text:
# 1 Synopsis

## 1 Synopsis

Essential elements of the fundamental constituents of matter and their interactions have been discovered in the past three decades by operating $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders. A coherent picture of the structure of matter has emerged, that is adequately described by the Standard Model, in many of its facets at a level of very high accuracy. However, the Standard Model does not provide a comprehensive theory of matter. Neither the fundamental parameters, masses and couplings, nor the symmetry pattern can be explained, but they are merely built into the model. Moreover, gravity is not incorporated at the quantum level. First steps to solutions of these problems are associated with the unification of the electroweak and the strong forces, and with the supersymmetric extension of the model which provides a bridge from the presently explored energy scales up to scales close to the Planck mass.

Two strategies can be followed to enter into the area beyond the Standard Model. $`(i)`$ Properties of the particles and forces within the Standard Model will be affected by new energy scales. Precision studies of the top quark, the electroweak gauge bosons and the Higgs boson can thus reveal clues to the physics beyond the Standard Model. $`(ii)`$ Above the mass thresholds, new phenomena can be searched for directly and studied thoroughly so that the underlying basic theories can be reconstructed.

In this dual approach a variety of fundamental problems still remain to be solved within the Standard Model , demanding experiments at energies beyond the range of existing accelerators.
$`(a)`$ The mass of the top quark is much larger than the masses of the electroweak gauge bosons. Understanding the rôle of this particle in Nature is therefore an important goal for the future. In the $`t\overline{t}`$ threshold region of $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions the top quark mass can be measured to an accuracy better than 200 MeV. This is a desirable goal since a future theory of flavor dynamics will lead to relations among the lepton/quark masses and mixing angles in which the heavy top quark is expected to play a key rôle. In addition, stringent tests in the electroweak and Higgs sector of the Standard Model can be carried out when the top mass is known very accurately. Helicity analyses of the $`t\overline{t}`$ production vertex and the $`t`$ decay vertex will determine the magnetic dipole moments of the top quark and the chirality of the ($`tb`$) decay current at the per–cent level. Bounds on the $`𝒞𝒫`$ violating electric dipole moments of the $`t`$ quark can be set to $`10^{18}`$ e cm.
$`(b)`$ Studying the dynamics of the electroweak gauge bosons is another important task at high energy $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders. The form and the strength of the triple and quartic couplings of these particles are uniquely predicted by the non–abelian gauge symmetry of the theory, defining the electroweak charges, the magnetic dipole moments and the electric quadrupole moments of the $`W^\pm `$ bosons in the static limit. Tests of these fundamental symmetry concepts can be performed at an accuracy of $`10^3`$ down to $`10^4`$.
$`(c)`$ A high–luminosity $`e^+e^{}`$ collider with an energy between 300 and 500 GeV will be an ideal instrument to search for Higgs particles  throughout the mass range characterized by the scale of electroweak symmetry breaking, and to investigate their properties. The intermediate Higgs mass range below $`200`$ GeV is the theoretically preferred region. In this scenario Higgs particles remain weakly interacting up to the scale of grand unification, thus providing a basis for the renormalization of the electroweak mixing angle $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$ from the GUT symmetry value 3/8 down to the experimentally observed value close to 0.2. Once the Higgs particle is found, its properties can be studied thoroughly, the external quantum numbers $`𝒥^{𝒫𝒞}`$ and the Higgs couplings, including the self–couplings of the particle. The measurements of these couplings are the necessary ingredient to establish the Higgs mechanism sui generis experimentally.

Even though many facets of the Standard Model are experimentally supported at a level of very high accuracy, extensions should nevertheless be anticipated as argued before. The next generation of accelerators can shed light on three domains in the area beyond the Standard Model.

The Grand Unification of the gauge symmetries  suggests itself quite naturally. This idea can be realized in different scenarios some of which predict new vector bosons and a plethora of new fermions. Mass scales of these novel particles could be as low as a few hundred GeV.

A very important theoretical extension of the Standard Model, which is interrelated with the unification of the gauge symmetries, is Supersymmetry . This novel symmetry concept unifies matter and forces by pairing the associated fermionic and bosonic particles in common multiplets. Several arguments strongly support the hypothesis that this symmetry is realized in Nature indeed. $`(i)`$ Supersymmetry stabilizes light masses of Higgs particles in the context of very high energy scales as demanded by grand unified theories. $`(ii)`$ Supersymmetry may generate the Higgs mechanism itself by inducing the radiative symmetry breaking of $`\mathrm{SU}(2)_\mathrm{L}\times \mathrm{U}(1)_\mathrm{Y}`$ while leaving $`\mathrm{U}(1)_{\mathrm{EM}}`$ and $`\mathrm{SU}(3)_\mathrm{c}`$ unbroken for a top quark mass between 100 and 200 GeV. $`(iii)`$ This symmetry picture is also supported strongly by the successful prediction of the electroweak mixing angle in the minimal version of the theory. The particle spectrum in this theory drives the evolution of the electroweak mixing angle from the GUT value 3/8 down to $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$ = 0.2336 $`\pm `$ 0.0017, within a margin $``$ 0.002 to the experimental value $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W^{exp}`$ = 0.2316 $`\pm `$ 0.0002.

A spectrum of several neutral and charged Higgs bosons is predicted in supersymmetric theories. The mass of the lightest Higgs boson is less than $`150`$ GeV in nearly all scenarios while the heavy Higgs particles have masses of the order of the electroweak symmetry breaking scale. Many other novel particles are predicted in supersymmetric theories. The scalar partners of the leptons could have masses in the range of $`200`$ GeV whereas squarks are expected to be considerably heavier. The lightest supersymmetric states are likely to be non–colored gaugino/higgsino states with masses possibly in the 100 GeV range. Searching for these supersymmetric particles will be one of the most important tasks at future $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders. Moreover, the high accuracy which can be achieved when masses and couplings are measured, will allow us to determine the mechanism of supersymmetry breaking and to extrapolate the basic parameters of the theory so that the key elements of the underlying grand unified theories at scales, potentially close to the Planck scale, can be reconstructed.

In the alternative scenario of heavy or no fundamental Higgs bosons, new strong inter- actions between electroweak bosons would be observed, characterized by a scale of order 1 TeV at which the electroweak symmetries would be broken strongly . This scenario could be analyzed by studying the elastic scattering of $`W`$ bosons at high energies. New resonances would be formed, the properties of which would uncover the underlying microscopic interactions.

While new high–mass vector bosons and particles carrying color quantum numbers can be searched for very efficiently at hadron colliders, $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders provide in many ways unique opportunities to discover and explore non–colored particles. This is most obvious in supersymmetric theories. Combining LEP2 analyses with future searches at the Tevatron and the LHC, the light and heavy Higgs bosons can be found individually only in part of the supersymmetry parameter space. Squarks and gluinos can be searched for very efficiently at the LHC. Yet precision studies of their properties are possible only in part of the parameter space. Similarly non-colored supersymmetric particles; a model–independent analysis of gauginos/higgsinos and scalar sleptons can only be carried out at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders with well–defined kinematics at the level of the subprocesses. The detailed knowledge of all the properties of the colored and non–colored supersymmetric states will reveal the mechanism of supersymmetry breaking and the structure of the underlying theory.

Thus, the physics progamme of $`e^+e^{}`$ linear colliders is in many aspects complementary to the programme of the $`pp`$ collider LHC. The high accuracy which can be achieved at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders in exploring the properties of the top quark, electroweak gauge bosons, Higgs particles and supersymmetric particles will enable us to cover the energy range above the existing machines up to the TeV region in a conclusive form, eventually providing us with essential clues to the basic structure of matter and the laws of physics.

The discussion will focus on the physics program at an $`e^+e^{}`$ linear collider operating at center–of–mass energies above LEP2 up to about 1 TeV. Primarily high–luminosity runs, collecting integrated luminosities up to 0.5 ab<sup>-1</sup> in one to two years of operation, will be described. Also the results expected from high–luminosity runs at low energies on the $`Z`$ resonance, the GigaZ mode, and near the $`WW`$ threshold will be summarized. Electrons and positrons will in general be assumed polarized to 80% and 60%, respectively. Specific problems which can be solved in $`e^{}e^{}`$, e$`\gamma `$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ modes of the linear collider will be addressed in the appropriate context.

This summary report is built on the general linear collider review of Ref.. Other material can be found in Refs., experimental aspects particularly in Ref.. For recent summaries of the LHC physics and $`\mu \mu `$ physics programs see Refs. and , respectively.

## 2 Top Quark Physics

Top quarks are the heaviest matter particles in the 3–family Standard Model, introduced to incorporate $`𝒞𝒫`$ violation in the left–handed charged current sector. They may therefore hold the key for aspects of the physics beyond the Standard Model at high–energy scales. Examples in which the large top mass is crucial, are multi–Higgs doublet models, models of dynamical symmetry breaking, compositeness and supersymmetry. Strong indirect evidence for the existence of top quarks, based on the well established gauge symmetry pattern of the Standard Model, had been accumulated quite early. By evaluating the high–precision electroweak data, the value of the top quark mass was estimated to be $`m_t=180\pm 14`$ GeV. Top quarks have recently been observed directly by the two Tevatron experiments , corresponding to a mass of $`m_t=174.3\pm 5.1\text{ GeV}`$ which is in striking agreement with the result of the electroweak analysis.

### 2.1 The Profile of the Top Quark

For a top mass larger than the $`W`$ mass, the channel

$$tb+W^+$$

is the dominant decay mode. For m$`{}_{t}{}^{}`$ 175 GeV the width of the top quark, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_t`$ 1.4 GeV, is so large compared with the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the strong interactions that this quark can be treated as a bare quantum which is not dressed by non–perturbative strong interactions .
Chirality of the $`(tb)`$ decay current: The precise determination of the weak isospin quantum numbers does not allow for large deviations of the $`(tb)`$ decay current from the left–handed SM prescription. Nevertheless, since $`V+A`$ admixtures may grow with the masses of the quarks involved \[through mixing with heavy mirror quarks, for instance\], it is necessary to check the chirality of the decay current directly. The $`l^+`$ energy distribution in the semileptonic decay chain $`tW^+l^+`$ depends on the chirality of the current. Any deviation from the standard $`VA`$ current would lead to a stiffening of the spectrum and, in particular, to a non-zero value at the upper end–point of the energy distribution. A sensitivity of about 5% to a possible $`V+A`$ admixture can be reached experimentally .
Non–standard top decays could occur in supersymmetric extensions of the Standard Model: top decays into charged Higgs bosons and/or top decays to stop particles, $`tb+H^+`$ and $`t\stackrel{~}{t}+\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^o`$. If kinematically allowed, branching ratios of order 10% are expected in both cases so that these decay modes could be observed easily. Decays with signatures as clean as $`tc\gamma ,cZ,cH`$ may be detected for branching ratios of order $`10^4`$ and less.

The main production mechanism for top quarks in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions is the annihilation channel ,

$$e^+e^{}\stackrel{\gamma ,Z}{}t\overline{t}$$

For $`m_t175`$ GeV, the maximum of the cross section $`\sigma (t\overline{t})800`$ fb is reached about 30 GeV above the threshold, giving rise to a million top quarks in two years of collider operation. If the scale of new areas beyond the Standard Model is much larger than the collider energy, the electroweak production currents can globally be described by form factors which reduce to anomalous $`Z`$ charges, anomalous magnetic dipole moments and electric dipole moments.
Magnetic dipole moments: If the electrons in $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}`$ are left–handedly polarized, the top quarks are produced preferentially as left–handed particles in the forward direction while only a small fraction is produced as right–handed particles in the backward direction , so that the backward direction is most sensitive to small anomalous magnetic moments of the top quarks. The anomalous magnetic moments can be bounded to the percent level by measuring the angular dependence of the $`t`$ quark cross section in this region.
Electric dipole moments: These moments are generated by $`𝒞𝒫`$–non invariant interactions. Non–zero values of the moments can be detected by means of non–vanishing expectation values of $`𝒞𝒫`$–odd momentum tensors such as $`T_{ij}=(q_+q_{})_i(q_+\times q_{})_j`$ with $`q_\pm `$ being the unit momentum vectors of the $`W`$ decay leptons. Sensitivity limits to $`\gamma ,Z`$ electric dipole moments of $`10^{18}`$ e cm can be reached  for an integrated luminosity of $`=100\text{ fb}^1`$ at $`\sqrt{s}=500`$ GeV.

### 2.2 The Top-Quark Mass

Quark–antiquark production near the threshold in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions is of exceptional interest. The long time which the particles stay close together at low velocities, allows the strong interactions to build up rich structures of bound states and resonances. This picture would have applied to top quarks up to the mass range of $`130`$ GeV. Beyond this value, the picture changes quite dramatically as a result of the rapid top decay: The decay time of the states becomes shorter than the revolution time of the constituents so that toponium resonances cannot be formed any more . For a while, however, remnants of the $`1S`$ state give rise to a peak in the excitation curve, yet it disappears for top masses in excess of 180 GeV. Nevertheless, across this range the resonance remnants induce a steep rise of the cross section near the threshold.

Since the rapid top decay restricts the interaction region to small distances, the excitation curve can be predicted in perturbative QCD , based essentially on the Coulombic interquark potential $`V(R)=4/3\times \alpha _s(R)/R`$. The cross section is built up by the superposition of all $`nS(t\overline{t})`$ states. The form and the height of the excitation curve are very sensitive to the mass of the top quark, cf Fig. 1.

Detailed experimental simulations predict the following sensitivity to the top mass  near $`m_t175`$ GeV:

$`\delta m_t`$ $``$ $`200\text{MeV}`$
for an integrated luminosity of $`=50\text{ fb}^1`$, including remnant uncertainties due to higher–order QCD corrections and experimental errors contributing at approximately equal strength. At proton colliders a sensitivity of about 1 to 2 GeV has been predicted for the top mass, based on the reconstruction of top quarks from jet and lepton final states . Thus, $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders will improve the measurement of the top quark mass by at least an order of magnitude.

## 3 Electroweak Gauge Bosons

### 3.1 Standard $`W`$, $`Z`$ Bosons

The fundamental electroweak and strong forces appear to be of gauge theoretical origin. This is one of the outstanding results of theoretical and experimental analyses in the past three decades. However, little direct evidence has been accumulated so far for the non–Abelian nature of the forces in the electroweak $`W^\pm ,Z,\gamma `$ sector. Since deviations from the gauge symmetries manifest themselves in experimental observables with coefficients $`(\beta \gamma )^2`$, high energies will allow stringent direct tests of the self–couplings of the electroweak gauge bosons.

The gauge symmetries of the Standard Model determine the form and the strength of the self–interactions of the electroweak bosons, triple couplings $`WW\gamma ,WWZ`$ and quartic couplings. Deviations from the gauge symmetric form of these vertices could be expected in more general scenarios . In models in which $`W,Z`$ bosons are generated dynamically and interact strongly with each other at high scales $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$, corrections could alter the vertices to order $`(M_W/\mathrm{\Lambda }_{})^2`$ and induce new types of couplings.

While the experimental analyses of the self–couplings of the electroweak bosons can be carried out at collider energies of 500 GeV with high accuracy, $`WW`$ scattering  can only be studied at energies in the TeV range. This is an important process which must be investigated very thoroughly if light Higgs particles do not exist and $`W`$ bosons become strongly interacting particles at high energies.

The properties of the $`Z`$ boson have been studied at LEP and SLC with very high accuracy. By operating TESLA at low energies on the $`Z`$ resonance in the GigaZ mode and near the $`WW`$ threshold, the measurement of fundamental electroweak parameters, the electroweak mixing angle and $`W`$ mass can be improved by yet an order of magnitude, allowing to test electroweak symmetry breaking stringently at the quantum level.

#### The GigaZ Mode:

By building a bypass for the transport of electron and positron bunches, high luminosity can also be reached at low energies in linear colliders. On the $`Z`$ resonance, an ensemble of $`10^9`$ events, 1 GigaZ, can be generated in a year, expanding the LEP sample by two orders of magnitude. With both electron and positron beams longitudinal polarized, the electroweak mixing angle can be determined very accurately by measuring the left–right asymmetry $`A_{LR}=2(14\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)/[1+(14\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)^2]`$, Ref. :

$`\delta \mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W10^5`$
Similarly the measurement of the $`W`$ mass can be improved to

$`\delta M_W6\text{MeV}`$
by scanning the threshold region, Ref. .

Based on these two measurements, a variety of high–precision tests can be performed in the electroweak sector. Extracting the Higgs mass from the electroweak observables is particularly interesting. From the $`\rho `$–parameter  this mass can be predicted to an accuracy of about 6%, improving LHC based predictions by almost an order of magnitude . Comparing this prediction with the direct measurement of the Higgs mass, quantum fluctuations can be tested stringently in a spontaneously broken gauge theory.

#### The Triple Gauge-Boson Couplings:

The couplings $`W^+W^{}\gamma `$ and $`W^+W^{}Z`$ are in general described each by seven parameters. Assuming $`𝒞,𝒫`$ and $`𝒯`$ invariance in the pure electroweak boson sector, the number of parameters can be reduced to three,

$`_k/ig_k`$ $`=`$ $`g_k^1W_{\mu \nu }^{}W_\mu A_\nu +\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.+\kappa _kW_\mu ^{}W_\nu F_{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _k}{M_W^2}}W_{\rho \mu }^{}W_{\mu \nu }F_{\nu \rho }`$
with $`g_\gamma =e`$ and $`g_Z=e\mathrm{cot}\theta _W`$ for $`k=\gamma ,Z`$. The $`\kappa =1+\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa `$ and the $`\lambda `$ parameters can be identified with the $`\gamma ,Z`$ charges of the $`W`$ bosons and the related magnetic dipole moments and electric quadrupole moments:

$`\mu _\gamma =`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2M_W}}\left[2+\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa _\gamma +\lambda _\gamma \right]`$ $`\mathrm{and}\gamma Z`$
$`Q_\gamma =`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{M_W^2}}\left[1+\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa _\gamma \lambda _\gamma \right]`$ $`\mathrm{and}\gamma Z`$
The gauge symmetries of the SM demand $`\kappa =1`$ and $`\lambda =0`$. The magnetic dipole and the electric quadrupole moments can be measured directly in the production of $`W\gamma `$ and $`WZ`$ pairs at $`p\overline{p}/pp`$ colliders and $`WW`$ pairs at $`e^+e^{}`$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ colliders.

Detailed experimental analyses have been carried out for the reaction $`e^+e^{}W^+W^{}(l\nu _e)(q\overline{q}^{})`$. The bounds on $`\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa ,\lambda `$ which can be obtained at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders of 500 GeV  are significantly better than the bounds expected from the LHC:

$`\mathrm{\Delta }g_1^Z=2.5\times 10^3`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa _\gamma =4.8\times 10^4`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa _Z=7.9\times 10^4`$
$`\lambda _\gamma =7.2\times 10^4`$ $`\lambda _Z=6.5\times 10^4`$
Moreover, they improve at 1 TeV by nearly an order of magnitude. The scales $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$ which can be probed, extend far beyond the energy scales which are accessible directly.

#### Strongly Interacting $`W`$, $`Z`$ Bosons

If the scenario in which $`W`$, $`Z`$, Higgs bosons are weakly interacting up to the GUT scale is not realized in Nature, the alternative scenario is a strongly interacting $`W`$, $`Z`$ sector. Without a light Higgs boson with a mass of less than about 1 TeV, the electroweak bosons must become strongly interacting particles at energies of about 1.2 TeV to comply with the requirements of unitarity for the $`W_LW_L`$ scattering amplitudes. By absorbing the Goldstone particles associated with the spontaneous symmetry breaking of the new strong interactions, the longitudinal degrees of freedom for the massive vector bosons may be built up, as realized in technicolor type theories, for instance. In such scenarios, novel resonances are predicted in the $`𝒪`$(1 TeV) energy range which can be generated in $`W_LW_L`$ collisions.

