1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: \documentstyle[prd,aps,preprint,tighten,epsfig]{revtex}
3:
4: \begin{document}
5:
6: \draft
7: \preprint{\begin{tabular}{r}
8: {\bf hep-ph/0009294} \\
9: {LMU-00-14} \\
10: {~}
11: \end{tabular}}
12:
13: \title{Commutators of Lepton Mass Matrices, CP Violation, and \\
14: Matter Effects in Medium-Baseline Neutrino Experiments}
15: \author{\bf Zhi-zhong Xing}
16: \address{Theory Division, Institute of High Energy Physics, P.O. Box 918,
17: Beijing 100039, China \\
18: and \\
19: Sektion Physik, Universit$\it\ddot{a}$t M$\it\ddot{u}$nchen,
20: Theresienstrasse 37A, 80333 M$\it\ddot{u}$nchen, Germany \\
21: ({\it Electronic address: xing@theorie.physik.uni-muenchen.de}) }
22: \maketitle
23:
24: \begin{abstract}
25: We introduce the commutators of lepton mass matrices to describe
26: the phenomenon of lepton flavor mixing, and establish their relations
27: to the effective Hamiltonians responsible for the propagation of
28: neutrinos. The determinants of
29: those commutators are invariant under matter effects, leading to an
30: instructive relationship between the universal CP-violating parameters
31: in vacuum and in matter.
32: In the scenario of low-energy (100 MeV $\leq E \leq$ 1 GeV) and
33: medium-baseline (100 km $\leq L \leq$ 400 km) neutrino
34: experiments, we illustrate the features of lepton flavor
35: mixing and CP violation. The terrestrial matter effects on CP- and
36: T-violating asymmetries in $\nu_e \leftrightarrow \nu_\mu$ and
37: $\overline{\nu}_e \leftrightarrow \overline{\nu}_\mu$
38: neutrino oscillations are also discussed. We demonstrate that
39: a relatively pure signal of leptonic CP violation at the percent level
40: can be established from such medium-baseline experiments with
41: low-energy neutrino beams.
42:
43: \end{abstract}
44:
45: \pacs{PACS number(s): 14.60.Pq, 13.10.+q, 25.30.Pt}
46:
47: %\newpage
48:
49: {\Large\bf 1} ~
50: Robust evidence for the long-standing anomalies of solar and
51: atmospheric neutrinos has recently been reported by the
52: Super-Kamiokande Collaboration \cite{SK98}. It strongly implies
53: that neutrinos are massive and lepton flavors are mixed.
54: The admixture of three different lepton flavors generally
55: involves non-trivial complex phases, leading to the phenomenon
56: of CP violation \cite{Cabibbo}. Leptonic CP violation can manifest itself
57: in neutrino oscillations. In reality, to measure CP-violating
58: asymmetries needs a new generation of accelerator neutrino experiments
59: with very long baselines \cite{LB}. In such long-baseline experiments
60: the earth-induced matter effects, which are likely to
61: deform the neutrino oscillation patterns in vacuum and to fake
62: the genuine CP-violating signals, must be taken into account.
63:
64: Recently some attention has been paid to an interesting possibility
65: to measure lepton flavor mixing and CP violation
66: in the {\bf medium}-baseline neutrino experiments with
67: {\bf low}-energy beams \cite{Richter,Minakata,Sato}. The essential
68: idea is on the one hand to minimize the terrestrial matter effects,
69: which are more significant in the long-baseline
70: neutrino experiments, and on the other hand to
71: obtain the fast knowledge of neutrino mixing and CP violation
72: long before a neutrino factory based on the muon storage ring
73: is really built. Although such low-energy and medium-baseline
74: neutrino experiments may somehow suffer from the problems such
75: as smaller detection crosss sections and larger beam opening angles,
76: they can well be realized by choosing the optimum baseline length and
77: beam energy.
78: They are also expected to be complementary to the high-energy and
79: long-baseline neutrino experiments, towards a full
80: determination of lepton flavor mixing and CP-violating parameters.
81:
82: The purpose of this paper is three-fold. First, the commutators of
83: lepton mass matrices are introduced to describe the phenomenon
84: of lepton flavor mixing, and their relations to the effective
85: Hamiltonian responsible for the propagation of Dirac and Majorana
86: neutrinos are established. An elegant relationship
87: between the universal CP-violating parameters in matter and in vacuum,
88: no matter whether neutrinos are Dirac or Majorana particles, can
89: then be derived from the determinants of those commutators, which
90: are invariant under matter effects.
91: Secondly, we study the features of lepton flavor mixing
92: and CP violation in the scenario of low-energy
93: (100 MeV $\leq E \leq$ 1 GeV) and medium-baseline
94: (100 km $\leq L \leq$ 400 km) neutrino experiments. The
95: terrestrial matter effects on the elements of the flavor mixing matrix
96: and the rephasing-invariant measure of CP violation are in
97: particular illustrated. Finally we analyze the CP- and T-violating
98: asymmetries in $\nu_e \leftrightarrow \nu_\mu$ and
99: $\overline{\nu}_e \leftrightarrow \overline{\nu}_\mu$
100: neutrino oscillations based on a low-energy and
101: medium-baseline experiment. It is demonstrated that a relatively
102: pure signal of leptonic CP violation at the percent level can be established
103: from such accelerator neutrino experiments.
104:
105:
106: {\Large\bf 2} ~
107: Let us denote the mass matrices of charged leptons and neutrinos in
108: vacuum to be $M_l$ and $M_\nu$, respectively.
109: The phenomenon of lepton flavor mixing arises from the mismatch between
110: the diagonalization of $M_l$ and that of $M_\nu$ in an arbitrary flavor
111: basis. Without loss of generality, one can choose to identify the flavor
112: eigenstates of charged leptons with their mass eigenstates. In this
113: specific basis, where $M_l$ takes the diagonal form
114: $\overline{M}_l \equiv {\rm Diag} \{m_e, m_\mu, m_\tau \}$,
115: the corresponding lepton flavor mixing matrix $V$
116: links the neutrino mass eigenstates $(\nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3)$
117: to the neutrino flavor eigenstates $(\nu_e, \nu_\mu, \nu_\tau)$.
118: The effective Hamiltonian responsible for the propagation of neutrinos
119: in vacuum can be written as \cite{Wolfenstein}
120: \begin{equation}
121: {\cal H}_{\rm eff} \; =\; \frac{1}{2E}
122: \left (V \overline{M}^2_\nu V^\dagger \right ) \; ,
123: % (1)
124: \end{equation}
125: where $\overline{M}_\nu \equiv {\rm Diag}\{m_1, m_2, m_3 \}$ with
126: $m_i$ being the neutrino mass eigenvalues, and $E \gg m_i$ denotes
127: the neutrino beam energy.
128: When neutrinos travel through a normal material medium (e.g., the earth),
129: which consists of electrons but of no muons or taus, they encounter
130: both charged- and neutral-current interactions with electrons.
131: The neutral-current interactions are universal for $\nu_e$, $\nu_\mu$
132: and $\nu_\tau$ neutrinos, therefore they lead only to an overall
133: and unobservable phase for neutrino mixing. The charged-current
134: interactions are likely to modify the features of neutrino mixing in vacuum
135: and must be taken into account in all realistic neutrino oscillation
136: experiments. Let us use ${\bf M}_\nu$ and $\bf V$ to denote
137: the effective neutrino mass matrix and the effective flavor mixing matrix
138: in matter. Then the effective Hamiltonian responsible for the propagation
139: of neutrinos in matter can be written as \cite{Wolfenstein}
140: \begin{equation}
141: {\cal H}^{\rm m}_{\rm eff} \; =\; \frac{1}{2E}
142: \left ({\bf V} \overline{\bf M}^2_\nu {\bf V}^\dagger \right ) \; ,
143: % (2)
144: \end{equation}
145: in which
146: $\overline{\bf M}_\nu \equiv {\rm Diag}\{{\bf m}_1, {\bf m}_2, {\bf m}_3 \}$
147: with ${\bf m}_i$ being the effective neutrino mass eigenvalues in matter.
