DOCSLIB.ORG

Muon Collider - Open Questions and New Ideas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Muon Collider - Open Questions and New Ideas Muon Collider - Open Questions and New Ideas July 20, 2020 Donatella Lucchesi University of Padova And INFN P. Andreetto, N. Bartosik, A. Bertolin, L. Buonincontri, M. Casarsa, F. Collamati, C. Curatolo, A. Ferrari, A. Ferrari, A. Gianelle, A. Mereghetti, N. Mokhov, M.Palmer, N. Pastrone, C. Riccardi, P. Sala, L. Sestini, I. Vai Muon Collider Collaboration q June 19, 2020 the Eu Strategy updated was published, where at page 14en, we read: […] In addition to the high field magnets the accelerator R&D roadmap could contain: an international design study for a muon collider, as it represents a unique opportunity to achieve a multi-TeV energy domain beyond the reach of e+e– colliders, and potentially within a more compact circular tunnel than for a hadron collider. The biggest challenge remains to produce an intense beam of cooled muons, but novel ideas are being explored;[…] q To facilitate the implementation of the EU Strategy the CERN Laboratory Directors Group on July 2nd: § Agreed to start building the collaboration for international muon collider design study. § Daniel Schulte appointed ad interim project leader, Nadia Pastrone, Lenny Rivkin and Daniel Schulte will collect MoUs. q Scope: • develop a baseline concept for a muon collider at centre-of-mass energy ranges: 3-10 TeV or above • identify an R&D path toward a conceptual design; • design a demonstrator. International Muon Collider Collaboration kick-off virtual meeting on July 3rd https://indico.cern.ch/event/930508/ Energy Frontier Workshop - Donatella Lucchesi July 20, 2020 2 First collaboration meeting on Physics and Experiments at a Muon Collider On July 27th there will be a remote meeting, here the link to the agenda, to discuss: q Physics benchmarks at 3 TeV and 10+ TeV center-of-mass energy to have a multi-TeV muon collider physics reach: § Agree on a set of physics processes to better coordinate the studies in the next months q Detector performance in the presence of the beam-induced background at different center-of-mass energy: • Selection of R&D that can be performed in synergies with the upgrade of existing experiments and new projects. • Identification of brand new R&D specific to the project. q Software framework to perform the studies: § On July 16en an hands-on on the current code version has been performed at Fermilab by M. Casarsa, here the link to the slides . Please, register to the meeting if interested. A document with a proposed plan for discussion is in preparation and will be linked to the agenda. Energy Frontier Workshop - Donatella Lucchesi July 20, 2020 3 Physics Motivations: Discovery Potential The advantage in colliding muons rather than protons is that !" is entirely available to produce short- distance reactions. At a proton collider the relevant interactions occur between the proton constituents, which carry a small fraction of !# Vector boson fusion at multi-TeV muon colliders, A. Costantini et al. 2 → 1 *+ = !, ./ 2 → 2 pp pp $%$& $%$& Energy Frontier Workshop - Donatella Lucchesi(a)(a) July(b)(b) 20, 2020 4 FigureFigure 1. 1. The The equivalent equivalent proton proton collider collider energy energyppsspp[TeV][TeV] required required to to reach reach the the same, same, beam-level + + crosscross section section as as a aµµµ−µ−collidercollider with with energy energyppssµµ[TeV][TeV] for for (a) (a)22 11 andand (b) (b) 22 22 parton-level !! !! process,process, for for benchmark benchmark scaling scaling relationships relationships between between the the parton-level parton-level cross cross sections sections [ˆσ]p and [ˆ[ˆσσ]]µµ t˜t˜ χ++χ 2 2 asas well well as as for for pair pair production production of oft˜t˜ andandχ χ−−throughthrough their their leading leading2 2 productionproduction modes. !! ⌧ = s /s wewe identify identify the the kinematic kinematic threshold threshold as as⌧ = sµµ/spp,, and and likewise likewise the the factorization factorization scale as as µf = sµ/2. If one further assumes a relationship between the partonic cross sections, this µf = ppsµ/2. If one further assumes a relationship between the partonic cross sections, this identificationidentification allows allows us us to to write write equation equation3.63.6asas sµ pssµ [ˆσ[ˆσ]]µ 1 Φij sµ ,p µ = µ 1 . (3.7) Φij sp, 2 = [ˆσ]p ⌘ β. (3.7) ij ✓sp 2 ◆ [ˆσ]p ⌘ β ijX X ✓ ◆ which can be solved⇤ numerically for sp as a function of sµ and β. which can be solved⇤ numerically for sp as a function of sµ and β. For various benchmark assumptions (β) on the partonic cross sections [ˆσ]p and [ˆσ]µ, For various benchmark assumptions (β) on the partonic cross sections [ˆσ]p and [ˆσ]µ, and for the parton luminosity configurations ij = gg (red) and ij = qq (blue), where and for the parton luminosity configurations ij = gg (red) and ij = qq (blue), where q u, c, d, s is any light quark, we plot in figure 1(a) the equivalent proton collider energy q 2u,{ c, d, s }is any light quark, we plot in figure 1(a) the equivalent proton collider energy 2ps{p as a function} of psµ, for a generic 2 1, neutral current process. In particular, for psp as a function of psµ, for a generic 2 !1, neutral current process.+ In particular, for each partonic configuration, we consider the! case where the ij and µ µ− partonic rates are each partonic configuration, we consider the case where the ij and µ+µ partonic rates are the same, i.e., when β =1(solid line) in equation 3.7, as well as when−β = 10 (dash) and the same, i.e., when β =1(solid line) in equation 3.7, as well as when β = 10 (dash) and β = 100 (dash-dot). The purpose of these benchmarks is to cover various coupling regimes, β = 100 (dash-dot).ij TheY purposeµ+µ of theseY benchmarks is to cover various coupling(β = 1) regimes, such as when and + − are governed by the same physics or when such as when ij !Y and µ µ− !Y are+ governed by the same physics (β = 1) or when ij Y is governed! by, say, QCD! but µ µ− Y by QED (β = 10). ij !Y is governed by, say, QCD but µ+µ !Y by QED (β = 10). ! Overall, we find several notable features.− ! First is the general expectation that a larger pp Overall, we find several notable features. First is the general expectation+ that a larger pp collider energy is needed to achieve the same partonic cross section as a µ µ− collider. This + colliderfollows energy from the is needed fact that to achievepp beam the energies same partonic are distributed cross section among as many a µ µ partons− collider. whereas This follows+ from the fact that pp beam energies are distributed among many partons whereas µ µ− collider energies are effectively held by just two incoming partons. Interestingly, + µ weµ− findcollider a surprisingly energies are simple effectivelylinear heldscaling by between just two the incoming two colliders partons. for Interestingly, all ij and β wecombinations. find a surprisingly For the simpleij = qlinearq configurationscaling between and equal the partonic two colliders coupling for strength, all ij and i.e.,β combinations.β =1, we report For a the scalingij = relationshipqq configuration of psp and5 equalpsµ partonic. Under the coupling above strength, assumptions, i.e., ⇠ ⇥ β =1, we report a scaling relationship of psp 5 psµ. Under the above assumptions, ⇤Explicitly, we use the scipy function fsolve to carry⇠ out⇥ a brute force computation of this transcen- dental⇤Explicitly, equation. we use We the reportscipy a reasonablefunction fsolve computationto carry time out on a a brute 2-core force personal computation laptop. of this transcen- dental equation. We report a reasonable computation time on a 2-core personal laptop. –7– –7– Physics Motivations: Discovery Potential through the Higgs Boson Higgs boson couplings to fermions and bosons reaches have to be evaluated, similar or better performance of !"