1: \documentstyle[prd,aps,preprint,tighten,epsfig]{revtex}
2:
3: \begin{document}
4:
5: \draft
6:
7: \title{Neutrino Telescopes as a Probe of Broken $\mu$-$\tau$ Symmetry}
8: \author{{\bf Zhi-zhong Xing}
9: \thanks{E-mail: xingzz@mail.ihep.ac.cn}}
10: \address{
11: CCAST (World Laboratory), P.O. Box 8730, Beijing 100080,
12: China \\
13: and
14: Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, \\
15: P.O. Box 918, Beijing 100049, China}
16:
17: \maketitle
18:
19: \begin{abstract}
20: It is known that neutrino oscillations may map $\phi^{}_e :
21: \phi^{}_\mu : \phi^{}_\tau = 1 : 2 : 0$, the initial flavor ratios
22: of ultrahigh-energy neutrino fluxes produced from a distant
23: astrophysical source, into $\phi^{\rm D}_e : \phi^{\rm D}_\mu :
24: \phi^{\rm D}_\tau = 1 : 1 : 1$ at the detector of a neutrino
25: telescope. We remark that this naive expectation is only valid in
26: the $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry limit, in which two neutrino mixing
27: angles satisfy $\theta^{}_{13} = 0$ and $\theta^{}_{23} = \pi/4$.
28: Allowing for the slight breaking of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry, we find
29: $\phi^{\rm D}_e : \phi^{\rm D}_\mu : \phi^{\rm D}_\tau = (1 -2
30: \Delta) : (1 +\Delta) : (1 +\Delta)$ with $\Delta$ characterizing
31: the combined effect of $\theta^{}_{13} \neq 0$ and $\theta^{}_{23}
32: \neq \pi/4$. Current neutrino oscillation data indicate $-0.1
33: \lesssim \Delta \lesssim +0.1$. We also look at the possibility to
34: probe $\Delta$ by detecting the $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$ flux of
35: $E^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} \approx 6.3 ~ {\rm PeV}$ via the
36: Glashow resonance channel $\overline{\nu}^{}_e e \rightarrow W^-
37: \rightarrow ~ {\rm anything}$.
38: \end{abstract}
39:
40: \pacs{PACS number(s): 14.60.Lm, 14.60.Pq, 95.85.Ry}
41:
42: \newpage
43:
44: \framebox{\Large\bf 1} ~ The solar \cite{SNO}, atmospheric
45: \cite{SK}, reactor \cite{KM} and accelerator \cite{K2K} neutrino
46: experiments have convinced us of the existence of neutrino
47: oscillations and opened a new window to physics beyond the
48: standard model. Given the basis in which the flavor eigenstates of
49: charged leptons are identified with their mass eigenstates, the
50: phenomenon of neutrino mixing can simply be described by a
51: $3\times 3$ unitary matrix $V$ which links the neutrino flavor
52: eigenstates $(\nu^{}_e, \nu^{}_\mu, \nu^{}_\tau)$ to the neutrino
53: mass eigenstates $(\nu^{}_1, \nu^{}_2, \nu^{}_3)$:
54: \begin{equation}
55: \left ( \matrix{\nu^{}_e \cr \nu^{}_\mu \cr \nu^{}_\tau \cr}
56: \right ) \; =\; \left ( \matrix{ V^{}_{e1} & V^{}_{e2} & V^{}_{e3}
57: \cr V^{}_{\mu 1} & V^{}_{\mu 2} & V^{}_{\mu 3} \cr V^{}_{\tau 1} &
58: V^{}_{\tau 2} & V^{}_{\tau 3} \cr} \right ) \left ( \matrix{
59: \nu^{}_1 \cr \nu^{}_2 \cr \nu^{}_3 \cr} \right ) \; .
60: % (1)
61: \end{equation}
62: In the so-called standard parametrization of $V$ \cite{PDG},
63: $V^{}_{e2} = \sin\theta^{}_{12} \cos\theta^{}_{13}$, $V^{}_{e3} =
64: \sin\theta^{}_{13} e^{-i\delta}$ and $V^{}_{\mu 3} =
65: \sin\theta^{}_{23} \cos\theta^{}_{13}$. Here we have omitted the
66: Majorana CP-violating phases from $V$, because they are irrelevant
67: to the properties of neutrino oscillations to be discussed. A
68: global analysis of current experimental data (see, e.g., Ref.
69: \cite{Vissani}) points to $\theta^{}_{13} = 0$ and $\theta^{}_{23}
70: = \pi/4$, which motivate a number of authors to consider the
71: $\mu$-$\tau$ permutation symmetry for model building
72: \cite{Symmetry}. In the limit of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry, the
73: (effective) neutrino mass matrix $M^{}_\nu$ takes the form
74: \begin{equation}
75: M^{}_\nu \; = \; V^{}_0 \overline{M}^{}_\nu V^T_0 \; = \; \left (
76: \matrix{ a & b & b \cr b & c & d \cr b & d & c \cr} \right ) \; ,
77: % (2)
78: \end{equation}
79: where $\overline{M}^{}_\nu \equiv {\rm Diag}\{ m^{}_1, m^{}_2,
80: m^{}_3\}$ with $m^{}_i$ (for $i=1,2,3$) being three neutrino
81: masses, and $V^{}_0$ is a special pattern of $V$ with
82: $\theta^{}_{13} = 0$ and $\theta^{}_{23} = \pi/4$. Note that
83: $\theta^{}_{12}$ is arbitrary and $\delta$ is not well-defined in
84: $V^{}_0$. The parameters $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ of $M^{}_\nu$ are
85: in general complex and can produce the desired Majorana
86: CP-violating phases for $V^{}_0$. Any slight breaking of
87: $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry in $M^{}_\nu$ will result in non-vanishing
88: $\theta^{}_{13}$ and small departure of $\theta^{}_{23}$ from
89: $\pi/4$. Nontrivial $\delta$ can also be generated from the
90: breaking of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry, leading to the effect of CP
91: violation in neutrino oscillations.
92:
93: The main purpose of this paper is to investigate how the effect of
94: $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry breaking can show up at a neutrino
95: telescope. We anticipate that IceCube \cite{Ice} and other
96: second-generation neutrino telescopes \cite{Water} are able to
97: detect the fluxes of ultrahigh-energy $\nu^{}_e$
98: ($\overline{\nu}^{}_e$), $\nu^{}_\mu$ ($\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu$)
99: and $\nu^{}_\tau$ ($\overline{\nu}^{}_\tau$) neutrinos generated
100: from very distant astrophysical sources. For most of the
101: currently-envisaged sources of ultrahigh-energy neutrinos
102: \cite{R}, a general and canonical expectation is that the initial
103: neutrino fluxes are produced via the decay of pions created from
104: $pp$ or $p\gamma$ collisions and their flavor content can be
105: expressed as
106: \begin{equation}
107: \left \{\phi^{}_e ~,~ \phi^{}_\mu ~,~ \phi^{}_\tau \right \} \; =
108: \; \left \{ \frac{1}{3} ~,~ \frac{2}{3} ~,~ 0 \right \} \phi^{}_0
109: \; ,
110: % (3)
111: \end{equation}
112: where $\phi^{}_\alpha$ (for $\alpha = e, \mu, \tau$) denotes the
113: sum of $\nu^{}_\alpha$ and $\overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha$ fluxes, and
114: $\phi^{}_0 = \phi^{}_e + \phi^{}_\mu + \phi^{}_\tau$ is the total
115: flux of neutrinos and antineutrinos of all flavors. Due to
116: neutrino oscillations, the flavor composition of such cosmic
117: neutrino fluxes to be measured at the detector of a neutrino
118: telescope has been expected to be \cite{Pakvasa}
119: \begin{equation}
120: \left \{\phi^{\rm D}_e ,~ \phi^{\rm D}_\mu ,~ \phi^{\rm D}_\tau
121: \right \} \; = \; \left \{ \frac{1}{3} ~,~ \frac{1}{3} ~,~
122: \frac{1}{3} \right \} \phi^{}_0 \; .
123: % (4)
124: \end{equation}
125: However, it is worth remarking that this naive expectation is only
126: true in the limit of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry (or equivalently,
127: $\theta^{}_{13} = 0$ and $\theta^{}_{23} = \pi/4$). Starting from
128: the hypothesis given in Eq. (3) and allowing for the slight
129: breaking of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry, we are going to show that
130: \begin{equation}
131: \left \{\phi^{\rm D}_e : ~ \phi^{\rm D}_\mu : ~ \phi^{\rm D}_\tau
132: \right \} \; = \; \left \{ \left (1 -2 \Delta \right ) : \left (1
133: +\Delta \right ) : \left (1 +\Delta \right ) \right \} \;
134: % (5)
135: \end{equation}
136: holds to an excellent degree of accuracy, where $\Delta$
137: characterizes the effect of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry breaking (i.e.,
138: the combined effect of $\theta^{}_{13} \neq 0$ and $\theta^{}_{23}
139: \neq \pi/4$). We obtain $-0.1 \lesssim \Delta \lesssim +0.1$ from
140: current neutrino oscillation data. We find that it is also
141: possible to probe $\Delta$ by detecting the $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$
142: flux of $E^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} \approx 6.3 ~ {\rm PeV}$ via
143: the well-known Glashow resonance (GR) channel $\overline{\nu}^{}_e
144: e \rightarrow W^- \rightarrow ~ {\rm anything}$ \cite{Glashow} at
145: a neutrino telescope.
146:
147: \vspace{0.5cm}
148:
149: \framebox{\Large\bf 2} ~ Let us define $\phi^{(\rm D)}_\alpha
150: \equiv \phi^{(\rm D)}_{\nu^{}_\alpha} + \phi^{(\rm
151: D)}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha}$ (for $\alpha = e, \mu, \tau$)
152: throughout this paper, where $\phi^{(\rm D)}_{\nu^{}_\alpha}$ and
153: $\phi^{(\rm D)}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha}$ denote the
154: $\nu^{}_\alpha$ and $\overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha$ fluxes,
155: respectively. As for the ultrahigh-energy neutrino fluxes produced
156: from the pion-muon decay chain with $\phi^{}_{\nu^{}_\tau} =
157: \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\tau} = 0$, the relationship between
158: $\phi^{}_{\nu^{}_\alpha}$ (or
159: $\phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha}$) and $\phi^{\rm
160: D}_{\nu^{}_\alpha}$ (or $\phi^{\rm D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha}$)
161: is given by $\phi^{\rm D}_{\nu^{}_\alpha} = \phi^{}_{\nu^{}_e}
162: P^{}_{e\alpha} + \phi^{}_{\nu^{}_\mu} P^{}_{\mu\alpha}$ or
163: $\phi^{\rm D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha} =
164: \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} \bar{P}^{}_{e\alpha} +
165: \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu} \bar{P}^{}_{\mu\alpha}$, in which
166: $P^{}_{\beta\alpha}$ and $\bar{P}^{}_{\beta\alpha}$ (for $\alpha =
167: e, \mu, \tau$ and $\beta = e$ or $\mu$) stand respectively for the
168: oscillation probabilities $P (\nu^{}_\beta \rightarrow
169: \nu^{}_\alpha)$ and $P (\overline{\nu}^{}_\beta \rightarrow
170: \overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha)$. Because the Galactic distances far
171: exceed the observed neutrino oscillation lengths,
172: $P^{}_{\beta\alpha}$ and $\bar{P}^{}_{\beta\alpha}$ are actually
173: averaged over many oscillations. Then we obtain
174: $\bar{P}^{}_{\beta\alpha} = P^{}_{\beta\alpha}$ and
175: \begin{equation}
176: P^{}_{\beta\alpha} \; = \; \sum^3_{i=1} |V^{}_{\alpha i}|^2
177: |V^{}_{\beta i}|^2 \; ,
178: % (6)
179: \end{equation}
180: where $V^{}_{\alpha i}$ and $V^{}_{\beta i}$ (for $\alpha, \beta =
181: e, \mu, \tau$ and $i = 1, 2, 3$) denote the matrix elements of $V$
182: defined in Eq. (1). The relationship between $\phi^{}_\alpha$ and
183: $\phi^{\rm D}_\alpha$ turns out to be
184: \begin{equation}
185: \phi^{\rm D}_\alpha \; = \; \phi^{}_e P^{}_{e\alpha} + \phi^{}_\mu
186: P^{}_{\mu\alpha} \; .
187: % (7)
188: \end{equation}
189: To be explicit, we have
190: \begin{eqnarray}
191: \phi^{\rm D}_e & = & \frac{\phi^{}_0}{3} \left (P^{}_{ee} + 2
192: P^{}_{\mu e} \right ) \; , \nonumber \\
193: \phi^{\rm D}_\mu & = & \frac{\phi^{}_0}{3} \left (P^{}_{e\mu} + 2
194: P^{}_{\mu \mu} \right ) \; , \nonumber \\
195: \phi^{\rm D}_\tau & = & \frac{\phi^{}_0}{3} \left (P^{}_{e\tau} +
196: 2P^{}_{\mu \tau} \right ) \; .
197: % (8)
198: \end{eqnarray}
199: It is then possible to evaluate the relative magnitudes of
200: $\phi^{\rm D}_e$, $\phi^{\rm D}_\mu$ and $\phi^{\rm D}_\tau$ by
201: using Eqs. (1), (6) and (8).
202:
203: In order to clearly show the effect of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry
204: breaking on the neutrino fluxes to be detected at neutrino
205: telescopes, we define a small quantity
206: \begin{equation}
207: \varepsilon \; \equiv \; \theta^{}_{23} - \frac{\pi}{4} \; ,
208: ~~~~~~~ (|\varepsilon| \ll 1) \; .
209: % (9)
210: \end{equation}
211: Namely, $\varepsilon$ measures the slight departure of
212: $\theta^{}_{23}$ from $\pi/4$. Using small $\theta^{}_{13}$ and
213: $\varepsilon$, we may express $|V^{}_{\alpha i}|^2$ (for $\alpha
214: =e, \mu, \tau$ and $i=1,2,3$) as follows:
215: \begin{eqnarray}
216: \left [ \matrix{ |V^{}_{e1}|^2 & |V^{}_{e2}|^2 & |V^{}_{e3}|^2 \cr
217: |V^{}_{\mu 1}|^2 & |V^{}_{\mu 2}|^2 & |V^{}_{\mu 3}|^2 \cr
218: |V^{}_{\tau 1}|^2 & |V^{}_{\tau 2}|^2 & |V^{}_{\tau 3}|^2 \cr}
219: \right ] & = & \frac{1}{2} \left [ \matrix{ 2\cos^2\theta^{}_{12}
220: & 2\sin^2\theta^{}_{12} & 0 \cr \sin^2\theta^{}_{12} &
221: \cos^2\theta^{}_{12} & 1 \cr \sin^2\theta^{}_{12} &
222: \cos^2\theta^{}_{12} & 1 \cr} \right ] + \varepsilon \left [
223: \matrix{ 0 & 0 & 0 \cr -\sin^2\theta^{}_{12} &
224: -\cos^2\theta^{}_{12} & 1 \cr \sin^2\theta^{}_{12} &
225: \cos^2\theta^{}_{12} & -1 \cr} \right ]
226: \nonumber \\
227: & & + ~ \frac{\theta^{}_{13}}{2} \sin 2\theta^{}_{12} \cos\delta
228: \left [ \matrix{ 0 & 0 & 0 \cr 1 & -1 & 0 \cr -1 & 1 & 0 \cr}
229: \right ] + {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) + {\cal O}(\theta^2_{13}) \; .
230: % (10)
231: \end{eqnarray}
232: Combining Eqs. (6) and (10) allows us to calculate
233: $P^{}_{\beta\alpha}$. After a straightforward calculation, we
234: obtain
235: \begin{eqnarray}
236: P^{}_{ee} + 2 P^{}_{\mu e} & = & 1 - \varepsilon \sin^2
237: 2\theta^{}_{12} + \frac{\theta^{}_{13}}{2} \sin 4\theta^{}_{12}
238: \cos\delta + {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) + {\cal O}(\theta^2_{13}) \;
239: ,
240: \nonumber \\
241: P^{}_{e\mu} + 2 P^{}_{\mu \mu} & = & 1 + \frac{\varepsilon}{2}
242: \sin^2 2\theta^{}_{12} - \frac{\theta^{}_{13}}{4} \sin
243: 4\theta^{}_{12} \cos\delta + {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) + {\cal
244: O}(\theta^2_{13}) \; ,
245: \nonumber \\
246: P^{}_{e\tau} + 2 P^{}_{\mu \tau} & = & 1 + \frac{\varepsilon}{2}
247: \sin^2 2\theta^{}_{12} - \frac{\theta^{}_{13}}{4} \sin
248: 4\theta^{}_{12} \cos\delta + {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) + {\cal
249: O}(\theta^2_{13}) \; .
250: % (11)
251: \end{eqnarray}
252: Substituting Eq. (11) into Eq. (8), we arrive at
253: \begin{eqnarray}
254: \phi^{\rm D}_e & = & \frac{\phi^{}_0}{3} \left ( 1 - 2\Delta \right )
255: \; , \nonumber \\
256: \phi^{\rm D}_\mu & = & \frac{\phi^{}_0}{3} \left ( 1 + \Delta \right )
257: \; , \nonumber \\
258: \phi^{\rm D}_\tau & = & \frac{\phi^{}_0}{3} \left ( 1 + \Delta
259: \right ) \; ,
260: % (12)
261: \end{eqnarray}
262: where
263: \begin{equation}
264: \Delta \; = \; \frac{1}{4} \left ( 2\varepsilon \sin^2
265: 2\theta^{}_{12} - \theta^{}_{13} \sin 4\theta^{}_{12} \cos\delta
266: \right ) + {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) + {\cal O}(\theta^2_{13}) \; .
267: % (13)
268: \end{equation}
269: Eq. (5) is therefore proved by Eq. (12). One can see that
270: $\phi^{\rm D}_e + \phi^{\rm D}_\mu + \phi^{\rm D}_\tau =
271: \phi^{}_0$ holds. Some discussions are in order.
272:
273: (1) The small parameter $\Delta$ characterizes the overall effect
274: of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry breaking. Allowing $\delta$ to vary
275: between $0$ and $\pi$, we may easily obtain the lower and upper
276: bounds of $\Delta$ for given values of $\theta^{}_{12}$ ($<
277: \pi/4$), $\theta^{}_{13}$ and $\varepsilon$: $-\Delta^{}_{\rm
278: bound} \leq \Delta \leq +\Delta^{}_{\rm bound}$, where
279: \begin{equation}
280: \Delta^{}_{\rm bound} = \frac{1}{4} \left ( 2|\varepsilon| \sin^2
281: 2\theta^{}_{12} + \theta^{}_{13} \sin 4\theta^{}_{12} \right ) +
282: {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) + {\cal O}(\theta^2_{13}) \; .
283: % (14)
284: \end{equation}
285: It is obvious that $\Delta = -\Delta^{}_{\rm bound}$ when
286: $\varepsilon <0$ and $\delta =0$, and $\Delta = +\Delta^{}_{\rm
287: bound}$ when $\varepsilon >0$ and $\delta =\pi$. A global analysis
288: of current neutrino oscillation data \cite{Vissani} indicates
289: $30^\circ < \theta^{}_{12} < 38^\circ$, $\theta^{}_{13} <
290: 10^\circ$ ($\approx 0.17$) and $|\varepsilon| < 9^\circ$ ($\approx
291: 0.16$) at the $99\%$ confidence level, but the CP-violating phase
292: $\delta$ is entirely unrestricted. Using these constraints, we
293: analyze the allowed range of $\Delta$ and its dependence on
294: $\delta$. The maximal value of $\Delta^{}_{\rm bound}$ (i.e.,
295: $\Delta^{}_{\rm bound} \approx 0.098$) appears when
296: $|\varepsilon|$ and $\theta^{}_{13}$ approach their respective
297: upper limits and $\theta^{}_{12} \approx 33^\circ$ holds, as one
298: can clearly see from Fig. 1(A). Indeed, we find that
299: $\Delta^{}_{\rm bound}$ is not very sensitive to the variation of
300: $\theta^{}_{12}$ in its allowed region.
301:
302: Provided $\theta^{}_{13} =0$ holds, we easily obtain
303: $\Delta^{}_{\rm bound} = 0.5|\varepsilon|\sin^2 2\theta^{}_{12}
304: <0.074$ when $\theta^{}_{12}$ approaches its upper limit. If
305: $\varepsilon =0$ (i.e., $\theta^{}_{23} =\pi/4$) holds,
306: nevertheless, we find $\Delta^{}_{\rm bound} = 0.25 \theta^{}_{13}
307: \sin 4\theta^{}_{12} <0.038$ as $\theta^{}_{12}$ approaches its
308: lower limit. We observe that $\Delta^{}_{\rm bound}$ is more
309: sensitive to the deviation of $\theta^{}_{23}$ from $\pi/4$.
310:
311: (2) Of course, $\Delta =0$ exactly holds when $\theta^{}_{13} =
312: \varepsilon =0$ is taken. Because the sign of $\varepsilon$ and
313: the range of $\delta$ are both unknown, we are now unable to rule
314: out the nontrivial possibility $\Delta \approx 0$ in the presence
315: of $\theta^{}_{13} \neq 0$ and $\varepsilon \neq 0$. In other
316: words, $\Delta$ may be vanishing or extremely small if its two
317: leading terms cancel each other. It is straightforward to arrive
318: at $\Delta \approx 0$ from Eq. (13), if the condition
319: \begin{equation}
320: \frac{\varepsilon}{\theta^{}_{13}} \; =\; \cot 2\theta^{}_{12}
321: \cos\delta \;
322: % (15)
323: \end{equation}
324: is satisfied. Due to $|\cos\delta| \leq 1$, Eq. (15) imposes a
325: strong constraint on the magnitude of
326: $\varepsilon/\theta^{}_{13}$. The dependence of
327: $\varepsilon/\theta^{}_{13}$ on $\delta$ is illustrated in Fig.
328: 1(B), where $\theta^{}_{12}$ varies in its allowed range. One can
329: see that $|\varepsilon|/\theta^{}_{13} < 0.6$ is necessary to
330: hold, such that a large cancellation between two leading terms of
331: $\Delta$ is possible to take place. It should be remarked again
332: that the above result is a natural consequence of the assumption
333: made in Eq. (3) for the initial flavor ratios of ultrahigh-energy
334: neutrino fluxes.
335:
336: The implication of Fig. 1 on high-energy neutrino telescopes is
337: two-fold. On the one hand, an observable signal of $\Delta \neq 0$
338: at a neutrino telescope implies the existence of significant
339: $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry breaking. If a signal of $\Delta \neq 0$
340: does not show up at a neutrino telescope, on the other hand, one
341: cannot conclude that the $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry is an exact or
342: almost exact symmetry. It is therefore meaningful to consider the
343: complementarity between neutrino telescopes and terrestrial
344: neutrino oscillation experiments \cite{Winter}, in order to
345: finally pin down the parameters of neutrino mixing and leptonic CP
346: violation.
347:
348: (3) To illustrate, we define three neutrino flux ratios
349: \begin{eqnarray}
350: R^{}_e & \equiv & \frac{\phi^{\rm D}_e}{\phi^{\rm D}_\mu +
351: \phi^{\rm D}_\tau} \; ,
352: \nonumber \\
353: R^{}_\mu & \equiv & \frac{\phi^{\rm D}_\mu}{\phi^{\rm D}_\tau +
354: \phi^{\rm D}_e} \; ,
355: \nonumber \\
356: R^{}_\tau & \equiv & \frac{\phi^{\rm D}_\tau}{\phi^{\rm D}_e +
357: \phi^{\rm D}_\mu} \; ,
358: % (16)
359: \end{eqnarray}
360: which may serve as the {\it working} observables at neutrino
361: telescopes \cite{XZ}. At least, $R^{}_\mu$ can be extracted from
362: the ratio of muon tracks to showers at IceCube \cite{Ice}, even if
363: those electron and tau events cannot be disentangled. Taking
364: account of Eq. (12), we approximately obtain
365: \begin{eqnarray}
366: R^{}_e & \approx & \frac{1}{2} ~ - ~ \frac{3}{2} \Delta \; ,
367: \nonumber \\
368: R^{}_\mu & \approx & \frac{1}{2} ~ + ~ \frac{3}{4} \Delta \; ,
369: \nonumber \\
370: R^{}_\tau & \approx & \frac{1}{2} ~ + ~ \frac{3}{4} \Delta \; .
371: % (17)
372: \end{eqnarray}
373: It turns out that $R^{}_e$ is most sensitive to the effect of
374: $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry breaking.
375:
376: As a straightforward consequence of $\phi^{\rm D}_\mu = \phi^{\rm
377: D}_\tau$ shown in Eq. (12), $R^{}_\mu = R^{}_\tau$ holds no matter
378: whether $\Delta$ vanishes or not. This interesting observation
379: implies that the ``$\mu$-$\tau$" symmetry between $R^{}_\mu$ and
380: $R^{}_\tau$ is actually insensitive to the breaking of
381: $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry in the neutrino mass matrix $M^{}_\nu$. If
382: both $R^{}_e$ and $R^{}_\mu$ are measured at a neutrino telescope,
383: one can then extract the information about $\Delta$ from the
384: difference of these two observables:
385: \begin{equation}
386: R^{}_\mu - R^{}_e \; =\; \frac{9}{4} \Delta \; .
387: % (18)
388: \end{equation}
389: Taking $\Delta = \Delta^{}_{\rm bound} \approx 0.1$, we get
390: $R^{}_\mu - R^{}_e \lesssim 0.22$.
391:
392: \vspace{0.5cm}
393:
394: \framebox{\Large\bf 3} ~ We proceed to discuss the possibility to
395: probe the breaking of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry by detecting the
396: $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$ flux from distant astrophysical sources
397: through the Glashow resonance (GR) channel $\overline{\nu}^{}_e e
398: \rightarrow W^- \rightarrow ~ {\rm anything}$ \cite{Glashow}. The
399: latter can take place over a narrow energy interval around the
400: $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$ energy $E^{\rm GR}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e}
401: \approx M^2_W/2m^{}_e \approx 6.3 ~ {\rm PeV}$. A neutrino
402: telescope may measure both the GR-mediated $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$
403: events ($N^{\rm GR}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e}$) and the $\nu^{}_\mu +
404: \overline{\nu}^{}_\mu$ events of charged-current (CC) interactions
405: ($N^{\rm CC}_{\nu^{}_\mu + \overline{\nu}^{}_\mu}$) in the
406: vicinity of $E^{\rm GR}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e}$. Their ratio,
407: defined as $R^{}_{\rm RG} \equiv N^{\rm
408: GR}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e}/N^{\rm CC}_{\nu^{}_\mu +
409: \overline{\nu}^{}_\mu}$, can be related to the ratio of
410: $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$'s to $\nu^{}_\mu$'s and
411: $\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu$'s entering the detector,
412: \begin{equation}
413: R^{}_0 \; \equiv \; \frac{\phi^{\rm
414: D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e}}{\phi^{\rm D}_{\nu^{}_\mu} + \phi^{\rm
415: D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu}} \; .
416: % (19)
417: \end{equation}
418: Note that $\phi^{\rm D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e}$, $\phi^{\rm
419: D}_{\nu^{}_\mu}$ and $\phi^{\rm D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu}$ stand
420: respectively for the fluxes of $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$'s,
421: $\nu^{}_\mu$'s and $\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu$'s before the RG and CC
422: interactions occur at the detector. In Ref. \cite{BG}, $R^{}_{\rm
423: GR} = a R^{}_0$ with $a \approx 30.5$ has been obtained by
424: considering the muon events with contained vertices \cite{Beacom}
425: in a water- or ice-based detector. An accurate calculation of $a$
426: is certainly crucial for a specific neutrino telescope to detect
427: the GR reaction rate, but it is beyond the scope of this work.
428: Instead, here we concentrate on the possible effect of
429: $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry breaking on $R^{}_0$.
430:
431: Provided the initial neutrino fluxes are produced via the decay of
432: $\pi^+$'s and $\pi^-$'s created from high-energy $pp$ collisions,
433: their flavor composition can be expressed in a more detailed way
434: as follows:
435: \begin{equation}
436: \left \{\phi^{}_{\nu^{}_e} ,~ \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} ,~
437: \phi^{}_{\nu^{}_\mu} ,~ \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu} ,~
438: \phi^{}_{\nu^{}_\tau} ,~ \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\tau} \right
439: \} \; = \; \left \{ \frac{1}{6} ~,~ \frac{1}{6} ~,~ \frac{1}{3}
440: ~,~ \frac{1}{3} ~,~ 0 ~,~ 0 \right \} \phi^{}_0 \; .
441: % (20)
442: \end{equation}
443: In comparison, the flavor content of ultrahigh-energy neutrino
444: fluxes produced from $p\gamma$ collisions reads
445: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
446: \footnote{Note that the dominant reaction to generate electron and
447: muon neutrinos in $p\gamma$ collisions is $p\gamma \rightarrow
448: \Delta^+ \rightarrow \pi^+ n$ with $\pi^+ \rightarrow \mu^+
449: \nu^{}_\mu$ and $\mu^+ \rightarrow e^+ \nu^{}_e
450: \overline{\nu}^{}_\mu$. There is no production of
451: $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$, because the produced neutrons can escape
452: the source before decaying \cite{Weiler}. In contrast, the numbers
453: of $\nu^{}_e$'s and $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$'s in Eq. (20) are
454: identical as a result of the equal amount of $\pi^+$'s and
455: $\pi^-$'s produced from inelastic $pp$ collisions.}
456: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
457: \begin{equation}
458: \left \{\phi^{}_{\nu^{}_e} ,~ \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} ,~
459: \phi^{}_{\nu^{}_\mu} ,~ \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu} ,~
460: \phi^{}_{\nu^{}_\tau} ,~ \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\tau} \right
461: \} \; = \; \left \{ \frac{1}{3} ~,~ 0 ~,~ \frac{1}{3} ~,~
462: \frac{1}{3} ~,~ 0 ~,~ 0 \right \} \phi^{}_0 \; .
463: % (21)
464: \end{equation}
465: For either Eq. (20) or Eq. (21), the sum of
466: $\phi^{}_{\nu^{}_\alpha}$ and $\phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\alpha}$
467: (for $\alpha = e, \mu, \tau$) is consistent with $\phi^{}_\alpha$
468: in Eq. (3).
469:
470: Due to neutrino oscillations, the $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$ flux at
471: the detector of a neutrino telescope is given by $\phi^{\rm
472: D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} = \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e}
473: \bar{P}^{}_{ee} + \phi^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu} \bar{P}^{}_{\mu
474: e}$. With the help of Eqs. (6), (10), (20) and (21), we explicitly
475: obtain
476: \begin{eqnarray}
477: \phi^{\rm D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} (pp) ~ & = & ~
478: \frac{\phi^{}_0}{6} \left (1 - 2 \Delta \right ) \; ,
479: \nonumber \\
480: \phi^{\rm D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} (p\gamma) ~ & = & ~
481: \frac{\phi^{}_0}{12} \left (\sin^2 2\theta^{}_{12} - 4 \Delta
482: \right ) \; .
483: % (22)
484: \end{eqnarray}
485: The sum of $\phi^{\rm D}_{\nu^{}_\mu}$ and $\phi^{\rm
486: D}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_\mu}$, which is defined as $\phi^{\rm
487: D}_\mu$, has been given in Eq. (12). It is then straightforward to
488: calculate $R^{}_0$ by using Eq. (19) for two different
489: astrophysical sources:
490: \begin{eqnarray}
491: R^{}_0(pp) ~ & \approx & ~ \frac{1}{2} ~ - ~ \frac{3}{2} \Delta \;
492: ,
493: \nonumber \\
494: R^{}_0(p\gamma) ~ & \approx & ~ \frac{\sin^2 2\theta^{}_{12}}{4} ~
495: - ~ \frac{4 + \sin^2 2\theta^{}_{12}}{4} \Delta \; .
496: % (23)
497: \end{eqnarray}
498: This result indicates that the dependence of $R^{}_0(pp)$ on
499: $\theta^{}_{12}$ is hidden in $\Delta$ and suppressed by the
500: smallness of $\theta^{}_{13}$ and $\varepsilon$. In addition, the
501: deviation of $R^{}_0(pp)$ from $1/2$ can be as large as
502: $1.5\Delta^{}_{\rm bound} \approx 0.15$. It is obvious that the
503: ratio $R^{}_0(p\gamma)$ is very sensitive to the value of $\sin^2
504: 2\theta^{}_{12}$. A measurement of $R^{}_0 (p\gamma)$ at IceCube
505: and other second-generation neutrino telescopes may therefore
506: probe the solar neutrino mixing angle $\theta^{}_{12}$ \cite{BG}.
507: Indeed, the dominant production mechanism for ultrahigh-energy
508: neutrinos at Active Galactic Nuclei (AGNs) and Gamma Ray Bursts
509: (GRBs) is expected to be the $p\gamma$ process in a tenuous or
510: radiation-dominated environment \cite{Berezinsky}. If this
511: expectation is true, the observation of $R^{}_0(p\gamma)$ may also
512: provide us with useful information on the breaking of $\mu$-$\tau$
513: symmetry.
514:
515: \vspace{0.5cm}
516:
517: \framebox{\Large\bf 4} ~ In summary, we have discussed why and how
518: the second-generation neutrino telescopes can serve as a striking
519: probe of broken $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry. Based on the conventional
520: mechanism for ultrahigh-energy neutrino production at a distant
521: astrophysical source and the standard picture of neutrino
522: oscillations, we have shown that the flavor composition of cosmic
523: neutrino fluxes at a terrestrial detector may deviate from the
524: naive expectation $\phi^{\rm D}_e : \phi^{\rm D}_\mu : \phi^{\rm
525: D}_\tau = 1 : 1 : 1$. Instead, $\phi^{\rm D}_e : \phi^{\rm D}_\mu
526: : \phi^{\rm D}_\tau = (1 -2 \Delta) : (1 +\Delta) : (1 +\Delta)$
527: holds, where $\Delta$ characterizes the effect of $\mu$-$\tau$
528: symmetry breaking. The latter is actually a reflection of
529: $\theta^{}_{13} \neq 0$ and $\theta^{}_{23} \neq \pi/4$ in the
530: $3\times 3$ neutrino mixing matrix. We have examined the
531: sensitivity of $\Delta$ to the deviation of $\theta^{}_{13}$ from
532: zero and to the departure of $\theta^{}_{23}$ from $\pi/4$, and
533: obtained $-0.1 \lesssim \Delta \lesssim +0.1$ from current
534: neutrino oscillation data. We find that it is also possible to
535: probe the breaking of $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry by detecting the
536: $\overline{\nu}^{}_e$ flux of $E^{}_{\overline{\nu}^{}_e} \approx
537: 6.3 ~ {\rm PeV}$ via the Glashow resonance channel
538: $\overline{\nu}^{}_e e \rightarrow W^- \rightarrow ~ {\rm
539: anything}$.
540:
541: This work, different from the previous ones (see, e.g., Refs.
542: \cite{Winter,XZ,BG,Serpico}) in studying how to determine or
543: constrain one or two of three neutrino mixing angles and the Dirac
544: CP-violating phase with neutrino telescopes, reveals the combined
545: effect of $\theta^{}_{13} \neq 0$, $\theta^{}_{23} \neq \pi/4$ and
546: $\delta \neq \pi/2$ which can show up at the detector. Even if
547: $\Delta \neq 0$ is established from the measurement of
548: ultrahigh-energy neutrino fluxes, the understanding of this
549: $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry breaking signal requires more precise
550: information about $\theta^{}_{13}$, $\theta^{}_{23}$ and $\delta$.
551: Hence it makes sense to look at the complementary roles played by
552: neutrino telescopes and terrestrial neutrino oscillation
553: experiments (e.g., the reactor experiments to pin down the
554: smallest neutrino mixing angle $\theta^{}_{13}$ and the neutrino
555: factories or superbeam facilities to measure the CP-violating
556: phase $\delta$) in the era of precision measurements.
557:
558: The feasibility of our idea depends on the assumption that we have
559: correctly understood the production mechanism of cosmic neutrinos
560: from a distant astrophysical source (i.e., via $pp$ and $p\gamma$
561: collisions) with little uncertainties. It is also dependent upon
562: the assumption that the error bars associated with the measurement
563: of relevant neutrino fluxes or their ratios are much smaller than
564: $\Delta$. The latter is certainly a challenge to the sensitivity
565: or precision of IceCube and other neutrino telescopes under
566: construction or under consideration, unless the effect of
567: $\mu$-$\tau$ symmetry breaking is unexpectedly large.
568: Nevertheless, there is no doubt that any constraint on $\Delta$ to
569: be obtained from neutrino telescopes will be greatly useful in
570: diagnosing the astrophysical sources and in understanding the
571: properties of neutrinos themselves. Much more efforts are
572: therefore needed to make in this direction.
573:
574: \vspace{0.5cm}
575:
576: The author would like to thank J.X. Lu for warm hospitality at the
577: Interdisciplinary Center for Theoretical Study of USTC, where part
578: of this paper was written. He is also grateful to H.B. Yu and S.
579: Zhou for useful discussions. This work is supported by the
580: National Natural Science Foundation of China.
581:
582: \newpage
583:
584: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
585: \bibitem{SNO} SNO Collaboration, Q.R. Ahmad {\it et al.},
586: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 89}, 011301 (2002).
587:
588: \bibitem{SK} For a review, see: C.K. Jung {\it et al.},
589: Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. {\bf 51}, 451 (2001).
590:
591: \bibitem{KM} KamLAND Collaboration, K. Eguchi {\it et al.},
592: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 021802 (2003).
593:
594: \bibitem{K2K} K2K Collaboration, M.H. Ahn {\it et al.},
595: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 041801 (2003).
596:
597: \bibitem{PDG} Particle Data Group, S. Eidelman {\it et al.}, Phys.
598: Lett. B {\bf 592}, 1 (2004); Z.Z. Xing, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf
599: 19}, 1 (2004).
600:
601: \bibitem{Vissani} A. Strumia and F. Vissani, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf
602: 726}, 294 (2005).
603:
604: \bibitem{Symmetry} See, e.g., T. Fukuyama and H. Nishiura, hep-ph/9702253;
605: R.N. Mohapatra and S. Nussinov,
606: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 60}, 013002 (1999); Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Rev. D {\bf
607: 61}, 057301 (2000); Phys. Rev. D {\bf 64}, 093013 (2001); E. Ma
608: and M. Raidal, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 87}, 011802 (2001); C.S. Lam,
609: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 507}, 214 (2001); T. Kitabayashi and M. Yasue,
610: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 67}, 015006 (2003); W. Grimus and L. Lavoura,
611: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 572}, 189 (2003); J. Phys. G {\bf 30}, 73
612: (2004); Y. Koide, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 69}, 093001 (2004); R.N.
613: Mohapatra, JHEP {\bf 0410}, 027 (2004); A. de Gouvea, Phys. Rev. D
614: {\bf 69}, 093007 (2004); W. Grimus, A.S. Joshipura, S. Kaneko, L.
615: Lavoura, H. Sawanaka, and M. Tanimoto, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 713},
616: 151 (2005); R.N. Mohapatra and W. Rodejohann, Phys. Rev. D {\bf
617: 72}, 053001 (2005); T. Kitabayashi and M. Yasue, Phys. Lett. B
618: {\bf 621}, 133 (2005); R.N. Mohapatra and S. Nasri, Phys. Rev. D
619: {\bf 71}, 033001 (2005); R.N. Mohapatra, S. Nasri, and H.B. Yu,
620: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 615}, 231 (2005); A.S. Joshipura,
621: hep-ph/0512252; K. Matsuda and H. Nishiura, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 73},
622: 013008 (2006); R.N. Mohapatra, S. Nasri, and H.B. Yu, Phys. Lett.
623: B {\bf 636}, 114 (2006); hep-ph/0605020.
624:
625: \bibitem{Ice} J. Ahrens {\it et al.} (IceCube), Nucl. Phys. (Proc.
626: Suppl.) {\bf 118}, 388 (2003).
627:
628: \bibitem{Water} E. Aslanides {\it et al.} (ANTARES),
629: astro-ph/9907432; S.E. Tzamarias (NESTOR), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A
630: {\bf 502}, 150 (2003); P. Piattelli (NEMO), Nucl. Phys. (Proc.
631: Suppl.) {\bf 143}, 359 (2005).
632: %The web addresses of these three
633: %collaborations are {\sf http://antares.in2p3.fr/}, {\sf
634: %http://www.nestor.org.gr/} and {\sf http://nemoweb.lns.infn.it/},
635: %respectively.
636:
637: \bibitem{R} J.G. Learned and K. Mannheim, Annu.
638: Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. {\bf 50}, 679 (2000); F. Halzen and D.
639: Hooper, Rept. Prog. Phys. {\bf 65}, 1025 (2002).
640:
641: \bibitem{Pakvasa} J.G. Learned and S. Pakvasa, Astropart. Phys. {\bf
642: 3}, 267 (1995).
643:
644: \bibitem{Glashow} S.L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. {\bf 118}, 316 (1960).
645: \bibitem{Winter} W. Winter, hep-ph/0604191; and references
646: therein.
647:
648: \bibitem{XZ} Z.Z. Xing and S. Zhou, astro-ph/0603781.
649:
650: \bibitem{BG} P. Bhattacharjee and N. Gupta, hep-ph/0501191.
651:
652: \bibitem{Beacom} J.F. Beacom, N.F. Bell, D. Hooper, S. Pakvasa,
653: and T.J. Weiler, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 68}, 093005 (2003);
654: Erratum-{\it ibid.} D {\bf 72}, 019901 (2005).
655:
656: \bibitem{Weiler} M. Ahlers, L.A. Anchordoqui, H. Goldberg, F.
657: Halzen, A. Ringwald, and T.J. Weiler, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 72},
658: 023001 (2005); and references therein.
659:
660: \bibitem{Berezinsky} V.S. Berezinsky, S.V. Bulanov, V.A. Dogiel,
661: V.L. Ginzburg, and V.S. Ptuskin, {\it Astrophysics of Cosmic Rays}
662: (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1990); T.K. Gaisser, F. Halzen, and T.
663: Stanev, Phys. Rept. {\bf 258}, 173 (1995).
664:
665: \bibitem{Serpico} G. Barenboim and C. Quigg, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 67},
666: 073024 (2003); J.F. Beacom, N.F. Bell, D. Hooper, S. Pakvasa, and
667: T.J. Weiler, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 69}, 017303 (2004); P.D. Serpico
668: and M. Kachelrie$\rm \ss$, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 94}, 211102
669: (2005); P.D. Serpico, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 73}, 047301 (2006).
670:
671: \end{thebibliography}
672:
673: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
674: \begin{figure}[t]
675: \vspace{-2.5cm}
676: \epsfig{file=mtfig.ps,bbllx=1.5cm,bblly=17.5cm,bburx=11.5cm,bbury=28.5cm,%
677: width=9cm,height=10cm,angle=0,clip=0}
678: \vspace{8.6cm} \caption{(A)
679: the dependence of $\Delta^{}_{\rm bound}$ on $\theta^{}_{12}$,
680: where $\theta^{}_{13}$ and $\varepsilon$ take their respective
681: upper limits (i.e., $\theta^{}_{13} < 10^\circ$ and $\varepsilon <
682: 9^\circ$); (B) the nontrivial condition for $\Delta =0$, where
683: $\theta^{}_{12}$ is allowed to vary in the range $30^\circ <
684: \theta^{}_{12} < 38^\circ$.}
685: \end{figure}
686: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
687:
688: \end{document}
689: