Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment Carlo Rubbia

12
Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment Carlo Rubbia

description

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

Transcript of Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment Carlo Rubbia

Page 1: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

Review of possible alternatives for the CERN

experiment

Carlo Rubbia

Page 2: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

A direct, new approach to sterile oscillations The direct, unambiguous measurement of an oscillation

pattern requires necessarily the (simultaneous) observation at several different distances. It is only in this way that the values of m2 and of sin2(2) 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 m2 window for the expected anomalies.“Imaging” detector capable to identify unambiguously

all reaction channels with a “Gargamelle class” LAr-TPC Interchangeable and anti- focussed beams Very high rates due to large masses, in order to record

relevant effects at the % level (>106 ,≈104 e)Both initial e and components cleanly identified.

CERN_Get_together Slide# : 2

Page 3: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

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

eoscillationanomalies; The Gallex + Reactor oscillatory disappearance of the

initial e signal, both for neutrino and antineutrinos  an oscillatory disappearance maybe present in the

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 Slide# : 3

Page 4: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

Determination m2 and  sin2 2 values in eanomaly

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 Slide# : 4

Page 5: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

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 Slide# : 5

Page 6: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

Sensitivity to disappearance anomalies

Sensitivities in the sin2(2new) 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 Slide# : 6

Page 7: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

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 Slide# : 7

Page 8: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

CERN_Get_together Slide# : 8

Page 9: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

The new T150 detector to be constructed

CERN_Get_together Slide# : 9

Page 10: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

Expected event rates

Events for the near and far detectors given after 7.5 1020 pot and E < 8 GeV. The oscillated signals are clustered below 3 GeV of visible energy.

CERN_Get_together Slide# : 10

Page 11: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

The Proposed Lay-out at CERN-PSRende Steerenberg, CERN Switzerland

Re-use the old TT7 tunnel and cavern to house primary beam line and target station

Proton beam to be provide by CERN PS

150t liquid argon TPC near detector in building 181

600t liquid argon TPC far detector in building 191

Near detector

Far detector

T600ICARUSdetectors

REVI

VAL

OF

THE

CERN

PS

NEU

TRIN

O B

EAM

CERN_Get_together Slide# : 11

Page 12: Review of possible alternatives for the CERN experiment  Carlo Rubbia

Thank you !

CERN_Get_together Slide# : 12