DOCSLIB.ORG

Multi-Strange and Charmed Antihyperon-Hyperon Physics for PANDA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Multi-Strange and Charmed Antihyperon-Hyperon Physics for PANDA ACTA UNIVERSITATIS UPSALIENSIS Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 101 Multi-Strange and Charmed Antihyperon- Hyperon Physics for PANDA Erik Thomé Dissertation presented at Uppsala University to be publicly examined in Häggsalen, Ångström- laboratoriet, Lägerhyddsvägen 1, Uppsala, Friday, November 23, 2012 at 10:15 for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The examination will be conducted in English Abstract Thomé, E. 2012. Multi-Strange and Charmed Antihyperon-Hyperon Physics for PANDA. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 101. 151 pp. Uppsala. ISBN 978-91-554-8497-2. The thesis concerns the prospects of studying multi-strange and charmed antihyperon-hyperon physics and CP violation in hyperon decays in the upcoming PANDA experiment. The angular distribution dependence on polarisation parameters in the decay of the spin 3/2 Omega hyperon was calculated using the density matrix formalism. Expressions for the angular distributions in both the W ! LK and the subsequent L ! pp were obtained. ¯ + − ¯ + − ¯ − + Simulations were performed for the pp¯ ! X X , pp¯ ! W W and pp¯ ! Lc Lc . The beam momenta were 4, 12 and 12 GeV/c, respectively. Special attention was given to the reconstruc- tion of spin variables. For the pp¯ ! X¯ +X− reaction PANDA will give tens of events/s, which should be compared to the previously existing data of a handfull of events for this reaction. For the other two reactions the event rates will be lower but still reasonably high, considering that this will be the first measurements of these reactions. It was also shown that spin variables can be reconstructed in all three reactions for all production angles of the hyperons. Simulations concerning the possibility to measure CP violation parameters in hyperon de- cays were also performed for the reactions pp¯ ! LL¯ and pp¯ ! X¯ +X−. It was found that false signals from detector asymmetries disappears if no particle identification criterium is used and the analysis is restricted to events were the hyperon decays occur close to the beam axis. The effect of the magnetic field in the PANDA detector on the measurement of hyperon spin variables was investigated for the case of pp¯ ! LL¯ . The effect was observed to be small for polarisation and negligible for spin correlations. Keywords: PANDA, FAIR, antiproton, hyperon, strangeness, charm, polarisation, spin correlation, CP violation Erik Thomé, Uppsala University, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Nuclear Physics, Box 516, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden. c Erik Thomé 2012 ISSN 1104-2516 ISBN 978-91-554-8497-2 urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-182450 (http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-182450) Printed by Elanders Sverige AB, 2012 Till Alva och Lovisa Contents 1 Introduction . ........................................ 11 1.1 Standard Model of Particle Physics . .................... 11 1.2 Quarks and Gluons ................................. 13 1.3 Hadrons .......................................... 14 1.4 Hyperons . ...................................... 16 1.5 Hyperon Physics in Antiproton-Proton Collisions and the PANDA experiment . .............................. 18 1.6 CP Violation ...................................... 19 1.7 Thesis Disposition .................................. 20 2 PANDA............................................. 23 2.1 The FAIR Facility .................................. 23 2.2 The PANDA Detector . ............................. 25 2.2.1 Target Spectrometer . ............................ 26 2.2.2 Forward Spectrometer . ........................ 32 2.3 PANDA Physics . .................................. 34 3 The pp¯ → YY¯ Reaction . ................................ 37 3.1 Spin Variables . .................................. 37 3.1.1 The Density Matrix . ............................ 37 3.1.2 Hyperon Density Matrices ........................ 39 3.1.3 Angular Distributions for Hyperon Decays . .......... 44 3.1.4 Spin Variables in the pp¯ → YY¯ Reaction . ............ 50 3.1.5 Hyperon Rest Systems and Symmetry Constraints on Spin Variables ................................. 53 3.1.6 Restrictions on Spin Variables from Theoretical Consid- erations . ..................................... 54 3.2 CP Violation Parameters ............................. 56 4 Existing Data and Theoretical Predictions . ................. 