!# are expected. In addition, muon collider has the unique possibility to determine the Higgs potential having sensitivity also to quadrilinear coupling ' ' 22 2200 ( ( - / ,- = ,01 1 + 3- + $ ℎ = ) ℎ + , .ℎ + , ℎ µ µ− HHH⌫⌫ ( * - / / 20 ! 2000 ,/ = ,01 1 + 3/ WHIZARD 18 1800 ) 16 1600 1 − Muon Collider with several TeV CM energy and with integrated δ4 = 1 14 − 1400 luminosities of the order of several tens of attobarns, could 12 1200 [ab] provide enough events to allow a determination (a SM) quartic σ 10 δ4 =0(SM) 1000 Higgs self-coupling with an accuracy in the tens of percent. 8 800 6 600 Nevents(L=100ab Measuring the quartic Higgs self-coupling at a multi- 4 400 TeV muon collider, M Chiesa et al. 2 200 051015202530 ps [TeV] Figure 2: Expected cross sections (left) and signal event numbers for a reference integrated 1 + luminosity of 100 ab− (right) for µ µ− HHH⌫⌫ versus the c.m. collision energy, for Energy Frontier Workshop - Donatella Lucchesi ! July 20, 2020 5 M⌫⌫¯ > 150GeV. Cross sections for di↵erent assumptions of the trilinear and quartic couplings are presented,⇠ as well as for the SM case, obtained by Whizard (left-hand side) and Mad- Graph5 aMC@NLO (right-hand side). Details on the scenarios are given in the text. switching o↵ λ4 (δ3 =0, δ4 = 1or3 =1, 4 =0).Thee↵ect is an increase, as expected from general arguments on unitarity− cancellation, of production rates of about 20% 30% in the ps range considered here. On the right-hand plot, we show the corresponding− results as obtained from MG5aMC also including two scenarios of interest: the δ = 1, δ = 6 3 ± 4 ± cases, corresponding to relative shift between δ3 and δ4 consistent with an EFT approach, and a scenario δ3 =0, δ4 =+1withnochangeinλ3, yet a 100% increase of λ4.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:1901.06150V1 [Physics.Acc-Ph] 18 Jan 2019
    Input to the European Particle Physics Strategy Update Muon Colliders The Muon Collider Working Group Jean Pierre Delahaye1, Marcella Diemoz2, Ken Long3, Bruno Mansoulié4, Nadia Pastrone5 (chair), Lenny Rivkin6, Daniel Schulte1, Alexander Skrinsky7, Andrea Wulzer1;8 1 CERN, Geneva, Switzerland 2 INFN Sezione di Roma, Roma, Italy 3 Imperial College, London, United Kingdom 4 CEA, IRFU, France 5 INFN Sezione di Torino, Torino, Italy 6 EPFL and PSI, Switzerland 7 BINP, Russia 8 LPTP, EPFL, Switzerland and University of Padova, Italy Muon colliders have a great potential for high-energy physics. They can offer collisions of point-like par- ticles at very high energies, since muons can be accelerated in a ring without limitation from synchrotron radiation. However, the need for high luminosity faces technical challenges which arise from the short muon lifetime at rest and the difficulty of producing large numbers of muons in bunches with small emittance. Addressing these challenges requires the development of innovative concepts and demanding technologies. The document summarizes the work done, the progress achieved and new recent ideas on muon colliders. A set of further studies and actions is also identified to advance in the field. Finally, a set of recommen- dations is listed in order to make the muon technology mature enough to be favourably considered as a candidate for high-energy facilities in the future. arXiv:1901.06150v1 [physics.acc-ph] 18 Jan 2019 Contact: Nadia Pastrone, [email protected] Webpage: https://muoncollider.web.cern.ch 1 1 Introduction The quest for discovery in particle physics has always required experiments at the highest possible en- ergies.
