Aspen 2002

38
J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002 Aspen 2002 Recent Results from Super-K (and K2K) Neutrino Oscillations & Mechanical Chain Reactions Jordan Goodman University of Maryland

description

Aspen 2002. Recent Results from Super-K (and K2K) Neutrino Oscillations & Mechanical Chain Reactions Jordan Goodman University of Maryland. Super-Kamiokande. Detecting neutrinos. Cherenkov ring on the wall. Electron or muon track. The pattern tells us the energy and type of particle - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Aspen 2002

Page 1: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Aspen 2002

Recent Results from Super-K (and K2K)

Neutrino Oscillations &

Mechanical Chain Reactions

Jordan GoodmanUniversity of Maryland

Page 2: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Super-Kamiokande

Page 3: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 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

Page 4: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

A muon going through the detector

Page 5: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

A muon going through the detector

Page 6: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

A muon going through the detector

Page 7: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

A muon going through the detector

Page 8: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

A muon going through the detector

Page 9: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

A muon going through the detector

Page 10: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Stopping Muon

Page 11: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Stopping Muon – Decay Electron

Page 12: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Neutrino Production

Ratio predicted to ~ 5%

Absolute Flux Predicted to ~20% :

2

ee

Page 13: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 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

Page 14: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 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 +

Page 15: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Telling particles apart

MuonElectronMuonElectron

Page 16: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Muon - Electron Identification

PID Likelihood

sub-GeV, Multi-GeV, 1-ring

Monte Carlo (no oscillations)

We expect

about twice as

many as e

Page 17: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 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

Page 18: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Low Energy Sample

No Oscillations

Oscillations (1.0, 2.4x10-3eV2)

Page 19: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Moderate Energy Sample

Page 20: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Multi-GeV Sample

Oscillations (1.0, 2.4x10-3eV2)

No Oscillations

UP going Down UP Down

Page 21: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Multi-Ring Events

Page 22: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Upward Going Muons

Page 23: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 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

Page 24: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Tau vs Sterile Neutrino Analysis

Page 25: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 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

Page 26: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 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 now the error in (0) (~1-2 Gev) has been as large as the effect!

Page 27: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Original SK Systematic Errors

• Systematic Error in r0=(0/Q.E.)

– Cross section – 20%

– Reconstruction – 7%

– Nuclear Interaction – 7%

– Flux – 3%

– Total Systematic – 23%

Page 28: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Original Results from 0s

Page 29: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

K2K Near Detector

K2K beam is:

~1.3 GeV

98.2%

1.3% e

0.5%

Page 30: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

0 Peaks

Page 31: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Monte Carlo of 0 Production

Page 32: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Use K2K to measure the Cross Section

• A normalized 0 rate is defined as r0=(0/fc)

• Form double ratio of R0= r0(data)/r0(MC) to

minimize flux uncertainties and nuclear effects• Simulate both K2K and SK flux and efficiencies

• K2K finds R0 = 1.04 ± 0.02 ± 0.02 ± 0.09

Stat (data MC) Sys

• Old SK R0 = 1.05 ± 0.05 ± 0.01 ± 0.23

• Use K2K measurement to improve SK result

Page 33: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

New Systematic Errors in SK

• Using K2K Result

– Reconstruction – 7%

– Flux – 3%

– Spectral Diff between SK and K2K – 5%

– Cross section/Nuclear effects – 12%

(flux averaged)

– Total Systematic – 14%

Page 34: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

New Results

Page 35: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Combined

Page 36: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Super-K Disaster - Nov 12, 2001

• Chain reaction destroyed 7000 OD and 1000 ID Tubes

• The cause is not completely understood, but it started with a lower pmt collapse.

• The energy release comes from a 4 T column of water falling

• There are plans to rebuild…

Page 37: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Disaster (Continued)

Page 38: Aspen 2002

J. Goodman - Aspen - Feb 2002

Disaster (Continued)