Physics Beyond the Standard. Model with IceCube. Alex Olivas. University of Maryland. (for the IceCube Collaboration)

Transcription

1 Physics Beyond the Standard Motivation Main Physics Goals Detector Design/Construction Beyond the SM Searches Model with IceCube Alex Olivas University of Maryland (for the IceCube Collaboration)

2 Why a km 3 observatory? Cosmic Ray Spectrum follows broken power law Where does the high energy component come from? 1. Unknown p + accelerators? 2. Decay of cosmological relics? Recent AUGER results hint that perhaps the source might be AGN E 2.7 F(E) [GeV 1.7 m 2 s 1 sr 1 ] Cosmic Ray Flux x E 2.7 Grigorov JACEE MGU TienShan Tibet07 Akeno CASA/MIA Hegra Flys Eye Agasa HiRes1 HiRes2 Auger SD Auger hybrid Kascade Knee Spectrum hardens at very high energies LHC 2nd Knee r p > Rgalaxy (E p > EeV) Extragalactic origin Ankle E [ev] Plot from PDG 2007 Fig 24.9 ~1 event km -2 yr -1 arxiv: v1

3 Why a km 3 observatory? Advantages of neutrinos 1. Point back to source 2. Universe transparent to 3. Not GZK suppressed GZK Suppression p + + CMB p n + + E 3 dn/de [m 2 sr 1 s 1 ev 2 ] AGASA HiRes 1,2, monocular Auger 2007 GZK cutoff 5x10 19 ev Energy (ev) Plot from PDG 2007 Fig 24.10

4 Overview of Physics with IceCube cosmic p + accelerator GRB Point Sources Diffuse Energy Spectrum SUSY WIMPs (Sun and Earth) μ μ Supernovae Cosmic Ray Composition GZK/EHE Extreme High Energy

5 IceCube Backgrounds* p Up-going atm He up-going down-going Fe p Simulated with CORSIKA (COsmic Ray SImulations for KAscade) Down-going muons and muon bundles (*Cosmic Ray Composition Signal)

6 The IceCube Collaboration Oxford University Uppsala University Stockholm University Lausanne Bartol Research Institute Penn State University UC Berkeley UC Irvine Clark-Atlanta University U. Maryland U. Wisconsin - Madison U. Wisconsin - River Falls LBNL - Berkeley Southern University U. Anchorage Utrecht University U. Libre de Bruxelles U. Brussel U. Gent U. de Mons-Hainaut U. Mainz DESY-Zeuthen U. Dortmund U. Wuppertal Humboldt U. U. Aachen MPK-K Heidelberg Chiba University U. Canterbury

7 IceTop Surface array of 80 stations 2 ~2.3m 3 surface ice tanks per string 2 optical modules per tank (high and low gain) IceCube Design Goal 80 Strings, 125 m apart on hexagonal grid 60 optical modules per string (~17m spacing) Cubic kilometer of instrumented ice AMANDA 19 Strings 677 Optical Modules (10-20m spacing)

8 Simple case of incoming μ 1. Incoming interacts with N 2. Muons generate Cherenkov light 3. Cherenkov photons detected in DOM 4. Reconstruct μ from photon arrival times Simulation - 80 strings

9 IceCube sensitive to all flavors Low energy EM and hadronic cascades roughly spherical (neglecting dusty ice and LPM effect) e : Classic Double-Bang One among several tau signatures : lollipop, inverted lollipop, etc...

10 DOM Digital Optical Module Measures arrival time of photons 2 ATWD Analog Transient Waveform Digitizers 300MHz for 400ns 3 gain channels each(low, medium, high) ping-pong to minimize deadtime fadc fast Analog to Digital Converter 40MHz for 6.4μs Local Coincidence triggering Hard Local Coincidence Soft Local Coincidence (isolated hits) Improvements over AMANDA OMs Digitize waveforms in-ice surface Lower noise ~ 400Hz 33cm

11 Hose Reel for Hot Water Drill Drilling IceTop Tanks

12 Drilling Animation

13 Deployment

14 DL Signal (A.U.) The Dust Logger Designed to map out dust layers 404nm laser as light source Dusty layers due to volcanic ash Three Dust Logger runs so far (strings 21, 50, and 66) Can measure tilt of dust layers 42k years BP 60k years BP depth(m)

15 Photon Propagation Model in Antarctic Ice Optical Ice Properties 300nm sc ~(10-40m) abs ~ (30-120m) 400nm sc ~(10-50m) abs ~ (50-140m) 500nm sc ~(15-65m) abs ~ (30-50m) 600nm sc ~(20-80m) abs ~ 10m Maybe up to 250m for deep ice (>2200m)

16 Maximum Attainable Velocity (MAV) states not necessarily flavor eigenstates 180 o Exotic oscillations Violation of Lorentz Invariance (VLI) in atm conventional atm oscillations Atmospheric Survival Probability VLI Oscillations 90 o Results Survey (90% CL on c/c) AMANDA* < 5.3x10-27 MACRO < 25x10-27 SuperK+K2K < 2.0x10-27 *J.Ahrens, Ph.D. thesis, U. Mainz Battistoni et. al., hep-ex/ Gonázlez-Garcia & Maltoni, PRD (2004) Sensitivity Projections AMANDA (7 yrs) c/c < IceCube (10 yrs) c/c < Ideal Case (i.e. neglects energy and angular resolutions) S.Coleman and S.L. Glashow, PRD 59, (1999)

17 IceCube vs. LHC New Physics Potential from Cosmic Rays 10 5 Knee Cosmic Ray Event Rate LCR ~ cm -2 s -1 E>10 8 GeV NN ~ 10 5 s -1 E 2.7 F(E) [GeV 1.7 m 2 s 1 sr 1 ] Grigorov JACEE MGU TienShan Tibet07 Akeno CASA/MIA Hegra Flys Eye Agasa HiRes1 HiRes2 Auger SD Auger hybrid Kascade 2nd Knee Ankle LHC Event Rate L ~ cm -2 s -1 s =14TeV pp ~ 10 9 s Plot from PDG 2007 E [ev] 1 event km -2 hr -1 s p-p > 14TeV 1 event km -2 yr -1 s p-p > 140TeV 17

18 SUSY in Cosmic Rays MSSM w/ conserved R parity Weakly interacting LSP Charged meta-stable NLSP NLSP LSP How they are produced? 1.UHE CR produce SUSY particles 2.SUSY particles cascade to NLSP 3.Meta-stable NLSP travels to IceCube stau ( ) ~ will look very similar to a muon in IceCube M.Ahlers, J.I. Illana, M. Masip, D. Meloni 18 arxiv: v1 [hep-ph]

19 SUSY in Cosmic Rays ~ ~ p Signature Two nearly parallel -like tracks near the horizon separated by more than 100m Above the horizon dominated by SM + - background Other stau sources via -N Cosmic HE (unknown diffuse flux) Atmospheric prompt charm decay SM + - background <80 o No background >80 o Signal 80 o < <90 o O(1 yr -1 ) M.Ahlers, J.I. Illana, M. Masip, D. Meloni arxiv: v1 [hep-ph] I.F.M.Albuquerque, G. Burdman, Z. Chacko arxiv: v1 [hep-ph] S.Ando, J.F. Beacom, S. Profumo, D. Rainwater 19 arxiv: v1 [hep-ph] yr WB limit 20-1 yr MPR limit <1 yr -1 & dominates over cosmic

20 Heavy Exotics with IceCube Monopoles, Q-balls, Nuclearites, Preons, etc... GUT Monopole Light (m<10 12 GeV) & Relativistic ( >0.5) Basic E&M Cherenkov Radiation e ( knock-on ) production SUSY Q-balls SENS SECS Heavy (m~10 16 GeV) & Slow (10-4 < <10-2 ) Nucleon catalyzed decay Magnetic Monopole : MP ~ QCD SUSY Q-ball : SENS >> QCD SQM nuclearites, preons, etc. Heavy (m<10 16 GeV) & Large (R~Å) DeRujula-Glashow Mechanism plasma shock wave emits blackbody radiation

21 Monopole Acceleration Only light Monopoles expected to be relativistic Heavy (MMP ~10 16 GeV) can t be accelerated to relativistic speeds by known sources

22 Relativistic Monopole Photon Production Cherenkov Radiation e ( knock-on ) electrons ionization electrons above the Cherenkov threshold ~10 4 x bare Quantum corrections and Monopole structure play a small role at these speeds

23 Monopoles on IceCube - > 0.8

24 Monopoles on IceCube - ~ 0.6

25 t Hooft-Polyakov SU(5) GUT Monopoles Rubakov-Callan Mech. Catalyzed Nucleon Decay cat ~ QCD F( ) Decay Modes p,n e + (90%) p,n + K (10%) cat= 0-2 cat= 0-1 Assume only proton decay of H in H2O Model as a series of 1GeV EM showers (~4x10 4 ) bare Vary mean free path in simulation (0.1m-10m) Relativistic events only a few s long MP=10-2 Work in progress for IceCube MC (signal and background) Trigger/Filtering estimates for 2008 A.Pohl - AMANDA simulation

26 Monopoles at ICRC 2007 (International Cosmic Ray Conference - Merida, Mexico) Relativistic Monopoles A. Pohl (Uppsala University) 113 days AMANDA 2001 D. Hardtke (U.C. Berkeley) for IceCube Slow Monopoles H. Wissing (Aachen University) 154 days AMANDA 2000 Brian Christy (UMD), A. Olivas (UMD), and D. Hardtke (U.C. Berkeley) for IceCube

27 Conclusion IceCube currently the largest neutrino observatory 25 IceCube strings + 19 AMANDA + 26 stations on surface : Point Sources, Diffuse flux, Exotic atm Oscillations Cosmic Ray Composition Supernovae Detection Gamma Ray Bursts WIMPs (Dark Matter) Monopoles, Q-balls, etc.. SUSY sleptons w/ N-N and -N TeV Gravity in cosmogenic -N String Deployment Plan Deployment season has begun strings (36 IceCube strings) 23rd string deployed Dec. 8th strings (50 IceCube strings) 24th string deployed Dec. 13th strings (64 IceCube strings) 25th string deployed Dec. 15th strings (75+ IceCube strings)