M ACRO.Atmospheric Neutrinos, MMs,.... M ACRO.Atmospheric Neutrinos, MMs, Introduction 2. Early  oscillation analyses 3. Monte Carlos 4. Final oscillation analyses 5. Search for LIV contributions 6. Search for GUT MMs, Nuclearites, …… 7. Conclusions MACRO: Bari, Bologna, Boston, Caltech, Drexel, Frascati, Gran Sasso, Indiana, L’Aquila, Lecce, Michigan, Napoli, Pisa, Roma, Texas, Torino. Oujda G. Giacomelli University of Bologna and INFN Caltech, 21 jan 2005, Peck-Fest

p, He, Fe …     1a. Atmospheric neutrinos E : 1 GeV  300 GeV L:hundred km  km L/E  : 30 km/GeV  6000 km/GeV Downgoing  : “near” source Upgoing  : “far” source p, He, Fe …   e   e

The MACRO experiment 1984 : Proposal 1987 : Construction starts 1989 : First Supermodule ON 4/1994 : Full detector ON12/2000 : Rest In Peace

Upstop In down In up Upthroughgoing Absorber Streamer Scintillator 1) 2) 3) 4) DATA SAMPLES (measured) (Bartol96 expected) __________________________ Upthrough(1) In up(2) In down(3)+ Up stop(4)

1984 MACRO Proposal

Flux reduction depending on zenith angle for the high energy events From MC: distortion of the angular distribution underground detector Effects of  oscillations on upthroughgoing events Earth 

2. Early analyses Upthrough  only Angular distribution Absolute value (Bartol96 MC) Very early Phys.Lett. B357(1995)481 Early  m 2 = eV 2 Phys.Lett. B434(1998)451 Maximal mixing Phys.Lett. B517(2001)59 Lower energy topologies consistent with upthrough  { {  energy estimate through Multiple Coulomb Scattering of upthroughgoing muons Phys.Lett. B566(2003)35

-After 2001 FLUKA (Honda2001-3) Both 3-dimensional improved interaction models new cosmic ray fit,..... They agree to ~5% But: Predictions of new Honda and FLUKA MCs H.E. 25% low ; L.E. 12% low -Angular distributions of Bartol96, new Honda and FLUKA MCs agree to ~<6% New L3cosmic data favor Bartol96 3. Atmospheric flux. Monte Carlos -Until 2001 Bartol96 (Honda96)

From the muon zenith angle distribution. L(cos  =-1)~13000 km L(cos  =0)~500 km n1 MACRO data MonteCarlos

Very early data. Scintillators with PHRASE electronics Agrees with standard procedure and shows “bump”

    or  sterile ? OSCILLATION HYPOTHESIS Minimum value for    : R  min =1.61 Minimum value for  sterile : R st min =2.03 PROBABILITY FOR R < R min : P  = 7.2% ; P sterile = 0.015% P  /P sterile = 480  sterile hypothesis disfavoured at 99.8 % C.L. with respect to    Phys. Lett. B517 (2001) 59 Eur. Phys. J. C36 (2004) 357

 energy estimate through Multiple Coulomb Scattering of muons in rock in lower MACRO (Phys. Lett. B566 (2003) 35) E = 13 GeVE = 36 GeV E = 88 GeV E =146 GeV No oscillation Bartol96 MC predictions for    oscillations with the MACRO parameters

From the muon zenith distribution From the measurement of the muon energy using Multiple Coulomb Scattering Upthr.  data IU  data 12% point-to-point syst. error MC predictions for    oscillations with the best MACRO parameters L/E distribution

Low Energy Neutrino Events Internal Up Internal Down + Up-stopping  Measured (points) and expected number (dashed lines: MC Bartol96) of upgoing semicontained events (left) and up-stopping plus downgoing semicontained  (right). Solid lines: oscillations with the best fit parameters sin 2 2  =1 and  m 2 = eV 2. =2.3 GeV. Monte Carlo scale uncertainty 21%

4. Final oscillation analyses R 1 = N(cos  -0.4) { H.E. Zenith distribution E estimate IU, ID and UGS  R 2 = N(low E ) / N(high E ) R 3 = N(ID+UGS) / N(IU) No oscillation hypothesis ruled out by ~ 5  Best fit parameters for       m 2 = eV 2 ; sin 2 2  =1 Eur. Phys. J. C36(2004)357 L.E. Absolute values referred to Bartol96 MC : R 4 =(Data/MC) H.E. ; R 5 =(Data/MC) L.E. With these informations, the no oscillation hypothesis is ruled out by ~ 6  Use ratios with uncertainties of ~5%, indep of MCs

MACRO  

Exotic oscillations Lorentz invariance violation (LIV) Mixing between flavor and velocity eigenstates (asymptotic v different from c)  dependence LE  LIV is not dominant We computed upper limits of LIV parameters  v/2=(v 3 -v 2 )/2, sin 2 2θ v using the formalism of Coleman-Glashow PL B405(1997)249; hep-ph/ , taking the N low, N high samples of low and high energy upthroughgoing data, fixing mass oscillation parameters to the MACRO values and using the Feldman-Cousin procedure Violation of the equivalence principle Similar results as for LIV, but with parameter   difference of coupling constants of to grav pot   Fogli hep-ph/

L=10000 km,  m 2 = eV 2, sin 2 2θ m =1, sin 2 2θ v =1

)

Direct searches, g = g D, isotropic flux,  cat < 1 mb Flux upper limits for GUT MMs EPJ C25 (2002) 511

The Lab in Hall B (to the tune of House at Pooh Corner) Christopher Walter and I rode along On the road to the Fiordigigli Posing our questions to Sciubba and Peck On our way to get tortellini But we spent more time schmoozing Today than we had And we've got to get back To the external lab So help me if you can, I've got to get Back there to catch the navetta by one You'd be surprised there's so much to be done: Clean up the oil that we've spilled Fix all the tubes that we've killed Back to the lab beneath the Gran Sasso Back to the slab beneath the Gran Sasso Back to the lab in Hall B Back to the lab in Hall B Return Return to the Macro song parodies home page

GUT MM – p interaction may violate baryon and lepton number conservation M + p M + e + +  0 If   B  0 ~  core ~ cm 2 ~ negligible Rubakov-Callan mechanism If   B  0 ~  strong could see a string of p decays along MM trajectory   B  0 ~  0 /  or  0 /    p-decay detectors IMB  < 1  cm -2 sr -1 s <  < Kamiokande <  < telescopes Lake Baikal  < cm -2 sr -1 s -1  ~ Catalysis of proton decay

Look for Slow MM track Fast e + track MM e+e+ MACRO: dedicated search for MM induced p decay   = cm 2   = cm 2 EPJ C26 (2002) 163 using the streamer tube system S  = 4250 m 2 sr, t = 70,000 hours

Magnetic Monopole searches GUT MM, m M ˜10 16 GeV Sensitivity well below the Parker bound, cm -2 s -1 sr –1 Good efficiency for ~ 5x10 -5 <  =v/c<1 Redundancy: 3 different sub- detectors Sensitivity for catalysis of nucleon-decay induced by MM NO Candidates

Aggregates of u, d, s quarks + electrons, n e = 2/3 n u –1/3 n d –1/3 n s Ground state of nuclear matter; stable for any barion number A :  300 < A < Z~A 1/3 ?, ~A 2/3 ? ; Z/A << 1,  N  3.5 x g cm -3 (  nuclei  g cm -3 ) Produced in Early Universe: candidates for cold Dark Matter Searched for in CR reaching the Earth [black points are electrons] NUCLEARITES E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D30 (1984) 272 A. De Rujula, S. L. Glashow, Nature 312 (1984) 734 udd < nuclei udd uud u d d u s s u d nuclearites u d quark matter (non strange) < R N = 10 2 fm 10 3 fm 10 4 fm 10 5 fm 10 6 fm M N = 10 6 GeV 10 9 GeV GeV GeV

High Mass Nuclearites: present situation: White Mountain 4800 m a.s.l. Mt. Norikura 2000 m a.s.l. Ohya : 100 hg/cm 2 undergr. MACRO : 3700 hg/cm 2 undergr.

NATO ARW, Oujda, spring 2001