The NOνA Experiment and the Future of Neutrino Oscillations

Similar documents
Long & Very Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Studies at Intense Proton Sources. Jeff Nelson College of William & Mary

NO A. Karol Lang. University of Texas at Austin. For the NOvA Collaboration. XII International Workshop on Neutrino Telescopes

Neutrino Oscillations

PoS(NEUTEL2015)037. The NOvA Experiment. G. Pawloski University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA

Neutrino Oscillations

Neutrino Experiments: Lecture 2 M. Shaevitz Columbia University

NEUTRINOS II The Sequel

The NOνA Neutrino Experiment

Long Baseline Neutrinos

Jarek Nowak University of Minnesota. High Energy seminar, University of Virginia

EXPLORING PARTICLE-ANTIPARTICLE ASYMMETRY IN NEUTRINO OSCILLATION. Atsuko K. Ichikawa, Kyoto University

Douglas Michael California Institute of Technology RPIA 2002 KEK, Oct. 29, 2002

Recent results from Super-Kamiokande

Neutrino Physics II. Neutrino Phenomenology. Arcadi Santamaria. TAE 2014, Benasque, September 19, IFIC/Univ. València

What We Know, and What We Would Like To Find Out. Boris Kayser Minnesota October 23,

Neutrino Studies at an EIC Proton Injector. Jeff Nelson College of William & Mary

Chart of Elementary Particles

- Future Prospects in Oscillation Physics -

From Here to a Neutrino Factory: Neutrino Oscillations Now and Again

Neutrino Experiments: Lecture 3 M. Shaevitz Columbia University

Recent T2K results on CP violation in the lepton sector

Recent Discoveries in Neutrino Oscillation Physics & Prospects for the Future

The T2K experiment Results and Perspectives. PPC2017 Corpus Christi Mai 2017 Michel Gonin On behalf of the T2K collaboration

The NuMI Off-axis ν e Appearance Experiment (NOνA)

Neutrino Experiments with Reactors

Neutrino mixing II. Can ν e ν µ ν τ? If this happens:

DAEδALUS. Janet Conrad LNS Seminar March 16, 2010

Recent Results from T2K and Future Prospects

Neutrino Physics: Lecture 1

Accelerator Neutrino Experiments News from Neutrino 2010 Athens

Review of νe Appearance Oscillation Experiments

Physics Potential of existing and future LBL ν beams

Latest Results from MINOS and MINOS+ Will Flanagan University of Texas on behalf of the MINOS+ Collaboration

arxiv: v1 [hep-ex] 11 May 2017

Neutrino Oscillation and CP violation

Long Baseline Neutrino Experiments

New Results for ν µ ν e oscillations in MINOS

PoS(Nufact08)003. Status and Prospects of Long Baseline ν Oscillation Experiments

Particle Physics: Neutrinos part II

The future of neutrino physics (at accelerators)

Existing and future long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments

Neutrino oscillation physics potential of Hyper-Kamiokande

Status and prospects of neutrino oscillations

PHYS 5326 Lecture #2. Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2007 Dr. Jae Yu. Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2007 PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu

PoS(NOW2016)003. T2K oscillation results. Lorenzo Magaletti. INFN Sezione di Bari

MiniBooNE Progress and Little Muon Counter Overview

T2K and other long baseline experiments (bonus: reactor experiments) Justyna Łagoda

Measurement of q 13 in Neutrino Oscillation Experiments. Stefan Roth, RWTH Aachen Seminar, DESY, 21 st /22 nd January 2014

Neutrino Basics. m 2 [ev 2 ] tan 2 θ. Reference: The Standard Model and Beyond, CRC Press. Paul Langacker (IAS) LSND 90/99% SuperK 90/99% MINOS K2K

Particle Physics: Neutrinos part I

Neutrino Oscillation Measurements, Past and Present. Art McDonald Queen s University And SNOLAB

MINOS. Physics Program and Construction Status. Karol Lang The University of Texas at Austin. YITP: Neutrinos and Implications for Physics Beyond

Today: Part I: Neutrino oscillations: beam experiments. Part II: Next tutorials: making distributions with histograms and ntuples

BNL Very Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Expt.

PMT Signal Attenuation and Baryon Number Violation Background Studies. By: Nadine Ayoub Nevis Laboratories, Columbia University August 5, 2011

Discovery of the Neutrino Mass-I. P1X* Frontiers of Physics Lectures October 2004 Dr Paul Soler University of Glasgow

( Some of the ) Lateset results from Super-Kamiokande

Comparisons and Combinations of Oscillation Measurements

Neutrinos From The Sky and Through the Earth

Status and Neutrino Oscillation Physics Potential of the Hyper-Kamiokande Project in Japan

Neutrino Oscillations and the Matter Effect

Recent Results from K2K. Masashi Yokoyama (Kyoto U.) For K2K collaboration 2004 SLAC Summer Institute

An Introduction to Modern Particle Physics. Mark Thomson University of Cambridge

Neutrinos: Three-Flavor Effects in Sparse and Dense Matter

MINOS Oscillation Results from The First Year of NuMI Beam Operation

Neutrino Masses and Mixing

Future Experiments with Super Neutrino Beams

Neutrinos. Thanks to Ian Blockland and Randy Sobie for these slides. spin particle with no electric charge; weak isospin partners of charged leptons

BNL Very Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Expt.

ν?? Solar & Atmospheric Oscillation Experiments Greg Sullivan University of Maryland Aspen Winter Conference January 21, 1999 )Past )Present )Future

Indication of ν µ ν e appearance in the T2K EXPERIMENT

Neutrinos: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. Stanley Wojcicki SLAC Summer Institute 2010 August 13, 2010

Solar and atmospheric ν s

MINOS. Luke A. Corwin, for MINOS Collaboration Indiana University XIV International Workshop On Neutrino Telescopes 2011 March 15

Accelerator neutrino experiments

The Daya Bay Reactor Neutrino Oscillation Experiment

Atmospheric Neutrinos MINOS MINOS Far Detector Type of Atmospheric Neutrinos at MINOS Two MINOS Atmospheric Analyses.

The Double Chooz Project

NEW νe Appearance Results from the. T2K Experiment. Matthew Malek Imperial College London. University of Birmingham HEP Seminar 13 June 2012

K2K and T2K experiments

Application of GLoBES: GLACIER on conventional neutrino beams

Particle Physics. Michaelmas Term 2009 Prof Mark Thomson. Handout 11 : Neutrino Oscillations. Neutrino Experiments

reνolution Three Neutrino Oscillation Lecture Two Lindley Winslow Massachusetts Institute of Technology


Neutrinos and Cosmos. Hitoshi Murayama (Berkeley) Texas Conference at Stanford Dec 17, 2004

Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiments

1 Neutrinos. 1.1 Introduction

Neutrino Oscillations

1. Neutrino Oscillations

Neutrinos. Riazuddin National Centre for Physics Quaid-i-Azam University Campus. Islamabad.

Is the Neutrino its Own Antiparticle?

10 Neutrino Oscillations

arxiv: v3 [hep-ph] 23 Jan 2017

PoS(FPCP2017)023. Latest results from T2K. Jennifer Teresa Haigh, for the T2K Collaboration

arxiv: v3 [hep-ex] 24 Nov 2015

Neutrino Anomalies & CEνNS

Neutrino Phenomenology. Boris Kayser INSS August, 2013 Part 1

Conventional neutrino experiments

Neutrino Factories: Physics

Future Reactor Expts. The Challenge. DoubleChooz. In France. Stanley Wojcicki. Far Detector m ~50 events/day

Transcription:

f Axis The NOνA Experiment and the Future of Neutrino Oscillations NOνA SLAC 26 January 2006 Gary Feldman

Why are Neutrinos Particularly Interesting? Masses are anomalously low From CMB data m ν < 0.2 ev/c 2 0.0000004 m e A Window on the the GUT Scale? (seesaw mechanism) Only fundamental fermion which can be its own antiparticle (Majorana particle) Could be responsible for the matter/antimatter asymmetry of the universe (leptogenesis) Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 2

Seesaw Mechanism Right-handed neutrinos have no weak interactions and thus are not confined to the weak mass scale. Postulate both a GUT-scale right-handed Marjorana neutrino N R and both Majorana and Dirac mass terms in the Lagrangian: ( ) i φ 1 L = 1 2 M ijn Ri N R j + λ ij ν L, e L φ 2 N R + h.c. j Dropping the flavor index, this results in a mass matrix 0 m l, where m l = λ φ, M m l a normal fermionic mass. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 3

Seesaw Mechanism Diagonalizing the mass matrix to obtain the physical masses yields, m N M and m ν = m l 2 M. This is the seesaw mechanism. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 4

Leptogenesis To explain how our matter-dominated universe arose from a matter-antimatter symmetric big bang, we need (Sakharov conditions) Lepton and baryon number violation CP violation (Standard Model quark CP violation not sufficient) Thermal non-equilibrium Majorana neutrinos can provide these conditions. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 5

Leptogenesis CP-violating decays of N s in the big bang era provides a source of lepton-number violation. Example: N hν N hν GUT-level (B - L)-conserving interactions convert the lepton-number asymmetry to a baryon asymmetry. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 6

Neutrino Oscillations Neutrino oscillations occur because the weak eigenstates and not identical to the mass eigenstates. Neutrinos are always produced and detected in weak eigenstates, but they propagate in mass eigenstates. To the extent that the masses of the mass eigenstates are different, the phase relations generated by the propagation (e -iet/ ) change, producing the oscillation. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 7

Mixing Matrix The relationship between the weak eigenstates and the mass eigenstates is given by a unitary rotation matrix: ν e ν µ ν τ = U e1 U e 2 U e 3 U µ1 U µ2 U µ 3 U τ1 U τ2 U τ3 ν 1 ν 2 ν 3 Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 8

Mixing Matrix The mixing matrix can be specified by 3 angles and one complex phase: ν l = U ν n, where (c ij cos θ ij, s ij sinθ ij ) = U = 1 0 0 c 13 0 s 13 e iδ c 12 s 12 0 0 c 23 s 23 0 1 0 s 0 s 23 c 23 s 13 e iδ 12 c 12 0 0 c 13 0 0 1 c 12 c 13 s 12 c 13 s 13 e iδ s 12 c 23 c 12 s 23 s 13 e iδ c 12 c 23 s 12 s 23 s 13 e iδ s 23 c 13 s 12 s 23 c 12 c 23 s 13 e iδ c 12 s 23 s 12 c 23 s 13 e iδ c 23 c 13 Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 9

Vacuum Oscillations When a 2 x 2 oscillation is sufficient, in vacuum, ih d ν e = H ν Δm 2 e, H = 4E cos 2θ Δm 2 4E sin2θ dt ν x ν x Δm 2 4E sin2θ Δm2 cos 2θ 4E P(ν e ν x ) = sin 2 2θ sin 2 1.27Δm2 L E Δm ij 2 (m i 2 m j 2 ) is in (ev / c 2 ) 2, L is in km, and E is in GeV Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 10

Matter Oscillations Matter effects: In matter ν e s interact differently than ν x s. H = sin 2 2θ m = Δm 2 4E cos 2θ 2G Fρ e Δm 2 Δm 2 4E (cos 2θ 4E sin2θ 2 Δm sin2θ cos 2θ 4E sin 2 2θ 2G F ρ e E / Δm 2 ) 2 + sin 2 2θ Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 11

What Have We Learned? We have learned a great deal over the past decade. From observing neutrinos from the sun and reactors, we have learned that ν e ν µ and ν e ν τ with L/E 15 000 km/gev, with a large but not maximal mixing angle. From observing neutrinos produced in the atmosphere by cosmic rays, we have learned that ν µ ν τ with L/E 500 km/gev and θ consistent with being maximal. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 12

Know to some extent Don t know What We Know and What We Don t Know O. Mena and S. Parke, hep-ph/0312131 Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 13

One Anomaly A Los Alamos experiment with stopped pions (LSND) has reported evidence for oscillations of ν µ ν e with Δm 2 > 0.1 (ev) 2. Such an oscillation requires a sterile neutrino since three active neutrinos admit only two independent Δm 2 s. Such a neutrino would be only very marginally consistent with solar and atmospheric data. This effect is being checked currently by MiniBooNE, a Fermilab experiment. A confirmation would be exciting and require rethinking some of our plans. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 14

1st Generation Long Baseline Experiments We are now starting the first generation of long baseline accelerator experiments K2K: Low statistics experiment in Japan now completed. CNGS: Gran Sasso program will start this year. MINOS: Fermilab experiment started last year. Will report first results in a few months. First generation goals: Verify dominant ν µ ν τ oscillations Precise measurement of dominant Δm 23 2 and sin 2 2θ 23 Search for subdominant ν µ ν e (sin 2 2θ 13 ) and ν µ ν s oscillations Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 15

MINOS Layout (Main Injector Neutrino Oscillation Search) Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 16

MINOS Far Detector 8m octagonal tracking calorimeter 484 layers of 2.54 cm Fe plates 4.1 cm-wide scintillator strips with WLS fiber readout, read out from both ends 8 fibers summed on each PMT pixel; 16 pixels/pmt 25,800 m 2 of active detector planes Toroidal magnetic field <B> = 1.3 T Total mass 5.4 kt Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 17

MINOS Far Detector Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 18

MINOS Near Detector 280 squashed octagon plates Same plate thickness, scintillator thickness and width as far detector Target/calorimeter section: 120 planes 4/5 partial area instrumented 1/5 full area instrumented Muon spectrometer section: 160 planes 4/5 uninstrumented 1/5 full area instrumented 980 tons Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 19

MINOS Near Detector (Under Construction) Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 20

MINOS Sensitivity 5 year run Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 21

MINOS Sensitivity to ν µ ν e at 90% CL Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 22

2nd Generation Experiments The 2nd generation experiments will concentrate on ν µ ν e oscillations, which are needed for the measurements of sin 2 (2θ 13 ) sign(δm 32 2 ) δ T2K: 295 km baseline, Tokai to SuperKamiokande NOνA: 810 km baseline, Fermilab to Ash River, MN Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 23

The T2K Experiment (Tokai to Kamiokande) Phase 1 0.77 MW into 50 kt SuperK (full intensity in 2012) Phase 2 4 MW into 1 MT HyperK Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 24

The NOνA Experiment (NuMI Off-Axis ν e Appearance Experiment) NOνA is an approved Fermilab experiment optimized for measuring ν e appearance with the goal of improving MINOS s ν µ ν e measurement by approximately an order of magnitude. The NOνA far detector will be a 30 kt totally active liquid scintillator detector located 15 mrad (12 km) off the NuMI beamline axis near Ash River, MN, 810 km from Fermilab The uniqueness of NOνA is the long baseline, which is necessary for determining the mass ordering of the neutrino states. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 25

Off-Axis Rationale Both Phase 2 experiments, NOνA and T2K are sited off the neutrino beam axis. This yields a narrow band beam: More flux and less background (ν e s from K decay and higherenergy NC events) E ν = 0.43γ m π 1+ γ 2 θ 2 Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 26

NOνA Site Ash River Beam Soudan Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 27

NOνA Far Detector Totally Active 30 kt: 24 kt liquid scintillator 6 kt PVC 32 cells/extrusion 12 extrusions/plane 1984 planes 15.7m Cell dimensions: 3.9 cm x 6 cm x 15.7m (0.15 X 0 thickness) Extrusion walls: 3 mm outer 2 mm inner U-shaped 0.8 mm WLS fiber into APD 15.7m 132 m 32-plane block Admirer Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 28

1.65 GeV ν e N epπ 0 Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 29

NOνA Near Detector 8-plane block 10.6 T full 1.6 T empty 9.6 m 262 T 145 T totally active 20.4 T fiducial (central 2.5 x 3.25 m) 5 m Muon catcher 1 m iron 3.5 m Target region Veto region Shower containment region Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 30

Near Detector in the Access Tunnel Far Detector x 800 Site 1.5 Site 2 ν µ CC events ν e CC events Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 31

Proton Intensity (1) NOνA will run after the Tevatron terminates operation. Thus, parts of the accelerator complex now devoted to antiproton production and storage will be available for the neutrino program. Presently, we must load Booster batches at 15/sec into the Main Injector and then ramp the Main Injector. Idea for increased proton intensity is to get Booster batches while the Main Injector is ramping. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 32

Proton Intensity (2) Assumption of our proposal: Slip-stack 11 Booster batches into the Recycler and inject them into the Main Injector. This gives 0.7 MW, of which we assumed 0.625 MW for the NOνA program. Graphs (without Proton Driver) will be based on this. New idea: (Dave McGinnis) Momentum stack 4 Booster batches into the Accumulator, and then boxcar stack 6 Accumulator batches into the Recycler (24 Booster batches in all). Somewhat reduced Booster intensity gives 1.1 MW. Could be ready in FY 2011 at a cost of about $15M. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 33

Proton Intensity (3) Fermilab strategy: If ILC looks affordable, move to host the ILC and do cheap upgrades to the proton intensity. If ILC will be delayed, move toward a Proton Driver (i.e., a new Booster). We assume that the Proton Driver will allow 2.4 MW. If no Proton Driver, then upgrade to 1.1 MW, add mass (perhaps liquid argon detector), and run longer to achieve the equivalent of the Proton Driver intensity. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 34

Improvement over MINOS How does NOνA get an order of magnitude improvement over MINOS for ν µ ν e oscillations? Off-axis advantages (more flux, less background) 5.5 times the mass Twice the beam intensity initially, more later Greater sensitivity to ν e events: 0.15 X0 longitudinal segmentation compared to 1.5 X0 in MINOS Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 35

P(ν µ ν e ) (in Vacuum) P(ν µ ν e ) = P 1 + P 2 + P 3 + P 4 P 1 = sin 2 (θ 23 ) sin 2 (2θ 13 ) sin 2 (1.27 Δm 13 2 L/E) Atmospheric P 2 = cos 2 (θ 23 ) sin 2 (2θ 12 ) sin 2 (1.27 Δm 12 2 L/E) Solar P 3 = J sin(δ) sin(1.27 Δm 2 13 L/E) P 4 = J cos(δ) cos(1.27 Δm 13 2 L/E) } Atmosphericsolar interference where J = cos(θ 13 ) sin (2θ 12 ) sin (2θ 13 ) sin (2θ 23 ) x sin (1.27 Δm 13 2 L/E) sin (1.27 Δm 12 2 L/E) Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 36

P(ν µ ν e ) (in Matter) In matter at oscillation maximum, P 1 will be approximately multiplied by (1 ± 2E/E R ) and P 3 and P 4 will be approximately multiplied by (1 ± E/E R ), where the top sign is for neutrinos with normal mass hierarchy and antineutrinos with inverted mass hierarchy. E R = Δm 13 2 2 2G F ρ e 11GeV for the earth s crust. About a ±30% effect for NuMI, but only a ±11% effect for T2K. However, the effect is reduced for energies above the oscillation maximum and increased for energies below. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 37

3 σ Sensitivity to θ 13 0 Comparison with Proton Driver 2.5 yr each ν and ν run Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 38

3 σ Sensitivity to θ 13 0 2.5 yr each ν and ν run Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 39

3 σ Sensitivity to θ 13 0 Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 40

Importance of the Mass Ordering Window on very high energy scales: grand unified theories favor the normal mass ordering, but other approaches favor the inverted ordering. If we establish the inverted ordering, then the next generation of neutrinoless double beta decay experiment can decide whether the neutrino is its own antiparticle. However, if the normal ordering is established, a negative result from these experiments will be inconclusive. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 41

Importance of the Mass Ordering To measure CP violation, we need to resolve the mass ordering, since it contributes an apparent CP violation that we must correct for. CP violation in neutrinos may be connected to the mystery of why the universe is composed of matter. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 42

Matter Effect The mass ordering can only be determined by observing the matter effect, which is caused by a quantum mechanically coherent interaction of ν e s interacting with the electrons in matter. For a given oscillation phase (the oscillation maximum, for example), the effect is proportional to the distance the neutrino has traveled times the electron density of the matter. Therefore, it can only be observed by long baseline experiments. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 43

Ambiguity between Mass Ordering and CP Phase Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 44

95% CL Resolution of the Mass Ordering: Summary Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 45

3 σ Determination of CP Violation Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 46

Measurement of Δm 32 2 and sin 2 (2θ 23 ) 5-year ν run 5-year ν run with Proton Driver Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 47

Schedule Aiming for a FY2008 project start. Can get FY2007 Preliminary Engineering Design and Long Lead Item funding ($12M?) Now completing the Conceptual Design Report for review in February. Technical Design Report due for review in July. Start of data taking October 2010 Completion of the Far Detector July 2011 Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 48

Conclusions The Fermilab/NuMI/NOνA program provides a flexible, step-by-step approach to studying all of the parameters of neutrino oscillations A long baseline approach is crucial in the context of the world program. NOνA is the first stage of a flexible program where each stage can be planned according to what has been learned in previous stages. The NOνA physics reach is comparable to or greater than other experiments being contemplated for the next few years. Even without a Proton Driver, the NOνA/NOνA II program should be able to attain equivalent sensitivity. Gary Feldman SLAC 26 January 2006 49