DOCSLIB.ORG

Physics Briefing Book

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CERN-ESU-004 10 January 2020 Physics Briefing Book Input for the European Strategy for Particle Physics Update 2020 ; Electroweak Physics: Richard Keith Ellis1, Beate Heinemann2 3 (Conveners) Jorge de Blas4;5, Maria Cepeda6, Christophe Grojean2;7, Fabio Maltoni8;9, Aleandro Nisati10, Elisabeth Petit11, Riccardo Rattazzi12, Wouter Verkerke13 (Contributors) Strong Interactions: Jorgen D’Hondt14, Krzysztof Redlich15 (Conveners) Anton Andronic16, Ferenc Siklér17 (Scientific Secretaries) Nestor Armesto18, Daniël Boer19, David d’Enterria20, Tetyana Galatyuk21, Thomas Gehrmann 22, Klaus Kirch23, Uta Klein24, Jean-Philippe Lansberg25, Gavin P. Salam26, Gunar Schnell27, Johanna Stachel28, Tanguy Pierog29, Hartmut Wittig30, Urs Wiedemann20(Contributors) Flavour Physics: Belen Gavela31, Antonio Zoccoli32 (Conveners) Sandra Malvezzi33, Ana M. Teixeira34, Jure Zupan35 (Scientific Secretaries) Daniel Aloni36, Augusto Ceccucci20, Avital Dery36, Michael Dine37, Svetlana Fajfer38, Stefania Gori37, Gudrun Hiller39, Gino Isidori22, Yoshikata Kuno40, Alberto Lusiani41, Yosef Nir36, Marie-Helene Schune42, Marco Sozzi43, Stephan Paul44, Carlos Pena31 (Contributors) ; Neutrino Physics & Cosmic Messengers: Stan Bentvelsen45, Marco Zito46 47 (Conveners) Albert De Roeck 20, Thomas Schwetz29 (Scientific Secretaries) Bonnie Fleming48, Francis Halzen49, Andreas Haungs29, Marek Kowalski2, Susanne Mertens44, Mauro Mezzetto5, Silvia Pascoli50, Bangalore Sathyaprakash51, Nicola Serra22 (Contributors) ; Beyond the Standard Model: Gian F. Giudice20, Paris Sphicas20 52 (Conveners) Juan Alcaraz Maestre6, Caterina Doglioni53, Gaia Lanfranchi20;54, Monica D’Onofrio24, Matthew McCullough20, Gilad Perez36, Philipp Roloff20, Veronica Sanz55, Andreas Weiler44, Andrea Wulzer4;12;20 (Contributors) Dark Matter and Dark Sector: Shoji Asai56, Marcela Carena57 (Conveners) Babette Döbrich20, Caterina Doglioni53, Joerg Jaeckel28, Gordan Krnjaic57, Jocelyn Monroe58, Konstantinos Petridis59, Christoph Weniger60 (Scientific Secretaries/Contributors) Accelerator Science and Technology: Caterina Biscari61, Leonid Rivkin62 (Conveners) Philip Burrows26, Frank Zimmermann20 (Scientific Secretaries) Michael Benedikt20, Pierluigi Campana54, Edda Gschwendtner20, Erk Jensen20, Mike Lamont20, arXiv:1910.11775v2 [hep-ex] 10 Jan 2020 Wim Leemans2, Lucio Rossi20, Daniel Schulte20, Mike Seidel62, Vladimir Shiltsev63, Steinar Stapnes20, Akira Yamamoto20;64 (Contributors) Instrumentation and Computing: Xinchou Lou65, Brigitte Vachon66 (Conveners) Roger Jones67, Emilia Leogrande20 (Scientific Secretaries) Ian Bird20, Simone Campana20, Ariella Cattai20, Didier Contardo68, Cinzia Da Via69, Francesco Forti70, Maria Girone20, Matthias Kasemann2, Lucie Linssen20, Felix Sefkow2, Graeme Stewart20(Contributors) Editors: Halina Abramowicz71, Roger Forty20, and the Conveners 1 IPPP, University of Durham, UK 49 Winsconsin University, US 2 DESY, Hamburg, Germany 50 Durham University, UK 3 Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Germany 51 Pennsylvania State University, US 4 University of Padova, Italy 52 NKUA, Athens, Greece 5 INFN Sezione di Padova, Italy 53 Lund University, Sweden 6 CIEMAT, Madrid, Spain 54 INFN-LNF, Frascati, Italy 7 Humboldt-Universität, Berlin, Germany 55 8 University of Sussex, UK Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium 56 9 University of Tokyo, Japan Università di Bologna and INFN, Bologna, Italy 57 FNAL and University of Chicago, US 10 INFN Roma, Rome, Italy 58 Royal Holloway, University of London, UK 11 Aix Marseille University, CNRS/IN2P3, CPPM, 59 University of Bristol, UK Marseille, France 60 12 EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland GRAPPA, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands 61 13 NIKHEF and University of Amsterdam, Netherlands ALBA Cells, Barcelona, Spain 62 14 IIHE, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium PSI, Villigen, Switzerland 63 15 University of Wrocław, Poland FNAL, Batavia, US 64 16 Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, KEK, Tsukuba, Japan 65 Germany IHEP, China 66 17 Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, McGill University, Canada Hungary 67 University of Lancaster, UK 18 IGFAE, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, 68 IN2P3, France Spain 69 University of Manchester, UK 19 University of Groningen, The Netherlands 70 INFN and University of Pisa, Italy 20 CERN, Geneva, Switzerland 71 Tel Aviv University, Israel 21 Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany 22 Universität Zürich, Switzerland 23 ETH Zürich and PSI, Villigen, Switzerland 24 University of Liverpool, UK 25 IPNO, Université Paris-Saclay, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS/IN2P3, France 26 University of Oxford, UK 27 University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Bilbao, Spain 28 Universität Heidelberg, Germany 29 KIT, Institut für Kernphysik, Karlsruhe, Germany 30 Universität Mainz, Germany 31 Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Spain 32 INFN and Universita di Bologna, Italy 33 INFN Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy 34 Laboratoire de Physique de Clermont, CNRS/IN2P3, University Clermont Auvergne, France 35 University of Cincinnati, Ohio, US 36 Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel 37 University of California, Santa Cruz, US 38 University of Ljubljana and J. Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia 39 Technische Uinversität Dortmund, Germany 40 Osaka University, Japan 41 Scuola Normale Superiore and INFN Pisa, Italy 42 LAL Orsay, Paris, France 43 University of Pisa, Italy 44 Technische Universität München, Germany 45 NIKHEF, Netherlands 46 IRFU/DPhP CEA Saclay, France 47 LPNHE, Paris, France 48 Yale University, US ii Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Theoretical overview 16 3 Electroweak Physics 24 3.1 Introduction . 24 3.2 Future prospects . 30 3.3 Summary and conclusions . 41 4 Strong Interactions 43 4.1 State-of-the-art . 43 4.2 Hadronic structure . 46 4.3 Electron-proton collisions (LHeC, EIC, FCC) . 46 4.4 Hot and dense QCD . 50 4.5 Precision QCD . 53 4.6 QCD and other disciplines . 62 4.7 Overview and perspectives for QCD . 64 5 Flavour Physics 65 5.1 Introduction/Theory of Flavour . 65 5.2 Light sector: spectrum below GeV (short-, mid- and long-term) . 68 5.3 Heavy sector (short-, mid- and long-term) . 74 5.4 Flavour and dark sectors (short-, mid- and long-term) . 83 5.5 The CKM matrix elements: prospects . 85 5.6 Conclusions . 87 6 Neutrino Physics 90 6.1 Introduction . 90 6.2 Present knowledge of neutrino mixing parameters . 91 6.3 Measurements of neutrino oscillation parameters . 92 6.4 Determination of neutrino mass and nature . 100 6.5 Search for new neutrino states . 102 6.6 Conclusions . 104 7 Cosmic Messengers 105 7.1 Ultra-High Energy charged particles . 106 7.2 High-Energy gamma rays . 107 7.3 Ultra High Energy neutrinos . 108 7.4 Gravitational waves . 109 7.5 Multimessenger astroparticle physics . 111 7.6 Synergies with HEP . 111 iii 8 Beyond the Standard Model 113 8.1 Introduction . 113 8.2 Electroweak symmetry breaking and new resonances . 114 8.3 Supersymmetry . 118 8.4 Extended Higgs sectors and high-energy flavour dynamics . 125 8.5 Dark Matter . 129 8.6 Feebly-interacting particles . 132 8.7 Summary and conclusions . 137 9 Dark Matter and Dark Sectors 142 9.1 Introduction . 142 9.2 Astrophysical Probes of Dark Matter . 144 9.3 Dark matter and Dark sectors at Colliders . 147 9.4 DM and DS at beam-dump and fixed-target experiments . 151 9.5 Axions and ALPs . 156 9.6 Conclusions . 160 10 Accelerator Science and Technology 162 10.1 Present state of accelerator technology for HEP . 162 10.2 Technologies for electroweak sector . 165 10.3 Path towards highest energies . 171 10.4 Muon Colliders . 173 10.5 Plasma acceleration . 175 10.6 Accelerators Beyond Colliders . 178 10.7 Energy management . 182 10.8 The role of National Laboratories in the European Strategy . 184 10.9 Complementarities and synergies with other fields . 185 11 Instrumentation and Computing 187 11.1 Particle physics instrumentation . 187 11.2 Computing and software for particle physics . 199 11.3 Interplay between instrumentation and computing . 203 11.4 Developing and preserving knowledge and expertise . 203 11.5 Summary of key points . 205 Appendices 205 A Glossary . 206 B Open Symposium scientific programme . 208 C European Strategy Update contributions . 211 References 215 iv Chapter 1 Introduction The European Particle Physics Strategy Update (EPPSU) process takes a bottom-up approach, whereby the community is first invited to submit proposals (also called inputs) for projects that it would like to see realised in the near-term, mid-term and longer-term future. National in- puts as well as inputs from National Laboratories are also an important element of the process. All these inputs are then reviewed by the Physics Preparatory Group (PPG), whose role is to organize a Symposium around the submitted ideas and to prepare a community discussion on the importance and merits of the various proposals. The results of these discussions are then concisely summarised in this Briefing Book, prepared by the Conveners, assisted by Scientific Secretaries, and with further contributions provided by the Contributors listed on the title page. This constitutes the basis for the considerations of the European Strategy Group (ESG), con- sisting of scientific delegates from CERN Member States, Associate Member States, directors of major European laboratories, representatives of various European organizations as well as invitees from outside the European Community. The ESG has the mission to formulate the European Strategy Update for the consideration and approval of the CERN Council. For the 2020 EPPSU, the call for inputs was issued at the end of February 2018 with the deadline
Recommended publications
  • The LHC Project and Future of CERN

