AHEP Advances in High Energy Physics 1687-7365 1687-7357 Hindawi 10.1155/2018/2396275 2396275 arXiv:1710.09956 Research Article Magnetic Monopoles in Multivector Boson Theories Kobayashi Koichiro 1 Kan Nahomi 2 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9761-5137 Shiraishi Kiyoshi 3 Stanco Luca 1 National Institute of Technology Oshima College Suooshima-cho Yamaguchi 742-2193 Japan oshima-k.ac.jp 2 National Institute of Technology Gifu College Motosu-shi Gifu 501-0495 Japan gifu-nct.ac.jp 3 Graduate School of Sciences and Technology for Innovation Yamaguchi University Yamaguchi-shi Yamaguchi 753-8512 Japan yamaguchi-u.ac.jp 2018 2162018 2018 01 02 2018 23 05 2018 30 05 2018 2162018 2018 Copyright © 2018 Koichiro Kobayashi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The publication of this article was funded by SCOAP3.

A classical solution for a magnetic monopole is found in a specific multivector boson theory. We consider the model whose [SU(2)]N+1 gauge group is broken by sigma model fields (à la dimensional deconstruction) and further spontaneously broken by an adjoint scalar (à la triplet Higgs mechanism). In this multivector boson theory, we find the solution for the monopole whose mass is MN~(4πv/g)N+1, where g is the common gauge coupling constant and v is the vacuum expectation value of the triplet Higgs field, by using a variational method with the simplest set of test functions.

1. Introduction

The existence of magnetic monopoles (for reviews, see ) has been discussed for many years, although monopoles have not yet been observed experimentally.

In 1931, Dirac  reconsidered the duality in electromagnetism and showed that the quantum mechanics of an electrically charged particle can be consistently formulated in the presence of a point magnetic charge, provided that the magnetic charge gm is related to the electric charge e by egm=nħc/2 with an integer n. In 1974, ‘t Hooft  and Polyakov  found that a nonsingular configuration arises from spontaneous symmetry breaking in a certain class of non-Abelian gauge theory. Their models are based on the Georgi-Glashow model , which uses spontaneous symmetry breaking of SU(2) gauge symmetry by a scalar field in the adjoint representation. The ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopoles are classical solutions, which are stable for topological reasons. Recently, the mathematical study of monopoles has focused on not only topology, but also integrable systems, supersymmetry, nonperturbative analyses, and so on.

In the present paper, we consider a novel monopole in a multivector boson theory, which is based on dimensional deconstruction [11, 12] and the Higgsless theories . The Higgsless theory is one of the theories that include symmetry breaking of the electroweak symmetry. In the Higgsless theory, for example, the [SU(2)]NU(1) gauge theory is considered. Such a theory yields N sets of massive vector fields besides one massless photon field.

In our model of the multivector boson theory, [SU(2)]N+1 gauge symmetry is assumed. One of the SU(2) gauge groups is broken by an adjoint scalar as in the Georgi-Glashow model. There remains one massless vector field due to the triplet Higgs mechanism. We can thus construct the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov-type monopole configuration in the model. We estimate the monopole mass M~(4πv/g)N+1, where v is the vacuum expectation value of the scalar field, and g is the coupling constant of the gauge field.

In Section 2, we briefly review dimensional deconstruction and the Higgsless theory. Our model of the multivector boson theory is shown in Section 3, which is a generalization of the gauge-field part of the Higgsless theory. The mass spectrum in the multivector boson theories is investigated in Section 4. In Section 5, we demonstrate the construction of monopole configurations in the multivector boson theory. In order to treat many variables, we propose an approximation scheme by a variational method in this section. In Section 6, we discuss the magnetic charge of the monopole in the multivector boson theory. The final section (Section 7) is devoted to summary and discussion.

2. Deconstruction and Higgsless Theory

We review the basic idea of dimensional deconstruction [11, 12] and the Higgsless theories  in this section. We consider N+1 gauge fields A1μ,A2μ,AN+1,μ. The field strength GIμν (I=1,2,,N+1) is defined as(1)GIμνμAIν-νAIμ-igIAIμ,AIν,where gI is the I-th gauge coupling constant. The I-th field strength transforms as(2)GIμνUIGIμνUI1IN+1,according to the I-th gauge group transformation UIGI.

In addition to the gauge fields, we introduce N scalar fields Σ1,Σ2,ΣN, which would supply the Nambu-Goldstone fields as nonlinear-sigma model fields. The scalar field ΣI (I=1,2,,N) transforms as in the bifundamental representation,(3)ΣIUIΣIUI+11IN.(Here, we show the case of “linear moose”, and the different assignments of the transformation of ΣI yield the theory associated with various other types of moose diagrams .)

Now, the Lagrangian density, which is invariant under the gauge transformation of G1G2GN+1, is given by(4)L=-12I=1N+1trGIμνGIμν-I=1NtrDμΣIDμΣI,where the covariant derivative of ΣI is(5)DμΣIμΣI-igIAIμΣI+igI+1ΣIAI+1,μ,and then its gauge transformation is(6)DμΣIUIDμΣIUI+1.

In the usual dimensional deconstruction scheme, we consider that G1=G2==GN+1=G and g1=g2==gN+1=g. We also assume that the absolute value of each nonlinear sigma model field ΣI has a common vacuum value, f. Then, the field ΣI is expressed as(7)ΣI=fexpiπaTaf,where Ta is the generator in the adjoint representation of G and πa is the Nambu-Goldstone field, which is absorbed into the gauge fields. Taking the unitary gauge ΣI=f×(identitymatrix), we find that the kinetic terms of ΣI lead to the mass terms of the gauge fields as (provided that tr(TaTb)=(1/2)δab)(8)I=1NtrDμΣIDμΣI=12g2f2I=1NAIμa-AI+1,μa2,and these produce the mass spectrum of vector bosons. It is known that a certain continuum limit of this model can be taken, which corresponds to the G gauge theory with one-dimensional compactification on to S1/Z2 (or an “interval”).

In the Higgsless theories, for example, the gauge group [SU(2)]NU(1) is adopted for explaining the electroweak sector in the particle theory. Namely, we set G1=U(1) and G2==GN+1=SU(2). Then, the covariant derivative of Σ1 is(9)DμΣ1μΣ1-ig1A1μT3Σ1+igΣ1A2μ,where g1 is the U(1) gauge coupling constant, g is the common SU(2) gauge coupling constant, A1μ is the U(1) gauge field, and T3 is the third generator of SU(2). The nonzero vacuum expectation value of ΣI leads to symmetry breaking [SU(2)]NU(1)U(1) , and we get only one massless electromagnetic field and N sets of massive weak boson fields.

The original motivation for the Higgsless theory has been abandoned after the discovery of the Higgs particles. Nevertheless, we would like to extend the standard model, since there might be a lack of unknown extra particles, which explain the dark matter problem [19, 20]. As a model of dark matter, the multivector boson theory describes a hidden sector of dark photons [21, 22] with mutual mixings. Therefore, we suppose that it is worth considering the theoretical models whose massive particle contents are rich and governed by certain symmetries.

3. Multivector Boson Theory from the Higgsless Theory Incorporating the Higgs Mechanism

Here, we consider the model whose [SU(2)]NU(1) gauge group comes from the spontaneous symmetry breaking by an adjoint scalar : [SU(2)]N+1[SU(2)]NU(1). The mechanism is now generally called the Higgs mechanism. The symmetry is broken into U(1) by the vacuum expectation value of the nonlinear sigma model field ΣI introduced in the previous section. As a consequence, we have a monopole configuration; the construction of the monopole solution will be described in the next section. In this section, we define our model, and in the subsequent section, we show the mass spectrum of this model.

We consider the following Lagrangian density:(10)L=-12I=1N+1trGIμνGIμν-I=1NtrDμΣIDμΣI-trDμϕDμϕ-λ42trϕϕ-v22,where GIμν(I=1,,N+1) is the field strength of the SU(2)I gauge field AIμ(I=1,,N+1) and ΣI(I=1,,N) is the nonlinear sigma model fields in the bifundamental representation of SU(2)ISU(2)I+1, which connect the gauge fields at neighboring sites, as in the dimensionally deconstructed model reviewed in the previous section. For simplicity, all the coupling constants of the gauge fields are assumed to be the same g.

Here, ϕ is a scalar field in the adjoint representation of SU(2)1, and the covariant derivative of the scalar field ϕ is given by(11)Dμϕμϕ-igA1μ,ϕ.In the last term in the Lagrangian density (10), λ is a positive constant and the constant v is the scalar field vacuum expectation value.

First, we consider the symmetry breaking by the sigma fields. We choose the unitary gauge Σ1==ΣN=f×(theidentitymatrix). Then, the Lagrangian density is represented as follows:(12)L=-14I=1N+1GIμνaGIaμν-12g2f2I=1NAIμa-AI+1,μa2-12DμϕaDμϕa-λ4ϕaϕa-v22,where(13)GIμνaμAIνa-νAIμa+gεabcAIμbAIνcandDμϕaμϕa+gεabcA1μbϕc.Here, we use the component representations AIμ=AIμaTa, GIμν=GIμνaTa, ϕ=ϕaTa, and Dμϕ=DμϕaTa, and εabc is the totally antisymmetric symbol (a=1,2,3).

Next, we consider the symmetry breakdown by the Higgs mechanism with respect to the adjoint scalar field ϕ. We express the third component of the scalar field as ϕ3=v+φ. Then, the Lagrangian density is denoted by(14)L=-14I=1N+1GIμν1GI1μν-12g2f2I=1NAIμ1-AI+1,μ12-12g2v2A1μ1A11μ-14I=1N+1GIμν2GI2μν-12g2f2I=1NAIμ2-AI+1,μ22-12g2v2A1μ2A12μ-14I=1N+1GIμν3GI3μν-12g2f2I=1NAIμ3-AI+1,μ32-12μφμφ-λv2φ2+interactionterms,where the labels a are explicitly represented. We have only one massless U(1) symmetric gauge field in the third component. Therefore, we have obtained the symmetry breaking SU(2)U(1) by using the Higgs mechanism. This type of symmetry breaking gives rise to the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopole configuration.

It should be noted that we do not discuss which sequences of symmetry breaking, that is, [SU(2)]N+1[SU(2)]NU(1)U(1) or [SU(2)]N+1SU(2)U(1), occurred in the universe, although the order may have an effect on the process of creation of monopoles in the early universe.

4. Mass Spectrum of Vector Bosons

In the Lagrangian density (14), the mass term of gauge fields for a=1 is(15)Lmassterma=1=-12g2f2I=1NAIμ1-AI+1,μ12-12g2v2A1μ1A11μ=-12g2f2×A11μA21μA31μAN-11μAN1μAN+1μ1+v2f2-1-12-1-12-1-12-1-12-1-11A1μ1A2μ1A3μ1AN-1,μ1ANμ1AN+1,μ1.Therefore, for a=1, the mass-squared matrix (mass1)2 of the vector bosons is(16)mass12=g2f21+v2f2-1-12-1-12-1-12-1-12-1-11g2f2M12.

We consider the eigenvalue equation(17)M12A1=ME12A1,where A1 is the eigenvector(18)A1A1μ1A2μ1A3μ1AN-1,μ1ANμ1AN+1,μ1,and (ME1)2 is the eigenvalue.

We show the ME1-v/f graphs in Figure 1. The highest eigenvalue behaves differently from the other eigenvalues. When v/f, the highest eigenvalue becomes ME1~v/f, but the other eigenvalues asymptotically approach constant values that are less than two.

The eigenvalues ME1 are shown as functions of v/f in the cases of N=10,5,1,and0.

The mass term of gauge fields for a=2 is the same as for a=1, but the mass term is different for a=3. The mass-squared matrix of gauge fields for a=3 is(19)mass32=g2f21-1-12-1-12-1-12-1-12-1-11g2f2M32.

The eigenvalues ME3 can be analytically obtained  as(20)ME3n=2sinnπ2N+1n=0,,N.Obviously, there is a zero mode, and we have only one massless vector field in the theory after symmetry breakdown.

5. Energy and Equations of Motion of the Monopole in the Multivector Boson Theory

In the multivector boson theory defined by the Lagrangian density (14), the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov-type monopole is expected.

Similar to the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopole, the static and spherically symmetric monopole solution in the multivector boson theory is considered to be specified by the following ansatz:(21)ϕa=δiaxigr2Hr,(22)AI0a=0,(23)AIia=εaijxjgr21-KIr,and the boundary conditions on the function of the radial coordinate r are(24)limr0Hrr=0,limrHrr=gv,limr0KIr=1,limrKIr=0.The common form of AIia is due to the requirement of finite energy of the monopole, i.e., the contribution of the term (8) to the energy density vanishes at spatial infinity.

For the static case, the energy density is given by -L. Substituting the ansatz, we obtain the expression for total energy(25)EN=4πvg0dξI=1N+1KI2+12ξ21-KI22+f2v2I=1NKI-KI+12+12H-Hξ2+1ξ2K12H2+λξ24g2H2ξ2-12where we set ξgvr and the prime () denotes the derivative with respect to ξ.

From this expression, we can obtain the following equations of motion by the variational principle:(26)ξ2K1=K1K12-1+H2K1+f2v2ξ2K1-K2,(27)ξ2KI=KIKI2-1+f2v2ξ22KI-KI-1-KI+12IN,(28)ξ2KN+1=KN+1KN+12-1+f2v2ξ2KN+1-KN,(29)ξ2H=2HK1+λg2HH2-ξ2.

Analytical and semianalytical studies of the single ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopole are found in . Because it is hard to find a set of solutions for these coupled equations for large N and because we are presently considering a simple toy model, we adopt a simple variational method to obtain approximate solutions in this paper. We have confirmed that this approach obtains a good solution for the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopole in the BPS limit.

For the approximation, we assume that the solutions take the following forms:(30)KIξ=1+aIξexp-aIξ1IN+1,(31)Hξξ=1-exp-αξ,where both aI(1IN+1) and α are variational parameters. The functions KI(ξ) and H(ξ) with minimal number of parameters apparently satisfy the boundary conditions and are similar to those of the solutions in the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopole. This is the reason why we assume the simple form of solutions as shown above.

We substitute the expressions (30) and (31) into the energy EN and calculate the minimum value of the energy EN by varying the parameters aI and α.

Each term is separately integrated as follows:(32)0dξKI2+12ξ21-KI22=4164aI,(33)0dξKI-KI+12=54aI+54aI+1-4aI2+3aIaI+1+aI+12aI+aI+13,(34)0dξH-Hξ2=14α,(35)0dξ1ξ2K12H2=α256a14+132a13α+111a12α2+39a1α3+5α44a1a1+α32a1+α3,(36)0dξξ2H2ξ2-12=635864α3.Therefore, the energy expressed by the variational parameters becomes(37)EN=4πvg4164I=1N+1aI+f2v2I=1N54aI+54aI+1-4aI2+3aIaI+1+aI+12aI+aI+13+18α+α256a14+132a13α+111a12α2+39a1α3+5α44a1a1+α32a1+α3+635λ3456g2α3.

