1 / 66

Does superhigh-energy cosmic-ray coplanarity contradict to LHC data? Ra uf Mukhamedshin

26th E+CRS / 35th RCRC. Does superhigh-energy cosmic-ray coplanarity contradict to LHC data? Ra uf Mukhamedshin Institute for Nuclear Research, Russian Academy of Sciences , Moscow. “ F orward - physics ” c oplanarity at superhigh energies. C osmic-ray coplanarity at superhigh energies.

escheller
Télécharger la présentation

Does superhigh-energy cosmic-ray coplanarity contradict to LHC data? Ra uf Mukhamedshin

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. 26th E+CRS / 35th RCRC Does superhigh-energy cosmic-ray coplanarity contradict to LHC data? Rauf Mukhamedshin Institute for Nuclear Research, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow

  2. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies Cosmic-ray coplanarity at superhigh energies

  3. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies • Coplanarity of most energetic subcores (E > 10 TeV) in central core of young air showers (s << 1) • is found with XRECs* in γ-ray–hadron families**in: • high-mountainPamir & Kanbala experiments; • stratospheric events «JF2af2» & «Strana» • corresponds tohadroninteractionenergies E0 ≳ 1016eV *XREC = X-Ray Emulsion Chamber **γ-ray – hadronfamilies = groups of high-energy particles (Eγ,e±,h > few ТeV)

  4. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies Examples of target planes of coplanar events a) b) 5 most energetic particles e) g-ray clusters c) d) <Pt>≈10 100 GeV/c Electromagnetic halo hadron halo hadron g-ray cluster “Pamir” : a) 4- g-ray cluster family; b)Pb-6: l4=0.95;c)Pb-28: l4=0.85. d)JF2af2(“Concorde”); e) “Strana” (balloon). Numbersshow energy in TeV j -1/(N-1)≤lN≤ 1,0 Aligned event:lN≥ lfixUsually: l4≥0,8 k jkij i

  5. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies • Coplanarity • is not explained with • fluctuationsin the framework of KGSmodels(wfluct< 10-10) • magneticfield of Earth& electricthunderstorm fields • QCD jet generation; • has a large cross section: spcopl~ a·spinel (a ≈ 0.1 – 0.5); • is produced by hadroninteractionsat E0≳1016 eV • was explained long timewith growth of ptof mostenergeticparticles (MEP)inthecoplanarity plane • Theoretical status: • The mechanism of coplanar particle generation (CPG) isunknown • Different hypothesis are proposed

  6. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies а)QCD jets:Sinqi const  inappropriate correlation “Binocular”families nocoplanarity(Lokhtin 05, PYTHIA) Appropriate ideas: b)SHDID(Royzen, 1994) – rupture of stretched quark- gluon string in DD cluster:  appropriate correlation  coplanarity can beobserved c)very-high-spinleading systemappropriate correlation coplanaritycan beobserved d)QGS angular momentum conservation(Wibig 04) appropriate correlation coplanaritycan beobserved most energetic particles

  7. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies Preferable(phenomenologically!) ideas: a)Wibig 2004:Conservation of QGS angular momentum transforming to a growth of particle pt in a coplanarity plane b)Roizen, 1994:SHDID = rupture of stretched quark-gluon string in Double Diffractionclusters c) Luis A.Anchordoqui et al. 2010:Most exotic idea on connection of coplanarity with the recently proposed “crystal world”with latticized and anisotropic spatial dimensions. Planar events are expected to dominate in particle collisions at a hard-scattering energy exceeding the scale 3 at which space transitions from 3D ⇋ 2D Ordered lattice. The fundamental quantization scale of space is indicated by L1. Space structure is 1D on scales much shorter than L2, while it appears effectively 2D on scales much larger than L2 but much shorter than L3. At scales much larger than L3, the structure appears effectively 3D.

  8. Introduction • To analyze experimental results, a new easily-variable modelis required, which could reproduce results of • cosmic-ray experiments in a wide energy range: • LHCfandCMS+TOTEM experimentsin the highη&xF range • LHC (ALICE, ATLAS, CMS, LHCb) experimentsin the central kinematic range(dN/dη, dσ/dpt,σprodπ,K,charm…etc) (mainly for greater trust !) Phenomenological FANSY 2.0 model

  9. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies Phenomenological FANSY 2.0 • FANSY = FAN-likeSecondary particle Yield • FANSY2.0 QGSJ=traditional version • FANSY 2.0QGSCPG=QGSJ+ CPG* • FANSY QGSCPG: • Twocompetingchannels:1) traditional qurk-gluon string (QGS) model (i.е. FANSY QGSJ); 2) coplanar particle generation (CPG)(appears at √s≳ 2TeV;probability rises with increasing energy) insoftinteractions • VersionsFANSYQGSJи QGSCPGare • different in azimuthal characteristics (at √s≳ 2TeV) • identical in longitudinal characteristics (y, η, xF, xLab) *CPG= coplanar QGS particle generation Do model predictions contradict to experimental data?

  10. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies Simulation of coplanar particle generation

  11. Superhigh energy unconventional “forward physics”FANSY 2.0 View of particle tracks on the target plane Most energetic particles (MEP) Most energetic particles (MEP) Traditionalconcept: axialsymmetry& traditional pt px = py Initialconcept: axialasymmetry; traditional px & large py in coplanarity plane py > px Finalconcept: axialasymmetry; traditional py & small py in coplanarity plane py < px

  12. Superhigh energy unconventional “forward physics”FANSY 2.0 View of particle tracks on the target plane Энергетически выделенные частицы Most energetic particles (MEP) Initial(1990-2007)concept: axialasymmetry; usual px & large py in coplanarity plane py > px Traditionalconcept: axialsymmetry& traditional pt px = py Finalconcept: axialasymmetry; traditional py & small py in coplanarity plane py < px

  13. Superhigh energy unconventional “forward physics”FANSY 2.0 • Simulation unsolvableproblem • Cosmic-ray coplanarity is determined by most energetic particles withxF≳ 0.05 – 0.1 • Significant increase ofptsuppresses hadrondσ/dy & dσ/dηcross sections at|η,y|>> 1and createspeaksat 2 ≲|y|≲ 5-6 Primary FANSY QGSCPG versions: Attempts to compensate of maxima by artificial creation of an appropriate dip at 2 ≲|y|≲ 5-6 in traditional interaction mode do not help (a largept version) LHC data contradict the initial large-pt-concept simulation results, however coplanarity in cosmic rays is observed! Is it possible to resolve this contradiction ?

  14. Superhigh energy unconventional “forward physics”FANSY 2.0 View of particle tracks on the target plane It is necessary to go beyond the concept of a connection between coplanariy and the strong growth of transverse momentaof MEPs Most energetic particles (MEP) Most energetic particles (MEP) Initial(1990-2007)concept: axialasymmetry; usual px & large py in coplanarity plane py > px Finalconcept: axialasymmetry; traditional py& pt; small px (normal to coplanarity plane) py > px Traditionalconcept: axialsymmetry& traditional pt px = py

  15. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies CPG simulation • Traditional particle generation: |y| < ythr≈ 2 –3 • Coplanar particle generation:|y| > y thr ≈ 2 – 3 copl copl • Coplanarity plane is determined by moments of colliding protons and transverse momenta of leading hadrons after interaction • Transverse momenta of particles are rotated by an algorithm toward the coplanarity plane at |y| > y thr • The distribution of the particle momentum directionsnear the plane is described by the Gaussian distributionwith σ ≈ 0.1 rad copl

  16. ppinteractions(“forward physics”)FANSY 2.0 / QGSCPG The high-energy ppinteractions’ central range is very interesting but not too important for cosmic-ray XREC experiments • Reasons • PCR spectrum falls off rapidly with energy I(>E)~E-β(β~1.6–2.2) • Strong fluctuationsin EAS development • Important ! • dσ/dxF spectrum at xF≳ 0.05 • xFβ (not xF!) the role of particles rises with increasing xF What do we know on ppinteractions &“forward physics” at largexF?

  17. ppinteractions(“forward physics”)FANSY 2.0 / QGSCPG High-energy ppinteractions

  18. ppinteractions(“forward physics”)FANSY 2.0 / QGSCPG LHCf: spectra of g-rays and neutron-like hadrons

  19. ppinteractions(“forward physics”)FANSY 2.0 / QGSCPG Low energies (“forward physics”) pp interactions

  20. dσ/dxF cross sections (pp → Λ0, Λc+,D±,0,s)

  21. Low energies(“forward physics”).FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ dσ/dxFcross sections ofη, ωandρmesons Experimental&simulatedspectra of η, ω,ρmesons agree, in general, within statistical & systematic errors

  22. Низкие энергии (“forward physics”).FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ dσ/dxF cross sections ofπ±mesons protons? leading π+? • AtxF > 0.6 dσ/dxF cross section ofπ+mesonsat pLab = 158 GeV/ccontradictsto the cross section at 400 GeV/c • Methodical or physical origin? • Methodical = poor selectionof protons • Physical = wounded interacting diquark →lower-energy hadrons quark-spectator → leading π+)

  23. Низкие энергии (“forward physics”).FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Δ++dσ/dxF cross sections

  24. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies Can we study coplanarityatLHC ?

  25. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies Coplanarity of energy flows in CASTOR’s 16 segments 5.3 < η < 6.5 №13 Emax= maximum energy flow in i-th segment (i→no. 1) Ecop= energy in segments 1+9 Etr= energy in segments 5+13 (transversal to 1+9) Ecop №1 εtr= Ecop / (Ecop+Etr) №5 Etr №9 The larger is circle size, the larger is energy of particle

  26. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies Energy flows in CASTOR segments εtr= Ecop/(Ecop+Etr) Ecop= E1 + E9 Etr = E5 + E13 • Different CPG versions could be tested by CASTOR • promising parameterεtrcould be used • low luminosity andevent-by-event measurements are required

  27. Conclusion • ModelFANSY2.0 for hadron-hadroninteractions is developed: • traditionalQGSJversion • QGSCPG version withcoplanar particle generation: • Both the versionsare identical at√s ≲ 2 TeV • Both the versions reproduce LHC data: • generalcentral kinematic range data at |y| & |η|≲ 7:dσ/dη, dσ/dy, dσ/dptspectra ofcharged particles, kaons, charmed stableparticles and a number of resonances • LHCf data for γ-rays and neutrons • dσ/dxFspectra of stableπ, K, Dmesons and a number of resonancesinpp, πp, Kpinteractionsare reproduced at low energies (√s ~ 17 – 63 GeV)

  28. Conclusion • QGSCPG: • The concept of coplanarity with large ptof most energetic particles in the plane of coplanarity is contrary to the LHC data • Agreement between LHC data and complanarity is possible in the concept of decreasing of transverse momentum components directed normally to the coplanarity plane • Coplanar particle generation (FANSY 2.0 QGSCPG) could be tested at LHC (CASTOR)

  29. Thank you !

  30. Backup

  31. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ J.L.Pinfold, ISVHECRI 2012 • Interaction channels : QCDjets, softprocesses, diffraction (SD&DD) • Each channel is specific • SD&DD most strongly affect on CR experimental results

  32. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies In this workcoplanar generation of most energetic particles (MEP)through the rupture ofthe QGS stretched between the interacting hadronsisanalyzed

  33. p-pinteractions FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Cross sections

  34. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ dN/dhchdistributions

  35. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Charmed D±& D*± meson dN/dη distributions

  36. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ ϕ & Ds±meson dσ/dy distributions

  37. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Charmed D± meson ds/dpt distributions

  38. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Charmed D0 meson ds/dpt distributions

  39. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Charmed Ds±meson ds/dpt distributions

  40. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Charmed vectorD*+ meson ds/dpt distributions

  41. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Charmed Λc±baryonds/dpt distribution

  42. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Charmed D meson generation cross sections Experimental&simulatedcross sections of D/D*/Λ±сgeneration agree in generalwithin statistical & systematic errors

  43. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Experimental(ATLAS, ALICE, LHCb) andsimulated(FANSY 2.0 QGSJ)dσ/dptspectra of D/D* mesons &Λ±сbaryons agree in generalwithin statistical and systematic errors

  44. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ Heavy vector neutral K, ω, ϕ meson ds/dpt distributions

  45. p-pinteractions(central range)FANSY 2.0 / QGSJ ds/dpt spectra ofω&ϕ mesons Ratioσϕ/σωgives direct information about suppression of strange quarkgeneration

  46. K-pinteractionsFANSY 2.0 / QGSJ dσ/dXF f2(1270) meson spectrum

  47. K-pinteractionsFANSY 2.0 / QGSJ • Experimental&simulatedspectra of secondary particles in Kp interactions agree, in general, within error limits • Spectrum of K2*0(1430)is harder than K*0(892) spectrum;thespectra are comparable at XF →1 • Spectra of u/d resonances (ρ,ω) are softer than spectra of strange resonances (K*, K2*)

  48. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies FANSY 2.0 QGSCPG & LHC data

  49. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies FANSY 2.0QGSCPG FANSY 2.0 QGSCPG & LHC data a) NSD-enhanced nch > 0 in -6.5 < η < -5.3 and in 5.3 < η < 6.5 b) more-forward nch > 0 in -6.5 < η < -5.3 or 5.3 < η < 6.5 c) SD-enhanced nch > 0 only in -6.5 < η < -5.3 or only in 5.3 < η < 6.5 d) more-forward displacedinteraction point nch > 0 in -7.0 < η < -6.0 or 3.7 < η < 4.8

  50. “Forward-physics”coplanarityat superhigh energies LHCf: g-rays

More Related