1: % Final Version for submission
2: \documentstyle[12pt,epsfig]{article}
3: \textwidth 145mm
4: \textheight 195mm
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6: \newcommand{\be}[1]{\begin{equation} \label{(#1)}}
7: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
8: \newcommand{\ba}[1]{\begin{eqnarray} \label{(#1)}}
9: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{eqnarray}}
10: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
11: \newcommand{\rf}[1]{(\ref{(#1)})}
12: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
13: \def \lsim {\mbox{${}^< \hspace*{-7pt} _\sim$}}
14: \def \gsim {\mbox{${}^> \hspace*{-7pt} _\sim$}}
15: \def\p{\prime}
16: \def\rp{$R_p \hspace{-1em}/\ \ $}
17: \def\rpm{R_p \hspace{-0.8em}/\;\:}
18: \def\Lv{$L\hspace{-0.5em}/\ \ $}
19: \def\Lfv{$L_i\hspace{-0.8em}/\ \ $}
20: \def\Bv{$B\hspace{-0.6em}/\ \ $}
21: \def\znbb{0\nu\beta\beta}
22: \def\kd{{\rm K}^+\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^+\pi^-}
23: \def\td{{\tau}^-\rightarrow e^+(\mu^+) \pi^-\pi^-}
24: \def\t{{\tau}^-\rightarrow l^{\pm} \pi^{\mp}\pi^-}
25: \def\tlnv{{\tau}^-\rightarrow l^{+} \pi^{-}\pi^-}
26: \def\tlfv{{\tau}^-\rightarrow l^{-} \pi^{+}\pi^-}
27: %
28: \def\nrightarrow{\rightarrow\hspace{-1em}/\ \ }
29: \def \sw {\sin\!\theta^{}_W }
30: \def \cw {\cos\!\theta^{}_W }
31: \def \tw {\tan\!\theta^{}_W }
32: %
33: \def \lg {\langle}
34: \def \rg {\rangle}
35: %
36: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
37: \begin{document}
38: %
39: \hfill{USM-TH-193}\\[0.5cm]
40: %\hfill{IFIC-06/xx}
41: \begin{center}
42:
43: {\Large\bf Extended Black Box Theorem for Lepton Number and Flavor Violating
44: processes}\\[3mm]
45: Martin Hirsch, $^1$ Sergey Kovalenko $^2$ and Ivan Schmidt $^2$\\[1mm]
46: %
47: {\it $^1$ AHEP Group, Institut de F\'{\i}sica Corpuscular \\
48: C.S.I.C./Universitat de Val{\`e}ncia \\
49: Edificio Institutos de Paterna, Apt 22085, E--46071 Valencia, Spain \\[2mm]
50: $^2$ Departamento de F\'\i sica, Universidad
51: T\'ecnica Federico Santa Mar\'\i a,}\\
52: {\it Casilla 110-V, Valpara\'\i so, Chile}
53: \end{center}
54: \bigskip
55:
56: \begin{abstract}
57: %
58: We revisit the well known ``Black Box" theorem establishing a
59: fundamental relation between the amplitude of neutrinoless double
60: beta decay and the effective Majorana neutrino mass. We extend this
61: theorem to the general case of arbitrary lepton number and lepton
62: flavor violating (LFNV) processes and to the three generation
63: Majorana neutrino mass matrix. We demonstrate the existence of a
64: general set of one-to-one correspondence relations between the
65: effective operators generating these processes, and elements of the
66: neutrino mass matrix, such that if one of these two quantities
67: vanishes the other is guaranteed to vanish as well, and moreover, if
68: one of these quantities is non-zero the other is guaranteed to be
69: non-zero. We stress that this statement remains valid even in the
70: presence of arbitrary new physics contributions. As a particularly
71: important example, we then show that neutrino oscillation data imply
72: that neutrinoless double beta decay must occur at a certain non-zero
73: rate.
74:
75: \end{abstract}
76: \vskip 0.5cm
77: %
78:
79: \bigskip
80: \bigskip
81:
82: PACS: 13.35.Dx,13.35.Hb,14.60.Pq,14.60.St
83:
84: \bigskip
85: \bigskip
86:
87: KEYWORDS: new physics, lepton flavor violation, neutrino.
88:
89: \newpage
90:
91: \section{Introduction}
92:
93: In the past few years neutrino oscillation experiments \cite{Fukuda:1998mi}
94: have, for the first time, provided unambiguous evidence for lepton flavor
95: violation (LFV). The current status of the experimental data can be briefly
96: summarized as follows \cite{Maltoni:2004ei}. Two neutrino mass squared
97: differences and two neutrino angles are known to be non-zero. These
98: are the atmospheric neutrino mass, $\Delta m^2_{\rm Atm} = (2.0-3.2)$
99: [$10^{-3}$ eV$^2$], and angle, $\sin^2\theta_{\rm Atm} = (0.34-0.68)$,
100: as well as the solar neutrino mass $\Delta m^2_{\odot} = (7.1-8.9)$
101: [$10^{-5}$ eV$^2$], and angle, $\sin^2\theta_{\odot} = (0.24-0.40)$,
102: all numbers at 3 $\sigma$ c.l. For the remaining neutrino angle,
103: often called the reactor neutrino angle $\theta_R$, and for the overall
104: neutrino mass scale only upper limits exist \cite{Maltoni:2004ei,PDG}.
105:
106: Interestingly, the observed LFV can not exist isolated only in the neutrino
107: sector. It inevitably is carried over to the sector of charged leptons via
108: the LFV charged current loop with virtual neutrinos and should manifest
109: itself in the form of LFV processes with charged leptons, such as $\mu$,
110: $\tau$ and meson LFV decays, $\mu^--e^-$ nuclear conversion, etc. Thus,
111: given the observation of neutrino oscillations, the existence of yet
112: unobserved LFV processes with charged leptons is expected.
113:
114: However, the LFV in the charged lepton sector may also receive
115: direct contributions from non-SM interactions of new physics. These
116: may cancel the contribution of the loop induced effect related to
117: neutrino oscillations. Such a cancellation is phenomenologically
118: unnatural, but possible if there exists some symmetry protecting
119: this cancellation. This observation gives rise to the question as to
120: whether the observation of neutrino oscillations guarantees non-zero
121: rates of some LFV processes with charged leptons and vice versa. In
122: view of the experimental observation of neutrino oscillations the
123: latter part of this question may be considered a purely theoretical
124: curiosity but it may reveal some generic relations between the
125: neutrino mass matrix and LFV processes with charged leptons.
126:
127: One particular example of such kind of relation has been known for
128: some time. It is generally referred to as the ``Black Box'' theorem
129: \cite{BB}, and relates the effective Majorana neutrino mass and the
130: amplitude of neutrinoless double beta decay. In essence, it
131: establishes a one-to-one correspondence between these two
132: quantities, such that if one of them vanishes the other is
133: guaranteed to vanish and if one of these quantities is non-zero the
134: other must be non-zero as well. \footnote{A supersymmetric version
135: of the ``Black Box'' theorem has been formulated in Ref.
136: \cite{SUSY-BB}, extending this relation also to the lepton number
137: violating scalar neutrino mass.} The crucial point of the ``Black
138: Box'' theorem is that it remains valid in the presence of arbitrary
139: contributions of new physics. Note, however, that the existing
140: version of the ``Black box'' theorem \cite{BB} is limited to the
141: relation between neutrinoless double beta decay and the Majorana
142: property of the $\nu_e$ neutrino flavor, without properly taking
143: into account its mixing with (at least two) other neutrino flavor
144: states $\nu_{\mu}$ and $\nu_{\tau}$.
145:
146: In the present paper we therefore revisit the ``Black Box'' theorem
147: and extend it to the general case of arbitrary lepton number and
148: flavor violating (LFNV) processes and the three-generation Majorana
149: neutrino mass matrix. Applying symmetry arguments we will show that
150: there exists a one-to-one correspondence between the amplitudes of
151: the LFNV processes and the corresponding entries of the Majorana
152: neutrino mass matrix. The same symmetry arguments allow us to
153: formulate self-consistency conditions for the Majorana neutrino mass
154: matrix, thus restricting its allowed index structure. We study in
155: more details the specific case of neutrinoless double beta decay and
156: the corresponding $M^{\nu}_{ee}$ element of the Majorana neutrino
157: mass matrix. We show that the self-consistency condition, in
158: combination with neutrino oscillation data, exclude the case
159: $M^{\nu}_{ee}=0$, guaranteeing that neutrinoless double beta decay
160: must occur at a non-zero rate.
161:
162:
163:
164: \section{LFNV Processes and Neutrino mass Matrix}
165:
166: Here we are going to prove a generic set of one-to-one correspondence
167: relations between LFV processes with total lepton number violation (LFNV)
168: $\Delta L = \Delta (L_{\alpha} + L_{\beta}) = 2$ and the corresponding
169: entries of the Majorana neutrino mass matrix. We consider baryon number
170: conserving processes in which LFNV manifests itself via two external
171: charged leptons. In addition, these processes may contain any set of
172: external SM particles satisfying certain conditions to be specified below.
173: For convenience we put all these additional particles to the initial states
174: of the LFNV processes while the two charged leptons appear in the final
175: states. Nevertheless our conclusions are valid for any $\Delta L = 2$
176: process, as will be seen later on.
177:
178: Without loss of generality we focus on $\Delta L = 2$ processes of the
179: form (see Fig 1(a).): $\Phi_k\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$, where
180: $\Phi_k$ denotes certain color-singlet subsets of external particles
181: with $B=0, L_{\alpha}=0$ and total electric charge $Q=-2$. The difference
182: between the processes with the same lepton flavor structure,
183: $l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$, is due to the difference of their external
184: particle subsets $\Phi_k$ marked with different subscript $k$.
185: The possible subsets considered are of the following two types:
186: %
187: \begin{eqnarray}\label{set}
188: \Phi_0 &=& W^- W^-,\ \ \ \Phi_k = (\bar{u} d)(\bar{u} d) \left\{(\bar{u}u),
189: (\bar{d}d), ... \right\}
190: \left\{(\bar{l}_{\alpha} l_{\alpha}), \gamma, Z \right\}.
191: \end{eqnarray}
192: The second type of sets must contain two pairs of anti-up and down quarks
193: of arbitrary generation in order to provide $Q=-2$. They may or may not
194: be accompanied by an arbitrary neutral set of particles.