In scenarios of strongly interacting vector bosons, $`W_LW_L`$ scattering must be studied at energies of order 1 TeV which requires the highest energies possible in $`e^\pm e^{}`$ colliders. (Quasi)elastic $`WW`$ scattering can be investigated by using $`W`$ bosons radiated off the electron and positron beams, $`ee\nu \nu WW`$, or by exploiting final-state interactions in the $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation to $`W`$ pairs, $`e^+e^{}W^+W^{}`$. All possible (isospin, angular momentum) combinations in $`WW`$ scattering amplitudes $`a_{IJ}`$ can be realized in the first process. The cross sections however are small as long as no resonances are formed.

Building up the electroweak vector boson masses by the interactions of the gauge fields with the Goldstone bosons associated with the spontaneous symmetry breaking of the underlying strong–interaction theory, the longitudinal degrees of freedom of the vector bosons can be identified at high energies with the Goldstone bosons themselves as a result of the equivalence theorem. In analogy to the $`\pi \pi `$ low–energy theorems, the first terms in the energy expansion of the $`WW`$ scattering amplitudes  are determined independent of dynamical details:

$`a_{00}=+{\displaystyle \frac{6}{96\pi v^2}}`$ $`a_{20}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{96\pi v^2}}`$
$`a_{11}=+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{96\pi v^2}}`$
These fundamental scattering amplitudes in the threshold region of the strong $`WW`$ interactions can be tested  to an accuracy of about 15% at a high–luminosity collider of 1 TeV; new strong-interaction scales extending up to about 3 TeV can be probed in these experiments, thus covering energy scales up to the formation of novel resonances.

The attractive $`I=0`$ and $`I=1`$ channels may form Higgs and $`\rho `$–type resonances at high energies. The formation of resonances would lead to spectacular phenomena in $`WW`$ collisions .

Similar phenomena would also be observed as rescattering effects in the cross section $`\sigma (e^+e^{}W^+W^{})`$ for $`W`$–pair production. $`(I,J)=(1,1)`$ resonance effects would be noticeable at $`\sqrt{s}=1`$ TeV up to resonance masses of about 5 TeV in the angular distributions of the $`W`$ decay final states .

### 3.2 Extended Gauge Theories

The gauge symmetry of the Standard Model, $`\mathrm{SU}(3)\times \mathrm{SU}(2)\times \mathrm{U}(1)`$, is widely believed not to be the ultima ratio. The SM does not unify the electroweak and strong forces since the coupling constants of these interactions are different and appear to be independent. However, one should expect that in a more fundamental theory the three forces are described within a single gauge group and, hence, with only one coupling constant at high energy scales. This grand unified theory will be based on a gauge group containing $`\mathrm{SU}(3)\times \mathrm{SU}(2)\times \mathrm{U}(1)`$ as a subgroup and it will be reduced to this symmetry at low energies.

Two predictions of grand unified theories may have interesting consequences in the energy range of a few hundred GeV :

(a) The unified symmetry group must be spontaneously broken at the unification scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{GUT}}\stackrel{<}{}10^{16}`$ GeV in order to be compatible with the experimental bounds on the proton lifetime. However, the breaking to the SM group may occur in several steps and some subgroups may remain unbroken down to a scale of order 1 TeV. In this case the surviving group factors allow for new gauge bosons with masses not far above the scale of electroweak symmetry breaking. Besides $`\mathrm{SU}(5)`$, two other unification groups have received much attention: In $`\mathrm{SO}(10)`$ three new gauge bosons $`W_R^\pm ,Z_R`$ are predicted, while in E(6) a light neutral $`Z^{}`$ boson may exist in the TeV range.

The virtual effects of a new $`Z_R/Z^{}`$ boson associated with the most general effective theories which arise from breaking E(6) $`\mathrm{SU}(3)\times \mathrm{SU}(2)\times \mathrm{U}(1)\times \mathrm{U}(1)_\mathrm{Y}^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{SO}(10)\mathrm{SU}(2)_\mathrm{L}\times \mathrm{SU}(2)_\mathrm{R}\times \mathrm{U}(1)`$, have been investigated in Ref. . Assuming the $`Z_R/Z^{}`$ bosons to be heavier than the available c.m. energy, the propagator effects on various observables of the process

$`e^+e^{}\stackrel{V}{}f\overline{f}:V=\gamma ,Z\text{and}Z_R/Z^{}`$
have been studied in detail. As shown in Table 1, the effects of new vector bosons can be probed for masses up to 5 TeV at a 500 GeV collider. While they may be produced directly up to about 5 TeV at the LHC, experiments at the $`e^+e^{}`$ collider will measure the couplings of the vector bosons to fermions very precisely, thus identifying the physical nature of the new bosons. Masses up to 10 TeV and 50 TeV can be probed in $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders operating at 800 GeV and 5 TeV, respectively. These two windows extend to much higher scales than the discovery limits anticipated at LHC.

(b) The grand unification groups incorporate extended fermion representations in which a complete generation of SM quarks and leptons can be naturally embedded. These representations accommodate a variety of additional new fermions. It is conceivable that the new fermions acquire masses not much larger than the Fermi scale. This is necessary if the predicted new gauge bosons are relatively light. SO(10) is the simplest group in which the 15 members of each SM generation of fermions can be embedded into a single multiplet. This representation has dimension 16 and contains a right–handed neutrino. The group E(6) contains $`\mathrm{SU}(5)`$ and $`\mathrm{SO}(10)`$ as subgroups. In E(6), each quark–lepton generation belongs to a representation of dimension 27. To complete this representation, twelve new fields are needed in addition to the SM fermion fields. In each family the spectrum includes two additional isodoublets of leptons, two isosinglet neutrinos and an isosinglet quark with charge $`1/3`$.

If the new particles have non–zero electromagnetic and weak charges, and if their masses are smaller than the beam energy of the $`e^+e^{}`$ collider, they can be pair produced. In general, the production processes are built up by a superposition of s–channel $`\gamma `$ and $`Z`$ exchanges, but additional contributions could come from the extra neutral bosons if their masses are not much larger than the c.m. energy . The cross sections are large, of the order of the point–like QED cross section. This leads to samples of several thousands of events. Fermion mixing, if large enough, gives rise to additional production mechanisms for the new fermions: single production in association with the light partners. In this case, masses very close to the total energy of the $`e^+e^{}`$ collider can be reached.

## 4 The Higgs Mechanism

### 4.1 Basis

The Higgs mechanism is the cornerstone in the electroweak sector of the Standard Model. The fundamental SM particles, leptons, quarks and weak gauge bosons, acquire masses by means of the interaction with a scalar field. To accommodate the well–established electromagnetic and weak phenomena, the Higgs mechanism requires the existence of at least one weak iso–doublet scalar field. After absorbing three Goldstone modes to build up the longitudinal polarization states of the $`W^\pm ,Z`$ bosons, one degree of freedom is left–over, corresponding to a real scalar particle.

Three steps are necessary to establish experimentally the Higgs mechanism sui generis as the mechanism for generating the masses of the fundamental SM particles:

The Higgs boson must be discovered – the experimentum crucis;

The couplings of the Higgs particle with gauge bosons and fermions must be proven to increase with their masses;

The Higgs potential generating the non–zero Higgs field in the vacuum and breaking the electroweak symmetry in the scalar sector must be reconstructed by determining the Higgs self–couplings.

The only unknown parameter in the SM Higgs sector is the mass of the Higgs particle. Constraints on the mass can, however, be derived from the upper scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$ of the energy range in which the model is assumed to be valid before the particles become strongly interacting and new dynamical phenomena emerge . Increasing the energy scale, the quartic self–coupling of the Higgs field grows for large values indefinitely. If the Higgs mass is small, the energy cut–off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$ is large at which the coupling grows beyond any bound; conversely, if the Higgs mass is large, the cut–off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$ is small. The condition $`M_H<\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}`$ sets an upper limit on the Higgs mass in the Standard Model. Detailed analyses lead to an estimate of about 700 GeV for the upper limit on $`M_H`$. If the Higgs mass is less than 180 to 200 GeV, the Standard Model can be extended up to the GUT scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{GUT}}10^{16}`$ GeV, while all particles remain weakly interacting. The hypothesis that the interactions between $`W,Z`$ bosons and Higgs particles remain weak up to the GUT scale, plays a key rôle in deriving the experimental value of the electroweak mixing parameter $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$ from grand unified theories. From this hypothesis and the additional requirement of vacuum stability, upper and lower bounds on the Higgs mass can be derived. Based on these arguments, the SM Higgs mass should be expected in the mass window $`130<M_H<180`$ GeV for a top mass value of about 175 GeV.

Several channels can be exploited to search for Higgs particles in the Higgs–strahlung and fusion processes of $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders \[??\]. In the Higgs–strahlung process $`e^+e^{}`$ $`ZH`$, missing–mass techniques can be used in events with leptonic $`Z`$ decays or the Higgs particle may be reconstructed in $`Hb\overline{b},WW`$ directly. The $`WW`$ fusion process $`e^+e^{}`$ $`\overline{\nu }_e\nu _eH`$ requires the reconstruction of the Higgs particle.

Once the Higgs boson is found at LEP, Tevatron or LHC, it will be very important to explore its properties at the $`e^+e^{}`$ linear collider to establish the Higgs mechanism experimentally. This is possible with high precision in the clean environment of $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders in which at high luminosity a large ensemble of order $`10^5`$ Higgs bosons can be generated nearly background–free. The zero–spin of the Higgs particle is reflected in the angular distribution of the Higgs–strahlung process which must approach the $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta `$ law asymptotically . The strength of the couplings to $`Z`$ and $`W`$ bosons is reflected in the magnitude of the $`e^+e^{}`$ production cross sections. The strength of the couplings to fermions can be measured in the decay branching ratios and the Higgs bremsstrahlung off top quarks. Double Higgs–strahlung can be exploited to measure the trilinear Higgs self–coupling.

