Paper detail

Who's Afraid of the Supersymmetric Dark? The Standard Model vs Low-Energy Supergravity

Use of supergravity equations in astronomy and late-universe cosmology is often criticized on three grounds: (i) phenomenological success usually depends on the supergravity form for the scalar potential applying at the relevant energies; (ii) the low-energy scalar potential is extremely sensitive to quantum effects involving very massive particles and so is rarely well-approximated by classical calculations of its form; and (iii) almost all Standard Model particles count as massive for these purposes and none of these are supersymmetric. Why should Standard Model loops preserve the low-energy supergravity form even if supersymmetry is valid at energies well above the electroweak scale? We use recently developed tools for coupling supergravity to non-supersymmetric matter to estimate the loop effects of heavy non-supersymmetric particles on the low-energy effective action, and provide evidence that the supergravity form is stable against integrating out such particles (and so argues against the above objection). This suggests an intrinsically supersymmetric picture of Nature where supersymmetry survives to low energies within the gravity sector but not the visible sector (for which supersymmetry is instead non-linearly realized). We explore the couplings of both sectors in this picture and find that the presence of auxiliary fields in the gravity sector makes the visible sector share many features usually attributed to linearly realized supersymmetry although (unlike for the MSSM) a second Higgs doublet is not required for all Yukawa couplings to be non-vanishing and changes the dimension of the operator generating the Higgs mass. We discuss the naturalness of this picture and some of the implications it might have when searching for dark-sector physics.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.