text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Brane world theories with large or infinite extra dimension provide insight into a number of problems of high energy physics, cosmology and possible relations between them . Those models may ultimately emerge as a part of a fundamental higher dimensional theory like string theory §§§A first attempt towards realizing them in string theory was proposed in .

The idea that our universe may have infinite extra dimensions was rejected for a long time as being incompatible with the observed 4D nature of gravity. Since gravity probes all dimensions, the force between objects localized on a $`3+1`$ dimensional hyper surface would be higher dimensional. Nevertheless, it was pointed out in  that, in the presence of a brane in 5D space, the ordinary 5D action of gravity is modified by a 4D Einstein-Hilbert on the brane. This term is compatible with all the symmetries of the theory and, therefore, can be generated by quantum corrections. This model, also known as the DGP (Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati) model, is an example of a theory of “brane induced gravity.” There, gravity is 4D below a certain scale $`r_c`$, ranging from galactic to horizon size. One major problem of this scenario, related to the existence of $`1/r_c^2`$ singularities in off-shell trilinear interactions of longitudinal gravitons , was pointed out in  (see also ). There, it was shown that radiative corrections to DGP become uncontrollably large at a very low energy scale, $`(L_{Pl}r_c^2)^{1/3}`$. This scale is essentially a cutoff beyond which the DGP model needs a UV completion. A similar problem should arise also in codimension greater than one, in analogy with the UV behavior of massive gravity . We will not address this problem in this paper, but we will concentrate on another, simpler one. Namely, the proper definition and regularization of induced gravity in codimension $`N>1`$.

Setting aside the strong-coupling problem just mentioned here, brane induced gravity in five dimensions is compatible with all present measurement and observations  and allows the scale of 5D quantum gravity $`M_{}`$ to be as low as $`10^3`$eV . Choosing $`r_c`$ to be the horizon radius, $`M_{}`$ is instead $`10^8`$eV. In higher codimension, $`M_{}`$ depends on the UV regularization scale, i.e. on the thickness of the brane. It is natural to choose this thickness to be $`O(1/M_{})`$; in this case $`M_{}`$ becomes $`O(10^3\mathrm{eV})`$.

The investigation of brane induced gravity in a space with more than one infinite extra dimension is interesting because that framework may provide a solution to the cosmological constant problem .

Brane induced gravity in space with $`N`$ transverse dimensions is described by the action:

$$S=M_{}^{2+N}d^4xd^NY\sqrt{G}_{4+N}+M_P^2d^4xd^NY\delta ^N(Y)\sqrt{g}_4,$$
(1.1)
where $`Y_i,i=1,..,N`$ are coordinates of $`N`$ infinite extra dimensions, and the brane is taken to be infinitesimally thin and located at the origin. $`_{4+N}`$ is the $`(4+N)`$D curvature, $`G_{MN}`$ is the $`(4+N)`$D metric, $`_4`$ is the 4D curvature constructed from the induced metric on the brane $`g_{\mu \nu }G_{MN}(y=0)\delta _\mu ^M\delta _\nu ^N`$. The philosophy behind brane induced gravity is that there are two scales in the theory. A scale for bulk gravity $`M_{}`$, and a much higher scale $`M_P`$, which characterizes the physics on the brane, i.e. the standard model and possible extensions like SUSY and GUTs. In order to obtain the correct value of Newtons constant, $`M_P`$ is taken to be $`10^{19}`$GeV.

Calculating the Green function and KK spectrum of (1.1) for the case $`N=1`$ is straightforward. The task is less clear for $`N>1`$ due to singularities that appear because of the zero thickness of the brane, and the resulting singularities in the Green functions for $`N>1`$ .

In this paper we study a simple regularization of the action Eq.(1.1). We propose to consider an action for $`(4+N)`$-dimensional gravity, reminiscent of the action for a dielectric in electrodynamics:

$$\frac{S}{M_{}^{2+N}}=ϵ_{\rho <\mathrm{\Delta }}d^{4+N}x\sqrt{G_{4+N}}_{4+N}+_{\rho >\mathrm{\Delta }}d^{4+N}x\sqrt{G_{4+N}}_{4+N},$$
(1.2)
with $`ϵ`$ a large dimensionless quantity (to be defined more precisely in the text), $`\rho `$ the radial coordinate in the $`N`$ transverse dimensions, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the width of the brane.

The brane in this theory is a thin “gravitational” dielectric. We will prove that, at distances smaller than a certain critical scale $`r_c`$ and for $`N>1`$, the gravitational interaction is mediated by a massive resonant graviton, whereas at larger distances one rediscovers $`(4+N)`$-dimensional gravitation.

We will also investigate smooth versions of this scenario. This is achieved by taking a varying “dielectric constant.” A scalar action of this kind was considered in , where it was pointed out that this kind of action can be realized physically in a dilaton gravity theory.

We thus consider the action of  generalized to arbitrary codimensions:

$$\frac{S}{M_{}^{2+N}}=d^4xd^NY\sqrt{G}\left[1+ϵ(\rho /\mathrm{\Delta })\right]_{4+N},$$
(1.3)
where $`(\rho /\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is the shape of the brane, which we take to depend only on the radial coordinate $`\rho `$ of the $`N`$ transverse dimensions. Again, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the width of the brane and $`ϵ`$ is a large, dimensionless parameter. The action Eq. (1.2) is obtained from Eq. (1.3) by choosing for the profile the step function $`=\theta (\rho \mathrm{\Delta })`$.

The action Eq. (1.3) describes a smooth 3-brane in a $`(4+N)`$-dimensional space. We will show that for sufficiently large values of $`ϵ`$, the effect of this brane “dielectric” constant is to convert the higher dimensional laws of gravity to four-dimensional laws at short distances.

On physical grounds one does not expect that the introduction of a “medium” (i.e. a brane) into the higher dimensional vacuum will result in the appearance of ghosts or tachyons and make the theory inconsistent. We will explicitly show this for the model (1.2). A brane with smoothly changing permeability, $`ϵ`$, can be thought of as a succession of as a sequence of small regions of constant $`ϵ`$, and hence the proof should also hold for smooth $``$.

The action Eq. (1.3) may provide a physical realization of Eq. (1.2). One can think of it as gravity coupled to a scalar that gets a non-constant vacuum expectation value, in the form of a topological defect (domain wall, string, monopole etc.).

This paper is organized as follows. In the first section we consider the scalar equivalent of action Eq. (1.2). We analytically calculate the scalar field resonances and show that they lead to the crossover distance between 4-dimensional and higher dimensional behavior for the force they mediate. We do that by studying the KK modes of the fields and prove that their coupling to the “dielectric” is determined by their wave function on the brane, for an appropriately chosen source. We will see that, generically, the coupling of heavy modes is strongly suppressed on the brane, and that the coupling of the modes is sharply peaked around a value, $`m_g`$, which is the mass of the effective 4-dimensional scalar “graviton.”

Next, we take a specific choice of a smooth brane and see that even there the scalar “graviton” is a massive resonance. Numerical results show that the behavior is the same as with the sharp-boundary dielectric. This shows that the regularization considered here is really shape independent.

In Section 4, we investigate the tensor structure of our regularized theory. We show that in the model (1.2) the 4 dimensional massive graviton propagates with the correct degrees of freedom - i.e. the mass term generated in this theory has the Pauli-Fierz form. There are no ghost or tachyons propagating in our system, unlike in the regularization proposed in .

Section 5 summarizes the findings of this paper.

As we previously mentioned, its was pointed out in  and  that the DGP theory suffers from strong-coupling problems, as is typical for theories with massive gravitons . Our regularization, of course, does not cure that problem.

## 2 A Dielectric Brane with a Sharp Boundary

We start by looking at a model in which we imagine a thin “dielectric” with a sharp boundary, and dielectric constant $`ϵ1`$ centered around the origin of the transverse $`N`$-dimensional space. The results are easily generalized to smooth branes (smooth variation of the “dielectric” constant) by taking that $`ϵ`$ changes in small steps. We are interested in whether this system exhibit a 4-dimensional behavior in a certain region of distance (or energy) scales.

Let us analyze this system first for the simplest case; a scalar field. Consider the following action ($`M=0,\mathrm{},3+N`$):

$$\frac{S}{M_{}^{2+N}}=ϵ_{\rho <\mathrm{\Delta }}d^{4+N}x(_M\mathrm{\Phi })^2+_{\rho >\mathrm{\Delta }}d^{4+N}x(_M\mathrm{\Phi })^2,$$
(2.4)
where we define the dimensionless quantity $`ϵ`$ as follows:

$$ϵ\mathrm{\Delta }^N=M_P^2/M_{}^{2+N},$$
(2.5)
a definition guaranteeing that in the limit $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$, $`ϵ\mathrm{\Delta }^N=\text{constant}`$, we approach the delta function limit. $`\rho `$ is the radial coordinate in the extra N-dimensional space. To find a solution to this system, we solve the equation of motion in the two different regions, and impose the matching conditions at the boundary of the sphere. One obtains:

$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ $`=`$ $`0,\rho <\mathrm{\Delta },`$ (2.6)
$`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }^o`$ $`=`$ $`0,\rho >\mathrm{\Delta },`$ (2.7)
and the boundary condition:

$`\mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }^o|_{\rho =\mathrm{\Delta }},`$
$`ϵ_\rho \mathrm{\Phi }^I`$ $`=`$ $`_\rho \mathrm{\Phi }^o|_{\rho =\mathrm{\Delta }}.`$ (2.8)
If we decompose the field in Kaluza-Klein modes, $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x,Y)=\sigma ^m(x)\varphi _m(Y)`$, $`\mathrm{}_4\sigma ^m=m^2\sigma ^m`$, the equations of motion and the boundary condition on the sphere reduce to equations for each one of the modes:

$$ϵ_\rho \varphi _m^I=_\rho \varphi _m^o|_{\rho =\mathrm{\Delta }.}$$
(2.9)
We must make some important remarks at this point. We are interested in the coupling of the KK modes to the matter on the brane, which is given by the convolution of the wave function and the matter profile $`\mathrm{\Psi }(y)`$.

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_m(0)=_{\rho <\mathrm{\Delta }}d^{4+N}Y\mathrm{\Psi }(Y)\mathrm{\Phi }_m(Y).$$
(2.10)
Now we can assume that the profile of the matter fields is spherically symmetric in the extra dimensions, $`\mathrm{\Psi }(Y)=\mathrm{\Psi }(\rho )`$. We can take that the standard model matter is given by zero modes of some fields with characteristic scale $`M_{SM}M_{}`$. Those zero modes have spherically symmetric profiles in the $`N`$ transverse dimensions. The excited states with nonzero angular momentum $`l`$ have masses which are naturally of order $`M_{SM}`$, so that they decouple from low energy physics. That is why we can assume that only KK modes with $`l=0`$ couple to the “spherically” symmetric brane matter. When calculating the tree level exchange, we are taking into account only a single tower of radial KK excitations.

Since we can assume that the matter profiles are sharply peaked around the origin, the coupling of the KK modes is approximately given by $`\varphi _m(0)`$.

We look at the case of codimension 1 first. The DGP model is perfectly regular for $`N=1`$, so we expect to discover the same results as obtained in . The general solution to the 5D equations of motion is (using plane wave normalization):

$`\varphi _m^I=A_m\mathrm{cos}(m\rho ),`$ (2.11)
$`\varphi _m^o=\mathrm{cos}(m\rho +\phi ).`$ (2.12)
The odd modes do not couple significantly to matter located on the brane, as explained in the previous paragraph. A straightforward calculation yields the following equation for $`\phi `$:

$$ϵ\mathrm{tan}(m\mathrm{\Delta })=\mathrm{tan}(m\mathrm{\Delta }+\phi ).$$
(2.13)
On the other hand $`A_m`$ is given by:

$$A_m\mathrm{cos}(m\mathrm{\Delta })=\mathrm{cos}(m\mathrm{\Delta }+\phi ).$$
(2.14)
Since we are interested in four-dimensional distances larger than the width of the brane, modes heavier than $`1/\mathrm{\Delta }`$ decouple. Later we will take that $`\mathrm{\Delta }1/M_{}`$. Since $`M_{}`$ is the cutoff of the effective field theory for the bulk gravity, we take $`m\mathrm{\Delta }1`$. Then we can approximate $`\mathrm{tan}(m\mathrm{\Delta })m\mathrm{\Delta }`$, so we find for $`A_m`$:

$$A_m\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+(ϵm\mathrm{\Delta })^2}}.$$
(2.15)
Using the definition of $`ϵ`$ (2.5), we see that $`ϵ=\frac{r_c}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, where $`r_c=\frac{M_P^2}{M_{}^3}`$. As explained above, the coupling of the Kaluza Klein mode of mass $`m`$ to the brane matter is given by:

$$|\varphi _m(\rho =0)|^2\frac{1}{1+(mr_c)^2}.$$
(2.16)
We see that we get a resonance, and that for $`mr_c^1`$ the coupling is strongly suppressed. The result is independent of the shape of the brane  and it is exactly what is found in the DGP model , as we anticipated. In ref  it was explained how this resonance leads to a $`1/r`$ potential for $`r<r_c`$ and to a $`1/r^2`$ potential for $`r>r_c`$.

Now consider for instance the case of codimension $`N=3`$. The theory with a delta function type brane is known to have singular behavior in this case. Let us apply our regularization prescription to this case. We expect a regularization ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$) dependent result in this case. The solution in the two regions is:

$`\varphi _m^I=A_m{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(m\rho )}{\rho }},`$
$`\varphi _m^o={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(m\rho +\phi )}{\rho }}.`$ (2.17)
The $`\varphi _m^I`$ solution is determined by asking for regularity at $`\rho =0`$. We keep only the $`l=0`$ terms in the expansion in spherical harmonics as explained before. Boundary conditions give the following equations:

$`A_m\mathrm{sin}(m\mathrm{\Delta })=\mathrm{sin}(m\mathrm{\Delta }+\phi ),`$ (2.18)
$`ϵ[m\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cot}(m\mathrm{\Delta })1]=m\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cot}(m\mathrm{\Delta }+\phi )1.`$ (2.19)
Expanding the cotangent, we get:

$$\mathrm{cot}(m\mathrm{\Delta }+\phi )\frac{1}{m\mathrm{\Delta }}\frac{ϵm\mathrm{\Delta }}{3}.$$
(2.20)
We obtain for the amplitude:

$$A_m\frac{1}{\sqrt{1\frac{2ϵ(m\mathrm{\Delta })^2}{3}+\frac{ϵ^2}{9}(m\mathrm{\Delta })^4}}$$
(2.21)
The amplitude squared is a sharply peaked function around its maximum, obtained at $`ϵ(m\mathrm{\Delta })^23`$. This gives, using our definition of $`ϵ`$, $`m_g^2\frac{M_{}^5\mathrm{\Delta }}{M_P^2}`$. The coupling of the modes, given by the wavefunction squared, is now $`\varphi _m(0)^2m^2A_m^2`$. We must emphasize that the fact that $`A_m`$ is singular at its maximum is due to our approximation. Indeed, the denominator receives corrections at $`O[(m\mathrm{\Delta })^2]`$, which gives $`\varphi _m(m_g)^2\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2}`$: a finite and $`ϵ`$-independent result. For KK modes with mass larger than $`m_g`$, the coupling to the brane is heavily suppressed. In this case we find that $`m_g`$ is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ dependent, as we anticipated before.

For $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, one might take the natural value $`\mathrm{\Delta }=M_{}^1`$, in which case the crossover distance and the graviton width become

$$r_cm_g^1\frac{M_P}{M_{}^2},\mathrm{\Gamma }_{m_g}\frac{M_{}^3}{M_P^2}.$$
(2.22)
This is exactly what is found for the regularized delta-function type brane theory regularized with higher derivative operators . In Fig. 1 we show the value of the wave function $`\varphi _m(0)`$ that is roughly the coupling of KK modes to the brane matter.

Figure 1: Wave functions of KK modes on the brane for $`ϵ=1000`$. The scalar “graviton” is a very sharp massive resonance. Inset: light modes are suppressed as $`m`$, giving rise to a $`1/r^4`$ potential at large distances.

In codimension $`N=3`$, the effective 4-D “graviton” is a very narrow resonance. The crossover from 4D to 7D behavior does not happen because of graviton “decay.” At large distances, the 4D “graviton” simply becomes too heavy to contribute to the tree-level exchange.

At large distances $`rr_c`$ we evaluate the potential from the coupling of light KK modes to brane matter. Their coupling is suppressed linearly $`\varphi _m(0)m`$ and the potential is:

$$V_{New}(r)_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{m^2}{M_{}^5}\frac{\mathrm{exp}(mr)}{r}𝑑m\frac{1}{M_{}^5}\frac{1}{r^4},rr_c.$$
(2.23)
This is just the 7D potential that appear at distances larger than the crossover distance.

At short distances, the Newtonian potential between two masses, due to exchange of KK modes, $`\varphi _m`$, is dominated by the exchange of the lowest-mass resonance. So we can approximate our integral by the area of the resonance peak. This gives:

$$V_{New}(r)_{m_g\mathrm{\Gamma }_{m_g}}^{m_g+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{m_g}}\frac{|\varphi _m(0)|^2}{M_{}^5}\frac{\mathrm{exp}(mr)}{r}𝑑m\frac{1}{M_P^2}\frac{1}{r}rr_c.$$
(2.24)
We see that the weak four dimensional gravity is due to the exchange of a massive resonant “graviton.”

## 3 A Smooth Dielectric Brane

In this section we study the 4D effective field theory of a scalar system in which the kinetic term of a bulk field is not homogeneous through extra dimensions. We shall obtain results qualitatively similar to the ones obtained in the previous Section. As we remarked earlier, a smooth “dielectric” constant may be achieved in dilaton gravity theories. The reader not interested in the details of this regularization can skip this section and proceed to Section 4, where the sharp-boundary approximation is applied to true spin-2 gravity.

The action that describes a scalar in a smoothly varying “dielectric” medium is

$$=M_{}^{2+N}f(Y_i)_A\mathrm{\Phi }^A\mathrm{\Phi }.$$
(3.25)
We take the localizing profile $`f(Y_i)`$ to be a spherically symmetric function of radial variable in $`N`$ extra dimensions. For the system Eq.(1.3) that we are studying the localizing profile $`f`$ is

$$f(\rho /\mathrm{\Delta })=1+ϵ(\rho /\mathrm{\Delta }).$$
(3.26)
As before, we are interested in the four dimensional spectrum of Eq. (3.25), and we decompose the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ into its Kaluza Klein modes

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x_\mu ,Y_i)=\underset{m}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_m(Y_i)\sigma _m(x_\mu ),\mathrm{}_4\sigma _m=m^2\sigma _m.$$
(3.27)
The differential equation for wave functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m(Y_i)`$ is

$$f(\rho )_N^2\mathrm{\Phi }_m+_Nf(\rho )_N\mathrm{\Phi }_m+f(\rho )m^2\mathrm{\Phi }_m=0.$$
(3.28)
Let us look at the Schrödinger equation for wave functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m`$ for a general profile $`f(\rho )`$ in the case $`N=2`$. The Laplacian and gradient in $`N=2`$ have both radial and angular parts, so the solutions can be separated as $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m(\rho ,\theta )=\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\rho )\mathrm{\Theta }_m(\theta )`$, where $`\theta `$ is the polar angle in the transverse plane. The scalar “graviton” couples to matter located on the string-like brane $`ϵ(\rho )`$. We assume, as explained in the previous section, that only the radial KK modes (no angular dependence) of our scalar field couple to matter density localized on the soliton $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\rho )T(x)`$. If we substitute

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_m(\rho )\frac{1}{\sqrt{\rho f(\rho )}}\varphi _m(\rho ),$$
(3.29)
we obtain a Schrodinger equation for modes $`\varphi _m`$

$$\varphi _m^{^{\prime \prime }}+\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{f^{\prime \prime }}{f}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{f^{}}{f}\left(\frac{1}{\rho }\frac{f^{}}{2f}\right)^2\frac{1}{4\rho ^2}\right)\varphi _m=m^2\varphi _m.$$
(3.30)
The modes are orthogonal, and the normalization integrals are:

$$f(\rho )\mathrm{\Phi }_n\mathrm{\Phi }_m\rho 𝑑\rho =\alpha _m\delta _{m,n},\frac{f(\rho )_\rho \mathrm{\Phi }_n_\rho \mathrm{\Phi }_m\rho d\rho }{f(\rho )\mathrm{\Phi }_n\mathrm{\Phi }_m\rho 𝑑\rho }=m^2.$$
(3.31)
The effective 4D action is:

$$=\frac{1}{2}M_{}^{2+N}\underset{m}{}\left(_\mu \sigma _m^\mu \sigma _mm^2\sigma _m^2\right)+\underset{m}{}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_m(0)}{M_{}^2\sqrt{\alpha _m}}\sigma _mT(x).$$
(3.32)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_m(0)`$ is the convolution of the wave function $`\mathrm{\Phi }_m(\rho )`$ and the matter profile $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\rho )`$

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_m(0)=\rho 𝑑\rho \mathrm{\Psi }(\rho )\mathrm{\Phi }_m(\rho ).$$
(3.33)
As in the previous section, this represents the coupling of KK graviton modes of mass $`m`$ to brane-localized matter, and we can approximate their couplings to be $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_m(0)\mathrm{\Phi }_m(0)`$.

Let us illustrate the main properties of the smooth brane model in $`N=2`$ transverse dimensions. Consider following profile:

$$=\frac{\mathrm{exp}(\rho ^2/\mathrm{\Delta }^2)}{\rho /\mathrm{\Delta }}.$$
(3.34)
This profile, multiplied by $`1/\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$ is a regularization of a delta function in $`N=2`$ dimensions. It is instructive to see what the spectrum is when one neglects the constant 1 in Eq. (3.26), and then treats the problem in some approximation. This is equivalent to taking the limit $`ϵ\mathrm{}`$. Taking $`f=1+ϵ`$ one finds in Eq. (3.30) the Schrödinger potential

$`V(\rho )=(1/\mathrm{\Delta })^2[(\rho /\mathrm{\Delta })^21].`$ (3.35)
This is the potential of a simple harmonic oscillator with the spectrum

$$m_n=\sqrt{2n}/\mathrm{\Delta },n=0,2,4,\mathrm{}$$
(3.36)
Here $`n`$ is an even integer, since the wave function and derivative at origin must be continuous, and we restricted ourselves to modes with no angular dependence. As a first approximation, we can say that the spectrum of the model in Eq. (1.3) consists of a tower of metastable modes with masses Eq. (3.36). A metastable zero mode (with mass exactly zero in the $`ϵ\mathrm{}`$ limit) will be responsible for the $`1/r`$ potentialIn fact, in the case $`N=1`$  this is an exact picture. The metastable mode of mass zero has a width $`1/ϵ`$, that results in the crossover distance $`r_c=M_P^2/M_{}^3`$ between four and five-dimensional gravity.. The Schrodinger potential resulting from the profile (3.26) reads

$`V(\rho )=(1/\mathrm{\Delta })^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(2\rho ^2)4ϵ[2\rho ^3\mathrm{exp}(\rho ^2)+ϵ(1+\rho ^2)]}{4[ϵ+\rho \mathrm{exp}(\rho ^2)]^2}}.`$ (3.37)
where $`\rho `$ is given in units of the brane thickness $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. This potential is shown in Fig. 2. The tunneling rate represents the decay width of the resonance and can be calculated in the WKB approximation

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_0\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\mathrm{exp}\left(2_{y_1}^{y_2}\sqrt{V}𝑑y\right),$$
(3.38)
here $`y_1,y_2`$ are the classical turning points. The width of the potential well is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. For large values of $`ϵ`$, we are well within the limit of validity of the WKB approximation, namely $`V^{}/(2V)^{3/2}1`$. The integral in Eq. (3.38) can be evaluated numerically. The dependence of the integral on $`ϵ`$ is (shown in a log-log plot in the insets in Fig. 2) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0^{N=2}1/\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ^{0.931}`$.

Figure 2: Potential Eq. (3.37) $`N=2`$ (solid line) together with potential Eq. (3.35) (dashed line). $`\rho `$ is in units of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the potentials are in units of $`1/\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$, while $`ϵ=10000`$. The inset shows the log-log plot of integral in Eq. (3.38) vs. $`ϵ`$.

Here, the difference from the expected result $`\mathrm{\Gamma }1/ϵ`$ is due to the WKB approximation. Assuming that the width of zero mode is $`1/ϵ`$, and by knowing that the zero mode is responsible for the 4D potential on the brane, we can calculate the value of the “Newton” constant $`G`$. The square of KK graviton coupling to matter (3.32) multiplied by the width of the zero mode resonance gives the cumulative effect of tree level exchange of continuum KK modes in the resonance. The effective 4D Newton constant is thus $`G_{N=2}\frac{1}{M_P^2}`$ for two choices of parameters: 1) $`\mathrm{\Delta }1/M_{}`$ and $`ϵ(M_P/M_{})^2`$; 2) $`\mathrm{\Delta }1/M_P`$, and $`ϵ(M_P/M_{})^4`$.

Four dimensional interactions between masses on the brane are mediated by the exchange of the zero mode resonance, of width $`1/\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ`$. The WKB approximation gives the value of Newton’s constant, however it misses most of the features of brane induced gravity in $`N=2`$ transverse dimensions. In particular, it doesn’t predict the transition between the four-dimensional and the higher-dimensional regime and it does not give the distance at which this transition happens (crossover distance). In the rest of this section, we will study the spectrum and the couplings of KK modes in brane induced gravity. We will see that the graviton resonance has a finite mass, and that its width is not $`1/ϵ`$. However, the correct value of the Newton constant is obtained by exchange of a massive graviton resonance.

The Schroedinger equation can be solved numerically, and its solution can be used to find the convolution of the KK wave functions with the wave function of localized matter. We will investigate the couplings of different modes in order to determine how the transition between four dimensional gravity and higher dimensional gravity occurs and what is the crossover distance.

The suppression of the KK graviton couplings to brane matter is shown in Fig. 3. We notice the peak positioned close to zero mass that is responsible for 4D gravity, as well as higher resonant modes at position of harmonic oscillator levels, with masses $`m=2/\mathrm{\Delta },\sqrt{8}/\mathrm{\Delta },etc.`$. Since we are interested in the large distance behavior, we show a magnified picture of a graviton resonance in log-log scale. The behavior is as follows: for the mode of mass zero, the coupling is zero. Then, the coupling rises as $`\sqrt{m}`$, with the peak positioned at $`m_g1/\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{ϵ}`$. To the right of the peak, the coupling dies off as $`1/m`$.

Figure 3: Dependence of the coupling of a KK mode on its mass for $`ϵ=5000`$. Peaks are at the location of resonant states of a harmonic oscillator with $`m=0,2,\sqrt{8}\mathrm{}`$. In the inset, a peak is shown at $`m_g1/\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{ϵ}`$, for $`ϵ=50000`$ both in normal (left) and log-log (right) scale. The “graviton” resonance is asymmetrical. To the left of the peak, it grows as $`\sqrt{m}`$, giving rise to a 6D potential at large distances, while to the right, it decays as $`1/m`$. The solid lines have coefficients 0.5 and -1, respectively.

We see that the graviton is a massive asymmetric resonance. The mass and the width of the resonance are

$$m_g\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{ϵ}},\mathrm{\Gamma }_{m_g}\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{ϵ}}.$$
(3.39)
Starting from zero mass, the resonance grows as

$$\varphi _m(0)\sqrt{ϵm}.$$
(3.40)
Now we can choose two possible sets of values for $`ϵ`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in order to reproduce the correct 4D Newton constant $`\mathrm{\Delta }1/M_{},ϵ(M_P/M_{})^2`$; or $`\mathrm{\Delta }1/M_P,ϵ(M_P/M_{})^4`$. Both choices give, for the crossover distance (inverse graviton mass) and the resonance width,

$$r_c^{N=2}m_g^1\frac{M_P}{M_{}^2},\mathrm{\Gamma }_{m_g}\frac{M_{}^2}{M_P}.$$
(3.41)
In the case of $`N=2`$, the graviton mass is roughly the same as the resonance width. On the brane, at distances $`rr_c`$, we can evaluate the “Newtonian” potential $`V_{New}`$ from the coupling given in Eq. (3.32), and the shape of the peak’s left ridge Eq. (3.40). The exchange of modes with mass $`m>1/r`$ contributes weakly, so one can integrate from zero to infinity. The coupling of graviton KK modes is proportional to $`\sqrt{m}`$, so the potential is given by:

$$V(r)_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{m}{M_{}^4}\frac{\mathrm{exp}(mr)}{r}𝑑m=\frac{1}{M_{}^4}\frac{1}{r^3},rM_P/M_{}^2.$$
(3.42)
This is just the 6D Newton’s potential that appear at distances larger than the crossover distance. At short distances, the exchange of a single massive-graviton resonance gives rise to the 4D Newton’s potential:

$$V(r)\frac{1}{M_P^2}\frac{1}{r},rM_P/M_{}^2.$$
(3.43)
Here we approximated the area under the square of the curve determining the coupling with twice the area on the left side of the peak.

## 4 The Spin 2 Case

After having studied in details the scalar theory, we can proceed with a true gravitational theory. Although the scalar gravity example captures the main features of brane-induced gravity, it is crucial to show that our regularization gives a consistent (4D) spin-2 theory. In particular, we have to show that no tachyons or ghosts propagate in our framework. In the effective 4D theory, the higher dimensional graviton is represented by four dimensional spin two states and a set of scalars. We should check that the masses given to those fields are not negative, and that the (massive) graviton propagates with the right number of degrees of freedom, which is assured if the mass term is of the Pauli-Fierz form.

The action to be considered is:

$$\frac{S}{M_{}^{2+N}}=ϵ_{\rho <\mathrm{\Delta }}d^{4+N}x\sqrt{G_{4+N}}_{4+N}+_{\rho >\mathrm{\Delta }}d^{4+N}x\sqrt{G_{4+N}}_{4+N}.$$
(4.44)
We can do an expansion in KK-modes for the gravitational field, analogous to the scalar case:

$$G_{MN}=\underset{m}{}G_{MN}^m(x)\varphi _m(Y).$$
(4.45)
The boundary conditions now are the well-known Israel matching conditions , which give an equation for the extrinsic curvature of the sphere which divides the $`4+N`$-dimensional space into two parts:

$$ϵK_{MN}^I(x,Y)=K_{MN}^o(x,Y)|_{\rho =\mathrm{\Delta }}.$$
(4.46)
These equations become particularly simple when we use Gaussian normal coordinates, since then the extrinsic curvature is given by $`K_{MN}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{G_{MN}}{\rho }`$. One sees that the boundary conditions for the KK modes are completely analogous to the scalar case equations treated in the previous section. This reduces the spin 2 case essentially to the spin 0 case. In the following equations we split the $`4+N`$-dimensional indices $`M,N,\mathrm{}`$ into 4D indices: $`\mu =0,\mathrm{},3`$, and transverse indices: $`i=4,\mathrm{},3+N`$. The $`\gamma _{ab}`$ are the fluctuations of the metric around the flat background and $`\gamma =\gamma _4+\gamma _N`$ is the trace of the fluctuation. The Einstein tensor is denoted by $`𝒢_{MN}`$.

$`𝒢_{i\mu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}^\lambda _i\gamma _{\mu \lambda }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}^j_i\gamma _{\mu j}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}^\lambda _\mu \gamma _{i\lambda }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}^j_\mu \gamma _{ij}`$ (4.47)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{}_4\gamma _{i\mu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{}_N\gamma _{i\mu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu _i\gamma ,`$
$`𝒢_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`^\lambda _{(\mu }\gamma _{\nu )\lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{}_4\gamma _{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu _\nu (\gamma _4+\gamma _N)+^i_{(\mu }\gamma _{\nu )i}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{}_N\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ (4.48)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _{\mu \nu }[^\lambda ^\rho \gamma _{\lambda \rho }(\mathrm{}_4+\mathrm{}_N)\gamma _4]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _{\mu \nu }[^i^j\gamma _{ij}+2^i^\mu \gamma _{i\mu }(\mathrm{}_4+\mathrm{}_N)\gamma _N].`$
We perform now a shift on $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$:

$$\gamma _{\mu \nu }\gamma _{\mu \nu }+\alpha \eta _{\mu \nu }\gamma _N.$$
(4.49)
After some algebra we get:

$`𝒢_{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`^\lambda _{(\mu }\gamma _{\nu )\lambda }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{}_4\gamma _{\mu \nu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu _\nu \gamma _4+^i_{(\mu }\gamma _{\nu )i}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{}_N\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$ (4.50)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _{\mu \nu }[^\lambda ^\rho \gamma _{\lambda \rho }(\mathrm{}_4+\mathrm{}_N)\gamma _4]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _{\mu \nu }[^i^j\gamma _{ij}(\mathrm{}_4+\mathrm{}_N)\gamma _N]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\alpha \eta _{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}_N\gamma _N.`$
Now we make the gauge choice:

$$^i\gamma _{\nu i}=0,^i^j\gamma _{ij}\alpha \mathrm{}_N\gamma _N=0.$$
(4.51)
For $`\alpha =\frac{1}{2}`$ we get the following equation of motion for the four dimensional part of the metric:

$$𝒢_{\mu \nu }^4\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}_N\gamma _{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{2}\eta _{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}_N\gamma _4=T_{\mu \nu }.$$
(4.52)
We assume that the matter distribution is confined to the brane, so only the 4D part of the energy momentum tensor is nonzero. If we contract this equation with $`^\mu `$, we get, by conservation of the matter energy-momentum tensor, and thanks to the Bianchi identities:

$$\mathrm{}_N(^\mu \gamma _{\mu \nu }_\nu \gamma _4)=0.$$
(4.53)
This equation gives us a constraint on $`\gamma _{\mu \nu }`$. Indeed, remembering that $`\mathrm{}_N`$ applied to the fields gives their (nonzero) masses, we can conclude:

$$^\mu \gamma _{\mu \nu }_\nu \gamma _4=0.$$
(4.54)
On the other hand, if we take the trace of Eq. (4.52), we get

$$\frac{3}{2}\mathrm{}_N\gamma _4=T.$$
(4.55)
This means that $`\gamma _4`$ is determined “algebraically” by T; $`\gamma _4=\frac{2}{3\mathrm{}_N}T`$. By algebraically, we mean that the equation for $`T`$ is local in four dimensions. Next, after a short calculation, the equations of motion for $`\gamma _{\mu i}`$ become:

$$\frac{1}{2}^\lambda F_{\lambda \mu }^i+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}_N\gamma _{\mu i}=0,$$
(4.56)
where $`F_{\mu \nu }^i`$ is the field strength of the 4-dimensional vectors $`\gamma _{\mu i}`$. This equation describes $`N`$ massive vector fields in four dimensions.

We are left with the equations of motion of the $`N^2`$ scalars $`\gamma _{ij}`$. One obtains:

$$\mathrm{}_4\gamma _{ij}+\mathrm{}_N\gamma _{ij}+_i_j\gamma +\eta _{ij}(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}_4\gamma _N+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}_N\gamma _N\mathrm{}_N\gamma _4)=0.$$
(4.57)
Observe that the divergence of $`𝒢_{ij}`$ is identically zero by virtue of the gauge choice $`^j\gamma _{ij}+\frac{1}{2}_i\gamma _N=0`$As it should be, using global energy-momentum conservation and remembering that the energy momentum tensor has only 4D components..

Using Eq. (4.55) we finally obtain:

$$\mathrm{}_4(\gamma _{ij}+\frac{1}{2}\eta _{ij}\gamma _N)+\mathrm{}_N(\gamma _{ij}+\frac{1}{2}\eta _{ij}\gamma _N)=(\eta _{ij}\mathrm{}_N_i_j)\frac{2}{3\mathrm{}_N}T.$$
(4.58)
Looking at equations (4.52) and (4.58), we see that all the mass terms have the correct form, with $`m^2=\mathrm{}_N`$. In particular, the spin-2 mass terms have the Pauli-Fierz form. This is of course what we expect in a generic Kaluza-Klein reduction . We can thus be sure that in our regularization, no ghost propagates.

## 5 Conclusions

In this paper we have proposed a well-defined regularization scheme for “brane-induced” gravity in codimension $`N>1`$. At its simplest, the scheme replaces an infinitely thin brane with a “dielectric” sphere of radius $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in the transverse space. This regularization allows for a simple analytic computation of the spectrum of massive resonances, and it accounts simply for the tensor structure of gravity. Unlike other regularizations already existing in the literature, ours introduces neither ghosts nor tachyons. In this respect we must notice an important point. Our definition of the 4D graviton involves a shift \[see Eq. (4.49)\], which is the linearized version of a conformal rescaling. By doing this shift, we couple the (scalar) internal components of the metric fluctuation to the trace of the matter stress-energy tensor, even though it only has 4D components. In other words, extra scalar, dilaton-like degrees of freedom couple to matter. This is not a disaster per se, because even in their absence, linearized massive gravity propagates an extra spin-zero degree of freedom . Their presence only worsens the vDVZ discontinuity. In the regularization of ref. , instead, when the regularization parameter is removed, one recovers massless 4D gravity. This is achieved at the price of introducing light ghosts into the system.

We notice also that in codimension $`N=1`$, no extra scalar propagate, as shown by Eq. (4.58).

Finally, our “sharp” regularization can be easily extended to cover the case of vector fields in $`4+N`$ dimensions. The smooth version of our regularization may also be realized in a physical setting by coupling $`4+N`$ dimensional gravity to a scalar field which admits a soliton solution (kink etc.)

### Acknowledgments

M.K. would like to thank G. Dvali for very useful communications. J.-W.R. would like to thank F. Nitti for useful discussions. M.P. is supported in part by NSF grant PHY-0070787.


format: text

text:
# Radiative Electroweak Symmetry-Breaking Revisited

## Abstract

In the absence of a tree-level scalar-field mass, renormalization-group methods permit the explicit summation of leading-logarithm contributions to all orders of the perturbative series within the effective potential for $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ electroweak symmetry. This improvement of the effective potential function is seen to reduce residual dependence on the renormalization mass scale. The all-orders summation of leading logarithm terms involving the dominant three couplings contributing to radiative corrections is suggestive of a potential characterized by a plausible Higgs boson mass of $`216`$ GeV. However, the tree potential’s local minimum at $`\varphi =0`$ is restored if QCD is sufficiently strong.

Over thirty years ago, S. Coleman and E. Weinberg 1  demonstrated how spontaneous symmetry breaking may occur through radiative corrections to a conformally-invariant Lagrangian in which no quadratic mass term appears. Such symmetry breaking, in which the scalar-field vacuum expectation value $`\varphi `$ is the only source of scale, is of particular relevance for the spontaneous breakdown of $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ electroweak symmetry, which necessarily requires a mechanism within any embedding theory to keep any such quadratic mass term minimally contaminated by the unification mass scale— the absence of such a mass term implies that this mechanism is exact sher . We emphasize that such a mechanism, whether exact or nearly so, is a necessary component of the Standard Model, though the nature of this mechanism (possibly conformal invariance) remains unknown. In the absence of an explicit scalar-field mass term (i.e. the “exact mechanism”), the one-loop (1L) effective potential for $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ gauge theory is given by 1

$$V_{eff}^{(1L)}=\frac{\lambda \varphi ^4}{4}+\varphi ^4\left[\frac{12\lambda ^23g_t^2}{64\pi ^2}+\frac{3(3g_2^4+2g_2^2g^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}}+g^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}4}})}{1024\pi ^2}\right]\left(\mathrm{log}\frac{\varphi ^2}{\mu ^2}\frac{25}{6}\right).$$
(1)
There are four distinct coupling constants appearing in Eq. (1), the $`SU(2)`$ coupling constant $`g_2`$, the $`U(1)`$ coupling constant $`g^{}`$, the $`t`$-quark Yukawa coupling constant $`g_t`$, and the quartic scalar-field self-interaction coupling constant $`\lambda `$. The radiative symmetry breaking scenario of Ref. 1 , which preceded the discovery of the massive top quark, led to a value for $`\lambda `$ proportional to $`g_2^4`$ and a scalar field mass of order $`10`$ GeV. The presence of a large Yukawa couplant \[$`g_t^21.0>>g_2^2,g_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$\] spoils this scenario; the $`𝒪(g_t^2)`$ value of $`\lambda `$ required for radiative symmetry breaking would be so large that subsequent leading logarithm terms \[e.g. $`\lambda ^3\varphi ^4\mathrm{log}^2(\varphi ^2/\mu ^2)`$\] would be too large to neglect.

In the present work, we explicitly sum all such leading logarithm terms within the full perturbative series for the effective potential 1a  to examine the viability of radiative electroweak symmetry breaking. We find the potential is minimized for a Higgs mass of $`216`$ GeV, and observe some evidence that this value may be stable after including contributions from subsequent-to-leading logarithms.

If we denote the dominant Standard Model couplants as $`xg_t^2/4\pi ^2`$, $`y\lambda /4\pi ^2`$, and $`zg_3^2/4\pi ^2`$ \[QCD contributes to leading logarithms past one-loop order\], which are much larger than corresponding couplants for $`g_2`$, $`g^{}`$ and non-$`t`$-quark Yukawa couplings, this series is of the form $`V_{eff}=\pi ^2\varphi ^4C_{n,k,\mathrm{},p}x^ny^kz^{\mathrm{}}L^p`$, where $`L(\mu )\mathrm{log}[\varphi ^2(\mu )/\mu ^2]`$. The leading logarithms in this series are those terms one degree lower in the power of the logarithm $`L`$ than in the aggregate power of the couplants $`\{x,y,z\}`$,

$$V_{LL}=\pi ^2\varphi ^4S_{LL}=\pi ^2\varphi ^4\left\{\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x^n\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}y^k\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}z^{\mathrm{}}C_{n,k,\mathrm{}}L^{n+k+\mathrm{}1}\right\},(C_{0,0,0}=0).$$
(2)
The series $`S_{LL}`$ is determined entirely by one-loop contributions to the renormalization-group (RG) equation, i.e., by those contributions that either lower the power of $`L`$ by one or raise the aggregate power of the couplants by one 2 ; sher :

$$\left[2\frac{}{L}+\left(\frac{9}{4}x^24xz\right)\frac{}{x}+\left(6y^2+3yx\frac{3}{2}x^2\right)\frac{}{y}\frac{7}{2}z^2\frac{}{z}3x\right]S_{LL}(x,y,z,L)=0.$$
(3)
In eq. (3), the coefficients of $`\frac{}{x}`$, $`\frac{}{y}`$, $`\frac{}{z}`$ are respectively the one-loop beta-functions for $`x,y,z`$ (where $`\beta _x=\mu \frac{dx}{d\mu }`$); the final term in eq. (3) is four times the one-loop scalar field anomalous dimension. For example, the leading coefficients $`C_{0,1,0}=1`$, $`C_{1,0,0}=C_{0,0,1}=0`$, follow from the $`\lambda \varphi ^4/4`$ tree-order potential. Upon substitution of Eq. (2) into Eq. (3), one easily sees that $`C_{0,2,0}=3`$, $`C_{2,0,0}=3/4`$, and that the remaining four degree-2 coefficients $`C_{i,j,2ij}`$ equal zero, leading to a recovery of the $`\{\lambda ^2,g_t^2\}`$-contributions to the potential (1).

We find it convenient to express the series (2) in the form

$$S_{LL}=yF_0(w,\zeta )+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x^nL^{n1}F_n(w,\zeta )$$
(4)
where $`w13yL`$ and $`\zeta zL`$, and where

$$F_n(w,\zeta )=\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}C_{n,\mathrm{},k}\left(\frac{1w}{3}\right)^{\mathrm{}}\zeta ^k\underset{k=0}{\overset{n+1}{}}f_{n,k}(\zeta )\left[\frac{w1}{w}\right]^k.$$
(5)
By using Eq. (3) to obtain sequential partial differential equations relating $`F_0=1/w`$ to $`F_1(w,\zeta )`$ and $`F_2(w,\zeta )`$, we are able to solve explicitly for these quantities. For $`p3`$ one can show from Eq. (3) that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 0=& \left(\left[(7\zeta ^2/2)\frac{d}{d\zeta }+4p\zeta \right]+\left[2\zeta \frac{d}{d\zeta }+2(p1)+2k\right]\right)f_{p,k}(\zeta )\hfill \\ & \left[(9p21)/4+3k\right]f_{p1,k}(\zeta )+3(k1)f_{p1,k1}(\zeta )\hfill \\ & \left[9(k1)/2\right]f_{p2,k1}(\zeta )+9kf_{p2,k}(\zeta )\left[9(k+1)/2\right]f_{p2,k+1}(\zeta ),\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
where $`f_{p,k}0`$ when $`k<0`$ or $`k>p+1`$, and where $`f_{p,k}(0)`$ is finite.

We now examine possible radiative spontaneous symmetry breaking for the RG-improved effective potential $`V_{eff}(\varphi )=\pi ^2\varphi ^4(S_{LL}+K)`$, where $`K`$ is a finite $`\varphi ^4`$ counterterm coefficient. As in Ref. 1 , we choose $`\mu =\varphi =v`$ \[$`L=\mathrm{log}\left(\varphi ^2(v)/v^2\right)`$\], in which case $`V_{eff}^{}(v)=0`$. The counterterm $`K`$ facilitates the fourth-derivative renormalization condition $`V_{eff}^{(4)}(v)=V_{tree}^{(4)}(v)=24\pi ^2y(=6\lambda )`$. For any one-loop effective potential of the form $`V_{eff}^{(1L)}(\varphi )=\pi ^2\varphi ^4\left[y+\sigma L+K\right]`$, this fourth-derivative condition ensures that $`K=25\sigma /6`$, as in Eq. (1). For our RG-improved potential, we find it convenient to expand $`S_{LL}`$ in powers of the logarithm $`L`$:

$$S_{LL}=y+B\mathrm{log}\left(\frac{\varphi ^2}{v^2}\right)+C\mathrm{log}^2\left(\frac{\varphi ^2}{v^2}\right)+D\mathrm{log}^3\left(\frac{\varphi ^2}{v^2}\right)+E\mathrm{log}^4\left(\frac{\varphi ^2}{v^2}\right)+\mathrm{},$$
(7)
We then obtain from Eqs. (3) and (6) an exact determination of terms up to $`𝒪(L^4)`$ within Eq. (7):

$$B=3y^2\frac{3}{4}x^2,$$
(8)
$$C=9y^3+\frac{9}{4}xy^2\frac{9}{4}x^2y+\frac{3}{2}x^2z\frac{9}{32}x^3,$$
(9)
$$D=27y^4+\frac{27}{2}xy^3\frac{3}{2}xy^2z+3x^2yz\frac{225}{32}x^2y^2\frac{23}{8}x^2z^2+\frac{15}{16}x^3z\frac{45}{16}x^3y+\frac{99}{256}x^4,$$
(10)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill E=& 81y^5+\frac{243}{4}xy^49xy^3z+\frac{45}{32}xy^2z^2\frac{69}{16}x^2yz^2\frac{135}{8}x^2y^3+\frac{531}{64}x^2y^2z\hfill \\ & +\frac{345}{64}x^2z^3\frac{603}{256}x^3z^2+\frac{207}{32}x^3yz\frac{8343}{512}x^3y^2\frac{459}{512}x^4z+\frac{135}{512}x^4y+\frac{837}{1024}x^5.\hfill \end{array}$$
(11)
The procedure for obtaining the Higgs mass, as described below, is insensitive to any terms in the leading-logarithm series (7) past $`𝒪(L^4)`$. Consequently, Eqs. (8)–(11) are sufficient to determine the entire leading logarithm contribution to the scalar field mass to *all* (contributing) orders in $`\{x,y,z\}`$. These equations are also obtainable via the method-of-characteristics methodology of Bando et al bando , which has been implemented in conventional (non-radiative) Standard Model symmetry breaking by Quiros and collaborators quiros . The conditions $`V_{eff}^{}(v)=0`$ and $`V_{eff}^{(4)}(v)=24\pi ^2y`$ respectively imply that $`y=B/2K`$ and $`K=[\frac{25}{6}B+\frac{35}{3}C+20D+16E]`$. Given the phenomenological Standard Model values for the vacuum expectation value $`v=246GeV`$, the $`t`$-quark Yukawa couplant $`x(v)=1/4\pi ^2`$, the QCD couplant $`z(v)=\alpha _s(v)/\pi =0.0329`$, as evolved from $`\alpha _s(M_z)=0.120`$ 3 , we find these constraints taken together constitute a degree-5 equation for the scalar-field self-interaction couplant $`y`$. The only real positive-$`y`$ solution that yields a positive second derivative (hence, a local minimum) is $`y=0.0538`$. Once $`y`$ is determined, then $`B`$, $`C`$, $`D`$ and $`E`$ are also numerically determined. To present order, we can approximate the Higgs field propagator pole with the second derivative of the effective potential at $`\varphi =v`$. One then finds $`m_\varphi ^2V_{eff}^{\prime \prime }(v)=8\pi ^2v^2(B+C)=(216`$ $`\mathrm{GeV})^2`$.

In assessing the viability of this result, it is of interest to consider what one would similarly obtain from the one-loop effective potential augmented by a $`\pi ^2\varphi ^4K`$ counterterm. Such a potential is seen to correspond to Eq. (7) with $`B`$ as given by Eq. (8), but with $`C=D=E=0`$. The conditions $`V^{}(v)=0`$, $`V^{(4)}(v)=24\pi ^2y`$ are then seen to lead to a solution $`y=0.093`$, $`m_\varphi =350`$ GeV. Such a mass is well outside the $`𝒪(200\mathrm{GeV})`$ bound on $`m_\varphi `$ from corrections to electroweak theory 3 . Moreover, it is easy to demonstrate that this value for $`y`$ is too large to be meaningful. The contributions of $`y`$ alone to the $`\beta `$-function for its own evolution correspond to the $`\beta `$-function of an $`O(4)`$ symmetric scalar field theory, which is known to five-loop order 4 :

$$\underset{\stackrel{x0}{z0}}{lim}\mu \frac{dy}{d\mu }=6y^2\frac{39}{2}y^3+187.85y^42698.3y^5+47975y^6+\mathrm{}$$
(12)
If $`y=0.093`$, terms of this series increase after the second term, indicative of a failure to converge. By contrast, terms of the series (12) decrease if $`y=0.0538`$. Similar results characterize this same scalar field theory’s anomalous dimension, whose terms decrease monotonically when $`y=0.0538`$, but fail to do so when $`y=0.093`$. Of course it is of greater interest to estimate possible corrections to our result to 2-loop order. For our parameter values $`x=0.0253`$, $`y=0.0538`$, $`z=0.0329`$, the two loop contributions to the Standard Model beta functions and anomalous scalar-field dimension provide corrections no larger than $`17\%`$ of their one-loop counterparts. This provides us with further confidence that the $`216`$GeV Higgs mass prediction will be stable upon summation of subsequent next-to-leading logarithms.

In Figure 1 we compare the residual scale- ($`\mu `$-) dependence of $`V_{eff}(\varphi )=\pi ^2\varphi ^4\left(S_{LL}+K\right)`$ obtained via Eqs. (8)–(11) to that of the one-loop effective potential discussed in the preceding paragraph. Such dependence in both potentials occurs explicitly through $`L(\mu )`$ and implicitly through couplants whose one-loop evolution in $`\mu `$ is anchored to the $`\mu =v`$ initial values given above (e.g. $`x(v)=1/4\pi ^2`$). The $`K\varphi ^4`$ counterterms in both potentials are each assumed to be RG-invariant ($`K(v)\varphi ^4(v)`$), since the subleading logarithm contributions ultimately devolving from such terms are uncontrolled by Eq. (3). For $`\mu =\{v/2,v,2v\}`$, the curves exhibit the dependence of the potentials on the RG-invariant initial value $`\varphi (v)`$ for the evolution of $`\varphi (\mu )`$ \[$`(\mu /\varphi )d\varphi /d\mu =3x(\mu )/4`$\]. Figure 1 shows that summation of leading logarithms substantially reduces the residual scale dependence of the effective potential. Moreover, if we assume such scale dependence to be indicative of next-order corrections, we can expect only modest departures from the $`m_\varphi =216\mathrm{GeV}`$ prediction at $`\mu =v`$: $`m_\varphi `$ varies from 208 GeV at $`\mu =v/2`$ to 217 GeV at $`\mu =2v`$. We find such uncertainties in $`m_\varphi `$ to dominate over much smaller ones deriving from (Standard-Model) uncertainties in the couplant values $`x(v)`$ and $`z(v)`$. We have also verified by numerical calculation of the RG equations that the method-of-characteristics methodology of Bando et al bando ; quiros  yields the same results for the effective potential and the Higgs mass to within a value of 0.2%.

Note also that the scalar field mass of order $`216\mathrm{GeV}`$ we obtain from the aggregate contribution of leading logarithms to the purely-radiative breakdown of $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ electroweak symmetry is accompanied by a scalar-field interaction couplant $`y=0.0538`$ substantially larger than that anticipated from conventional spontaneous symmetry breaking (deriving from a potential with an initially-negative quadratic term), in which a $`216\mathrm{GeV}`$ Higgs particle would necessarily correspond to a value $`y=\lambda /4\pi ^2=m_\varphi ^2/(8\pi ^2\varphi ^2=0.0097`$. If electroweak symmetry-breaking is purely radiative, then y-sensitive processes such as the $`W^+W^{}ZZ`$ scattering cross-section nierste  will necessarily be larger than anticipated from conventional spontaneous symmetry breaking. Consequently, if an $`𝒪(200\mathrm{GeV})`$ Higgs were discovered, a clear signal of radiative symmetry breaking would be a corresponding order-of-magnitude-or-more enhancement of $`\sigma \left(W^+W^{}ZZ\right)`$ over the value expected from such a Higgs mass.

One of the motivations for summing leading logarithms is to ascertain the negative large-logarithm behaviour of the effective potential, behaviour corresponding to the zero-field limit of the potential. We do not consider positive large-logarithm behaviour because of the intervening Landau singularity at $`w=0`$ \[Eqs. (4) and (5)\], corresponding to $`\varphi (v)22v`$ 6ex . When $`|L|`$ is very large, we find that $`yF_01/3L`$, $`xF_12(x/z)/L`$, and $`x^2LF_23(x^2/z^2)/2L`$. The large-$`|L|`$ behaviour of subsequent terms in the series (4) can be extracted by noting that the first term on the RHS of Eq. (6) dominates the second term when the magnitude of $`\zeta (=zL)`$ is large, and that $`F_p(w,\zeta )_{k=0}^{p+1}f_{p,k}(\zeta )`$ in this large-$`|L|`$ limit $`\left[\left(\frac{w1}{w}\right)1\right]`$. One then finds after a little algebra that when $`|\zeta |`$ is large,

$$\left[(7\zeta ^2/2)\frac{d}{d\zeta }+4p\zeta \right]F_p=\frac{9p21}{4}F_{p1},p3.$$
(13)
In the large $`|\zeta |`$ limit, we find that $`F_2_{k=0}^3f_{2,k}(\zeta )(3/2)\zeta ^2`$. Eq. (13) implies that $`F_pf_p\zeta ^p`$, where the numerical factors $`f_p`$ follow from $`f_2=3/2`$ via the recursion relation $`f_p=(9p21)f_{p1}/2p`$. Note that $`x^pL^{p1}F_p(w,\zeta )\left(\frac{x}{z}\right)^pf_p/L`$ in the large-$`|L|`$ limit; each term in the series (4) is inversely proportional to $`L`$ when $`|L|`$ is large. Moreover, if $`(x/z)<2/9`$, the above recursion relation for $`f_p`$ can be utilized to obtain the closed-form series summation $`S_{LL}\left(\frac{1}{3L}\right)\left(1\frac{9x}{2z}\right)^{4/3}`$. For sufficiently strong QCD, this result implies that a Standard Model effective potential based upon a massless tree potential exhibits a local *minimum*, rather than a maximum, at $`\varphi =0`$ (i.e. $`L\mathrm{}`$). Such a conclusion, however, does not follow if $`x/z`$ is outside its radius of convergence (i.e. if $`x/z>2/9`$), as is the case for the empirical standard model \[$`x(v)1/4\pi ^2`$, $`z(v)=\alpha _s(v)/\pi 0.033`$\].

Recent work 5  based upon Padé approximants constructed from the QCD $`\beta `$-function series suggests for up to five light flavours that the QCD couplant may exhibit the same double-valued behaviour known to characterize $`N=1`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills (SYM) theory, in which coexisting strong-couplant and (asymptotically-free) weak-couplant phases evolve toward a common infrared attractive point 6 . If the strong phase is sufficiently strong ($`x/z<2/9`$), one can envision a scenario in which the $`\varphi =0`$ local minimum of preserved $`SU(2)\times U(1)`$ symmetry is upheld by the strong phase of QCD, but is transformed into a symmetry breaking minimum at $`\varphi =v`$  if QCD is in its weak phase. Since for the latter case the minimum at $`\varphi =v`$ $`(V(v)<0)`$ is deeper than the $`\varphi =0`$ $`(V(0)=0)`$ minimum occurring when QCD is in its strong phase, the weak phase of QCD is seen to be the preferred one. Thus, if QCD is characterized by two coexisting phases, as is the case for SYM 6 , the asymptotic freedom of QCD may be linked to the radiative breakdown of electroweak symmetry.

###### Acknowledgements.

We are grateful to V.A. Miransky for useful discussions, and to the Natural Sciences & Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for financial support.