1 / 34

Muon g-2 experimental results & theoretical developments

Muon g-2 experimental results & theoretical developments. Huaizhang Deng. Yale University. University of Pennsylvania. Collaboration. Outline. Overview of (g-2) . Measure (g-2) μ in experiment. Principle of and experimental setup. Analyses and results.

annice
Télécharger la présentation

Muon g-2 experimental results & theoretical developments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Muon g-2experimental results & theoretical developments Huaizhang Deng Yale University University of Pennsylvania

  2. Collaboration

  3. Outline • Overview of (g-2) • Measure (g-2)μin experiment • Principle of and experimental setup. • Analyses and results • Compare (g-2)+ and (g-2)− • Calculate (g-2)in theory • QED contribution • Weak contribution • Hadronic contribution • Conclusion

  4. The magnetic moment of a particle is related to its spin g For Dirac pointlike particle : g=2   Anomalous magnetic moment Magnetic dipole moment For the proton : ap1.8 because the proton is composite particle.

  5. Largest contribution : QED hadronic weak New physics ? g - 2  0 for the muon Some of other contributions :

  6. The effects from heavy particles are generally • proportional to m2. Why muon? • The muon is a point particle, so far. • (Hadrons, like p and n, are composite particles.) • The muon lives long enough for us to measure.

  7. a B Principle of the measurement When=29.3 (p=3.09 Gev/c), a is independent of E.

  8. Muon storage ring

  9. Time scales : 149.2 ns cyclotron (or fast rotation) period c , 4.4 s g-2 period a , what we want to measure 64.4 s dilated muon lifetime  Some numbers about the experiment Magnetic field : 1.45 T p : 61.79MHz Experimental sequence : t =0 beam injection 35 — 500 ns beam kicked onto orbit 0 — 15 s beam scraping 15 — 40 s calorimeters gated on 15 — 1000 s g-2 measurement 33 ms beam injection repeats (12 times) 3 s circle repeats 3 day field measurement by trolley 1 year data-taking repeats 20 year whole experiment repeats

  10. How to measure B B is determined by measuring the proton nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) frequency p in the magnetic field. +/p=3.183 345 39(10) W. Liu et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 711 (1999).

  11. 378 fixed probes around the ring 17 trolley probes NMR trolley The NMR system is calibrated against a standard probe† of a spherical water sample. † X. Fei, V.W. Hughes, R. Prigl, NIM A394 349 (1997)

  12. Uniformity of the B field The B field variation at the center of the storage region. <B>1.45 T The B field averaged over azimuth.

  13. Stability of the B field Calibration of the fixed probe system with respect to the trolley measurements The magnetic field measured by the fixed probe system during μ− run in 2001.

  14. Systematic errors for p † higher multipoles, trolley temperature and voltage response, eddy currents from the kickers, and time-varying stray fields.

  15. In the parity violated decay , e+ are emitted preferentially along the muon spin direction in muon rest frame. And e+ emitted along the muon momentum direction get large Lorentz boost and have high energy in laboratory frame. Hence, a is determined by counting the high energy e+ . How to measure a

  16. a data N(t)=Ne-t/[1-Acos(ωat+φ)] Divide N(t) into four independent sets N1, N2, N3 and N4 r(t)=Acos(ωat+φ)+(a/16)2 Slow effects are largely cancelled in the ratio method.

  17. n=0.142 • Observation : • Beam centroid and • beam width oscillate • CBO phase varies from • 0 to 2π around the ring n=0.122 Coherent Betatron Oscillation Cause : Phase space not filled • Solution : • Sum all detectors to • reduce the CBO effect

  18. Error for a 0.11 † AGS background, timing shifts, E field and vertical oscillations, beam debunching/randomization.

  19. Blind analysis and result After two analyses of p had been completed, p /2π= 61 791 400(11) Hz (0.2ppm), and four analyses of a had been completed, a /2π= 229 073.59(15)(5) Hz (0.7ppm), separately and independently, the anomalous magnetic moment was evaluated, am-=11 659 214(8)(3) 10-10

  20. History of the experimental measurements

  21. Rμ+ = 0.003 707 204 8(2 5) Rμ− = 0.003 707 208 3(2 6) CPT test : Compare μ+ and μ− to test CPT Combined result : am=11 659 208(6) 10-10

  22. Standard model calculation of a a(SM)= a(QED) + a(weak) + a(had)* a(QED)=11 658 472.07(0.04)(0.1)10-10 a(weak)=15.1(0.1)(0.2)10-10 a(had,lo)=692.4(6.2)(3.6)10-10 * a(had,nlo)=−98(0.1)10-10 * a(had,lbl)=12(3.5)10-10 * *The exact value and error of hadronic contribution are still under studies by many groups.

  23. QED contribution a(QED)=11 658 470.6(0.3)10-10 a(QED)=11 658 472.07(0.04)(0.1)10-10

  24. Electroweak Contributions

  25. Cannot be calculated from pQCD alone because it involves low energy scales near the muon mass. However, by dispersion theory, this a(had,1) can be related to measured in e+e- collision or indirectly in  decay. Hadronic contribution (LO)

  26. Evaluation of R M. Davier et al., hep-ph/0208177

  27. % 2π 508.20±5.18±2.74 72.99 ω 37.96±1.02±0.31 5.45 φ 35.71±0.84±0.20 5.13 0.6 − 2.0 63.18±2.19±0.86 9.07 2.0 − 5.0 33.92±1.72±0.03 4.87 J/ψ,ψ’ 7.44±0.38±0.00 1.07 > 5.0 9.88±0.11±0.00 1.42 Total 696.3±6.2±3.6 100.0 aμ(had, lo)based on e+e− data (DEHZ) • aμ(had,lo) = 696.15(5.7)(2.4) × 10-10 (HMNT) • aμ(had,lo) = 694.8 (8.6) × 10-10 (GJ) S. Eidelman at DAФNE 2004

  28. Discrepancy between e+e− and  data aμ(had,lo) = 711.0(5.0)(0.8)(2.8)×10-10 (DEHZ) M. Davier et al., hep-ph/0208177 S. Eidelman at DAФNE 2004

  29. Possible reasons for discrepancy • Problem with experimental data • Problem with SU(2) breaking corrections • Non-(V−A) contribution to weak interaction • Difference in mass of ρ mesons (mρ±>mρ0). • Current data indicate equality within a few MeV

  30. Comparsion between CMD-2 and KLOE Radiative return is another way to measure hadronic contributions Kloe CMD-2 KLOE (375.6  0.8stat  4.9syst+theo)  10-10 (1.3%) only statistical errors are shown CMD-2 (378.6  2.7stat  2.3syst+theo)  10-10(0.9%) • Two measurements are in agreement F. Nguyen at DAФNE 2004

  31. a(had,nlo)=10.0(0.6)10-10 Higher order hadronic contributions a(had,lbl)=8.6(3.5)10-10 a(had,lbl)=13.6(2.5)10-10 a(had,lbl)=12.0(3.5)10-10

  32. Comparison of SM and experiment • e+e− : • aμ = 11 659 184.1 (7.2had,lo)(3.5lbl)(0.3QED+EW) × 10-10 • : aμ = 11 659 200.4 (5.8had,lo)(3.5lbl)(0.3QED+EW) × 10-10 experimental result : am=11 659 208(6) 10-10 …including KLOE result • e+e− : • Δaμ = 23.9 (7.2had,lo)(3.5lbl)(6exp) × 10-10 (2.4 σ) • : Δaμ = 7.6 (5.8had,lo)(3.5lbl)(6exp) × 10-10 (0.9 σ) F. Nguyen at DAФNE 2004

  33. particularly supersymmetric particles Beyond standard model • compositeness for leptons or gauge bosons. • extra dimensions, or extra particles,

  34. Conclusions • Measurement of a−=11 659 214 (8)(3)×10-10(0.7 ppm) • a− anda+ agree with each other as expected by CPT • The combined result a=11 659 208(6) ×10-10(0.5 ppm) • a(exp)−a(SM) is 2.4σ (e+e−) or 0.9σ () • The discrepancy between e+e− and  data is confirmed by • KLOE • Upgraded muon g-2 experiment is expected to reduce the • experimental error to 0.2 ppm. • Efforts on solving discrepancy between e+e−and , and • attempts to calculate a(had) from lattice QCD

More Related