Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Flavor ratios in neutrino telescopes for decay and oscillation measurements NuPAC meeting Chennai (Mahabalipuram), India April 6, 2009 Walter Winter Universität.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Flavor ratios in neutrino telescopes for decay and oscillation measurements NuPAC meeting Chennai (Mahabalipuram), India April 6, 2009 Walter Winter Universität."— Presentation transcript:

1 Flavor ratios in neutrino telescopes for decay and oscillation measurements NuPAC meeting Chennai (Mahabalipuram), India April 6, 2009 Walter Winter Universität Würzburg TexPoint fonts used in EMF: AAAAA A A A

2 2 Contents  Motivation  The sources  The fluxes  Flavor composition and propagation  The detectors  Flavor ratios, and their limitations  The LBL complementarity  Particle physics applications  Summary and conclusions

3 3 galactic extragalactic Neutrino fluxes  Cosmic rays of high energies: Extragalactic origin!?  If protons accelerated, the same sources should produce neutrinos (Source: F. Halzen, Venice 2009 )

4 4 Different messengers  Shock accelerated protons lead to p, , fluxes  p: Cosmic rays: affected by magnetic fields (Teresa Montaruli, NOW 2008)   : Photons: easily absorbed/scattered  : Neutrinos: direct path

5 5 Different source types  Model-independent constraint: E max < Z e B R (Lamor-Radius < size of source)  Particles confined to within accelerator!  Interesting source candiates:  GRBs  AGNs  … (Hillas, 1984; Boratav et al. 2000)

6 Motivation (this talk) What can we learn from neutrinos coming from astrophysical sources about neutrino properties? Especially: Neutrino flavor mixing and decays

7 The sources Generic cosmic accelerator

8 8 From Fermi shock acceleration to production Example: Active galaxy (Halzen, Venice 2009)

9 9 Synchroton radiation  Where do the photons come from? Typically two possibilities:  Thermal photon field (temperature!)  Synchroton radiation from electrons/positrons (also accelerated) ? (example from Reynoso, Romero, arXiv: ) B ~ (1-s)/2+1 determined by spectral index s of injection Determined by particle‘s minimum energy E min =m c 2 (~ (E min ) 2 B )

10 10 Pion photoproduction (Photon energy in nucleon rest frame) (Mücke, Rachen, Engel, Protheroe, Stanev, 2008; SOPHIA) Resonant production Multi-pion production Different characteristics (energy loss of protons) Power law injection spectrum from Fermi shock acc.

11 11 Neutrino production  Described by kinematics of weak decays (see e.g. Lipari, Lusignoli, Meloni, 2007)  Complication: Pions and muons loose energy through synchroton radiation for higher E before they decay – aka „muon damping“ (example from Reynoso, Romero, arXiv: ) Dashed: no losses Solid: with losses

12 The fluxes Single source versus diffuse flux versus stacking

13 13 Neutrinos from a single source  Example: GRBs observed by BATSE  Applies to other sources in atmospheric BG-free regime as well …  Conclusion: Most likely no significant statistics with only one source! (Guetta et al, astro-ph/ )

14 14 Diffuse flux (e.g. AGNs)  Advantage: optimal statistics (signal)  Disadvantage: Backgrounds (e.g. atmospheric, cosmogenic) (Becker, arXiv: ) Single source spectrum Source distribution in redshift, luminosity Comoving volume Decrease with luminosity distance

15 15 Stacking analysis  Idea: Use multi-messenger approach  Good signal over background ratio, moderate statistics  Limitations:  Redshift only measured for a small sample (BATSE)  Use empirical relationships  A few bursts dominate the rates  Selection effects? (Source: NASA) GRB gamma ray observations (e.g. BATSE, Fermi-GLAST, …) (Source: IceCube) Neutrino observations (e.g. AMANDA, IceCube, …) Coincidence! (Becker et al, astro-ph/ ; from BATSE satellite data) Extrapolate neutrino spectrum event by event

16 Flavor composition and propagation Neutrino flavor mixing

17 17  Astrophysical neutrino sources produce certain flavor ratios of neutrinos ( e :  :  ):  Pion beam source (1:2:0) Standard in generic models  Muon damped source (0:1:0) Muons loose energy before they decay  Neutron beam source (1:0:0) Neutrino production by photo-dissociation of heavy nulcei  NB: Do not distinguish between neutrinos and antineutrinos Flavor composition at the source (Idealized)

18 18 Flavor composition at the source (More realistic)  Flavor composition changes as a function of energy  Pion beam and muon damped sources are the same sources in different energy ranges!  Use energy cuts! (from Kashti, Waxman, astro-ph/ ; see also: Kachelriess, Tomas, 2006, 2007; Lipari et al, 2007 for more refined calcs)

19 19 Neutrino propagation  Key assumption: Incoherent propagation of neutrinos  Flavor mixing:  Example: For  13 =0,  12 =  /6,  23 =  /4:  NB: No CPV in flavor mixing only! But: In principle, sensitive to Re exp(-i  ) ~ cos   Take into account Earth attenuation! (see Pakvasa review, arXiv: , and references therein)

20 The detection Neutrino telescopes

21 21  High-E cosmic neutrinos detected with neutrino telescopes  Example: IceCube at south pole Detector material: ~ 1 km 3 antarctic ice (1 million m 3 )  Status 2008: 40 of 80 Strings IceCube

22 22 Neutrino astronomy in the Mediterranean: Example ANTARES

23 23 Different event types  Muon tracks from  Effective area dominated! (interactions do not have do be within detector) Relatively low threshold  Electromagnetic showers (cascades) from e Effective volume dominated!    Effective volume dominated  Low energies (< few PeV) typically hadronic shower (  track not separable)  Higher Energies:  track separable  Double-bang events  Lollipop events  Glashow resonace for electron antineutrinos at 6.3 PeV (Learned, Pakvasa, 1995; Beacom et al, hep-ph/ ; many others)   e e   

24 Flavor ratios … and their limitations

25 25 Definition  The idea: define observables which  take into account the unknown flux normalization  take into account the detector properties  Three observables with different technical issues:  Muon tracks to showers (neutrinos and antineutrinos added) Do not need to differentiate between electromagnetic and hadronic showers!  Electromagnetic to hadronic showers (neutrinos and antineutrinos added) Need to distinguish types of showers by muon content or identify double bang/lollipop events!  Glashow resonance to muon tracks (neutrinos and antineutrinos added in denominator only). Only at particular energy!

26 26 Applications of flavor ratios  Can be sensitive to flavor mixing, neutrino properies  Example: Neutron beam  Many recent works in literature (e.g. for neutrino mixing and decay: Beacom et al ; Farzan and Smirnov, 2002; Kachelriess, Serpico, 2005; Bhattacharjee, Gupta, 2005; Serpico, 2006; Winter, 2006; Majumar and Ghosal, 2006; Rodejohann, 2006; Xing, 2006; Meloni, Ohlsson, 2006; Blum, Nir, Waxman, 2007; Majumar, 2007; Awasthi, Choubey, 2007; Hwang, Siyeon,2007; Lipari, Lusignoli, Meloni, 2007; Pakvasa, Rodejohann, Weiler, 2007; Quigg, 2008; Maltoni, Winter, 2008; Donini, Yasuda, 2008; Choubey, Niro, Rodejohann, 2008; Xing, Zhou, 2008) (Kachelriess, Serpico, 2005)

27 27 The limitations  Flavor ratios depend on energy if energy losses of muons important  Distributions of sources or uncertainties within one source  Unbalanced statistics: More useful muon tracks than showers (Lipari, Lusignoli, Meloni, 2007; see also: Kachelriess, Tomas, 2006, 2007)

28 Complementarity to long- baseline experiments

29 29 There are three possible ways to create neutrinos artificially:  Beta decays:  Example: Nuclear fission reactors  Pion decays:  From accelerators:  Muon decays:  Muons created through pion decays! Muons, Neutrinos Terrestrial neutrino sources Protons TargetSelection, Focusing Pions Decay tunnel Absorber Neutrinos Reactor experiments Beams, Superbeams Neutrino factory

30 30 Reactor experiment: Double Chooz ~ Identical Detectors, L ~ 1.1 km (Source: S. Peeters, NOW 2008) Start: 2009?

31 31  Running experiment in the US for the determination of the atmospheric osc. parameters  Uses pion decays Beam experiment: MINOS Ferndetektor: 5400 t Near detector: 980 t 735 km Beam line (Protons) Source: MINOS

32 32 Narrow band superbeams  Off-axis technology to suppress backgrounds  Beam spectrum more narrow  Examples: T2K NO A T2K beam OA 1 degree OA 2 degrees OA 3 degrees (hep-ex/ )

33 33  Oscillation probability of interest to measure  13,  CP, mass hierachy (in A) Appearance channels (Cervera et al. 2000; Akhmedov et al., 2004) Almost zero for narrow band superbeams

34 34 Flavor ratios: Approximations  Astro sources for current best-fit values:  Superbeams: (Source: hep-ph/ )

35 35 Complementarity LBL-Astro  Superbeams have signal ~ sin  CP (CP-odd)  Astro-FLR have signal ~ cos  CP (CP-even)  Complementarity for NBB  However: WBB, neutrino factory have cos  -term! (Winter, 2006) Smallest sensitivity

36 36 SB-Reactor-Astrophysical  Complementary information for specific best-fit point: Curves intersect in only one point! (Winter, 2006)

37 37 Octant complementarity  In principle, one can resolve the  23 octant with astrophysical sources (Winter, 2006)

38 Particle physics applications … of flavor ratios

39 39 Constraining  CP  No  CP in  Reactor exps  Astro sources (alone)  Combination: May tell something on  CP  Problem: Pion beam has little  CP sensitivity! (Winter, 2006)

40 40 Earlier MH measurement? (Winter, 2006) R: 10% Matter effects 8 8

41 41 Decay scenarios  2 3 possibilities for complete decays  Intermediate states integrated out  LMH: Lightest, Middle, Heaviest  I: Invisible state (sterile, unparticle, …)  123: Mass eigenstate number (LMH depends on hierarchy) (Maltoni, Winter, 2008; see also Beacom et al ; Lipari et al 2007; …) H ? LM #7 a 1-a 1-b b

42 42 R Scenario identification Some information even if only ~ 10 useful events! (Pion beam source; L: no of events observed in #1) 99% CL allowed regions (present data) (Maltoni, Winter, 2008)

43 43 Generalized source  Define (f e :f  :f  )=(X:1-X:0) at source (no  in flux) (Maltoni, Winter, 2008) X=0: Muon damped source X=1/3: Pion beam source X=1: Neutron beam source

44 44 Unknown source/diff. flux  Cumulative flux (X marginalized X<=X max ) (Maltoni, Winter, 2008) X<=1/3: Cosmic accelerator with arbitrary pion/muon cooling X<=1: Any source without  production

45 45 Synergies with terrestrial exps  Pion beam, 100 muon tracks, only m 1 stable Double Chooz + Astrophysical, only R measured!  Independent of flavor composition at source! (Maltoni, Winter, 2008)

46 46 Summary and conclusions  In this talk: argumentation from sources via propagation to detection with the purpose of physics applications  Flavor ratio measurements might be complementary to LBL physics if  Neutrinos decay (or have other exotic properties) or  Discovery of High-E neutrino flux within 5-10 years (T2K/NOvA-timescales) and  At least some statistics (esp. in showers)

47 47 Discussion  Individual sources: In which cases can we predict the flavor ratio at the source?  Fluxes: If we accumulate statistics, which additional uncertainties enter?  Detector:  Ability to detect showers?  What about double bang and lollipop events?  Timescales: Can we expect some information at the timescale of the upcoming terrestrial experiments? (Huber, Lindner, Schwetz, Winter, in prep.) ?


Download ppt "Flavor ratios in neutrino telescopes for decay and oscillation measurements NuPAC meeting Chennai (Mahabalipuram), India April 6, 2009 Walter Winter Universität."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google