Lesson1: Peak proving

Transcription

1 Lesson1: Peak proving A par2cle detector claim detec2on of GLE; They confirm it by sta2s2cal analysis, see below. Their analysis is incorrect. Read their conclusions look on the plots and answer ques2ons in the end of this sec2on.

2 First cosmic- ray measurements by the SciCRT solar neutron experiment in Mexico The SciBar Cosmic Ray Telescope (SciCRT) is a new mul2- purpose cosmic- ray detector. Its main aim is the measurement of solar neutrons to inves2gate the ion accelera2on process during solar flares. We installed SciCRT at Ins2tuto Nacional de Astrofisica, O ṕ2ca y Electr ónica (INAOE) in eastern Mexico. We had two cosmic- ray observa2on campaigns at the place in November 2012 and February 2013 using 5/8 of the complete detector. The detector was transferred to the top of Mt. Sierra Negra, 4,600 m above sea level, in April The results obtained at INAOE, and the first results of the experimented opera2on at the mountain are presented here. The coun2ng rates of experimental data and Monte Carlo simula2on (MC) are (±0.1) Hz and (±3.6) Hz, respec2vely. Changed to ±0.1 and ±4.8 is it real improvement? The percentages of hadronic shower events in the data and MC are 0.15 (±0.02)% and 0.16 (±0.03)%, pec2vely. The corresponding percentages of electromagne2c shower events are 0.16 (±0.02)% and 0.18(±0.03)%. Data and MC calculauons are in reasonable agreement. The effec2ve area and assumed 2me profile of the SciCRT are calculated using MC σ = σ = 399.3

3 CorrecUons by the SciCRT solar neutron experiment in Mexico At the previous version, the error of the coun2ng rate of the MC had only a sta2s2c error. The new one adds the ambiguity of determina2on of MIP peak (about 13%).The coun2ng rate of MC is changed from (±3.6) Hz to 395.2( }4.8) Hz. The data and the MC does not agree by 3 standard devia2ons, which indicates there are other systema2cs which we do not know now. We changed the sentense in the abstract.

4 Tupi detector Niteroi, Brazil, 220.9S, 430.2W, 3 m above sea level The Tupi telescopes were placed inside a building, under two flagstones of concrete (150g/cm2). The flagstones increased the detec2on muon energy threshold up to GeV required to pass the two flagstones. The Tupi telescopes had an effec2ve field of view 037 sr.

5 GOES 13 Proto (cm 2 s sr M Tupi muon counting Rate Rate (/5min) Flux measured by Typi detector UTC (hour) Vertical Time series of the 5- min muon coun2ng rate observed by the ver2cal Tupi muon telescope; es2mate roughly variance from the picture! : Observation of the May 17, 2012 solar flare. The x-ray prompt e

6 Sta2s2cal Analysis 5 minute TS

7 Sta2s2cal Analysis: 1 minute TS

8 Physical Inference on Peak existence Number of trials Number of trials Standard deviation 4.3. Confidence analysis In order to see with more accuracy the background fluctua2on, we have examined the 2me profiles up to four hour before and aner the GOES X- ray peak (M5.1- class- flare). The results from this confidence analysis are shown windows (bopom panel). From this analysis, it is possible to iden2fy that the significance of the Tupi signals (red arrows) associated with SEP from M5.1- class solar flare are 26% (top panel) and 8.8% (bopom panel), and they are out of the Gaussian distribu2on (solid line) due to the background fluctua2ons.

9 Homework for lesson 1 What is GLE? Consider corrected data from SciBar Cosmic Ray Telescope (SciCRT), can they claim now that The data and the MC do not show a big discrepancy.? Find mistakes in sta2s2cal analysis of confirming detec2on of GLE by Typi; Es2mate variance of Tupi detector and perform correct sta2s2cal analysis of presence of peak in 1 and 5 minute 2me series of Typi muon detector; Es2mate rela2ve significance of peaks in 1 and 5 min. TS if peak dura2on is larger than 5 minutes.

10 Condi2onal probabili2es; electron and gamma ray flux recovering Consider TGE of 17 March 2014, find detectors demonstra2ng large enhancements; Compare STAND1, AMMM and CUBE detectors; Consider 100 and 010 coincidences of STAND1 and 7 and 8 scin2llators of CUBE with and without veto.

11 Thunderstorm ground enhancement detected on Aragats in March 17.

12 Cube detector evidence

13 Homework for lesson 2 Why in % enhancement of AMMM is much smaller than STAND1, however z score (number of sigmas) is much larger? Es2mate electron/gamma ray ra2o by STAND 100 and 010 coincidences, by CUBE 7 with and without veto, by CUBE 8 with and without veto. What will happen with electron and gamma ray fluxes if we change efficiency to es2mate electrons of 1 cm scin2llator? Say it is 97% and not 99%. What is strange with electron gamma ray fluxes es2mated by CUBE 8 with and without veto? Can you explain it?

14 Correla2on analysis 1 cm thick upper scin2llator of Cube demonstrate strong variability; Stand1 upper same type scin2llator in the same 2me is much more stable; Cube 7 and 8 20 cm thick scin2llators are also stable; Scaper plots of measured Cube1 flux with different meteorological parameters demonstrate weak and moderate correla2on.

15 1 cm thick plas2c scin2llators ' Temperature Cube up 1 cm thick STAND up 1 cm thick

16 Mul2ple correla2ons

17 Cube1 flux correla2ons with meteorological parameters

18 Homework for lesson 3 Explain correla2on paperns of Cube1 and give explana2on of flux variability: is it genuine CR deple2on? Is it due Temperature, pressure, humidity varia2ons? Find in 2me series another strong varia2on of Cube1 measurements and make analogical analysis; do your inference confirmed? Can you find another variable correlated beper with Cube1 flux? What you can say about the reason of Cube1 flux variance?

19 Lesson 4 Energy spectra Natural radioac2vity Atomic power plant monitoring; Beta- decay; PET annihila2on; Nuclear medicine; Par2cle physics give birth to industry and medicine; Count rate energy spectra Differen2al and integral energy spectra Energy spectra of Galac2c CR Energy spectra of Solar CR Knee region Power law universal dependence Bas2lle event 14 July 2000 L3 CERN experiment Neutron Monitor network es2mate

20 Natural Radioac2vity

21 Radioac2ve safety

22 Preven2on and Control Radia2on Sensor Network

23 Beta- minus Decay

24 Electron- positron annihila2on

25 Annihila2on - "total destruc2on" or "complete oblitera2on" Introduc2on to Feinman diagrams follow the link: hpps://

26

27 PET annihila2on

28

29 Bremstrahlung radia2on

30 Knee physics source and mechanisms of hadron accelerauon in Galaxy

31 Light and Heavy Cosmic- Ray Mass Group Energy Spectra as Measured by the MAKET- ANI Detector, The Astrophysical Journal, 603:L29- L32, 2004 March hpp:// iopscience.iop.org/ /603/1/L29/ fulltext/

32 BasUlle Ground Level Enhancement

33 Neutron Monitor network protons/(cm 2.s.sr.MeV) (a) 10:45 (b) 11:00 (c) Stochastic Shock Neutron Monitor GOES 8 Protons Energy(MeV) Energy (MeV) 11: Energy (MeV) Energy spectral fits to combined satellite and ground based observa2ons. Five- minute proton data (solid circles) from GOES 8 EPS/HEPAD par2cle detectors; energy range is ~100 to 700 MeV. The neutron monitor derived data (open circles) range from ~400 to 4000 MeV and are spaced evenly on a logarithmic scale;. The value of the e- folding energy at 10:50 UT (2.8 GV in terms of rigidity) is consistent with the maximum proton rigidity of ~3 GV observed for this event. The spectral slope () at 10:35 UT is At 13:25 UT is ±0.1. The uncertainty in the 10: change of slope () at 10:35 is small, while at 13:25 UT the uncertainty in is es2mated at ± 0.2. The resul2ng uncertainty in the calculated flux at 1 GV is less than 10%.

34 TGE simula2on: RREA or MOS?

35 L3+C detector system located at CERN, near Geneva (6.02 E, N) at an alu- tude of 450 m above sea level and about 30 m underground, providing an average energy threshold of around 20 GeV for veru- cally incident muons. sin(θ).cos(φ) azimuth sin(θ).sin(φ) N The direc2onal acceptance of L3+C. The contour lines indicate direc2ons having an equal event rate. The star marks show direc2ons of the Sun for each hour with t0 deno2ng the flare 2me. The square indicates the sky cell No. 37. L3 axis t 0 E Solar proton flux (cm -2 sr -1 s -1 ) proton beam flux Theoretical upper limits Proton energy (GeV) The solar flare induced proton flux upper limit obtained by this work compared with other measurements and theore2cal upper limit I = 2*10-3

36 Home work for lesson 4 Par2cle physics in 21 century new applica2ons? Find examples of important energy spectra Find examples of industrial/medical applica2ons of par2cle beams Inverse beta decay what is it? Weak interac2on more details of beta decay Why beta decay par2cle have energy spectrum and not fixed energy? What determines the maximal energy of beta par2cle? Mechanisms of nuclei accelera2on in Galaxy Inves2gate ASEC data on July (Bas2lle) GLE Diff energy spectra of solar protons on 20 January 2005 was dn/de =4*10^5*E^- 5 1/m^2sec GeV. Calculate how many par2cles was above 1 GeV, 10 GeV, 20 GeV and 100 GeV. Es2mate difference between solar proton flux es2mate by L3 experiment at CERN and NM network; what is reason of huge difference?

37 An electron and a positron annihilate at rest to form two equal energy photons. Find the energy, frequency, and wavelength of the two resulung photons. Pu}ng angular momentum conserva2on aside, each photon carries exactly 1/2 the total energy released by the electron- positron annihila2on. So, first the total energy released. This is given by using E = mc^2 and since the electron and positron have the same mass, E = 2*m*c^2 - - > the rest mass on an electron is MeV (million electron volts) or 8.18x10^- 14 J so the total energy is: E = 1.64x10^- 13 J Now one photon has the energy of 8.18x10^- 14 J and using the formula E = hf where h = Planck's constant and f is the photon frequency, you find f = E/h = 1.24x10^20 Hz Since wavelength wl, and f are related by c = f*wl where c = speed of light we can find the wavelength: wl = c/f = 2.43x10^- 12 m