1: \documentstyle[12pt,epsfig]{article}
2: \textwidth 6.5in
3: \oddsidemargin 0in
4: \textheight 9in
5: \topmargin 0in
6: \headheight 0in
7: \headsep 0in
8: \def\MP#1{\marginpar{\scriptsize {#1}}}
9: \newcommand{\be}[1]{\begin{equation} \label{(#1)}}
10: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
11: \newcommand{\ba}[1]{\begin{eqnarray} \label{(#1)}}
12: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{eqnarray}}
13: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
14: \newcommand{\rf}[1]{(\ref{(#1)})}
15: \def\lsim{\mbox{${}^< \hspace*{-7pt} _\sim$}}
16: \def\gsim{\mbox{${}^> \hspace*{-7pt} _\sim$}}
17: \def\leql{ ^< \hspace*{-7pt} _=}
18: \def\geql{ ^> \hspace*{-7pt} _=}
19: \def\p{\prime}
20: \def\pmb#1{\setbox0=\hbox{#1} \kern-.015em\copy0\kern-\wd0
21: \kern.03em\copy0\kern-\wd0
22: \kern-.015em\raise.0233em\box0 }
23: \def\rpt{R$_p \hspace{-1em}/\;\:$}
24: \def\rp{$R_p\hspace{-1em}/\ \ $}
25: \def\r{$R_p\hspace{-1em}/\hspace{3mm} $}
26: %
27: \def\Lv{$L\hspace{-0.5em}/\ \ $}
28: %\def\Lfv{$L_i\hspace{-0.8em}/\ \ $}
29: \def\Bv{$B\hspace{-0.6em}/\ \ $}
30: \def\Lv{$L\hspace{-0.5em}/\ \ $}
31: \def\Lfv{$L_f\hspace{-0.95em}/\ \ $}
32: %
33: \def\rpm{R_p \hspace{-0.8em}/\;\:}
34: \def\sw{\sin\!\theta^{}_W }
35: \def\cw{\cos\!\theta^{}_W }
36: \def\tw{\tan\!\theta^{}_W }
37: \def\ssqw{\sin^2\!\theta^{}_W }
38: \def\sbt{\sin\!\beta }
39: \def\stwobt{\sin\!2\beta }
40: \def\cbt{\cos\!\beta }
41: \def\lg{\langle}
42: \def\rg{\rangle}
43: \def\tbt{\tan\!\beta }
44: \def\mg{{m^{}_{\tilde g}} }
45: \def\msq{{m^{}_{\tilde q}} }
46: \def\znbb{0\nu\beta\beta}
47: \def\m{$\mu^--e^-$}
48: \def\bfr{\pmb{${r}$}}
49: \def\bfsgm{\pmb{${\sigma}$}}
50: \def\sir{({ \bfsgm_{a}^{~}} \cdot {\hat{\bfr}_{ab}^{~}} )}
51: \def\sjr{({ \bfsgm_{b}^{~}} \cdot {\hat{\bfr}_{ab}^{~}} )}
52: \def\si{{ \bfsgm_{a}^{~}}}
53: \def\sj{{ \bfsgm_{b}^{~}} }
54:
55: \begin{document}
56: %\begin{titlepage}
57: \hfill{USM-TH-111}\\[1cm]
58: \begin{center}
59: %
60: {\Large\bf B-quark mediated neutrinoless $\mu^--e^-$ conversion in presence of R-parity violation}
61: \\
62:
63: \bigskip
64:
65: {T.S. Kosmas$^a$, Sergey Kovalenko$^{b}$\footnote{On
66: leave of absence from the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia}
67: and Ivan Schmidt$^b$} \\[0.5cm]
68: %
69: {$^a$\it Division of Theoretical Physics, University of Ioannina GR-45110
70: Ioannina, Greece}\\[3mm]
71: {$^b$\it Departamento de F\'\i sica, Universidad
72: T\'ecnica Federico Santa Mar\'\i a, Casilla 110-V, Valpara\'\i so, Chile}
73:
74: \end{center}
75:
76: \bigskip
77:
78: \begin{abstract}
79: We found that in supersymmetric models with R-parity non-conservation (\rp SUSY)
80: the b-quarks may appreciably contribute to exotic neutrinoless \m conversion in
81: nuclei via the triangle diagram with two external gluons.
