antony sarratnufact04, jul. 26 - aug. 1, 2004, osaka non-accelerator physics with large water...

Antony Sarrat NuFact04, Jul. 26 - Aug. 1, 2004, Osaka

Non-Accelerator Physics With Large Water

Cherenkov◆ Existing Proposals, Detector Conceptual Design

◆ Physics Reach

◆ Proton Decay

◆ Atmospheric Neutrinos

◆ Solar Neutrinos

◆ Supernovae Neutrinos (galactic, extra-galactic, SRN)

Antony Sarrat

Stony Brook University


Existing Existing ProposalProposal

UNO / Henderson mine, USA650 (440) kton total (fid.) volume~4000 mwe, 10-40-10% coverage

HyperK / Tochibora-mine, Japan

~1 (0.54) Mton total (fid.) volume

1500-2000 mwe, 20% coverage

Mton Class / Frejus underground Lab., France/Italy border

~1 Mton total volume ~ 4000 to 5000 mwe


Detector Conceptual Design Detector Conceptual Design (UNO)(UNO)

A Water Cherenkov Detectoroptimized for:

• Light attenuation length limit

• PMT pressure limit

• Cost (built-in staging)

60 x 60 x 60 m3 (x3)

Total Vol: 650 kton

Fid. Vol: 440 kton (20xSuperK)

# of 20” PMTs: 56,000

# of 8” PMTs: 14,900

10%

40%

Only optical

separation


Physics GoalsPhysics Goals

Nucleon DecaySupernovaNeutrinos

SupernovaRelic Neutrinos

AstrophysicalNeutrino Sources

AtmosphericNeutrinos

Super-beam(+Beta-beam)

Solar Neutrinos

Comprehensive programs in astrophysics, nuclear and particle physics

Synergy between accelerator and non-accelerator physics


Proton Decay Search Proton Decay Search MotivationsMotivations

◆ Unification Theories predict nucleon decay (and specify the decay modes)

step toward unification of interactions

◆ Predicted decay rate :

– Favored mode (rough estimate of upper value) :

-1(p --> +) ≤ 1034 yrs

– Less favored mode (less model-dependant) :

-1(p --> e+o) ≈ 1035 yrs (MGUT=1016 GeV, h=0.015 GeV3)

not far from the current experimental limits

_


Theory vs Experimental Theory vs Experimental ResultsResults

IMB, Kamiokande & Super-K Results

SU(5) and MSSM SU(5)are ruled-out

Some models are strongly constrained


Characteristics Of Water Cherenkov Characteristics Of Water Cherenkov DetectorDetector

Sensitivity ~1035 yrs <=> ~1035 nucleons

needs huge detector (1 Mton scale)

Water is really cheap

Cherenkov radiation allows 2-body decay reconstruction with particle identification.

Not optimal for high multiplicity tracks and shower prongs and/or charged particles below threshold.

For example, one among the favored modes by SUSY GUTs:

P +Kº, Kº

But Super-K has the best current limit on such modes


Summary Of Proton Decay Search Summary Of Proton Decay Search ResultsResults

Water cherenkovIron calorimeter

Best limits from

water cherenkov

measurements

Dominated by

Super-K statistics


20 Mton-yr Atmospheric Background MC

SuperK Standard Cuts

==> 2.2 events/Mton-yr

==> signal eff.: 43.0%

Tighter Momentum Cut

==> 0.15 events/Mton-yr

==> signal eff.: 17.4%

p ep e++ 0 0 Search Search BackgroundBackground


p ep e++ 0 0 Search Search SignalSignal

No Fermi MomentumNo Binding energyNo Nuclear effect

Signal Events with Tighter Momentum Cut

Important to have free protons


UNO Proton Decay UNO Proton Decay SensitivitySensitivity

If MSSM SO(10) is correct

ObservationObservationis possible !is possible !

Other Models

Potential discoveryPotential discoverywith p ewith p e++ºº


Atmospheric Atmospheric NeutrinosNeutrinos

◆ 13 - sign of m223 (Kajita’s and Shiozawa’s talks)

◆ Huge statistics for all atmospheric samples Super-K statistics * 20 to 40

◆ Containment of High Energy Tracks About 12 GeV threshold in smaller detector size

(≈ maximum contained event in Super-K )

Maximum contained event ~36 GeV

Large Statistics in a Broad L/E range


~7 years of UNO exposure(m2 = 0.003 eV2, sin22 = 1.0)

P’ = sin22 sin2 (1.27 m2 L/E)

Direct Observation of L/E Oscillatory BehaviorDirect Observation of L/E Oscillatory Behavior

◆ 1 muon with E > 1GeV or

Evis () > 0.5 Evis (total)

◆ horizontal events cut (≤50% path length resolution)

Can discriminate

between models

Flavor oscillation

Decoherence

Decay


Solar NeutrinosSolar Neutrinos

• An unambiguous signature of the LMA solution (MSW effect) should be probed :

Current best-fit LMA solution predicts 2% day/night effect

a 4 effect can be observed by UNO in ten years using only the central module (3x104 events/year)

• Look for 8B spectrum upturn at low energy

• Detect Hep neutrinos

• Verify solar neutrino energy endpoint: 18.2 MeV

• Look for unexpected


Day/Night Day/Night AsymetryAsymetry

◆ day/night ratio is the most effective way to measure an asymmetry

◆ Ultimate sensitivity : systematics only

◆ Suppose 0.4% syst.

(Y. Suzuki, Neutrino 2004)

4-5 effect


Neutrinos From Neutrinos From SupernovaSupernova

■ Supernova signal at 10 kpc : ~ 140,000 events

■ 3% from e- elastic scattering

supernova direction at ± 1º

■ 8% NC from 16O : x + 16O --> x + + X (need low threshold)

sensitive to neutrino temperature

■ 89% inverse decay

fine-grained energy spectrum, time evolution

■ A single supernova detected so far: SN1987A

~ 20 events from IMB and Kamiokande 100s papers !


Physics Physics PotentialPotential

- Nucleosynthesis

- Stellar atmospherics

- Degenerate states of matter

- Shock wave mechanism

- Neutrino mixing

- Neutrino mass

- General relativity

Huge Physics Potential for a Galactic SN


Beacom, Boyd and MezzacappaPRL 85, 3568 (2000)

Galactic Galactic SupernovaSupernova

~140,000 events in UNO (10 kpc)

Rate: ~1/30 years

Possible Observation of

the Birth of a Black Hole !

Determination of the core

collapse mechanism

msec timing structure of the flux


Extra-Galactic Extra-Galactic NeutrinosNeutrinos

Supernova Reach

~ 1 Mpc(local group)

Supernova Rate

~1/10 or 15 yrs

Signal in UNO

~40 events

Andromeda


Supernova Relic Supernova Relic NeutrinosNeutrinos

When a massive star (M > 8 M) dies, it forms core collapse ("Type II") SN

~1053 ergs of energy released, with ~99% emitted in the form of

All 6 types of are emitted (but e are most likely to be observed via inverse decay).

A Diffuse background of SN relic should exist !

Maybe the next astrophysical neutrinos detected !


◆ Full spectrum flux :

FSRN = 2 - 54 e cm-2 sec-1

SRN Flux SRN Flux PredictionsPredictions

◆ The spectrum shape varies with redshift, oscillations, etc.


SuperK SNR SuperK SNR Search Search LimitsLimits

UNO at 4000 mwe can rule out all models within 3~5 yearsor discover SRN

M.S. Malek et. al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, E-ID 061101 (2003)


ConclusionsConclusions

• Water cherenkov detectors address some of the most important physics questions today, with potential for with potential for

major discoveriesmajor discoveries

• Mature technology: no critical R&D item

• A large water cherenkov detector could provide a

comprehensive nucleon decay and neutrino physics

program for the world science community for the 21st

century

• Intersection of interests from High Energy Physics, Nuclear Physics and Astrophysics communities, and international community (Japan: Hyper-Kamiokande, Europe: CERN/Fréjus (133 km) initiatives)


Backup SlidesBackup Slides


Granularity And Detector Granularity And Detector SizeSize

Event in K2K 1kt detector K2K event in Super-K

Same photocathode coverage (40%) finer granularity in larger detector


Through-going Muon Event in Through-going Muon Event in UNOUNO

Can look for astrophysical neutrino sources with energy range ~10 GeV to ~100 GeV

Complementary to km3 detector


Comparison of Next Generation Comparison of Next Generation DetectorsDetectors

Water Cherenkov Liquid Ar

Total Mass 650 kton 70 kton

Cost ~$500M N/A*

p e+ 0 in 5 years 5 x 1034 year 1.3 x 1034 years

p K+ in 5 years 1 x 1034 year 3 x 1034 years

SN at Gal. Center 194,000 events 3000 events

SN in Andromeda 40 events No

SN msec structure yes No

SN relic neutrino yes yes

Astrophysical Neutrino E > 10 GeV No

* assumes ~$200M for 70 kton of liquid argon.Source for LANDD: astro-ph/0104552 and astro-ph/0208381

UNO Proto-CollaborationUNO Proto-Collaboration70 Members from 29 Institutions, 4 Countries (Experimentalists Only)

ANL GRPHE / UHA - Mulhouse SUNY at Stony Brook

Maury Goodman Yann Benhammou Marcus AckermanBNL Indiana University John Hobbs

Maurice Goldhaber Rick Van Kooten Chang Kee Jung

Milind Diwan University of Kansas Tokufumi KatoDick Hahn Phil Baringer Dan Kerr

Brett Viren Dave Besson Kenkou KobayashiUniv. of California, Davis Kansas State University Matthew Malek

Daniel Ferenc Tim Bolton Bob McCarthy

Univ. of California, Irvine Eckhard von Toerne Clark McGrew

Steve Barwick Ron A. Sidwell Michael RijssenbeekDave Casper Noel Stanton Antony Sarrat

Wojtek Gajewski KEK Ryan Terri

William R. Kropp Kenzo Nakamura Chiaki YanagisawaS. Mine Makoto Sakuda University of Rochester

Michael Smy LANL Arie Bodek

Hank Sobel Todd J. Haines Kevin McFarlandMark Vagins Louisiana State University Saclay

Gaurang Yodh Bob Svoboda Jacques BouchezCalifornia State Univ., Dominguez Hills University of Minesota, Duluth Francois Pierre

Ken Ganezer Alec Habig IRES / ULP - Strasbourg

Jim Hill University of Minesota, Minneapolis Chantal Racca

Bill Keig Marvin Marshak Jean-Marie BromColorado School of Mines Jeff Nelson Tuft University

James McNeil Earl Peterson Tomas Kafka

Uwe Greife University of Nebraska Tony MannFred Sarazin Dan Claes Univ. of Utah

Murray Hitzman NHMFL Kai Martens

Mark Kuchta John Miller Warsaw University

D. Scott Kieffer University of New Mexico Danka Kielczewska

John Fanchi Sally Seidel Univ. of WashingtonColorado State University Northwestern University Jeff Wilkes

John Holton Heidi Schellman Tianchi Zhao

Walter Toki Purdue University WIPP

Bob Wilson Wei Cui Roger NelsonJohn Finley Bill Thompson

UNO Theoretical Advisory CommitteeUNO Theoretical Advisory Committee

– John Bahcall (IAS/Princeton)

– John Beacom (FNAL)

– Adam Burrows (U. of Arizona)

– Maria Concepcion Gonzales-Garcia (Stony Brook)

– Jim Lattimer (Stony Brook)

– Bill Marciano (BNL)

– Jogesh Pati (U. of Maryland)

– Robert Shrock (Stony Brook)

– Frank Wilczek (MIT)

– Edward Witten (IAS/Princeton)

UNO Advisory CommitteeUNO Advisory Committee

– Gene Beier (U. Penn)

– Jacques Bouchez (Saclay)

– Maury Goodman (ANL)

– Takahaki Kajita (ICRR)

– Tom Kirk (BNL)

– Tony Mann (Tufts)

– Masayuki Nakahata (ICRR)

– Kenzo Nakamura (KEK)

– Yoichiro Suzuki (ICRR)

– Jeff Wilkes (U. of Washington)

– Bob Wilson (Colorado State U.)

UNO Design and Construction UNO Design and Construction TimelineTimeline

Conceptual UNO Schedule2003 2004-5 Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

R&D Proposal/LOITech. Proposal

ExcavationWater containmentPMT deliveryPreparationInstallationWater fill

contingency

Two years of rigorous detector design needed

Year -1Year -2

antony sarratnufact04, jul. 26 - aug. 1, 2004, osaka non-accelerator physics with large water...

Documents