fundamental physics. The only trouble with it is that it will be extremelydiﬃcult to check experimentally the predictions of this theory, because themost direct predictions refer to the nature of space-time at the Plank scale,
GeV, and no experimental method seems to be ever able to accesssuch energies in a foreseeable future. So the string theorists are doomedto face the fatal question “can there be physics without experiments?” for a long time. Therefore, on the one hand, we have a clear experimentaland theoretical success up to the electroweak scale,
100 GeV, where theStandard Model reigns, and, on the other hand one has a very ambitioustheory without any clues how to check it experimentally. But what liesin between, worth of billions of dollars to spend in future accelerators anddetectors, to investigate?Despite its splendid success, nobody doubts that the Standard Model willbreak down sooner or later. There are several reasons why the StandardModel cannot be the ﬁnal theory and why some new physics beyond theStandard Model is expected :
(1) symmetry group deﬁnes separate gauge theorieswith three diﬀerent coupling constants. The conceptual similarity of these theories is begging for uniﬁcation.
The family problem – why are there three quark-lepton families?
The origin of the quark and lepton masses and mixing angles, as wellas of the
Solid experimental evidence of the neutrino oscillations require non-vanishing neutrino masses and therefore some extension of the Stan-dard Model. However, very minimal extension might be suﬃcient toaccommodate neutrino masses.
problem – why is the allowed
-term inthe QCD Lagrangian very small or absent?
The hierarchy problem – why is the electroweak scale so diﬀerent fromthe Plank scale?
The cosmological constant problem – why gravity almost does not feelthe presence of various symmetry-breaking condensates?But how far is this expected new physics? The logical structure of theStandard Model itself hints that quite interesting and crucial things can