59 4.1 Prior Knowledge on the pp¯ → YY¯ Reaction . ............. 60 4.2 Hyperon Channels for This Thesis . .................... 65 4.2.1 The pp¯ → Ξ¯ +Ξ− Reaction ........................ 65 4.2.2 The pp¯ → Ω¯ +Ω− Reaction ........................ 67 → Λ¯ −Λ+ 4.2.3 The pp¯ c c Reaction ........................ 69 4.3 CP Violation ...................................... 69 5 Analysis Methods . ................................... 71 5.1 Spin Variables for the Spin 1/2 Hyperons . ................ 71 5.2 Polarisation and Asymmetry Parameters of the Ω Hyperon . 73 5.3 Methods to Compensate for Angular Dependence of Recon- struction Efficiency . .............................. 76 5.3.1 Method Using Monte Carlo Based Acceptance Functions . 76 5.3.2 Method Without the Use of Monte Carlo Based Accep- tance functions ................................. 76 5.4 CP violation parameters . ............................. 80 6 Simulations of Multi-Strange and Charmed pp¯ → YY¯ Reactions . 85 6.1 The Simulation Framework . ......................... 85 6.1.1 Digitisation . ................................. 86 6.1.2 Track Reconstruction ............................ 87 6.1.3 Charged Particle Identification . ................... 87 6.1.4 Analysis ..................................... 90 6.1.5 Ongoing Software Development . ................... 90 6.2 The pp¯ → Ξ¯ +Ξ− Reaction . ......................... 92 6.2.1 Data Generation ................................ 92 6.2.2 Event Reconstruction ............................ 92 6.2.3 Reconstruction Efficiency and Background . .......... 93 6.2.4 Reconstruction Efficiency as a Function of the Ξ¯ + Pro- duction Angle ................................. 93 6.2.5 Reconstruction of Decay Vertices ................... 94 6.2.6 Ξ− Lifetime Reconstruction . ..................... 94 6.2.7 Invariant Mass ................................. 95 6.2.8 Correction for the Bending of the Ξ¯ + and Ξ− Trajectories in the Magnetic Field ............................ 96 6.2.9 Reconstruction Efficiency as a Function of the Λ¯ Decay Angle in the Ξ¯ + rest frame . ..................... 97 6.2.10 Comparison Between the Methods for Calculation of Spin Variables ................................. 98 6.3 The pp¯ → Ω¯ +Ω− Reaction . ......................... 104 6.3.1 Data Generation ................................ 104 6.3.2 Event Reconstruction ............................ 104 6.3.3 Reconstruction Efficiency and Background . .......... 105 6.3.4 Reconstruction Efficiency as a Function of the Ω¯ + Pro- duction Angle ................................. 106 6.3.5 Reconstruction of Decay Vertices ................... 106 6.3.6 Ω− Lifetime Reconstruction . ..................... 107 6.3.7 Invariant Mass ................................. 107 6.3.8 Reconstruction of Polarisation and Asymmetry Parameters 108 → Λ¯ −Λ+ 6.4 The pp¯ c c Reaction . ......................... 111 6.4.1 Data Generation ................................ 111 6.4.2 Reconstruction ................................. 111 6.4.3 Reconstruction Efficiency and Background . .......... 111 Λ¯ − 6.4.4 Acceptance as a Function of the c Production Angle . 112 6.4.5 Reconstruction of Decay Vertices ................... 113 6.4.6 Invariant Mass ................................. 113 6.4.7 Reconstruction of Spin Variables ................... 114 6.4.8 Other Charmed Hyperons ........................ 114 6.5 CP Violation in Hyperon Decay ........................ 116 6.5.1 General Experimental Considerations . ............... 116 6.5.2 Reconstruction of the CP Violation Parameter A for the pp¯ → ΛΛ¯ Reaction .............................. 116 6.5.3 Reconstruction of CP Violation Parameters for the pp¯ → Ξ¯ +Ξ− Reaction . ............................... 119 7 Precession of the Hyperon Polarisation Vector in the Magnetic Field of the PANDA Detector . ............................... 123 7.1 Precession of Polarisation Vectors in a Magnetic Field ....... 123 7.2 Effect on the measurement of Λ Polarisation . ........... 125 7.3 Effect on the measurement of ΛΛ¯ Spin Correlations . ....... 127 7.4 Other Hyperons . .................................. 130 8 Conclusions and Outlook . .............................. 133 8.1 Calculations of Decay Angular Distributions for the Spin 3/2 Ω Hyperon . ...................................... 133 8.2 Simulations of Multi-Strange and Charmed pp¯ → YY¯ Reactions 134 8.3 Effect of Magnetic Field on Measurement of Hyperon Spin Variables . ...................................... 135 8.4 Outlook .......................................... 136 9 Svensk sammanfattning . .............................. 137 10 Acknowledgements . ................................... 143 11 Bibliography . ....................................... 145 1. Introduction Three quarks for Muster Mark! Sure he hasn’t got much of a bark And sure any he has it’s all beside the mark. James Joyce “Finnegans Wake’ The topic of this thesis is within the field of hadron physics. A hadron is a composite particle built up by quarks and held together by the strong in- teraction. The most important aim of hadron physics is to understand how the strong interaction binds the quarks into composite particles. This is the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Five Common Particles