From the preceding discussion we conclude that an $`e^+e^{}`$ linear collider with energies in the range of 300 to 500 GeV and high luminosity is the ideal instrument to investigate the Higgs mechanism in the intermediate mass range which, a priori, may be considered the theoretically preferred part in the entire range of possible Higgs mass values.

### 4.2 The Higgs Particle in the Standard Model

The profile of the SM Higgs particle is completely determined if the Higgs mass is fixed. For Higgs particles in the intermediate mass range $`M_ZM_H2M_Z`$ the main decay modes are decays into $`b\overline{b}`$ pairs and $`WW,ZZ`$ pairs with one of the two gauge bosons being virtual below the threshold . Above the $`WW`$ threshold, the Higgs particles decay almost exclusively into these channels, except in the mass range near the $`t\overline{t}`$ decay threshold. Below 140 GeV, the decays $`H\tau ^+\tau ^{},c\overline{c}`$ and $`gg`$ are also important besides the dominating $`b\overline{b}`$ channel. Up to masses of 140 GeV, the Higgs particle is very narrow, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(H)10`$ MeV. After opening the \[virtual\] gauge boson channels, the state becomes rapidly wider, the width reaching $``$ 1 GeV at the $`ZZ`$ threshold. The width cannot be measured directly in the intermediate mass range. Only above $`M_H200`$ GeV it becomes wide enough to be resolved experimentally.

The main production mechanisms for Higgs particles in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions are Higgs–strahlung off the $`Z`$ boson line  and the $`WW`$ fusion process ,

$`(a)e^+e^{}`$ $`\stackrel{Z}{}`$ $`Z+H`$
$`(b)e^+e^{}`$ $`\stackrel{WW}{}`$ $`\overline{\nu }_e\nu _e+H`$
With rising energy the Higgs–strahlung cross section scales $`\alpha _w^2/s`$ while the fusion cross sections increase logarithmically $`\alpha _w^3M_W^2\text{log }s/M_H^2`$, becoming dominant above 500 GeV:

$`\sigma (e^+e^{}ZH)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_F^2M_Z^4}{96\pi s}}[1+(14\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)^2]`$
$`\sigma (e^+e^{}\overline{\nu }\nu H)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_F^3M_W^4}{4\sqrt{2}\pi ^3}}\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{M_H^2}}`$
As a general rule, the cross sections and rates \[about $`10^5`$ events\] are sufficiently large to detect Higgs particles with masses up to 70% of the total $`e^+e^{}`$ c.m. energy.

The recoiling $`Z`$ boson in the two–body reaction $`e^+e^{}ZH`$ is mono–energetic and the mass can be derived from the energy of the $`Z`$ boson, $`M_H^2=s2\sqrt{s}E_Z+M_Z^2`$. Initial state bremsstrahlung and beamstrahlung smear out the peak slightly, as shown in Fig. 2. A similarly clear peak can be observed in the fusion process $`e^+e^{}`$ $`\overline{\nu }_e\nu _eH`$ by collecting the decay products of the Higgs boson.

#### Mass and Width:

The mass of the Higgs boson can be measured very accurately by analyzing the recoil $`Z`$ spectrum in Higgs–strahlung events. Experimental simulations  have demonstrated that the error in the mass measurement can be reduced to

$`\delta M_H50\text{MeV}`$
in high–luminosity runs.

The width of the SM Higgs boson can be determined in an almost completely model–independent way in the difficult intermediate mass range in which the Breit–Wigner form cannot be reconstructed at an $`e^+e^{}`$ collider. Measuring the branching ratio $`BR_i`$ in the decay and the partial width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ in the production process, the total width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_H`$ can be derived from

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_H=\mathrm{\Gamma }_i/BR_i`$
The two channels $`i=WW`$  and $`i=\gamma \gamma `$  are useful for this analysis . The partial width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{WW}`$ can be extracted from the size of the $`WW`$ fusion cross section  while $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\gamma \gamma }`$ can be measured in the Compton collider mode . The accuracies of a few percent match the expected accuracy in scanning the Breit–Wigner excitation at a muon–collider.

#### Spin and Parity:

The angular distribution of the $`Z/H`$ bosons in the Higgs–strahlung process is sensitive to the external quantum numbers of the Higgs particle . Since the amplitude is given by $`𝒜(0^+)\epsilon _Z^{}\epsilon _Z^{}`$, the $`Z`$ boson is produced in a state of longitudinal polarization at high energies. As a result, the angular distribution $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}\mathrm{cos}\theta \lambda \mathrm{sin}^2\theta +8M_Z^2/s`$ approaches the spin–zero law $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta `$ asymptotically. This may be contrasted with the distribution $`1+\mathrm{cos}^2\theta `$ for negative parity states, which follows from the transverse polarization amplitude $`𝒜(0^{})\epsilon _Z^{}\times \epsilon _Z^{}k_Z`$. It is also characteristically different from the background process $`e^+e^{}`$ $`ZZ`$ which is strongly peaked in the forward/backward direction.

#### Higgs Couplings:

Since the fundamental SM particles acquire masses by means of the interaction with the Higgs field, the scale of the Higgs couplings to fermions and gauge bosons is set by the masses of the particles:

$`g_{HVV}=2[\sqrt{2}G_F]^{1/2}M_V^2\text{and}g_{Hff}=[\sqrt{2}G_F]^{1/2}M_f`$
It will be a very important task to measure the Higgs couplings to the fundamental particles  since they are uniquely predicted by the very nature of the Higgs mechanism. The Higgs couplings to massive gauge bosons can be determined from the measurement of the production cross sections with an accuracy of $`\pm 1\%`$, the $`HZZ`$ coupling in the Higgs–strahlung and the $`HWW`$ coupling in the fusion process. For Higgs couplings to fermions, either loop effects in $`Hgg,\gamma \gamma `$ \[mediated by top quarks\] can be exploited, or the direct measurement of branching ratios $`Hb\overline{b},c\overline{c},\tau ^+\tau ^{},gg`$ in the lower part of the intermediate mass range. This is exemplified in Fig. 3. For $`M_H=120`$ GeV the following accuracy $`\delta BR/BR`$ can be achieved  in the determination of the Higgs decay branching ratios:

$`bb:2.4\%`$ $`WW^{}:5.4\%`$
$`cc:8.3\%`$ $`gg:5.5\%`$
$`\tau \tau :6.0\%`$
By measuring the ratio of the $`\tau \tau `$ to the $`bb`$ branching ratios

$`{\displaystyle \frac{BR(H\tau \tau )}{BR(Hbb)}}={\displaystyle \frac{m_\tau ^2}{3m_b^2(M_H)}}`$
the linear dependence of the Yukawa couplings on the fermion masses can be tested very nicely. A direct way to determine the Yukawa coupling of the intermediate mass Higgs boson to the top quark in the range $`m_H120`$ GeV is provided by the bremsstrahlung process $`e^+e^{}t\overline{t}H`$ in high energy $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders . The absolute values of the Yukawa couplings can be reconstructed by combining decay branching ratios with the production cross sections.

#### Higgs Self–couplings:

To generate a non–zero value of the Higgs field in the vacuum, the minimum of the Higgs potential must be shifted away from the origin. Rewriting the potential

$`V`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda [\phi ^2\frac{1}{2}v^2]^2`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{M_H^2}{2}}H^2+{\displaystyle \frac{M_H^2}{2v}}H^3+{\displaystyle \frac{M_H^2}{8v^2}}H^4`$
in terms of the physical Higgs field $`H`$, the potential can be reconstructed by measuring the trilinear and quartic couplings. At a high–luminosity $`e^+e^{}`$ collider, the trilinear coupling can be tested in the double Higgs–strahlung process:

$`e^+e^{}Z+HH`$
The splitting of a virtual Higgs boson into two real Higgs bosons is determined by the trilinear Higgs coupling: $`e^+e^{}Z+H^{}[HH]`$. Even though the cross section is less than 1 fb , the coupling can nevertheless be measured with an accuracy better than 20%, cf. Ref. . Thus an essential element of the mechanism responsible for the spontaneous symmetry breaking in the scalar sector can be established experimentally at the high–luminosity collider.

## 5 Supersymmetry

Even though there is no direct experimental evidence so far for the realization of supersymmetry in Nature, this concept has so many attractive features that it can be considered as a prime target of present and future experimental particle research . Arguments in favor of supersymmetry are deeply rooted in particle physics. Supersymmetry may play an important r$`\widehat{\mathrm{o}}`$le in a quantum theory of gravity. In relating particles of different spins to each other, i.e. fermions and bosons, low–energy supersymmetry stabilizes the masses of fundamental Higgs scalars in the background of very high energy scales associated with grand unification. Besides solving this hierarchy problem, supersymmetry may even be closely related to the physical origin of the Higgs phenomenon itself: In a supergravity inspired GUT realization with universal scalar masses at the GUT scale, the evolution of one of the scalar masses squared down to the electroweak scale can become negative and can thus give rise to spontaneous symmetry breaking if the top mass has a value between about 100 to 200 GeV while all other squared masses of squarks and sleptons remain positive so that $`\mathrm{U}(1)_{\mathrm{EM}}`$ and $`\mathrm{SU}(3)_\mathrm{C}`$ remain unbroken.

