Date post: | 21-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 2 times |
2
3
2
1
MNSU
e
100
0
0
0
010
0
0
0
001
U 1212
1212
1313
1313
2323
2323MNS cs
sc
ces
esc
cs
sci
i
ne
nm
nt
Flavor eigenstates m1
m2
m3
Mass eigenstates
6 parametersq12, q23, q13, dDm12
2, Dm232, Dm13
2
)sin(s ),cos(c ijijijij
3 flavor mixing of neutrino
Unitary matrix
2
Dmij=mi2-mj
2
T.Kobayashi (KEK) 3
Known and Unknowns
OR
Solar & Reactor• q12~33o
• Dm122~0.00008eV2
Atomspheric + Acc• q23~45o • Dm23
2~0.0025eV2
Unknown!• q13<10o
• (Dm132~Dm23
2)?• d ???
n1
n2
n3
Mass hierarchy
ne??
4
Unknown properties of neutrino
4
q13? Last unknown mixing angle T2K, NOvA, Double Chooz, RENO, DayaBay
CP invariance ? Mass hierarchy ?
Absolute mass Tritium beta decay, double-beta
Majorana or Dirac? Double-beta
Next generation accelerator based expriemtns
Sakharov’s 3 conditions
To generate Baryon asymmetry in the unverse There is a fundamental process that violates
Baryon number C and CP invariance is violated at the same
time There is a deviation from thermal
equilibrium acting on B violating process
6
Toward origin of matter dominated universe
Quark sector CPV is found to be not sufficient for reproducing present baryon content
Scenario for baryogenesis through lepton CP violation: Leptogenesis CPV in lepton sector is responsible for B genesis
CPV in neutrino oscillation could provide a key to unravel mystery of origin of matter
7
Let’s find CPV in lepton sector I give you
1000 億円 or 1.2 Billion USD 755M GBP 55 Billion INR 1,401 Billion Won 2,130 Billion Peso 7.9 Billion 元 918 Million Euro 35 Billion Ruble 1.2 Billion CHF
8
Let’s design an experiment to search for CPV in lepton sector
If you find any good idea, let’s write a paper!
One condition: Within 10years
How? …. : Q1
Do we really need oscillation phenomena to probe CPV??
Can’t we attack CPV in an experiment which fit in an experimental hall like such as Kaon CPV or B CPV
Why??
9
Measuring CPV in quark sector
Through loop diagram Amplitude (m∝ u,c,t/MW)2
Please calculate Since quark is heavy (especially top), this
process becomes measureable10
W W
s,b
d
u,c,t
u,c,ts,b
W
u,c,t
VCKM VCKM
VCKMVCKM VCKMVCKM
How about lepton sector?
Amplitude (m∝ n/MW)2
Standard model process STRONGLY suppressed Thus, good field to search for physics beyond
standard model
11
m
W
ne,nm,nt
VMNSVMNS
e
gExample: meg
Oscillation (cont)
13
i
liimtiE
lmiet
If Ei are same for all mass eigenstates E
mliEt
lmiEt
iliim
iEtlm
ee
et
Ei’s are same, no oscillation, in other word, Ei’s are different, we can probe mixing matrix through oscillation
Difference of Ei, ie, phase advance difference is essential
jiljmjlimi
tEEilmml UUUUetP ji
,
**2
)100()1(~ 2/)( 2
kmOLOee ELmitEEi ijji
222jiij mmm For Dm2~10-3eV2
Q2: What oscillation process is best?
OK, now, we somehow understand we need (long baseline) oscillation phenomena to probe matrix elements and attack CPV.
What type of oscillation is best? Fundamental physics reason Experimental feasibility
15
Disappearance ? Appearance?
16
i
liimtiE
lmiet
ili
tiE
iliil
tiEll
Ue
et
i
i
2
Oscillation probability
Disappearance case
There is no place for complex phase d in UMNS to appear
Disappearance has no sensitivity on (standard) CPV
Appearance
Conventional nm beam (~GeV) nm ne
Not yet discovered nm nt
Dominant oscillation mode
Neutrino factory/Beta beam (~10GeV) ne nm ne nt
17
Next talks
ne vs nt appearance
18
Oscillation probability (w/ CPV)
sin2 AAP
Relative effect of CPV
AAACPCCPV sinsin/ 2
CP conserved part
CPV part
nm nt case, probability A sin∝ 22q23, is known to be large, relative effect of CPV
becomes small
Also experimentally, identification of nt (out of lots of nm interactions ) is not easy
For nue appearance, A sin∝ 22q13 is known to be small
Large CPV effect expected
Matter effect
19
ne
Z
ne
X X
ne
W
e-
e- ne
nm
Z
nm
X X
nt
Z
nt
X XNC
Interactions through propagation in matter
CC
Matter effect
20
e
tot
e
Hdt
di
000
000
001
3
2
1 W
MNSMNStot
V
U
E
E
E
UH
Relative size of effect E∝ Change sign when Dm2 sign
change: Can probe sign Change sign when n
⇔nbar: Fake CPV effect
21
Oscillation probabilities
ELmP e /27.1sin2sinsin 213
213
223
2
ELmP x /27.1sin2sincos1 223
223
213
4
ELmP xe /27.1sin2sin1 213
213
2
contribution from Dm12 is small
ne appearance (LBL/Atm)
nm disappearance (LBL/Atm)
ne disappearance (Reactor)
223
213
223
212
mL
E
mmm
when
12
3
Dm232
(No CPV & matter eff. approx.)
~1
~0.5
≪1
Pure q13 and Dm132
q13 and Dm132
q23 and Dm232
22
nmne appearance & CPV
d-d, a-a for e
]GeV[]cmg[][eV1056.7
325 E
a
Matter eff.:
CP-odd
sinsin
2sin
13
12212
E
Lm
PP
PPACP
Solar
Main
Matter
# of signal sin∝ 2q13 (Stat err sin∝ q13),CP-odd term sin∝ q13
Sensitivity indep. from q13
(if no BG & no syst. err)
23Takashi Kobayashi (KEK), PAC07
23
All mixing angle need to be non-zero
d-d, a-a for e
]GeV[]cmg[][eV1056.7
325 E
a
Matter eff.:
CP-odd
Leading
132312sin sss CPV effect
(where sinq12~0.5, sinq23~0.7, sinq13<0.2)
+ other terms..
Same as Kobayashi-Maskawa model which require 3x3 to incorporate CPV
24
CPV vs matter effect
295km 730km
)( ePP )( ePP
Smaller distance/lower energy small matter effectPure CPV & Less sensitivity on sign of Dm2
Combination of diff. E&L help to solve.
nmne osc. probability w/ CPV/matter
@sin22q13=0.01
Lepton Sector CP Violation
Effect of CP Phase δ appear as– νe Appearance Energy Spectrum Shape
*Peak position and height for 1st, 2nd maximum and minimum
*Sensitive to all the non-vanishing δ including 180°
*Could investigate CP phase with ν run only
– Difference between νe and νe Behavior
3
2
1
231323122313122312231312
231323131223122313122312
1312131312
ccsccssesscsce
scssseccsscecs
sesccc
ii
ii
ie
25
How to do experiment?
OK, we now understand Importance of CPV in lepton sector Necessity of oscillation to probe CPV What process is suited for CPV measurement Behavior of oscillation probabilities and
relevant physics
So, now, let’s consider more on experimentation!
26
27
Super Beam
Conventional neutrino beam with (Multi-)MW proton beam (nFact)
Pure nm beam ( 99%)≳ ne ( 1%) from ≲ pme chain and K decay(Ke3) nm/nm can be switched by flipping polarity of focusing
device
ProtonBeam
Target FocusingDevices
Decay Pipe
Beam Dump
nmp,K
m
Strongly motivated by high precision LBL n osc. exp.
28
High intensity narrow band beam-- Off-axis (OA) beam --
(ref.: BNL-E889 Proposal)
qTargetHornsDecay Pipe
Far Det.
Decay Kinematics
Increase statistics @ osc. max.Decrease background from HE tail
1/gp~q Ep(GeV)
En(GeV)
En(G
eV)
5
12
]mrad[
30]GeV[max
E
nm flux
nm/nm flux for CPV meas.
-15%@peak
nm
nm
1021POT/yr
Sign flip byjust changinghorn plarity
Example
50GeV protonAt 295km
Cross sections Cross section E∝
Higher energy higher statistics
Anti-neutrino cross section smaller than neutrino by ~1/3 Why? Take ~3 times more
time for anti-neutrino measurements to acquire same statistics as neutrino
31
m ep0
Back ground for ne appearance search• Intrinsic ne component in initial beam• Merged p0 ring from nm interactions
ne appearance search
“Available” technologies for huge detector
Liq Ar TPC Aim O(100kton) Electronic “bubble chamber”
Can track every charged particle Down to very low energy
Neutrino energy reconstruction by eg. total energy No need to assume process type Capable upto high energy
Good PID w/ dE/dx, pi0 rejection Realized O(1kton)
Water Cherenkov Aim O(1000kton) Energy reconstruction
assuming Ccqe Effective < 1GeV
Good PID (m/e) at low energy
Cherenkov threshold Realized 50kton
32
Good at Wideband beam
Good at low E (<1GeV) narrow band beam
Neutrino Energy En reconstruction in Water Cherenkov
CC quasi elastic reaction
cospEm
2mEmE
N
2N
nm + n → m + p
n
m-
p
(Em, pm)qm
QE
inelastic
0
0 .5
1
1 .5
2
2 .5
3
3 .5
4
4 .5
0 1 2 3 4 5E (G e V )
c
ross
se
ctio
ns
(10
cm
)-3
82
In e la s t ic
C C q e
nm + n → m + p + p
n
m-
p
(Em, pm)ql
p
2 approaches for CPV (and sign(Dm2) )
Energy spectrum measurement of appeared ne Only w/ numu beam (at least early part) Measure term cos∝ d (and sind)
Assume standard source of CPV (d in MNS) Cover 2nd oscillation maximum (higher sensitivity on
CPV) Higher energy = longer baseline favorable
Wideband beam suited Liq Ar TPC is better suited
Difference between P(numunue) and P(numubar nuebar) Measure term sin∝ d Not rely on the standard scenario
34
Angle and Baseline
OA3°
OA0°OA2°
OA2.5°
nm
flu
x
• Off-axis angle– On-Axis: Wide Energy Coverage,
○Energy Spectrum Measurement
×Control of π0 Background– Off-Axis: Narrow Energy Coverage,
○Control of π0 Background
×Energy Spectrum Measurement
→ Counting Experiment• Baseline
– Long:
○ 2nd Osc. Max. at Measurable Energy
× Less Statistics
? Large Matter Effect– Short:
○ High Statistics
× 2nd Osc.Max.Too Low Energy to Measure
? Less Matter Effect (E/L)
dCP=90dCP=270
dCP=0
Dm312 = 2.5x10-3 eV2
sin22q13 = 0.1No matter effects
νμ νe oscillation probability
Osc
illa
tion
pro
babi
lity
35
CERN future possibilities
39
Present accelerator complex Various POSSIBLE scenarios
Under discussion
Okinoshima
658km0.8deg. Off-axis
KamiokaKorea
1000km1deg. Off-axis
295km2.5deg. Off-axis
Possible scenarios in Japan
41
Okinoshima
658km0.8deg. Off-axis
•Cover 1st and 2nd Maximum•Neutrino Run Only 5Years×1.66MW•100kt Liq. Ar TPC
-Good Energy Resolution-Good e/π 0 discrimination
•Keeping Reasonable Statistics
Scenario 1 δ=0°
νeSpectrum
Beam νe
Background
CP Measurement Potential
NP08, arXiv:0804.2111
δ=90°
δ=180° δ=270°
sin22θ13=0.03,Normal Hierarchy
3s
42
295km2.5deg. Off-axis<En>~0.6GeV
TokaiKamioka
•Cover 1st Maximum Only•2.2Years Neutrino+7.8Years anti-Neutrino Run 1.66MW•540kt Water Cherenkov Detector
Scenario 2
K.Kaneyuki @NP08
nm
nm
d=0 d=p/2
Enr
ec
Enr
ec
Enr
ec
Enr
ec
nm+nm BG
nm+ +nm ne+ne BG
signal+BG
sin22θ13=0.03,Normal Hierarchy
sin
22q
13
Fract
ion o
f d
3s
3s
CP sensitivity
sin22θ13
deg.
43
US Superbeam Strategy: Young-Kee Kim, Oct. 1-3, 2009
NSF’s proposedUnderground Lab.
DUSEL
1300 km
Project X: ~2 MW
700kW15kt Liquid Scintillator
Under construction
NOvA
~50 kton Liquid Ar TPC~300 kton
Water Cerenkov
MiniBooNESciBooNE
MINOSNOvA
MINERvAMicroBooNE
735 km2.5 msec810 km
Combination of WC and LAr
FNAL possibilities
To realize the experiments
Need Finite (reasonable) q13 T2K, NOvA,
Reactors! High power (>MW) neutrino beam Huge high-sensitivity detector YOUR CHALLENGE OR YOUR NEW IDEA!
48
Summary Properties of neutrino are gradually being revealed However still yet far unknown than quarks
CPV, mass hierarchy, etc. Especially, CP symmetry could be a critical key to answer
the fundamental question: What is the origin of matter in the universe
Future superbeam long baseline oscillation experiments have chance to discover CPV effect (if q13 is large enough to be detected in present on-going experiments)
Already many studies and developments (beam, detectors) are being made around the world to realize the experiments
Lot’s of challenges and funs forseen Let’s enjoy! 49