82: This allowed us to extract previously overlooked constraints on the third generation
83: trilinear \r parameters significantly more stringent than those existing in the literature.
84: \end{abstract}
85:
86: \bigskip
87: \bigskip
88:
89: PACS: 12.60Jv, 11.30.Er, 11.30.Fs, 23.40.Bw
90:
91: \bigskip
92: \bigskip
93:
94: KEYWORDS: Lepton flavor violation, $\mu -e$ conversion in nuclei,
95: supersymmetry, R-parity violation.
96:
97: %\end{titlepage}
98: \bigskip
99: \bigskip
100:
101:
102: In the standard model (SM) the lepton flavors ($L_f$) are conserved quantum
103: numbers as an accidental consequence of gauge invariance and field
104: content. Thus, observation of $L_f$ non-conservation would imply the presence
105: of physics beyond the standard model. Non-conservation of muon lepton flavor
106: $L_{\mu}$ in neutrino oscillations has been recently established by
107: the SuperKamiokande experiment in atmospheric neutrino measurements.
108: In this case lepton flavor violation (\Lfv) is generated by non-zero neutrino masses.
109: %
110: Various sources of \Lfv can be probed by searching for certain exotic processes.
111: Among them the neutrinoless muon-to-electron conversion in muonic atoms,
112: $ \mu^- + (A,Z) \longrightarrow e^- \,+\,(A,Z)^*$, is known to be one of the most powerful
113: tools to constrain \Lfv interactions
114: %\cite{KLV94,Kuno,9701381,Huitu,FKKV:2000,KKS:2001}.
115: \cite{KLV94}-\cite{KKS:2001}.
116: In particular, it allows setting stringent constraints on the \Lfv
117: interactions of the supersymmetric models with R-parity violation (\rp SUSY).
118: In the literature there have been obtained upper bounds on
119: various products of the \Lfv trilinear R-parity violating (\rp) couplings
120: $\lambda\lambda'$, $\lambda'\lambda'$ \cite{9701381,Huitu,FKKV:2000,Barb}.
121: %
122: In the present letter we derive new constraints on the products
123: $\lambda\lambda'$ with some other combinations of generation indexes.
124: These constraints emerge from the previously overlooked contribution of b-quark
125: to \m conversion via the triangle diagram shown in Fig. 1.
126: %
127:
128: \begin{figure}[t!]
129: %\vspace{-2cm}
130: %\vspace{-1.cm}
131: \hspace{3.5cm}
132: \mbox{\epsfxsize=8 cm\epsffile{fig1.eps}}
133:
134: %\vspace{-3cm}
135: \caption{The b-quark contribution to the nuclear \m conversion in the \rp SUSY.}
136: \label{fig1}
137: \end{figure}
138: %
139:
140: During the last decade \rp SUSY models have been extensively studied in the literature.
141: For the minimal field content the R-parity violating part of the superpotential reads
142: \begin{eqnarray}
143: W_{\rpm} =\lambda _{ijk}L_{i}L_{j}E_{k}^{c} + \bar\lambda _{ijk}^{\prime
144: }L_{i}Q_{j}D_{k}^{c}+\mu _{j}L_{j}H_{2}+\bar\lambda _{ijk}^{\prime \prime
145: }U_{i}^{c}D_{j}^{c}D_{k}^{c}.
146: \label{sup1}
147: \end{eqnarray}
148: The definition of the couplings $\bar\lambda', \bar\lambda'' $ corresponds to the gauge
149: basis for the quark fields. We set $\bar\lambda^{\prime \prime }=0$, since these are
150: irrelevant for our consideration. This ``ad hoc" condition ensures proton stability and
151: can be guaranteed by special discreet symmetries other than R-parity.