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Colliders Come a Step Closer
    News & views those for particle colliders. For example, a Accelerator physics ‘Higgs factory’ is a highly desirable facility that would produce huge numbers of elementary particles known as Higgs bosons and allow the properties of these particles to be pre- Muon colliders cisely determined. A Higgs factory based on a conventional linear accelerator that collides come a step closer electrons and positrons (the antiparticles of electrons) would have to be 10–20 kilometres 3 Robert D. Ryne long . But one based on a circular muon col- lider would require a circumference of only Particle colliders that use elementary particles called muons about 0.3 km (ref. 4). In another example, if could outperform conventional colliders, while requiring muons could be stored in a racetrack config- much smaller facilities. Muon cooling, a milestone on the road uration that has long, straight sections, the decay of the muons in these sections would to these muon colliders, has now been achieved. See p.53 produce intense neutrino beams. Such a facil- ity, called a neutrino factory, would shed light on the mysteries of neutrinos and on physics “SMASH! Colossal colliders are unlocking the electrons (go.nature.com/3twyjba). This fact beyond the standard model. secrets of the universe.” The cover story of has ramifications for the size, and therefore Before a neutrino factory or a muon collider the 16 April 1990 issue of Time magazine dis- cost, of colliders, and for the energy that can can exist, scientists must learn how to manip- cussed giant particle accelerators, including be reached in their particle collisions (and thus ulate muon beams.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 TARGETRY and PION PRODUCTION
    Chapter 4 TARGETRY AND PION PRODUCTION Contents 4.1 Target and Collection Optimization for Muon Colliders . 149 4.1.1 BasicDescription............................ 149 4.1.2 Target Region Studies . 153 4.1.3 PionandMuonCollection....................... 170 4.1.4 Conclusions............................... 183 4.2 DesignStudiesofCaptureMagnetSystems........... 184 4.2.1 Introduction.............................. 184 4.2.2 TheCaptureSolenoidSystem..................... 184 4.2.3 Water-CooledBitterSolenoidInsert................. 185 4.2.4 Superconducting Outsert Solenoid . 187 4.2.5 TheTransferSolenoidSystem..................... 188 4.1 Target and Collection Optimization for Muon Col- liders 4.1.1 Basic Description To achieve adequate luminosity in a muon collider it is necessary to produce and collect large numbers of muons. The basic method starts with a proton beam impinging on a thick target 149 150 CHAPTER 4. TARGETRY AND PION PRODUCTION (one to two interaction lengths) followed by a long solenoid which collects muons resulting mainly from pion decay. Because of their short lifetime muons must be generated by a single proton pulse for each new acceleration cycle. Production and collection of pions and their decay muons must be optimized while keeping in mind limitations of target integrity and of the technology of magnets and debuncher cavities. Early estimates of muon yield, based on conventional lithium lens and quadrupole magnet collection methods, indicated that roughly 1000 protons are needed for every muon delivered to the collider rings [1]. This results from inherent limitations in the momentum acceptance of these systems (typically less than ±5 percent) which causes most (potential) muons produced to be wasted. Motivated by neutrino beamline experience, a solenoid collection scheme for pions has been suggested [2].
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Collider. a Path to the Future?
    Muon Collider. A Path to the Future? Daniel Schulte∗ CERN, Geneva, Switzerland E-mail: [email protected] Jean-Pierre Delahaye CERN, Geneva, Switzerland Marcella Diemoz INFN, Sezione di Roma, Roma, Italy Ken Long Imperial College London Bruno Mansoulié CEA, IRFU, France Nadia Pastrone INFN, Sezione di Torino, Torino, Italy Lenny Rivkin EPFL and PSI, Switzerland Alexander Skrinsky BINP, Russia Andrea Wulzer CERN, Geneva, Switzerland LPTP, EPFL, Switzerland and University of Padova, Italy A muon collider would be both a precision and a powerful discovery machine, because it can offer collisions of point-like particles at very high energies, strongly exceeding the energy reach of other lepton colliders. It can even match the discovery of a proton collider with much higher energy, since the muon collision energy is fully available at constituent level unlike for the protons. However, the need for high luminosity faces technical challenges which arise from the short muon lifetime at rest and the difficulty of producing large numbers of muons in bunches with small emittance. Addressing these challenges requires the development of innovative concepts and demanding technologies. In view of the potential importance of muon colliders for the future of high-energy physics it is timely to start an R&D programme now. European Physical Society Conference on High Energy Physics - EPS-HEP2019 - 10-17 July, 2019 Ghent, Belgium ∗Speaker. c 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). https://pos.sissa.it/ Muon Collider Daniel Schulte 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 12.2 Muon Colliders [Ref
    12-16 12.2 Muon Colliders [Ref. p. 12-20 12.2 Muon Collider S.D. Holmes, V.D. Shiltsev Both e+e− and µ+µ− colliders have been proposed as possible candidates for a lepton collider to complement and extend the reach of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. The physics program that could be pursued by a new lepton collider (e+e− or μ+μ−) with sufficient luminosity would include understanding the mechanism behind mass generation and electroweak symmetry breaking; searching for, and possibly discovering, supersymmetric particles; and hunting for signs of extra spacetime dimensions and quantum gravity. However, the appropriate energy reach for such a collider is currently unknown, and will only be determined following initial physics results at the LHC. It is entirely possible that such results will indicate that a lepton collider with a collision energy well in excess of 1 TeV will be required to illuminate the physics uncovered at LHC. Such a requirement would require consideration of muons as the lepton of choice for such a collider. The lifetime of the muon, 2 μs in the muon rest frame, is just long enough to allow acceleration to high energy before the muon decays into an electron, a muon-type neutrino and an electron-type antineutrino ( ). However, constructing and operating a muon based collider with useable luminosity requires− surmounting− significant technical challenges associated with the production, capture, cooling, acceleration, → and ̅storage of muons in the required quantities and with appropriate phase space densitites. Over the last decade there has been significant progress in developing the concepts and technologies needed to produce, capture, cool, and accelerate muon beams with high intensities of the order of O (1021) muons/year.
    [Show full text]
  • Positron Driven Muon Source for a Muon Collider: Recent Developments ∗ M.E
    10th Int. Particle Accelerator Conf. IPAC2019, Melbourne, Australia JACoW Publishing ISBN: 978-3-95450-208-0 doi:10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2019-MOZZPLS2 POSITRON DRIVEN MUON SOURCE FOR A MUON COLLIDER: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS ∗ M.E. Biaginiy, M. Antonelli, M. Boscolo, O. R. Blanco-Garcia, A. Ciarma, A. Giribono, S. Guiducci, C. Vaccarezza, A. Variola, INFN-LNF, 00044 Frascati, Italy M. Bauce, F. Collamati, G. Cesarini, R. Li Voti, INFN-Roma1, 00185 Roma, Italy A. Bacci, INFN-MI, 20133 Milano, Italy P. Raimondi, S. Liuzzo, ESRF, 38043 Grenoble, France I. Chaikovska, R. Chehab, IN2P3-LAL, 91440 Orsay, France N. Pastrone, INFN-TO, 10125 Torino, Italy D. Lucchesi, Padova University, 35121 Padova, Italy Abstract and reduce losses. Moreover, one complete cycle must ac- + The design of a future multi-TeV µ collider needs new commodate enough time for the e production and damping, ideas to overcome the technological challenges related to µ in the main Positron Ring (PR) or in a dedicated Damping production, cooling, accumulation and acceleration. In this Ring (DR). Damping time must be compatible with a rea- paper an upgraded layout of a e+ driven µ source, known as sonable amount of synchrotron power emitted, ranging from 10 msec in a 5 GeV DR to 80 msec in a 45 GeV PR. This the Low EMittance Muon Accelerator (LEMMA) concept + developed at INFN-LNF, is presented. In this new scheme time is needed even in case it is possible to recuperate the e the e+ beam, stored in a ring with high energy acceptance bunches “spent” in the µ production which, after interacting and low emittance, is extracted and driven to a multi-target with the targets, are strongly affected and have a degraded system, to produce µ pairs at threshold.
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Collider Design
    Presented at 3rd Int'l Conference on Physics Potential and Development of mu+ mu- Colliders, SLAC-PUB-9921 12/13/1995-12/16/1995, San Francisco, CA, USA acc-phys/9604001 MUON COLLIDER DESIGN R. Palmer1,2, A. Sessler3, A. Skrinsky4, A. Tollestrup5, A. Baltz1, S. Caspi3, P. Chen2, W-H. Cheng3, Y. Cho6, D. Cline7, E. Courant1, R. Fernow1, J. Gallardo1, A. Garren3,7, H. Gordon1, M. Green3, R. Gupta1, A. Hershcovitch1, C. Johnstone5, S. Kahn1, H. Kirk1, T. Kycia1, Y. Lee1, D. Lissauer1, A. Luccio1, A. McInturff3, F. Mills5, N. Mokhov5, G. Morgan1, D. Neuffer5, K-Y. Ng5, R. Noble5, J. Norem6, B. Norum8, K. Oide 9, Z. Parsa1, V. Polychronakos1, M. Popovic5, P. Rehak1, T. Roser1, R. Rossmanith10, R. Scanlan3, L. Schachinger3, G. Silvestrov4, I. Stumer1, D. Summers11, M. Syphers1, H. Takahashi1, Y. Torun1,12, D. Trbojevic1, W. Turner3, A. Van Ginneken5, T. Vsevolozhskaya4, R. Weggel13, E. Willen1, W. Willis1,14, D. Winn15, J. Wurtele16, Y. Zhao1 1) Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973-5000, USA 2) Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford, CA 94309, USA 3) Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 4) BINP, RU-630090 Novosibirsk, Russia 5) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL 60510, USA 6) Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439-4815, USA 7) Center for Advanced Accelerators, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1547,USA 8) University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22901, USA 9) KEK, Tsukuba-shi, Ibaraki-Ken 305, Japan 10) DESY, Hamburg, Germany 11) University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS 38677, USA 12) SUNY, Stony Brook, NY 11974, USA 13) Francis Bitter National Magnet Laboratory, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA 14) Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA 15) Fairfield University, Fairfield, CT 06430-5195, USA 16) UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-7300, USA Work supported in part by Department of Energy Contract DE-AC03-76SF00515 Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94309, USA 2 Abstract.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 ABSTRACT PHYSICS VALIDATION STUDIES for MUON COLLIDER DETECTOR BACKGROUND SIMULATIONS Aaron Owen Morris, M.S. Department of Ph
    1 ABSTRACT PHYSICS VALIDATION STUDIES FOR MUON COLLIDER DETECTOR BACKGROUND SIMULATIONS Aaron Owen Morris, M.S. Department of Physics Northern Illinois University, 2011 David Hedin, Director Muon colliders are under consideration as a possible important future energy- frontier accelerator. A muon collider could be built as a circular accelerator into the TeV energy range as a result of the reduced synchrotron radiation expected from the larger rest mass of muons. Unlike existing lepton (electron/positron) colliders, muons decay with a 2.2 µs lifetime. These decays will produce very energetic electrons off of the beam reference orbit which can generate detector backgrounds that can affect the physics. The main backgrounds include electrons from muon decays, synchrotron radiation from the decay electrons, hadrons produced by photonuclear interactions, coherent and incoherent beam-beam pair-production, and Bethe-Heitler muon production. We will discuss simulation results in terms of observed physics processes in G4beamline. i NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNVIERSITY DE KALB, ILLINOIS 2011 PHYSICS VALIDATION STUDIES FOR MUON COLLIDER DETECTOR BACKGROUND SIMULATIONS BY AARON OWEN MORRIS © 2011 Aaron Owen Morris A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS Thesis Director: David Hedin, Ph.D. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank the many people who made this research possible. I would especially like to thank my advisor, David Hedin, for getting me on this project. Likewise, I would like to thank my collaborators Steve Kahn, Mary Anne Cummings, and Tom Roberts at Muons, Inc. and Joseph Kozminski at Lewis University and Chason Zacher at NIU.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Challenges and Scientific Payoffs of Muon Beam Accelerators for Particle Physics
    4P-2-02 1 Technical Challenges and Scientific Payoffs of Muon Beam Accelerators for Particle Physics Michael S. Zisman trend started with electrostatic accelerators (Cockcroft-Walton Abstract—Progress in particle physics has largely been and van de Graaff devices) and continued with cyclotrons, determined by development of more capable particle synchrocyclotrons, synchrotrons, and most recently colliders accelerators. This trend continues today with the recent advent of (both circular and linear). Advances in accelerator high-luminosity electron-positron colliders at KEK and SLAC performance come only with corresponding advances in operating as “B factories,” the imminent commissioning of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, and the worldwide accelerator technology, including magnets, vacuum systems, development effort toward the International Linear Collider. RF systems, feedback systems, diagnostic systems, etc. Looking to the future, one of the most promising approaches is In the early days of accelerators, building the accelerator the development of muon-beam accelerators. Such machines have and building the detectors were not considered separate tasks, very high scientific potential, and would substantially advance that is, such activities were simply part of preparing the the state-of-the-art in accelerator design. A 20–50 GeV muon experiment. Modern accelerators—and their technical storage ring could serve as a copious source of well-characterized electron neutrinos or antineutrinos (a Neutrino Factory), subsystems—require a high degree of specialization, and providing beams aimed at detectors located 3000–7500 km from experts in all aspects are needed. the ring. Such long baseline experiments are expected to be able to observe and characterize the phenomenon of charge- II.
    [Show full text]
  • Backgrounds and Detector Issues at a Muon Collider 
    Backgrounds and Detector Issues at a Muon Collider S. Geer Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia, Il 60510 ABSTRACT environment (maybe it can't !). This second problem was con- sidered in Refs. [3, 4], was subsequently the subject of a working Backgrounds arising from muon decay at a 4 TeV muon col- sub-group [5] at Snowmass, and is the subject of this paper. lider are summarized, and some implicationsfor a muon collider In the following we consider a 2+2 TeV muon collider with detector are discussed. Ideas on how to cope with the signi®cant 12 10 two bunches of 2 muons per bunch, a luminosity of background levels are also described. 35 2 1 ? =3 10 cm s , mm, and a beam-beam interaction re- gion 3 mm long and 3 m radial rms. The time between bunch- I. INTRODUCTION bunch crossings is about 10 s. In Section II a summary of our current understanding of the background ¯uxes is presented. In The physics case for a multi-TeV lepton collider has been ex- Section III some general detector considerations are discussed. tensively studied [1]. It is generally believed that new physics Sections IV and V discuss the background implications for ver- associated with electroweak symmetry breaking will manifest it- tex and outer tracking detectors, together with some ideas for self at or below the few TeV scale. If this new physics gives rise trackers that have been discussed at Snowmass and are worthy of to new particles (e.g. SUSY,technicolor, extended gauge groups further consideration.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics Opportunities for the Fermilab Booster Replacement
    FNAL Pub No. goes here Physics Opportunities for the Fermilab Booster Replacement John Arrington,1 Joshua Barrow,2 Brian Batell,3 Robert Bernstein,4 S. J. Brice,4 Ray Culbertson,4 Patrick deNiverville,5 Jeff Eldred,4 Angela Fava,4 Laura Fields,6 Alex 7 4 8 4, 4, 9 Friedland, Andrei Gaponenko, Stefania Gori, Roni Harnik, ∗ Richard J Hill, Daniel M. Kaplan,10 Kevin J. Kelly,4 Tom Kobilarcik,4 Gordan Krnjaic,4 Gabriel Lee,11, 12, 13 B. R. Littlejohn,10 W. C. Louis,5 Pedro Machado,4 William M. Morse,14 David Neuffer,4 Zarko Pavlovic,4 William Pellico,4 Ryan Plestid,4, 9 Maxim Pospelov,15 Eric Prebys,16 Yannis K. Semertzidis,17, 18 M. H. Shaevitz,19 P. Snopok,10 Rex Tayloe,20 R. T. Thornton,5 Oleksandr Tomalak,4, 9 M. Toups,4 Nhan Tran,4 Richard Van de Water,5 Katsuya Yonehara,4 Jacob Zettlemoyer,4 Yi-Ming Zhong,21 Robert Zwaska,4 and Anna Mazzacane4 1Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA 2The University of Tennessee at Knoxville, Department of Physics and Astronomy, 1408 Circle Drive, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA 3University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 4Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL, 60510, USA 5Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545 6Notre Dame 7SLAC 8Department of Physics and Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA 9University of Kentucky, KY, 40506, USA 10Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616, USA 11Department of Physics, LEPP, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA 12Department of Physics, Korea
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Collider Design R
    DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi• bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer• ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom• mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. MUON COLLIDER DESIGN R. Palmer1'2, A. Sessler3, A. Skrinsky4, A. ToUestrup5, A. Baltz1, S. Caspi3, P. Chen2, W-H. Cheng3, Y. Cho6, D. Cline7, E. Courant1, R. Fernow1, J. Gallardo1, A. Garren3'7, H. Gordon1, M. Green3, R. Gupta1, A. Hershcovitch1, C. Johnstone5, S. Kahn1, H. Kirk1, T. Kycia1, Y. Lee1, D. Lissauer1, A. Luccio1, A. Mclnturfl3, F. Mills5, N. Mokhov5, G. Morgan1, D. Neuffer5'8, K-Y. Ng5, R. Noble5, J. Norem6, B. Norum9, K. Oide 10, Z. Parsa1, V. Polychronakos1, M. Popovic5, P. Rehak1, T. Roser1, R. Rossmanith11, R. Scanlan3, L. Schachinger3, G. Silvestrov4,1. Stumer1, D. Summers12, M. Syphers1, H. Takahashi1, Y. Torun1'13, D. Trbojevic1, W. Turner3, A. Van Ginneken5, T. Vsevolozhskaya4, R. Weggel14, E. Willen1, W. Willis1-15, D.
    [Show full text]