Astroparticle Experiments

Rene A. Ong (UCLA)

Nobel Symposium on LHC Results, May 2013 Cosmic Messengers

We study the Universe using the following possible messengers:

Messenger ElExamples FtFeatures Photons CMB, X-ray, γ-ray Can be absorbed Cosmic Rays p, e, nuclei, anti-matter Deflected by B fields Neutrinos ν Hard to detect Grav. Waves Very hard to detect ? New Particles WIMPs, Axions, ALPs … Hard to detect The Astroparticle Diagram

Astro Particle

VHE /UHE Astrophysics New Particles, Interactions Particle Properties • Point sources (γ, ν, CR) • Particle dark matter • Neutrino properties • Diffuse sources • WISPs (non DM) (Atm., solar, SN, relic ν) • Intergalactic radiation fields • Big Bang relics • Proton-Proton σ • Origin of cosmic rays (PBH’s, GUT particles…) • VHE/UHE ν interactions • etc. • Lorentz invariance violation • etc. • etc. Outline

Selected set of topics in three general areas:

A. Introduction to Very High Energy (VHE) Astrophysics • VHE γ-ray and neutrino telescopes • Cosmic sources of VHE particles

B. Astroparticle Physics Topics Connected to LHC • Dark Matter (DM) Motivation and Detectors • WIMP DM – Direct and I ndi rect D et ecti on Resu lts & LHC • Proton-Proton Cross Section at 70 TeV

C. Other Topics (possibly connected to LHC) • Other particle dark matter (axions) • WklitWeakly interac tiliting slim par til(WISP)ticles (WISPs) Caveats

Broad science Wide variety of techniques Æ Selective coverage Large number of projects ) … lots missing !

Focus on present day experiments and results. Leave future projections for questions. Experiments are introduced when discussing the relevant science.

Minimal details on project design and operation.

No discussion of cosmology (CMB, dark energy) – not enough time.

Selective, idiosyncratic snapshot of present landscape in the context of LHC. Outline

Selected set of topics in three general areas:

A. Introduction to Very High Energy (VHE) Astrophysics • VHE γ-ray and neutrino telescopes • Cosmic sources of VHE particles Present Instruments CR, γ-ray

Satellite Instruments Balloon Fermi, AMS Instruments PAMELA

Atmospheric Cherenkov Air Shower Telescopes Arrays HESS, VERITAS Auger MAGIC

Ground or IceCube Underground Detectors Ice/Water CDMS, Xenon Cherenkov ADMX, CAST ν Detectors GeV and TeV γ-ray Telescopes

Anti-Coincidence Si Strip Tracker Shield Fermi-LAT • E = 30 MeV-300 GeV 2 • A ~ 1 m Calorimeter • 252.5 sr FOV • 0.3o-1.5o resolution

T4 Atm. Cherenkov T3 Telescopes T2 • E > 50 GeV • A ~ 1 x 105 m2 • ~4o FOV T1 • < 0.1o resolution VERITAS @ Mt. Hopkins AZ, USA IceCube: ν Detector at South Pole

Muon Detector

Neutrino

TeV muon-neutrino detection

Installing an IceCube string

km3 Neutrino Detector Ice-Cherenkov technique Energy range: 1011-1017 eV 86 strings x 60 optical modules IceTop for air showers DCflDeep Core for low energ ies Schematic of IceCube at South Pole Multi-Messenger Science

Black Hole EeV p Cosmic Rays

p π e Jet ν Active Galactic Nucleus (AGN) γ PPVeV Neutrinos

GeV/TeV γ−rays TeV γ-ray Sky c1997

4 sources

tevcat.uchicago.edu TeV γ-ray Sky c2005

13 sources

tevcat.uchicago.edu TeV γ-ray Sky c2013

~140 sources

tevcat.uchicago.edu

• Almost all discoveries made by atm. Cherenkov telescopes • Detailed information from spectra, images, variability, MWL … VHE γ-ray Sky c2013 + HE γ-ray Sky

~140 sources

tevcat.uchicago.edu

• Almost all discoveries made by atm. Cherenkov telescopes • Detailed information from spectra, images, variability, MWL … VHE/UHE ν Sky c2013

tevcat.uchicago.edu

• Neutrino detections should be coming soon ! The High Energy Milky Way

Extended sources, size typically few 0.1o HESSH.E.S.S. (TeV) few 10 pc

Fermi-LAT (GeV) Courtesy of W. Hofmann The Many Faces of TeV Particle Acceleration

AGN Star Forming Regions Supernova Pulsars Remnants

Jets powered by SNRs, cosmic rays, accretion or unipolar molecular clouds. NS dynamo Induction. UHECR ’ ss? ? FiAltiFermi Acceleration

Gamma-Ray Unidentifieds Bursts Binary Systems VERITAS

Accretion jets Star collapseÆ ??? or stellar winds relativistic jets Latest IceCube Results

Simple Search for Diffuse ν’s

Look at events all directions Look for upward (E>1 PeV) and downward (E>100 PeV) events

Find 2 events (0.14 exp. bkgnd) C. Kopper, LLWI 2013

~1.1 PeV (“Bert”) ~1.2 PeV (“Ernie”)

Not consistent with atm. background, but not enough for continuous spectrum … … perhaps the “tip of the iceberg” ?! Outline

Postulated in the 1930’s, dark matter (DM) remains one of the deeppyest mysteries of science.

There is now overwhelming evidence for existence of DM.

What we do know: 1E 0657-56 Dark matter:

• is non-baryonic Planck • is non-relativistic (cold or warm) • is stable on cosmological times • has v. weak interaction with SM matter • comprises ~85% of the matter in Universe

One of the clearest indications for physics beyond the standard model !

Planck What is Dark Matter ? Many candidates exist !

Candidate Mass Range “Bonus”

WIMP 1–104 GeV “WIMP miracle” (new physics ~WI scale)

Axion 1 μeV – 1 meV Strong CP problem (PQ symmetry)

Sterile ν various Accel./reactor ν experiments

Many others various

Mos t di scussed i s co ld dar k ma tter (CDM), w hic h is very a ttrac tive and fits much (most) of the astrophysical/cosmological data, but …

1. CDM has we ll-known probl ems (e.g. m iss ing sa te llites, cusps … ) Æ “warm” DM, “fuzzy” DM, self-interacting DM, … 2DMiht2. DM might cons itfist of mu ltilltiple cons titttituents, i.e. Æ “Dark Sector”, such as asymmetric DM What is Dark Matter ? Many candidates exist !

Candidate Mass Range “Bonus”

WIMP 1–104 GeV “WIMP miracle” (new physics ~WI scale)

Axion 1 μeV – 1 meV Strong CP problem (PQ symmetry)

Sterile ν various Accel./reactor ν experiments

Many others various

Mos t di scussed i s co ld dar k ma tter (CDM), w hic h is very a ttrac tive and fits much (most) of the astrophysical/cosmological data, but …

Produce DM particle Direct Detection: in Accelerators Detect DM in Laboratory

Large Hadron Collider (LHC) e.g. Xenon Detector

Indirect Detection: i. e. Astrophysical e.g. VERITAS Telescope Complementary Approaches

WIMP annihilation In the cosmos Heavy particle prod. MET + jets Indirect Detection Weak pair prod. MET + monojet LHC Production WIMP-Nucleon Elastic scattering Direct Detection WIMP Direct Detection Basics

Particle Physics Astrophysics

Particle Physics: Elastic scattering of WIMPs off nuclei a) Spin-independent (coherent) ~ A2 b) Spin-dependent (target has net spin)

Astrophysics: Isothermal, spherical halo with MB velocity dist, f(v)dv, and

vo ~ 230 km/s 3 D. Bauer, LLWI 2013 ρχ ~ 030.3 GVGeV/cm Signals and Challenges

Signal options: 1) Counting Eliminate recoils from SM particles

2) Annual Modulation Vearth causes slight variation in rate 3) Diurnal Modulation Earth rotation causes v. slight variation

