With some explicitly <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><a:msub><a:mi>Z</a:mi><a:mn>3</a:mn></a:msub></a:math> breaking terms in the NMSSM (next-to-minimal supersymmetric standard model) effective superpotential and scalar potential, domain walls (DWs) from spontaneously breaking of the discrete symmetry in approximate <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><c:msub><c:mi>Z</c:mi><c:mn>3</c:mn></c:msub></c:math>-invariant NMSSM can collapse and lead to observable stochastic gravitational wave (GW) background signals. In the presence of a hidden sector, such terms may originate from the geometric superconformal breaking with holomorphic quadratic correction to frame function when the global scale-invariant superpotential is naturally embedded into the canonical superconformal supergravity models. The smallness of such mass parameters in the NMSSM may be traced back to the original superconformal invariance. Naive estimations indicate that a SUSY explanation to muon <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><e:mi>g</e:mi><e:mo>−</e:mo><e:mn>2</e:mn></e:math> anomaly can have tension with the constraints on SUSY by pulsar timing arrays data, because large SUSY contributions to <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><g:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</g:mi><g:msub><g:mi>a</g:mi><g:mi>μ</g:mi></g:msub></g:math> in general needs relatively light superpartners while present <j:math xmlns:j="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><j:msubsup><j:mi mathvariant="normal">Ω</j:mi><j:mrow><j:mi>g</j:mi><j:mi>w</j:mi></j:mrow><j:mn>0</j:mn></j:msubsup></j:math> can set the lower bounds for <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><m:msub><m:mi>m</m:mi><m:mrow><m:mi>soft</m:mi></m:mrow></m:msub></m:math>. We calculate numerically the signatures of GWs produced from the collapse of DWs and find that the observed nHZ stochastic GW background by NANOGrav, etc., can indeed be explained with proper tiny values of <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><o:mi>χ</o:mi><o:msub><o:mi>m</o:mi><o:mrow><o:mn>3</o:mn><o:mo>/</o:mo><o:mn>2</o:mn></o:mrow></o:msub><o:mo>∼</o:mo><o:msup><o:mn>10</o:mn><o:mrow><o:mo>−</o:mo><o:mn>14</o:mn></o:mrow></o:msup><o:mtext> </o:mtext><o:mtext> </o:mtext><o:mi>eV</o:mi></o:math> for <q:math xmlns:q="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><q:mi>χ</q:mi><q:msup><q:mi>S</q:mi><q:mn>2</q:mn></q:msup></q:math> case (and <s:math xmlns:s="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><s:mi>χ</s:mi><s:msub><s:mi>m</s:mi><s:mrow><s:mn>3</s:mn><s:mo>/</s:mo><s:mn>2</s:mn></s:mrow></s:msub><s:mo>∼</s:mo><s:msup><s:mn>10</s:mn><s:mrow><s:mo>−</s:mo><s:mn>10</s:mn></s:mrow></s:msup><s:mtext> </s:mtext><s:mtext> </s:mtext><s:mi>eV</s:mi></s:math> for <u:math xmlns:u="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><u:mi>χ</u:mi><u:msub><u:mi>H</u:mi><u:mi>u</u:mi></u:msub><u:msub><u:mi>H</u:mi><u:mi>d</u:mi></u:msub></u:math> case), respectively. Besides, there are still some parameter points, whose GW spectra intersect with the NANOGrav signal region, that can explain the muon <w:math xmlns:w="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><w:mi>g</w:mi><w:mo>−</w:mo><w:mn>2</w:mn></w:math> anomaly to <y:math xmlns:y="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><y:mn>1</y:mn><y:mi>σ</y:mi></y:math> range. Published by the American Physical Society 2024
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: