SciPost Submission Page
Testing the mechanism of lepton compositness
by Vincenzo Afferrante, Axel Maas, René Sondenheimer, Pascal Törek
Submission summary
As Contributors:  Vincenzo Afferrante · Axel Maas 
Arxiv Link:  https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.02301v3 (pdf) 
Date submitted:  20210112 11:36 
Submitted by:  Afferrante, Vincenzo 
Submitted to:  SciPost Physics 
Academic field:  Physics 
Specialties: 

Approaches:  Theoretical, Computational 
Abstract
Strict gauge invariance requires that physical lefthanded leptons are actually bound states of the elementary lefthanded lepton doublet and the Higgs field within the standard model. That they nonetheless behave almost like pure elementary particles is explained by the Fr\"ohlichMorchioStrocchi mechanism. Using lattice gauge theory, we test and confirm this mechanism for fermions. Though, due to the current inaccessibility of nonAbelian gauged Weyl fermions on the lattice, a model which contains vectorial leptons but which obeys all other relevant symmetries has been simulated.
Current status:
Submission & Refereeing History
You are currently on this page
Reports on this Submission
Anonymous Report 1 on 2021126 Invited Report
Report
The authors revised the manuscript improving most of the points I suggested. However, there still remain two to be addressed.
>8.) At the end of 2nd paragraph of page 7, "Note that the theory is symmetric under a change of sign of the Yukawa couplings.." But the sign relative to the Wilson term on a lattice should change the physics.
authors> We agree that the hopping parameter has to be positive for a welldefined theory. However, our comment should only reflect that y→−y and X→−X leaves the Lagrangian in lattice (and continuum) notation unchanged.
If so, the authors should clarify X→−X transformation in addition to y→−y.
>10.) *Eq (24) and the analysis follows. The author should use the (numerical) solution of cosh(m(tT/2))/cosh(m(t+1T/2)) = lattice data, rather than simply taking log.*
authors>We actually did use the full lattice data without approximation in the fits as the referee suggests. We merely used the log prescription only for the plots to emphasize the onset of finite volume effects.
I know it. But the readers would be interested in the effective mass itself, rather than trivial finite volume effect on the "correlators". The (numerical) solution of cosh(m(tT/2))/cosh(m(t+1T/2)) should be used.