    The LHC Project and Future of CERN

    The LHC Project and Future of CERN Robert Aymar Symposium on Physics of Elementary Interactions in the LHC Era Warsaw, 21–22 April 2008 Contents about CERN: a facility for the benefit of the European Particle Physics Community the LHC project: completion of installation, start of commissioning for accelerator, experiments and computing, the CNGS: start of operations and the CLIC scheme for multi Tev e+e- Linear Collider plans for CERN in the next decade Warsaw, 21-22 April 2008 2 CERN… • Seeking answers to questions about the Universe • Advancing the frontiers of technology • Training the scientists of tomorrow • Bringing nations together through science 33 CERN in Numbers • 2415 staff* • 730 Fellows and Associates* • 9133 users* • Budget (2007) 982 MCHF (610M Euro) *5 February 2008 • Member States: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. • Observers to Council: India, Israel, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, Turkey, the European Warsaw, 21-22Commission April 2008 and Unesco 4 Distribution of All CERN Users by Nation of Institute on 5 February 2008 Warsaw, 21-22 April 2008 5 CERN: the World’s Most Complete Accelerator Complex (not to scale) Warsaw, 21-22 April 2008 6 TheThe LongLong--TermTerm ScientificScientific ProgrammeProgramme Legend: Approved Under Consideration 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 LHC Experiments ALICE ATLAS CMS LHCb TOTEM LHCf Other LHC Experiments (e.g. MOEDAL) Non-LHC Experimental Programme SPS NA58 (COMPASS) P326 (NA48/3)/NA62 P327 (EM processes in strong crystalline fields) NA49-future/NA61 Neutrino / CNGS New initiatives PS PS212 (DIRAC) PS215 (CLOUD) OTHER FACILITIES AD ISOLDE n-TOF Neutron CAST P331 (optical axion search and QED test) Test Beams North Areas West Areas East Hall R&D (Detector & Accelerator) 7 Poland and the Four Strategic Missions of CERN FUNADAMENTAL RESEARCH • Polish physicists collaborate with CERN since 1959.
  • 2018 APS Prize and Award Recipients

    2018 APS Prize and Award Recipients

    APS Announces 2018 Prize and Award Recipients The APS would like to congratulate the recipients of these APS prizes and awards. They will be presented during APS award ceremonies throughout the year. Both March and April meeting award ceremonies are open to all APS members and their guests. At the March Meeting, the APS Prizes and Awards Ceremony will be held Monday, March 5, 5:45 - 6:45 p.m. at the Los Angeles Convention Center (LACC) in Los Angeles, CA. At the April Meeting, the APS Prizes and Awards Ceremony will be held Sunday, April 15, 5:30 - 6:30 p.m. at the Greater Columbus Convention Center in Columbus, OH. In addition to the award ceremonies, most prize and award recipients will give invited talks during the meeting. Some recipients of prizes, awards are recognized at APS unit meetings. For the schedule of APS meetings, please visit http://www.aps.org/meetings/calendar.cfm. Nominations are open for most 2019 prizes and awards. We encourage members to nominate their highly-qualified peers, and to consider broadening the diversity and depth of the nomination pool from which honorees are selected. For nomination submission instructions, please visit the APS web site (http://www.aps.org/programs/honors/index.cfm). Prizes 2018 APS MEDAL FOR EXCELLENCE IN PHYSICS 2018 PRIZE FOR A FACULTY MEMBER FOR RESEARCH IN AN UNDERGRADUATE INSTITUTION Eugene N. Parker University of Chicago Warren F. Rogers In recognition of many fundamental contributions to space physics, Indiana Wesleyan University plasma physics, solar physics and astrophysics for over 60 years.
  • Update on the Combined Analysis of Muon Measurements from Nine Air Shower Experiments

    Update on the Combined Analysis of Muon Measurements from Nine Air Shower Experiments

    ICRC 2021 THE ASTROPARTICLE PHYSICS CONFERENCE ONLINE ICRC 2021Berlin | Germany THE ASTROPARTICLE PHYSICS CONFERENCE th Berlin37 International| Germany Cosmic Ray Conference 12–23 July 2021 Update on the Combined Analysis of Muon Measurements from Nine Air Shower Experiments Dennis Soldin0,∗ for the EAS-MSU, IceCube, KASCADE-Grande, NEVOD-DECOR, Pierre Auger, SUGAR, Telescope Array, and Yakutsk EAS Array Collaborations (a complete list of authors can be found at the end of the proceedings) 0Bartol Research Institute, Dept. of Physics and Astronomy University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA E-mail: [email protected] Over the last two decades, various experiments have measured muon densities in extensive air showers over several orders of magnitude in primary energy. While some experiments observed differences in the muon densities between simulated and experimentally measured air showers, others reported no discrepancies. We will present an update of the meta-analysis of muon measurements from nine air shower experiments, covering shower energies between a few PeV and tens of EeV and muon threshold energies from a few 100 MeV to about 10 GeV. In order to compare measurements from different experiments, their energy scale was cross-calibrated and the experimental data has been compared using a universal reference scale based on air shower simulations. Above 10 PeV, we find a muon excess with respect to simulations for all hadronic interaction models, which is increasing with shower energy. For EPOS-LHC and QGSJet-II.04 the significance of the slope of the increase is analyzed in detail under different assumptions of the individual experimental uncertainties. arXiv:2108.08341v2 [astro-ph.HE] 20 Aug 2021 37th International Cosmic Ray Conference (ICRC 2021) July 12th – 23rd, 2021 Online – Berlin, Germany ∗Presenter © Copyright owned by the author(s) under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
  • TASI Lectures on Emergence of Supersymmetry, Gauge Theory And

    TASI Lectures on Emergence of Supersymmetry, Gauge Theory And

    TASI Lectures on Emergence of Supersymmetry, Gauge Theory and String in Condensed Matter Systems Sung-Sik Lee1,2 1Department of Physics & Astronomy, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. W., Hamilton ON L8S4M1, Canada 2Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, 31 Caroline St. N., Waterloo ON N2L2Y5, Canada Abstract The lecture note consists of four parts. In the first part, we review a 2+1 dimen- sional lattice model which realizes emergent supersymmetry at a quantum critical point. The second part is devoted to a phenomenon called fractionalization where gauge boson and fractionalized particles emerge as low energy excitations as a result of strong interactions between gauge neutral particles. In the third part, we discuss about stability and low energy effective theory of a critical spin liquid state where stringy excitations emerge in a large N limit. In the last part, we discuss about an attempt to come up with a prescription to derive holographic theory for general quantum field theory. arXiv:1009.5127v2 [hep-th] 16 Dec 2010 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Emergent supersymmetry 2 2.1 Emergence of (bosonic) space-time symmetry . .... 3 2.2 Emergentsupersymmetry . .. .. 4 2.2.1 Model ................................... 5 2.2.2 RGflow .................................. 7 3 Emergent gauge theory 10 3.1 Model ....................................... 10 3.2 Slave-particletheory ............................... 10 3.3 Worldlinepicture................................. 12 4 Critical spin liquid with Fermi surface 14 4.1 Fromspinmodeltogaugetheory . 14 4.1.1 Slave-particle approach to spin-liquid states . 14 4.1.2 Stability of deconfinement phase in the presence of Fermi surface... 16 4.2 Lowenergyeffectivetheory . .. .. 17 4.2.1 Failure of a perturbative 1/N expansion ...............
  • Round Table Talk: Conversation with Nathan Seiberg

    Round Table Talk: Conversation with Nathan Seiberg

    Round Table Talk: Conversation with Nathan Seiberg Nathan Seiberg Professor, the School of Natural Sciences, The Institute for Advanced Study Hirosi Ooguri Kavli IPMU Principal Investigator Yuji Tachikawa Kavli IPMU Professor Ooguri: Over the past few decades, there have been remarkable developments in quantum eld theory and string theory, and you have made signicant contributions to them. There are many ideas and techniques that have been named Hirosi Ooguri Nathan Seiberg Yuji Tachikawa after you, such as the Seiberg duality in 4d N=1 theories, the two of you, the Director, the rest of about supersymmetry. You started Seiberg-Witten solutions to 4d N=2 the faculty and postdocs, and the to work on supersymmetry almost theories, the Seiberg-Witten map administrative staff have gone out immediately or maybe a year after of noncommutative gauge theories, of their way to help me and to make you went to the Institute, is that right? the Seiberg bound in the Liouville the visit successful and productive – Seiberg: Almost immediately. I theory, the Moore-Seiberg equations it is quite amazing. I don’t remember remember studying supersymmetry in conformal eld theory, the Afeck- being treated like this, so I’m very during the 1982/83 Christmas break. Dine-Seiberg superpotential, the thankful and embarrassed. Ooguri: So, you changed the direction Intriligator-Seiberg-Shih metastable Ooguri: Thank you for your kind of your research completely after supersymmetry breaking, and many words. arriving the Institute. I understand more. Each one of them has marked You received your Ph.D. at the that, at the Weizmann, you were important steps in our progress.
  • Antiprotons in the Big Machine

    Antiprotons in the Big Machine

    Antiprotons in the big machine Right the beam line which injects 26 GeV antiprotons into the SPS. Centre, the beam fine which sends high energy protons from the SPS towards the West Experimental Area. The main ring is on the left. (Photo CERN 38.4.81) On 7 July a pulse of antiprotons was sent to the CERN Super Proton Synchrotron, accelerated to 270 GeV and (briefly) stored. Two days later the exercise was repeated with greater success and the first evi­ dence obtained for proton-antipro­ ton collisions at 540 GeV — by far the highest collision energies ever achieved. Although there is still much to be done before the scheme becomes fully operational, this achievement is a major milestone in the CERN antiproton story. The origins of the project Antiprotons, since they presuma­ bly have the same properties as protons except for the sign of their electric charge, can be accelerated and stored in the same magnet ring as protons. Thus colliding beam sys­ tems, like the familiar electron-posi­ tron machines, are, in principle, fea­ sible. However until recently it was not possible to produce antiproton tion, the antiprotons emerge with a for colliding beam physics. It in­ beams of sufficient intensity and wide range of momenta, distinctly volves using electron beams travel­ density to give sufficient collisions in unsuitable for a magnet system in a ling along with the antiproton beam a reasonable enough time for useful beam transfer line, an accelerator or at the same velocity. The electron physics to be done. a storage ring which is designed to beam, which is much easier to con­ This situation has changed with handle a well defined particle mo­ trol, has particles at precisely the the invention of 'beam cooling'.
  • SUSY, Landscape and the Higgs

    SUSY, Landscape and the Higgs

    SUSY, Landscape and the Higgs Michael Dine Department of Physics University of California, Santa Cruz Workshop: Nature Guiding Theory, Fermilab 2014 Michael Dine SUSY, Landscape and the Higgs A tension between naturalness and simplicity There have been lots of good arguments to expect that some dramatic new phenomena should appear at the TeV scale to account for electroweak symmetry breaking. But given the exquisite successes of the Model, the simplest possibility has always been the appearance of a single Higgs particle, with a mass not much above the LEP exclusions. In Quantum Field Theory, simple has a precise meaning: a single Higgs doublet is the minimal set of additional (previously unobserved) degrees of freedom which can account for the elementary particle masses. Michael Dine SUSY, Landscape and the Higgs Higgs Discovery; LHC Exclusions So far, simplicity appears to be winning. Single light higgs, with couplings which seem consistent with the minimal Standard Model. Exclusion of a variety of new phenomena; supersymmetry ruled out into the TeV range over much of the parameter space. Tunings at the part in 100 1000 level. − Most other ideas (technicolor, composite Higgs,...) in comparable or more severe trouble. At least an elementary Higgs is an expectation of supersymmetry. But in MSSM, requires a large mass for stops. Michael Dine SUSY, Landscape and the Higgs Top quark/squark loop corrections to observed physical Higgs mass (A 0; tan β > 20) ≈ In MSSM, without additional degrees of freedom: 126 L 124 GeV H h m 122 120 4000 6000 8000 10 000 12 000 14 000 HMSUSYGeVL Michael Dine SUSY, Landscape and the Higgs 6y 2 δm2 = t m~ 2 log(Λ2=m2 ) H −16π2 t susy So if 8 TeV, correction to Higgs mass-squred parameter in effective action easily 1000 times the observed Higgs mass-squared.
  • Cherenkov Light Imaging in Astroparticle Physics

    Cherenkov Light Imaging in Astroparticle Physics

    Cherenkov light imaging in astroparticle physics U. F. Katz Erlangen Centre for Astroparticle Physics, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-N¨urnberg, Erwin-Rommel-Str. 1, 91058 Erlangen, Germany Abstract Cherenkov light induced by fast charged particles in transparent dielectric media such as air or water is exploited by a variety of experimental techniques to detect and measure extraterrestrial particles impinging on Earth. A selection of detection principles is discussed and corresponding experiments are presented together with breakthrough-results they achieved. Some future develop- ments are highlighted. Keywords: Astroparticle physics, Cherenkov detectors, neutrino telescopes, gamma-ray telescopes, cosmic-ray detectors 1. Introduction Photomultiplier tubes (PMTs) and, more recently, silicon pho- tomultipliers (SiPMs) [3,4] are the standard sensor types. They In 2018, we commemorate the 60th anniversary of the award are provided by specialised companies who cooperate with the of the Nobel Prize to Pavel Alexeyewich Cherenkov, Ilya experiments in developing and optimising sensors according to Mikhailovich Frank and Igor Yevgenyevich Tamm for the dis- the respective specific needs (see e.g. [5,6]). covery and the interpretation of the Cherenkov effect [1,2]. In the following, the detection principles of different types of The impact of this discovery on astroparticle physics is enor- Cherenkov experiments in astroparticle physics are presented mous and persistent. Cherenkov detection techniques were ins- together with selected technical details and outstanding results. tumental for the dicovery of neutrino oscillations; the detection of high-energy cosmic neutrinos; the establishment of ground- based gamma-ray astronomy; and important for the progress in 2. Ground-based gamma-ray detectors cosmic-ray physics.
  • TASI Lectures on the Strong CP Problem

    TASI Lectures on the Strong CP Problem

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CERN Document Server hep-th/0011376 SCIPP-00/30 TASI Lectures on The Strong CP Problem Michael Dine Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, Santa Cruz CA 95064 Abstract These lectures discuss the θ parameter of QCD. After an introduction to anomalies in four and two dimensions, the parameter is introduced. That such topological parameters can have physical effects is illustrated with two dimensional models, and then explained in QCD using instantons and current algebra. Possible solutions including axions, a massless up quark, and spontaneous CP violation are discussed. 1 Introduction Originally, one thought of QCD as being described a gauge coupling at a particular scale and the quark masses. But it soon came to be recognized that the theory has another parameter, the θ parameter, associated with an additional term in the lagrangian: 1 = θ F a F˜µνa (1) L 16π2 µν where 1 F˜a = F ρσa. (2) µνρσ 2 µνρσ This term, as we will discuss, is a total divergence, and one might imagine that it is irrelevant to physics, but this is not the case. Because the operator violates CP, it can contribute to the neutron electric 9 dipole moment, dn. The current experimental limit sets a strong limit on θ, θ 10− . The problem of why θ is so small is known as the strong CP problem. Understanding the problem and its possible solutions is the subject of this lectures. In thinking about CP violation in the Standard Model, one usually starts by counting the parameters of the unitary matrices which diagonalize the quark and lepton masses, and then counting the number of possible redefinitions of the quark and lepton fields.
  • Around the Laboratories

    Around the Laboratories

    Around the Laboratories such studies will help our under­ BROOKHAVEN standing of subnuclear particles. CERN Said Lee, "The progress of physics New US - Japanese depends on young physicists Antiproton encore opening up new frontiers. The Physics Centre RIKEN - Brookhaven Research Center will be dedicated to the t the end of 1996, the beam nurturing of a new generation of Acirculating in CERN's LEAR low recent decision by the Japanese scientists who can meet the chal­ energy antiproton ring was A Parliament paves the way for the lenge that will be created by RHIC." ceremonially dumped, marking the Japanese Institute of Physical and RIKEN, a multidisciplinary lab like end of an era which began in 1980 Chemical Research (RIKEN) to found Brookhaven, is located north of when the first antiprotons circulated the RIKEN Research Center at Tokyo and is supported by the in CERN's specially-built Antiproton Brookhaven with $2 million in funding Japanese Science & Technology Accumulator. in 1997, an amount that is expected Agency. With the accomplishments of these to grow in future years. The new Center's research will years now part of 20th-century T.D. Lee, who won the 1957 Nobel relate entirely to RHIC, and does not science history, for the future CERN Physics Prize for work done while involve other Brookhaven facilities. is building a new antiproton source - visiting Brookhaven in 1956 and is the antiproton decelerator, AD - to now a professor of physics at cater for a new range of physics Columbia, has been named the experiments. Center's first director. The invention of stochastic cooling The Center will host close to 30 by Simon van der Meer at CERN scientists each year, including made it possible to mass-produce postdoctoral and five-year fellows antiprotons.
  • History of High-Energy Neutrino Astronomy

    History of High-Energy Neutrino Astronomy

    History of high-energy neutrino astronomy C. Spiering DESY, Platanenallee 6, D-15738 Zeuthen, Germany This talk sketches the main milestones of the path towards cubic kilometer neutrino telescopes. It starts with the first conceptual ideas in the late 1950s and describes the emergence of concepts for detectors with a realistic discovery potential in the 1970s and 1980s. After the pioneering project DUMAND close to Hawaii was terminated in 1995, the further development was carried by NT200 in Lake Baikal, AMANDA at the South Pole and ANTARES in the Mediterranean Sea. In 2013, more than half a century after the first concepts, IceCube has discovered extraterrestrial high-energy neutrinos and opened a new observational window to the cosmos { marking a milestone along a journey which is far from being finished. 1 From first concepts to the detection of atmospheric neutrinos The initial idea of neutrino astronomy beyond the solar system rested on two arguments: The first was the expectation that a supernova stellar collapse in our galaxy would be accompanied by an enormous burst of neutrinos in the 5-10 MeV range. The second was the expectation that fast rotating pulsars must accelerate charged particles in their Tera-Gauss magnetic fields. Either in the source or on their way to Earth they must hit matter, generate pions and neutrinos as decay products of the pions. The first ideas to detect cosmic high energy neutrinos underground or underwater date back to the late fifties (see 1 for a detailed history of cosmic neutrino detectors). In the 1960 Annual Review of Nuclear Science, K.
  • 40 Years of CERN's Proton Synchrotron

    40 Years of CERN's Proton Synchrotron

    ANNIVERSARY 40 years of CERN's Proton Synchrotron CERN's Proton Synchrotron achieved its first high-energy beams 40 years ago. The pioneers at CERN had dared to follow a new, untested route in a bid to become the world's highest energy machine. Now, 40 years later, the valiant Proton Synchrotron remains the ever-resourceful hub of an unrivalled The team that coaxed the protons from CERN's Proton Synchrotron through the "transition particle beam energy" and up to 24 GeVon the night of 24 November 1959. Left to right: John Adams, Hans Geibel, Hildred Blewett, Chris Schmelzer, Lloyd Smith, Wolfgang Schnell and Pierre Germain. network. On 24 November 1959, CERN's new Proton Synchrotron acceler­ step from a weak-focusing to a strong-focusing synchrotron, its ated protons through the dreaded "transition energy" barrier and on design, construction and legendary start-up - has been told before. to achieve the nominal energy of 24GeV. Could any of those rejoic­ Instead we look at the evolution that has led to today's PS, the com­ ing on that historic day have thought that their machine would still plex that has grown around it and the assured future that awaits it. be alive and well 40 years later, or that it would be the hub of the world's largest complex of accelerators, at the centre of European History 1959-1999: protons high-energy physics? If such thoughts were on their minds, they cer­ The performance of the PS has increased, partly through patient tainly would not have extended so far in time or in performance.