195:
196: We write down the effective Lagrangian describing the LFNV processes in
197: the following schematic form:
198: %
199: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eff-Lag-1}
200: %
201: {\cal L}^{\Delta L=2} &=&
202: \Phi_k \bar{l}_{\alpha} \Gamma^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta} l^c_{\beta} +
203: g \bar{l}_{\alpha}\gamma^{\mu}P_L \nu_{\alpha} W_{\mu}^-
204: + \Phi_k W^-_{\mu}S^{\mu\nu}_k W^-_{\nu}
205: %
206: + {\cal L}^{\prime} + h.c.
207: \end{eqnarray}
208: Here, $P_L = (1-\gamma_5)/2$. The first effective operator
209: generates amplitudes for $\Phi_k\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$
210: processes and may receive contributions from SM interactions with
211: Majorana neutrino mass insertions (to be discussed in the next
212: section) and possibly from some physics beyond the SM. The vertex
213: structure $\Gamma^{(k)}$ depends on the concrete realization of this
214: operator. The second term is the usual SM leptonic charged current
215: interaction. The third term represents the SM interactions of the
216: sets of fields $\Phi_k$ with W-bosons. This term plays an important
217: role in our analysis and is always induced by the SM interactions.
218: This is guaranteed by the structure of the field set $\Phi_k$ given
219: in Eq. (\ref{set}) and directly follows from the presence of the two
220: $\bar{u}d$ pairs which have SM couplings to $W^-$. The term ${\cal
221: L}^{\prime}$ denotes any interactions beyond the SM, whose explicit
222: form is irrelevant for our analysis. The particular realization of
223: the above terms depends on the field set $\Phi_k$ and determines the
224: vertex structure $S_k$. The explicit form of $\Gamma^{(k)}$ and
225: $S_k$ are also irrelevant for our subsequent reasoning. In what
226: follows we denote the first and second effective operators in Eq.
227: (\ref{eff-Lag-1}) by $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ and
228: $\hat{S}_k$, respectively.
229:
230: Majorana mass terms for the three left handed neutrinos
231: $\nu_{\alpha}=\nu_{e},\nu_{\mu},\nu_{\tau}$ in 4-component notations
232: can be written as
233: %
234: \begin{eqnarray}\label{nu-mass-matrix}
235: {\cal L}^{M}_{\alpha\beta} = -\frac{1}{2}
236: \overline{\nu_{\alpha}^c} M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} P_L \nu_{\beta} + \mbox{h.c.}
237: \end{eqnarray}
238:
239: It is obvious that neutrinos contribute to the operator
240: $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ in Eq. (\ref{eff-Lag-1}) via the
241: well known diagram in Fig. 1(a), leading to the following expression
242: for the vertex function
243: %
244: \begin{eqnarray}\label{nu-contribution}
245: \Gamma^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}(x_1-x_2,...) &\sim&
246: %
247: \int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} M^{\nu}_{\alpha m}
248: \left(q^2 - M^{\nu\dagger}M^{\nu}\right)_{m\beta}^{-1}
249: e^{-iq(x_1 - x_2)} = \\ \nn
250: %
251: &=& \int \frac{d^4q}{(2\pi)^4} q^{-2}M^{\nu}_{\alpha m} \left(\delta_{m\beta} +
252: \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} q^{-2n}
253: \left(M^{\nu\dagger}M^{\nu}\right)_{m \beta}^{n}\right) e^{-iq(x_1 - x_2)}.
254: \end{eqnarray}
255: %
256: Here we have formally expanded the denominator in the ratio
257: $M_{(\nu)}^2/q^2$. The terms of this expansion correspond, in the
258: flavor basis, to the contributions of all possible mass insertions in the
259: intermediate neutrino line, see Fig.1(a). The number of insertions must be
260: odd in order to have total lepton number violation $\Delta L =2$,
261: since each Majorana mass insertion introduces $\Delta L = \pm 2$.
262: Thus, the leading order neutrino contribution to the operator
263: $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ is proportional to the
264: $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$ entry of the Majorana neutrino mass matrix.
265: However, this operator receives higher order contributions from the
266: other entries which can generate it even in the absence of an
267: $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$ entry. The infinite serie in Eq.
268: (\ref{nu-contribution}) can be represented in a compact form on the basis
269: of the Hamilton-Kelly theorem \cite{Hamilton-Kelly},
270: which asserts that any analytic function of an
271: $n\times n$ matrix is equivalent to an n-1 order polynomial of this matrix.
272: Applying this theorem to Eq. (\ref{nu-contribution}) we get
273: %
274: \begin{eqnarray}\label{H-K}
275: \Gamma^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta} &=& c_0 M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} + c_1
276: M^{\nu}_{\alpha k}\left(M^{\nu\dagger}M^{\nu}\right)_{k\beta} +
277: c_2 M^{\nu}_{\alpha k}\left(M^{\nu\dagger}M^{\nu}\right)^2_{k\beta}
278: + \Gamma^{\prime}\, .
279: \end{eqnarray}
280: %
281: The coefficients $c_n$ depend on the mass eigenvalues $m^2_{\nu_{1,2,3}}$
282: of the matrix $M^{\nu\dagger}M^{\nu}$. Here, in addition to the first
283: three terms following from Eq. (\ref{nu-contribution}) we allowed for a
284: term $\Gamma^{\prime}$ representing any possible contributions other
285: than those of Fig. 1(a). The above formula represents the net result of
286: all possible mass insertions.
287: The advantage of the representation (\ref{H-K}) is that it specifies all
288: the irreducible sets of non-trivial LFV transitions, into which any other
289: LFV transition in the infinite sum of Eq. (\ref{nu-contribution}) can be
290: decomposed. We will use this fact later.
291:
292: Now consider the contribution of the operator
293: $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ in Eq. (\ref{eff-Lag-1}) to the Majorana
294: neutrino mass matrix $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$ in Eq. (\ref{nu-mass-matrix}).
295: This contribution is generated by the 1PI self-energy diagrams in Fig. 1(b)
296: with two SM charged current vertices. In leading order, taking into account
297: all non-trivial lepton flavor transitions, we write the corresponding
298: contribution to the Majorana neutrino mass matrix in a form similar to
299: that of Eq. (\ref{H-K}):
300: %
301: \begin{eqnarray}\label{O-M}
302: %
303: M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} &=& \Sigma_0\langle \Gamma_{\alpha\beta}\rangle +
304: \Sigma_1\langle \Gamma_{\alpha m} (\Gamma^{\dagger}\Gamma)_{m\beta} \rangle
305: + \Sigma_2\langle \Gamma_{\alpha m} (\Gamma^{\dagger}\Gamma)^2_{m\beta}\rangle
306: + M^{\prime},
307: %
308: \end{eqnarray}
309: where in the brackets $\langle \rangle$ a convolution in coordinate space
310: and matrix multiplication in flavor space are implied. As in Eq. (\ref{H-K}),
311: here we also allowed for a term $M^{\prime}$ representing any possible
312: contributions other than in Fig. 1(b). The explicit form of the terms in
313: Eqs. (\ref{O-M}),(\ref{H-K}) is not important for our subsequent analysis.
314: Decisive, however, is the observation that the operator
315: $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ from Eq. (\ref{eff-Lag-1}) and the
316: Majorana neutrino mass matrix $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$ defined in
317: Eq. (\ref{nu-mass-matrix}) mutually contribute to each other.
318: %
319:
320: \section{Extended ``Black Box Theorem"}
321:
322: Now we are in a position to prove the Extended ``Black Box'' Theorem
323: establishing a one-to-one correspondence between the amplitudes of
324: LNFV processes and the entries of the Majorana neutrino mass matrix.
325: First, let us explore the consequences of the assumption
326: $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}=0$ for $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ and
327: vice versa $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}=0$ for
328: $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$. To this end let us consider Eq. (\ref{O-M})
329: for the former case and Eq. (\ref{H-K}) for the latter one. The
330: condition $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}=0$ in Eq. (\ref{O-M}) implies that
331: the sum of the terms on the r.h.s. must vanish. This can happen
332: either if each of the four terms vanish individually or if these
333: four non-zero terms cancel each other. The latter case of an
334: accidental self-cancellation is unnatural, since it is in general
335: unstable with respect to radiative corrections. The same arguments
336: can be applied to Eq. (\ref{H-K}). Thus, on the basis of naturalness
337: arguments alone one may expect from Eqs. (\ref{H-K}) and (\ref{O-M})
338: that $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}=0$ requires
339: $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}=0$ and vice versa. This conclusion
340: may be circumvented only if there exists a symmetry protecting the
341: cancellation to all orders of perturbation theory.
342:
343: Let us examine if any global symmetry of this type in a theory with the
344: Lagrangian Eq. (\ref{eff-Lag-1}), which includes both SM and beyond the SM
345: interactions, can exist. Such a symmetry should be associated with a
346: unitary transformation of the fields realizing representations of a global
347: group, which we denote by $G_{\eta}$. Suppose under this symmetry the fields
348: transform as
349: %
350: \begin{eqnarray}\label{group}
351: W^- \stackrel{G_\eta}{\longrightarrow} \eta_{_W} \cdot W^-,\ \
352: l_{\alpha} \stackrel{G_\eta}{\longrightarrow} \eta^{l}_{\alpha}
353: \cdot l_{\alpha}, \ \ \
354: \nu_{\alpha} \stackrel{G_\eta}{\longrightarrow} \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha}
355: \cdot \nu_{\alpha}, \ \ \
356: \Phi_k \stackrel{G_\eta}{\longrightarrow} \eta_k \cdot \Phi_k,
357: %
358: \end{eqnarray}
359: with $\eta_a \eta_a^{\dagger} = 1$. Terms in Eq. (\ref{eff-Lag-1})
360: will then be allowed (forbidden) by the symmetry if the corresponding
361: product of $\eta$ factors is equal to $1$ (different from $1$).
362: The group $G_{\eta}$ is not
363: completely arbitrary since it must at least be consistent with the
364: SM part of the Lagrangian (\ref{eff-Lag-1}). The invariance of the second
365: and third terms in Eq. (\ref{eff-Lag-1}) with respect to $G_{\eta}$
366: requires:
367: %
368: \begin{eqnarray}\label{constr}
369: \eta_{_W}^2\eta_k =1, \ \ \ \ \eta_{_W} \eta_{\alpha}^{l \dagger}
370: \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha} =1.
371: \end{eqnarray}
372: The effective operators $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ generating the
373: processes $\Phi_k\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$ and the Majorana neutrino
374: mass terms transform under $G_{\eta}$ as
375: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Gamma1}
376: \hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta} &\stackrel{G_\eta}{\longrightarrow}&
377: \eta^k_{\alpha\beta} \cdot \hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}, \ \ \
378: \mbox{with}\ \
379: \eta^k_{\alpha\beta} = \eta^{l}_{\alpha}\cdot\eta^{l}_{\beta}\cdot \eta_k,\\
380: %
381: \label{Gamma1-1}
382: {\cal L}^{M}_{\alpha\beta} &\stackrel{G_\eta}{\longrightarrow}&
383: \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} \cdot {\cal L}^{M}_{\alpha\beta}, \ \ \ \ \
384: \mbox{with}\ \
385: \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} = \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha}\cdot\eta^{\nu}_{\beta}.
386: \end{eqnarray}
387: From condition (\ref{constr}) it follows that
388: $\eta_k = (\eta_{_W}^{\dagger})^2$ and
389: $\eta^{l}_{\alpha} = \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha}\eta_{_W}$ and thus
390: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Gamma2}
391: \eta^k_{\alpha\beta} = \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}\ \ \
392: \mbox{for}\ \ \ \forall\ k\ .
393: \end{eqnarray}
394: %
395: We repeat that terms in the Lagrangian Eqs. (\ref{eff-Lag-1}) and
396: (\ref{nu-mass-matrix}) are allowed by $G_{\eta}$ if the corresponding
397: transformation factor of this term is $\eta=1$ and forbidden if $\eta\neq1$.
398: \footnote{Similar arguments have been used previously to prove a one-to-one
399: correspondence between the amplitude of neutrinoless double beta decay,
400: Majorana neutrino \cite{BB} and sneutrino \cite{SUSY-BB} masses as well as
401: between different LFNV processes \cite{LFV-rel}.}
402: Eq. (\ref{Gamma2}) proves a general one-to-one correspondence between
403: the effective operators $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$, generating
404: the processes $\Phi_k\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$, and the elements
405: of the neutrino mass matrix $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$.
406: According to Eq. (\ref{Gamma2}), the effective operator
407: $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ and the corresponding element of the
408: mass matrix $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$ are related such that if one of these
409: two quantities vanishes the other is guaranteed to vanish, and vice versa
410: if one of these quantities is non-zero the other one is non-zero as well.
411: The crucial point of this statement is that it is valid in the presence
412: of any contributions of new physics represented in Eqs. (\ref{eff-Lag-1}),
413: (\ref{H-K}) and (\ref{O-M}) by ${\cal L}^{\prime}$, $\Gamma^{\prime}$
414: and $M^{\prime}$. Schematically one can express these relations as:
415: %
416: \begin{eqnarray} \label{rel}
417: %
418: (\Phi_k\nrightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}) \ \hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}
419: = 0\ \leftrightarrow \ M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}=0, \ \ \
420: (\Phi_k\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}) \ \hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}
421: \neq 0\ \leftrightarrow \ M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} \neq 0, \ \ \
422: \end{eqnarray}
423: %
424: This result is valid not only for the processes of type
425: $\Phi_{k}\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$ but for any
426: $\Delta L = \Delta (L_{\alpha} + L_{\beta}) = 2$ process like
427: $\Phi^{(1)}_{k}\rightarrow \Phi^{(2)}_{n} l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$,
428: $\Phi^{(1)}_{k} \bar{l}_{\alpha} \rightarrow \Phi^{(2)}_{n} l_{\beta}$,
429: because our conclusions are based on the analysis of the effective
430: operator $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$, which generates all these
431: processes.
432:
433: Eq. (\ref{rel}) represents a direct extension of the flavor blind
434: ``Black Box'' Theorem \cite{BB} to the case involving arbitrary
435: LNFV. However, due to the possibility of multiple LNFV transitions,
436: in the latter case there are additional indirect relations between
437: $\Phi_k\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$ and $M^{\nu}_{kn}$ for
438: $k\neq \alpha, n\neq \beta$. Let us turn again to Eqs. (\ref{H-K})
439: and (\ref{O-M}). The relations Eq. (\ref{rel}) correspond to the
440: leading order terms on the r.h.s. of Eqs. (\ref{H-K}) and
441: (\ref{O-M}) when $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ and
442: $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$ are directly proportional to each other.
443: However, according to Eq. (\ref{H-K}) and (\ref{O-M}), the second
444: and third (next-to-leading) terms introduce new relations between
445: $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}$ and $M^{\nu}_{mn}$ for $m\neq
446: \alpha, n\neq \beta$. One can find all these residual relations
447: using the above symmetry arguments. First, using Eqs.
448: (\ref{Gamma1})-(\ref{Gamma2}), the following relations for the
449: $G_{\eta}$ symmetry factors are obtained
450: %
451: \begin{eqnarray}\label{next}
452: %
453: &&\eta^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} = \eta^k_{\alpha n}\eta^{k\ \dagger}_{mn}
454: \eta^k_{m\beta}, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
455: \eta^{k}_{\alpha\beta} = \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha n}\eta^{\nu\ \dagger}_{mn}
456: \eta^{\nu}_{m\beta},\\
457: %
458: \label{next1}
459: &&\eta^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} = \eta^k_{\alpha n}\eta^{k\ \dagger}_{mn}
460: \eta^k_{ml}\eta^{k\ \dagger}_{pl}\eta^k_{p\beta}, \ \ \
461: \eta^{k}_{\alpha\beta} = \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha n}\eta^{\nu\ \dagger}_{mn}
462: \eta^{\nu}_{ml}\eta^{\nu\ \dagger}_{pl}\eta^{\nu}_{p\beta},
463: %
464: \end{eqnarray}
465: These relations follow from the fact that $\eta^k_{mn}=\eta^\nu_{mn}
466: =\eta^\nu_{m}\eta^\nu_{n}$ and $\eta^\nu_{i}\eta^{\nu \dagger}_{i}=1$.
467: In principle, one can write down an infinite set of such relations involving
468: multiple LNFV transitions corresponding to the mass insertions in
469: Fig. 1(a), given by the infinite series in Eq. (\ref{nu-contribution}) as well
470: as the self-energy insertions to the massless neutrino
471: propagator of Fig. 1(b). However, as we already have noted the irreducible
472: set of transitions is given by the first three terms of Eqs.
473: (\ref{H-K}) and (\ref{O-M}), as follows from the Hamilton-Kelly
474: theorem. Eqs. (\ref{Gamma2}), (\ref{next}) and (\ref{next1}) represent a
475: complete set of relations between the transformation $\eta$-factors
476: corresponding to these terms. In fact, let us consider Eq. (\ref{H-K})
477: and observe that the field transformations in Eqs. (\ref{group}) are
478: equivalent to the transformations of the vertex function and
479: neutrino mass matrix:
480: %
481: %\begin{eqnarray}\label{equiv}
482: $\Gamma^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta} \stackrel{G_\eta}{\longrightarrow}
483: \eta^k_{\alpha\beta} \cdot \Gamma^{(k)}_{\alpha\beta}, \
484: %
485: M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} \stackrel{G_\eta}{\longrightarrow}
486: \eta^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta} \cdot M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$.
487: %\end{eqnarray}
488: Both sides of Eq. (\ref{H-K}) must equally transform under $G_{\eta}$.
489: The necessary and sufficient conditions to satisfy this requirement
490: are given by Eqs. (\ref{Gamma2}), (\ref{next}) and (\ref{next1}). In
491: other words they represent a complete set of non-trivial relations
492: between the symmetry $\eta$-factors. Another way to demonstrate the
493: completeness of the relations Eqs. (\ref{Gamma2}), (\ref{next}) and
494: (\ref{next1}) is given by combinatorial analysis. In the three generation
495: case under consideration it is easy to show that any relationships other
496: than the type given in Eqs. (\ref{next})-(\ref{next1}) can be decomposed
497: into blocks corresponding to irreducible sets of $\eta$-factors on the
498: r.h.s. of these equations.
499:
500: Thus it is sufficient to consider Eq. (\ref{next})-(\ref{next1}), together
501: with Eq. (\ref{Gamma2}), in order to find all possible relations
502: between $\hat{\Gamma}^{(k)}$ and $M^{\nu}$, following from our symmetry
503: arguments. The information provided by Eqs. (\ref{next})-(\ref{next1})
504: can be expressed in various ways. We
505: formulate the consequences of these equations in the form of the
506: following question: what are the minimal sets of the LFNV processes
507: to be observed experimentally that are sufficient to prove that
508: $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}\neq 0$ ? Naturally, the observation of
509: $\Phi_{k}\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$ would establish this fact
510: as evidenced by Eqs. (\ref{rel}). However, there exist other sets of
511: processes $\Phi_{k}\rightarrow l_m l_n$ with $m\neq \alpha$ and/or $n\neq
512: \beta$, whose observation would also establish
513: $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}\neq 0$. The complete lists of such processes
514: corresponding to each entry of $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$ can be
515: derived from Eqs. (\ref{next})-(\ref{next1}). Here for illustration
516: we only show the complete list of LFNV processes necessary to
517: establish that $M^{\nu}_{ee}\neq 0$. In this case there are five
518: independent sets of experiments shown in the curl brackets:
519: %
520: \begin{eqnarray}\label{list}
521: %
522: M^{\nu}_{ee}\neq 0 \longleftarrow
523: \left\{
524: \begin{array}{l}
525: \left\{(e\mu),(\mu\mu)\right\},\ \left\{(e\tau),(\tau\tau)\right\},
526: \ \left\{(e\mu),(\mu\tau),(e\tau)\right\}, \\
527: \left\{(e\mu),(\mu\tau),(\tau\tau)\right\},\ \left\{(e\tau),(\mu\tau),
528: (\mu\mu)\right\}.
529: \end{array}
530: \right.
531: %
532: \end{eqnarray}
533: Here we denoted the process $\Phi_{k}\rightarrow l_{m} l_{n}$
534: by $(mn)$, where $m\neq e$ and/or $n\neq
535: e$ . The first three sets of experiments follow from Eq. (\ref{next})
536: and the last two from Eq. (\ref{next1}). For instance, the observation of
537: both $\Phi_{k}\rightarrow l_{e} l_{\mu}$ and
538: $\Phi_{k}\rightarrow l_{\mu} l_{\mu}$ would establish $M^{\nu}_{ee}\neq 0$,
539: etc. In practice, information of this type might become
540: useful in a situation when for some (experimental) reasons the observation
541: of certain $\Phi_{k}\rightarrow l_{\alpha} l_{\beta}$ processes is not
542: possible. In the above example this is $\Phi_{k}\rightarrow l_{e} l_{e}$.
543:
544: Formally the Extended Black Box Theorem is formulated as Eqs. (\ref{Gamma2})
545: and (\ref{next})-(\ref{next1}), allowing one to extract various relations
546: of the above discussed type between LFNV processes and entries of the
547: Majorana neutrino mass matrix $M^{\nu}$.
548:
549: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
550:
551: \section{Neutrinoless double beta decay}
552:
553: We will now apply the symmetry arguments of the previous section
554: to analyze the structure of the Majorana neutrino mass matrix
555: itself. As the phenomenologically most relevant lepton number
556: violating process, we will concentrate on the consequences for
557: neutrinoless double beta decay ($\znbb$). As is well-known, Majorana
558: neutrino masses induce a $\znbb$ decay amplitude proportional to
559: \begin{eqnarray}\label{meff}
560: \langle m_{\nu}\rangle & = & \sum_j U_{ej}^2 m_j \\
561: & \equiv & M^{\nu}_{ee}
562: \end{eqnarray}
563: Here, the sum includes all light neutrino mass eigenstates. The
564: second relation, i.e. that $\znbb$ decay is sensitive to the
565: ($\nu_e-\nu_e$) element of the neutrino mass matrix in flavor space,
566: follows from a straightforward calculation.
567:
568: From the discussion presented above it is clear that $M^{\nu}_{ee} \equiv 0$
569: requires $\eta^{\nu}_{ee} \ne 1$. We will now show that $\eta^{\nu}_{ee}
570: \ne 1$ is inconsistent with data from neutrino oscillation experiments.
571: The argument is essentially a proof by contradiction: construct all
572: possible neutrino mass matrices consistent with $\eta^{\nu}_{ee} \ne 1$;
573: if none of the resulting matrices can explain all oscillation data,
574: $M^{\nu}_{ee}$ must be non-zero.
575:
576: As an example, assume $\eta^{\nu}_{ee} = \eta^{\nu}_{e}\eta^{\nu}_{e}\ne 1$.
577: Choose $\eta^{\nu}_{e\mu}=\eta^{\nu}_{e}\eta^{\nu}_{\mu} = 1$ and
578: $\eta^{\nu}_{e\tau}=\eta^{\nu}_{e}\eta^{\nu}_{\tau} = 1$. It follows
579: that $\eta^{\nu}_{\mu}= (\eta^{\nu}_{e})^*$ and
580: $\eta^{\nu}_{\tau}= (\eta^{\nu}_{e})^*$, as well as
581: $\eta^{\nu}_{\mu\mu}\ne 1$, $\eta^{\nu}_{\mu\tau}\ne 1$ and
582: $\eta^{\nu}_{\tau\tau}\ne 1$. Thus the resulting mass matrix has the
583: structure \footnote{We stress that the zeros in these matrices are exact,
584: since we assume they are enforced by a symmetry.}
585: %
586: \begin{equation}\nonumber
587: {\cal M}_{\nu}^{(1)} =
588: \left(\begin{array}{cccc}
589: 0 & x & y \\
590: x & 0 & 0 \\
591: y & 0 & 0
592: \end{array}\right) .
593: \end{equation}
594: %
595: In a completely analogous way one can find all possible neutrino mass
596: matrices consistent with $M^{\nu}_{ee}=0$ and with a maximal number of
597: non-zero entries. In addition to ${\cal M}_{\nu}^{(1)}$, the other
598: possibilities have the following structures
599: %
600: \begin{equation}\nonumber
601: {\cal M}_{\nu}^{(2)} =
602: \left(\begin{array}{cccc}
603: 0 & 0 & 0 \\
604: 0 & x & y \\
605: 0 & y & z
606: \end{array}\right) \hskip5mm
607: {\cal M}_{\nu}^{(3)} =
608: \left(\begin{array}{cccc}
609: 0 & x & 0 \\
610: x & 0 & y \\
611: 0 & y & 0
612: \end{array}\right)
613: %
614: \end{equation}
615:
616: \begin{equation}\nonumber
617: {\cal M}_{\nu}^{(4)} =
618: \left(\begin{array}{cccc}
619: 0 & 0 & y \\
620: 0 & x & 0 \\
621: y & 0 & 0
622: \end{array}\right) \hskip5mm
623: {\cal M}_{\nu}^{(5)} =
624: \left(\begin{array}{cccc}
625: 0 & x & 0 \\
626: x & 0 & 0 \\
627: 0 & 0 & y
628: \end{array}\right)
629: \end{equation}
630: As promised, none of these five matrices is consistent with the
631: data. ${\cal M}_{\nu}^{(1)}$ and ${\cal M}_{\nu}^{(3)}$ have
632: eigenvalues such that one $\Delta m^2 \equiv 0$. ${\cal M}_{\nu}^{(2)}$
633: leads to a solar angle $\theta_{\odot} \equiv 0$ and ${\cal M}_{\nu}^{(5)}$
634: predicts the atmospheric angle $\theta_{\rm Atm} \equiv 0$. And,
635: finally, ${\cal M}_{\nu}^{(4)}$ predicts the reactor angle to be
636: maximal and $\theta_{\odot} \equiv 0 \equiv \theta_{\rm Atm}$.
637:
638: As we have already shown, $\znbb$ decay must occur at certain
639: non-zero rate if $M^{\nu}_{ee}\neq 0$ and is forbidden if
640: $M^{\nu}_{ee}\equiv 0$. We can conclude that, with the
641: assumption that neutrinos indeed are Majorana particles, current
642: neutrino oscillation data show that neutrinoless double beta decay
643: must occur with a non-zero rate.
644:
645:
646:
647: \section{Conclusions}
648:
649: We have proven a generic set of one-to-one correspondence relations
650: between LFV processes with total lepton number violation (LFNV)
651: $\Delta L = \Delta (L_{\alpha} + L_{\beta}) = 2$ and the
652: corresponding entries of the Majorana neutrino mass matrix. These
653: relations are an extension of the well known ``Black Box" theorem,
654: establishing a fundamental relation between the amplitude of
655: neutrinoless double beta decay and the effective Majorana neutrino
656: mass, to the general case of arbitrary lepton number and lepton
657: flavor violating (LFNV) processes and the three generation Majorana
658: neutrino mass matrix. As a particularly interesting application of
659: this theorem we have shown that neutrino oscillation data imply that
660: neutrinoless double beta decay must occur at a certain non-zero
661: rate.
662:
663: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
664: \vskip15mm
665: \centerline{\bf Acknowledgments}
666:
667: This work was supported by the FONDECYT projects 1030244 and
668: 1030355, by Spanish grant FPA2005-01269 and by the European
669: Commission Human Potential Program RTN network MRTN-CT-2004-503369,
670: as well as the EU Network of Astroparticle Physics
671: (ENTApP) WP1. M.H. is supported by an MCyT Ramon y Cajal contract.
672:
673: %
674: \bigskip
675: %
676: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
677: %
678: \bibitem{Fukuda:1998mi}
679: Y.~Fukuda {\it et al.} [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration],
680: %``Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos,''
681: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81}, 1562 (1998)
682: [arXiv:hep-ex/9807003];
683: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9807003;%%
684: Q.~R.~Ahmad {\it et al.} [SNO Collaboration],
685: %``Direct evidence for neutrino flavor transformation from neutral-current
686: %interactions in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory,''
687: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 89}, 011301 (2002)
688: [arXiv:nucl-ex/0204008];
689: %%CITATION = NUCL-EX 0204008;%%
690: K.~Eguchi {\it et al.} [KamLAND Collaboration],
691: %``First results from KamLAND: Evidence for reactor anti-neutrino
692: %disappearance,''
693: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 90}, 021802 (2003)
694: [arXiv:hep-ex/0212021].
695: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0212021;%%
696:
697: %\cite{Maltoni:2004ei}
698: \bibitem{Maltoni:2004ei}
699: M.~Maltoni, T.~Schwetz, M.~A.~Tortola and J.~W.~F.~Valle,
700: %``Status of global fits to neutrino oscillations,''
701: New J.\ Phys.\ {\bf 6} (2004) 122
702: [arXiv:hep-ph/0405172]. (V5) in the archive provides updated numbers
703: taking into account all relevant data as of June 2006.
704: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0405172;%%
705:
706: \bibitem{PDG}
707: S.~Eidelman {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group],
708: %``Review of particle physics,''
709: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 592}, 1 (2004).
710: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B592,1;%%
711:
712: %
713: \bibitem{BB} J. Schechter and J.W.F. Valle, Phys.Rev. D {\bf 25}, 2951 (1982);
714: %
715: J.F. Nieves, Phys.Lett. B {\bf 147}, 375 (1984);
716: E. Takasugi, Phys.Lett. B {\bf 149}, 372 (1984);
717: B. Kayser, in Proc. of {\it the XXIII Int. Conf on High
718: Energy Physics,} ed. S. Loken (World Scientific
719: Singapore, 1987), p. 945;
720: S.P. Rosen, UTAPHY-HEP-4 and hep-ph/9210202.
721: %
722: \bibitem{SUSY-BB} M. Hirsch, H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus and S.G. Kovalenko,
723: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 398}, 311 (1997);
724: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9701253;%%
725: Phys.Rev. D {\bf 57}, 1947 (1998).
726: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707207;%%
727:
728:
729: \bibitem{LFV-rel} S. Kovalenko, I. Schmidt, arXiv:hep-ph/0512086.
730:
731: \bibitem{Hamilton-Kelly} G.A. Korn and Th.M. Korn, ``Mathematical Handbook
732: for Scientists and Engineers", McGraw-Hill, New York San Fransisco Toronto
733: London Sidney, 1968.
734:
735: %
736: \end{thebibliography}
737: %
738: \newpage
739:
740: \begin{figure}
741: \begin{center}
742: \epsfig{file=fig1.eps}\\
743: \caption{(a) Contribution of the $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$ entry of the
744: Majorana neutrino mass matrix to the effective LFNV vertex
745: $\Gamma_{\alpha\beta}$ and visa versa (b) contribution of
746: $\Gamma_{\alpha\beta} $ to $M^{\nu}_{\alpha\beta}$. }
747: \end{center}
748: \end{figure}
749:
750: \end{document}
751: