1 / 14

Peter Kammel

First Results from the New Muon Lifetime Experiments at PSI. G F. g P. Peter Kammel. MuLan. MuCap. L 1A. “MuSun” project. MuCap. g P. MuCap Physics Case. EW current key probe Understanding hadrons from QCD Symmetries of Standard Model Muon Capture Formfactors.

roseanne-helen
Télécharger la présentation

Peter Kammel

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. First Results from the New Muon Lifetime Experiments at PSI GF gP Peter Kammel MuLan MuCap L1A “MuSun”project

  2. MuCap gP MuCap Physics Case • EW current key probe • Understanding hadrons from QCD • Symmetries of Standard Model • Muon Capture • Formfactors • - + p  m+ n rateLSat q2= -0.88 mm2 The Black Sheep of Form Factors T. Hemmert + second class currentssuppressed by isospin symm. Lorentz, T invariance All form factors precisely known fromSM symmetries and data apart from gP = 8.3 ± 50%

  3. MuCap gpNN n p p Fp W m- nm Pseudoscalar Form Factor gP gP determined by chiral symmetry of QCD: gP= (8.74  0.23) – (0.48  0.02) = 8.26  0.23 PCAC pole term Adler, Dothan, Wolfenstein ChPT leading order one loop two-loop <1%N. Kaiser Phys. Rev. C67 (2003) 027002 • gP basic and experimentally least known EW nucleon form factor • solid QCD prediction via HBChPT (2-3% level) • basic test of QCD symmetries Recent reviews:T. Gorringe, H. Fearing, Rev. Mod. Physics 76 (2004) 31V. Bernard et al., Nucl. Part. Phys. 28 (2002), R1

  4. MuCap 1 % LH2 100% LH2 pm ppμ ppmO ppμ pm ppmO ppmP ppmP time (ms) Interpretationof Experiments ? LT = 12 s-1 triplet (F=1) pμ↑↑ Lortho=506s-1 Lpara=200s-1 λop μ ppμ ppμ f λppm ortho (J=1) para (J=0) pμ↑↓ • Interpretation requires knowledge of ppm population • Strong dependence on hydrogen density f singlet (F=0) LS= 710s-1 n+n

  5. MuCap MuCap Experimental Strategy • Lifetime method • 1010m→enn decays • measure - to 10ppm, • S = 1/- - 1/+to 1% • Unambiguous interpretation at 1% LH2 density • Clean m stop definition in active target (TPC) to avoid wall stops • Ultra-pure gas system and purity monitoring at 10 ppb level • Isotopically pure “protium” m → enn LSreduces lifetime by 10-3 • + log(counts) • - μ+ μ – te-tm fulfill all requirements simultaneouslyunique MuCap capabilities

  6. m- Muons stop in active TPC target 10 bar ultra-pure hydrogen, 1.16% LH2 2.0 kV/cm drift field ~5.4 kV on 3.5 mm anode half gap bakeable glass/ceramic materials Observed muon stopping distribution E p e- 3D tracking w/o material in fiducial volume

  7. MuCap 6 mm Inside TPC Time Spectra m-e impact parameter cut huge background suppression diffusion (deuterium) monitoring blinded master clock frequency variety of consistency checks

  8. MuCap Results arXiv:0704.2072v1 [nucl-ex] accepted PRL SMuCap = 725.0  13.7stat 10.7sys s-1 further sub percent theory required Average of HBChPT calculations of S: Apply new rad. correction (2.8%): arXiv:0704.3968v1 [hep-ph]Czarnecki, Marciano,Sirlin gP = 7.3 ± 1.1 (MuCap 2007)

  9. MuCap gP Landscape after MuCap 06 • - + p  m + n + g Before MuCap experiments inconclusive and mutually inconsistent MuCap • MuCap result nearly model independent First precise and unambiguous result • Consistent with chiral prediction Does not confirm radiative muon capture (RMC) discrepancy • Final result (’06 and ’07 data) will reduce error twofold

  10. MuLan MuLan Scientific Case • Fundamental electroweak parameters • GF • Implicit to all EW precision physics • Uniquely related to muon decay • PrecisionGF t relation no longer theory limited • GFaMZ 9 ppm 0.0007 ppm 23 ppm QED exp MuLan2004 theory 17 ppm 18 ppm 90 ppb 30 ppm9 ppm 18 ppm <0.3 ppm0.5 ppm 1 ppm <0.3 ppm van Ritbergen and Stuart: 2-loop QED corrections MuLan Goal

  11. MuLan MuLan Experiment Real data Kicker On “Early-to-late” changes • Instrumental shifts Gain or threshold Time response • Effective acceptance Residual polarization or precession Pileup • Missing events PSI DC proton beam590 MeV, 1.7 mA Systematics Measurement Period Number (log scale) time Fill Period -12.5 kV 12.5 kV

  12. MuLan 6/5/07 accepted PRL arXiv:0704.1981v1 [hep-ex] tm(MuLan) = 2.197 013(21)(11) ms (11ppm) tm(World) = 2.197 019(21) ms (9.6 ppm) GF = 1.166 371(6) x 10-5 GeV-2(5 ppm)

  13. MECEFT L1A m + d  n + n + n “Calibrating the Sun” via Muon Capture on the Deuteron “MuSun” proposal end 2007 model-independent connection via EFT & L1A • Goal • total md capture rate to 1% precision • Motivation • first precise measurement of basic EW reaction in 2N system, benchmark measurement with 10x higher precision • impact on fundamental astrophysics reactions (SNO, pp) • comparison of modern high precision calculations (EFT/SNPA) • high precision feasible by mCap technique and careful optimization

  14. Synergy and Outlook • MuLan • MuCap 20 ppm10 ppm1 ppm ??30 ppm10 ppm log(counts) 2008 projected 2006 μ+ μ – time • MuSun needs both, gP and precision lifetimes

More Related