148: The deviation of ${\cal H}^{\rm m}_{\rm eff}$ from ${\cal H}_{\rm eff}$,
149: denoted as $\Delta {\cal H}_{\rm eff}$, is given by
150: \begin{equation}
151: \Delta {\cal H}_{\rm eff} \; =\; \left ( \matrix{
152: {\bf A} & 0 & 0 \cr
153: 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
154: 0 & 0 & 0 \cr} \right ) \; ,
155: % (3)
156: \end{equation}
157: in which ${\bf A} = \sqrt{2} ~ G_{\rm F} N_e$ measures the
158: charged-current contribution to the $\nu_e e^-$ forward scattering,
159: and $N_e$ is the background density of electrons.
160: Assuming a constant earth density profile
161: (i.e., $N_e$ = constant), which is quite close to the reality
162: for most of the long- and medium-baseline
163: neutrino experiments \cite{LB}, one can derive the analytical
164: relationship between ${\bf m}_i$ and $m_i$ as well as that between
165: $\bf V$ and $V$ from Eqs. (1) and (2) \cite{Xing00}. Instead of
166: repeating such calculations, we list the relevant results for
167: ${\bf m}_i$ and $\bf V$ in Appendix A. Subsequently we concentrate
168: on the commutators of lepton mass matrices and explore how leptonic CP
169: violation in matter is related to that in vacuum. Our discussion in
170: this section is essentially the extension of that in Ref. \cite{Scott}.
171:
172: An instructive measure of the lepton flavor mixing, i.e., the mismatch
173: between the diagonalization of $M_l$ and that of $M_\nu$ (or ${\bf M}_\nu$),
174: is the commutators of lepton mass matrices, which can be defined as
175: \begin{eqnarray}
176: \left [ M_l M^\dagger_l ~ , ~ M_\nu M^\dagger_\nu \right ]
177: & \equiv & i X \; ,
178: \nonumber \\
179: \left [ M_l M^\dagger_l ~ , ~ M^\dagger_\nu M_\nu \right ]
180: & \equiv & i \overline{X} \; ,
181: \nonumber \\
182: \left [ M^\dagger_l M_l ~ , ~ M_\nu M^\dagger_\nu \right ]
183: & \equiv & i Y \; ,
184: \nonumber \\
185: \left [ M^\dagger_l M_l ~ , ~ M^\dagger_\nu M_\nu \right ]
186: & \equiv & i \overline{Y} \;
187: % (4)
188: \end{eqnarray}
189: for neutrinos propagating through vacuum; or as
190: \begin{eqnarray}
191: \left [ M_l M^\dagger_l ~ , ~ {\bf M}_\nu {\bf M}^\dagger_\nu \right ]
192: & \equiv & i {\bf X} \; ,
193: \nonumber \\
194: \left [ M_l M^\dagger_l ~ , ~ {\bf M}^\dagger_\nu {\bf M}_\nu \right ]
195: & \equiv & i \overline{\bf X} \; ,
196: \nonumber \\
197: \left [ M^\dagger_l M_l ~ , ~ {\bf M}_\nu {\bf M}^\dagger_\nu \right ]
198: & \equiv & i {\bf Y} \; ,
199: \nonumber \\
200: \left [ M^\dagger_l M_l ~ , ~ {\bf M}^\dagger_\nu {\bf M}_\nu \right ]
201: & \equiv & i \overline{\bf Y} \;
202: % (5)
203: \end{eqnarray}
204: for neutrinos interacting with matter.
205: In the flavor basis where $M_l = \overline{M}_l$ holds,
206: we obtain $X = Y$, $\overline{X} = \overline{Y}$ and
207: ${\bf X} = {\bf Y}$, $\overline{\bf X} = \overline{\bf Y}$.
208: It is important to note that
209: \begin{eqnarray}
210: M_\nu M^\dagger_\nu & = & V \overline{M}^2_\nu V^\dagger
211: \; = \; 2 E {\cal H}_{\rm eff} \; ,
212: \nonumber \\
213: {\bf M}_\nu {\bf M}^\dagger_\nu & = & {\bf V} \overline{\bf M}^2_\nu
214: {\bf V}^\dagger \; = \; 2 E {\cal H}^{\rm m}_{\rm eff}
215: % (6)
216: \end{eqnarray}
217: hold in the chosen basis, no matter whether neutrinos are Dirac or
218: Majorana particles (see Appendix B for a brief proof). In contrast,
219: there is no direct relationship between $M^\dagger_\nu M_\nu$ (or
220: ${\bf M}^\dagger_\nu {\bf M}_\nu$) and ${\cal H}_{\rm eff}$ (or
221: ${\cal H}^{\rm m}_{\rm eff}$). We are therefore interested only in
222: the commutators $X$ and ${\bf X}$, which can be rewritten as
223: \begin{eqnarray}
224: X & = & i \left [V \overline{M}^2_\nu V^\dagger ~ ,
225: ~ \overline{M}^2_l \right ] \; ,
226: \nonumber \\
227: {\bf X} & = & i \left [{\bf V} \overline{\bf M}^2_\nu {\bf V}^\dagger ~ ,
228: ~ \overline{M}^2_l \right ] \; .
229: % (7)
230: \end{eqnarray}
231: The determinants of $X$ and ${\bf X}$ are related to leptonic CP violation
232: in vacuum and in matter, respectively. To see this point clearly, we
233: carry out a straightforward calculation and arrive at
234: \begin{eqnarray}
235: {\rm Det}(X) & = & 2 J
236: \prod_{\alpha < \beta} \left (m^2_\alpha - m^2_\beta \right )
237: \prod_{i<j} \left (m^2_i - m^2_j \right ) \; ,
238: \nonumber \\
239: {\rm Det}({\bf X}) & = & 2 {\bf J}
240: \prod_{\alpha < \beta} \left (m^2_\alpha - m^2_\beta \right )
241: \prod_{i<j} \left ({\bf m}^2_i - {\bf m}^2_j \right ) \; ,
242: % (8)
243: \end{eqnarray}
244: where the Greek indices run over $(e, \mu, \tau)$; the
245: Latin indices run over $(1, 2, 3)$; $J$ and $\bf J$ are the universal
246: CP-violating parameters of $V$ and $\bf V$, respectively.
247: In vacuum $J$ is defined through \cite{Jarlskog}
248: \begin{equation}
249: {\rm Im} \left (V_{\alpha i}V_{\beta j} V^*_{\alpha j}V^*_{\beta i} \right )
250: \; = \; J \sum_{\gamma,k} \epsilon^{~}_{\alpha \beta \gamma}
251: \epsilon^{~}_{ijk} \; ,
252: % (9)
253: \end{equation}
254: where $(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)$ and $(i, j, k)$ run over
255: $(e, \mu, \tau)$ and $(1, 2, 3)$, respectively. Similarly $\bf J$ can
256: be defined in terms of the matrix elements of $\bf V$.
257: We see that the quantities ${\rm Det}(X)$ and
258: ${\rm Det}({\bf X})$ measure leptonic CP violation rephasing-invariantly.
259:
260: We proceed to find out the relationship between the universal CP-violating
261: parameters $\bf J$ and $J$. In view of Eq. (6) as well as Eq. (3),
262: we immediately realize
263: that
264: \begin{equation}
265: {\bf X} \; = \; 2iE
266: \left [ {\cal H}^{\rm m}_{\rm eff} ~ , ~ \overline{M}^2_l \right ]
267: \; = \; X
268: + 2iE \left [ \Delta {\cal H}_{\rm eff} ~ , ~ \overline{M}^2_l \right ]
269: \; = \; X \; .
270: % (10)
271: \end{equation}
272: This interesting result implies that the commutators
273: of lepton mass matrices are invariant under matter effects.
274: As a consequence, ${\rm Det}({\bf X}) = {\rm Det}(X)$, leading
275: to an elegant relationship between $\bf J$ and $J$ \cite{Scott}:
276: \begin{equation}
277: {\bf J} \prod_{i<j} \left ({\bf m}^2_i - {\bf m}^2_j \right ) \; = \;
278: J \prod_{i<j} \left (m^2_i - m^2_j \right ) \; .
