1. New Physics Phases in CPV The Case in Present Tense January 19, 2004

2. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 2 Intro: raison d’etre for B Factories (Abelian) Flavor Symmetry and SUSY S  K s S  ’K s S K s    K Accounting for S  K s, S  ’K s, S K s   & |A ⊥ (  K * )| 2 B s Mixin Situation for B s Mixing S K * 0 ( K s    )  SuperB Crisp Measurement: S K * 0 ( K s    )  Conclusion see Kolda’s talk for more on NP CPV NP CPV Phases in Present Tense

3. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 3 Intro: raison d’etre for B Factories

4. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 4 Events leading up to B Factories Carter & Sanda, Bigi & Sanda 1979-80Carter & Sanda, Bigi & Sanda — — Neat Mechanism/Method 1983Long  B 1987Large  m B d [ARGUS] 1989Asymmetric e + e − [Oddone] 1993-94“David & Goliath”... B Factories Built on Clean Measure of sin 2  1  Raison d’etre accomplished 2001

5. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 5 Totsuka sensei’s Charge to Super-KEKB... Considering all these research programs other than the B factory, the Considering all these research programs other than the B factory, the funding for the luminosity upgrade of a B-factory is not an easy task for KEK, and for other laboratories, too. All I can say at this point is that I need more good results like the recent one in order to impress MEXT (funding agency) about how important the super-B factory program is. One thing I like to hear from you is, though it is a nasty question, One thing I like to hear from you is, though it is a nasty question, what you will do once a consensus is made to globally build the LC; whether you will join the LC or you will still be 100% involved in the super-B factory.... super-B factory.... A no-nonsense guy! BELLE’s new result on asymmetry in the B   Ks Theme “David & Goliath” Redux ? Large NP CPV Phase w/ Crisp Measurement HL5 @ Izu ’n I agree w/ him...

6. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 6 Large NP CPV Phase w/ Crisp Measuremen t S  K s Sign Anomaly  K * Polarization Anomaly “Belle” SK*0(Ks)SK*0(Ks)SK*0(Ks)SK*0(Ks) “BaBar” Confession: We’ve been saying for years “ICPV in B   K s is a great place to search for New Physics”. It was lip service. The mindset was “Precision Tests”. So, S  K s < 0, for 2nd year, came as a shocker. Kagan (SSI 2002)“P Conserving”... Chua, WSH, Nagashima 03WSH, Nagashima (to appear)

7. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 7 Still 2.7  from 0.73 (~ 2002) S  K s Sign Anomaly sin 2  1eff (  K S ) =  0.39±0.41 2002 sin 2  1eff (  K S ) =  0.15±0.33 2003 158 fb  1 : 250 fb  1 : Large Large Effective s-b Mixing New New CPV Phase Right-handed Right-handed Interaction Large,NewPhysics, Large, New Physics, b → s CPV Effect [ to get sin 2  1eff (  ’ K S ) ~ sin 2  1 ] Flavor SUSY Call for Synergies of Flavor & SUSY ? [Belle/BaBar Average View]

8. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 8 Penguins (Vertex Loops) S  K S = sin 2  1 SM (KM) Prediction SUSY Possible SUSY FCNC/CPV Loop Real 

9. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 9 PRL 0303020  K * Polarization Anomaly Large,NewPhysics, Large, New Physics, b → s Effect Needed?

10. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 10 Flavor SUSY (approximate) Abelian Flavor Symmetry ⊕ SUSY Right-handed s-b Mixing AFSHas Right-handed s-b Mixing Right-handed Dynamics SUSYBrings in Right-handed Dynamics AFS Model Pre-existed Nir-Seiberg, PLB’93; Leurer-Nir-Seiberg, NPB’94 More Definite, yet Generic, Model Context ⇨ Constraints ⇨ Predictions Has All Ingredients Framework Raison d’etrefor Super B ? Raison d’etre for Super B ? Crisp Measurement! Have Advantage vs Hadronic Machines SK*0(Ks)SK*0(Ks)SK*0(Ks)SK*0(Ks) & Theme w/ CPV Phase

11. Sept. 24, 2003 @ HL05George W.S. Hou 11 (Abelian) Flavor Symmetry and SUSY

12. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 12 R.H. Flavor Mass/Mixing Hierarchy & R.H. Flavor Sector Or, under Abelian Flavor Symmetry Nir-Seiberg, PLB’93; Leurer-Nir-Seiberg, NPB’94 Prominent r.-h. elements Commuting Charges mass V CKM no r.h. force Ansatz

13. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 13 R.H. Flavor Mass/Mixing Hierarchy & R.H. Flavor Sector Or, under Abelian Flavor Symmetry Nir-Seiberg, PLB’93; Leurer-Nir-Seiberg, NPB’94 Prominent r.-h. elements Chua-WSH, PRL’01: Because of FCNC, Need 4 Texture Zeros (decouple s flavor) Arhrib-Chua-WSH ’01: Decouple d flavor Commuting Charges Ansatz Alternative Picture: Chang, Masiero, Murayama GUT s-b Focus: s-b no r.h. force

14. TeV ~ 4  M W decouple 1st gen. Tension hierarchy scale

15. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 15 Right-handed Quarks Inert in SM S  Right-handed Squarks SUSY RR Sector Impact b ⇄ s SUSY thru SUSY also important Assume

16. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 16 Level Splitting by Large Mixing  Drive One State Light 100 GeV Possible  1 CP Phase  Focus on 200 GeV strange-beauty squark

17. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 17 Strange-beauty Squark TeV Scale SUSY w/ Strange-beauty Squark Some Remarks Fine-tuning to  -   to get light ? Fine Fine tuning! Why TeV Scale SUSY? Large Flavor Violation (s-b) ⇔ Stringent Low Energy Constraints - even w/ d decoupled; - all other SUSY partners a “nuisance”:), so pushed high “Light” Particles: ≲ 200 GeV ≳ (≲?) 500 GeV likely LSP?   V cb    V ub  ⊕  phase Not MSSM... Not MSSM...

18. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 18 B   K s,  ’K s Rates b  s  (and B   K s ) Rate Constraints Survive b  s  Constraint  K s Rate “Sees Red” Cannot Account for  ’K s Rate Not a New Problem Combine b  s  and B   K s →  ~  /2, 3  /2 ? →  ~  /2, 3  /2 ? 1, 0.5 TeV 2, 0.5 1, 0.8 TeV 2, 0.8 More Conservative

19. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 19 S  K s S  ’K s S K s    K Accounting for S  K s, S  ’K s, S K s   and |A ⊥ (  K * )| 2

20. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 20 A Little Note on Formalism … Besides O 1,2 Tree O 3-6 Strong Penguin O 7-10 EM/EW Penguin also O 11,12  /g Dipole Matrix Elements evaluated via Naïve Factorization

21. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 21 Tuning for S  K s ≲ 0, S  ’K s ~ S  K s Possible S  K s S  K s ≲ 0 prefers lower  -plane S  ’K s ➯ S  ’K s ≅ sin2  B d as well ! Lower gluino mass S  K s Lower gluino mass lowers S  K s Hadronic Parameters CP phase enters B →  K s via Lower q 2, and/or larger S  K s ➯ Larger | S  K s | ∴ Prefer to keep gluino mass above 500 GeV (L.E. Constraints) Could  ≲  /2 be it? Noticed also by Khalil & Kou ’03 [Murayama et al. ’03] 0.5 TeV Preferred

22. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 22 BaBar: CPV with B 0  K s  0 [b  s d dbar] Reconstruct B  K s  0 vertex using K s trajectory and boost trajectory N = C = S = S (C=0) = KsKs ++ -- 00 e+e+ e-e- boosted  (4s) zz m ES asymmetry In the absence of New Physics, S = sin(2φ 1 ) =0.731±0.056 Browder @ LP03 Consistent Seems Fine

23. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 23 Amplitudes V ∓ A S  K s vs S  ’K s S K s   Reason why Opposite Trend in S  K s vs S  ’K s, S K s   hadronicuncertainty R.H. interactions, not quite “P-conserving”

24. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 24  K  K * : Br and |A ⊥ (  K * )| 2 ~ 0.4 Attainable Kagan/Sinha Talks on VV

25. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 25 Upshot w/ Kingman Cheung  60 ° - 70 ° NP CPV phase  ~ 60 ° - 70 ° ~ 200 GeV ~ 500 GeV Collider Direct Search Flavor Factory but need to disentangle hadronic effect Two Particle System

26. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 26 B s Mixin Situation for B s Mixing

27. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 27 Lighter gluino ~ 500 GeV Needed  m B s > 70 ps -1 -  m B s > 70 ps -1 Tough ! sin2  B s ~ 0 - 1 - sin2  B s ~ 0 - 1 Tough ? Would’ve preferred [Arhib, Chua, WSH 01] S  K s ≲ 0 heavier gluino but for … S  K s ≲ 0 For lighter gluino, periodicity change ∵ a -term dominant (two exch.) 100 GeV 100 GeV ? ~ 200 GeV case Direct Detection ! Except, Easier Direct Detection !  m B s, sin2  B s Consequences:  m B s, sin2  B s Take  ≲  /2 as example Tough (!?)

28. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 28  m B s Experimental Prospects for  m B s 10 fb -1 (1 yr) DiminishedExpectation SlightlyBetter Steep ! 5  at 68 ps -1 / yr x

29. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 29   B s Go for Untagged   B s CPV Effect?  B s ~ 10%  B s

30. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 30 S K * 0 ( K s    )  SuperB Crisp Measurement: S K * 0 ( K s    )  S K s   inspired by S K s  

31. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 31 BaBar: CPV with B 0  K s  0 [b  s d dbar] Reconstruct B  K s  0 vertex using K s trajectory and boost trajectory N = C = S = S (C=0) = KsKs ++ -- 00 e+e+ e-e- boosted  (4s) zz m ES asymmetry In the absence of New Physics, S = sin(2φ 1 ) =0.731±0.056 Browder @ LP03 K S Vertexing to B Factory K S Vertexing: Unique to B Factory Thank Oddone again

32. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 32 Strength of Mixing-dep. CPV  L Test  L component (Atwood, Gronau, Soni, 1997 ) (Atwood, Gronau, Soni, 1997 ) S K * 0 ( K s    )   nowPromising S K * 0 ( K s    )   now Promising B s   In contrast B s     B s probably rely on   B s  L Can also test  L comp. via  Polarization in  b     (Mannel, Recksiegel, 1997) (Mannel, Recksiegel, 1997) Wrong Helicity Photon in b  s  L Implications: Wrong Helicity Photon in b  s  L Free of hadronic uncertainty Crisp

33. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 33 S  K s S  ’K s S K s    K Large effects in S  K s ( S  ’K s, S K s   ) and |A ⊥ (  K * )| 2 hadronic uncertainties... but plagued by hadronic uncertainties... NP CPV Phase S  K s < 0 Large NP CPV Phase implied by S  K s < 0 S K s    ≠ 0 Projects Crisp Measurement of S K s    ≠ 0 S  K s < 0 No Target to Shoot for if S  K s < 0 Goes Away Large NP CPV Phase w/ Crisp Measurement Let’s Hope for the Better This Year !

34. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 34 Liked AGS Mechanism since beginning Quantum Interference requires two helicities Alas, Nature is Cunning: K * 0  K S  0 No Track! Pursued etc. instead... Pursued B 0  K 1 (1270)   etc. instead... S K s   So, BaBar’s S K s   came as a shocker. ’course, had large(r) Si (than Belle) or so I thought... Nakao san will show eff. vs Si size Invest in Larger Si ! Confession II S K s     difficult N.B. S K s     difficult for hadronic for hadronic

35. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 35 Caveats Direct CPV in K  : Pattern Change, but Improved D 0 -mixing: Just at present limit [because V us shifted to uc sector generic for alignment Cannot escape 199 Hg edm (Shimizu talk) [complicated enough... as opportunity ?

36. Jan. 19, 2004 @ Super BGeorge W.S. Hou 36 Conclusion S  K s S  ’K s S K s   S  K s, S  ’K s, S K s   Data Calls for s-b - Large s-b Mixing, w/ New CPV Phase Right-handed - New Right-handed Interaction Flavor-mixed A Light Flavor-mixed Squark? Independtly Well Motivated (Flavor & SUSY) Survive b  s  S  K s ≲ 0, S  ’K s S K s   ~ S  K s Can Account for S  K s ≲ 0, S  ’K s, S K s   ~ S  K s  m B s sin2  B s  m B s, sin2  B s May Become Difficult S K s    nowPromising S K s    now Promising ➯ Push for Super B w/ Large Silicon SuperB may be Superb