We evaluate the minimum value of this energy by numerical calculation with Mathematica . Thus, we get the approximate solution of KI(ξ) and H(ξ)/ξ, and the case of N=10 and λ=0 is shown in Figure 2.

K I and H/ξ are shown for N=10, λ=0. In each graph, KI<KI+1(1IN=10) at any ξ. The three graphs correspond to the cases of f/v=0.5, f/v=1, and f/v=2, respectively.

The region of nonvanishing KI can be interpreted as the region where the I-th massive vector bosons (a=1,2) condensate. For larger values of f/v, the ranges of finite KI become narrower and degenerate, while the distance where H/ξ~1 becomes larger.

We obtain the energy of the monopole in the limiting case λ/g2=0 for the cases where N=0,1,5,and10 and f/v=0.5,1,and2.(38)E0=4πvg×1.05,BPSmonopole(39)E1=4πvg×1.41,fv=0.5(40)E1=4πvg×1.47,fv=1(41)E1=4πvg×1.48,fv=2(42)E5=4πvg×2.07,fv=0.5(43)E5=4πvg×2.37,fv=1(44)E5=4πvg×2.51,fv=2(45)E10=4πvg×2.47,fv=0.5(46)E10=4πvg×2.99,fv=1(47)E10=4πvg×3.32,fv=2From these results, we roughly estimate that the energy of the monopole (λ=0) is(48)EN~4πvgN+1λ=0,since the difference that appears due to different f/v is smaller than that due to different N. We find that our approximate values of the static energies for λ=0 are well fitted to EN(4πv/g)×1.94×W(0.62N+0.96), where W(x) is the Lambert W-function, which is slightly smaller than (4πv/g)1+N for large N. This is in contrast to the rather large dependence of the profiles of solutions for KI and H/ξ on f/v (Figure 2).

On the other hand, we know the exact value of the energy of the BPS limit [27, 28] for the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopole, which corresponds to E0 for λ=0, as(49)Eλ=0=4πvg.Comparing these values, we find that the energy of the BPS monopole in the multivector boson theory is obtained by replacing gg/N+1 in that of the usual BPS monopole.

Note that we only show the case of λ0. However, we confirmed that the energy of the monopole changes at most factor two for a finite value of λ/g2 in general.

6. Magnetic Charge of the Monopole

In this section, we specify the magnetic charge of the monopole in the multivector boson theory obtained in the previous section. First of all, we should discuss the definition of electric charge. As in Section 3, if we choose ϕ3=v, the massless gauge field satisfies(50)A1μ3=A1μ3==AN+1,μ31N+1Aμ3.The normalization factor is determined by the canonical form of the Lagrangian density of this zero-mode field. Therefore, if the charged matter field is virtually coupled only to A1μ, similar to that in the triplet Higgs field, the electric charge of the matter field e becomes(51)e=gN+1,and the field strength satisfies G1μν3=G1μν3==GN+1,μν3(1/N+1)Gμν3.

Now, we consider the magnetic field far from the monopole. The projection of the vacuum expectation values of the field strength [1, 3, 6] is(52)limrFij=limrϕ^aGija=limr1N+1I=1N+1ϕ^aGIija=N+1g-εaijxar3,where ϕ^a=ϕa/v. Then, the magnetic field Bi is asymptotically(53)Bi=-N+1gxir3=-xier3.Comparing this magnetic field representation with the magnetic field created by a point magnetic charge gm(54)Bi=gm4πxir3,the magnetic charge gm of our monopole is(55)gm=-4πgN+1=-4πe.This relation is the same as that for the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopole.

The static energy of the monopole in the multivector boson theory that was described in the previous section can be rewritten as(56)EN~4πvgN+1=4πve,which is the same as the mass of the ‘t Hooft–Polyakov monopole (or, the case of N=0).

7. Summary and Discussion

In this paper, we studied the static, spherically symmetric monopole solutions in the multivector boson theory with N+1 sets of vector bosons with the gauge coupling g. The theory includes two mass scales f and v. We found that 3N+2 massive vector bosons and a single massless vector boson (of the electromagnetic field) appear according to the theory described in Section 4. We used a simple variational method to obtain approximate solutions in Section 5. The solution of KI shows that the regions of existence of massive vector fields have a multilayer structure, where massive bosons “stratify”. Although the profile of condensation of the massive degrees of freedom is sensitive with respect to both N and f/v, the mass of the monopole is approximately EN~(4πv/g)N+1=4πv/e, where e is the electric charge defined in the theory. It is necessary to conduct a more accurate investigation for obtaining the precise dependence of mass of the monopole on N.

The model used in this study is the simplest one; therefore, we would like to investigate more general models, which have different coupling constants for different gauge fields or have complicated mass matrices as in the clockwork theory .

Another possible connection to a phenomenological model can be considered in a model with symmetry breakdown by a Higgs doublet, as in the standard model. In 1997, Cho and Maison  found an electroweak monopole solution in the standard model. The Cho–Maison monopole and its generalization have been studied further [36, 37], and an experimental search for them is going on [38, 39]. We wish to investigate the multivector boson theory with a doublet Higgs field and compare the properties of its monopoles with those of the Cho–Maison monopoles.

We also wish to study a scenario in which the monopoles in the multivector boson theory represent the dark matter in the universe. Since the present model of multivector boson theory has two symmetry breaking scales f and v and there can be various mass spectra of massive vector bosons as seen in Section 4, we need to perform a detailed study on the process of symmetry breaking and (time-dependent) monopole production.

Data Availability

No data were used to support this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Hideto Manjo for useful comments on numerical estimations.

Goddard P. Olive D. I. Magnetic monopoles in gauge field theories Reports on Progress in Physics 1978 4 9 1357 Rajaraman R. Solitons and Instantons 1987 New York, NY, USA North-Holland Rubakov V. Classical Theory of Gauge Fields 2002 Princeton, NJ, USA Princeton Univ. Press Manton N. Sutcliffe P. Topological Solitons 2004 Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press 10.1017/CBO9780511617034 MR2068924 Zbl1100.37044 Shnir Y. M. Magnetic Monopoles 2005 Berlin, Germany Springer Weinberg E. J. Classical Solutions in Quantum Field Theory 2012 Cambridge, UK Cambridge Univ. Press Dirac P. A. M. Quantised singularities in the electromagnetic field Proceedings of the Royal Society 1931 133 60 10.1098/rspa.1931.0130 't Hooft G. Magnetic monopoles in unified gauge theories Nuclear Physics B 1974 79 276 284 MR0413809 10.1016/0550-3213(74)90486-6 Polyakov A. M. Particle spectrum in quantum field theory JETP Letters 1974 20 6 194 195 Georgi H. Glashow S. L. Unity of all elementary-particle forces Physical Review Letters 1974 32 8 438 441 10.1103/physrevlett.32.438 2-s2.0-0001166611 Arkani-Hamed N. Cohen A. G. Georgi H. (De)constructing dimensions Physical Review Letters 2001 86 21 4757 4761 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.4757 MR1987100 Hill C. T. Pokorski S. Wang J. Gauge invariant effective Lagrangian for Kaluza-Klein modes Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology 2001 64 10 10.1103/PhysRevD.64.105005 Cheng H.-C. Hill C. T. Pokorski S. Wang J. Standard model in the latticized bulk Physical Review D 64 2001 065007 10.1103/PhysRevD.64.065007 Csáki C. Grojean C. Murayama H. Pilo L. Terning J. Gauge theories on an interval: unitarity without a Higgs boson Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology 2004 69 5 19 10.1103/physrevd.69.055006 055006 Csáki C. Grojean C. Pilo L. Terning J. Towards a Realistic Model of Higgsless Electroweak Symmetry Breaking Physical Review Letters 2004 92 10 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.101802 Csaki C. Hubisz J. Maede P. TASI Lectures on Electroweak Symmetry Breaking from Extra Dimensions 2006 Singapore World Scientific Foadi R. Gopalakrishna S. Schmidt C. Higgsless electroweak symmetry breaking from theory space Journal of High Energy Physics 2004 0403 042 10.1088/1126-6708/2004/03/042 Georgi H. Fun with Higgsless theories Physical Review 2005 D71 015016 10.1103/PhysRevD.71.015016 Bertone G. Hooper D. Silk J. Particle dark matter: evidence, candidates and constraints Physics Reports 2005 405 5-6 279 390 10.1016/j.physrep.2004.08.031 Profume S. An Introduction to Particle Dark Matter 2017 Singapore World Scientific Okun L. B. Limits of electrodynamics: paraphotons? Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics 1982 56 502 Holdom B. Two U(1)'s and epsilon charge shifts Physics Letters B 1986 166 196 198 Kirkman T. W. Zachos C. K. Asymptotic analysis of the monopole structure Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology 1981 24 4 999 1004 10.1103/PhysRevD.24.999 Gardner C. L. The 't Hooft-Polyakov monopole near the Prasad-Sommerfield limit Annals of Physics 1983 146 1 129 148 10.1016/0003-4916(83)90054-4 MR701263 Forgács P. Obadia N. Reuillon S. Publisher’s Note: Numerical and asymptotic analysis of the ’t Hooft-Polyakov magnetic monopole [Phys. Rev. D Physical Review D: Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology 2005 71 11 10.1103/PhysRevD.71.119902 Wolfram http://www.wolfram.com/ Bogomol'nyi E. The stability of classical solutions Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics 1976 24 449 454 Prasad M. Sommerfield C. Exact classical solution for the 't Hooft Monopole and the Julia-Zee Dyon Physical Review Letters 1975 35 12 760 10.1103/PhysRevLett.35.760 Choi K. Im S. H. Realizing the relaxion from multiple axions and its UV completion with high scale supersymmetry Journal of High Energy Physics 2016 1601 149 10.1007/JHEP01(2016)149 Kaplan D. E. Rattazzi R. Large field excursions and approximate discrete symmetries from a clockwork axion Physical Review D 2016 93 085007 10.1103/PhysRevD.93.085007 Giudice G. F. McCullough M. A clockwork theory Journal of High Energy Physics 2017 2017 036 10.1007/JHEP02(2017)036 Farina M. Pappadopulo D. Rompineve F. Tesi A. The photo-philic QCD axion Journal of High Energy Physics 2017 2017 1 10.1007/JHEP01(2017)095 Kehagias A. Riotto A. Clockwork inflation Physics Letters B 2017 767 73 80 10.1016/j.physletb.2017.01.042 Hambye T. Teresi D. Tytgat M. H. A clockwork WIMP Journal of High Energy Physics 2017 2017 7 10.1007/JHEP07(2017)047 Cho Y. Maison D. Monopole configuration in Weinberg-Salam model Physics Letters B 1997 391 3-4 360 365 10.1016/S0370-2693(96)01492-X Kim K. Yoon J. H. Cho Y. M. Finite energy electroweak dyon The European Physical Journal C 2015 75 67 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3290-3 Cho Y. M. Kim K. Yoon J. H. Gravitationally coupled electroweak monopole Physics Letters B 2016 761 203 206 10.1016/j.physletb.2016.08.033 Ellis J. Mavromatos N. E. You T. The price of an electroweak monopole Physics Letters B 2016 756 29 35 10.1016/j.physletb.2016.02.048 Acharya B. Alexandre J. Baines S. Search for Magnetic Monopoles with the MoEDAL Forward Trapping Detector in 13 TeV Proton-Proton Collisions at the LHC Physical Review Letters 2017 118 061801 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.061801