279: % (11)
280: \end{equation}
281: $\bf J$ depends on the matter effect (i.e., the parameter $\bf A$)
282: through ${\bf m}^2_i$. Of course ${\bf J} = J$ if ${\bf A} = 0$, and
283: ${\bf J} = 0$ if $J =0$.
284:
285: The results obtained above are valid for neutrinos propagating in
286: vacuum and in matter. As for antineutrinos, the corresponding
287: formulas can straightforwardly be written out from Eqs. (1) -- (11)
288: through the replacements $V \Longrightarrow V^*$ and
289: ${\bf A} \Longrightarrow (-{\bf A})$.
290:
291: {\Large\bf 3} ~
292: Now we illustrate the features of lepton flavor mixing and CP
293: violation in the scenario of low-energy
294: (100 MeV $\leq E \leq$ 1 GeV) and medium-baseline
295: (100 km $\leq L \leq$ 400 km) neutrino experiments.
296: As the large-angle MSW solution to the solar
297: neutrino problem seems to be favored by the latest Super-Kamiokande
298: data \cite{Osaka}, we typically take the mass-squared difference
299: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun} = 5\cdot 10^{-5} ~ {\rm eV}^2$. We take
300: $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm} = 3\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$ in view of the present
301: data on atmospheric neutrino oscillations. The corresponding
302: pattern of lepton flavor mixing is expected to be nearly
303: bi-maximal;
304: i.e., $|V_{e3}| \ll 1$ as supported by the CHOOZ experiment \cite{CHOOZ},
305: $|V_{e1}|\sim |V_{e2}| \sim {\cal O}(1)$,
306: and $|V_{\mu 3}|\sim |V_{\tau 3}| \sim {\cal O}(1)$.
307: The approximate decoupling of atmospheric and solar neutrino
308: oscillations implies that one can set
309: \begin{eqnarray}
310: \Delta m^2_{21} \equiv m^2_2 - m^2_1
311: & \approx & \pm \Delta m^2_{\rm sun} \; ,
312: \nonumber \\
313: \Delta m^2_{31} \equiv m^2_3 - m^2_1
314: & \approx & \pm \Delta m^2_{\rm atm} \; .
315: % (12)
316: \end{eqnarray}
317: Of course $\Delta m^2_{32} \approx \Delta m^2_{31}$ holds in this
318: approximation.
319: Note that the phenomena of flavor mixing and CP violation in neutrino
320: oscillations can fully be described in terms of four independent
321: parameters of $V$. To satisfy the nearly bi-maximal neutrino mixing with
322: large CP violation, we typically choose $|V_{e1}| = 0.816$,
323: $|V_{e2}| = 0.571$, $|V_{\mu 3}| = 0.640$, and $J = \pm 0.020$ as the
324: four independent input parameters in the numerical calculations
325: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
326: \footnote{This specific choice corresponds to $\theta_{12} \approx 35^\circ$,
327: $\theta_{23}\approx 40^\circ$, $\theta_{13}\approx 5^\circ$, and
328: $\delta \approx \pm 90^\circ$ in the standard parametrization of
329: $V$ \cite{PDG}, in which $J = \sin\theta_{12} \cos\theta_{12} \sin\theta_{23}
330: \cos\theta_{23} \sin\theta_{13} \cos^2\theta_{13} \sin\delta$ holds.
331: $J>0$ and $J<0$ are associated with the case of neutrino mixing and
332: that of antineutrino mixing, respectively.}.
333: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
334: In addition, the dependence of the terrestrial matter effect on the
335: neutrino beam energy is given as
336: $A \equiv 2E {\bf A}= 2.28\cdot 10^{-4} ~{\rm eV}^2 E$/[GeV] \cite{LB}.
337: With the help of Eq. (11) and those listed in Appendix A, we are then able
338: to compute the ratios
339: $\Delta {\bf m}^2_{i1}/\Delta m^2_{i1}$ (for $i=2,3$),
340: $|{\bf V}_{\alpha i}|/|V_{\alpha i}|$ (for $\alpha = e, \mu, \tau$ and
341: $i = 1, 2, 3$), and ${\bf J}/J$ as functions of $E$. The relevant results
342: are shown respectively in Figs. 1, 2 and 3, in which $\Delta m^2_{21} >0$ and
343: $\Delta m^2_{31} > 0$ have been assumed.
344: Some comments are in order.
345:
346: (a) Fig.1 shows that the earth-induced matter effect on
347: $\Delta m^2_{21}$ is significant, but that on $\Delta m^2_{31}$
348: is negligibly small in the chosen range of $E$ (i.e.,
349: $\Delta {\bf m}^2_{31} \approx \Delta m^2_{31}$ is an acceptable
350: approximation). In addition,
351: the mass-squared differences of neutrinos are relatively
352: more sensitive to the matter effect than those of antineutrinos.
353:
354: (b) Fig. 2 shows that the matter effects on $|V_{\mu 3}|$
355: and $|V_{\tau 3}|$ are negligible in the low-energy neutrino
356: experiment. The smallest matrix element $|V_{e3}|$ is weakly
357: sensitive to the matter effect; e.g., $|{\bf V}_{e3}|/|V_{e3}|$
358: deviates about $7\%$ from unity for $E\approx 1$ GeV. In contrast,
359: the other six matrix elements of $V$ are significantly modified by the
360: terrestrial matter effects. For $|V_{e1}|$, $|V_{\mu 2}|$ and
361: $|V_{\tau 2}|$, the relevant matter effects of neutrinos are
362: more important than those of antineutrinos. For $|V_{e2}|$,
363: $|V_{\mu 1}|$ and $|V_{\tau 1}|$, the matter effects of neutrinos
364: and antineutrinos are essentially comparable in magnitude.
365:
366: (c) Fig. 3 shows that the magnitude of $\bf J$ may rapidly decrease
367: with the neutrino beam energy $E$. This feature implies that the
368: low-energy and medium-baseline neutrino experiments are likely to
369: provide a good chance for measurements of leptonic CP-violating
370: and T-violating asymmetries. Note also that $\bf J$ undergoes a
371: resonance around $E\sim 100$ MeV because of the terrestrial matter
372: effect.
373:
374: So far we have chosen $\Delta m^2_{21} >0$ and $\Delta m^2_{31} > 0$
375: in the numerical calculations. As the spectrum of neutrino masses
376: is unknown, it is possible that $\Delta m^2_{21} <0$ and (or)
377: $\Delta m^2_{31} <0$. After a careful analysis of the dependence
378: of $\bf J$ on positive and negative values of $\Delta m^2_{21}$
379: and $\Delta m^2_{31}$, we find the following exact relations:
380: \begin{eqnarray}
381: {\bf J} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, +\Delta m^2_{31}, +A )
382: & = & -{\bf J} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, -\Delta m^2_{31}, -A ) \; ,
383: \nonumber \\
384: {\bf J} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, -\Delta m^2_{31}, +A )
385: & = & -{\bf J} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, +\Delta m^2_{31}, -A ) \; ,
386: \nonumber \\
387: {\bf J} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, +\Delta m^2_{31}, -A )
388: & = & -{\bf J} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, -\Delta m^2_{31}, +A ) \; ,
389: \nonumber \\
390: {\bf J} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, -\Delta m^2_{31}, -A )
391: & = & -{\bf J} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, +\Delta m^2_{31}, +A ) \; .
392: % (13)
393: \end{eqnarray}
394: The validity of these equations, which are independent of both
395: the neutrino beam energy and the baseline length, can easily be proved
396: with the help of Eqs. (11), (A1) and (A2). The key point
397: is that $\Delta {\bf m}^2_{21}$ and $\Delta {\bf m}^2_{31}$ keep
398: unchanged in proper arrangements of the signs for $\Delta m^2_{21}$,
399: $\Delta m^2_{31}$ and $A$. Furthermore, there exist four
400: approximate relations:
401: \begin{eqnarray}
402: {\bf J} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, +\Delta m^2_{31}, +A )
403: & \approx & {\bf J} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, -\Delta m^2_{31}, +A ) \; ,
404: \nonumber \\
405: {\bf J} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, +\Delta m^2_{31}, -A )
406: & \approx & {\bf J} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, -\Delta m^2_{31}, -A ) \; ,
407: \nonumber \\
408: {\bf J} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, +\Delta m^2_{31}, -A )
409: & \approx & {\bf J} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, -\Delta m^2_{31}, -A ) \; ,
410: \nonumber \\
411: {\bf J} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, -\Delta m^2_{31}, +A )
412: & \approx & {\bf J} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, +\Delta m^2_{31}, +A ) \; ,
413: % (14)
414: \end{eqnarray}
415: which hold to a good degree of accuracy (with the relative errors
416: $\leq 15\%$) for the chosen neutrino beam energy.
417: This result implies that changing the sign of $\Delta m^2_{31}$
418: does not affect the magnitude of $\bf J$ significantly
419: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
420: \footnote{Note that the sign of
421: $\Delta m^2_{32}$ (= $\Delta m^2_{31} - \Delta m^2_{21}$) changes
422: simultaneously with that of $\Delta m^2_{31}$, simply because
423: $|\Delta m^2_{32}| \approx |\Delta m^2_{31}| \gg |\Delta m^2_{21}|$ holds.
424: The sensitivity of ${\bf J}/J$ to the signs of $\Delta m^2_{21}$
425: and $\Delta m^2_{31}$ has been examined in Ref. \cite{Yokomakura}.}.
426: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
427: We expect that those interesting relations in Eqs. (13) and (14) can
428: experimentally be tested in the near future.
429:
430: In a similar way we have carefully analyzed the behaviors of
431: $|{\bf V}_{\alpha i}|$ (for $\alpha = e, \mu, \tau$ and
432: $i =1,2,3$) with respect to the negative values of $\Delta m^2_{21}$ and
433: $\Delta m^2_{31}$. Instead of presenting the details
434: of our quantitative results, we only make two qualitative remarks:
435: (1) while $\bf J$ is not sensitive to the sign
436: of $\Delta m^2_{31}$, $|{\bf V}_{\alpha i}|$ may
437: dramatically be suppressed or enhanced by changing
438: the sign of $\Delta m^2_{31}$; (2) in contrast,
439: the dependence of $|{\bf V}_{\alpha i}|$ on the
440: sign of $\Delta m^2_{21}$ is less significant.
441:
442: Finally it is worth mentioning that dramatic changes of the
443: results shown in Figs. 1 -- 3 do not happen, even if one allows
444: every parameter to change in a reasonable region around the
445: originally chosen value (e.g.,
446: $\Delta m^2_{21} \sim (10^{-5} - 10^{-4}) ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
447: $\Delta m^2_{31} \sim (1 - 6)\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
448: $|V_{e1}| \sim 0.7 - 0.9$,
449: $|V_{e2}| \sim 0.5 - 0.7$,
450: $|V_{\mu 3}| \sim 0.5 - 0.8$,
451: and $|J| \sim 0.01 - 0.03$).
452: This observation implies that the matter-corrected quantities
453: of lepton flavor mixing and CP violation have quite stable
454: behaviors, as a qualitative consequence of the nearly bi-maximal
455: mixing pattern of $V$ and the rough hierarchy
456: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun} < A < \Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$ in the
457: experimental scenario under consideration.
458:
459: {\Large\bf 4} ~
460: Let us turn to CP- and T-violating asymmetries in the low-energy and
461: medium-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments.
462: The conversion probability of a neutrino $\nu_\alpha$
463: to another neutrino $\nu^{~}_\beta$ in vacuum is given by \cite{Xing00}
464: \begin{equation}
465: P(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta) \; = \;
466: -4 \sum_{i<j} [ {\rm Re} ( V_{\alpha i} V_{\beta j}
467: V^*_{\alpha j} V^*_{\beta i} ) \cdot \sin^2 F_{ij} ]
468: ~ + ~ 8 J \prod_{i<j} \sin F_{ij} \; ,
469: % (15)
470: \end{equation}
471: where $(\alpha, \beta)$ run over $(e, \mu)$, $(\mu, \tau)$ or $(\tau, e)$,
472: and $F_{ij} \equiv 1.27 \Delta m^2_{ij} L/E$ with $L$ being the
473: baseline length (in unit of km) and $E$ being the neutrino beam energy
474: (in unit of GeV).
475: The probabilities of $\nu^{~}_\beta \rightarrow \nu_\alpha$ and
476: $\overline{\nu}_\alpha \rightarrow \overline{\nu}^{~}_\beta$ transitions
477: can straightforwardly be read off from Eq. (15) with the replacement
478: $J \Longrightarrow -J$. Clearly
479: $P(\overline{\nu}_\alpha \rightarrow \overline{\nu}^{~}_\beta) =
480: P(\nu^{~}_\beta \rightarrow \nu_\alpha)$
481: holds as a straightforward consequence
482: of CPT invariance. The CP-violating asymmetry between
483: $P(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta)$ and
484: $P(\overline{\nu}_\alpha \rightarrow \overline{\nu}^{~}_\beta)$
485: amounts to the T-violating asymmetry between
486: $P(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta)$ and
487: $P(\nu^{~}_\beta \rightarrow \nu_\alpha)$ \cite{Cabibbo,FX00}:
488: \begin{eqnarray}
489: \Delta P & = & P(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta) ~ - ~
490: P(\overline{\nu}_\alpha \rightarrow \overline{\nu}^{~}_\beta) \;
491: \nonumber \\
492: & = & P(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta) ~ - ~
493: P(\nu^{~}_\beta \rightarrow \nu_\alpha) \;
494: \nonumber \\
495: & = & -16 J \sin F_{21} \cdot \sin F_{31} \cdot \sin F_{32} \; .
496: % (16)
497: \end{eqnarray}
498: Because of $|\Delta m^2_{31}| \approx |\Delta m^2_{32}| \gg |\Delta m^2_{21}|$,
499: a favorable signal of CP or T violation can be obtained only when
500: the condition $|\Delta m^2_{21}| \sim E/L$ is satisfied (i.e.,
501: $|\sin F_{21}| \sim {\cal O}(1)$ is acquired). Therefore only the large-angle
502: MSW solution to the solar neutrino problem is possible to meet such
503: a prerequisite for the observation of CP violation in realistic
504: neutrino oscillation experiments.
505:
506: When the terrestrial matter effects are taken into account,
507: the probability of the $\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta$ transition
508: becomes
509: \begin{equation}
510: {\bf P}(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta) \; = \;
511: -4 \sum_{i<j} [ {\rm Re} ( {\bf V}_{\alpha i} {\bf V}_{\beta j}
512: {\bf V}^*_{\alpha j} {\bf V}^*_{\beta i} ) \cdot \sin^2 {\bf F}_{ij} ]
513: ~ + ~ 8 {\bf J} \prod_{i<j} \sin {\bf F}_{ij} \; ,
514: % (17)
515: \end{equation}
516: in which ${\bf F}_{ij} \equiv 1.27 \Delta {\bf m}^2_{ij} L/E$.
517: The probability ${\bf P}(\nu^{~}_\beta \rightarrow \nu_\alpha)$
518: can directly be read off from Eq. (17) with the replacement
519: $J \Longrightarrow -J$. To obtain the probability
520: ${\bf P}(\overline{\nu}_\alpha \rightarrow \overline{\nu}^{~}_\beta)$,
521: however, both the replacements $J \Longrightarrow -J$
522: and $A \Longrightarrow -A$ need be made for Eq. (17).
523: In this case,
524: ${\bf P}(\overline{\nu}_\alpha \rightarrow \overline{\nu}^{~}_\beta)$
525: is not equal to ${\bf P}(\nu^{~}_\beta \rightarrow \nu_\alpha)$.
526: Such a false signal of CPT violation measures the matter effect!
527: Similar to Eq. (16), the CP- and T-violating asymmetries in the
528: presence of matter effects can be defined respectively as
529: \begin{eqnarray}
530: \Delta {\bf P} & = & {\bf P}(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta) ~ - ~
531: {\bf P}(\overline{\nu}_\alpha \rightarrow \overline{\nu}^{~}_\beta) \; ,
532: \nonumber \\
533: \Delta \tilde{\bf P} & = & {\bf P}(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta) ~ - ~
534: {\bf P}(\nu^{~}_\beta \rightarrow \nu_\alpha) \; ,
535: % (18)
536: \end{eqnarray}
537: where the flavor indices $(\alpha, \beta)$ run over $(e, \mu)$,
538: $(\mu, \tau)$ or $(\tau, e)$.