The minimal supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model (MSSM) is based on the SM group $`\mathrm{SU}(3)\times \mathrm{SU}(2)\times \mathrm{U}(1)`$. The MSSM incorporates a spectrum of five Higgs particles (representative for a wide class of models). At tree level, the mass of the lightest Higgs boson $`h^0`$ is smaller than the $`Z`$ mass; the bound is shifted to $`\stackrel{<}{}140`$ GeV by radiative corrections. The masses of the heavy neutral and charged Higgs bosons can be expected in the range of the electroweak symmetry breaking scale. The gauginos are the supersymmetric spin–$`\frac{1}{2}`$ partners of the gauge bosons. The quark and lepton matter particles are associated with scalar supersymmetric particles, squarks and sleptons. To preserve supersymmetry, two Higgs doublets are needed to endow down as well as up–type fermions with masses; the supersymmetric partners of the Higgs bosons are spin–$`\frac{1}{2}`$ higgsinos. \[Charged/neutral higgsinos mix in general with the non–colored gauginos, forming charginos and neutralinos.\] Supersymmetric partners carry a multiplicative quantum number $`R=1`$ ($`R=+1`$ for ordinary particles) which is conserved in this model. Supersymmetric particles are therefore generated in pairs and the lightest supersymmetric particle $`LSP`$ is stable.

Strong support for supersymmetry and the MSSM particle spectrum in the mass range of several hundred GeV follows from the high–precision measurement of the electroweak mixing angle $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$ . The value predicted by the MSSM and the value determined by the LEP and other experiments,

$`MSSM:\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$ $`=0.2336\pm 0.0017`$
$`EXP:\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W`$ $`=0.2316\pm 0.0002`$
match surprisingly well, the difference being less than about 2 per–mille.

A central problem of supersymmetric theories is the breaking mechanism. Several scenarios have been proposed and experimental consequences have been elaborated in a few cases: gravity mediated supersymmetry breaking mSUGRA ; gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking GMSB ; anomaly mediated supersymetry breaking AMSB ; Scherk–Schwarz supersymmetry breaking SSSB . Mass spectra of the supersymmetric particles are quite different in these scenarios so that high–precision measurements of the particle properties will shed light experimentally on this theoretical problem. Moreover, extrapolations can be performed in a stable way which will allow to reconstruct the basic supersymmetric theory eventually at a scale close to the Planck scale. Precision experiments at a high–luminosity $`e^+e^{}`$ linear collider are therefore expected to advance the understanding of supersymmetry in an essential way.

### 5.1 SUSY Higgs Particles

The Higgs spectrum in the minimal supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model  consists of five states: $`h^0,H^0,A^0`$ and $`H^\pm `$. Besides the masses, two mixing angles define the properties of the scalar particles and their interactions with gauge bosons, fermions and the self–interactions: the ratio of the two vacuum expectation values $`\mathrm{tg}\beta =v_2/v_1`$ and a mixing angle $`\alpha `$ in the neutral $`𝒞𝒫`$–even sector. Supersymmetry leads to several relations among the masses and mixing angles and, in fact, only two parameters are independent.

#### Neutral Higgs Bosons:

The lightest neutral Higgs boson will decay mainly into fermion pairs since its mass is smaller than $``$ 140 GeV. This is also the dominant decay mode of the pseudoscalar boson $`A^0`$. For values of $`\mathrm{tg}\beta `$ larger than unity and for masses less than $``$ 140 GeV, the main decay modes of the neutral Higgs bosons are decays into $`b\overline{b}`$ and $`\tau ^+\tau ^{}`$ pairs; the branching ratios are of order $`90\%`$ and $`8\%`$, respectively. The decays into $`c\overline{c}`$ pairs and gluons \[proceeding through $`t`$ and $`b`$ quark loops\] are suppressed, for large $`\mathrm{tg}\beta `$ strongly. For large masses, the top decay channels $`H^0,A^0t\overline{t}`$ open up; yet this mode remains suppressed for large $`\mathrm{tg}\beta `$. For large $`\mathrm{tg}\beta `$, the neutral Higgs bosons decay almost universally into $`b\overline{b}`$ and $`\tau ^+\tau ^{}`$ pairs. If the mass is high enough, the heavy $`𝒞𝒫`$–even Higgs boson $`H^0`$ can in principle decay into weak gauge bosons, $`H^0WW,ZZ`$. Since the partial widths are proportional to $`\mathrm{cos}^2(\beta \alpha )`$, they are strongly suppressed and the gold–plated $`ZZ`$ signal of the heavy SM Higgs boson is lost in the supersymmetric extension. The heavy neutral Higgs boson $`H^0`$ can also decay into two lighter Higgs bosons. These modes, however, are restricted to small domains in the parameter space. Other possible channels are decays into supersymmetric particles. While sfermions are likely too heavy to affect Higgs decays in the mass range considered here, Higgs boson decays into charginos and neutralinos could eventually be important since the masses of some of these particles are expected to be of order $`M_Z`$. \[These channels are summarized in Ref..\] The charged Higgs particles decay into fermions but also, if allowed kinematically, into the lightest neutral Higgs boson and a $`W`$ boson. Below the $`tb`$ and $`Wh`$ thresholds, the charged Higgs particles will decay mostly into $`\tau \overline{\nu }_\tau `$ and $`c\overline{s}`$ pairs, the former being dominant for $`\mathrm{tg}\beta >1`$. For large $`M_{H^\pm }`$ values, the top–bottom decay mode $`H^+t\overline{b}`$ becomes dominant.

Adding up the various decay modes, the width of all five Higgs bosons remains very narrow, being of order 10 GeV even for large masses.

The search for the neutral SUSY Higgs bosons at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders will be a straightforward extension of the search performed at LEP2. This collider is expected to cover the mass range up to $`110`$ GeV for neutral Higgs bosons, depending on $`\mathrm{tg}\beta `$. Higher energies, $`\sqrt{s}250`$ GeV, are required to sweep the entire parameter space of the MSSM . The main production mechanisms of neutral Higgs bosons at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders  are the Higgs–strahlung process and associated pair production,

$`(a)\mathrm{Higgs}\mathrm{strahlung}:e^+e^{}`$ $``$ $`Z+h/H`$
$`(b)\mathrm{Pair}\mathrm{production}:e^+e^{}`$ $``$ $`A+h/H`$
as well as the related fusion processes. The $`𝒞𝒫`$–odd Higgs boson $`A^0`$ cannot be produced in fusion processes because it does not couple to gauge bosons in leading order.

The cross sections for the four Higgs–strahlung and pair production processes can be expressed as

$`\sigma (e^+e^{}Zh)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\beta \alpha )\sigma _{SM}`$
$`\sigma (e^+e^{}ZH)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}^2(\beta \alpha )\sigma _{SM}`$
and

$`\sigma (e^+e^{}Ah)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}^2(\beta \alpha )\overline{\lambda }\sigma _{SM}`$
$`\sigma (e^+e^{}AH)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\beta \alpha )\overline{\lambda }\sigma _{SM}`$
where $`\sigma _{SM}`$ is the SM cross section for Higgs–strahlung and the factor $`\overline{\lambda }`$ accounts for the suppression of the $`P`$–wave cross sections near the threshold. The cross sections for the Higgs–strahlung and for the pair production as well as the cross sections for the production of the light and the heavy neutral Higgs bosons $`h^0`$ and $`H^0`$ are mutually complementary to each other, coming either with a coefficient $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\beta \alpha )`$ or $`\mathrm{cos}^2(\beta \alpha )`$. As a result, since $`\sigma _{SM}`$ is large, at least the lightest $`𝒞𝒫`$–even Higgs boson must be detected.

The cross section for $`hZ`$ in the Higgs–strahlung process is large for values of $`M_h`$ near the upper bound. The heavy $`𝒞𝒫`$–even and $`𝒞𝒫`$–odd Higgs bosons $`H`$ and $`A`$, on the other hand, are produced pairwise in this limit: $`e^+e^{}AH`$. The decoupling limit becomes effective for heavy Higgs masses above 250 to 300 GeV. The discovery limit is therefore set by the beam energy independently of the mixing parameter $`\mathrm{tg}\beta `$, in contrast to LHC where the heavy Higgs bosons cannot be detected individually in parts of the parameter space.

#### Charged Higgs Bosons:

The charged Higgs bosons, if lighter than the top quark, can be produced in top decays, $`tb+H^+`$, with a branching ratio varying between $`2\%`$ and $`20\%`$ in the kinematically allowed region. Since for $`\mathrm{tg}\beta `$ larger than unity, the charged Higgs bosons will decay mainly into $`\tau \nu _\tau `$, this results in a surplus of $`\tau `$ final states over $`e,\mu `$ final states in $`t`$ decays, an apparent breaking of lepton universality. For large Higgs masses the dominant decay mode is the top decay $`H^+t\overline{b}`$. In this case the charged Higgs particles must be pair produced in $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders:

$$e^+e^{}H^+H^{}$$

The cross section depends only on the charged Higgs mass. For small Higgs masses the cross section is of order 100 fb at $`\sqrt{s}=500`$ GeV, but it drops very quickly due to the $`P`$–wave suppression $`\beta ^3`$ near the threshold.

SUMMARY: The preceding discussion of the MSSM Higgs sector at $`e^+e^{}`$ linear colliders can be summarized in the following two points:

$`(i)`$ The lightest $`𝒞𝒫`$–even Higgs particle $`h^0`$ can be detected in the entire range of the MSSM parameter space, either in the Higgs–strahlung process $`e^+e^{}hZ`$ or in pair production $`e^+e^{}hA`$ . In fact, this conclusion holds true even at a c.m. energy of 250 GeV, even if invisible neutralino decays are allowed for.

$`(ii)`$ The area in the parameter space where all SUSY Higgs bosons can be discovered individually at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders, is characterized by $`M_A\stackrel{<}{}\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{s}`$, independently of $`\mathrm{tg}\beta `$. The $`H^0,A^0`$ Higgs bosons can be produced either in Higgs–strahlung or in $`Ah,AH`$ associated production; charged Higgs bosons will be produced in $`H^+H^{}`$ pairs up to the kinematical limit.

