1 / 15

SEISMIC SEARCH FOR STRANGE QUARK MATTER

SEISMIC SEARCH FOR STRANGE QUARK MATTER. V. L. Teplitz January 13, 2005. COLLABORATORS. E. T. Herrin, SMU Seismologist on all papers and, on some papers each: D. C. Rosenbaum, D. Anderson, and I. Tibuleac, SMU J.J. Broderick, Virginia Tech M. Sher, T. Morgan, William & Mary

jin
Download Presentation

SEISMIC SEARCH FOR STRANGE QUARK MATTER

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. SEISMIC SEARCH FOR STRANGE QUARK MATTER V. L. Teplitz January 13, 2005

  2. COLLABORATORS • E. T. Herrin, SMU Seismologist on all papers and, on some papers each: • D. C. Rosenbaum, D. Anderson, and I. Tibuleac, SMU • J.J. Broderick, Virginia Tech • M. Sher, T. Morgan, William & Mary • B. Banerdt, T.C.P. Chui, JPL

  3. Strange Quark Matter (SQM) • Witten (1984): 3 fermi seas; near neutrality • Farhi and Jaffe (1984) MIT Bag: nuclear density, no saturation BE/N increase w. N • N could be 1000+ before binding • M<10^{-9}gm, atom like; m>10{-9}gm lattice like (i.e. electrons mostly inside)

  4. Experiments • de Rujula and Glashow (1984) suggested mica (Price), LDF, seismology, etc • Accelerator production: Sandweiss et al at RHIC (negative; but N could be >1200) • AMS (Ting) • ICE CUBE (Price) • Seismology: below

  5. Nugget Production • Primordial: phase transition; cooling: evaporation v. neutrino energy loss; DM? • NS’s SQS’s; fragments from SQS+SQS • No hint of fragment size/mass distribution in either case • Alcock, Farhi and Olinto SQS structure: glitch issue; Broderick et al radio signal

  6. Intro to Seismology • Point events: 4 variables; line events: 6; distinctive first signal arrival time pattern. • dE/dt=(v³/2)rBpa2 a=(3m/4rN)1/3 • e=seismic/total=0.01 (nuc), 0.02 (chem); >0.5 (quake); SQN? • f=1Hertz (nuc, chem, quake -- SQN?) • Best stations detect approx 0.1erg/cm2-s • Noise: wind, instrument

  7. Monte Carlo • Herrin & VLT (1996): about 50 class 1, many more classes 2 and 3. • Found minimum m, for random geometry, such that 7 or more stations detect. • 97% of detections class 1 • Chances 1/10 of detecting <1 ton nugget; 1/3, 10 ton, and 90% for 220 tons

  8. Real Data • 106 “unassociated” reports 1990-93 (USGS) • Lot of unrecognized quakes • Ignored reports for hour after quake>4.0, non-class 1 stations, signals through core. • Published one likely nugget but learned clock in important station off for month

  9. Anderson et al. Limit • Use 96 MC for p(detection); dN/da=Ka-g; normalize to rDM • g=3.5 Dohnanyi distribution - maintained under collisions • Look for more than one event/year with rSQN=rDM implying must have rSQN<rDM • Find limit for γ~4.0 for all m1, m2 and, for nearby γ, for some (there is γ=4 divergence)

  10. Lunar Seismology • Formation of the moon • Apollo: shallow, deep quakes; impacts • Expect detect 10-3erg/cm2-s, perhaps 10-5. • How well can background noise be separated from instrumental? • Apollo got limits on both number of events and total seismic energy.

  11. Earth-moon Sensitivity Comparison • Cross sections ratio 0.075, but less attenuation to station partially offsets. • More stations on Earth, but placement can be much better on moon • Fewer seismic events on moon but ringing • No ocean or atmosphere on moon implies greatly reduced background - biggest factor • Result: moon 50 or more times more events

  12. Summary • Jury still out on SQM existence • Seismology instrument of choice for high masses • Search of million seismic reports gave negative results and distribution dependent limits • Seismology on moon more sensitive

More Related