539: In general, $\Delta \tilde{\bf P} \neq \Delta {\bf P}$ because of the
540: matter-induced corrections to $\Delta P$.
541: Note that the overall matter effects residing
542: in $\Delta \tilde{\bf P}$ is expected to be tiny. Indeed
543: $\Delta \tilde{\bf P} \approx \Delta P$ has numerically been confirmed
544: to be an excellent approximation \cite{LB,FX00}.
545: The reason is simply that the
546: matter-induced corrections to $P(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta)$
547: and $P(\nu^{~}_\beta \rightarrow \nu_\alpha)$, which depend on the same
548: parameter $\bf A$, may essentially cancel each other in the asymmetry
549: $\Delta \tilde{\bf P}$. In contrast,
550: ${\bf P}(\nu_\alpha \rightarrow \nu^{~}_\beta)$ and
551: ${\bf P}(\overline{\nu}_\alpha \rightarrow \overline{\nu}^{~}_\beta)$
552: are associated separately with $(+{\bf A})$ and $(-{\bf A})$, thus
553: there is no large cancellation of matter effects in the asymmetry
554: $\Delta {\bf P}$.
555:
556: To illustrate, we perform a numerical analysis of the CP-violating
557: asymmetry $\Delta {\bf P}$ between $\nu_e \rightarrow \nu_\mu$
558: and $\overline{\nu}_e \rightarrow \overline{\nu}_\mu$ transitions
559: as well as the T-violating asymmetry $\Delta \tilde{\bf P}$
560: between $\nu_e \rightarrow \nu_\mu$ and $\nu_\mu \rightarrow \nu_e$
561: transitions. The values of the relevant input parameters are
562: taken the same as before. We first choose $\Delta m^2_{21}>0$ and
563: $\Delta m^2_{31}>0$ to calculate $\Delta P$ and $\Delta {\bf P}$ as
564: functions of the beam energy $E$ with respect to
565: $L=100$ km, 200 km, 300 km and 400 km. The results are shown in
566: Fig. 4. For the chosen range of $E$, one can see that the matter effect
567: on $\Delta P$ is insignificant; i.e., $\Delta {\bf P} \approx \Delta P$
568: is a good approximation. The largest deviation of $\Delta {\bf P}$ from
569: $\Delta P$, of the magnitude $0.12\%$ or so, takes place when $E$ and
570: $L$ satisfy the rough condition $L/E \sim 500$ km/GeV. This observation
571: is of course dependent on the values of the input parameters. We confirm
572: that $\Delta \tilde{\bf P} \approx \Delta P$ holds to a better degree
573: of accuracy than $\Delta {\bf P} \approx \Delta P$.
574: Following a similar analysis, we find that
575: the CP-violating asymmetry between $\nu_\mu \rightarrow \nu_e$ and
576: $\overline{\nu}_\mu \rightarrow \overline{\nu}_e$ transitions amounts
577: essentially to ($-\Delta {\bf P}$). It becomes clear that
578: a relatively pure CP-violating asymmetry at the percent level
579: can be obtained from such a low-energy and medium-baseline neutrino
580: experiment.
581:
582: The continuous dependence of the CP-violating asymmetry
583: $\Delta {\bf P}$ on the baseline length $L$ is shown in Fig. 5
584: for five different values of the neutrino beam energy $E$ (i.e.,
585: $E= 100$ MeV, 200 MeV, 300 MeV, 400 MeV and 500 MeV).
586: Fixing $E = 100$ MeV, for example, we observe that the maximal magnitude of
587: $\Delta {\bf P}$ may reach $4\%$ at $L\sim 200$ km and
588: $6\%$ at $L\sim 280$ km. Note that $L$ should not be too large in
589: realistic experiments, in order to keep the neutrino beam opening angles
590: as small as possible \cite{Minakata}.
591: For a specific experiment, one can select
592: the optimum values of $E$ and $L$ after taking its luminosity and
593: other technical details into account.
594:
595: Finally let us examine the sensitivity of $\Delta {\bf P}$ to the
596: signs of $\Delta m^2_{21}$ and $\Delta m^2_{31}$. To be explicit,
597: we take $L=100$ km and 400 km. The dependence of $\Delta {\bf P}$
598: on $E$ is then studied with respect to four possible combinations
599: for the signs of $\Delta m^2_{21}$ and $\Delta m^2_{31}$. The
600: numerical results are depicted in Fig. 6. We find that the
601: following relations hold to a good degree of accuracy:
602: \begin{eqnarray}
603: \Delta {\bf P} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, + \Delta m^2_{31}) & \approx &
604: -\Delta {\bf P} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, - \Delta m^2_{31}) \; ,
605: \nonumber \\
606: \Delta {\bf P} (+\Delta m^2_{21}, - \Delta m^2_{31}) & \approx &
607: -\Delta {\bf P} (-\Delta m^2_{21}, + \Delta m^2_{31}) \; .
608: % (19)
609: \end{eqnarray}
610: To understand the above equation, we notice from
611: Eq. (16) that $\Delta P(+\Delta m^2_{21}, \pm \Delta m^2_{31})$
612: and $\Delta P(-\Delta m^2_{21}, \mp \Delta m^2_{31})$ have the
613: same magnitude but the opposite signs. A slight deviation of
614: $\Delta {\bf P}(\pm \Delta m^2_{21}, \pm \Delta m^2_{31})$ from
615: $\Delta P(\pm \Delta m^2_{21}, \pm \Delta m^2_{31})$ arises from
616: the terrestrial matter effects, which are very samll in the
617: experimental scenario under consideration. Therefore we arrive
618: at the approximate relations in Eq. (19). Note also that the
619: sensitivity of $\Delta {\bf P}$ to the sign of $\Delta m^2_{31}$
620: is quite weak, as shown in Fig. 6. This result is certainly consistent
621: with that for ${\bf J}$ in Eq. (14); i.e., changing the sign of
622: $\Delta m^2_{31}$ does not affect $\bf J$ and $\Delta {\bf P}$
623: significantly.
624:
625: {\Large\bf 5} ~
626: In this paper we have introduced the commutators
627: of lepton mass matrices to describe the phenomenon of lepton
628: flavor mixing. Their relations to the effective Hamiltonian
629: responsible for the propagation of neutrinos are independent of the
630: nature of neutrinos (Dirac or Majorana).
631: The determinants of those commutators are
632: invariant under matter effects, leading to an elegant relationship
633: between the universal CP-violating parameters in matter and
634: in vacuum.
635:
636: We have illustrated the features of lepton flavor mixing and CP
637: violation in the scenario of low-energy (100 MeV $\leq E \leq$ 1 GeV)
638: and medium-baseline (100 km $\leq L\leq$ 400 km) neutrino experiments,
639: In particular, the terrestrial matter effects on the elements of
640: the lepton mixing matrix and on the rephasing-invariant measure of CP
641: violation are systematically analyzed. Some useful relations have been found
642: for the matter-corrected parameters of CP or T violation in respect to
643: different signs of the neutrino mass-squared differences.
644:
645: We have also presented a detailed analysis of CP- and T-violating
646: asymmetries in neutrino oscillations, based on a medium-baseline
647: experiment with low-energy neutrino beams. The terrestrial matter
648: effects are demonstrated to be insignificant and sometimes even negligible
649: in such an experimental scenario. A relatively pure signal of leptonic
650: CP violation at the percent level can be established from the
651: probability asymmetry between $\nu_\mu \rightarrow \nu_e$ and
652: $\overline{\nu}_\mu \rightarrow \overline{\nu}_e$ transitions, or
653: between $\nu_e \rightarrow \nu_\mu$ and
654: $\overline{\nu}_e \rightarrow \overline{\nu}_\mu$ transitions.