### 5.2 Supersymmetric Particles

#### Charginos and Neutralinos

The two charginos $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{+}{}_{i}{}^{}`$ and the four neutralinos $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{0}{}_{i}{}^{}`$, mixtures of the \[non–colored\] gauginos and higgsinos, are expected to be the lightest supersymmetric particles. In the MSSM with conserved $`R`$–parity, the neutralino $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{0}{}_{1}{}^{}`$ with the smallest mass, assumed to be the lightest supersymmetric particle, is stable. The heavier neutralinos and the charginos decay into (possibly virtual) gauge and Higgs bosons plus the $`LSP`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{0}{}_{i}{}^{}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{0}{}_{1}{}^{}+Z`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{0}{}_{1}{}^{}+W`$, or if they are heavy enough, into neutralino/chargino cascades, and leptons plus sleptons .

Neutralinos and charginos are easy to detect at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders. They are produced in pairs

$`e^+e^{}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{+}{}_{i}{}^{}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_j^{}[i,j=1,2]`$
$`e^+e^{}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{0}{}_{i}{}^{}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{0}{}_{j}{}^{}[i,j=1,..,4]`$
through $`s`$–channel $`\gamma ,Z`$ exchange and $`t`$–channel selectron or sneutrino exchange. Since the cross sections are as large as $`𝒪`$(100 fb), enough events will be produced to discover these particles for masses nearly up to the kinematical limit.

The properties of the charginos and neutralinos can be studied in great detail at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders. From the fast onset $`\beta `$ of the spin $`\frac{1}{2}`$ excitation curve near the threshold, the masses can be measured very accurately within less than 100 MeV, Fig. 4. Using polarized $`e^\pm `$ beams, the decomposition of the states, $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{+}{}_{i}{}^{}=\alpha \stackrel{~}{W}^++\beta \stackrel{~}{H}^+`$ into wino and higgsino components can be determined  since left–handed electrons couple to sneutrinos in the $`t`$–channel but right–handed electrons do not, so that the energy and angular dependence of the cross sections is different for the two polarization states . In a similar way the properties of neutralinos can be explored .

#### Sleptons and Squarks:

The superpartners of the right–handed leptons decay into the associated SM partners and neutralinos/charginos. In major parts of the SUSY parameter space the dominant decay mode is $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_R\mu +\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^{0}{}_{1}{}^{}`$ . For the superpartners of the left–handed sleptons, the decay pattern is slightly more complicated since, besides the $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ channels, decays into leptons and charginos are also possible. In $`e^+e^{}`$ and $`e^{}e^{}`$ collisions, sleptons are produced in pairs:

$`e^+e^{}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_L^+\stackrel{~}{\mu }_L^{},\stackrel{~}{\mu }_R^+\stackrel{~}{\mu }_R^{},\stackrel{~}{\tau }_L^+\stackrel{~}{\tau }_L^{},\stackrel{~}{\tau }_R^+\stackrel{~}{\tau }_R^{}`$
$`e^+e^{}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{\nu }_L\overline{\stackrel{~}{\nu }}_L`$
$`e^+e^{}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{e}_L^+\stackrel{~}{e}_L^{},\stackrel{~}{e}_R^+\stackrel{~}{e}_R^{},\stackrel{~}{e}_L^+\stackrel{~}{e}_R^{},\stackrel{~}{e}_R^+\stackrel{~}{e}_L^{}`$
$`e^{}e^{}`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{e}_L^{}\stackrel{~}{e}_L^{},\stackrel{~}{e}_R^{}\stackrel{~}{e}_R^{},\stackrel{~}{e}_L^{}\stackrel{~}{e}_R^{}`$
For charged sleptons, the production proceeds via $`\gamma ,Z`$ exchange in the $`s`$–channel, in the case of selectrons, also by additional $`t`$–channel neutralino exchange. For sneutrinos, the process is mediated by $`s`$–channel $`Z`$–exchange and, in the case of electron–sneutrinos, also by the $`t`$–channel exchange of charginos.

The cross sections for the pair production of sleptons are of the order of $`10^1`$ to $`10^2`$ pb so that their discovery is very easy up to the kinematical limit. From the $`P`$–wave onset $`\beta ^3`$ of the annihilation cross section the masses can in general be determined  at a level of 200 to 300 MeV; the sharper onset of selection production in $`e^{}e^{}`$ scattering  will reduce this number further. Enough events will be produced to study their detailed properties. The polarization of the $`e^\pm `$ beams will help to identify the couplings of these particles.

The endpoints in the decay spectra of $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_R\mu +\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ can be exploited to determine the LSP mass with an accuracy of 100 MeV, cf. Fig. 4.

If one of the stop states is light enough due to the strong $`LR`$ Yukawa mixing, these particles may be pair produced even at a 500 GeV collider:

$`e^+e^{}\stackrel{~}{t_i}\overline{\stackrel{~}{t_j}}i,j=1,2`$
By measuring the $`LR`$ asymmetry of the production cross sections, the $`\stackrel{~}{t}_L/\stackrel{~}{t}_R`$ mixing angle can be determined to high accuracy $`\delta \mathrm{cos}\theta _{\stackrel{~}{t}}0.01`$ .

### 5.3 Supersymmetry Breaking

The high precision with which masses, couplings and mixing parameters will be determined at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders, can be exploited to test the mechanism for supersymmetry breaking and the structure of the underlying theory. In minimal supergravity mSUGRA the breaking of supersymmetry is mediated by gravity from a hidden sector to the eigenworld, generating soft SUSY breaking parameters at the grand unification scale<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1 If gravitational interactions would become strong not at a very high scale but near the electroweak scale , collider experiments could probe the additional spatial dimensions through which gravitational fields would propagate . Contact interactions and missing energy events could signal Planck scales in 4 + n dimensions up to about 10 TeV. Thus, the basic space–time structure can be explored in these experiments. . The parameters are generally assumed to be universal at that scale in the gaugino and the scalar sectors. In gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking, gauge interactions connect the mechanism to the eigenworld at a scale possibly between 10 and $`10^3`$ TeV. Mass spectra in mSUGRA and GMSB are characteristically different, the splitting between sleptons and squarks being larger in GMSB. Moreover, since the gravitino in GMSB is very light, $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{\tau _1}`$ may be long lived giving rise to displaced photons or stable heavy tracks in the decays $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_1^0\gamma \stackrel{~}{G}`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{\tau _1}\tau \stackrel{~}{G}`$ with the gravitino $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ escaping undetected .

If minimal supergravity is the underlying theory, the observable properties of the superparticles can be expressed by a small set of parameters defined at the GUT scale. Basically five parameters specify the properties of the particles in the supersymmetric sector. The scalar mass parameter $`m_0`$, the $`\mathrm{SU}(2)`$ gaugino mass $`M_{1/2}`$, the trilinear coupling $`A_0`$ and the sign of the coupling $`\mu `$ of the Higgs doublets in the superpotential, and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, the ratio of the vacuum expectation values $`v_2/v_1`$. Evolving the scalar masses from the GUT scale down to low energies, it turns out that non–colored particles are in general significantly lighter than colored particles. The lightest of the non–colored gauginos/higgsinos and sleptons could have masses in the range of 100 to 200 GeV. Since only a few parameters determine the low energy theory of the evolution from the GUT scale down to the electroweak scale, many relations can be found among the masses of the superparticles which can stringently be tested at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders . Two examples should illustrate the potential of $`e^+e^{}`$ facilities in this context.
$`(i)`$ The gaugino masses at the scale of $`\mathrm{SU}_2\times \mathrm{U}_1`$ symmetry breaking are related to the common $`\mathrm{SU}_2`$ gaugino mass $`M_{1/2}`$ at the GUT scale by the running gauge couplings:

$`M_i={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _i}{\alpha _{GUT}}}M_{1/2}i=SU_3,SU_2,U_1`$
with $`\alpha _{GUT}`$ being the gauge coupling at the unification scale. The mass relation in the non–color sector

$`{\displaystyle \frac{M_1}{M_2}}={\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _W{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}`$
can be tested very well by measuring the masses and production cross sections of charginos/neutralinos and sleptons.
$`(ii)`$ In a similar way the slepton masses can be expressed in terms of a common scalar mass parameter $`m_0`$ at the GUT scale, contributions $`M_{1/2}`$ due to the evolution from the GUT scale down to low energies, and the D terms related to the electroweak symmetry breaking. These expressions give rise to relations among the slepton masses:

$`m^2(\stackrel{~}{l}_L)m^2(\stackrel{~}{\nu })`$ $`=`$ $`(12\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)\mathrm{cos}2\beta m_Z^2`$
$`m^2(\stackrel{~}{l}_L)m^2(\stackrel{~}{l}_R)`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa M_{1/2}^2{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{1}{2}}(14\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W)\mathrm{cos}2\beta m_Z^2`$
with $`\kappa =0.37`$. The second relation follows from the hypothesis that the scalar masses are universal at the GUT scale, in particular $`m^2(5^{})=m^2(10)`$ within $`\mathrm{SU}_5`$. This assumption can be tested by relating the mass difference between $`\stackrel{~}{e}_L`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{e}_R`$ to the $`\mathrm{SU}_2`$ gaugino mass.
The typical result of an overall fit to the fundamental mSUGRA parameters at the GUT scale and tg$`\beta `$ is illustrated in Table 2.

In a procedure which reveals more clearly the structure of the underlying theory<sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2This procedure is particularly important for non-universal theories., the parameters may not only be fitted by assuming a universal set at the GUT scale from the start, but the set itself may be reconstructed by evolving the mass parameters from the electroweak scale to the unification scale , cf. Fig. 5. For gauginos and sleptons the reconstruction of the universal mass parameters is excellent. Due to mutual cancelations it is much more difficult for the squark and Higgs sectors. Nevertheless, this is the only way to reconstruct operationally the fundamental supersymmetric theory near the Planck scale from experimental observations at the electroweak scale.

Precision tests of supersymmetric particles in $`e^+e^{}`$ collider experiments can thus open a window to energy scales close to the Planck scale where gravity, the fourth of the fundamental forces, becomes an integral part of physics.


format: text

text:
# Temporary Acceleration of Electrons While Inside an Intense Electromagnetic Pulse

## Abstract

A free electron can temporarily gain a very significant amount of energy if it is overrun by an intense electromagnetic wave. In principle, this process would permit large enhancements in the center-of-mass energy of electron-electron, electron-positron and electron-photon interactions if these take place in the presence of an intense laser beam. Practical considerations severely limit the utility of this concept for contemporary lasers incident on relativistic electrons. A more accessible laboratory phenomenon is electron-positron production via an intense laser beam incident on a gas. Intense electromagnetic pulses of astrophysical origin can lead to very energetic photons via bremsstrahlung of temporarily accelerated electrons.

PACS numbers: 03.65.Sq, 12.15.-y 41.75.Fr, 52.40.Mj, 97.30.-b

The prospect of acceleration of charged particles by intense plane electromagnetic waves has excited interest since the suggestion by Menzel and Salisbury  that this mechanism might provide an explanation for the origin of cosmic rays. However, it has generally been recognized that if a wave overtakes a free electron, the latter gains energy from the wave only so long as the electron is still in the wave, and reverts to its initial energy once the wave has past . There is some controversy as to the case of a “short” pulse of radiation, for which modest net energy transfer between a wave and electron appears possible . Acceleration via radiation pressure is negligible . It has been remarked that even in the case of a “long” pulse, some of the energy transferred from the wave to the electron can be extracted if the electron undergoes a scattering process while still inside the wave . This paper is an elaboration of that idea. We do not discuss here the observed phenomenon that an electron ionized from an atom in a strong wave can emerge from the wave with significant energy .

We consider a plane electromagnetic wave (often called the background wave) with dimensionless, invariant field strength

$$\eta =\frac{e\sqrt{A_\mu A^\mu }}{mc^2}=\frac{e_{\mathrm{rms}}}{m\omega _0c}=\frac{e_{\mathrm{rms}}\mathrm{\lambda ̄}_0}{mc^2}.$$
(1)
Here the wave has laboratory frequency $`\omega _0`$, reduced wavelength $`\mathrm{\lambda ̄}_0`$, root-mean-square electric field $`_{\mathrm{rms}}`$, and four-vector potential $`A_\mu `$; $`e`$ and $`m`$ are the charge and mass of the electron, and $`c`$ is the speed of light.

A practical realization of such a wave is a laser been. Laser beams with parameter $`\eta `$ close to one have been used in recent plasma-physics experiments  and in high-energy-physics experiments .

When such a wave overtakes a free electron, the latter undergoes transverse oscillation (quiver motion), with relativistic velocities for η

>

1

>

𝜂1\eta\mathrel{\vbox{\kern 0.0pt\hbox{$>$} \kern 0.0pt\hbox{$\sim$} }}1 . The v $`\times `$ B force then couples the transverse oscillation to a longitudinal drift in the direction of the wave. In the nonrelativistic limit, this effect is often said to be due to the “ponderomotive potential” associated with the envelope of the electromagnetic pulse . The resulting temporary energy transfer to the longitudinal motion of the electron can in principle be arbitrarily large.

A semiclassical description of this process exists as well. A quantum-mechanical electron inside a classical plane wave can be described by the Volkov solutions to the Dirac equation . Such electrons are sometimes described as “dressed”, and they can be characterized by a quasimomentum

$$q=p+ϵk_0,$$
(2)
where the invariant $`ϵ`$ is given by

$$ϵ=\frac{m^2\eta ^2}{2(pk_0)},$$
(3)
with $`(pk_0)`$ being the 4-vector product of the 4-momenta $`p`$ of the electron and $`k_0`$ of a photon of the background wave. The factor $`ϵ`$ need not be an integer, and can be thought of as an effective number of wave photons “dragged” along with the electron as a result of a small difference between the large rates of absorption and emission (back into the wave) of wave photons by the electron. (Strictly speaking, the wave used in the Volkov solution is classical and, hence, contains no photons.) As a result, the electron inside the wave has an effective mass, $`\overline{m}`$, that is greater than its free mass $`m`$ :

$$\overline{m}^2=q^2=m^2(1+\eta ^2).$$
(4)
From a classical view, the quasimomentum $`q`$ is the result of averaging over the transverse oscillations (quiver motion) of the electron in the background wave. When discussing conservation of energy and momentum in the classical view, both transverse and longitudinal motion of the electron must be considered; but in a quantum analysis, quasimomentum is conserved and no mention is made of the classical transverse oscillations.

Throughout this paper the background wave propagates in the $`+z`$ direction, and the 4-momentum of a photon of this wave is written

$$k_0=(\omega _0,0,0,\omega _0).$$
(5)
From now on, we use units in which $`c`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ equal one.

We first consider a relativistic electron moving along the $`+z`$ axis with 4-momentum

$$p=(E,0,0,P)=\gamma m(1,0,0,\beta ),$$
(6)
where $`E`$ and $`P`$ are the energy and the momentum of the electron prior to the arrival of the wave, $`\beta 1`$ is the electron’s velocity and $`\gamma =1/\sqrt{1\beta ^2}1`$. Then

$$(pk_0)=\omega _0(EP)=\frac{m^2\omega _0}{E+P},$$
(7)
so

$$ϵ=\frac{\eta ^2(E+P)}{2\omega _0}\frac{\gamma m\eta ^2}{\omega _0},$$
(8)
where the approximation holds for a relativistic electron. For a wave of optical frequencies (such as a laser), $`ϵ1`$. The quasienergy, $`q_0`$, is then large:

$$q_0=E(1+\eta ^2).$$
(9)
The electron has been accelerated from energy $`E`$ outside the wave to energy $`E(1+\eta ^2)`$ inside the wave. Since $`\eta `$ can in principle be large compared to 1, this acceleration can be very significant.

Can we take advantage of this acceleration in a high-energy-physics experiment? The example of Compton scattering of an electron by one laser beam while in a second laser beam has recently been reported elsewhere . Here, we consider examples of possibly enhanced production of electroweak gauge bosons in high-energy $`ee`$ and $`e\gamma `$ collisions in the presence of an intense laser.

Suppose the electron $`p`$ collides head-on with a positron $`p^{}`$, all inside the background wave. The positron 4-momentum is then

$$p^{}=(E^{},0,0,P^{}),$$
(10)
where $`E^{}m`$ in the relativistic case. Then

$$(p^{}k_0)=\omega _0(E^{}+P^{})2E^{}\omega _0.$$
(11)
The corresponding quasimomentum is

$$q^{}=p^{}+ϵ^{}k_0,$$
(12)
where

$$ϵ^{}=\frac{m^2\eta ^2}{2(p^{}k_0)}\frac{m^2\eta ^2}{2E^{}\omega _0}.$$
(13)
The factor $`ϵ^{}`$ is not large in general, and the energy of a relativistic positron (or electron) moving against an optical wave is almost unchanged.

However, the center-of-mass (cm) energy of the $`e^+e^{}`$ system is increased when the collision occurs inside the background wave. The cm-energy squared is

$$s=(q+q^{})^24EE^{}(1+\eta ^2),$$
(14)
which is enhanced by a factor $`1+\eta ^2`$ compared to the case of no background wave.

For example, the $`Z^0`$ boson could be produced in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions with 33- rather than 46.6-GeV beams, if the collision took place inside a background wave of strength $`\eta =1`$.

Of course, the background wave Compton scatters off the positron beam at a high rate if η

>

1

>

𝜂1\eta\mathrel{\vbox{\kern 0.0pt\hbox{$>$} \kern 0.0pt\hbox{$\sim$} }}1, which results in substantial smearing of the energy of that beam. In practice, the cm-energy enhancement by a background wave would not be very useful in $`e^+e^{}`$ or $`ee`$ collisions.

Note, however, that Compton scattering is insignificant when the background wave and electron move in the same direction, unless the wave is extraordinarily strong. By an application of the Larmor formula in the (average) rest frame of the electron, we find that the fraction of the electron’s (laboratory) energy radiated in one cycle of its motion in the wave is of order $`\alpha \eta ^2(\omega _0/E)`$, where $`\alpha `$ is the fine-structure constant.

Suppose instead that the electron collides head-on with a high-energy photon of frequency $`\omega `$ and 4-momentum

$$p^{}=k=(\omega ,0,0,\omega ).$$
(15)
Then eq. (14) holds on substituting $`\omega `$ for $`E^{}`$; the cm-energy squared is again enhanced by the factor $`1+\eta ^2`$.

The background wave can, of course, interact directly with the high-energy photon to produce $`e^+e^{}`$ pairs, but if $`4\omega \omega _0<m^2(1+\eta ^2)`$, the pair-production rate is much suppressed . Thus, there is a regime in which $`e`$ \+ photon collisions in a strong background wave are cleaner than $`e^+e^{}`$ or $`ee`$ collisions in the wave.

In practice, we could get the high-energy photon from Compton scattering of the background wave off an electron beam. One might not want to backscatter the wave off a positron beam because of “backgrounds” from $`e^+e^{}Z^0`$.

A physics topic of interest would be the reaction

$$k+e^{}W^{}+\nu ,$$
(16)
which proceeds via the triple-gauge-boson coupling $`\gamma WW`$, and whose angular distribution is sensitive to the magnetic moment of the $`W`$ boson . The “background” process

$$k+e^{}Z^0+e^{}$$
(17)
could be suppressed by suitable choice of polarization of the electron and background wave.

For electron beams of 46.6 GeV as at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, green laser light backscatters into photons of energies up to about 30 GeV. Thus if the laser had $`\eta =1`$, the cm energy would extend up to 106 GeV, well above the threshold for reactions (16-17).

However, the enhancement factors $`1+\eta ^2`$ in the electron energy, eq. (9), and in the cm-energy squared, eq. (14), of $`ee`$ or electron-photon collisions are very much dependent on the idealization that the background wave is highly collinear with the electron.

