DOCSLIB.ORG

Neutrino Interactions in SN and in the Laboratory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Neutrino Interactions in SN and in the Laboratory Neutrino interactions in SN and in the laboratory Chuck Horowitz, [email protected], INT, Feb. 2020 2020 TALENT Courses - The TALENT initiative, Training in Advanced Low Energy Nuclear Theory, aims at providing an advanced and comprehensive training to graduate students and young researchers in all aspects of low-energy nuclear theory. TALENT offers intensive three-week courses on a rotating set of topics. See http://www.nucleartalent.org - Three TALENT courses will be offered in 2020: - Atomic Nuclei as Open Quantum Systems: Unifying Nuclear Structure and Reactions will be held at the INT in Seattle, WA, USA from June 22 to July 10, 2020. The principal lecturers will be Christian Forssén (Chalmers), Witek Nazarewicz (MSU), Marek Ploszajczak (GANIL), and Alexander Volya (FSU). https:// nucleartalent.github.io/NuclearOQS2020/ - Density Functional Theory and Self-Consistent Methods will be held at LBNL, in Berkeley, CA, USA from July 6 to July 24, 2020. The principal instructors will be Nicolas Schunck (LLNL), Michael Forbes (WSU), Heiko Hergert (MSU), and Tomás Rodríguez (Univ. Autonoma de Madrid). https://indico.frib.msu.edu/event/32/ - Machine Learning and Data Analysis for Nuclear Physics will be held at the ECT* in Trento, Italy The from June 22 to July 10, 2020. The principal instructors will be Daniel Bazin (MSU), Morten Hjorth-Jensen (MSU), Michelle Kuchera (Davidson), Sean Liddick (NSCL), and Raghuram Ramanujan (Davidson). http://www.ectstar.eu/node/4472 Neutrino interactions in SN and in the laboratory • Supernova neutrino detectors • Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) neutrino experiments • Parity violating measurements of neutron density • Nucleon-nucleon correlations in SN • Muons in SN and flavor physics Detecting Supernova Neutrinos Super Kamiokande • SN radiate the gravitational binding energy of a neutron star, 0.2 Msunc2, as 1058 neutrinos in ~10 s • Historic detection of ~20 neutrinos from SN1987A 40 m • Expect several thousand events from next galactic SN in Super Kamiokande: 32 kilotons of H2O + phototubes. Good antineutrino detector. • Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) in DUNE South Dakota plans 40 kilotons of liquid Ar to study oscillations of Fermilab neutrinos. Good neutrino detector. • Hyper Kamiokande is very large version of SuperK. Expect 100,000 events. Good for late times. DUNE Supernova neutrino detectors • Important to measure individual flavors –Anti-electron neutrinos: Super-K, JUNO, Hyper-K, Ice Cube… –Electron neutrinos: DUNE, need to measure Ar charged current cross section at SNS –Mu and tau neutrinos: Good neutral current detector… • Can we measure total E in (active) neutrinos Etot to 10% for a Galactic SN? Total E radiated in neutrinos Etot • Binding E of NS ~ 3/5 GMns2/R • Uncertainties –Distance to SN. Assume determined by E+M observations. –Radius of NS R: NICER promised NASA 5%, combination of GW170817, NICER, chiral EFT may give R to 10%??? –Mass of NS Mns: Assume mass of preSN star known? SN simulations now suggest Mns given preSN star?? What if Etot is big? • Only option, Mns must be large. A 2Msun star has twice BE of a 1.4Msun star. Note GW170817 likely rules out small R. • What if Etot is small? • Very likely Mns>1.2Msun and GW170817 says R<13 km. There is a minimum expected BE for a NS. • Would provide strong evidence for new particle physics: sterile nu, axions, light dark matter particles … Neutrino-Nucleus Elastic • Neutrino-nucleus elastic scattering can make a great SN detector. –Large coherent cross section ~ N2. –All six flavors of nu and anti-nu contribute. –All mass of detector active (factor of ~10 compared to H mass fraction in anti-nue ) • Yields of tens of events per TON compared to 100s of events per KILO- TON for conventional detector and SN at 10 kpc. Large dark matter detector • May be good way to cleanly measure Etot. • Independent of (active) nu oscillations. • Need low threshold (~5 keV??) but lots of work on this to detect lower mass WIMPS. • Need large size, 10+ tons, for statistics. • Backgrounds probably fine if ok for dark matter. • Systematic erros –Quenching factor –Energy scale –?? • Yield in events per ton for a SN at 10 kpc • Large 100+ ton liquid Ar dark matter experiment could be an exciting SN detector. DARWIN talks about 40 tons Xe, could have larger Ar detectors. Darkside-20k will have 23 tons active of Ar. The next detector Argo could have 300t of Ar and 1,000+ events for a SN. C. J. Horowitz, K. J. Coakley, and D. N. McKinsey, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 023005 Charged current interactions and nucleosynthesis R-process nucleosynthesis: origin of heavy elements such as gold, uranium SN1987a According to many textbooks, supernovae are the site of the r-process. Why are the textbooks wrong? 12 SN neutrinos and nucleosynthesis Y =0.4 • Possible site of r-process is the Yep=0.4 neutrino driven wind in a SN. Wind • Ratio of neutrons to protons in n rich Wind p wind set by capture rates that rich depend on neutrino and anti- Super-K neutrino energies. + Phys.Rev. D65, 083005 νe + n → p + e ν¯e + p → n + e • Composition of wind depends DUNE on anti-neutrino energy (Y-axis) • ~20 events from SN1987A, and neutrino energy (X-axis). thousands of events from next • Because of robust galactic SN. Important to observe neutrino physics we find both anti-neutrinos (SK…) and wind is not n rich enough neutrinos (DUNE, HALO-1kT) for main r-process! • Measure Ar CC cross sec. at SNS! SNS Neutrino Experiments • Spallation neutron source (SNS) has large neutrino flux from pion decay at rest. Similar in spectrum to SN neutrinos. • Coherent neutrino-nucleus experiments. • Important to measure nu-Ar charged current cross section “to calibrate” DUNE for SN. • Can measure Pb (Fe?) cross sections for HALO-1kT • Neutrino induced fission exp. probably possible. Fission may play an important role in r-process. 14 Coherent neutrino- nucleus elastic scattering • Original results for CsI. • Now results for Ar. • Very interesting probe of nonstandard neutrino interactions. • Can measure neutron density • Don’t expand form factor in moments <Rn2>, <Rn4>… Series is poorly converging. • Instead assume something very mild about surface thickness. Good agreement among theory on surface thickness. Given approx shape can then fit one parameter for neutron radius. 15 208Pb PREX Spokespersons K. Kumar R. Michaels K. Paschke P. Souder G. Urciuoli PREX measures how much neutrons stick out past protons (neutron skin). • 16 Parity violating electron scattering neutron radius Experiments Experiment Nucleus Error in Rn MAINZ C12 12C ~ 0.5% CREX 48Ca 0.6% PREX (PREX II) 208Pb 3% (1%) MREX 208Pb 0.5% 17 Parity Violation Isolates Neutrons 0 • In Standard Model Z boson • Apv from interference of couples to the weak charge. photon and Z0 exchange. In • Proton weak charge is small: Born approximation p 2 2 2 Q =1− 4sin ΘW ≈ 0.05 GF Q FW (Q ) W = Apv 2 • Neutron weak charge is big: 2πα√2 Fch(Q ) n sin( ) QW = −1 2 3 Qr FW (Q )= d r ρW (r) • Weak interactions, at low Q2, ! Qr probe neutrons. • Model independently map out • Parity violating asymmetry Apv is distribution of weak charge in cross section difference for a nucleus. positive and negative helicity •Electroweak reaction electrons free from most strong dσ/dΩ+ dσ/dΩ− Apv = − interaction dσ/dΩ+ + dσ/dΩ− uncertainties. 18 PREX in Hall A Jefferson Lab •PREX: ran in 2010. 1.05 GeV electrons elastically scattering at ~5 deg. from 208Pb APV = 0.657 ± 0.060(stat) ± 0.014(sym) ppm •From Apv I inferred neutron skin: Rn - Rp= 0.33+0.16-0.18 fm. •Next runs •PREX-II: 208Pb with more statistics. Goal: Rn to ±0.06 fm. Ran summer ’19. •CREX: Measure Rn of 48Ca to ±0.02 fm. Microscopic calculations feasible for light n rich 48Ca to relate Rn to three neutron forces. Running now. R. Michaels 19 Physics Data Analysis for PREX, CREX • 1.05 GeV electrons elastically scattering at ~5 deg. from 208Pb APV = 0.657 ± 0.060(stat) • E+M charge Weak charge ± 0.014(sym) ppm density density (gray) determined by -1 • Weak form factor at q=0.475 fm : PREX FW(q) = 0.204 ± 0.028 • Radius of weak charge distr. RW = 5.83 ± 0.18 fm ± 0.03 fm • Compare to charge radius Rch=5.503 fm --> weak skin: RW - Rch = 0.32 ± 0.18 ± 0.03 fm • First observation that weak charge density more extended than (E+M) charge density --> weak skin. • Unfold nucleon ff--> neutron skin: Rn - Rp= 0.33+0.16-0.18 fm • Phys Rev Let. 108, 112502 (2012), Phys. Rev. C 85, 032501(R) (2012) How do supernovae explode? • Situation is not so clear. • Many Two-dimensional simulations with realistic nu transport explode. • Very costly 3D simulations may be less likely to explode than 2D. • Possibilities: 1) asymmetries in pre- SN star may aid explosion, 2) resolution / accuracy of nu transport, 3) Equation of state, 4) Neutrino interactions — perhaps important corrections have been left out. � interactions in SN matter �e + n —> p + e (Charged current capture rxn) � + N —> � + N (Neutral current elastic scattering, important opacity source for mu and tau �) • Neutrino-nucleon neutral current cross section in SN is modified by axial or spin response SA, and vector response SV, of the medium. • Responses SA, S V —> 1 in free space. Normally SA dominates because of 3ga2 factor. Neutrinosphere as unitary gas • Much of the action in SN at low densities near neutrinosphere at n ~ n0/100 (nuclear density n0). • Average distance between two neutrons near neutrinosphere is less than NN scattering length. 19 fm nn scattering length 8.5 fm Average distance between two neutrons at n0/100 1.4 fm Range of NN force.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Weak Charge of the Proton Via Parity Violating Electron Scattering
    The Weak Charge of the Proton via Parity Violating Electron Scattering Dave “Dawei” Mack (TJNAF) SPIN2014 Beijing, China Oct 20, 2014 DOE, NSF, NSERC SPIN2014 All Spin Measurements Single Spin Asymmetries PV You are here … … where experiments are unusually difficult, but we don’t annoy everyone by publishing frequently. 2 Motivation 3 The Standard Model (a great achievement, but not a theory of everything) Too many free parameters (masses, mixing angles, etc.). No explanation for the 3 generations of leptons, etc. Not enough CP violation to get from the Big Bang to today’s world No gravity. (dominates dynamics at planetary scales) No dark matter. (essential for understanding galactic-scale dynamics) No dark energy. (essential for understanding expansion of the universe) What we call the SM is only +gravity part of a larger model. +dark matter +dark energy The astrophysical observations are compelling, but only hint at the nature of dark matter and energy. We can look but not touch! To extend the SM, we need more BSM evidence (or tight constraints) from controlled experiments4 . The Quark Weak Vector Charges p Qw is the neutral-weak analog of the proton’s electric charge Note the traditional roles of the proton and neutron are almost reversed: ie, neutron weak charge is dominant, proton weak charge is almost zero. This suppression of the proton weak charge in the SM makes it a sensitive way to: 2 •measure sin θW at low energies, and •search for evidence of new PV interactions between electrons and light quarks. 5 2 Running of sin θW 2 But sin θW is determined much better at the Z pole.
    [Show full text]
  • TRIUMF & Canadian Scientists Help Measure Proton's Weak Charge
    Canada’s national laboratory for particle and nuclear physics Laboratoire national canadien pour la recherche en physique nucléaire et en physique des particules News Release | For Immediate Release | 17 Sep 2013, 5:00 p.m. PDT TRIUMF & Canadian Scientists Help Measure Proton’s Weak Charge (Newport News, VA, USA) --- An international team including Canadian researchers at TRIUMF has reported first results for the proton’s weak charge in Physical Review Letters (to appear in the October 18, 2013 issue) based on precise new data from Jefferson Laboratory, the premier U.S. electron-beam facility for nuclear and particle physics in Newport News, Virginia. The Q-weak experiment used a high-energy electron beam to measure the weak charge of the proton—a fundamental property that sets the scale of its interactions via the weak nuclear force. This is distinct from but analogous to its more familiar electric charge (Q), hence, the experiment’s name: ‘Q-weak.’ Following a decade of design and construction, Q-weak had a successful experimental run in 2010–12 in Hall C at Jefferson Laboratory. Data analysis has been underway ever since. “Nobody has ever attempted a measurement of the proton’s weak charge before,” says Roger Carlini, Q- weak’s spokesperson at Jefferson Laboratory, “due to the extreme technical challenges to reach the required sensitivity. The first 4% of the data have now been fully analyzed and already have an important scientific impact, although the ultimate sensitivity awaits analysis of the complete experiment.” The first result, based on Q-weak’s commissioning data set, is Q_W^p= 0.064 ± 0.012.
    [Show full text]
  • Neutrino Masses-How to Add Them to the Standard Model
    he Oscillating Neutrino The Oscillating Neutrino of spatial coordinates) has the property of interchanging the two states eR and eL. Neutrino Masses What about the neutrino? The right-handed neutrino has never been observed, How to add them to the Standard Model and it is not known whether that particle state and the left-handed antineutrino c exist. In the Standard Model, the field ne , which would create those states, is not Stuart Raby and Richard Slansky included. Instead, the neutrino is associated with only two types of ripples (particle states) and is defined by a single field ne: n annihilates a left-handed electron neutrino n or creates a right-handed he Standard Model includes a set of particles—the quarks and leptons e eL electron antineutrino n . —and their interactions. The quarks and leptons are spin-1/2 particles, or weR fermions. They fall into three families that differ only in the masses of the T The left-handed electron neutrino has fermion number N = +1, and the right- member particles. The origin of those masses is one of the greatest unsolved handed electron antineutrino has fermion number N = 21. This description of the mysteries of particle physics. The greatest success of the Standard Model is the neutrino is not invariant under the parity operation. Parity interchanges left-handed description of the forces of nature in terms of local symmetries. The three families and right-handed particles, but we just said that, in the Standard Model, the right- of quarks and leptons transform identically under these local symmetries, and thus handed neutrino does not exist.
    [Show full text]
  • The Search for Supersymmetry
    The Search for Supersymmetry • Introduction the Standard Model of Particle Physics • Introduction to Collider Physics • Successes of the Standard Model • What the Standard Model Does Not Do • Physics Beyond the Standard Model • Introduction to Supersymmetry • Searching for Supersymmetry • Dark Matter Searches • Future Prospects • Other Scenarios • Summary Peter Krieger, Carleton University, August 2000 Force Unifications Standard Model does NOT account magnetism for gravitational interactions Maxwell electromagnetism electricity electroweak S T A Planck Scale (or Planck Mass) weak interactions N D A is defined as the energy scale at R GUT D which gravitational interactions M O become of the same strength as D E SM interactions strong interactions L TOE celestial movement gravitation Newton terrestrial movement - - - MEW MGUT Mplanck The Standard Model Describes the FUNDAMENTAL PARTICLES and their INTERACTIONS All known FORCES are mediated by PARTICLE EXCHANGE a a Effective strength of an interaction depends on X • the coupling strength at the vertex αα • the mass of the exchanged particle MX a a Force Effective Strength Process Strong 100 Nuclear binding Electromagnetic 10-2 Electron-nucleus binding Weak 10-5 Radioactive β decay The Standard Model SPIN-½ MATTER PARTICLES interact via the exchange of SPIN-1 BOSONS MATTER PARTICLES – three generations of quarks and leptons |Q| m < m < m ⎛ e ⎞ ⎛ µ ⎞ ⎛ τ ⎞ 1 e µ τ Mass increases with generation: ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ m = 0 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ν ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ν ⎝ν e ⎠ ⎝ µ ⎠ ⎝ν τ ⎠ 0 Mu,d ~ 0.3 GeV ⎛u⎞ ⎛c⎞ ⎛ t ⎞ 2 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ 3 Each quark comes in 1 three ‘colour’ changes Mt ~ 170 GeV ⎝d⎠ ⎝s⎠ ⎝b⎠ 3 GAUGE BOSONS – mediate the interaction of the fundamental fermions γ 1 Gauge particle of electromagnetism (carries no electric charge) W ± ,Z 0 3 Gauge particles of the weak interaction (each carries weak charge) g 8 Gauge particles of the strong interaction (each gluon carries a colour and an anti-colour charge charge) All Standard Model fermions and gauge bosons have been experimentally observed There is one more particle in the SM – the Higgs Boson.
    [Show full text]
  • Weak Interactioninteraction
    WeakWeak InteractionInteraction OutlineOutline Introduction to weak interactions Charged current (CC) interactions Neutral current (NC) Weak vector bosons W± and Z0 Weak charged interactions Beta decay Flavour changing charged current W± boson propagator Fermi coupling constant Parity violation Muon decay Decay rate /lifetime Lepton Universality W± boson couplings for leptons Tau decays Weak quark decays W± boson couplings for quarks Cabibbo angle, CKM mechanism Spectator model Nuclear and Particle Physics Franz Muheim 1 IntroductionIntroduction Weak Interactions Account for large variety of physical processes Muon and Tau decays, Neutrino interactions Decays of lightest mesons and baryons Z0 and W± boson production at √s ~ O(100 GeV) Natural radioactivity, fission, fusion (sun) Major Characteristics Long lifetimes Small cross sections (not always) “Quantum Flavour Dynamics” Charged Current (CC) Neutral Current (NC) mediated by exchange of W± boson Z0 boson Intermediate vector bosons MW = 80.4 GeV ± 0 W and Z have mass MZ = 91.2 GeV Self Interactions of W± and Z0 also W± and γ Nuclear and Particle Physics Franz Muheim 2 BetaBeta DecayDecay Weak Nuclear Decays See also Nuclear Physics Recall β+ = e+ β- = e- Continuous energy spectrum of e- or e+ Î 3-body decay, Pauli postulates neutrino, 1930 Interpretation Fermi, 1932 Bound n or p decay − n → pe ν e ⎛ − t ⎞ N(t) = N(0)exp⎜ ⎟ ⎝ τ n ⎠ p → ne +ν (bound p) τ n = 885.7 ± 0.8 s e 32 τ 1 = τ n ln 2 = 613.9 ± 0.6 s τ p > 10 y (p stable) 2 Modern quark level picture Weak charged current mediated
    [Show full text]
  • Supersymmetry Lecture Notes for FYS5190/FYS9190
    Supersymmetry Lecture notes for FYS5190/FYS9190 Paul Batzing and Are Raklev December 4, 2015 2 Contents 1 Introduction 7 2 Groups and algebras 9 2.1 Whatisagroup?.................................. 9 2.2 Representations................................. 12 2.3 Liegroups...................................... 13 2.4 Liealgebras..................................... 15 2.5 Exercises ...................................... 16 3 The Poincar´ealgebra and its extensions 19 3.1 TheLorentzGroup................................. 19 3.2 ThePoincar´egroup ............................... 20 3.3 The Casimir operators of the Poincar´egroup . ........ 20 3.4 The no-go theorem and graded Lie algebras . ...... 22 3.5 Weylspinors .................................... 23 3.6 The Casimir operators of the super-Poincar´ealgebra . ............ 25 3.7 Representations of the superalgebra . ....... 26 3.8 Exercises ...................................... 28 4 Superspace 31 4.1 Superspacecalculus .............................. 31 4.2 Superspacedefinition.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 33 4.3 Covariantderivatives. 35 4.4 Superfields ..................................... 35 4.4.1 Scalarsuperfields.............................. 36 4.4.2 Vectorsuperfields. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 37 4.5 Supergauge ..................................... 38 4.6 Exercises ...................................... 39 5 Construction of a low-energy SUSY Lagrangian 41 5.1 Supersymmetry invariant Lagrangians . ....... 41 5.2 Albaniangaugetheories . 42 5.3 Non-Abelian gauge theories . 43 5.4 Supersymmetricfieldstrength.
    [Show full text]
  • Bounds on Supersymmetry from Electroweak Precision Analysis
    SLAC{PUB{7634 UPR{788{T January, 1998 Bounds on Sup ersymmetry from Electroweak Precision Analysis Jens Erler DepartmentofPhysics and Astronomy UniversityofPennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104 Damien M. Pierce Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Stanford University Stanford, CA 94309 Abstract The Standard Mo del global t to precision data is excellent. The Minimal Sup ersym- metric Standard Mo del can also t the data well, though not as well as the Standard Mo del. At b est, sup ersymmetric contributions either decouple or only slightly decrease 2 the total , at the exp ense of decreasing the numb er of degrees of freedom. In general, regions of parameter space with large sup ersymmetric corrections from light sup erpart- ners are asso ciated with p o or ts to the data. We contrast results of a simple (oblique) approximation with full one-lo op results, and show that for the most imp ortant observ- ables the non-oblique corrections can be larger than the oblique corrections, and must b e taken into account. We elucidate the regions of parameter space in b oth gravity- and gauge-mediated mo dels which are excluded. Signi cant regions of parameter space are excluded, esp ecially with p ositive sup ersymmetric mass parameter . We give a com- plete listing of the b ounds on all the sup erpartner and Higgs b oson masses. For either sign of , and for all sup ersymmetric mo dels considered, we set a lower limit on the mass of the lightest CP{even Higgs scalar, m 78 GeV. Also, the rst and second h generation squark masses are constrained to b e ab ove 280 (325) GeV in the sup ergravity (gauge-mediated) mo del.
    [Show full text]
  • Probing Supersymmetry with Neutral Current Scattering Experiments
    Probing Supersymmetry with Neutral Current Scattering Experiments † A. Kurylov∗, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf∗ and S.Su∗ ∗California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125 USA †Department of Physics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269 USA Abstract. We compute the supersymmetric contributions to the weak charges of the electron e p (QW ) and proton (QW ) in the framework of Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model. We also consider the ratio of neutral current to charged current cross sections, Rν and Rν¯ at ν (ν¯ )-nucleus deep inelastic scattering, and compare the supersymmetric corrections with the deviations of these quantities from the Standard Model predictions implied by the recent NuTeV measurement. INTRODUCTION 2 In the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics, the predicted running of sin θW from 2 2 Z-pole to low energy: sin θW (0) sin θW (MZ) = 0.007, has never been established − 2 experimentally to a high precision. sin θW (MZ) can be obtained through the Z-pole 2 precision measurements with very small error. However, no determination of sin θW at low energy with similar precision is available. More recently, the results of cesium atomic parity-violation (APV) [1] and ν- (ν¯ -) nucleus deep inelastic scattering (DIS)[2] 2 have been interpreted as determinations of the scale-dependence of sin θW . The cesium APV result appears to be consistent with the SM prediction for q2 0, whereas the neutrino DIS measurement implies a +3σ deviation at q2 100 GeV≈2. If conventional hadron structure effects are ultimately unable to account| f|or ≈ the NuTeV “anomaly", the results of this precision measurement would point to new physics.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Charge, Neutron, and Weak Size of the Atomic Nucleus G. Hagen1,2 , A
    Charge, neutron, and weak size of the atomic nucleus G. Hagen1,2 , A. Ekström1,2, C. Forssén1,2,3 , G. R. Jansen1,2, W. Nazarewicz1,4,5, T. Papenbrock1,2, K. A. Wendt1,2, S. Bacca6,7, N. Barnea8, B. Carlsson3, C. Drischler9,10, K. Hebeler9,10, M. Hjorth-Jensen4,11, M. Miorelli6,12, G. Orlandini13,14, A. Schwenk9,10 & J. Simonis9,10 Summary What is the size of the atomic nucleus? This deceivably simple question is difficult to answer. While the electric charge distributions in atomic nuclei were measured accurately already half a century ago, our knowledge of the distribution of neutrons is still deficient. In addition to constraining the size of atomic nuclei, the neutron distribution also impacts the number of nuclei that can exist and the size of neutron stars. We present an ab initio calculation of the neutron distribution of the neutron-rich nucleus 48Ca. We show that the neutron skin (difference between radii of neutron and proton distributions) is significantly smaller than previously thought. We also make predictions for the electric dipole polarizability and the weak form factor; both quantities are currently targeted by precision measurements. Based on ab initio results for 48Ca, we provide a constraint on the size of a neutron star. 1Physics Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831, USA. 2Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996, USA. 3Department of Fundamental Physics, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96 Göteborg, Sweden. 4Department of Physics and Astronomy and NSCL/FRIB, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • 9. the Weak Force Particle and Nuclear Physics
    9. The Weak Force Particle and Nuclear Physics Dr. Tina Potter Dr. Tina Potter 9. The Weak Force 1 In this section... The charged current weak interaction Four-fermion interactions Massive propagators and the strength of the weak interaction C-symmetry and Parity violation Lepton universality Quark interactions and the CKM Dr. Tina Potter 9. The Weak Force 2 The Weak Interaction The weak interaction accounts for many decays in particle physics, e.g. − − − − µ ! e ν¯eνµ τ ! e ν¯eντ + − − π ! µ ν¯µ n ! pe ν¯e Characterised by long lifetimes and small interaction cross-sections Dr. Tina Potter 9. The Weak Force 3 The Weak Interaction Two types of weak interaction Charged current (CC): W ± bosons Neutral current (NC): Z bosons See Chapter 10 The weak force is mediated by massive vector bosons: mW = 80 GeV mZ = 91 GeV Examples: (The list below is not complete, will see more vertices later!) Weak interactions of electrons and neutrinos: − νe − e e νe Z W − W + Z + ν¯e e+ e ν¯e Dr. Tina Potter 9. The Weak Force 4 Boson Self-Interactions In QCD the gluons carrycolour charge. In the weak interaction the W ± and Z bosons carry the weak charge W ± also carry the electric charge ) boson self-interactions W − W − Z γ W + W + Z W + Z W + γ W + W + W + W − W − Z W − γ W − γ W − (The list above is complete as far as weak self-interactions are concerned, but we have still not seen all the weak vertices. Will see the rest later) Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • A Geometric Theory of Everything Deep Down, the Particles and Forces of the Universe Are a Manifestation of Exquisite Geometry
    Nature’s zoo of elementary particles is not a random mish- mash; it has striking patterns and interrelationships that can be depicted on a diagram correspond- ing to one of the most intricate geometric objects known to mathematicians, called E8. 54 Scientific American, December 2010 Photograph/Illustration by Artist Name © 2010 Scientific American A. GarrettAuthor Lisi balances Bio Tex this until time an between ‘end nested research style incharacter’ theoretical (Command+3) physics andxxxx surfing. xxxx xx xxxxxAs an itinerantxxxxx xxxx scientist, xxxxxx hexxxxxx is in thexxx xxprocess xxxxxxxxxx of xxxx realizingxxxxxxxxxx a lifelong dream: xxxxxx founding xxxxxxxx the xxxxxxxx. Pacific Science Institute, located on the Hawaiian island of Maui. James Owen Weatherall, having recently completed his doctorate in physics and mathematics at the Stevens Institute of Technology, is now finishing a second Ph.D. in philosophy at the University of California, Irvine. He also manages to find time to work on a book on the history of ideas moving from physics into financial modeling. PHYSICS A Geometric Theory of Everything Deep down, the particles and forces of the universe are a manifestation of exquisite geometry By A. Garrett Lisi and James Owen Weatherall odern physics began with a sweeping unification: in 1687 isaac Newton showed that the existing jumble of disparate theories describing everything from planetary motion to tides to pen- dulums were all aspects of a universal law of gravitation. Unifi- cation has played a central role in physics ever since. In the middle of the 19th century James Clerk Maxwell found that electricity and magnetism were two facets of electromagnetism.
    [Show full text]
  • QUANTUM FIELD THEORY from QED to the Standard Model Silvan S
    P1: GSM 0521571995C19 0521571995-NYE March 6, 2002 13:59 19 QUANTUM FIELD THEORY From QED to the Standard Model Silvan S. Schweber Until the 1980s, it was usual to tell the story of the developments in physics during the twentieth century as “inward bound” – from atoms, to nuclei and electrons, to nucleons and mesons, and then to quarks – and to focus on conceptual advances. The typical exposition was a narrative beginning with Max Planck (1858–1947) and the quantum hypothesis and Albert Einstein (1879–1955) and the special theory of relativity, and culminating with the formulation of the standard model of the electroweak and strong interac- tions during the 1970s. Theoretical understanding took pride of place, and commitment to reductionism and unification was seen as the most impor- tant factor in explaining the success of the program. The Kuhnian model of the growth of scientific knowledge, with its revolutionary paradigm shifts, buttressed the primacy of theory and the view that experimentation and instrumentation were subordinate to and entrained by theory.1 The situation changed after Ian Hacking, Peter Galison, Bruno Latour, Simon Schaffer, and other historians, philosophers, and sociologists of science reanalyzed and reassessed the practices and roles of experimentation. It has become clear that accounting for the growth of knowledge in the physical sciences during the twentieth century is a complex story. Advances in physics were driven and secured by a host of factors, including contingent ones. Furthermore, it is often difficult to separate the social, sociological, and political factors from the technical and intellectual ones. In an important and influential book, Image and Logic, published in 1997, Peter Galison offered a framework for understanding what physics was about in the twentieth century.
    [Show full text]