655:
656: To realize a low-energy and medium-baseline neutrino experiment needs
657: high-intensity and narrow-band neutrino beams (e.g., 10 to 100 times
658: more intense than the neutrino flux in the K2K
659: experiment \cite{Minakata}).
660: Considering conventional neutrino beams produced from the charged
661: pion decay, for example, one may maximize the neutrino flux in the
662: forward direction by restricting the pion beam divergence.
663: The required radial focusing can be provided by a quadrupole channel
664: and (or) magnetic horns \cite{Richter,Barger}. The peak pion energy
665: and energy spread within the pion decay channel are determined by
666: the beamline optics, which in turn determine the neutrino spectrum.
667: If the optics are designed to accept a large pion momentum spread,
668: the resultant wide-band beam will contain a large neutrino flux
669: with a broad energy spectrum; and if the optics are designed to accept
670: a smaller pion momentum spread, the resultant narrow-band beam will
671: contain a smaller neutrino flux with a narrower energy spectrum \cite{Barger}.
672: A detailed study of such technical problems is certainly desirable, but
673: beyond the scope of this work.
674:
675: We expect that the low-energy, medium-baseline neutrino
676: experiments and the
677: high-energy, long-baseline neutrino experiments may be
678: complementary to each other, in the near future, towards a precise
679: determination of the flavor mixing and CP-violating parameters in
680: the lepton sector.
681:
682: The author is indebted to A. Romanino for her enlightening comments on this
683: paper.
684:
685: \newpage
686:
687: \centerline{\Large APPENDIX A}
688: \vspace{0.5cm}
689:
690: \setcounter{equation}{0}
691: \renewcommand{\thesection}{\Alph{section}}
692: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection\arabic{equation}}
693: \setcounter{section}{1}
694:
695: In the assumption of a constant earth density profile and
696: with the help of the effective Hamiltonians given in
697: in Eqs. (1) and (2), the author has recently derived
698: the exact and parametrization-independent formulas for
699: the matter-corrected neutrino masses ${\bf m}_i$ and the flavor
700: mixing matrix elements ${\bf V}_{\alpha i}$ in Ref. \cite{Xing00}.
701: The main results are briefly summarized as follows.
702:
703: (1) The neutrino mass eigenvalues $m^{~}_i$ in vacuum and
704: ${\bf m}^{~}_i$ in matter are related to each other through
705: \begin{eqnarray}
706: {\bf m}^2_1 & = & m^2_1 + \frac{1}{3} x - \frac{1}{3} \sqrt{x^2 - 3y}
707: \left [z + \sqrt{3 \left (1-z^2 \right )} \right ] ,
708: \nonumber \\
709: {\bf m}^2_2 & = & m^2_1 + \frac{1}{3} x - \frac{1}{3} \sqrt{x^2 -3y}
710: \left [z - \sqrt{3 \left (1-z^2 \right )} \right ] ,
711: \nonumber \\
712: {\bf m}^2_3 & = & m^2_1 + \frac{1}{3} x + \frac{2}{3} z \sqrt{x^2 - 3y} \; ,
713: % (A1)
714: \end{eqnarray}
715: where $x$, $y$ and $z$ are given by \cite{Zaglauer}
716: \begin{eqnarray}
717: x & = & \Delta m^2_{21} + \Delta m^2_{31} + A \; ,
718: \nonumber \\
719: y & = & \Delta m^2_{21} \Delta m^2_{31} + A \left [
720: \Delta m^2_{21} \left ( 1 - |V_{e2}|^2 \right )
721: + \Delta m^2_{31} \left ( 1 - |V_{e3}|^2 \right ) \right ] ,
722: \nonumber \\
723: z & = & \cos \left [ \frac{1}{3} \arccos \frac{2x^3 -9xy + 27
724: A \Delta m^2_{21} \Delta m^2_{31} |V_{e1}|^2}
725: {2 \left (x^2 - 3y \right )^{3/2}} \right ]
726: % (A2)
727: \end{eqnarray}
728: with $\Delta m^2_{21}$ and $\Delta m^2_{31}$ defined in Eq. (12),
729: and $A \equiv 2E {\bf A} = 2\sqrt{2} ~ G_{\rm F} N_e E$.
730: Of course, ${\bf m}^2_i = m^2_i$ can be reproduced from
731: Eq. (A1) if $A =0$ is taken. Only the mass-squared
732: differences $\Delta {\bf m}^2_{21} \equiv {\bf m}^2_2 - {\bf m}^2_1$
733: and $\Delta {\bf m}^2_{31} \equiv {\bf m}^2_3 - {\bf m}^2_1$ are
734: relevant to the practical neutrino oscillations in matter.
735:
736: At this point it is worth mentioning that $m^2_i$, $|V_{ei}|^2$,
737: $A$ and ${\bf m}^2_i$ are correlated with one another via an
738: interesting equation, which has not been noticed in the literature:
739: \begin{equation}
740: A \left (m^2_i - m^2_k \right ) \left (m^2_j - m^2_k \right )
741: |V_{ek}|^2 \; =\; \prod^3_{n=1} \left ({\bf m}^2_n - m^2_k \right ) \; ,
742: % (A3)
743: \end{equation}
744: where $(i, j, k)$ run over $(1, 2, 3)$ with $i\neq j \neq k$.
745: Assuming $|\Delta m^2_{31}| \gg |\Delta m^2_{21}|$ and taking
746: $k=3$, one can easily reproduce the
747: approximate analytical result for the correlation between
748: ${\bf m}^2_i$ and $m^2_i$ obtained in Ref. \cite{Pantaleone}.
749:
750: (2) The analytical relationship between the elements of $\bf V$ in
751: matter and those of $V$ in vacuum reads:
752: \begin{eqnarray}
753: {\bf V}_{\alpha i} \; = \; \frac{N_i}{D_i} V_{\alpha i}
754: ~ + ~ \frac{A}{D_i} V_{e i} \left [ \left ({\bf m}^2_i - m^2_j \right )
755: V^*_{e k} V_{\alpha k} + \left ({\bf m}^2_i - m^2_k \right )
756: V^*_{e j} V_{\alpha j} \right ] ,
757: % (A4)
758: \end{eqnarray}
759: in which $\alpha$ runs over $(e, \mu, \tau)$ and $(i, j, k)$ over $(1, 2, 3)$
760: with $i \neq j \neq k$, and
761: \begin{eqnarray}
762: N_i & = & \left ({\bf m}^2_i - m^2_j \right ) \left ({\bf m}^2_i - m^2_k \right )
763: - A \left [\left ({\bf m}^2_i - m^2_j \right ) |V_{e k}|^2
764: + \left ({\bf m}^2_i - m^2_k \right ) |V_{e j}|^2 \right ] ,
765: \nonumber \\
766: D^2_i & = & N^2_i + A^2 |V_{e i}|^2 \left [
767: \left ({\bf m}^2_i - m^2_j \right )^2 |V_{e k}|^2
768: + \left ({\bf m}^2_i - m^2_k \right )^2 |V_{e j}|^2 \right ] .
769: % (A5)
770: \end{eqnarray}
771: Obviously $A=0$ leads to
772: ${\bf V}_{\alpha i} = V_{\alpha i}$. This exact and compact formula shows
773: clearly how the flavor mixing matrix in vacuum is corrected by the matter
774: effects. Instructive analytical approximations can be made for Eq. (A4),
775: once the spectrum of neutrino masses is experimentally known or
776: theoretically predicted.
777:
778: The results listed above are valid for neutrinos interacting with matter.
779: As for antineutrinos propagating through matter,
780: the relevant formulas can straightforwardly be
781: obtained from Eqs. (A1) -- (A5) through the replacements
782: $V\Longrightarrow V^*$ and $A\Longrightarrow -A$.
783:
784: \vspace{2cm}
785: \centerline{\Large APPENDIX B}
786: \vspace{0.5cm}
787:
788: \setcounter{equation}{0}
789: \renewcommand{\thesection}{\Alph{section}}
790: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection\arabic{equation}}
791: \setcounter{section}{2}
792:
793: This Appendix aims to show why
794: $M_\nu M^\dagger_\nu = V \overline{M}^2_\nu V^\dagger$ holds in the flavor
795: basis where the charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal
796: (i.e., $M_l = \overline{M}_l$), no matter whether neutrinos are Dirac
797: or Majorana particles. For simplicity, we focus on the standard
798: charged-current weak interactions, in which only the left-handed
799: leptons take part:
800: \begin{equation}
801: -{\cal L}_{\rm weak} \; =\; \frac{g}{\sqrt{2}} ~
802: \overline{(\nu_e, \nu_\mu, \nu_\tau)^{~}_{\rm L}} ~ \gamma^\mu
803: \left (\matrix{
804: e \cr
805: \mu \cr
806: \tau \cr} \right )_{\rm L} W^+_\mu ~ + ~ {\rm h.c.} \; ,
807: % (B1)
808: \end{equation}
809: where the flavor eigenstates of charged leptons are identified with
810: their mass eigenstates. As the lepton flavor mixing matrix $V$
811: is defined to link the neutrino flavor eigenstates
812: $(\nu_e, \nu_\mu, \nu_\tau)$ to the neutrino mass eigenstates
813: $(\nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3)$, we get
814: \begin{equation}
815: -{\cal L}_{\rm weak} \; =\; \frac{g}{\sqrt{2}} ~
816: \overline{(\nu^{~}_1, \nu^{~}_2, \nu^{~}_3)^{~}_{\rm L}} ~ V^\dagger \gamma^\mu
817: \left (\matrix{
818: e \cr
819: \mu \cr
820: \tau \cr} \right )_{\rm L} W^+_\mu ~ + ~ {\rm h.c.} \;
821: % (B2)
822: \end{equation}
823: in the chosen flavor basis.
824:
825: If neutrinos are Dirac particles, the mass term can be written as
826: \begin{equation}
827: - {\cal L}_{\rm Dirac} \; =\;
828: \overline{(\nu_e, \nu_\mu, \nu_\tau)^{~}_{\rm L}}
829: ~ M_\nu \left (\matrix{
830: \nu_e \cr
831: \nu_\mu \cr
832: \nu_\tau \cr} \right )_{\rm R} + ~ {\rm h.c.} \; ,
833: % (B3)
834: \end{equation}
835: where $M_\nu$ is in general an arbitrary $3\times 3$ matrix. It is
836: always possible to diagonalize $M_\nu$ by a bi-unitary transformation:
837: $V^\dagger M_\nu \tilde{V} = \overline{M}_\nu$, where $V$ is just
838: the flavor mixing matrix of Dirac neutrinos consistent with Eq. (B2).
839: Obviously $M_\nu M^\dagger_\nu = V \overline{M}^2_\nu V^\dagger$ holds.
840:
841: If neutrinos are Majorana particles, the mass terms turns out to be
842: \begin{equation}
843: -{\cal L}_{\rm Majorana} \; =\; \frac{1}{2} ~
844: \overline{(\nu_e, \nu_\mu, \nu_\tau)^{~}_{\rm L}}
845: ~ M_\nu \left (\matrix{
846: \nu^{\rm c}_e \cr
847: \nu^{\rm c}_\mu \cr
848: \nu^{\rm c}_\tau \cr} \right )_{\rm R} + ~ {\rm h.c.} \; ,
849: % (B4)
850: \end{equation}
851: in which $\nu^{\rm c} \equiv C \overline{\nu}^{\rm T}$ with $C$
852: being the charge-conjugation operator. It is well known that $M_\nu$
853: must be a symmetric matrix and can be diagonalized by a single
854: unitary transformation: $V^\dagger M_\nu V^* = \overline{M}_\nu$,
855: where $V$ is just the flavor mixing matrix of Majorana neutrinos
856: consistent with Eq. (B2)
857: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
858: \footnote{If the Majorana mass matrix $M_\nu$ is diagonalized by the
859: transformation $U^{\rm T} M_\nu U = \overline{M}_\nu$, one will see
860: that it is $U^*$ (instead of $U$) linking the flavor eigenstates
861: to the mass eigenstates of neutrinos. Therefore the flavor mixing
862: matrix turns out to be $V = U^*$ in the chosen flavor basis.}.
863: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
864: Once again we arrive at
865: $M_\nu M^\dagger_\nu = V \overline{M}^2_\nu V^\dagger$.
866:
867: A more general neutrino mass Lagrangian involves both Dirac and
868: Majorana terms \cite{Bilenky}. In this case, one can similarly
869: prove that the mass matrix of light (active) Majorana neutrinos
870: is symmetric and satisfies
871: $M_\nu M^\dagger_\nu = V \overline{M}^2_\nu V^\dagger$. Thus
872: ${\cal H}_{\rm eff} = (M_\nu M^\dagger_\nu)/(2E)$ holds in vacuum,
873: no matter whether neutrinos are Dirac or Majorana particles.
874: In matter we have an analogous relation between
875: ${\cal H}^{\rm m}_{\rm eff}$ and ${\bf M}_\nu {\bf M}^\dagger_\nu$,
876: as given in Eq. (6).
877:
878:
879: \newpage
880:
881: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
882: \bibitem{SK98} Super-Kamiokande Collaboration,
883: Y. Fukuda {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 81}, 1562 (1998);
884: {\bf 81}, 4279 (1998); http://www-sk.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/dpc/sk/.
885:
886: \bibitem{Cabibbo} N. Cabibbo, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 72}, 333 (1978);
887: V. Barger, K. Whisnant, and R.J.N. Phillips,
888: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 45}, 2084 (1980).
889:
890: \bibitem{LB} See, e.g., S. Geer, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 57}, 6989 (1998);
891: A. De Rujula, M.B. Gavela, and P. Hern$\rm\acute{a}$ndez,
892: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 547}, 21 (1999);
893: K. Dick, M. Freund, M. Lindner, and A. Romanino,
894: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 562}, 299 (1999);
895: V. Barger, S. Geer, and K. Whisnant, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 61}, 053004 (2000);
896: V. Barger, S. Geer, R. Raja, and K. Whisnant,
897: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 62}, 013004 (2000);
898: A. Donini, M.B. Gavela, P. Hern$\rm\acute{a}$ndez, and S. Rigolin,
899: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 574}, 23 (2000);
900: A. Romanino, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 574}, 675 (2000);
901: H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing, hep-ph/0005148;
902: M. Freund, M. Lindner, S.T. Petcov, and A. Romanino,
903: hep-ph/9912457;
904: O. Yasuda, Acta. Phys. Polon. B {\bf 30}, 3089 (1999).
905:
906: \bibitem{Richter} B. Richter, hep-ph/0008222.
907:
908: \bibitem{Minakata} H. Minakata and H. Nunokawa, hep-ph/0009091.
909:
910: \bibitem{Sato} J. Sato, hep-ph/0006127.
911:
912: \bibitem{Wolfenstein} L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 17}, 2369 (1978);
913: V. Barger, S. Pakavasa, R.J.N. Phillips, and
914: K. Whisnant, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 22}, 2718 (1980);
915: T.K. Kuo and J. Pantaleone, Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 61}, 937 (1989).
916:
917: \bibitem{Xing00} A parametrization-independent
918: formalism of matter effects on neutrino mixing and CP violation
919: has recently been presented: Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 487}, 327 (2000);
920: talk given at the 3rd International Symposium on
921: Symmetries in Subatomic Physics, Adelaide, Australia,
922: March 2000; hep-ph/0007135.
923:
924: \bibitem{Scott} P.F. Harrison and W.G. Scott,
925: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 476}, 349 (2000).
926:
927: \bibitem{Jarlskog} C. Jarlskog, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 55}, 1039 (1985);
928: D.D. Wu, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 33}, 860 (1986).
929:
930: \bibitem{Osaka} The latest Super-Kamiokande data can be found from the
931: talks of Y. Takeuchi and T. Toshito at ICHEP2000, Osaka, July 2000;
932: http://ichep2000.hep.sci.osaka-u.ac.jp/.
933:
934: \bibitem{CHOOZ} CHOOZ Collaboration, M. Apollonio {\it et al.},
935: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 420}, 397 (1998).
