1 / 35

BETA-BEAMS

b. Piero Zucchelli - CERN M. Mezzetto D. Casper M. Lindroos U. Koester S. Hancock B. Autin M. Benedikt H. Haseroth M. Grieser A. Jansson S. Russenschuck F. Wenander. BETA-BEAMS. 363 days after. Physics Letters B 532 (3-4) (2002) pp. 166-172. GUIDELINES.

hallie
Télécharger la présentation

BETA-BEAMS

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. b Piero Zucchelli - CERN M. Mezzetto D. Casper M. Lindroos U. Koester S. Hancock B. Autin M. Benedikt H. Haseroth M. Grieser A. Jansson S. Russenschuck F. Wenander BETA-BEAMS 363 days after Physics Letters B 532 (3-4) (2002) pp. 166-172

  2. GUIDELINES A. Neutrino beams from a different perspective B. The “Beta-Beam” Concept C. Experimental Scenario D. Beta-beams and neutrino physics E. Feasible? Cost-effective? Competitive? Current talk, previous talks, tables, sources: http://cern.ch/Piero.Zucchelli/files/betabeam. A Website by this summer.

  3. Q A Focussing Properties n are produced by weak “decay” of a parent: m,p,K,nucleus. We assume the decay to be isotropic at rest and call E0 the rest frame energy of the neutrino. The focussing properties are given only by: - the divergence of the parent “beam” - the Lorentz transformations between different frames PT= pT PL=G ( p + p  cosq ) from which, on average Q 1/G (it depends ONLY on parent speed!) EGE0 and, in the forward direction, E2GE0 (same rest-frame spectrum shape multiplied by 2G) n parent

  4. A LBL Scope maximum neutrino flux for a given Dm2E/LGE0/L. The neutrino flux onto a “far” detector goes like FG2/L2; Therefore F(Dm2)2/E02. At a given parent intensity, low energy decays in the CMS frame are the most efficient in achieving the “LBL requirement”, and independently of the G factor. But we want to observe neutrino interactions: N= F  s If we assume to be in the regime where s  E (>300 MeV for nm) N (Dm2)2 G/E0 And acceleration enters into the game; The “Quality Factor” of a “non-conventional” neutrino beam is therefore G/E0

  5. B The BETA-BEAM 1. Produce a Radioactive Ion with a short beta-decay lifetime 2. Accelerate the ion in a conventional way (PS) to “high” energy 3. Store the ion in a decay ring with straight sections. 4. It will decay. ne (ne) will be produced. 6He Beta-: G~150 E0~1.9 MeV QF~79 - SINGLE flavour - Known spectrum - Known intensity - Focussed - Low energy - “Better” Beam of ne (ne) Muons: G~500 E0~34 MeV QF~15 18Ne Beta+: G~250 E0~1.86 MeV QF~135 The “quality factor” QF=G/E0 is bigger than in a conventional neutrino factory. In addition, ion production and collection is easier. Then, 500000X more time to accelerate.

  6. B Possible b- emitters (ne)

  7. B Possible b+ emitters (ne)

  8. B Anti-Neutrino Source Consider 6He++6Li+++ne e- E03.5078 MeV T/2  0.8067 s 1. The ion is spinless, and therefore decays at rest are isotropic. 2. It can be produced at high rates, I.e. 5E13 6He/s DATA and theory: <Ekine>=1.578 MeV <En>=1.937 MeV RMS/<En>=37% 3. The neutrino spectrum is known on the basis of the electron spectrum. B.M. Rustand and S.L. Ruby, Phys.Rev. 97 (1955) 991 B.W. Ridley Nucl.Phys. 25 (1961) 483

  9. B Neutrino Source Possible neutrino emitter candidate:18Ne The same technology used in the production of 6He is limited in the 18Ne case to 1012 ions/s. Despite it is very reasonable to assume that a dedicated R&D will increase this figure, this intensity is used as “today” reference. Issues: MgO less refractory, heat dissipation

  10. 2500 m R=300 m B The Acceleration principle ISOL Target and ECR Linac Cyclotron Storage Ring PS SPS Decay ring/Buncher Bunch rotation is the crucial issue for atmospheric background control! Studies are made on EXISTING CERN machines. Why? Much more detailed knowledge exists, the best way to identify possible problems and limitations.

  11. 2500 m R=300 m B The interactions time structure in the detector is identical to the time structure of the parents in the decay ring in a given position. The beta decay position does not matter, since the parents have the same speed of the neutrinos The far detector duty cycle is bunch length / ring length Bunched? A B Ion intensity time Interactions time

  12. B The Decay Ring straight section relative length fixed to 2500 m (~SPS diameter). The ring is essentially flat below ground (10 mrad). 100kW decay losses into the decay ring One bunch of 10 ns length From the physics point of view, the bigger the ring is, the better.

  13. C A Neutrino Physics Scenario It is reasonable to assume that - in the next years - savings issues will dominate the scenario in EU HEP. A. Imagine a neutrino detector that could do Physics independently of the neutrino factory. B. Imagine to build it, to run it, and to explore non-accelerator physics. C. Imagine that, as soon as the SPL will be ready (~2015?), you make a superbeam shooting muon neutrinos onto it. If this will expand the physics reach, and you’re competitive with the other world programs, you’re ready to do it (known technology). D. Imagine that you have PREPARRED and STUDIED an option to shoot electron neutrinos onto the same detector. If the next neutrino physics will demand it, you’re ready to do it.

  14. C A Dream? A. the ~600 Kton UNO detector. B. Supernovae, Solar, Atmospheric, Proton Decay: q12,m12,q23,m23. C. Frejus site and SPL Super-Beam: possibly q13 D. Frejus site and SPS Beta-Beam: possibly q13 , possibly CP (2) and T Is this physics program less wide than a muon-based neutrino factory program? The objectives are wider, the discovery potential is smaller. But, for example, we will see that the information on d, if within reach, is even more comprehensive than a muon-based nufactory.

  15. C SuperBeam Sinergy The proton requirements of the Beta-Beam are part of the ISOLDE@SPL (100uA for 1s every 2-5 s). The ISOLDE@SPL plans 100 uA protons overall. The Superbeam uses 2mA from the SPL. Therefore: The BetaBeam affects the SuperBeam intensity by 3% at most.

  16. C Why Cherenkov? The detector needs to be very massive, and capable to distinguish electrons from muons Same requirement of the SuperBeam! You don’t need the charge identification... ...Therefore you don’t need a magnetic detector!

  17. D The Far Detector Observables The relative neutrino flux for a spinless* parents is ONLY function of g and L, not even of the parent itself. (* as it is for 6He and 18Ne)

  18. D The Far Detector Background beam-related backgrounds due to Lithium/Fluorine interactions at the end of the straight sections GEANT3 simulation, 3E6 proton interactions onto a Fe dump, tracking down to 10 MeV 100 mrad off-axis and 130 km distance. DIF and DAR (K+) contributions <10-4 background @ g=150

  19. D Cross Sections antineutrinos interactions on Oxygen are typically penalized by a factor ~ 6. However: Free protons of H2O should also be included T.K Gaisser and J.S. O’Connel, P.R.D34,3 (1986) 822.

  20. D The Signal maximization... The signal coming from appearance nm interactions after oscillation @ 130 km and 440 kt-year fiducial mass in the hypothesis (q13=p/2,m13=2.4E-3 eV2). The machine duty-cycle is assumed to remain constant. table

  21. D …and the interaction background... NC interactions potentially produce D++ decays (almost at rest) and the p+ is misidentified as a muon. Asymmetries with Superbeams start to appear (the e/p0 separation becomes m/p) Kinematical cuts are possible, still delicate and MC dependent. Another strategy consists in having the pions below Cherenkov threshold (see later). Interaction Background

  22. D ...and the Atmospheric “background” The atmospheric neutrino background has to be reduced mainly by “timing” on the 6He bunches (protons for the SuperBeam). The shortness of the ion bunches is therefore mandatory (10 ns for a ~SPS ring length). However, the directionality of the antineutrinos can be used to further suppress this background by a factor ~4-6X dependent on gamma. Atmospheric Background

  23. D Anue Summary Numbers

  24. D The Nue case Neon production Intensity is lower, HOWEVER: 1. 18Ne has charge 10 and mass 18. 2. For the previous reason, SPS can accelerate the ion up to G=250 (250 GeV/nucleon) WITH THE SAME MAGNETIC FIELD used for 6He and G=150. <En>=0.93 GeV !!! 3. For the same reasons explained for the antineutrino case, the potential oscillation signal improves despite the fact <E>/L=7E-3 GeV/km

  25. D Nue Summary Numbers

  26. D The Super-BetaBeams (SPL-BB) Beta-Beam nue: 18,950 QE/Year @ 930 MeV @ 130 km Beta-Beam anue: 37,250 QE/Year @ 580 MeV @ 130 km (Old) Super-Beam numu: 9,800 QE/Year @ 260 MeV @ 130 km (Old) Super-Beam anumu: 2050 QE/Year @ 230 MeV @ 130 km Obviously: the SuperBeam lower energy is “better”. Still, the oscillation probability of the Beta-Beams are 37% (anue) and 15% (nue) respectively. The SuperBeam has more beam-related background, but is much simpler to do. Beta-beam detector backgrounds to be studied. ONE DETECTOR, ONE DISTANCE, 2X2 BEAMS!

  27. D A CP or a T search? CP Asymmetry J. Sato, hep-ph 0006127 T Asymmetry In the T search, ambiguities are resolved! The tunability of the beta-beam allows additional choice of the phase cot (Dm213 L / 4E)

  28. D General Considerations A. q13 is just the starting step for super&beta-beams. B. CP violation at low energy is almost exempt from matter effect, therefore already particularly attractive (nue beta-beam, anue beta-beam). C. Who else can do T violation without magnetic field and electron charge identification? (nue beta-beam, numu super-beam). D. CPT test by anue beta-beam, numu super-beam is the ultimate validation of the 3-family mixing model and of the CP and T measurements. E. If LSND is confirmed, 6 mixing angles and 3 CP violation phases are waiting for us! The smallness of the LSND mixing parameter implies high purity beams, the missing unitarity constraints will demand sources with different flavours. H. Minakata, H. Nunokawa hep-ph0009091. CPT Asymmetry

  29. D One simple Optimization Background should not generate a Cherenkov signal! At the same time, it maximizes the overlap with the CP-odd term (at CERN-Frejus distance)

  30. D BetaBeam “downgrading” 11X Flux Drop!!! g=75, Flux Drop, Background Drop

  31. D General Considerations The neutrino factory golden-measurement is the CP violation. Super-Beam+Beta-Beam are competitive in various ways, including T violation! d = 90 deg 99%C.L. Curves (M. Mezzetto, NNN02)

  32. E Nu2002 comparison chart F. Dydak 0.2-2 GeV ~10-4 ~1 YesYes Let’s Fill the BB column!

  33. E Comment on BB cost estimates

  34. E My Last Words 1. the Beta-Beams are possible! 2. Unique, unprecedented high intensity high purity ne/ne beams 3. Natural part of a program that starts with a non-accelerator Water Cherenkov phase and a SuperBeam phase. The program covers supernovae detection, proton decay, atmospheric neutrinos, solar neutrinos, q13 search, CP asymmetry, T asymmetry, CPT asymmetry. 4. Scaled technology approach based on existing accelerator technology

  35. Conclusions “Se son rose, fioriranno”. “If they're roses, they will blossom” “Si tiene barbas, San Antón, si no la Purísima Concepción”

More Related