP and COBE satellite considerations of the cosmic ray background, overclosure of the Universe, matter dominated cooling of the Universe, and reheating of the Universe [8]. For the core collapse of type II supernovae, the rate at which the core can lose energy via emission of KK states can be used to constrain the fundamental scale MD, our dimensional size measurement. The most conservative constraint on KK emission has Rc 7.1 x 10-4 mm for two extra dimensions, and Rc 8.5 x 10-7 mm for three dimensions [8]. The summary of these constraints, acquired through analysis of various experimental observations and astrophysical confirmed theories by Hewett and Spiropulu [8], is shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Summary of Astrophysical and Cosmological Constraints on Large Dimensions

Summary of constraints on the fundamental scale MD in TeV as compiled and discussed in [8], where the numbers in parentheses indicate references contained therein.

It is noted that integrating the relations of these constraints to MD is tricky numerically, as varying assumptions regarding the compactification scheme and alternative numerical conventions explicitly enter some of the computations; in particular, that of gravisstrahlung production during Page 13 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

supernova collapse adds to a large uncertainty in that bound. In addition, all of the stated bounds assume that all of the additional dimensions are of the same size while several spin-offs of even just the large dimensional theory dismiss that as necessary and prove that to be true mathematically (of course, it is well noted that no such physical proof has been really found for any of these theories). The constraints in Table 1 should therefore only be seen as guiding indications and not as any exact rubric. These restrictions, most of which are derived from the calculation that KK excitation states will be involved, are only restrictions on the basis that KK modes can only decay into a single brane. Therefore, these restrictions which help to parameterize simpler theories of large extra dimensions actually have no relevance to the more complex versions (for example, those with infinite dimensions), or to the RS model of curved extra dimensions, for that matter. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS: If the structure of spacetime is truly different than the classical 3+1 spacetime that we have accepted for the past century, then the effects across the scientific community could be as revolutionary as the introduction of special and general relativity, or any other new scientific paradigm, for that matter. The study of gravitational physics, particle physics and cosmology would all be immediately affected, in a most profound sense. Even while ignorant of the extent (if any) that the physics of extra dimensions is manifested in nature, its study stimulates new insights and solutions to fundamental questions arising in these fields. Since the dozen years of the introduction of new large and curved extra dimensional theories [2,3], thousands of scientific articles have been published that reference the topic in one way or another. Certainly many, if not most, of those references have come from very critical and cautious examiners and with strong justification: the theory is one of many potentially revolutionary theories in modern science; it remains abstract and young; it has not been substantially verified in any direct sense; and its future verification is subject to the continued development of experiments like those ongoing at LHC. No less, novel ideas and frameworks are continuously emerging from these new paradigms. These advances make use of the theoretical features and tools discussed in this paper. Such frameworks may one day reveal if and how an 11-dimensional string theory is relevant to our four-dimensional world. One such recent idea is that the extra dimension(s) are generated over a finite energy region while the theory is 4-dimensional both at high- and low-energies [8]. The framework for this Page 14 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

scenario does not presently include gravity, but work is underway to do so. In this theory, the extra dimension is generated dynamically and deconstructed at both high- and low-energies. a 4-dimensional conformal field theory (AdS/CFT correspondence). If the fundamental scale of gravity is at roughly a TeV, then future colliders will directly probe new exotic degrees of freedom in addition to the Kaluza Klein modes of extra dimensions, including the effects of quantum gravity itself [8]. In this review, I have summarized the leading frameworks employing extra spatial dimensions to solve the major problem of explaining gravitys strength. Many of the observable consequences for these paradigms at scales that we can (or will soon be able to) measure have been identified. I have outlined some of the experimental observations in particle physics as well as astrophysical and cosmological considerations that can constrain or confirm these scenarios. These efforts to describe the dynamics behind spacetime will continue to face the light of data in the coming years, and at least some of the theoretical paradigms may confirmed or dismissed in a few years [13], as major experiments like LHC begin to take their harness collisions at unprecedented energies. Still, in the case of LHC, considering the enormous amount of data that will collected in this experiment, even if it does stimulate the release energy into said extra dimensions, it may be wise to expect up to a decade of ongoing dispute. There will undoubtedly be multiple interpretations of the same data, driven by hundreds, if not thousands, of independent scientists providing their own reports. Ultimately, I believe extra dimensions may be real, but am ready to read about null results in the press on the topic, no less. A conceptually similar idea is that of a correspondence between 5-dimensional Anti-de-Sitter space and

Page 15 of 15

Extra Dimensions Lance Legel PHZ4390 Elementary Particle Physics Fall 2010

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1. T. Glick. The Comparative Receptions of Relativity. Boston Stud. Phil. Sci. 103 (1983) 2. N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. R. Dvali. Phys. Lett. B 429, 263 (1998) 3. L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3370 (1999) 4. I. Bengtsson. Anti-de Sitter Space. Physics Dep. of Stockholm Univ. (1998) 5. ORAL Session D9. Experimental Tests of Short Range Gravitation. Amer. Phys. Soc. (2004) 6. L. Randall and R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4690 (1999) 7. N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, G. R. Dvali and N. Kaloper, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 586 (2000) 8. J. Hewett and M. Spiropulu, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 52, 397 (2002) 9. A. Prez-Lorenzana, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 18, 224 (2005) 10. G. Landsberg, arXiv:hep-ex/0105039 (2001) 11. L. Vacavant and I. Hinchliffe, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 27, 1839 (2001) 12. D. Kapner et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 021101 (2007) 13. T. Rizzo, AIP Conf. Proc. 1256, 27 (2010)