936:
937: \bibitem{PDG} Particle Data Group, D.E. Groom {\it et al.},
938: Eur. Phys. J. C {\bf 15}, 1 (2000). For a classification of
939: all possible parametrizations of lepton or quark flavor mixing,
940: see: H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 413}, 396 (1997);
941: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 57}, 594 (1998).
942:
943: \bibitem{Yokomakura} H. Yokomakura, K. Kimura, and
944: A. Takamura, hep-ph/0009141.
945:
946: \bibitem{FX00} H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing,
947: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 61}, 073016 (2000); Z.Z. Xing,
948: Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) {\bf 85}, 187 (2000).
949:
950: \bibitem{Zaglauer} H.W. Zaglauer and K.H. Schwarzer, Z. Phys. C
951: {\bf 40}, 273 (1988);
952: V. Barger, S. Pakavasa, R.J.N. Phillips, and
953: K. Whisnant, in Ref. \cite{Wolfenstein}.
954:
955: \bibitem{Pantaleone} J. Pantaleone, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 49}, 2152 (1994);
956: V. Barger, S. Geer, R. Raja, and K. Whisnant, in Ref. \cite{LB}.
957:
958: \bibitem{Barger} V. Barger, S. Geer, R. Raja, and
959: K. Whisnant, hep-ph/0012017; and references therein.
960:
961: \bibitem{Bilenky} See, e.g., S.M. Bilenky and S.T. Petcov,
962: Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 59}, 671 (1987); H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing,
963: Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. {\bf 45}, 1 (2000); hep-ph/9912358;
964: and references therein.
965: \end{thebibliography}
966:
967: \newpage
968:
969: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
970: \begin{figure}[t]
971: \vspace{1.8cm}
972: \epsfig{file=M.ps,bbllx=2cm,bblly=6cm,bburx=19cm,bbury=28cm,%
973: width=15cm,height=20cm,angle=0,clip=}
974: \vspace{-12.5cm}
975: \caption{\small Ratios $\Delta {\bf m}^2_{21}/\Delta m^2_{21}$
976: and $\Delta {\bf m}^2_{31}/\Delta m^2_{31}$ changing with the
977: beam energy $E$ (in unit of GeV) for neutrinos ($\nu$) and
978: antineutrinos ($\overline{\nu}$),
979: in which $\Delta m^2_{21} = 5\cdot 10^{-5} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
980: $\Delta m^2_{31} = 3\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
981: $|V_{e1}| = 0.816$, and $|V_{e2}| = 0.571$
982: have typically been input.}
983: \end{figure}
984: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
985:
986: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 2 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
987: \begin{figure}[t]
988: \vspace{2.5cm}
989: \epsfig{file=V.ps,bbllx=1cm,bblly=5.8cm,bburx=19cm,bbury=30.cm,%
990: width=15cm,height=19cm,angle=0,clip=}
991: \vspace{-2.0cm}
992: \caption{\small Ratios $|{\bf V}_{\alpha i}|/|V_{\alpha i}|$
993: (for $\alpha = e, \mu, \tau$ and $i=1,2,3$)
994: changing with the beam energy $E$ (in unit of GeV) for neutrinos ($\nu$)
995: and antineutrinos ($\overline{\nu}$),
996: in which $\Delta m^2_{21} = 5\cdot 10^{-5} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
997: $\Delta m^2_{31} = 3\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
998: $|V_{e1}| = 0.816$, $|V_{e2}| = 0.571$,
999: $|V_{\mu 3}| = 0.640$, and $J = \pm 0.020$
1000: have typically been input.}
1001: \end{figure}
1002: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1003:
1004: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 3 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1005: \begin{figure}[t]
1006: \vspace{2.5cm}
1007: \epsfig{file=J.ps,bbllx=2cm,bblly=6cm,bburx=19cm,bbury=28cm,%
1008: width=15cm,height=20cm,angle=0,clip=}
1009: \vspace{-10.45cm}
1010: \caption{\small The ratio ${\bf J}/J$
1011: changing with the beam energy $E$ (in unit of GeV) for neutrinos ($\nu$) and
1012: antineutrinos ($\overline{\nu}$),
1013: in which $\Delta m^2_{21} = 5\cdot 10^{-5} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
1014: $\Delta m^2_{31} = 3\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
1015: $|V_{e1}| = 0.816$, $|V_{e2}| = 0.571$,
1016: $|V_{\mu 3}| = 0.640$, and $J = \pm 0.020$
1017: have typically been input.}
1018: \end{figure}
1019: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1020:
1021: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 4 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1022: \begin{figure}[t]
1023: \vspace{-0.8cm}
1024: \epsfig{file=CP01.ps,bbllx=1cm,bblly=5.8cm,bburx=19cm,bbury=30.cm,%
1025: width=15cm,height=20cm,angle=0,clip=}
1026: \vspace{-7.05cm}
1027: \caption{\small The CP-violating
1028: asymmetries between $\nu_e \rightarrow \nu_\mu$
1029: and $\overline{\nu}_e \rightarrow \overline{\nu}_\mu$ transitions
1030: in matter ({\bf a}: $\Delta {\bf P}$
1031: in unit of $10^{-2}$) and in vacuum ({\bf b}: $\Delta P$ in unit of
1032: $10^{-2}$) changing with the beam energy $E$ (in unit of GeV),
1033: in which $\Delta m^2_{21} = 5\cdot 10^{-5} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
1034: $\Delta m^2_{31} = 3\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
1035: $|V_{e1}| = 0.816$, $|V_{e2}| = 0.571$,
1036: $|V_{\mu 3}| = 0.640$, and $J = \pm 0.020$
1037: have typically been input.}
1038: \end{figure}
1039: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1040:
1041: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 5 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1042: \begin{figure}[t]
1043: \vspace{-0.8cm}
1044: \epsfig{file=CP02.ps,bbllx=0cm,bblly=6cm,bburx=19cm,bbury=28cm,%
1045: width=15.5cm,height=20cm,angle=0,clip=}
1046: \vspace{-10.4cm}
1047: \caption{\small The CP-violating asymmetry $\Delta {\bf P}$ between
1048: $\nu_e \rightarrow \nu_\mu$
1049: and $\overline{\nu}_e \rightarrow \overline{\nu}_\mu$ transitions
1050: (in unit of $10^{-2}$)
1051: changing with the baseline length $L$ (in unit of km) and the
1052: beam energy $E$ ({\bf a}: 100 MeV; {\bf b}: 200 MeV; {\bf c}: 300 MeV;
1053: {\bf d}: 400 MeV; {\bf e}: 500 MeV). Here
1054: $\Delta m^2_{21} = 5\cdot 10^{-5} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
1055: $\Delta m^2_{31} = 3\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
1056: $|V_{e1}| = 0.816$, $|V_{e2}| = 0.571$,
1057: $|V_{\mu 3}| = 0.640$, and $J = \pm 0.020$
1058: have typically been input.}
1059: \end{figure}
1060: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1061:
1062: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 6 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1063: \begin{figure}[t]
1064: \vspace{-0.8cm}
1065: \epsfig{file=CP03.ps,bbllx=1cm,bblly=6cm,bburx=19cm,bbury=28cm,%
1066: width=15cm,height=20cm,angle=0,clip=}
1067: \vspace{-12.2cm}
1068: \caption{\small Dependence of the CP-violating asymmetry
1069: $\Delta {\bf P}$ (in unit of $10^{-2}$)
1070: on the beam energy $E$ (in unit of GeV) and on the signs of
1071: $(\Delta m^2_{21}, \Delta m^2_{31}$) -- {\bf 1}: ($-$, $+$);
1072: {\bf 2}: ($-$, $-$); {\bf 3}: ($+$, $+$); {\bf 4}: ($+$, $-$).
1073: Here $|\Delta m^2_{21}| = 5\cdot 10^{-5} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
1074: $|\Delta m^2_{31}| = 3\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$,
1075: $|V_{e1}| = 0.816$, $|V_{e2}| = 0.571$,
1076: $|V_{\mu 3}| = 0.640$, and $J = \pm 0.020$
1077: have typically been input.}
1078: \end{figure}
1079: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1080:
1081:
1082: \end{document}
1083:
1084:
1085: