DOCSLIB.ORG

Searches for Double Beta Decay the Allure of Ultra-Sensitive Experiments Carter Hall, Univ

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Searches for Double Beta Decay the Allure of Ultra-Sensitive Experiments Carter Hall, Univ Searches for Double Beta Decay The Allure of Ultra-Sensitive Experiments Carter Hall, Univ. of Maryland - February 18, 2014! Outline • The Majorana/Dirac question • Is neutrino mass an example of beyond-standard-model physics? • Double beta decay as a Majorana/Dirac discriminant • Experimental techniques and challenges • Current status of experimental efforts Spin 1/2 mass spectrum 1st 2nd 3rd TeV Higgs! t b GeV c τ s 5 µ ~10 d MeV u e Fermion Mass Fermion keV ~105 eV at least one neutrino meV Charged fermions masses are due to interactions with the Higgs top quark: H H H H tL tL tL tL tL t t tR R R tR tR H H H H H mass term H electron - - e L - e R e R H Dirac mass term: conserves charge (e- →e-) Spin 1/2 mass spectrum 1st 2nd 3rd TeV t b GeV c τ s 5 µ ~10 d MeV u e Fermion Mass Fermion keV ~105 eV at least one neutrino meV Higgs? Types of Neutrino mass terms Dirac Neutrino Mass Standard model X ν Higgs creates only νR L Conserves Dirac masses! lepton number Majorana Mass 1 X ν νR L violates conservation of lepton number Majorana Mass 2 Neutrinos could, X νR νL in principle, have more than one mass term. What if neutrinos have two mass terms? Dirac Mass Dirac Mass (Higgs?) (Higgs?) X X νL ν νR R X νL Majorana Mass (New physics) Majorana ν νL Neutrino R Mass If neutrinos have more than one mass term, then they are Majorana particles. OR A Dirac neutrino is a special case where both Majorana mass terms are exactly zero. See-saw mechanism generated by the Higgs Suppose m(ν)Dirac ~ 100 GeV, like the top quark 15 and m(ν)Majorana ~ 10 GeV generated by some type of new physics at the Grand Unification energy scale Then we would observe two Majorana neutrinos, m2 D −2 like atmospheric oscillations with m1 ≈ ≈10 eV ν M GUT m2 ≈ M GUT too large to be seen directly M.Gellman, R.Slanksy, P.Ramond, R.Mohapatra, G.Senjanovic Spin 1/2 mass spectrum 1st 2nd 3rd TeV t b c τ GeV s µ d Higgs MeV u e Are neutrino masses Fermion Mass Fermion suppressed by grand keV unification physics? eV at least one neutrino meV Are neutrino masses Dirac or Majorana? Is the neutrino its own anti-particle? Question: Is neutrino mass a clear case of new physics? Or can it be accommodated in the standard model? What does a ‘standard model neutrino mass’ look like? 1. It should be due to the Higgs mechanism, which implies a Dirac neutrino: X νL νR mD X ν νL R mD • Note that we require the existence of νR and νL. These states are unusual: unlike all other SM particles, they have no gauge interactions…. they are “sterile”. • We do not yet have definitive evidence for their existence. Question: Is neutrino mass a clear case of new physics? Or can it be accommodated in the standard model? 2. Having introduced νR and νL, what prevents the appearance of Majorana mass terms? For example, what prevents this? X ν νR L MR – In QFT, ‘that which is not forbidden is mandatory’. – If we wish to maintain a Dirac neutrino, we should impose a global symmetry to enforce lepton number conservation and prevent the appearance of Majorana neutrino masses. – Lepton number conservation is fundamentally different than the conservation of color and electric charge. Those conservation laws are a consequence of the standard model’s gauge symmetries. Lepton number conservation has no comparable theoretical or experimental foundation. Question: Is neutrino mass a clear case of new physics? Or can it be accommodated in the standard model? 