152:
153: The leading quark-level tree diagrams with the trilinear \rp-couplings contributing
154: to the $\mu-e$ conversion are listed in Ref.
155: \cite{FKKV:2000}
156: and are of the following three types:
157:
158: (i) $\mu_{_{L,R}}\rightarrow e_{_{L,R}}, d_{_L}\rightarrow d_{_R}$, with t-channel $\tilde\nu$
159: exchange,
160:
161: (ii) $\mu_{_L}\rightarrow d_{_R}, d_{_R}\rightarrow e_{_L}$, with t-channel $\tilde{u}$
162: exchange,
163:
164: (iii) $\mu_{_L} u_{_L}\rightarrow \tilde{d}_{_R}\rightarrow e_{_L} u_{_L}$.
165:
166: \noindent
167: The photonic 1-loop diagrams can also significantly contribute to this process \cite{Huitu}.
168: However they are irrelevant for the present case of heavy quark contribution and, therefore,
169: are not included in our analysis. Integrating out the heavy intermediate SUSY-particles from
170: the above mentioned diagrams and carrying out a Fierz rearrangement one obtains the following
171: 4-fermion effective Lagrangian for $\mu-e$ conversion at the quark level \cite{FKKV:2000}
172: %
173: \begin{equation}
174: {\cal L}_{eff}^{q}\ =\ \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\ j_{\mu }\left[ \eta^{ui}J_{u(i)}^{\mu }+
175: \eta^{di}J_{d(i)}^{\mu }\right] +
176: \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\ (\eta_{L}^{di}\ j_L + \eta_{R}^{di} j_R) \ J_{d(i)}.
177: \label{eff-q}
178: \end{equation}
179: The index $i$ denotes generation so that $u_i = u,c,t$ and $d_i = d,s,b$.
180: Here
181: $J_{q(i)}^{\mu }=\bar{q}_i \gamma^{\mu } q_{i}$,
182: $J_{d(i)}=\bar{d}_i d_{i} $,
183: $j^{\mu }=\bar{e}\gamma^{\mu} P_L \mu$,
184: $j_{L,R} = \bar{e}P_{L,R} \mu$.
185: In Eq. (\ref{eff-q}) we neglected the terms with axial-vector and pseudoscalar
186: quark currents which do not contribute to the dominant coherent mode of
187: \m conversion \cite{KKS:2001,Chiang,Kosmas,tsk-tok}.
188: %
189: The coefficients $\eta $ in Eq. (\ref{eff-q}) accumulate the dependence on
190: $R_{p}\hspace{-1em}/\ \ $
191: SUSY parameters as
192: \begin{eqnarray} \nn
193: \eta^{ui} &=&- \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \sum_{l,m,n}\frac{\lambda _{2ln}^{\prime}
194: \lambda_{1mn}^{\prime *}}{G_F \tilde m_{dR(n)}^{2}}V^*_{il} V_{im}, \ \ \
195: %
196: %
197: \eta^{di} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sum_{l,m,n}
198: \frac{\lambda_{2mi}^{\prime }\lambda_{1li}^{\prime *}}
199: {G_F \tilde m_{{u}L(n)}^{2}} V^*_{nm} V_{nl}, \\
200: \label{coeff12}
201: %
202: %
203: \eta_{R}^{di} &=& - \sqrt{2} \sum_{n}
204: \frac{\lambda_{nii}^{\prime }\lambda _{n12}^{*}}{{G_F \tilde m^2_{\nu(n)}}},
205: \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
206: %
207: \eta_{L}^{di} = - \sqrt{2} \sum_{n}
208: \frac{\lambda_{nii}^{\prime*}\lambda_{n21}}{G_F \tilde m^2_{{\nu}(n)}}.
209: \end{eqnarray}
210: Here $\tilde m_{q(n)}, \tilde m_{\nu(n)}$ are the squark and sneutrino
211: masses.
212: In Eq. (\ref{coeff12}) we introduced the couplings
213: $\lambda_{ijk}^{\prime} = \bar\lambda_{imn}^{\prime }
214: \left(V^d_{_L}\right)^*_{jm} \left(V^d_{_R}\right)_{kn}$ corresponding to
215: the \r interactions in the quark mass eigenstate basis,
216: related to the gauge basis $q'$ through
217: $q_{_{L,R}} = V_{_{L,R}}^q q'_{_{L,R}}$. The CKM matrix
218: is defined in the standard way as $V = V^u_{_L} V^{d\dagger}_{_L}.$
219:
220: The contribution of the quark currents $J_{u(i)}^{\mu }, J_{d(i)}^{\mu }, J_{d(i)}$ present in Eq. (\ref{eff-q}) to the corresponding
221: nucleon currents can be parametrized in the form
222: %
223: \begin{eqnarray}\label{q-nucl}
224: \langle N|\bar{q}\ \Gamma_{K}\ q|N\rangle = G_{K}^{(q,N)}
225: \bar{\Psi}_N\ \Gamma_{K}\ \Psi_N,
226: \end{eqnarray}
227: with $q=\{u,d,s\}$, $N=\{p,n\}$ and $K = \{V,S\}$,
228: $\Gamma_K = \{ \gamma_{\mu}, 1 \}$.
229: The maximum momentum transfer ${\bf q}$ in $\mu -e$ conversion can be estimated as
230: $|{\bf q}| \approx m_\mu/c$ with $m_\mu=105.6$ MeV being the muon mass. Since $|{\bf q}|$ is
231: relatively small compared to the typical nucleon structure scales
232: we can safely neglect in Eq. (\ref{q-nucl}) the ${\bf q}^{2}$-dependence of
233: the nucleon form factors $G_{K}^{(q,N)}$ as well as the weak magnetism and
234: the induced pseudoscalar terms which are proportional to the small momentum transfer.
235:
236: Isospin symmetry requires that
237: $G_{K}^{(u,n)}=G_{K}^{(d,p)}\equiv G_{K}^{d}$,
238: $G_{K}^{(d,n)}=G_{K}^{(u,p)}\equiv G_{K}^{u}$,
239: $G_{K}^{(s,n)}=G_{K}^{(s,p)}\equiv G_{K}^{s}$,
240: $G_{K}^{(h,n)}=G_{K}^{(h,p)}\equiv G_{K}^{h}$,
241: with $K=V,S$ and $h = c,b,t$.
242: Furthermore, conservation of vector current requires the vector charge to be equal to
243: the quark number of the nucleon. This allows fixing the vector nucleon constants as
244: $
245: G_{V}^{u}=2$, $G_{V}^{d}=1$, $G_{V}^{s}=G_{V}^{h}=0.
246: $
247: Thus the strange and heavy quarks can contribute only to the scalar nucleon current
248: \footnote{They can also contribute to the axial-vector and pseudoscalar nucleon currents which
249: are irrelevant for the coherent \m conversion considered in the present letter.}.
250: Since the scalar currents in Eq. (\ref{eff-q}) involve only down quarks $d,s,b$ it follows
251: that among the heavy $c,b,t$-quarks only the b-quark can contribute to the coherent \m conversion.
252: The heavy quarks contribution to the scalar current is realized via the triangle diagram
253: in Fig. 1 with the two gluon lines. The heavy quark $q_h$ scalar current induced by the diagrams
254: of this type can be estimated using the heavy quark expansion \cite{SVZ}
255: %
256: \begin{eqnarray}\label{expans}
257: m_h \ \bar{q}_h \ q_h \approx -\frac{2}{3} \left(\frac{\alpha_s}{8 \pi} \right) GG +
258: O\left(\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2} \right).
259: \end{eqnarray}
260: %
261: Here $\alpha_s$ and $\mu$ are the QCD coupling constant and a typical hadronic scale respectively,
262: and
263: $G G = G_{\mu\nu}^a G^{\mu\nu}_a$ where
264: $G_{\mu\nu}^a$ is the gluon field strength.
