what have we learned from super-k? before super-k sk-i (1996-2001) atmospheric solar sno & sk-i
DESCRIPTION
What Have We Learned from Super-K? Before Super-K SK-I (1996-2001) Atmospheric Solar SNO & SK-I Active solar SK Accident Rebuild Greg Sullivan University of Maryland. Why Super-Kamiokande?. Solar Neutrinos “Problem” 3 experiments showed a deficit of solar neutrinos. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
What Have We Learned from Super-K?
– Before Super-K– SK-I (1996-2001)
• Atmospheric• Solar
– SNO & SK-I• Active solar
– SK Accident• Rebuild
Greg SullivanUniversity of Maryland
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Why Super-Kamiokande?
• Solar Neutrinos “Problem”– 3 experiments showed a deficit of solar neutrinos.
• Going back ~30 years– About ½ of the expected number were observed– results can not be reconciled with the standard solar model
• Atmospheric Neutrino “Anomaly”
– IMB and Kamiokande saw less than expected ratio of e
• One Proposed Explanation was: Neutrino Oscillations
– Solar neutrinos might be e
– Atmospheric neutrinos might be
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Neutrino Oscillations
• If neutrinos oscillate then “mixing” must occur between different type of neutrinos. Weak eigenstates of the neutrino are mixtures of the neutrinos with definite mass.– mass is not 0 and flavor is not absolutely conserved!
• Probability of electron neutrino to remain electron flavor
• Matter Effects will alter this vacuum expression– MSW effect
GeV
kmeVee E
LmP
222 27.1
sin2sin1)(
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Super-Kamiokande Detector
Detector Characteristics 41 m h x 39 m dia. 50,000 ton (22,000 ton
fiducial) 11,200 20” PMTs inner
detector 1,850 8” PMTs anti-
detector 40% photo-cathode
coverage
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Super-Kamiokande
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Detecting neutrinos
Electron or
muon track
Electron or
muon track
Cherenkov ring on the
wall
Cherenkov ring on the
wall
The pattern tells us the energy and type of particle
We can easily tell muons from electrons
The pattern tells us the energy and type of particle
We can easily tell muons from electrons
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
A muon going through the detector
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
A muon going through the detector
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
A muon going through the detector
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
A muon going through the detector
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
A muon going through the detector
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
A muon going through the detector
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Stopping Muon
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Stopping Muon – Decay Electron
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Atmospheric Neutrino Production
Ratio predicted to ~ 5%
Absolute Flux Predicted to ~20% :
2
ee
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Atmospheric Oscillations
about 13,000 km
about 15
km
Neutrinos produced in
the atmosphere
Neutrinos produced in
the atmosphere
We look for transformations
by looking at s with different distances from production
SK
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Atmospheric Neutrino Interactions
n p
W+
Reaction Thresholds
Electron: ~1.5 MeV
Muon: ~110 MeV
Tau: ~3500 MeV
Charged Current Neutral Current
e e
n p
W +
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Telling particles apart
MuonElectronMuonElectron
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Muon - Electron Identification
PID Likelihood
sub-GeV, Multi-GeV, 1-ring
Monte Carlo (no oscillations)
We expect
about twice as
many as e
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Super-K Atmospheric Data Set
• 1289.4 days of data (22.5 kilotons fiducial volume)• Data Set is divided into:
– Single and Multi Ring events– Electron-like and Muon-like– Energy Intervals
• 1.4 GeV< Evis >1.4 GeV• Also Evis< 400MeV (little or no pointing)
– Fully or partially contained muons (PC)– Upward going muons - stopping or through going
• Data is compared to Atmospheric Monte Carlo– Angle (path length through earth)– Visible energy of the Lepton
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Low Energy Sample
No Oscillations
Oscillations (1.0, 2.4x10-3eV2)
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Moderate Energy Sample
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Multi-GeV Sample
Oscillations (1.0, 2.4x10-3eV2)
No Oscillations
UP going Down UP Down
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Multi-Ring Events
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Upward Going Muons
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Summary of Atmospheric Results
Best Fit for to
Sin22 =1.0,
M2=2.4 x 10-3eV2
2min=132.4/137 d.o.f.
No Oscillations
2min=316/135 d.o.f.
99% C.L.
90% C.L.
68% C.L.
Best Fit
Compelling evidence for to atmospheric neutrino oscillations
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Tau vs Sterile Neutrino Analysis
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Tau Appearance?
• Tau’s require greater than 3 GeV in neutrino energy– This eliminates most events
• Three correlated methods were used– All look for enhanced upward going multi-ring events
• All show slight evidence for Tau appearance• None are statistically significant
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
The 0 sample
• For to s the rate of NC events is reduced as
compared to to which is the same as no
oscillations.• The SK NC enriched sample is only about 1/3
from NC interactions.
• The 0 sample is the cleanest NC signal
• Until K2K the error in (0) (~1-2 Gev) has been as large as the effect!
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
0 Peaks
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
New Results
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Neutrinos From Solar Reactions
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
The Solar Neutrino Problem
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Oscillation Parameter Space
LMA
LOW
VAC
SMA
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Expected Day – Night Asymmetry
Bahcall
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Solar Neutrinos in Super-K
• The ratio of NC/CC cross section is ~1/6.5
W
e
-
e
e
- e
-
Charged Current (electron ’s only)
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Solar Neutrinos in Super-K
• Super-K measures:– The flux of 8B solar neutrinos (electron type)– Energy, Angles, Day / Night rates, Seasonal
variations• Super-K Results:
– We see the image of the sun
from 1.6 km underground
– We observe a lower than predicted
flux of solar neutrinos (45%)
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Low Energy Electron in SK
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Solar Neutrinos
From SunFrom SunToward SunToward Sun
)s cm 10 x (syst)0.03(stat) (2.35
ssm) (syst) )0.005(stat (0.465
1-2-608.00.07
0.0160.015 -
e
SSM:Bachall 2000 Flux:
8B 5.05x106 /cm2/s
Spectrum Ortiz et al
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Global Flux allowed parameter space
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Energy Spectrum
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Energy Spectrum
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Day / Night - BP2000+New 8B SpectrumPreliminary
(syst)(stat)0.0200.021N)(D
21
DN 0.0130.012-
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Seasonal Variation
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Combined Results
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
SNO Results - Summer 2001
• SNO measures just e
• SK measures mostly e but also other flavors (~1/6 strength)
• From the difference we see oscillations!
}This is from
&
neutral current
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Combining SK and SNO
• SNO measures e= (35 ± 3 )% ssm
• SK Measures es= (47 ± .5 ± 1.6)% ssm
• No Oscillation to active neutrinos:– ~3 difference
• If Oscillation to active neutrinos:– SNO Measures just e
• This implies that ssm (~2/3 have oscillated)
– SK measures es =(e + ( /6.5)
• Assuming osc. SNO predicts that SK will see es ~ (35%+ 65%/6.5) ssm = 45% ± 3% ssm
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
SK & SNO Flux Measurements
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Super-K Disaster - Nov 12, 2001
• Chain reaction destroyed 7000 ID and 1000 OD Tubes
• The cause is not completely understood, but it started with a bottom pmt collapse.
• The energy release comes from a 4 T column of water falling
• There are plans to rebuild…
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Disaster (Continued)
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Disaster (Continued)
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Disaster (Continued)
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Rebuild at ½ of Original Coverage
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
What Have We Learned?
• Neutrinos undergo flavor oscillations– Neutrinos have mass– Flavor mixing
• 3 mixing angles, 2 m2 & 1 mass (or 3 masses)
• Atmospheric– Maximal mixing ()– m23 2 ~ 2 x 10-3 eV2
• Solar– Looks like active not sterile neutrinos– m12 2 ~ ? – Mixing angle ?
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
What We’ll Hopefully Know Soon
• Kamland, Borexino,SNO,SK,Cl,Ga– Which solution for solar neutrinos
• first m122
• first
• Accelerator (MINOS, JHF, K2K,…)– Better m23
2 , better
– First measurement of
• If not zero
– CP Violation in neutrinos possible
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002
Questions
• Neutrino Mass– Majorana or Dirac?
• Lepton Number Violation?• GUTs?
– What is the absolute Mass Scale? • Why neutrinos have such small mass?• Which mass Hierarchy of 3 mass states?• Cosmology?
• Mixing Matrix– Why mixing structure different then CKM in quarks?
• GUTs?– CP Violation?