Transcript ASTROPARTICLE PHYSICS AND THE LHC James L. Pinfold University of Alberta

ASTROPARTICLE PHYSICS AND THE LHC
James L. Pinfold
University of Alberta
Menu
• The LHC and its multi-purpose detectors, for high pt physics (and
forward physics?)
• Forward physics at the LHC and Cosmic Ray physics
–
–
–
–
The cosmic ray energy spectrum
Understanding cosmic ray air showers & the NEEDS project
Exotic physics (already seen in CR emulsions?)
UHECR and SUSY
• The synergy between astroparticle physics and high pT LHC physics
– WMAP & SUSY dark matter (MSUGRA, GMSB and split SUSY)
•
•
•
•
LHC and dark matter (eg neutralino Dark Matter)
Direct detection of dark matter
Indirect detection of dark matter
A brief look at gravitino dark matter
– Extra dimensions
• Collider signatures of Extra Dimensions
• Evidence for Extra Dimensions from the cosmos
• Mini black hole production at the LHC and in HECR interactions
• COSMOLHC – the direct detection of cosmic rays with LHC detectors
• Conclusions
The LHC Collider
LHC ring ~26km in circ.
SCHEDULE
•LHC install by the end of 2006
•First beam: April 2007
•First collisions: ~July 2007
•2007: First physics = 4 fb-1
•2008-09: Low lumi = 20 fb-1/y
•2010+: High lumi = 100 fb-1/y
The LHC Detectors
PHYSICS
TARGETS
CMS
ATLAS, CMS:
- Higgs boson(s)
- SUSY particles
-…??
ALICE:
-Quark Gluon
Plasma
LHC-B:
-CP violation in the
B sector
TOTEM:
-Total pp x-section
MoEDAL:
-Monopole search
(LoI stage only)
MoEDAL
Measuring the Forward Region at the LHC
The present
LHC
coverage
TOTEM
?
CMS
• TOTEM (at the CMS IP)~ 3 Roman Pot stations at both sides of IP to
detect leading proton in elastic scattering and in diffractive interactions
plus 2 telescopes (3<||<7) to study inelastic interactions in forward region
• Similar coverage being planned for ATLAS
A Benchmark Measurement of stot(pp)
Goal of CMS/TOTEM and
ATLAS: ~ 1 % precision
s tot
16 (dN el / dt ) t 0


2
1 
N el  N inel
Measured by TOTEM
Curves are ~ (log s)
-t  (4-mom. transfer)2  (pscat)2 (p=7 TeV)
Nel, Ninel : no’s of elastic & inelastic events
(dNel/dt)|t=0: (extrap.of) diff. elastic rate at t=0
  Re[forward amp.] /Im[forward amp.] = 0.10 0.01
To achieve ~ 1% accuracy on stot need
to Measure Ninel over large rapidity range
to minimize acceptance correction
For ||  7 acceptance is 99 % measure
dNel/dt down to -t ~ 2 x 10-2 GeV2 to
minimize extrapolation to t=0
 Of particular interest for cosmic ray physics is the measurement of the total
& inelastic X-section as well as the ratio of sdiff/sinel
Forward physics at the LHC
and Cosmic Ray Physics
The LHC & HECR Energy Spectrum
• Studies of LHC collisions with pp (& pA,
AA) x-sections are important in refining
our understanding the HECR energy
spectrum.
• Is there something that colliders can
contribute to understanding of the
knee? For example, a new threshold:
– The sextet quark model where enhanced
WW/ ZZ production has a threshold at
the knee (~1015 eV)
– The Tevatron energy is just too low but
the LHC could see a clear effect.
High energy CRs
consist of protons,
nuclei, gammas,…
GZK
Cut-off
• Is the CR spectrum, beyond the GZK
cut-off, due to physics beyond the SM?
– From monopoles
– From extra dimensions that induce
strong n x-sections
– Originating from massive relic
particle decay with MX >1012 GeV,
– From SUSY particles such as the S0
(uds-gluino)
HECR manifest themselves as
extended air showers (EAS)
Forward Physics - the LHC & CRs
• Forward directions (| |>5): few particles with
low pT but very high energy (>90% of the
event energy) relevant to HECR
• Collider physics measurement emphasis:
– High Transverse energy: Jets, Leptons,
Leptonic secondaries & ETmiss
ET
E
• Cosmic Ray Extended Air Shower (EAS)
measurements involve primarily:
– Total/inelastic x-section; fraction of diffractive
dissociation; energy flow; particle multiplicity
distributions; hadronic secondaries
• The study of hA interaction is mostly limited
to fixed target (FT) energies, (sNN)hA <
0.03 TeV (new data from RHIC (Au-Au) is
at ~0.2 TeV) but Feynman Scaling breaks
down at higher energies (eg Tevatron, LHC).
• Uncertainties in the MC prediction of the
development EAS are due to uncertainties in
the calculation of hadronic interactions.

EAS
EAS
Colliders & CR EAS - The NEEDS Meeting
• Major uncertainties in our understanding of
Cosmic ray observables still exist
• The NEEDS workshop - held in Karlsruhre in
2002 - discussed which measurements of
hadronic interactions are key to our
understanding of CR physics. Some central
questions were:
– How important are the uncertainties in our
knowledge of hadronic interactions in the
determination of CR flux & comp.
– Will planned expts reduce these uncertainties.
– What additional expts are necessary.
EG-1 The HECR
Energy spectrum
• A brief list of some of the most important
measurements for shower development:
– A precise measurement of the stot & sinel.
proton cross-sections
– Energy distribution of the leading nucleon
in the final state
– Measurement of sdiff/sinel
– Inclusive -spectra in the frag. region xF >0.1
• Ideally make these measurements for pp,
AA, and pA at the LHC.
EG-2 World data:<log mass>
Cosmic Ray Exotics at the LHC
• Centauro events have been
predominantly observed in CR
emulsion exposures in balloons
• Centauros all characterized by:
– Abnormal hadron dominance in
multiplicity/energy.
– Low hadron mult. (wrt AA
collisions of similar energy)
– PT of produced particles more
than “normal” (PT~1.7 GeV/c)
– Pseudorapidity distributions
consistent with formation &
isotropic decay of a fireball
• The CASTOR (CMS) proposal
makes charge particle mult. &
EM/HAD E-flow up to || ~8
– A tungsten/quartz fibre calorimeter
• CASTOR’s objectives, measure:
– EEM/Ehad
– Longitudinal shower evolution
– Search for Centauros, etc.
–L=1.5m, 8 sectors ~ 9
HECRs and SUSY
• A possible origin of UHECRs is the
decay of a supermassive particle Mx
with mass related to the unification
mass scale 1024 GeV
• Schematic view of a ‘jet’ for an initial
squark from the decay of the ‘X’ particle
– Particles with mass of order mSUSY
decay at the 1st vertical line. For mSUSY<
Q < 0.1 light QCD DOFs still contribute to
the evolution of the cascade.
– At the second vertical line, all partons
hadronize and unstable hadrons +
leptons decay.
• At best we would only detect on earth
one particle of the ~104’s of particles
produced in the decay of an ‘X-particle’.
• Thus, we will only be able to make
studies of the single-particle inclusive
spectra of protons, n’s, LSPs & ’s.
• Thus, input from the LHC wouldl be vital
to study physics at energies up to 1012
GeV.
hep-ph/0210142)
The Synergy Between Astroparticle
Physics and High pT LHC physics
WMAP & Dark Matter
• Launch of WMAP satellite in June 2001 
1st data, February 2003.
• The vastly increased precision of the WMAP CMB
data, revealed temperature fluctuations that vary
by only millionths of a degree.
• Best fit cosmological model (including CB, ACBAR,
2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey and Lyman alpha
forest data) give the following energy densities
(units of the critical density):
– ΩL = 0.73±0.04 (Vacuum energy)
– Ωb = 0.044±0.004 (baryon density)
– Ωm = 0.27±0.04 (Matter density
• One can derive the cold dark matter density
– 0.94 < ΩCDM h2 < 0.129 (95% CL) (Cold dark matter) –
normalized Hubble Constant =0.71 ± 0.04
• Little or no hot dark matter
Constraining Dark Matter Candidates
•Dark matter candidates are legion:
axions, gravitinos, neutralinos, KK
particles, Q balls, superWIMPs,
self-interacting particles, branons…
mSUGRA A0=0 ,
Ellis et al.,
hep-ph/0303043
SUSY DARK MATTER (MSUGRA)

(5 params m0- common scalar mass; m1/2 –

common gaugino mass; A0 - common
trilinear coupling; tanb;  - Higgsino mass
parameter)
Disfavoured by BR (b  s)
from CLEO, BaBar BELLE
BR (b  s) = (3.2  0.5)  10-4
used
Favoured by cosmology
assuming 0.1    h2  0.3
Favoured by cosmology
assuming 0.094    h2  0.129
i.e. new WMAP results
Favoured by g-2 (E821)
n~



~q Co-annihilation region
Focus point region

b

s
Forbidden
LSP = stau
Bulk region
0
0
~ 
R

“bulk region”

0
~
~


“co-annihilation region”
Investigating DM at the LHC
SUSY studies at the ATLAS/LHC will proceed in four steps:
1.
2.
SUSY Discovery phase (inclusive searches) success assumed!
Inclusive Studies (comparison of significance in inclusive
channels etc).
•
3.
First rough predictions of h2 within specific model framework (e.g.
Constrained MSSM / mSUGRA).
Exclusive studies (calculation of model-independent SUSY
masses) and interpretation within specific model framework.
•
4.
Model-independent calculation of LSP mass for comparison with e.g.
direct searches; detailed model-dependent calculations of DM
quantities (h2, sp, fsun etc.)
Less model-dependent interpretation.
•
Approach to model-independent measurement of h2 etc. through
measurement of all relevant masses etc.
First Step - Inclusive Constraints
ATLAS
constraints
jets+ETmiss+X
channel in ATLAS
Direct
Detection
Dan Tovey
Dan Tovey
M0 (GeV)
WIMP-N
x-section (pb).
The next direct DM searches (~1tonne)
5s reach of the inclusive SUSY searches
could probe cosmologically favoured
at ATLAS for mSUGRA with large tanb
regions (s~10-10 pb) not accessible to the
probing regions inaccessible to the current LHC: 1) Focus point scenarios (large m );
0
DM expts
2) models with large tan(b).
Step 2 Inclusive Studies
LHC Point 5
(Physics TDR)
• Assuming that SUSY is revealed at the
LHC the next step will be to test broad
features of the potential DM candidate.
• 1st Question: is R-Parity Conserved?
– If YES possible DM candidate
– LHC experiments sensitive only to LSP
lifetimes < 1 s (<< tU ~ 13.7 Gyr)
• 2nd Question: is the neutralino the LSP?
– Natural in many MSSM models
– If YES then test for consistency with
astrophysics
– If NO then what is it?
– e.g. Light Gravitino DM from GMSB
models (not considered here)
R-Parity
Conserved
R-Parity
Violated
ATLAS
Non-pointing
photons from 01gG
GMSB Point 1b
(Physics TDR)
ATLAS
Stage 2/3: Model-Dependent DM
• If a viable DM candidate is found
initially assume specific
consistent model
– e.g. CMSSM / mSUGRA.
• Measure model parameters
(m0, m1/2, tan(b), sign(), A0 in
CMSSM): Stage 2/3.
• Check consistency with
accelerator constraints (mh,
g-2, bgs etc.)
• Estimate h2 g consistency
check with astrophysics
(WMAP etc.)
• Ultimate test of DM at LHC only
possible in conjunction with
astroparticle experiments
g measure m , sp, fsun etc.
CMSSM A0=0 ,
Ellis et al.
hep-ph/0303043
Disfavoured by BR (b  s) =
(3.2  0.5)  10-4 (CLEO, BELLE)
Favoured by g-2 (E821)
Assuming  = (26  10)  10 10
from SUSY ( 2 s band)
0.094    h2  0.129
(WMAP)
Forbidden
(LSP = stau)
Step 3 - Mass Measurements
• Model parameters estimated using fit to measured positions of kinematic
end-points observed in the chain of decays in SUSY event. Model
independent estimate of masses will also be made
• At point 5 expected precisions after 30 fb-1 on M0, M1/2
& Tan b are ± 2.3%, ± 0.9% and 0.5% respectively
p
p
~g
q
~
q
~
0 2
q
~
lR
l
~0

1
l
e+e+ +-
30 fb-1
ATLAS
Point 5
TDR
llq threshold
ATLAS
llq edge
lq edge
1% error
(100 fb-1)
1% error
(100 fb-1)
TDR,
Point 5
ATLAS
TDR,
Point 5
2% error
(100 fb-1)
TDR,
Point 5
ATLAS
Stage 2/3: Model Parameters
• First indication (Stage 2) of CMSSM
parameters from inclusive channels
– Compare significance in jets + ETmiss
+ n leptons channels
• Detailed measurements (Stage 3) from
exclusive channels when accessible.
• Consider here two specific example
points:
Point
LHC Point 5
SPS1a
m0 m1/2 A0
100 300 300
100 250 -100
tan(b) sign()
2
+1
10
+1
Sparticle Mass (LHC Point 5)
~
qL
~690 GeV
~
02
233 GeV
~
lR
157 GeV
~
01
122 GeV
Mass (SPS1a)
~530 GeV
177 GeV
143 GeV
96 GeV
ATLAS
LHC Point 5 (A0 =300
GeV, tan(b)=2, >0)
Point SPS1a (A0 =-100
GeV, tan(b)=10, >0)
Step 34 Relic Density Scenarios
• Use parameter measurements to estimate h2 , direct detection crosssection etc. (e.g. for 300 fb-1, SPS1a)
–   h2 = 0.1921  0.0053 & log10(sp/pb) = - 8.17  0.04
Direct Searches for WIMPs
•
Predicted nuclear recoil energy spectrum depends on astrophysics (DM
halo model), nuclear physics (form-factors, coupling enhancements) and
particle physics (WIMP mass and coupling).
dR = s .  f(A) . S(A,E ) . I(A) . F2(A,E ) . g(A) . (E )
p
A
R
R
v
dEv
sp = WIMP-nucleon scattering cross-section,
f(A) = mass fraction of element A in target,
S(A,ER) ~ exp(-ER/E0r) for recoil energy ER,
I(A) = spin/coherence enhancement (model-dep.),
F2(A,ER) = nuclear form-factor,
g(A) = quenching factor (Ev/ER),
(Ev) = event identification efficiency.
Direct DM Searches
• Next generation of tonne-scale direct Dark Matter detection experiments
should give sensitivity to scalar WIMP-nucleon cross-sections ~ 10-10 pb.
EDELWEISS
CDMS
DAMA
ZEPLIN-I
CRESST-II
ZEPLIN-2
EDELWEISS 2
ZEPLIN-4
GENIUS
XENON
ZEPLIN-MAX
(Slide supplied from D. Tovey)
Indirect Dark Matter Searches
• Indirect neutralino dark matter can be detected via neutralino annihilations
giving rise to 3 main signals.
– The 1st of these signals arises from n’s produced by neutralino annihilation in
the sun’s/earth’s core. These n’s detected via CC interactions (ν  µ conv’s) in
n-telescopes such as AMANDA.
• The planned neutrino telescopes ANTARES & IceCube are sensitive to Eµ > 10
GeV & Eµ > 25–50 GeV, respect.
– The 2nd signal stems from -rays originating from neutralino annihilations in the
galactic core & halo producing hadrons, giving rise to ’s primarily from 0
decays.
• These signals can be detected by space- based detectors such as EGRET or
GLAST with thresholds as low as 100’s of MeV and in atmospheric Cerenkov
telescopes on the ground, with detection thresholds in the range 20100 GeV.
– The 3rd signal is provided by hard cosmic ray positrons produced in the decays
of leptons, heavy quarks & gauge bosons from neutralino annihilations in our
galactic halo. A “clumpy halo” is required to get sufficient s/n.
• Space-based anti-matter detectors such as AMS-02 and PAMELA will provide
precise measurements of the positron spectrum and may be able to detect a
possible positron signal from neutralino annihilation.
• All of these measurements are prone to large systematic uncertainties, for
example on quantities such as neutralino densities and density variations
in the core & halo of the galaxy.
Putting it All Together
The black contour depicts the
exclusion that we can expect
from the planned future direct
detection (DD) dark matter
experiments (σSI > 10-9 pb).
The S/B > 0.01 contour for halo produced
positrons (blue-green contour) and
The LHC (100 fb-1) can cover
the HB/FP region up to m1/2 ∼
700 GeV, which corresponds
to a reach in mgluino of ~1.8
TeV
Reach of IceCube ν telescope with
Fsun(μ) = 40 μ’s/km2/yr and Eμ > 25
covering the FP region to 1400GeV
The Tevatron (10 fb-1) could cover
the Higgs annihilation corridor as
shown by red dashed line
If SUSY lies in the upper FP region, then it may be discovered 1st by IceCube
(+ possibly Antares), & confirmed later by direct DM detection and the LC1000.
What if the Graviton is the LSP?
• Assume gravitino is LSP. Early universe behaves as usual, WIMP
freezes out with desired thermal relic density
• Gravitinos are superweakly-interacting massive particles –“superWIMPs”
as all interactions are suppressed by MW/MPl ~ 10-16
• Current scenarios favour a long lifetime for the WIMP (~1 year) - A year
passes…then all WIMPs decay to gravitinos
MPl2/MW3 ~
• Are there observable consequences? Well late decays,
year ̃ →  G̃ can
modify light element abundances
• Independent 7Li measurements are all low by factor of 3 - SuperWIMP
DM naturally explains 7Li !
Collider Phenomenology
• Each SUSY event produces 2 metastable
sleptons with a spectacular signature: highlyionizing charged tracks
– Current bound (LEP): m l̃ > 99 GeV
– Tevatron Run II reach: m l̃ ~ 150GeV
– LHC reach: m l̃ ~ 700 GeV in 1 year
• Slepton trapping:
– Sleptons live for roughly a year, so can be
trapped for the decays to be observed later
– LHC: 106 sleptons/yr possible, but most are fast.
By optimizing trap location and shape, can catch
~100/yr in 1000 m3we. (a 1000 a year at the LC)
• Measurement of G  mG̃
 G̃. SuperWIMP contribution to dark matter
 SUSY breaking scale
 Early universe (BBN, CMB) in the lab
Extra Dimensions
• The broad features of theories of Extra Dimensions (EDs) are as follows:
• Compactification of the n EDs generates a
Often assume that EDs have a
KK (Kaluza-Klein) tower of states - a generic
common size R
feature of models with compactified EDs.
(3+1+n ) dimensions
• Most of the ED models fall into 3 classes
–1st, the large extra dimension (LED)
ADD scenario in which:
•Gravity propagates in the bulk, the
matter gauge forces live on the 3-brane.
•There is an emission and exchange of large
KK towers of gravitons finely spaced in mass.
(3+1) dimensions
–2nd - In the RS scenario where the hierarchy is
generated by the large curvature of the EDs:
•There exists 1 ED and the TeV+Planck branes
within a 5-D space of constant -ve curvature
that forms the bulk - where gravity can propagate.
•All of the SM particles and forces are confined
to the TeV brane
– 3rd - The UED scenario all fields can propagate in the bulk and branes do
not need to be present
Searching for EDs at Colliders
• Searches for LEDs have usually assumed the ADD scenario. EG at LEP
graviton emission & virtual graviton effects from LEDs have been sought
• Hadron collider reach (ADD scenario) for real graviton emission and
virtual graviton effects
N=27
~80 pb-1
• In RS scenario there are KK excitations
of the SM gauge fields with masses ~TeV, that would manifest themselves
at the LHC as resonances.
• The constraints from data + theoretical asssumptions/ requirements mean
that the RS scenario could be ruled out completely at the LHC
Astrophysical/Cosmological Limits on EDs
SN cooling
via graviton
emission
Anomalous heating of neutron stars by
gravitionally trapped KK graviton modes
Radiative decay of
gravitons to ’s,
contribute to the
diffuse  back-grounds
• Although some of these limits are stringent they are indirect and contain
large systematic errors. Although the n =2 scenario looks to be in trouble.
• Ignoring these limitations we see that the astrophysical constraints allow
low-gravity models with MD ~1TeV, n  4.
• If extra dimensions are discovered at the LHC it would provide useful input
to our understanding of astrophysics/cosmology.
Extra Dimensions & the Radion
• In the RS scenario the radion field is a scalar field which stabilizes the
size of the extra-dimensions. Parameters: radion mass (mf ), radion vev
(Lf ), h-f mixing ()
• The presence of the radion is one of the key phenomenological
consequences of theories of warped EDs such as RS.
• Similar couplings as SM Higgs but with different strengths (f gg is
enhanced wrt the Higgs , fWW/ZZ suppressed in some cases); f  HH
important if open. Gf << GH
• Precise measurements of couplings needed to disentangle f/H. The
determination at the LHC would be ~10%.
• The experimental efforts to determine the properties of the radion field
have a cosmological significance since the size of the interaction of the
radion field with SM particles determines whether it can decay quickly
enough to avoid overclosure by the beginning of BBN.
• The ADD scenario also admits a light radion (10 MeV > Mf > 10-3 eV) that
is a potential source of dark matter similar to axionic dark matter
Searching for the Radion at ATLAS
Lf = 1 TeV
mH=125 GeV
(For 100 fb-1 of data)
Black Hole Production at the LHC
• Big surprise: BH production is not an exotic remote possibility, but the
dominant effect! (Limitation:lack of knowledge of quantum gravity effects )
• Main idea: when the Ecm reaches the
fundamental “Planck”scale, a BH is formed;
x-section is given by the black disk;
σ ~ πRS2 ~ 1 TeV-2 ~ 10-38 m2 ~ 100 pb
• The underlying assumptions rely on 2 simple qualitative properties: the
absence of small couplings; the “democratic” nature of BH decays
• Black holes decay immediately ( ~ 10-26 s) by Hawking radiation: large
multiplicity, small Etmiss, jets/leptons ~ 5
• Black holes to hadrons/leptons/g,W,Z/Higgs ~ 75%/20%/3%/2%
James Pinfold
ATLAS Athens Physics Workshop
20
Black Holes in ATLAS
Preliminary studies : reach is MD ~
6 TeV for any  in one year at low
luminosity.
log TH  -
MBH ~ 8 TeV
1
log M BH  f (M D ,  )
 1
By testing Hawking formula  proof
that it is BH + measure of MD, 
Precise measurements of MBH & TH
needed (TH from lepton &  spectra)
• The end of short-distance physics? Naively – yes, once the event horizon
is larger than a proton, a HEP collider would only produce BHs!
• But, gravity couples universally, so each new particle, which can appear in
the BH decay would be produced with ~1% probability (if its mass is less
thanTH ~ 100 GeV)
• Time required for a 5s Higgs discovery: MP = 1/3/5 TeV 1 hr/1 wk/1yr.
SUSY particles would also enjoy a similar rapid discovery mode
• Black hole decays open a new window into new physics! Hence, rebirth of
the short-distance physics! Clean BH samples would make LHC a new
physics factory as well
Black Hole Production by Cosmic Rays
(Feng and Shapere, hep-ph/0109106)
hep-ph/0311365
• Consider BH production deep in the
atmosphere by UHE neutrinos detect them, e.g. in PAO, Ice3 or
AGASSA
• OFO 100 BHs can be detected
before the LHC turns on
• But can the BH signature be
uniquely established?
nD=6
PAO limit (96% CL)
COSMOLHC – the Direct Detection
of Cosmic Rays with LHC Detectors
Cosmo-LHC
• The LHC detectors will deploy unprecedented areas of precision
muon tracking, tracking and calorimetry ~100m underground
• In the spirit of Cosmo-LEP the LHC detectors could be used to
detect and measure cosmic ray events directly
Muon Physics Plus with CosmoLHC
• CosmoLHC – carrying on CosmoLEP (L3+C,
CosmoALEPH). Topics to study:
L3+C
– Single/inclusive ’s (pt spectrum >20 GeV 2TeV,
angular dist. 0 <  < 50o, charge ratio, etc.)
– Upward going ’s (E spectrum, angular distribution,
etc.)
– Multi-’s (composition measurements, etc.)
– Muon bundles (evidence for new physics?)
– Isoburst events seen in LVD, KGF (an hyp. is that Single muon data
they are due to the decay of WIMPS (M> 10 GeV)
– better measured at the LHC.)
L3+C
• These measurements will yield data on:
– Forward physics of hadronic showers
– Primary composition of cosmic rays
– Non-uniformities (sidereal anisotropies, bursts,
point sources, GRBs)
– New physics (eg anomalous muon bundles)?
• One can also place detectors in coincidence
(cosmic strings)
A muon “bundle” event
Concluding Remarks
• There is a considerable and growing synergy between collider &
astroparticle physics A good example of this partnership is the search for
dark matter. Ultimate test of DM at LHC only possible in conjunction with
astroparticle experiments g measure m , sp,, fsun etc.
• The nature of discovery physics is that it often occurs when it is least
expected  astrocollider physics maximizes the coverage of “possibility
space”
Extra SLIDES
ATLAS
Weight 7K tonnes
46m
25m
Scale
LHC- Direct Search for Monopoles
• An LOI for the MoEDAL experiment to
search for monopoles, dyons & other
highly ionizing objects has been
(plastic ball)
accepted by the LHCC.
• The MoEDAL detector is essentially a
“partial” plastic ball deployed around
the LHCb vertex chamber region.
• Highly ionizing objects are detected by
etching the plastic’s “ionization
damage” zones
• Threshold Z/b > ~10. (Z/b for a highly
relativistic monopole ~1500)
• Advantages:
– Minimizes assumptions about the
nature of the monopole or dyon
– Essentially no SM background. In
principle 1 event should be enough
for a discovery
– Very Very cost effective
Detection medium, plastic
track-etch detectors (CR39)
Indirect Search for Monopoles/Dyons
pT1 + pT2
Also searched in cosmic rays
ATLAS, 100 fb-1
Caveat: there will be large form
factor suppression in the crosssection if the monopole is not
point-like
The Mysteries of an Opaque Universe
• The universe is opaque to UHECR
• In the case of the GZK cut-off a 5x1019 eV proton
has a mfp of 50 mpc due to interaction with
photons in the the CMB.
• But no nearby sources have been identified
• How are the protons with energy > EGZK
getting to us? There are two scenarios:
• BOTTOM UP: acceleration in AGNs, -ray
bursters, etc. Then production of a neutral (n,
so,etc).
• BOTTOM UP with GZK cut-off relaxed by
violation of Lorentz Invariance, etc.
• Or TOP DOWN: topological defects (cosmic
strings, monopoles, etc.) or massive relics, etc.
Region restricted
by GZK cut-off
~100 Mpc
10,000Mpc
Size of observable universe
Cosmic Ray Exotica
• Centauro, Mini-Centauros, Chirons, Geminions are
all characterized by:
A Centauro Model
– Abnormal hadron dominance in multiplicity/energy.
– Low total hadron multiplicity compared to that expected
for A-A collisions in that energy range
– PT of produced particles higher than “normal”
• PT ~1.7 GeV/c for centauros
• PT of 10-15 GeV/c for chirons
– Pseudorapidity distributions consistent with formation
and isotropic decay of a fireball with:
• Nh ~100 & MFB for centauros and chirons
• Nh ~15 and MFB ~ 35 GeV for mini-centauros
• Anti-Centauros:
– Events with abnormal EM dominance
• Long Flying Component:
– Unusually penetrating cascades, clusters of showers…
• Halo Events:
– Dense EM cascade containing several hadronic cores
spaced closely together (small rel. PT)– in many multihalo events the halos are aligned, where halos are EM
showers in jets.
• Muon Bundles:
– Events where bundles of muons with very small lateral
separation as if produced in a process with very small PT
Does the production of
strangelets play a role
in Centauro-type
phenomena?
Focus Point Region
• Relic density can also be reduced if  has significant Higgsino
component to enhance
• Such SUSY would be missed at
LHC, discovered at LC
James Pinfold Fermilab June 2005
Baer, Belyaev, Krupovnickas, Tata (2003)
• Motivates SUSY with multi-TeV g̃,
q̃, l ̃ ±/0 highly degenerate
DM Detectors (as of summer 2004)
• DAMA (Gran Sasso)
• CDMS (Stanford/Soudan)
– CDMS I Shallow site (Stanford)
– punch through fast neutrons from
cosmic ray µ spallation.
– Subtraction by MC checks on
multiple scatters limit at 3x10-6pb.
– CDMS II underground operation at
Soudan mine from April 2003
– 56 live days data collected, blind
analysis completed, limit at 4x10-7pb
– CRYO-ARRAY tonne scale detector
in planning stages
– 9x9.7 kg crystals in shield: 7 years
data analysed
– Annual variation observed in total
event rate < 6keV (+ noise rej.)
– LIBRA (250kg) NaI array construction
completed
• Edelweiss (Frejus)
– Ge thermal/ionisation detector. 50
kg.days data from 4x320g units
– 2002 no events in recoil region (one on
boundary) giving ~10-6pb limit.
– 2003 data runs see neutron events in
nuclear recoil region, confirms limit.
– 28x320g array expected operation in
2004: 40kg array planned
• XENON (DUSEL)
• CRESST (Gran Sasso)
– CRESST I: Sapphire bolometer: low
WIMP mass, spin interaction reach
– CRESST II: CaWO4 thermal/scint: 300g
•
demonstrator operated
– Engineering runs completed:
neutrons observed, no shielding
– 10kg (33x330g) stack in construction:
SQUID readout incorporated
– R&D programme to develop two
phase xenon target completed
– Proposal submitted for construction
of 100kg module for 2007
deployment
– Intend tonne scale final detector for
deployment at DUSEL
XMASS (Kamioka)
– 3kg two phase xenon dark matter
detector in operation.
– High background due to radon
contamination (200 Bq/m3!)
– 20kg module under construction
Point
LHC Point 5
SPS1a
m0 m1/2 A0
100 300 300
100 250 -100
tan(b) sign()
2
+1
10
+1
Sparticle Mass (LHC Point 5)
~
qL
~690 GeV
~
02
233 GeV
~
lR
157 GeV
~
01
122 GeV
Point
LHC Point 5
SPS1a
Parameter
m0
m1/2
tan(b)
m0 m1/2 A0
100 300 300
100 250 -100
Mass (SPS1a)
~530 GeV
177 GeV
143 GeV
96 GeV
tan(b) sign()
2
+1
10
+1
Expected precision
30 fb-1
300 fb-1
 3.2%
 1.4%
 0.9%
 0.6%
 0.5%
 0.5%
Colour Sextet Quark Model - Notes
Dfirectly rom Mike Albrow’s talk - “GTEV Gluon Physics at the Tevatron”