1. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 R adio I ce C herenkov E xperiment PI presenter

2. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 NeSS: 10 min + 2 Concept Status Results ( astro-ph/0206371) Future

3. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Radio Detection of High Energy Neutrinos Goals PeV: AGN 1 km 3 EeV: GZK 10 3 km 3 Cherenkov radiation from  induced in-ice shower Signal ~ D Q ~ 0.25 E s /GeV l ~ R M ~ 10 cm Transparency > 1 km Thermal noise @ 250 k.8 km

4. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 EeV neutrino detection with RICE 5 km 1-10 PeV1-10 EeV _ Signal StrengthIce Properties CalibrationLPM effect e  e N  recoil hadrons  0 s interact

5. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 16 Rx (10 cm dipole) 5 Tx 3 Horns 4 Oscilliscopes (x4) DAQ PCs Pulse Generator Dry hole Pole: Network analyzer Antenna range Kansas: Deployment

6. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Channel and DAQ configuration Power Scope Trigger generator Antenna Amp in PV cable AmpFilter Splitter PC 4 hits within 1200 ns Latch scope TDC times to PC On-line veto (TDC times) Read scope Write to disk 8  sec 1 ns sample 500 MHz

7. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Single Channel Calibrations 200-500 MHz: +/- 3 dB (E) TX….RX antenna + amplifier calibrations cable (TX, RX) and filter relative geometry of TX/RX (r, q)

8. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Monte Carlo Simulation Neutrino interaction e + /e - /  shower Radio pulse generation Propagation through ice Antenna & DAQ response

9. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Interactions and Event types Interaction Model –isotropic  flux from upper hemisphere (2  sr) –charged and neutral currents –hadronic energy = y E, lepton energy = (1-y) E –Gandhi et al. ’98 cross-section d  /dy with ~20% reduction for Oxygen (EMC effect)

10. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Shower Simulations Shower simulation –GEANT 3.21 (100 GeV – 1 TeV) 30% smaller than ZHS (but …GEANT 4 ??) –Extrapolate to higher energies –LPM from Alvarez & Zas –Hadronic cascades convert completely to EM with no LPM –EM & hadronic cascades treated separately Average 100 GeV shower

11. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 EM Pulse generation ALSO: Experimental results (Saltzberg, et al.) confirms coherence and Askaryan effect 1.Pulse increases with Energy 2.Narrows with frequency 3.Some small numerical differences between codes

12. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Radio Attenuation in Ice Red – Westphal (Greenland) + Matsuoka (high freq) Black – Kawada(lab) + Matsuoka (high freq) (from Matsuoka)  ’ + i  ” Solid – Provorov (used by RICE) Dashed – Matsuoka + Westphal RICE bandpass

13. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Pulse shape simulation Disc. threshold Background taken from data sample

14. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Results of MC simulation Limited by attenuation 60,000 e - showers at E = 1 EeV Black dots – sample Red dots – events which would trigger RICE ~ 5% efficiency Limited by Cherenkov angle

15. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 RICE effective volume for e -,  showers Range due to varying signal strength by 0.5-2 Range due to varying attenuation by 0.5-2 Multiply by 2  sr This is appropriate for e charged current events.

16. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 LPM and hadronic showers With LPM Without LPM “Hadronic” E s = 20% E

17. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Reconstruction of transmitter events  t =  50 ns for noise  t =  ns for  r = 10 m nearby  r = 0.1 R, < 1 km  ~ 10 deg  E/E ~ 0.5

18. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Results of Data Analysis 333.3 hrs livetime

19. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Limits on diffuse e flux from e - showers a)Stecker & Salamon (AGN) b)Protheroe (AGN) c)Mannheim (AGN) d)Protheroe & Stanev (TD) e)Engel, Seckel & Stanev (GZK) Ranges are central 80%

20. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Limits derived from e - showers ( e CC) hadronic showers (all CC+NC) a)Stecker & Salamon (AGN) d ) Protheroe & Stanev (TD) b)Protheroe (AGN) e) Engel, Seckel & Stanev (GZK) c)Mannheim (AGN) Ranges are central 80%

21. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Near term future Beginning analysis of ~ 1 yr of data. Improve limits by ~ 10.

22. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Longer term 100 GZK events/yr requires ~ 1000 km 3 (1 Eg) RICE: LPM no LPM Auger: tau e, mu LPM Needs Salt EUSO ANITA AMANDA/ANTARES IceCube/NEMO

23. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Summary Radio detection has a bright future Demonstrated ability to reject surface backgrounds and work close to thermal limit Major uncertainty is –attenuation in ice (high energy) –calibration (low energy) V eff (E > 10 18 eV) > 20 km 3 sr [ e CC only] Limit improves by 2-18 with inclusion of hadronic channels, depending on spectrum. Limits may improve by 10 (again) with analysis of 1 yr data. 100 GZK  events per yr is conceivable

24. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Intentionally left blank End of Talk

25. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Thermal Background Red – Simulated detected showers (1 EeV) Black – Simulated noise – uncorrelated background Warnings: shower vertices are “true” positions not reconstructed. Should be OK inside 1 km. shower vertices are monoenergetic.

26. RICE David Seckel, NeSS02, Washington DC, Sept. 19-21,/2002 Systematic Effects (see astro- ph/0206371 )