3. Summary: To accommodate neutrino mass in the standard model, we 1. introduced two new states (νR and νL), and 2. altered the symmetry structure of the theory. – Many people would say that these two features alone are sufficient to qualify as non-standard model physics. – Secondly, we would still like to have an explanation for why the Higgs couplings of the neutrinos are so small. – Conversely, if we allow for a new-physics mechanism at very high energies to generate Majorana mass terms, then the light neutrino masses are a generic consequence, which is appealing. – To distinguish these scenarios, we must determine if neutrinos are Dirac or Majorana. Use nuclear physics to test lepton number conservation in neutrinos: beta decay e - acts a neutrino source L Majorana neutrino? W-W- n ν p Inside a nucleus Use nuclear physics to test lepton number conservation in neutrinos: eL- Majorana neutrino? W-W- 2n eL- ν W- Inside a nucleus 2p second vertex acts as the detector Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay (ββ0ν) Forbidden if neutrino mass is Dirac only eL- N(Z,A)→N(Z+2,A)e-e- Majorana neutrino W-W- 2n e - ν L X m(ν) W- Forbidden Inside a nucleus by lepton number conservation if neutrinos are Dirac. “Neutrino mass 2p mechanism” for double beta decay The equivalent HEP process is e-e-→W-W- Imagine a 1 TeV e-e- collider must not carry Need both νL and νR, lepton number so νe must be massive If TeV scale Majorana neutrinos exist, this process could be used to discover them. For the light neutrinos that we know and love, the rate is far too small. 16 The ββ0ν half-life depends directly on the absolute neutrino masses Decay rate −1 2 2 i T 0νββ G0νββ NME m , m U 2 m e αi ( 1/ 2 ) = ⋅ ⋅ ν ν = ∑ ei i i effective mass Majorana mixing matrix phases phase space Nuclear Matrix (with phases) Element mass eigenvalues We can use the ββ0ν decay rate to measure the absolute neutrino mass if: 1) neutrinos are Majorana 2) we have a reliable calculation of the nuclear matrix element 3) the neutrino mass mechanism dominates the decay Many types of new physics lead to ββ0ν Right handed weak currents, leptoquarks, supersymmetry, ect., d u W- e- h-- W- e- d u “Doubly charged Higgs mechanism” for double beta decay Does this spoil neutrino-physics interpretations of ββ0ν ? 18 Black box theorem guarantees that ββ0ν always implies Majorana ν’s Anything that converts ν into ν implies that neutrinos are Majorana ν ν If we see ββ0ν, we know that Majorana neutrinos exist. Neutrino mass spectrum 48.5 ± 1.2 meV 8.71 ± 0.15 meV Comparison of ν mass techniques ββ0ν vs cosmology 1 EXO, KamLAND, ) ν 0 Gerda ββ 10-1 inverted hierarchy CMB ) – eV – ( ) – eV ββ (Planck + -2 m( 10 WMAP+ normal hierarchy high L) Σm - eV – (cosmology) 21 Adapted from G.L Fogli, et al, PRD 78 033010 (2008) Two-Neutrino Double Beta Decay: eL- W-W- 2n eL- νR Two neutrons convert to two protons and four leptons. W- νR First direct observation by Moe, Elliott, and Hahn 2p in 100Se (1988) No direct implications for neutrino mass, but useful for constraining and testing the nuclear matrix element calculations ββ0ν signature: a peak in the ββ energy spectrum ββ2ν spectrum (normalized to 1) 0νββ peak (5% FWHM) (normalized to 10-6) ββ0ν signal (5% FWHM) (normalized to 10-2) Summed electron energy in units of the kinematic endpoint (Q) Choice of ββ source isotope atomic mass atomic decay energy number of protons Choice of ββ source isotope Isotope Q value Abundance centrifuge (MeV) (%) enrichment? 48Ca 4.271 0.187 No 76Ge 2.039 7.8 Yes 82Se 2.995 9.2 Yes 96Zr 3.350 2.8 No 100Mo 3.034 9.6 Yes 110Pd 2.013 11.8 116Cd 2.802 7.5 Yes 124Sn 2.228 5.64 130Te 2.533 34.5 Yes 136Xe 2.457 8.9 Yes 150Nd 3.367 5.6 No Q values and natural abundance 5 4.5 48Ca Better Better 4 3.5 150Nd 96Zr 100Mo 3 82Se 116Cd Q value (MeV) 130Te 2.5 136Xe 124Sn 110Pd 2 76Ge 1.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 natural abundance (%) Better 26 27 Neutrino mass sensitivity for T1/2 = 10 years −1 2 T 0νββ G0νββ NME 2 m ( 1/2 ) = ⋅ ⋅ ν From P. Vogel, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 39 (2012) Radioactive backgrounds: Nuclide half lives “Stable”: ~1015 years “Peninsula ββ0ν halflife is 1010 times longer of stability” half-life comparable to age of the earth half-life short compared to age of the earth Peninsula of Stability Uranium-235 Curium-247 Plutonium-244 Thorium-232 Uranium-238 Uranium-238 decay chain start Thorium-232 decay chain start gamma sources end end Radioactive decay here on earth 76 136Xe Ge 130Te 116Cd 82Se ββ0ν Q values: 100Mo 150Nd 48Ca Source: http://npgroup.pd.infn.it/luna/images/background.jpg Double beta decay frustration theorem Gamma interaction cross section typical ββ Q values gammas travel about 2 cm before scattering in lead Lead shielding Historical progress T1/2 limit - 0ν decay 1026 1025 1024 1023 Years 1022 1021 1020 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Publication Date Historical progress m(ν) limit 102 76Ge 136Xe 130 10 Te 100Mo eV 1 -1 10 NME: RQRPA, Phys.Rev.C 79, 055501 (2009) 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Publication Date Germanium Diode Experiments Heidelberg-Moscow and IGEX 2-3 kg Ge diodes, 80% 76Ge Lead shielding Cu cryostats • Precise energy resolution (4 keV FWHM). • Pulse shape analysis rejects multiple site events within a single crystal. • Modest Q value (2039 keV) 76Ge: Heidelberg-Moscow Full spectrum ROI closeup 25 T1/2(ββ0ν) > 1.9 x 10 yrs (90%C.L.) mββ < 350 meV Exposure: 709 mol*years Eur.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Messenger
    THE MESSENGER No. 35-March 1984 Report on the First ESO-CERN Symposium on "Large Scale Structure of the Universe, Cosmology and Fundamental Physics" G. Setti, ESO The first ESO-CERN Symposium was held at CERN, deuterium, were produced when the age of the Universe was Geneva, from 21 st to 25th November 1983 and was attended only about 100 seconds, the temperature about one billion by approximately 200 participants. The discussions concen­ degrees and the density of the order of the density of water, in trated on the general field of Cosmology, where the progress a phase that lasted about 8 minutes. At that moment the made in the past twenty years, both in elementary particles Universe was essentially a gaseous mixture composed of and astronomy, has shown that these two fields of basic protons, neutrons, electrons, positrons, neutrinos and anti­ research are merging toward a new and fundamental under­ neutrinos (and perhaps some other exotic particles, such as standing of the laws that govern our Universe. A detailed photinos) immersed in a heat bath of photons. The equilibrium account is contained in the Proceedings of the Symposium between these components is maintained by the weak which will be available in a few months. interaction, one of the four fundamental forces wh ich are The meeting was started with an introductory lecture by believed to govern all natural phenomena.* The weak force D. W. Sciama (Oxford and Trieste) who highlighted the numer­ together with the "hot big-bang" model allows definite predic­ ous and fundamental problems the understanding of which tions about the abundances of primordial elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Extending Symmetries of the Standard Model Towards Grand Unification
    Master research Extending Symmetries of the Standard Model towards Grand Unification Anno Touwen Supervisor prof. dr. Dani¨el Boer August 3, 2018 Abstract In this master thesis the spacetime, global and gauge symmetries of the Standard Model are reviewed. These symmetries are used as a basis for finding possible extensions of this successful model, such as the two Higgs doublet model and Left-Right model. Methods of finding subgroups and the slitting up of representations are discussed based on Dynkin diagrams. These methods are applied to analyse the subgroups of the exceptional group E6 as candidates for Grand Unified 3 Theory groups. In this study SU(5), SO(10) and SU(3) and SU(4)×SU(2)×SU(2) are most important. A phenomenological comparison between these models is given focussed on the different types of leptoquarks that could be responsible for the not yet observed proton decay. Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Symmetry groups and Gauge theories 5 2.1 Group theory . .5 2.2 Unitary and Special Unitary groups . .8 2.3 Orthogonal and Special Orthogonal groups . 10 2.4 Gauge theories and fields . 11 2.5 Spacetime symmetries . 13 2.6 C, P and T transformations . 14 3 The Standard Model 16 3.1 The Electroweak interaction . 16 3.2 The Strong interaction . 19 3.3 Fermion content . 19 3.4 Eigenstates and the CKM-matrix . 22 3.5 Global symmetries . 23 4 Beyond the Standard Model 28 4.1 Two Higgs doublet model . 28 4.2 Left-Right models . 34 5 A further study of Lie Groups and Algebras 37 5.1 Root systems .
    [Show full text]
  • Anomaly and Cobordism Constraints Beyond the Standard Model
    Anomaly and Cobordism Constraints Beyond the Standard Model: Topological Force Juven Wang Center of Mathematical Sciences and Applications, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA Abstract Standard lore uses perturbative local anomalies to check the kinematic consistency of gauge theories coupled to chiral fermions, such as the Standard Models (SM) of particle physics. In this work, based on a systematic cobordism classification, we examine the constraints from invertible quantum anomalies (including all perturbative local anomalies and all nonperturbative global anomalies) for SM and chiral gauge theories. We also clarify the different uses of these anomalies: including (1) anomaly cancellations of dynamical gauge fields, (2) ’t Hooft anomaly matching conditions of background fields of global symmetries. We apply several 4d anomaly constraints of Z16, Z4, and Z2 classes, beyond the familiar Feynman-graph perturbative Z class local anomalies. As an application, for SU(3)×SU(2)×U(1) Zq SM (with q = 1; 2; 3; 6) and SU(5) Grand Unification with 15n chiral Weyl fermions and with a discrete baryon minus lepton number X = 5(B L) 4Y preserved, we discover a new hidden gapped sector previously unknown to the SM and− Georgi-Glashow− model. The gapped sector at low energy contains either (1) 4d non-invertible topological quantum field theory (TQFT, above the energy gap with heavy fractionalized anyon excitations from 1d particle worldline and 2d string worldsheet, inaccessible directly from Dirac or Majorana mass gap of the 16th Weyl fermions [i.e., right-handed neutrinos], but accessible via a topological quantum phase transition), or (2) 5d invertible TQFT in extra dimensions.
    [Show full text]
  • Searching for New Physics with Ultrahigh Energy Cosmic Rays
    Searching for New Physics with Ultrahigh Energy Cosmic Rays Floyd W Steckert Astrophysics Science Division NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA Sean T Scully Dept. of Physics and Astronomy James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA 22807, USA Abstract. Ultrahigh energy cosmic rays that produce giant extensive showers of charged particles and photons when they interact in the Earth’s atmosphere provide a unique tool to search for new physics. Of particular interest is the possibility of detecting a very small violation of Lorentz invariance such as may be related to the structure of space-time near the Planck scale of — 10 -35m. We discuss here the possible signature of Lorentz invariance violation on the spectrum of ultrahigh energy cosmic rays as compared with present observations of giant air showers. We also discuss the possibilities of using more sensitive detection techniques to improve searches for Lorentz invariance violation in the future. Using the latest data from 23 , the Pierre Auger Observatory, we derive a best fit to the LIV parameter of 3 .0±3:0 x 10- corresponding to an upper limit of 4.5 x 10-23 at a proton Lorentz factor of — 2 x 10 11 . This result has fundamental implications for quantum gravity models. 1. Introduction 1.1. Why Test Fundamental Physics at Ultrahigh Energies? Owing to the uncertainty principle, it has long been realized that the higher the particle energy attained, the smaller the scale of physics that can be probed. Thus, optical, UV and X-ray observations led to the understanding of the structure of the atom, -y-ray observations led to an understanding of the structure of the atomic nucleus, and deep inelastic scattering experiments with high energy electrons led to an understanding of the structure of the proton.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond the Standard Model
    Beyond the Standard Model V. Hedberg Beyond the Standard Model 1 The Standard Model What is the standard model ? The standard model describes the electromagnetic, strong and weak interactions. It is based on the principle of gauge invariance. The model has lots of free parameters: lepton and quark masses, coupling constants, quark and neutrino mixing parameters, W, Z and H masses... H It uses a basic set of fermions and gauge bosons: W Z g V. Hedberg Beyond the Standard Model 2 The Standard Model The Standard Model agrees very well with all experimental data. The model has been tested down to 10-18 m. It has been tested to a precision better than 0.1% . Problems with the standard model: Does the Higgs exist ? If neutrinos have mass, are there right-handed neutrinos ? Why are there 3 generations ? What about gravity ? V. Hedberg Beyond the Standard Model 3 The Standard Model Why are the masses so different (the hierarchy problem) ? Can the strong and electroweak interaction be described by a unified theory ? What happened with the anti-matter in the Big Bang ? What is dark matter ? What is dark energy ? V. Hedberg Beyond the Standard Model 4 Grand Unified Theories (GUTs) The Georgi-Glashow model Weak and electromagnetic interactions are unified, why not to add the strong one ? g2 g 2 s ’ W W= =8 =8 W We know that coupling 4 4 g’2 g 2 constants are not truely ’ = =8 Z =8 Z 4 4 Z constant but that they g 2 = s depend on energy (or Q2) ’ s 4 W g 2 in the interaction.
    [Show full text]
  • Looking for the God Particle at the Large Hadron Collider Mary Beth De Repentigny
    Papers Looking for the God Particle at the Large Hadron Collider Mary Beth De Repentigny The Large Hadron Collider at CERN is scheduled to begin colliding protons in October of this year. Two of its main goals are to look for both the Standard Model’s Higgs particle and supersymmetry’s sparticles. An objective overview of these theories, along with string theory, reveals the precarious balancing act that high-energy physics is in because of theorists’ attempts to explain away fine-tuning which points to an intelligent designer. Ironically, their foundational theory is rooted in a faith in very large numbers that they hope will cancel out impossible odds. n the autumn of 1993, a vote came before the United 11,000 loops per second around the circle, reaching a speed IStates Congress to continue funding construction of the to within 10 km per hour of the speed of light, making Superconducting Super Collider near Waxahachie, Texas. 50 million collisions within a second. Powerful particle It was to be a machine that would produce 40 trillion detectors will register the direction and energy of the electron-volts (TeV) of energy, twenty times the total resultant particle debris and collect a full DVD’s worth of energy of the Tevatron near Chicago, which was, at the data every five seconds. According to current schedule, the time the highest-energy particle accelerator in the world. first beam of protons will circulate through the entire LHC Although two billion dollars had already been poured on September 10, 2008. The first collisions will occur after into the project, and 22 km of the total 87 km tunnel had its official unveiling on October 21, 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Predictive Physics of Inflation and Grand Unification for and from the CMB Observations
    Contribution Prospectives IN2P3 2020 Predictive Physics of Inflation and Grand Unification for and from the CMB observations Principal Author: Name: Norma G. SANCHEZ Institution: CNRS LERMA OP-PSL SU Email: [email protected] Phone: 06 08 34 09 38 Abstract : Inflation is today part of the Standard Model of the Universe supported by the cosmic microwave background (CMB), large scale structure (LSS) and other precision cosmological data. It solves the horizon and flatness problems and naturally generates the density fluctuations that seed LSS, CMB anisotropies, and tensor perturbations (primordial gravitational waves of quantum origin: the primordial gravitons). Inflation is based on a scalar field ϕ (the inflaton) whose potential is fairly flat leading to a slow-roll evolution. This white paper to the IN2P3 prospective focuses on the following, realistic and timely situations of inflation in connection with the CMB, gravitational and particle physics, adding inter- disciplinarity and unification values within a strongly predictive physical approach. The formulation of inflation in the Ginsburg-Landau approach clarifies and places inflation in the setting of the effective field theories of particle physics. In addition, it sets up a clean way to directly confront the inflationary predictions with the available and forthcoming CMB data and select a definitive model. In the effective theory of inflation `a la Ginsburg-Landau the inflaton potential is a polynomial in the field ϕ, highlighting and capturing the relevant scales of the 4 problem with a universal form V (ϕ) = N M w(ϕ/[√N MPl]), where M ≪ MPl is the scale of inflation and N ∼ 60 is the number of Inflation efolds, (MPl is the Planck scale).The slow-roll expansion thus becomes a systematic 1/N expansion and the inflaton couplings become 2 naturally small as powers of the ratio (M/MPl) .
    [Show full text]
  • Freya Blekman
    Application Form Odysseus-programme Part A: Administrative Details and Project Summary Administrative Details of Applicant Family Name Blekman Birth Family Name First Name (s) Freya Male Gender Female x Date of Birth (16/11/1974) 1st Nationality Dutch 2nd Nationality Country of Residence Switzerland Country of Birth Netherlands Contact address Street Name and number Rue de Lausanne 87 PO Box Postal Code 1202 Cedex Town Genève Country Switzerland Phone 1 +41 765467148 Phone 2 Fax e-mail Freyaf [email protected] Qualifications University degree Date of award (DD/MM/YYYY) 09/02/2000 Doctorate Date of award (DD/MM/YYYY) 01/04/2005 Full-time postdoctoral experience Number of months In Oct 2008: 43 months Place of activity (previous 5 years) From 2000 To 2005 Country 60 % Netherlands, 40% United States From 2005 To 2007 Country United Kingdom From 2007 To Now Country United States and Switzerland Proposed start date of the Award (01/10/2009) Choose Odysseus Group I project Odysseus Group II project Administrative Details of Host Institution Name of host institution Name of research unit/department Local co-promotor Legal address Street Name and Number Postal Code Town Country Phone 1 Phone 2 Fax Web site Part A: Administrative Details and Project Summary Project Summary Project title (maximum 100 characters) New physics at the Energy Frontier: Supersymmetry search at the Compact Muon Solenoid Project summary (maximum 300 words) At the presently accessible energies, elementary particle interactions are well described by the Standard Model. The Standard Model however has some fundamental limitations, and is expected to be no longer valid at energies that are easily accessed by the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) when it starts operation in 2009 The LHC will collide protons at a centre-of-mass energy of 14 TeV, which is a factor 7 higher than Tevatron, the most powerful accelerator in operation Today.
    [Show full text]
  • The Creation of the Universe and the Monopole String of Paul Dirac for the Magnetic Monopoles of T’Hooft-Polyakov
    The Creation of the Universe and the Monopole String of Paul Dirac for the Magnetic Monopoles of t’Hooft-Polyakov Tony Bermanseder Abstract The Dirac quantization condition and its relationship to the electromagnetic finestructure constant alpha is derived from the initial boundary conditions of the Quantum Big Bang Singularity (QBBS). The QBBS is shown to form a 2/11-dimensional mirror membrane as a 1- dimensional Dirac string relating timespace of a string-membrane epoch preceding the QBBS to the spacetime following the creation event. The Dirac monopole then transforms as a point particle into a space extended elementary particle known as the classical electron and is electro charge coupled as an electropole to the magneto charge of a magnetopole. The electron as a point particle of QFT and QED so becomes the monopolar form of the Dirac monopole as the Dirac electron, but coupled to the elementary quantum geometric templates of the scalar Higgs boson with a dark matter particle defined as a RMP or Restmass Photon. The space occupying classical electron is shown to oscillate on the fermi scale of the nuclear interactions of colour charge asymptotic gluon-quark confinement, with the ground state for the electron defining the wormhole singularity of the QBBS in spacetime as the fifth transformation of superstring classes (heterotic class 64) from the timespace era. The Dirac string so manifests as a membrane-mirror for a 4-dimensional spacetime embedded within a 5-dimensional spacetime and descriptive for a 3-dimensional surface embedded as volumar within a higher dimensional cosmology, described in the properties of a Möbian-Klein Bottle geometric connectivity for a one-sided manifold becoming two-sided in the original form of the Dirac string as a one-dimensional mathematical singularity mirroring itself in the monopolar string self-duality of a multidimensional holographic cosmology.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthropic Principle's Predicting Symmetric Distribution Matter Strata, Their Physics Laws, and Verifications
    Hindawi Advances in Astronomy Volume 2019, Article ID 2501417, 16 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/2501417 Research Article Anthropic Principle’s Predicting Symmetric Distribution Matter Strata, Their Physics Laws, and Verifications Changyu Huang 1,2 and Yong-Chang Huang 3,4 1 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Road, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 2Department of Physics and Astronomy, Purdue University, 525 Northwestern Avenue, W. Lafayette, IN 47907-2036, USA 3Institute of Teoretical Physics, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China 4Institute of Teoretical Physics, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang 330022, China Correspondence should be addressed to Changyu Huang; [email protected] and Yong-Chang Huang; [email protected] Received 15 September 2018; Accepted 5 December 2018; Published 18 March 2019 Guest Editor: Pradyumn K. Sahoo Copyright © 2019 Changyu Huang and Yong-Chang Huang. Tis is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Tis paper shows anthropic principle’s predicting symmetric distribution matter strata, their physics laws, and verifcations, concretely deduces characteristic time, energy, and temperature expressions at diferent scales, discovers four interesting invariant quantities, shows homeomorphic theorem of space map, and naturally presents a supersymmetric scale energy. We further discover that any infnitesimal space has the same proportional structure space; namely, they have renormalization group invariance. �ℎ �ℎ �ℎ Consequently, this paper shows that the region of any n level Plank-scope is from the n level Planck scale to the (n+1) level �ℎ �ℎ Planck scale, where the diferent matters of the n level Planck scale build up the (n +1) level Planck scale matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Matter, Energy, Space and Time: the Case for the Linear Collider
    Understanding Matter, Energy, Space and Time: The Case for the Linear Collider A summary of the scientific case for the e+ e− Linear Collider, representing a broad consensus of the particle physics community. April 2003 1 Understanding Matter, Energy, Space and Time: + − The Case for the e+e− Linear Collider Over the past century, physicists have sought to explain the character of the matter and energy in our universe, to show how the basic forces of nature and the building blocks of matter come about, and to explore the fabric of space and time. In the past three decades, experiments at laboratories around the world have given us a descriptive framework called the standard model. These particle physics advances make a direct impact upon our understanding of the structure of the universe, both at its inception in the Big Bang, and in its evolution to the present and future. The final synthesis is not yet fully clear, but we know with confidence that major discoveries expanding the standard model paradigm will occur at the next generation of accelerators. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) being built at CERN will take us into the discovery realm. The proposed e+e− Linear Collider (LC) will extend the discoveries and provide a wealth of measurements that are essential for giving deeper understanding of their meaning, and pointing the way to further evolution of particle physics in the future. A world-wide consensus has formed for a baseline LC project in which positrons (e+) collide with electrons (e−) at energies up to 500 GeV, with luminosity (the measure of the collision rate) above 1034 cm-2s-1.
    [Show full text]
  • Nusag Recommendations On
    Recommendations to the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation on a U.S. Program of Reactor- and Accelerator-based Neutrino Oscillation Experiments Report to the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel and the Nuclear Science Advisory Committee Submitted by the Neutrino Scientific Assessment Group February 28, 2006 1 Contents 1 An experimental program in neutrino oscillations.............................................. 3 2 The science of neutrino oscillation ..................................................................... 4 2.1 The goals..................................................................................................... 4 2.2 What we have learned so far....................................................................... 5 2.3 The importance of the open questions ........................................................ 6 2.4 How the questions can be answered ........................................................... 8 3 NuSAG and the process leading to this report.................................................. 11 4 The experiments................................................................................................ 13 4.1 Accelerator experiments ........................................................................... 13 4.2 Reactor experiments.................................................................................. 18 5 Conclusions....................................................................................................... 24 5.1 Global Conclusions..................................................................................
    [Show full text]