Can faint neutrino mass be strictly a corrective term that derives from a hidden relationship (in an unknown Theory of Everything (TOE) perspective) to another elementary particle that does gain mass via the Higgs mechanism? you could call it vicarious mass. Rather than predicting things that haven't been seen, Majorana mass, seesaw mechanism etc this should be a simple, direct implication of unifying free parameters. Unless it is specifically forbidden I don't understand why "less is better "(in terms of the number of free parameters) isn't on the list of hypotheses for neutrino mass. Perhaps such a relationship would have to be confined to the Yukawa couplings only otherwise symmetries are violated..... Shouldn't this limit the type of T.O.Es we can expect?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Does the "hidden relationship" count as one more "free parameter"? In other words, how do you parameterize the "hidden relationship"? $\endgroup$ – MadMax Apr 24 at 17:29
  • $\begingroup$ My guess is yes a secret formula will most likely generate a new parameter even in the simplest case i.e sqrt x where the answer (-y,+y) is the underlying generator of 2 or more particle mass states. I would assume the dimension +/- is the new free parameter and where the magnitude defines the "equivalency" relationship but I really dont know all the mathematical ways a theoretical physicist would consider deriving two completely different couplings from a single source- $\endgroup$ – user130828 Apr 24 at 21:08
  • $\begingroup$ If you google "neutrino mass arxiv" a number of theoretical papers will come up. For example a similar proposal is here " arxiv.org/abs/1902.07259 " . See also the answers to physics.stackexchange.com/questions/99770/… $\endgroup$ – anna v Apr 25 at 3:36
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Anna v that is a good article however it requires rh neutrinos to be found. It does give me a better understanding of the complexity behind my suggestion of corrective term.maybe the historical example might lead to answer: Consider that for several decades the strange quark and the muon had nearly the same mass value. What are the implications if a coupling model assigns the same Yukawa coupling to each? and then at a deeper level what are the implications if a 'particle' generating model loads a quark = a lepton into their respective fields and the Yukawa are merely imitating that? $\endgroup$ – user130828 Apr 25 at 13:35

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.