1 / 12

Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment Carlo Rubbia

Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment Carlo Rubbia. A direct, new approach to sterile oscillations.

uyen
Download Presentation

Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment Carlo Rubbia

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment Carlo Rubbia

  2. A direct, new approach to sterile oscillations • The direct, unambiguous measurement of anoscillation pattern requires necessarily the (simultaneous) observation at several different distances. It is only in this way that the values of Dm2 and of sin2(2q) can be separately identified. • Our new proposal at the CERN-PS introduces important new features, which should allow a definitive clarification of the above described “anomalies”: • L/E oscillation paths lengths to ensure appropriate matching to the Dm2 window for the expected anomalies. • “Imaging” detector capable to identify unambiguously all reaction channels with a “Gargamelle class” LAr-TPC • Interchangeable n and anti-n focussed beams • Very high rates due to large masses, in order to record relevant effects at the % level (>106,≈104ne) • Both initial ne and nm components cleanly identified. CERN_Get_together

  3. Basic features of the proposed experiment • Our proposed experiment, collecting a large amount of data both with neutrino and antineutrino focussing, may be able to give a likely definitive answer to the 4 following queries:  • the LSND/+MiniBooNe both antineutrino and neutrino nm neoscillationanomalies;  • The Gallex + Reactor oscillatory disappearance of the initial n-e signal, both for neutrino and antineutrinos   • an oscillatory disappearance maybe present in the n-m signal, so far unknown.  • Accurate comparison between neutrino and antineutrino related oscillatory anomalies, maybe due to CPT violation. • In absence of these “anomalies”, the signals of the detectors should be a precise copy of each other for all experimental signatures and without any need of Monte Carlo comparisons. CERN_Get_together

  4. Determination m2 and  sin2 2 values in nm neanomaly It appears that the present proposal, unlike LNSD and MiniBooNE, can determine both the mass difference and the value of the mixing angle. Very different and clearly distingui- shable patterns are possible depending on the values in the (m2 – sin2 2) plane. The intrinsicν-e background due to the beam contamination is also shown. The magnitude of the LNSD expected oscillatory behaviour, for the moment completely unknown, is in all circumstances well above the backgrounds, also considering the very high statistical impact and the high resolution of the experimental measurement. CERN_Get_together

  5. Comparing LNSD like sensitivities (arXiv:0909.0355) Expected sensitivity for the proposed experiment exposed at the CERN-PS neutrino beam (left) for 2.5 1020 pot and twice as much for anti-neutrino (right) . The LSND allowed region is fully explored both for neutrinos and antineutrino. The expectations from one year of at LNGS are also shown. CERN_Get_together

  6. Sensitivity to disappearance anomalies • Sensitivities in the sin2(2new) vs. m2new for an integrated intensity of (A) at the 30 kWatt beam intensity of the previous CERN/PS experiments, (B) the newly planned 90 kWatt neutrino beam and (C) a 270 kWatt curve. They are compared (99% in red) with the “anomalies” of the reactor + Gallex and Sage experiments. A 1% overall and 3% bin-to-bin systematic uncertainty is included (for each 100 MeV bin). CERN_Get_together

  7. Which alternatives ? • Minimal programme: old 300T module near location, newer T300 module far location. The old T600 is split into two T300. • New thermal insulation (3000 k€) • New pumps (500 k€) • Dedalus readout (400 k€) • Installation (600 k€) and liquid Argon filling (600 k€) • No new PM • Full programme: New T150 in near position,T600 far position. • New PM’s construction for T600 (600 k€) • Construction dewar and insulation T150 (1000 k€) • TPC and inner structures T150 (CINEL patent) (2500 k€) • Electronics for readout T150 (1900 k€) • High Voltage and PMT T150 (300 k€) • Installation T150 (300 k€) and LAr fillings (2) (350 k€) • Difference of data acquisition rates ≈ a factor 2 CERN_Get_together

  8. CERN_Get_together

  9. The new T150 detector to be constructed CERN_Get_together

  10. Expected event rates • Events for the near and far detectors given after 7.5 1020 pot and En < 8 GeV. The oscillated signals are clustered below 3 GeV of visible energy. CERN_Get_together

  11. The Proposed Lay-out at CERN-PS Rende Steerenberg, CERN Switzerland Near detector REVIVAL OF THE CERN PS NEUTRINO BEAM Far detector • 150t liquid argon TPC near detector in building 181 • 600t liquid argon TPC far detector in building 191 T600 ICARUS detectors Re-use the old TT7 tunnel and cavern to house primary beam line and target station Proton beam to be provide by CERN PS CERN_Get_together

  12. Thank you ! CERN_Get_together

More Related