We reconsider the preceding, but now suppose that the electron makes angle $`\theta 1`$ to the $`z`$ axis, The 4-momentum of the electron is

$$p=(E,P\mathrm{sin}\theta ,0,P\mathrm{cos}\theta ),$$
(18)
and

$$(pk_0)=E\omega _0(1\beta \mathrm{cos}\theta )\frac{m\omega _0}{2\gamma }(1+\gamma ^2\theta ^2).$$
(19)
As a consequence, the (quasi)energy of the electron inside the wave is now

$$q_0=p_0+\frac{m^2\eta ^2\omega _0}{2(pk_0)}E\left(1+\frac{\eta ^2}{1+\gamma ^2\theta ^2}\right),$$
(20)
which reduces to eq. (9) as $`\theta `$ goes to zero. However, if $`\theta >\eta /\gamma `$, then the electron is hardly accelerated by the background wave.

Electrons of present interest in high-energy physics typically have energies in the range 1-1000 GeV, corresponding to $`\gamma 10^3`$-$`10^6`$. This places very severe requirements on the alignment of the background wave with the electron beam. Indeed, the angular divergence of an electron beam is often larger than $`1/\gamma `$, so that no alignment of the background wave could impart large energy enhancements to the entire beam.

Furthermore, optical waves with $`\eta 1`$ can only be obtained at present in focused laser beams for which the characteristic angular spread is Δθ

>

0.1

>

Δ𝜃0.1\Delta\theta\mathrel{\vbox{\kern 0.0pt\hbox{$>$} \kern 0.0pt\hbox{$\sim$} }}0.1. So even if the central angle of the beam could be aligned to better than $`1/\gamma `$, only a very small fraction of the beam power would lie within a cone of that angle.

We also note that for the quasimomentum $`q`$ to be meaningful, the electron must have resided inside the strong background field for at least one cycle. A relativistic electron moves distance $`2\gamma ^2(1+\eta ^2)\lambda _0`$ while the background wave advances one wavelength relative to the electron . However, the strong-field region of a focused laser is characterized by its Rayleigh range, which is typically a few hundred wavelengths when $`\eta 1`$. Further, the transverse extent of the (classical) trajectory is of order $`\gamma \eta \lambda _0`$. Hence, in present laser systems, the strong-field region is not extensive enough that the energy transfer (9) could be realized for γ

>

10

>

𝛾10\gamma\mathrel{\vbox{\kern 0.0pt\hbox{$>$} \kern 0.0pt\hbox{$\sim$} }}10.

While physical consequences of the temporary acceleration of relativistic electrons inside an intense laser beam may be difficult to demonstrate, there is also interest in the case where the electron is initially at rest, or nearly so, such as electrons ionized from gas atoms by the passage of the background laser pulse .

An interesting process is so-called trident production,

$$e+Ae^{}+A^{}+e^+e^{},$$
(21)
of an electron-positron pair in the interaction of an ionization electron with a nucleus $`A`$ of a gas atom. For a very heavy nucleus $`A`$, its final state $`A^{}`$ has a different momentum but the same energy. Then the initial electron must provide the energy to create the $`e^+e^{}`$ pair as well as that for the final electron. The least energy required is when all three final-state electrons and positrons are at “rest” (i.e., they have zero net longitudinal momentum; they must always have quiver motion when they are in the wave). Thus, the minimum total quasienergy of the final-state electrons and positrons is $`3\overline{m}`$.

We conclude that the quasienergy $`q_0`$ of the initial electron must be at least $`3\overline{m}`$ for reaction (21) to occur.

If the electron is at rest prior to the arrival of the background wave its 4-momentum is

$$p=(m,0,0,0).$$
(22)
As the electron is overtaken by a wave of strength $`\eta `$ and 4-momentum given by (5), it takes on quasimomentum

$$q=(m(1+\eta ^2/2),0,0,m\eta ^2/2)(\overline{m}\gamma ,0,0,\overline{m}\gamma \beta _z).$$
(23)
Thus, the net longitudinal velocity of the electron inside the wave is $`\beta _z=q_z/q_0=(\eta ^2/2)/(1+\eta ^2/2)`$. As expected, inside a very strong wave the electron can take on relativistic longitudinal motion.

We could have trident production while the electron is still in the wave if the quasienergy $`q_0=m(1+\eta ^2/2)`$ exceeds $`3\overline{m}`$. For an electron initially at rest, this requires $`\eta \sqrt{16+12\sqrt{2}}=5.74`$.

The trident process is still possible within a wave with $`\eta <5.74`$ provided the electron has quasienergy $`q_03\overline{m}`$. This might arise, for example, because of acceleration of the electron by the plasma-wakefield effect .

It is conceivable that the electron creates the pair in a linearly polarized wave at a phase when its (classical) kinetic energy is high, but the final electron and the pair all appear with a lower kinetic energy corresponding to some other phase of the wave. This can’t happen if the interaction takes place at a well-defined point, since the phase of the wave is a unique function space and time. It might occur if the final particles “tunnel” to another space-time point before appearing, and the instantaneous kinetic energy is lower at that point.

However, we will find shortly that such tunneling is not consistent with energy conservation. To be as definite as possible, we consider ordinary energy along the classical trajectories, rather than quasimomentum. The latter is taken into account in the sense that the electron and positron are not created at rest, but with the transverse velocities appropriate to phase of the background wave at the spacetime point at which the pair appears. It is sufficient to consider only those trajectories with zero average momentum (i.e., zero quasi-3-momentum).

For circular polarization of the background wave, the electron trajectory is a circle in the plane perpendicular to the $`z`$ axis, with radius $`a/\omega _0`$, velocity $`\beta =a`$ and Lorentz factor

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{circ}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1a^2}}=\sqrt{1+\eta ^2},$$
(24)
where parameter $`a`$ is given by

$$a^2=\frac{\eta ^2}{1+\eta ^2},0a^21.$$
(25)
For a background wave that is linearly polarized in the $`x`$-direction, the trajectory can be parametrized as

$$x=\sqrt{2}\frac{a}{\omega _0}\mathrm{sin}\delta ,z=\frac{a^2}{4\omega _0}\mathrm{sin}2\delta ,$$
(26)
where $`\delta =\omega _0\tau \sqrt{1+\eta ^2}=\omega _0\tau /\sqrt{1a^2}`$, and $`\tau `$ is the proper time. Expression (26) describes the well-known figure-8 trajectory. Now $`dx/d\tau =(dx/dt)(dt/d\tau )=\gamma \beta _x`$, so $`\gamma ^2=1+\gamma ^2\beta ^2=1+(dx/d\tau )^2+(dz/d\tau )^2`$. We find that

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{lin}}=\frac{1+\frac{1}{2}[a^2(\omega _0x)^2]}{\sqrt{1a^2}}.$$
(27)
From expression (26) for the $`x`$-trajectory we see that $`0(\omega _0x)^22a^2`$, so

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}=\frac{1+\eta ^2/2}{\sqrt{1+\eta ^2}},\text{and}\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}=\frac{1+3\eta ^2/2}{\sqrt{1+\eta ^2}}.$$
(28)
These values surround the result that $`\gamma _{\mathrm{circ}}=\sqrt{1+\eta ^2}`$ always for circular polarization. For small $`\eta `$, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}1+\eta ^4/8`$, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}1+\eta ^2`$, and $`\gamma _{\mathrm{circ}}1+\eta ^2/2`$; for large $`\eta `$, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}\eta /2`$, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}3\eta /2`$, and $`\gamma _{\mathrm{circ}}\eta `$.

Suppose an electron interacts with a nucleus at the place where its Lorentz factor is $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}`$ and reappears along with an electron-positron pair at a location where $`\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}`$ holds at that moment. The nucleus absorbs the excess momentum of the initial electron. Conservation of (ordinary) energy requires that $`\gamma _{\mathrm{max}}=3\gamma _{\mathrm{min}}`$. But this is not satisfied for any value of $`\eta `$ according to (28). That is, the hypothetical tunneling process is not possible under any circumstances.

In sum, even when in a background wave an electron can produce positrons off nuclei only if the electron has sufficient longitudinal momentum that the corresponding (quasi)energy is three times the (effective) electron mass.

We close by returning to the astrophysical context that began the historical debate on acceleration by intense electromagnetic waves. Gunn and Ostriker  have given an extensive discussion the possibility of electron acceleration in the rotating dipole field of a millisecond pulsar, where the field strength $`\eta `$ can be of order $`10^{10}`$. Their argument does not primarily address free electrons overtaken by a wave, but rather electrons “injected” or “dropped at rest’ into the wave. Neutron decay is a candidate process for injection. In very strong fields ($`\eta 1)`$ this decay takes place together with the absorption by the electron (and proton) of a very large number of wave photons, so that the electron is created with (quasi)energy $`m\eta ^2/2`$ (compare eq. (23)) . Because the fields of the pulsar fall off as $`1/r`$ where (coincidentally) $`r_{\mathrm{pulsar}}\lambda _0`$, the wavelength of the rotating dipole radiation, the field region is “short”, and the electron may emerge with some fraction of the large energy it had at the moment of its creation.

An example closer to the theme of the present paper would be an electron that is overtaken by the intense electromagnetic pulse of a supernova (or other transient astrophysical occurrence, perhaps including gamma-ray bursters), and thereby temporarily accelerated to energy $`m\eta ^2/2`$. Such pulses could have significant fields at optical frequencies, where the transverse scale, $`\eta \lambda _0`$, of the motion of accelerated electrons is less than the Chandrasekhar radius for $`\eta <10^{10}`$. In general, the electron has low energy before and after the passage of the pulse. However, high-energy photons can arise via bremsstrahlung of the electron when it interacts with a plasma nucleus while still in the pulse. In this view, the primary astrophysical evidence of temporarily accelerated electrons would be high-energy photons which, of course, could transfer some of their energy to protons and other charged particles in subsequent interactions.

This work was supported in part by DoE grants DE-FG02-91ER40671 and DE-FG05-91ER40627.