Atmospheric Neutrinos Phenomenology and Detection p 00 ++ e+e+ e-e- ++ Michelangelo DAgostino Physics C228 October 18, 2004 Outline Cosmic Rays and Atmospheric Generation Cosmic Rays and Atmospheric Generation Flavor Oscillations Flavor Oscillations Cerenkov Radiation Cerenkov Radiation SuperKamiokande SuperKamiokande SNO SNO AMANDA/IceCube AMANDA/IceCube Cosmic Rays Earth is constantly bombarded by a stream of charged particles Earth is constantly bombarded by a stream of charged particles 86% protons 11% alpha particles 1% heavier elements up to uranium 2% electrons Except for the highest energy constituents, theyre galactic in origin Cosmic Rays The flux follows an E -2.7 The flux follows an E -2.7 distribution up to knee E -3.0 after spectrum shows an ankle Controversy over highest energy cosmic rays, above ~10 20 eV would have to come from our local cluster because of the so-called GZK effect unknown acceleration mechanism Knee Ankle F. Halzen Knee Ankle Knee Ankle Cosmic Rays These primary cosmic ray particles slam into the atmosphere and generate secondary mesons These primary cosmic ray particles slam into the atmosphere and generate secondary mesons Most commonly produced particles are pions +, -, 0 and kaons Most commonly produced particles are pions +, -, 0 and kaons below 100 GeV the s decay before interacting below 100 GeV the s decay before interacting + + + - - + 0 2 e + e - 0 2 e + e - cascades hard component soft component Cosmic Rays s from the hard component further decay to neutrinos via s from the hard component further decay to neutrinos via - e - + e + and the conjugate decay for + energy spectrum peaks at around.25 GeV and falls off as E -2.7 at higher energies we get one produced from pion decay into the plus a e and from the decay, so wed roughly expect a 2:1 ratio of atmospheric to e generated by cosmic rays in the atmosphere Cosmic Rays ratio 2 above a few GeV, up-going and down-going fluxes are symmetric; this is an important observation for oscillation experiments is the zenith angle, so cos =-1 is an up-going (through the Earth) while cos =-1 is down- going Ref. 2 Flavor Oscillations in the 1980s, underground detectors set up to look for proton decay found that the atmospheric flux reaching the ground did not have the expected flavor ratio in the 1980s, underground detectors set up to look for proton decay found that the atmospheric flux reaching the ground did not have the expected flavor ratio this suggested that the s might be changing their flavor while traveling through the atmosphere this suggested that the s might be changing their flavor while traveling through the atmosphere solar investigations found that e s could oscillate; it now appeared that s could oscillate as well solar investigations found that e s could oscillate; it now appeared that s could oscillate as well atmospheric studies were ideal because one could vary the two important parameters, path length by looking at different zenith angles and energy by looking at different neutrino energies atmospheric studies were ideal because one could vary the two important parameters, path length by looking at different zenith angles and energy by looking at different neutrino energies Flavor Oscillations the basic idea is that s are created as eigenstates of flavor, but that they propagate as eigenstates of mass the basic idea is that s are created as eigenstates of flavor, but that they propagate as eigenstates of mass for two state mixing, the two sets of states are connected via for two state mixing, the two sets of states are connected via where is the mixing angle is some linear combination of the 1, 2 mass eigenstates; each of these eigenstates develops in time with the usual factor of where Flavor Oscillations we tack this factor onto each i and use t=L/c, where L is the distance traveled, and then compute the probability of observing we tack this factor onto each i and use t=L/c, where L is the distance traveled, and then compute the probability of observing there is a finite probability that will oscillate into there is a finite probability that will oscillate into the MSW effect, which describes oscillations in matter and is crucial important for solar neutrino oscillations, only needs to be considered for oscillations involving e, so we dont need to consider the MSW effect, which describes oscillations in matter and is crucial important for solar neutrino oscillations, only needs to be considered for oscillations involving e, so we dont need to consider it here it here Cerenkov Radiation Cerenkov Radiation is the primary means used to detect these s Cerenkov Radiation is the primary means used to detect these s when a charged particle moves through a medium at a speed greater than the speed of light in the medium, it emits Cerenkov photons when a charged particle moves through a medium at a speed greater than the speed of light in the medium, it emits Cerenkov photons wavefront particle so or Cerenkov Radiation this is analogous to this is analogous to a sonic boom a sonic boom timing of photons allows for reconstruction of the path of the charged particle F. Halzen SuperK 50,000 tons of 50,000 tons of water densely instrumented with 11,000 photo- multiplier tubes Cerenkov cone intersects water surface, forming a ring timing of pulses can be used to reconstruct direction e - and - give different rings; e - is more diffuse due to multiple scattering SuperK -- e- Ref. 1 SNO 1,000 tons of heavy 1,000 tons of heavy water, D 2 O, surrounded by ultrapure water to shield out radioactivity 9,500 PMTs SuperK-Results up-going, L 13,000 km down-going, L 15 km e The results for electron neutrinos agreed with expectations, but for muon neutrinos there was a clear deficit. Furthermore, it depended on distance traveled (as up-going muon neutrinos showed a larger deficit), and it depended on energy (the upper trace, lower energy, shows a greater deficit for all distances). The interpretation is that muon neutrinos oscillate into tau neutrinos. Ref. 2 SuperK-Results Observed /e over Monte Carlo /e for various experiments. The quantity A encapsulates the asymmetry. Without oscillations, we expect A =0. The observation deviates from A =0 by 7.5 Ref. 1 SuperK-Results sinusoidal dependence in L/E that cant be explained by Monte Carlo without oscillations Ref. 3 SuperK-Results 1.9x10 -3 < m 2 .90 Results are traditionally plotted as contours in the m 2, sin 2 2 plane where m 2 is the mass difference and sin 2 2 is the mixing angle. Ref. 3 AMANDA/IceCube AMANDA/IceCube 50 m SuperK Embedded in the South Polar ice cap, AMANDA and IceCube are large-scale, more sparsely instrumented detectors with higher energy thresholds intended to look for s of extraterrestrial origin, e.g. from gamma ray bursts, supernovae, active galactic nuclei, decays of dark matter particles atmospheric s are a background nuisance; not really sensitive to oscillations South Pole AMANDA 1 mile deep F. Halzen AMANDA/IceCube AMANDA/IceCube References For a basic introduction to cosmic rays and oscillations, see Donald Perkins, Particle Astrophysics. [1] T. Kajita and Y. Totsuka. Observation of atmospheric neutrinos. Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, [2] M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia and Y. Nir. Neutrino masses and mixing: evidence and implications. Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, [3] Y. Ashie et al. Evidence for an Oscillatory Signature in Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93,