    The Five Common Particles The world around you consists of only three particles: protons, neutrons, and electrons. Protons and neutrons form the nuclei of atoms, and electrons glue everything together and create chemicals and materials. Along with the photon and the neutrino, these particles are essentially the only ones that exist in our solar system, because all the other subatomic particles have half-lives of typically 10-9 second or less, and vanish almost the instant they are created by nuclear reactions in the Sun, etc. Particles interact via the four fundamental forces of nature. Some basic properties of these forces are summarized below. (Other aspects of the fundamental forces are also discussed in the Summary of Particle Physics document on this web site.) Force Range Common Particles It Affects Conserved Quantity gravity infinite neutron, proton, electron, neutrino, photon mass-energy electromagnetic infinite proton, electron, photon charge -14 strong nuclear force ≈ 10 m neutron, proton baryon number -15 weak nuclear force ≈ 10 m neutron, proton, electron, neutrino lepton number Every particle in nature has specific values of all four of the conserved quantities associated with each force. The values for the five common particles are: Particle Rest Mass1 Charge2 Baryon # Lepton # proton 938.3 MeV/c2 +1 e +1 0 neutron 939.6 MeV/c2 0 +1 0 electron 0.511 MeV/c2 -1 e 0 +1 neutrino ≈ 1 eV/c2 0 0 +1 photon 0 eV/c2 0 0 0 1) MeV = mega-electron-volt = 106 eV. It is customary in particle physics to measure the mass of a particle in terms of how much energy it would represent if it were converted via E = mc2.
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamentals of Particle Physics
    Fundamentals of Par0cle Physics Particle Physics Masterclass Emmanuel Olaiya 1 The Universe u The universe is 15 billion years old u Around 150 billion galaxies (150,000,000,000) u Each galaxy has around 300 billion stars (300,000,000,000) u 150 billion x 300 billion stars (that is a lot of stars!) u That is a huge amount of material u That is an unimaginable amount of particles u How do we even begin to understand all of matter? 2 How many elementary particles does it take to describe the matter around us? 3 We can describe the material around us using just 3 particles . 3 Matter Particles +2/3 U Point like elementary particles that protons and neutrons are made from. Quarks Hence we can construct all nuclei using these two particles -1/3 d -1 Electrons orbit the nuclei and are help to e form molecules. These are also point like elementary particles Leptons We can build the world around us with these 3 particles. But how do they interact. To understand their interactions we have to introduce forces! Force carriers g1 g2 g3 g4 g5 g6 g7 g8 The gluon, of which there are 8 is the force carrier for nuclear forces Consider 2 forces: nuclear forces, and electromagnetism The photon, ie light is the force carrier when experiencing forces such and electricity and magnetism γ SOME FAMILAR THE ATOM PARTICLES ≈10-10m electron (-) 0.511 MeV A Fundamental (“pointlike”) Particle THE NUCLEUS proton (+) 938.3 MeV neutron (0) 939.6 MeV E=mc2. Einstein’s equation tells us mass and energy are equivalent Wave/Particle Duality (Quantum Mechanics) Einstein E
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Particle Physics
    SFB 676 – Projekt B2 Introduction to Particle Physics Christian Sander (Universität Hamburg) DESY Summer Student Lectures – Hamburg – 20th July '11 Outline ● Introduction ● History: From Democrit to Thomson ● The Standard Model ● Gauge Invariance ● The Higgs Mechanism ● Symmetries … Break ● Shortcomings of the Standard Model ● Physics Beyond the Standard Model ● Recent Results from the LHC ● Outlook Disclaimer: Very personal selection of topics and for sure many important things are left out! 20th July '11 Introduction to Particle Physics 2 20th July '11 Introduction to Particle PhysicsX Files: Season 2, Episode 233 … für Chester war das nur ein Weg das Geld für das eigentlich theoretische Zeugs aufzubringen, was ihn interessierte … die Erforschung Dunkler Materie, …ähm… Quantenpartikel, Neutrinos, Gluonen, Mesonen und Quarks. Subatomare Teilchen Die Geheimnisse des Universums! Theoretisch gesehen sind sie sogar die Bausteine der Wirklichkeit ! Aber niemand weiß, ob sie wirklich existieren !? 20th July '11 Introduction to Particle PhysicsX Files: Season 2, Episode 234 The First Particle Physicist? By convention ['nomos'] sweet is sweet, bitter is bitter, hot is hot, cold is cold, color is color; but in truth there are only atoms and the void. Democrit, * ~460 BC, †~360 BC in Abdera Hypothesis: ● Atoms have same constituents ● Atoms different in shape (assumption: geometrical shapes) ● Iron atoms are solid and strong with hooks that lock them into a solid ● Water atoms are smooth and slippery ● Salt atoms, because of their taste, are sharp and pointed ● Air atoms are light and whirling, pervading all other materials 20th July '11 Introduction to Particle Physics 5 Corpuscular Theory of Light Light consist out of particles (Newton et al.) ↕ Light is a wave (Huygens et al.) ● Mainly because of Newtons prestige, the corpuscle theory was widely accepted (more than 100 years) Sir Isaac Newton ● Failing to describe interference, diffraction, and *1643, †1727 polarization (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Field Theory*
    Quantum Field Theory y Frank Wilczek Institute for Advanced Study, School of Natural Science, Olden Lane, Princeton, NJ 08540 I discuss the general principles underlying quantum eld theory, and attempt to identify its most profound consequences. The deep est of these consequences result from the in nite number of degrees of freedom invoked to implement lo cality.Imention a few of its most striking successes, b oth achieved and prosp ective. Possible limitation s of quantum eld theory are viewed in the light of its history. I. SURVEY Quantum eld theory is the framework in which the regnant theories of the electroweak and strong interactions, which together form the Standard Mo del, are formulated. Quantum electro dynamics (QED), b esides providing a com- plete foundation for atomic physics and chemistry, has supp orted calculations of physical quantities with unparalleled precision. The exp erimentally measured value of the magnetic dip ole moment of the muon, 11 (g 2) = 233 184 600 (1680) 10 ; (1) exp: for example, should b e compared with the theoretical prediction 11 (g 2) = 233 183 478 (308) 10 : (2) theor: In quantum chromo dynamics (QCD) we cannot, for the forseeable future, aspire to to comparable accuracy.Yet QCD provides di erent, and at least equally impressive, evidence for the validity of the basic principles of quantum eld theory. Indeed, b ecause in QCD the interactions are stronger, QCD manifests a wider variety of phenomena characteristic of quantum eld theory. These include esp ecially running of the e ective coupling with distance or energy scale and the phenomenon of con nement.
    [Show full text]
  • A Young Physicist's Guide to the Higgs Boson
    A Young Physicist’s Guide to the Higgs Boson Tel Aviv University Future Scientists – CERN Tour Presented by Stephen Sekula Associate Professor of Experimental Particle Physics SMU, Dallas, TX Programme ● You have a problem in your theory: (why do you need the Higgs Particle?) ● How to Make a Higgs Particle (One-at-a-Time) ● How to See a Higgs Particle (Without fooling yourself too much) ● A View from the Shadows: What are the New Questions? (An Epilogue) Stephen J. Sekula - SMU 2/44 You Have a Problem in Your Theory Credit for the ideas/example in this section goes to Prof. Daniel Stolarski (Carleton University) The Usual Explanation Usual Statement: “You need the Higgs Particle to explain mass.” 2 F=ma F=G m1 m2 /r Most of the mass of matter lies in the nucleus of the atom, and most of the mass of the nucleus arises from “binding energy” - the strength of the force that holds particles together to form nuclei imparts mass-energy to the nucleus (ala E = mc2). Corrected Statement: “You need the Higgs Particle to explain fundamental mass.” (e.g. the electron’s mass) E2=m2 c4+ p2 c2→( p=0)→ E=mc2 Stephen J. Sekula - SMU 4/44 Yes, the Higgs is important for mass, but let’s try this... ● No doubt, the Higgs particle plays a role in fundamental mass (I will come back to this point) ● But, as students who’ve been exposed to introductory physics (mechanics, electricity and magnetism) and some modern physics topics (quantum mechanics and special relativity) you are more familiar with..
    [Show full text]
  • On Particle Physics
    On Particle Physics Searching for the Fundamental US ATLAS The continuing search for the basic building blocks of matter is the US ATLAS subject of Particle Physics (also called High Energy Physics). The idea of fundamental building blocks has evolved from the concept of four elements (earth, air, fire and water) of the Ancient Greeks to the nineteenth century picture of atoms as tiny “billiard balls.” The key word here is FUNDAMENTAL — objects which are simple and have no structure — they are not made of anything smaller! Our current understanding of these fundamental constituents began to fall into place around 100 years ago, when experimenters first discovered that the atom was not fundamental at all, but was itself made of smaller building blocks. Using particle probes as “microscopes,” scientists deter- mined that an atom has a dense center, or NUCLEUS, of positive charge surrounded by a dilute “cloud” of light, negatively- charged electrons. In between the nucleus and electrons, most of the atom is empty space! As the particle “microscopes” became more and more powerful, scientists found that the nucleus was composed of two types of yet smaller constituents called protons and neutrons, and that even pro- tons and neutrons are made up of smaller particles called quarks. The quarks inside the nucleus come in two varieties, called “up” or u-quark and “down” or d-quark. As far as we know, quarks and electrons really are fundamental (although experimenters continue to look for evidence to the con- trary). We know that these fundamental building blocks are small, but just how small are they? Using probes that can “see” down to very small distances inside the atom, physicists know that quarks and electrons are smaller than 10-18 (that’s 0.000 000 000 000 000 001! ) meters across.
    [Show full text]
  • Baryon and Lepton Number Anomalies in the Standard Model
    Appendix A Baryon and Lepton Number Anomalies in the Standard Model A.1 Baryon Number Anomalies The introduction of a gauged baryon number leads to the inclusion of quantum anomalies in the theory, refer to Fig. 1.2. The anomalies, for the baryonic current, are given by the following, 2 For SU(3) U(1)B , ⎛ ⎞ 3 A (SU(3)2U(1) ) = Tr[λaλb B]=3 × ⎝ B − B ⎠ = 0. (A.1) 1 B 2 i i lef t right 2 For SU(2) U(1)B , 3 × 3 3 A (SU(2)2U(1) ) = Tr[τ aτ b B]= B = . (A.2) 2 B 2 Q 2 ( )2 ( ) For U 1 Y U 1 B , 3 A (U(1)2 U(1) ) = Tr[YYB]=3 × 3(2Y 2 B − Y 2 B − Y 2 B ) =− . (A.3) 3 Y B Q Q u u d d 2 ( )2 ( ) For U 1 BU 1 Y , A ( ( )2 ( ) ) = [ ]= × ( 2 − 2 − 2 ) = . 4 U 1 BU 1 Y Tr BBY 3 3 2BQYQ Bu Yu Bd Yd 0 (A.4) ( )3 For U 1 B , A ( ( )3 ) = [ ]= × ( 3 − 3 − 3) = . 5 U 1 B Tr BBB 3 3 2BQ Bu Bd 0 (A.5) © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 133 N. D. Barrie, Cosmological Implications of Quantum Anomalies, Springer Theses, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94715-0 134 Appendix A: Baryon and Lepton Number Anomalies in the Standard Model 2 Fig. A.1 1-Loop corrections to a SU(2) U(1)B , where the loop contains only left-handed quarks, ( )2 ( ) and b U 1 Y U 1 B where the loop contains only quarks For U(1)B , A6(U(1)B ) = Tr[B]=3 × 3(2BQ − Bu − Bd ) = 0, (A.6) where the factor of 3 × 3 is a result of there being three generations of quarks and three colours for each quark.
    [Show full text]
  • Particle Physics Dr Victoria Martin, Spring Semester 2012 Lecture 11: Mesons and Baryons
    Particle Physics Dr Victoria Martin, Spring Semester 2012 Lecture 11: Mesons and Baryons !Measuring Jets !Fragmentation !Mesons and Baryons !Isospin and hypercharge !SU(3) flavour symmetry !Heavy Quark states 1 From Tuesday: Summary • In QCD, the coupling strength "S decreases at high momentum transfer (q2) increases at low momentum transfer. • Perturbation theory is only useful at high momentum transfer. • Non-perturbative techniques required at low momentum transfer. • At colliders, hard scatter produces quark, anti-quarks and gluons. • Fragmentation (hadronisation) describes how partons produced in hard scatter become final state hadrons. Need non-perturbative techniques. • Final state hadrons observed in experiments as jets. Measure jet pT, !, ! • Key measurement at lepton collider, evidence for NC=3 colours of quarks. + 2 σ(e e− hadrons) e R = → = N q σ(e+e µ+µ ) c e2 − → − • Next lecture: mesons and baryons! Griffiths chapter 5. 2 6 41. Plots of cross sections and related quantities + σ and R in e e− Collisions -2 10 ω φ J/ψ -3 10 ψ(2S) ρ Υ -4 ρ ! 10 Z -5 10 [mb] σ -6 R 10 -7 10 -8 10 2 1 10 10 Υ 3 10 J/ψ ψ(2S) Z 10 2 φ ω to theR Fermilab accelerator complex. In addition, both the CDF [11] and DØ detectors [12] 10 were upgraded. The resultsρ reported! here utilize an order of magnitude higher integrated luminosity1 than reported previously [5]. ρ -1 10 2 II. PERTURBATIVE1 QCD 10 10 √s [GeV] + + + + Figure 41.6: World data on the total cross section of e e− hadrons and the ratio R(s)=σ(e e− hadrons, s)/σ(e e− µ µ−,s).
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Supersymmetry
    Introduction to Supersymmetry Pre-SUSY Summer School Corpus Christi, Texas May 15-18, 2019 Stephen P. Martin Northern Illinois University [email protected] 1 Topics: Why: Motivation for supersymmetry (SUSY) • What: SUSY Lagrangians, SUSY breaking and the Minimal • Supersymmetric Standard Model, superpartner decays Who: Sorry, not covered. • For some more details and a slightly better attempt at proper referencing: A supersymmetry primer, hep-ph/9709356, version 7, January 2016 • TASI 2011 lectures notes: two-component fermion notation and • supersymmetry, arXiv:1205.4076. If you find corrections, please do let me know! 2 Lecture 1: Motivation and Introduction to Supersymmetry Motivation: The Hierarchy Problem • Supermultiplets • Particle content of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model • (MSSM) Need for “soft” breaking of supersymmetry • The Wess-Zumino Model • 3 People have cited many reasons why extensions of the Standard Model might involve supersymmetry (SUSY). Some of them are: A possible cold dark matter particle • A light Higgs boson, M = 125 GeV • h Unification of gauge couplings • Mathematical elegance, beauty • ⋆ “What does that even mean? No such thing!” – Some modern pundits ⋆ “We beg to differ.” – Einstein, Dirac, . However, for me, the single compelling reason is: The Hierarchy Problem • 4 An analogy: Coulomb self-energy correction to the electron’s mass A point-like electron would have an infinite classical electrostatic energy. Instead, suppose the electron is a solid sphere of uniform charge density and radius R. An undergraduate problem gives: 3e2 ∆ECoulomb = 20πǫ0R 2 Interpreting this as a correction ∆me = ∆ECoulomb/c to the electron mass: 15 0.86 10− meters m = m + (1 MeV/c2) × .
    [Show full text]
  • Observation of Global Hyperon Polarization in Ultrarelativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Nuclear Physics A 967 (2017) 760–763 www.elsevier.com/locate/nuclphysa Observation of Global Hyperon Polarization in Ultrarelativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions Isaac Upsal for the STAR Collaboration1 Ohio State University, 191 W. Woodruff Ave., Columbus, OH 43210 Abstract Collisions between heavy nuclei at ultra-relativistic energies form a color-deconfined state of matter known as the quark-gluon plasma. This state is well described by hydrodynamics, and non-central collisions are expected to produce a fluid characterized by strong vorticity in the presence of strong external magnetic fields. The STAR Collaboration at Brookhaven National Laboratory’s√ Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) has measured collisions between gold nuclei at center of mass energies sNN = 7.7 − 200 GeV. We report the first observation of globally polarized Λ and Λ hyperons, aligned with the angular momentum of the colliding system. These measurements provide important information on partonic spin-orbit coupling, the vorticity of the quark-gluon plasma, and the magnetic field generated in the collision. 1. Introduction Collisions of nuclei at ultra-relativistic energies create a system of deconfined colored quarks and glu- ons, called the quark-gluon plasma (QGP). The large angular momentum (∼104−5) present in non-central collisions may produce a polarized QGP, in which quarks are polarized through spin-orbit coupling in QCD [1, 2, 3]. The polarization would be transmitted to hadrons in the final state and could be detectable through global hyperon polarization. Global hyperon polarization refers to the phenomenon in which the spin of Λ (and Λ) hyperons is corre- lated with the net angular momentum of the QGP which is perpendicular to the reaction plane, spanned by pbeam and b, where b is the impact parameter vector of the collision and pbeam is the beam momentum.
    [Show full text]
  • Light Higgs Production in Hyperon Decay
    Light Higgs Production in Hyperon Decay Xiao-Gang He∗ Department of Physics and Center for Theoretical Sciences, National Taiwan University, Taipei. Jusak Tandean† Department of Mathematics/Physics/Computer Science, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA 91750, USA G. Valencia‡ Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA (Dated: July 8, 2018) Abstract A recent HyperCP observation of three events in the decay Σ+ pµ+µ− is suggestive of a new particle → with mass 214.3 MeV. In order to confront models that contain a light Higgs boson with this observation, it is necessary to know the Higgs production rate in hyperon decay. The contribution to this rate from penguin-like two-quark operators has been considered before and found to be too large. We point out that there are additional four-quark contributions to this rate that could be comparable in size to the two-quark contributions, and that could bring the total rate to the observed level in some models. To this effect we implement the low-energy theorems that dictate the couplings of light Higgs bosons to hyperons at leading order in chiral perturbation theory. We consider the cases of scalar and pseudoscalar Higgs bosons in the standard model and in its two-Higgs-doublet extensions to illustrate the challenges posed by existing experimental constraints and suggest possible avenues for models to satisfy them. arXiv:hep-ph/0610274v3 16 Apr 2008 ∗Electronic address: [email protected] †Electronic address: [email protected] ‡Electronic address: [email protected] 1 I. INTRODUCTION Three events for the decay mode Σ+ pµ+µ− with a dimuon invariant mass of 214.3 0.5 MeV → ± have been recently observed by the HyperCP Collaboration [1].
    [Show full text]
  • The Standard Model and Beyond Maxim Perelstein, LEPP/Cornell U
    The Standard Model and Beyond Maxim Perelstein, LEPP/Cornell U. NYSS APS/AAPT Conference, April 19, 2008 The basic question of particle physics: What is the world made of? What is the smallest indivisible building block of matter? Is there such a thing? In the 20th century, we made tremendous progress in observing smaller and smaller objects Today’s accelerators allow us to study matter on length scales as short as 10^(-18) m The world’s largest particle accelerator/collider: the Tevatron (located at Fermilab in suburban Chicago) 4 miles long, accelerates protons and antiprotons to 99.9999% of speed of light and collides them head-on, 2 The CDF million collisions/sec. detector The control room Particle Collider is a Giant Microscope! • Optics: diffraction limit, ∆min ≈ λ • Quantum mechanics: particles waves, λ ≈ h¯/p • Higher energies shorter distances: ∆ ∼ 10−13 cm M c2 ∼ 1 GeV • Nucleus: proton mass p • Colliders today: E ∼ 100 GeV ∆ ∼ 10−16 cm • Colliders in near future: E ∼ 1000 GeV ∼ 1 TeV ∆ ∼ 10−17 cm Particle Colliders Can Create New Particles! • All naturally occuring matter consists of particles of just a few types: protons, neutrons, electrons, photons, neutrinos • Most other known particles are highly unstable (lifetimes << 1 sec) do not occur naturally In Special Relativity, energy and momentum are conserved, • 2 but mass is not: energy-mass transfer is possible! E = mc • So, a collision of 2 protons moving relativistically can result in production of particles that are much heavier than the protons, “made out of” their kinetic
    [Show full text]