4.4 Article

A consistent model for leptogenesis, dark matter and the Ice Cube signal

期刊

JOURNAL OF HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS
卷 -, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/JHEP11(2016)022

关键词

Beyond Standard Model; Cosmology of Theories beyond the SM; Neutrino Physics

资金

  1. STAG Institute
  2. Spanish MINECO [FPA2012-31880, SEV-2012-0249]
  3. European Union [ITN ELUSIVES H2020-MSCA-ITN-2015//674896, RISE INVISIBLESPLUS H2020-MSCA-RISE-2015//690575]
  4. research grant Theoretical Astroparticle Physics - Ministero dell'Istruzione [2012CPPYP7, PRIN 2012]
  5. Universita e della Ricerca (MIUR)
  6. research grant TAsP (Theoretical Astroparticle Physics) - Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We discuss a left-right symmetric extension of the Standard Model in which the three additional right-handed neutrinos play a central role in explaining the baryon asymmetry of the Universe, the dark matter abundance and the ultra energetic signal detected by the IceCube experiment. The energy spectrum and neutrino flux measured by IceCube are ascribed to the decays of the lightest right-handed neutrino N-1, thus fixing its mass and lifetime, while the production of N-1 in the primordial thermal bath occurs via a freeze-in mechanism driven by the additional SU(2)(R) interactions. The constraints imposed by IceCube and the dark matter abundance allow nonetheless the heavier right-handed neutrinos to realize a standard type-I seesaw leptogenesis, with the B-L asymmetry dominantly produced by the next-to-lightest neutrino N-2. Further consequences and predictions of the model are that: the N-1 production implies a specific power-law relation between the reheating temperature of the Universe and the vacuum expectation value of the SU(2)(R) triplet; leptogenesis imposes a lower bound on the reheating temperature of the Universe at 7 x 10(9) GeV. Additionally, the model requires a vanishing absolute neutrino mass scale m(1) similar or equal to 0.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据