Challenges faced: Very low backgrounds required – radioactive and CR’s swamp expectdWIMPited WIMP signal Low energy thresholds required – in 1-50 keV range, expected rate increases at low E (as do bkgnds) Low signal rate requires stable, large mass detectors running over extended time periods. Underground Labs & Some Expts

Picasso COUPP

Edelweiss XMASS LUX SuperCDMS DAMA CoGeNT Xenon100 CRESST

PANDAX

D. Bauer, LLWI 2013

There are ~20 operational (or soon to be operational) experiments ! Detection Techniques by Experiment

P. Decowski, Aspen 2013

The use of two detection techniques allows for cleaner separation of nuclear recoils from background Super CDMS (LNGS)

Ge or Si crystals: ionization and phonon signals T < 50 mK (EDELWEISS II si mil ar) Interleaved ionization/photon sensors

One detector

• Low energy threshold (< 10 keV) • Excellent energy resolution (<1%) • Proven event-by-event background discrimination • (Surface events mimic nuclear recoil) Xenon100 (Gran Sasso)

Dual phase Xe: Ionization and scintillation signals 3D track reconstruction (TPC) (LUX, PdXPandaX siil)imilar)

XENON100 XENON1Ton

• Good self-shielding, pure and homogeneous material • Large A Æ large rate, but less sensitive at lower E • Straightforward to scale to larger volumes • (Weaker detector discrimination, maintaining high purity LXe required) Other Experiments

Solid state ionization detectors Scintillating Crystals Ultrapure Ge @ 77K NaI (Tl) CoGeNT DAMA/LIBRA, DM-ICE

• V. low E threshold • keV E threshold • Low intrinsic bkgnd • Large mass Æ large signal • (Hard to distinguish NR from ER) • (No event-by-event discrimination) • (Pulse shape to discriminate • (Large residual bkgnds, annual surface from bulk events) modulation required) WIMP Limits Spin Independent

potential signals

best limit MSSM (Xenon 100) WIMP Limits Spin Dependent

COUPP Super-K

ICbIceCube

MSSM Neutrino WIMP Detection

σ σ • WIMPs scatter off nuclei in Sun and get captured ( SI or SD). • WIMP annihilation produces primary or secondary neutrinos.

• Neutrinos detected on Earth in water or ice Cherenkov detectors. WIMP Evidence: Direct Detection

R. Bernabei et al., arXiv:1002.1028 DAMA/LIBRA Ann. Modulation is ~9σ effect Is it due to DM ?

CoGeNT 442 live days Low E threshold & extensive Bkgnd studies

282.8σ annual modulation (4-5 times expected amount)

Continuing to take data … CEC.E. Aalseth et al ., PRL 107, 141301 (2011) WIMP Evidence: Direct Detection

SuperCDMS R. Agnese et al., arXiV:1304.4279 Latest results (2013) Si detectors, less sensitive above 15 GeV but more sensitive below. Prob for 3 evts from bgnd ~ 5.4%, but Prob for measured energies ~0. 19%.

Before timing cut (unblinded)

Max. likelihood @ m = 8.6 GeV σ =1.9 x 10-41 cm2 After timing cut (unblinded) WIMP Indirect Detection

WIMP Annihilation GeV Fermi, AGILE γγ (Satellite) Gamma Zγ rays TeV HESS, MAGIC γ (cont.) VERITAS (Atm. Cherenkov)

ν GVGeV-TVTeV Neutrinos from IceCube, Antares Sun Super-K (Water Cherenkov)

Anti-matter e+,p,-- d GeV-TeV PAMELA, Fermi, AMS in CR Particle Physics (Satellite) (Uncertainty from mχ, decay modes, etc.) WIMP Indirect Detection: γ-rays S. Murgia, Dark Attack 2012 DM dist rib uti on Line-of-sight Integral (Uncertainty from unknown DM profile)

Where to look: What to look for:

D. Hooper, Aspen 2013 WIMP Limits: γ-rays Fermi, HESS, VERITAS Fermi Gal. center, dwarf galaxies γγ line li mit s

A. Drlica-Wagner, APS 2013

No evidence for a signal in gamma rays, for standard thermal WIMP m > 10 GeV. But … 130 GeV WIMP Line in Fermi Data ?

Line evidence: However:

A. Drlica-Wagner, APS 2013

Analysis done by Fermi-LAT team: • Re-processed data, includes better calibration, reconstruction Analysis done using public data & tools • 3.4-3.7σ (local), ~2σ (global) • Feature near 130 GeV • “Peak” seen in Earth limb data, • Near to (but displaced from) the largely at incident cos(θ) ~ 0.7. Galactic center •4.6σ (local), 3.2σ (global) Systematic Effect ? Anti-Matter Space Detectors A. Drlica-Wagner, APS 2013

e detected by shower shape e detected by shower shape and TRD e+ detected by magnet e+ detected by magnet Anti-Matter Space Detectors A. Drlica-Wagner, APS 2013

e detected by shower shape e detected by shower shape and TRD e+ detected by magnet e+ detected by magnet Cosmic Anti-Protons

Secondary anti-p Future AMS-02 sensitivity (note: p-bar/p is plotted)

O. Adriani et al., PRL 105, 121101 (2010) No evidence in anti-protons But … what about Positrons ?

Clear rise in e+ fraction at high E: ((gyincluding very recent results from AMS-02) But, astrophysical sources possible:

Local pulsar (Yuskel,Kistler, & Stanev, PRL 103, 051101 (2009)).

But … “leptophilic” models largely ruled out by γ-ray and ν results. WIMP Detection Summary

Trying to make sense of all the results:

Experiment(s) Technique Features Difficulties with DM hypothesis with “Signal”

Direct Detection DAMA, CRESST, Low E Possible unknown bkgnds & large modulation; Spin-independent CoGeNT Annual modulation seemingly ruled out by Xenon100, Super-CDMS.

Direct Detection Low E Super-CDMS Near threshold, not significant yet. Spin-independent Si detectors only

Direct DtDetec tion No Signal Spin-dependent

γ-rays No Signal Dwarf galaxies

γ-rays Hard to account for strength of line signal; Fermi-LAT Line near 130 GeV Galactic center possible systematic? Not very significant.

Anti-Protons No Signal

Requires “leptophilic” models and large σ. PAMELA, Fermi, Rising e+ fraction Positrons Possible astrophysical source(s). AMS above 10 GeV DM hypothesis ruled out by γ-ray, ν results. Neutrinos No Signal Sun Plus, more results not listed here ! WIMP Detection Summary

Trying to make sense of all the results:

Experiment(s) Technique Features Difficulties with DM hypothesis with “Signal”

Direct Detection DAMA, CRESST, Low E Possible unknown bkgnds & large modulation; Spin-independent CoGeNT Annual modulation seemingly ruled out by Xenon100, Super-CDMS.

Direct Detection Low E Super-CDMS Near threshold, not significant yet. Spin-independent Si detectors only

Direct DtDetec tion No Signal Spin-dependent

γ-rays No Signal Dwarf galaxies

γ-rays Hard to account for strength of line signal; Fermi-LAT Line near 130 GeV Galactic center possible systematic? Not very significant.

Anti-Protons No Signal

Making comparisons between: • Direct detection results • Indirect detection results • LHC results is complica te d.

No generic prescriptions and many DOF.

Two general approaches:

1. Compare in context of specific models (e.g. MSSM)

2. Compare using generalized models (e.g. effective field theory models)

Operators for Dirac WIMP WIMP Comparisons to LHC

T. Tait, Aspen 2013 Some LHC Results and Comparisons σ σ scatt spin-idind scatt spin-dep

<σ ATLAS Collab., arXiV: 1210:4491v2. anh v >

• For some operators, LHC limits are quite constraining for mχ < 100 GeV. • For others, direct or indirect detectors are more constraining. • Similar results for CMS (see CMS PAS EXO-12-048, http://cds.cern.ch/record/1525585) WIMPs: a More General Framework DBD. Bauer et al ., “D “DkMttiark Matter in th thCe Comi ng D ecad e: C ompl ement ary P Pthaths to Discovery and Beyond,” White Paper for Snowmass 2013. Gluon Interactions Quark Interactions Lepton Interactions

1.0 = expected thermal relic cross-section • For gluon/quark interactions, LHC competitive or dominates at energies below ~few 100 GeV. • For gluon and lepton interactions, direct expts. are important. • For quark and lepton interactions, indirect expts are important. Auger Project for Ultrahigh Energies

Surface array & fluorescence detection

Auggjer Project in Mendoza, Ar gentina

3000 km2 air shower array E > 1017 eV Surface array of 1600 detectors 24 fluoresence detectors, 4 locations

A surface detector & fluorescence station P-P Cross-Section @ 60 TeV

18 Auger measures p-air showers at Elab > 10 eV

Cross-section scales with dn/dxmax, where

xmax = poitint of max sh ower deve lopmen t. Glauber formalism to infer pp cross-section.

P. Abreu et al., arXiV: 1208.1520 dn/dxmax distribution

Auger results consistent with smooth extrapolation from LHC. Outline

C. Other Topics (possibly connected to LHC) • Other particle dark matter (axions) • WklitWeakly interac tiliting slim par til(WISP)ticles (WISPs) Axions

Original motivation – to explain the “strong CP” problem

• QCD contains CP violating term for non-zero θ

• Expect EDM(n) ~ 10-15 e-cm; current limit 1011 below this!

• Peccei-Quinn introduce dynamical field, which produces an effective potential to drive θ to zero.

• The quantum offf the field is a particle, the axion (Weinberg-Wilczek).

Axion mass:

fa = decay constant Interactions scale as 1 / fa Axions as Dark Matter

• Variety of constraints (astrophysics, accelerators) on the axion coupling (and mass).

• MkMake fa lhlarge, hence re duce mass, tildtbllito yield a stable relic axion, and a DM candidate:

13 3 μ Ω e.g. for na ~ 2 x10 /cm and ma = 20 eV, a ~ 0.23. • Axion: neutral psuedoscalar boson (light cousin of πo) Produced/detected via Primakoff effect (Sikivie): Extension to ALPs

ALPs = Axion-like-particles ALPs,,p, hidden photons, chameleons, etc. are comp onents of a “hidden sector”, inspired by string theory extensions of SM.

A. Lindner, DPG 2013

QCD Axion

Schematic coupling-mass diagram for axions and ALPs. Axion/ALP Current/Future Limits

Laboratory Axions A. Lindner, DPG 2013 •“Light-shining-through -walls” (OSQAR,LIPSS,ALPS)

Solar Axions • Helioscopes (CS)(Tokyo, CAST)

Cosmic ALPs • γ-ray Telescopes (Fermi, VERITAS …)

DM Halo Axions • Haloscopes (ADMX) Laboratory & Solar Axion Expts

ALPS (DESY) CAST (CERN)

HERA Magnet Laser Detector

Wall

• HERA magnet • Decomissioned LHC magnet • ALPS-I search in 2010 • Tracks Sun (3 hrs/day) • Search for conversion to X-rays • Search for conversion to X-rays • Upgrade to laser, magnet and • Future expp()eriment IAXO (LLNL) cavity (ALPS-II). DM Haloscope (ADMX) ADMX (U. Washington)

• Microwave cavity DM axion search • Phase II construction underway • Operation by 2015 μ • Cover ma = 2-40 eV range VHE γ-rays as Cosmological Probes

EliBkdExtragalactic Background Light (EBL): • Opti cal/IR diffuse b ack ground produced by all star-formation throughout universe history. • γγ interaction probes EBL density & uniformity. • PtPotenti tilal way to measure tiny extragalactic magnetic field (EGMF). B ~ 10-9 -10-18 G Is the Universe too Transparent ?

D. Horns & M. Meyer, JCAP 1202, 033 (2012)

Axion conversion ?? Sanchez-Conde et al., arXiv:0905.3270 Some of the Topics Not Covered

Sterile neutrinos Cosmic electrons DM astrophysics – local density, cusps, streams, etc. “Fermi bubbles” WMAP/Plank “haze” Fermi “haze” Primordial black holes GUT-scale particles Lorentz invariance violation (LIV) Relic neutrinos Extragalactic magnetic field (EGMF) OiOrigi n o f cosm ic rays (rea l progress ma de here !) … Summary

Astroparticle physics is incredibly active with a large variety of detectors attackinggp a wide set of science topics.

Very high energy (VHE) particles probe astrophysics of TeV/PeV/EeV particle acceleration in the cosmic not addressed or understood by other means.

Dark matter is the central problem being studied today in astroparticle physics. Many tantalizing results, but as yet no clear evidence.

Future is promising with many new experiments in construction of planning stages.

“The real voyage of discovery consists, not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes.” Marcel Proust (1871-1922) END EXTRA Present and Future Instruments CR, γ-ray

Satellite Instruments Balloon Fermi, AMS Instruments PAMELA GAPS GAMMA-400 CALET Atmospheric Cherenkov Air Shower Telescopes Arrays HESS, VERITAS Auger MAGICCTA, HAWC JEM-EUSO

Ground or KM3NET IceCube Underground Detectors Ice/Water CDMS, Xenon Cherenkov ADMX, CAST + MANY MORE ν Detectors Direct Detection Backgrounds ADMX Target Sensitivity Fermi e+ Detection Technique Constraints on Leptophilic Scenario CMB Constraints

• CMB power spectrum sensitive to energy injected near recombination • Limit DM annihilation < σ v> from power spectrum Some pMSSM Comparisons (Future) Cosmic Rays: First 50 Years

1912 V. Hess discovery

1920-40 Identification as protons

1930-55 New Particles (e+,μ,π, etc.)

Birth of “high-energy physics” C.D. Anderson, 1933 B. Rossi, “Cosmic Rays”, 1964

1939 Extensive air showers 1949 E. Fermi proposes 1962 J. Linsley discovery discovered by P. Auger “shock” accelerator of UHECRs 15 20 Ecr > 10 eV E > 10 eV !

P. Auger & R. Maze, Comptes Rendus, 1938 J. Linsley looking for rattlesnakes at Volcano Ranch (NM) Mystery of Cosmic Rays

By 1960’s, we knew that cosmic rays were mostly charged protons & nuclei and that they covered a very large dynamic range > 1012.

Cosmic rays: cover an enormous energy range have energy density ~ 1 eV/cm3 have mysterious origin(s) – bent by galactic B field Photons, Neutrinos: are un-deflected by B fields can be used to directly image astrophysical sources

1960’s: S. Swordy, 1993 Ideas for γ-ray and ν astronomy existed – but it took another 25 years

Energy: GeV TeV PeV EeV ZeV to bear fruit … skipping forward ... SNRs: Origin of Cosmic Rays

Tycho, age = 440y, D = 2-5 kpc General Picture Recent Data from Tycho’s SNR

VERITAS Fermi-LAT , 2011 , 2011 .. V. Acciari et al. Giordano et al Giordano F.

Standard paradigm for CR’s Gives luminosity, spectral shape. Several SNRs now provide evidence for hadron acceleration. but … more evidence needed. Morlino & Caprioli, 2011 The GeV Sky (c 2012)

Extragalactic Sources (AGN, galaxy clusters, dwarf galaxies, local group,UnIDs)

Galactic Center

Galactic Plane (pulsars, SNRs, binaries, UnIDs)

EtExtragal ac tic Diffuse

Three-year γ-ray sky seen by Fermi-LAT Fermi Bubbles

M. Su et al. 2010

Complete Surprise !

Very extended (10 kpc) with hard spectrum. Related to earlier history of Galactic center ? γ-ray & Cosmic Ray Horizon

Intergalactic radiation fields limit the range of γ-rays and cosmic rays:

γ Δ+ Νπ P CMBÆ Æ “GZK Effect”

19 SiSuppression Ep > 6106 x10 eV

γ γ + - EBLÆ e e

Spectral Distortion Lim its the di s tance to sources to < ~150 Mpc.

Æ Diffuse “GZK” neutrinos. Latest Neutrino Results

Event displays of one PeV diffuse neutrino event

C. Spiering, “Gamma 2012”

IceCube neutrino sky map (probability) A No ν’s detected from point sources. “ . Ishihara,

Limits now well below initial estimates. N eutrino 2012”

Diffuse Search: 2 detected events

0. 14 expected from background E > 1015 eV Number of photoelectrons detected by IceCube for two shower events, with models/bkgfn. The 1019 eV Sky (c 2012)

P. Abreu et al., 2010

AGN position (3.1° circle)

Event position

EeV sky seen by Auger (E > 55 EeV), 69 events. Additional 25 events from Telescope Array (E>57 EeV). CR’s at the Highest Energies

Auger Telescope Array

S. Westerhoff, “COSPAR 2012”

Ori gi n i s still unk nown Auger and Telescope Array agree on spectrum – clear cutoff ~6x1019eV Æ Unclear if GZK effect or source acceleration limit Weakly correlated with nearby AGN/matter HE Instruments (2013)

MeV GeV TeV PeV EeV ZeV 6 9 12 15 18 21 γ Fermi-LAT HESS/MAGIC/VERITAS

6 9 12 15 18 21 CR Auger / TA

6 9 12 15 18 21 ν Super-K IceCube ANITA Future Major (>10 yr) Efforts*

Present Future Key Features

Fermi Cherenkov 10x better sensitivity Telescope Array Wider FOV γ HESS Higher & lower E MAGIC Space mission ? VERITAS

Auger Expanded Array ?

Larger aperture CR Tel Array JEM-EUSO Higher E reach

IceCube ARA, ARIANNA, EVA Higher E coverage ν Greater sensitivity ANTARES KM3NET ANITA SkS sky coverage PINGU Lower E coverage (*not necessarily complete) Future Major (>10 yr) Efforts*

Present Future Key Features

Fermi Cherenkov 10x better sensitivity Telescope Array Wider FOV γ HESS Higher & lower E MAGIC Space mission ? VERITAS

Auger Expanded Array ?

Larger aperture CR Tel Array JEM-EUSO Higher E reach

IceCube ARA, ARIANNA, EVA Higher E coverage ν Greater sensitivity ANTARES KM3NET ANITA SkS sky coverage PINGU Lower E coverage (*not necessarily complete) Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA)

CTA: artist’s conception

Key features of CTA:

Factor of 10 more sensitive, better σ σ ang and E than HESS/VERITAS. Wide E range: 25 GeV – 100 TeV. Wide field-of-view (>6o). Two sites: S (10 km2), N (1 km2) 40-80 Cherenkov telescopes/site. S. Funk, 2012 Oppyen observatory. Complemented by HAWC (wide- field, high duty cycle) in N. CTA and Fermi dark matter sensitivity Askaryan Radio Array (ARA) ARA: Very large (~150 km2) radio neutrino detector at South Pole. Uses Askaryan effect to detect radio Cherenkov signal. Main science goal: GZK neutrinos, E > 1017 eV.

Possible layout for ARA at South Pole ARA Projected Sensitivity

A. Karle, “Neutrino 2012”

ARA 3-year sensitivity to diffuse neutrino flux JEM-EUSO: UHECRs in Space

JEM-EUSO:

N2 fluorescence detector on ISS . Exposure/year is x10 Auger. Proposed launch in 2017.

JEM-EUSO concept

JEM-EUSO effective area in nadir & tilt modes. JEM-EUSO on ISS (nadir). JEM-EUSO Energy Reach

UHECR exposure versus time.

JEM-EUSO expected event numbers (5 years).