265: The quark scalar currents and the gluon operator $GG$ also contribute to
266: the trace of the energy-momentum tensor
267: %
268: \begin{eqnarray}\label{trace}
269: \theta^{\mu}_{\mu} = m_u \bar u u + m_d \bar d d
270: + m_s \bar s s + \sum_h m_h \bar{q}_h q_h - (b \alpha_s/8\pi)G G,
271: \end{eqnarray}
272: %
273: where $b = 11 - (2/3)n_f$ and $n_f=6$ is the number of quark species.
274:
275: The scalar form factors $G_S^q$ can be extracted from the baryon octet $B$ mass
276: spectrum $M_B$, expressed as \cite{Cheng}
277: %
278: \begin{eqnarray}\label{emt}
279: \lg B|\theta^{\mu}_{\mu}|B\rg = M_B \bar B B,
280: \end{eqnarray}
281: %
282: and from the data on the pion-nucleon sigma term
283: $
284: \sigma_{\pi N} = (1/2)(m_u + m_d)\lg p|\bar u u + \bar d d|p\rg .
285: $
286: Using Eqs. (\ref{expans})-(\ref{emt}) in combination with $SU(3)$ relations \cite{Cheng} for
287: the matrix elements in (\ref{emt}) we obtain
288: %
289: \begin{eqnarray}\label{scalar}
290: G_S^{u} \approx 5.1, \ \ \ G_S^{d} \approx 4.3, \ \ \ G_S^{s} \approx 2.5,
291: \ \ \ G_S^{b} \approx 9\times 10^{-3}.
292: \end{eqnarray}
293: %
294: Here we used for $\sigma_{\pi N} = 48$ MeV \cite{PiN}, and
295: $m_u= 4.2$ MeV, $m_d = 7.5$ MeV, $m_s = 150$ MeV, $m_b = 4.2$ GeV.
296:
297: Having the couplings $G_V^{q}, G_S^{q}$ determined
298: we rewrite the Lagrangian (\ref{eff-q}) in terms of the nucleon currents
299: %
300: \begin{equation}
301: {\cal L}_{eff}^{N}= \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\bar{e}
302: \gamma_{\mu }(1-\gamma _{5})\mu \cdot J^{\mu }+
303: \bar{e}\mu \cdot J^{+}+\bar{e}\gamma_{5}\mu \cdot J^{-}\right]. \label{nucl1}
304: \end{equation}
305: Here we defined
306: $
307: J^{\mu } = \bar{N}\gamma ^{\mu } (\alpha _{V}^{(0)}+\alpha_{V}^{(3)}\tau _{3}) \,N $,
308: $
309: J^{\pm } = \bar{N}\,\, (\alpha _{\pm S}^{(0)}+\alpha _{\pm S}^{(3)}\tau _{3}) \,N,
310: $
311: %
312: where $N^T = (p, n)$ is the nucleon isospin doublet.
313: The isosclar $\alpha^{(0)}$ and the isovector $\alpha^{(3)}$ coefficients are
314: %
315: \begin{eqnarray} \nn
316: \alpha _{V}^{(0)} &=&\frac{1}{8}(G_{V}^{u}+
317: G_{V}^{d})(\eta^{u1}+ \eta^{d1}), \ \ \
318: \alpha _{V}^{(3)} = \frac{1}{8}%
319: (G_{V}^{u}-G_{V}^{d})(\eta^{u1}-\eta^{d1}), \nonumber \\ \nn
320: %
321: \alpha_{\pm S}^{(0)} &=&\frac{1}{16}(G_{S}^{u}+G_{S}^{d})
322: (\eta_{L}^{d1}\pm \eta_{R}^{d1}) +
323: \frac{1}{8}G_S^{s}(\eta_{L}^{d2} \pm \eta_{R}^{d2}) +
324: \frac{1}{8}G_S^{b}(\eta_{L}^{d3} \pm \eta_{R}^{d3}),\\
325: %
326: \alpha_{\pm S}^{(3)} &=& -\frac{1}{16}
327: (G_{S}^{u}-G_{S}^{d})(\eta_{L}^{d1}\pm \eta_{R}^{d1}),
328: \end{eqnarray}
329:
330: Following the approach of Refs. \cite{FKKV:2000,KKS:2001} we derive from the Lagrangian
331: (\ref{nucl1}) the coherent $\mu-e$ conversion branching ratio in the form
332: %
333: \begin{equation}
334: R_{\mu e^-} =
335: \frac{G^2_F }
336: {2 \pi } \ {\cal Q}\ \frac{p_e E_e({\cal M}_p + {\cal M}_n)^2}{\Gamma(\mu^-\to capture)} \, ,
337: \label{Rme}
338: \end{equation}
339: where $\Gamma(\mu^-\to capture)$ is the total rate of ordinary muon capture and
340: \begin{eqnarray}
341: {\cal Q} \,=\, 2|\alpha_V^{(0)}|^2 +
342: |\alpha_{+S}^{(0)}|^2 + |\alpha_{-S}^{(0)}|^2
343: +2\ {\rm Re}\{\alpha_V^{(0)}[\alpha_{+S}^{(0)}+\alpha_{-S}^{(0)}] \}\, .
344: \label{Rme.1}
345: \end{eqnarray}
346: In this formula we neglected the contribution of isovector currents which is small
347: for most of the experimentally interesting nuclei \cite{FKKV:2000,KKS:2001}.
348: The numerical values of the nuclear matrix elements ${{\cal M}}_{p,n}$
349: for the currently interesting have been calculated in Ref. \cite{KKS:2001}.
350:
351: The most stringent experimental bounds on the branching ratio $R_{\mu e}$
352: have been set by the SINDRUM2 experiment (PSI) with $^{197}$Au
353: and $^{48}$Ti stopping targets:
354: %
355: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Au}
356: R_{\mu e}^{Au} &=&
357: \frac{\Gamma(\mu^- + {}^{197}Au\rightarrow e^- + {}^{197}Au)}
358: {\Gamma(\mu^- + {}^{197}Au \rightarrow \nu_{\mu} + ^{197}Pt)}
359: \leq 5.0\times 10^{-13}\ , \ \ \ \mbox{(90\% C.L.)} \ \ \ \cite{Schaaf},\\
360: \label{Ti}
361: R_{\mu e}^{Ti} &=&
362: \frac{\Gamma(\mu^- + \ \ {}^{48}Ti\rightarrow e^- + \ \ {}^{48}Ti)}
363: {\Gamma(\mu^- + {}^{48}Ti \rightarrow \nu_{\mu} + \ \ ^{48}Sc)}
364: \leq 6.1\times 10^{-13}\ , \ \ \
365: \mbox{(90\% C.L.)} \ \ \ \cite{SINDRUM}.
366: \end{eqnarray}
367: Note that a $^{48}$Ti target will be used in the future experiment planned at
368: the muon factory at KEK (Japan) \cite{Aoki}. This experiment is going to
369: increase the sensitivity up to $R_{\mu e} \le 10^{-18}$.
370:
371: In the near future new bounds are expected from the MECO (Brookhaven)
372: experiment with an $^{27}$Al target
373: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Al}
374: R_{\mu e}^{Al} =
375: \frac{\Gamma(\mu^- + {}^{27}Al\rightarrow e^- + {}^{27}Al)}
376: {\Gamma(\mu^- + {}^{27}Al \rightarrow \nu_{\mu} + {}^{27}Mg)}
377: \leq 2\times 10^{-17}\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \cite{MECO}
378: \end{eqnarray}
379:
380: From these experimental limits it is straightforward to extract upper bounds
381: on various products of the type $\lambda\lambda'$, $\lambda'\lambda'$.
382: Many of them have been previously derived in Refs.
383: %\cite{9701381,Huitu,FKKV:2000}.
384: \cite{9701381}-\cite{FKKV:2000}.
385: In Table 1 we present the new upper bounds that are associated with the b-quark contribution.
386: We show the three cases, corresponding to the experimental limits in Eqs. (\ref{Au})-(\ref{Al}).
387: %
388: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
389: \begin{table}[h!]
390: \begin{center}
391: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
392: \hline \hline
393: Parameters & Previous limits & Present limits (Au)&
394: Present limits (Ti) & Expected limits (Al) \\
395: & & $^{197}$Au$(\mu-e)\cdot B_1$ & $^{48}$Ti$(\mu-e)\cdot B_2$ &
396: $^{27}$Al$(\mu-e)\cdot B_3$ \\
397: \hline
398: & & & & \\
399: $|\lambda '_{133}\, \lambda_{121}|$ &$6.9\cdot 10^{-5}$ & $8.5\cdot 10^{-7}$ &
400: $2.0\cdot 10^{-6}$& $1.2\cdot 10^{-8}$\\
401: $|\lambda '_{233}\, \lambda_{212}|$ &$7.4\cdot 10^{-3}$ & $8.5\cdot 10^{-7}$ &
402: $2.0\cdot 10^{-6}$& $1.2\cdot 10^{-8}$\\
403: $|\lambda '_{333}\, \lambda_{312}|$ &$2.8\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $8.5\cdot 10^{-7}$ &
404: $2.0\cdot 10^{-6}$& $1.2\cdot 10^{-8}$\\
405: $|\lambda '_{333}\, \lambda_{321}|$ &$3.2\cdot 10^{-2}$ & $8.5\cdot 10^{-7}$ &
406: $2.0\cdot 10^{-6}$& $1.2\cdot 10^{-8}$\\
407: & & & & \\
408: \hline
409: \hline
410: \end{tabular}
411: %
412: \caption{The new upper bounds from the b-quark contribution to \m conversion.
413: The previous bounds were taken from \protect\cite{Barb}.
414: The scaling factors $B_{1,2,3}$ are defined in the text.}
415: %
416: \end{center}
417: \end{table}
418: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
419: %
420:
421: In the derivation of these bounds we assumed, as usual, the dominance of only one of these
422: products with the specific combination of generation indices. We also assumed that all
423: the scalar masses in Eq. (\ref{coeff12}) are equal
424: $\tilde m_{{u}L(n)}\approx \tilde m_{{d}L,R(n)} \approx \tilde m_{\nu(n)}\approx \tilde m$.
425:
426: As can be seen from Table 1, our new limits(columns 3-5) are significantly more stringent than
427: those previously known in the literature \cite{Barb} (column 2).
428: %
429: In Table 1 the quantities $B_{1,2,3}$ denote scaling factors defined as
430: \begin{eqnarray}\label{scale}
431: B_1 = (R^{exp}_{\mu e}/5.0 \cdot 10^{-13})^{1/2},\ \ \
432: B_2 = (R^{exp}_{\mu e}/6.1 \cdot 10^{-13})^{1/2},\ \ \
433: B_3 = (R^{exp}_{\mu e}/2.0\cdot 10^{-17})^{1/2}.
434: \end{eqnarray}
435: %
436: They allow recalculating limits given in Table 1 to the case corresponding
437: to the experimental upper bounds on the branching ratio $R^{exp}_{\mu e}$
438: other than in Eqs. (\ref{Au})-(\ref{Al}).
439: %
440:
441: In summary, we found new important contribution to $\mu^--e^-$ conversion
442: originating from the b-quark sea of the nucleon.
443: We have shown that among the heavy $c,b,t$-quarks
444: only the b-quark can contribute to the coherent \m conversion via
445: the scalar interactions involving down quarks $d,s,b$. The heavy quarks contribution
446: to the scalar current is materialized with the gluon exchange shown in the triangle
447: diagram of Fig. 1. From the existing data and expected experimental constraints on
448: the branching ratio $R_{\mu e^-}$ we obtained new upper limits on the products of
449: the trilinear \r parameters of the type $\lambda_{n12}\lambda'_{n33}$,
450: $\lambda_{n21}\lambda'_{n33}$
451: which are significantly more stringent than those existing in the literature.
452:
453: \bigskip
454:
455: This work was supported in part by Fondecyt (Chile) under grant
456: 8000017, by a C\'atedra Presidencial (Chile) and by RFBR (Russia) under
457: grant 00-02-17587.
458: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
459: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
460: \bibitem{KLV94} T.S. Kosmas, G.K. Leontaris and J.D. Vergados, Prog. Part.
461: Nucl. Phys. {\bf 33} (1994) 397.
462: \bibitem{Kuno} Y. Kuno and Y. Okada, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73 (2001) 151.
463: \bibitem{9701381} J.E. Kim, P. Ko, and D.-G. Lee, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 56} (1997) 100,
464: hep-ph/9701381.
465: \bibitem{Huitu} K. Huitu, J. Maalampi, M. Raidal, and A. Santamaria,
466: Phys. Lett. {\bf B 430} (1998) 355, hep-ph/9712249.
467: \bibitem{FKKV:2000} A. Faessler, T.S. Kosmas, S. Kovalenko and J.D. Vergados,
468: Nucl. Phys. B587 (2000) 25.
469: \bibitem{KKS:2001} T.S. Kosmas, S. Kovalenko, I. Schmidt,
470: Phys. Lett. {\bf B} 511 (2001) 203; hep-ph/0102101.
471: \bibitem{Barb} For a summuary of the limits on the R-parity violating parameters see,
472: for instance: R. Barbier et al. {Report of the GDR working group on the
473: R-parity violation}, hep-ph/9810232
474: \bibitem{Chiang} H.C. Chiang, E. Oset, T.S. Kosmas, A. Faessler and J.D. Vergados,
475: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A 559} (1993) 526.
476: \bibitem{Kosmas} T.S. Kosmas, Nucl. Phys {\bf A 683} (2001) 443,
477: \bibitem{tsk-tok} T.S. Kosmas, The nuclear physics aspects of the exotic \m conversion,
478: Invited talk at \cite{Schaaf}.
479: \bibitem{SVZ} M.A. Shifman, A.I. Vainshtein and V.I. Zakharov, Phys. Lett. {\bf B
480: 78} (1978) 443.
481: \bibitem{Cheng} T.P. Cheng, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 38} (1988) 2869; H.-Y. Cheng, Phys.
482: Lett. {\bf B 219} (1989) 347; Phys. Lett. {\bf B 317} (1993) 631.
483: \bibitem{PiN} J. Gasser, H. Leutwyler and M.E. Saino, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 253} (1991) 252;
484: B. Borasoy and U-G. Meissner, Phys. Lett. {\bf B 365} (1996) 285; S.J. Dong, J.-F. Lagae,
485: K.F. Liu, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 54} (1996) 5496; M. Fukugita, Y. Kuamshi, M. Okawa
486: and A. Ukawa, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 51} (1995) 5319; A. Corsetti and P. Nath, hep-ph/0003186.
487: \bibitem{Schaaf} A. van der Schaaf, The SINDRUM2 experiment, Invited talk at Intern. Workshop
488: on Nufact'01, Tsukuba, Japan, May 23-30, 2001; Nucl. Instr. Meth., to appear.
489: \bibitem{SINDRUM} SINDRUM II Collaboration, W. Honecker {\it et al.},
490: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 59} (1996) 200.
491: \bibitem{Aoki} M. Aoki, the PRIME experiment, Invited talk at \cite{Schaaf}.
492: \bibitem{MECO} J. Sculli, The MECO experiment, Invited talk at the conference on "New initiatives
493: in lepton flavor violation and neutrino oscillations
494: with very intense muon and neutrino beams", Honolulu-Hawaii, USA,
495: Oct. 2-6, 2000 (see also $http://meco.ps.uci.edu/lepton\_workshop.$).
496: \end{thebibliography}
497:
498: \end{document}
499: