DOCSLIB.ORG

Associated Higgs-Bottom Quark Production: Reconciling the 4FS and the 5FS Approach

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Associated Higgs-Bottom Quark Production: Reconciling the 4FS and the 5FS Approach Associated Higgs-bottom quark production: reconciling the 4FS and the 5FS approach R. Harlander, M. Kr¨amer, M. Schumacher 6. April 2011 — v0.52 1 Two approaches The cross section for associated Higgs-bottom quark production, pp → b¯bH + X, can be calculated in two different schemes. As the mass of the bottom quark is large compared to the QCD scale, mb ≫ ΛQCD, bottom quark production is a perturbative process and can be calculated order by order. Thus, in a four-flavour scheme (4FS), where one does not consider b quarks as partons in the proton, the lowest-order QCD production pro- cesses are gluon-gluon fusion and quark-antiquark annihilation, gg → b¯bH and qq¯ → b¯bH, respectively. However, the inclusive cross section for gg → b¯bH develops logarithms of the form ln(µF/mb), which arise from the splitting of gluons into nearly collinear b¯b pairs. The large scale µF ≈ MH /4 corresponds to the upper limit of the collinear region up to which factorization is valid [1, 2, 3]. For MH ≫ 4mb the logarithms become large and spoil the convergence of the perturbative series. The ln(µF/mb) terms can be summed to all orders in perturbation theory by introducing bottom parton densities. This defines the so-called five-flavour scheme (5FS). The use of bottom distribution functions is based on the approximation that the outgoing b quarks are at small transverse momentum. In this scheme, the LO process for the inclusive b¯bH cross section is bottom fusion, b¯b → H. If all orders in perturbation theory were taken into account, the four- and five-flavour schemes would be identical, but the way of ordering the perturbative expansion is different. At any finite order, the two schemes include different parts of the all-order result, and the cross section predictions do thus not match exactly. While this leads to an ambiguity in the way the cross section is calculated, it also offers an opportunity to test the importance of various higher-order terms and the reliability of the theoretical prediction. In the next section we briefly summarize some of the features of the two schemes. 2 Discussion In this section, we collect the main arguments and counter-arguments that have been discussed in the physics community for and against either the 4FS or the 5FS approach. We supplement some of them by our personal comments (in italic type-set). 4FS: • The 4FS includes the full splitting g → b¯b order by order in perturbation theory. 1 • The 4FS starts at LO with the correct kinematics of the process. • For Higgs masses MH ≫ 4 mb the 4FS calculation misses potentially large logarith- mic corrections. • As the LO process in the 4FS is already a 2 → 3 process, the 4FS prediction is only available at NLO [4, 5]. • The NLO calculation in the 4FS contains contributions that are formally of N3LO in the 5FS. • 4FS PDFs are rare. Comment: Not true anymore; there are now 4FS pdfs from all major fit groups. Also, it is possible to convert 5FS to 4FS pdfs. 5FS: • The 5FS resums collinear logarithms of the form ln(MH /mb). • The 5FS calculation is available at NNLO [6]. • The 5FS neglects the kinematical region from large pT,b. Comment: This is not true if NNLO is taken into account in the 5FS. • The 5FS neglects effects from a finite bottom quark mass (except those from the Yukawa coupling). Comment: (a) The leading terms in mb are taken into account from the resum- mation of the ln(MH /mb) terms, see above. (b) All other mb effects are of order 2 2 ∼ −3 mb /MH 10 or higher. This has been confirmed quantitatively in Ref.[7] (com- pare the markers to the dashed blue line in Fig.2). • Once cuts are applied, or b-jets are tagged, the 5FS is no longer valid. Comment: This is to be discussed in more detail, once we deal with more exclusive cross sections. • The 5FS calculation neglects contributions where the Higgs couples to a top quark triangle. Comment: (a) Most of these effects are taken into account in the gluon fusion cross section. At NNLO, interference terms between the b¯bh and gluon fusion arise. They are (currently) indeed neglected. (b) The b¯bh process becomes important for inter- mediate to large tan β. This suppresses the top-triangle contributions anyway. • The PDF uncertainty for the b-densities is under-estimated. Comment: The PDF groups provide uncertainties, and we have to trust them. One source of possibly uncontrolled uncertainty is the matching between the low and the high-Q2 region in the DGLAP evolution. However, since Higgs production happens 2 2 at energies way above the b threshold, these effects should be suppressed by mb /MH as well. 2 σ/pb 2 LHC b-bbar 1.75 MH=100 GeV 1.5 CTEQ6M NNLO 1.25 1 0.75 gg 0.5 bq 0.25 0 bb, q-qbar -0.25 bg -0.5 -1 10 1 10 µ F/MH Figure 1: The NNLO cross section for the process b¯b → h + X (pp@14 TeV, MH = 100GeV) (solid line) as a function of the factorization scale µF . The dashed and dotted lines represent the individual sub-processes in the MS scheme. The markers denote the contribution of the gg sub-process, with mass divergences subtracted minimally, and bottom quark mass terms kept in the matrix element calculation. From Ref. [7] (Fig. 140). • The uncertainty due to renormalization/factorisation scale dependence in the 5FS is unnaturally small. Comment: Since it is a NNLO calculation, we expect a small scale dependence. NNLO and NLO uncertainty bands nicely overlap and we observe a perfectly fine convergence behavior (for µF = MH /4). It is therefore fully reasonable to believe that the NNLO uncertainty band covers higher order effects. 3 Santander matching1 The 4FS and 5FS should both describe the cross section reliably for moderate Higgs masses. With increasing Higgs masses the 5FS should become more reliable, simply be- cause the effect of the collinear logarithms ln(MH /mb) becomes more and more important. This is why it is not surprising that the 5FS and the 4FS begin to differ once larger Higgs masses are considered (see Fig.23 of Ref.[8]). Nevertheless, fully ignoring this difference may make one feel uncomfortable. Therefore, we suggest to combine the two approaches in such a way that they are given variable weight, depending on the value of the Higgs mass. 1This name originates from the fact that the following procedure arose from discussions among the authors at the Higgs Days at Santander 2009. 3 The difference between the two approaches is formally logarithmic. Therefore, the de- pendence of their relative importance should be controlled by a logarithmic term. We determine the coefficients such that (a) the 5FS gets 100% weight in the limit mH → ∞ (b) the 4FS gets 100% weight in the limit where the logarithms are “small”. There is obviously quite some arbitrariness in this statement. We assume here that “small” means ln(MH /mb) = 2. The consequence of this particular choice is that the 4FS and the 5FS both get the same weight for Higgs masses around 100 GeV, consistent with the observed agreement between the 4FS and the 5FS in this region.2 This leads to the following formula 1 σ(b¯b → h + X)= σ4FS + tσ5FS , (1) 1+ t where M t = ln H − 2 . (2) mb For mb = 4.8GeV and specific values of MH , this leads to σ(b¯b → h + X) = 0.49 σ4FS + 0.51 σ5FS , MH =100 GeV σ(b¯b → h + X) = 0.37 σ4FS + 0.63 σ5FS , (3) MH =200 GeV σ(b¯b → h + X) = 0.32 σ4FS + 0.68 σ5FS . MH =300 GeV We suggest to add the uncertainties quadratically using the same weights: 1/2 (∆σ4FS)2 +(t∆σ5FS)2 ∆σ = . (4) 1+ t References [1] D. Rainwater, M. Spira, D. Zeppenfeld, Higgs boson production at hadron colliders: Signal and background processes, [hep-ph/0203187]. [2] T. Plehn, Charged Higgs boson production in bottom-gluon fusion, Phys. Rev. D 67, 014018 (2003), [hep-ph/0206121]. [3] F. Maltoni, Z. Sullivan, S. Willenbrock, Higgs-boson production via bottom-quark fu- sion, Phys. Rev. D 67, 093005 (2003), [hep-ph/0301033]. [4] S. Dittmaier, M. Kr¨amer, M. Spira, Higgs radiation off bottom quarks at the Tevatron and the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 70, 074010 (2004), [hep-ph/0309204]. 2 Note that one should use the pole mass for mb here rather than the running mass, since it is really the dynamical mass that rules the resummed logarithms. 4 [5] S. Dawson, C.B. Jackson, L. Reina, D. Wackeroth, Exclusive Higgs boson pro- duction with bottom quarks at hadron colliders, Phys. Rev. D 69, 074027 (2004), [hep-ph/0311067]. [6] R.V. Harlander and W.B. Kilgore, Higgs boson production in bottom quark fusion at next-to-next-to-leading order, Phys. Rev. D 68, 013001 (2003), [hep-ph/0304035]. [7] C. Buttar et al., Les Houches physics at TeV colliders 2005, standard model, QCD, EW, and Higgs working group: Summary report, [hep-ph/0604120]. [8] S. Dittmaier et al. [LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group Collaboration], Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 1. Inclusive Observables, arXiv:1101.0593. 5.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Particle World
    The Particle World ² What is our Universe made of? This talk: ² Where does it come from? ² particles as we understand them now ² Why does it behave the way it does? (the Standard Model) Particle physics tries to answer these ² prepare you for the exercise questions. Later: future of particle physics. JMF Southampton Masterclass 22–23 Mar 2004 1/26 Beginning of the 20th century: atoms have a nucleus and a surrounding cloud of electrons. The electrons are responsible for almost all behaviour of matter: ² emission of light ² electricity and magnetism ² electronics ² chemistry ² mechanical properties . technology. JMF Southampton Masterclass 22–23 Mar 2004 2/26 Nucleus at the centre of the atom: tiny Subsequently, particle physicists have yet contains almost all the mass of the discovered four more types of quark, two atom. Yet, it’s composite, made up of more pairs of heavier copies of the up protons and neutrons (or nucleons). and down: Open up a nucleon . it contains ² c or charm quark, charge +2=3 quarks. ² s or strange quark, charge ¡1=3 Normal matter can be understood with ² t or top quark, charge +2=3 just two types of quark. ² b or bottom quark, charge ¡1=3 ² + u or up quark, charge 2=3 Existed only in the early stages of the ² ¡ d or down quark, charge 1=3 universe and nowadays created in high energy physics experiments. JMF Southampton Masterclass 22–23 Mar 2004 3/26 But this is not all. The electron has a friend the electron-neutrino, ºe. Needed to ensure energy and momentum are conserved in ¯-decay: ¡ n ! p + e + º¯e Neutrino: no electric charge, (almost) no mass, hardly interacts at all.
    [Show full text]
  • QCD at Colliders
    Particle Physics Dr Victoria Martin, Spring Semester 2012 Lecture 10: QCD at Colliders !Renormalisation in QCD !Asymptotic Freedom and Confinement in QCD !Lepton and Hadron Colliders !R = (e+e!!hadrons)/(e+e!"µ+µ!) !Measuring Jets !Fragmentation 1 From Last Lecture: QCD Summary • QCD: Quantum Chromodymanics is the quantum description of the strong force. • Gluons are the propagators of the QCD and carry colour and anti-colour, described by 8 Gell-Mann matrices, !. • For M calculate the appropriate colour factor from the ! matrices. 2 2 • The coupling constant #S is large at small q (confinement) and large at high q (asymptotic freedom). • Mesons and baryons are held together by QCD. • In high energy collisions, jets are the signatures of quark and gluon production. 2 Gluon self-Interactions and Confinement , Gluon self-interactions are believed to give e+ q rise to colour confinement , Qualitative picture: •Compare QED with QCD •In QCD “gluon self-interactions squeeze lines of force into Gluona flux tube self-Interactions” ande- Confinementq , + , What happens whenGluon try self-interactions to separate two are believedcoloured to giveobjects e.g. qqe q rise to colour confinement , Qualitativeq picture: q •Compare QED with QCD •In QCD “gluon self-interactions squeeze lines of force into a flux tube” e- q •Form a flux tube, What of happensinteracting when gluons try to separate of approximately two coloured constant objects e.g. qq energy density q q •Require infinite energy to separate coloured objects to infinity •Form a flux tube of interacting gluons of approximately constant •Coloured quarks and gluons are always confined within colourless states energy density •In this way QCD provides a plausible explanation of confinement – but not yet proven (although there has been recent progress with Lattice QCD) Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Detection of a Strange Particle
    10 extraordinary papers Within days, Watson and Crick had built a identify the full set of codons was completed in forensics, and research into more-futuristic new model of DNA from metal parts. Wilkins by 1966, with Har Gobind Khorana contributing applications, such as DNA-based computing, immediately accepted that it was correct. It the sequences of bases in several codons from is well advanced. was agreed between the two groups that they his experiments with synthetic polynucleotides Paradoxically, Watson and Crick’s iconic would publish three papers simultaneously in (see go.nature.com/2hebk3k). structure has also made it possible to recog- Nature, with the King’s researchers comment- With Fred Sanger and colleagues’ publica- nize the shortcomings of the central dogma, ing on the fit of Watson and Crick’s structure tion16 of an efficient method for sequencing with the discovery of small RNAs that can reg- to the experimental data, and Franklin and DNA in 1977, the way was open for the com- ulate gene expression, and of environmental Gosling publishing Photograph 51 for the plete reading of the genetic information in factors that induce heritable epigenetic first time7,8. any species. The task was completed for the change. No doubt, the concept of the double The Cambridge pair acknowledged in their human genome by 2003, another milestone helix will continue to underpin discoveries in paper that they knew of “the general nature in the history of DNA. biology for decades to come. of the unpublished experimental results and Watson devoted most of the rest of his ideas” of the King’s workers, but it wasn’t until career to education and scientific administra- Georgina Ferry is a science writer based in The Double Helix, Watson’s explosive account tion as head of the Cold Spring Harbor Labo- Oxford, UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Boosted Higgs Bosons Decaying Into B-Quark
    Eur. Phys. J. C (2019) 79:836 https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7335-x Regular Article - Experimental Physics Identification of boosted Higgs bosons decaying into b-quark pairs with the ATLAS detector at 13 TeV ATLAS Collaboration CERN, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland Received: 27 June 2019 / Accepted: 23 September 2019 © CERN for the benefit of the ATLAS collaboration 2019 Abstract This paper describes a study of techniques for and angular distribution of the jet constituents consistent with identifying Higgs bosons at high transverse momenta decay- a two-body decay and containing two b-hadrons. The tech- ing into bottom-quark pairs, H → bb¯, for proton–proton niques described in this paper to identify Higgs bosons decay- collision data collected by the ATLAS detector√ at the Large ing into bottom-quark pairs have been used successfully in Hadron Collider at a centre-of-mass energy s = 13 TeV. several analyses [8–10] of 13 TeV proton–proton collision These decays are reconstructed from calorimeter jets found data recorded by ATLAS. with the anti-kt R = 1.0 jet algorithm. To tag Higgs bosons, In order to identify, or tag, boosted Higgs bosons it is a combination of requirements is used: b-tagging of R = 0.2 paramount to understand the details of b-hadron identifica- track-jets matched to the large-R calorimeter jet, and require- tion and the internal structure of jets, or jet substructure, in ments on the jet mass and other jet substructure variables. The such an environment [11]. The approach to tagging√ presented Higgs boson tagging efficiency and corresponding multijet in this paper is built on studies from LHC runs at s = 7 and and hadronic top-quark background rejections are evaluated 8 TeV, including extensive studies of jet reconstruction and using Monte Carlo simulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarks and Their Discovery
    Quarks and Their Discovery Parashu Ram Poudel Department of Physics, PN Campus, Pokhara Email: [email protected] Introduction charge (e) of one proton. The different fl avors of Quarks are the smallest building blocks of matter. quarks have different charges. The up (u), charm They are the fundamental constituents of all the (c) and top (t) quarks have electric charge +2e/3 hadrons. They have fractional electronic charge. and the down (d), strange (s) and bottom (b) quarks Quarks never exist alone in nature. They are always have charge -e/3; -e is the charge of an electron. The found in combination with other quarks or antiquark masses of these quarks vary greatly, and of the six, in larger particle of matter. By studying these larger only the up and down quarks, which are by far the particles, scientists have determined the properties lightest, appear to play a direct role in normal matter. of quarks. Protons and neutrons, the particles that make up the nuclei of the atoms consist of quarks. There are four forces that act between the quarks. Without quarks there would be no atoms, and without They are strong force, electromagnetic force, atoms, matter would not exist as we know it. Quarks weak force and gravitational force. The quantum only form triplets called baryons such as proton and of strong force is gluon. Gluons bind quarks or neutron or doublets called mesons such as Kaons and quark and antiquark together to form hadrons. The pi mesons. Quarks exist in six varieties: up (u), down electromagnetic force has photon as quantum that (d), charm (c), strange (s), bottom (b), and top (t) couples the quarks charge.
    [Show full text]
  • Search for a W' Boson Decaying to a Bottom Quark and a Top
    EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN) CERN-PH-EP/2013-037 2018/11/02 CMS-EXO-12-001 0 Search for a W boson decaying to a bottomp quark and a top quark in pp collisions at s = 7 TeV The CMS Collaboration∗ Abstract 0 Results are presented from a search for a W boson using a dataset corresponding to 5.0 fb−1 of integrated luminosity collected during 2011 by the CMS experiment at the p 0 LHC in pp collisions at s = 7 TeV. The W boson is modeled as a heavy W boson, but different scenarios for the couplings to fermions are considered, involving both left- handed and right-handed chiral projections of the fermions, as well as an arbitrary 0 mixture of the two. The search is performed in the decay channel W ! tb, leading to a final state signature with a single electron or muon, missing transverse energy, 0 and jets, at least one of which is identified as a b-jet. A W boson that couples to the right-handed (left-handed) chiral projections of the fermions with the same coupling constants as the W is excluded for masses below 1.85 (1.51) TeV at the 95% confidence 0 level. For the first time using LHC data, constraints on the W gauge couplings for a set of left- and right-handed coupling combinations have been placed. These results represent a significant improvement over previously published limits. Published in Physics Letters B as doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.12.008. arXiv:1208.0956v2 [hep-ex] 11 Mar 2014 c 2018 CERN for the benefit of the CMS Collaboration.
    [Show full text]
  • Higgs Decay Into Bottom Quarks Seen at Last
    VIEWPOINT Higgs Decay into Bottom Quarks Seen at Last Two CERN experiments have observed the most probable decay channel of the Higgs boson—a milestone in the pursuit to confirm whether this remarkable particle behaves as physicists expect. by Howard E. Haber∗ destroying the mathematical consistency of the theory, Wein- berg and Salam assumed that the W and Z bosons acquire ifty years ago, Steven Weinberg and Abdus Salam mass by interacting with an omnipresent field—an idea that independently proposed a theory for the weak inter- Peter Higgs and a number of other theorists had proposed actions that govern certain nuclear processes such as earlier [2, 3]. The presence of a “Higgs field” implied the radioactive beta decay [1]. The particles that mediate existence of a new particle [3], the Higgs boson, which, af- Fthese interactions, the W and Z bosons, had to be massive ter decades of searching, was ultimately discovered in 2012 to explain the short-range nature of the weak nuclear force. in the debris of proton-proton collisions by the ATLAS and But in order to introduce these masses without otherwise CMS collaborations at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN [4]. The 2012 discovery was a triumph for particle physics, but it was also the beginning of a new pursuit: determining whether physicists have the right picture of how the Higgs boson interacts with other particles. These interactions make the Higgs boson highly unstable, causing it to decay into a number of different possible final states. The CMS and AT- LAS collaborations have now confirmed a central part of the current picture by observing the decay of the Higgs boson into a pair of bottom quarks (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • The Quark Model and Deep Inelastic Scattering
    The quark model and deep inelastic scattering Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Pions . 2 1.2 Baryon number conservation . 3 1.3 Delta baryons . 3 2 Linear Accelerators 4 3 Symmetries 5 3.1 Baryons . 5 3.2 Mesons . 6 3.3 Quark flow diagrams . 7 3.4 Strangeness . 8 3.5 Pseudoscalar octet . 9 3.6 Baryon octet . 9 4 Colour 10 5 Heavier quarks 13 6 Charmonium 14 7 Hadron decays 16 Appendices 18 .A Isospin x 18 .B Discovery of the Omega x 19 1 The quark model and deep inelastic scattering 1 Symmetry, patterns and substructure The proton and the neutron have rather similar masses. They are distinguished from 2 one another by at least their different electromagnetic interactions, since the proton mp = 938:3 MeV=c is charged, while the neutron is electrically neutral, but they have identical properties 2 mn = 939:6 MeV=c under the strong interaction. This provokes the question as to whether the proton and neutron might have some sort of common substructure. The substructure hypothesis can be investigated by searching for other similar patterns of multiplets of particles. There exists a zoo of other strongly-interacting particles. Exotic particles are ob- served coming from the upper atmosphere in cosmic rays. They can also be created in the labortatory, provided that we can create beams of sufficient energy. The Quark Model allows us to apply a classification to those many strongly interacting states, and to understand the constituents from which they are made. 1.1 Pions The lightest strongly interacting particles are the pions (π).
    [Show full text]
  • The Discovery of the Top Quark
    The discovery of the top quark Claudio Campagnari University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106 Melissa Franklin Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 Evidence for pair production of a new particle consistent with the standard-model top quark has been reported recently by groups studying proton-antiproton collisions at 1.8 TeV center-of-mass energy at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. This paper both reviews the history of the search for the top quark in electron-positron and proton-antiproton collisions and reports on a number of precise electroweak measurements and the value of the top-quark mass that can be extracted from them. Within the context of the standard model, the authors review the theoretical predictions for top-quark production and the dominant backgrounds. They describe the collider and the detectors that were used to measure the pair-production process and the data from which the existence of the top quark is evinced. Finally, they suggest possible measurements that could be made in the future with more data, measurements that would confirm the nature of this particle, the details of its production in hadron collisions, and its decay properties. [S0034-6861(97)00101-3] CONTENTS 2. Z tt background 174 → 3. Drell-Yan background 174 4. WW background 175 I. Introduction 137 5. bb¯ and fake-lepton backgrounds 175 II. The Role of the Top Quark in the Standard Model 138 6. Results 175 III. Top Mass and Precision Electroweak Measurements 140 B. Lepton 1 jets + b tag 176 A. Measurements from neutral-current experiments 140 1. Selection of lepton 1 jets data before b 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Observation of Higgs Boson Decay to Bottom Quarks
    EUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN) CERN-EP-2018-223 2018/09/20 CMS-HIG-18-016 Observation of Higgs boson decay to bottom quarks The CMS Collaboration∗ Abstract The observation of the standard model (SM) Higgs boson decay to a pair of bottom quarks is presented. The main contribution to this result is from processes in which Higgs bosons are produced in association with a W or Z boson (VH), and are searched for in final states including 0, 1, or 2 charged leptons and two identified bottom quark jets. The results from the measurement of these processes in a data sample recorded −1 byp the CMS experiment in 2017, comprising 41.3 fb of proton-proton collisions at s = 13 TeV, are described.p When combined with previous VH measurements using data collected at s = 7, 8, and 13 TeV, an excess of events is observed at mH = 125 GeV with a significance of 4.8 standard deviations, where the expectation for the SM Higgs boson is 4.9. The corresponding measured signal strength is 1.01 ± 0.22. The combination of this result with searches by the CMS experiment for H ! bb in other production processes yields an observed (expected) significance of 5.6 (5.5) standard deviations and a signal strength of 1.04 ± 0.20. Published in Physical Review Letters as doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.121801. arXiv:1808.08242v2 [hep-ex] 19 Sep 2018 c 2018 CERN for the benefit of the CMS Collaboration. CC-BY-4.0 license ∗See Appendix A for the list of collaboration members 1 Since the discovery of a new boson with a mass near 125 GeV by the ATLAS [1] and CMS [2, 3] Collaborations, rapid progress in the understanding of its properties and couplings has re- vealed that the new particle is compatible with the standard model (SM) Higgs boson H [4–9].
    [Show full text]
  • Neutrino Oscillations and the MINOS Experiment
    An Introduction to Modern Particle Physics Mark Thomson University of Cambridge DALI Run=56698 Evt=7455 ALEPH 3 Gev EC 6 Gev HC Y" 1cm 0 −1cm −1cm 0 1cm X" Filename: DC056698_007455_000830_1723.PS Made on30-Aug-200017:24:02bykonstantwithDALI_F1. Z0<5 D0<2 RO TPC (φ −175)*SIN(θ) x xo o o−xo−oxx−− o x o x o o − − o x − −− o xo−x x xoo− − x x o − o x o x x o − − x o − − x − o xo − o − − oo− o − x o o x − x − x o x ox − x −−o − x 15 GeV θ=180 θ=0 Science Summer School: 30th July - 1st August 2007 1 Course Synopsis Introduction : Particles and Forces - what are the fundamental particles -what is a force The Electromagnetic Interaction -QED and e+e- annihilation - the Large Electron-Positron collider The Crazy world of the Strong Interaction - QCD, colour and gluons -the quarks The Weak interaction - W bosons - Neutrinos and Neutrino Oscillations -The MINOS Experiment The Standard Model (what we know) and beyond - Electroweak Unification - the Z boson - the Higgs Boson - Dark matter and supersymmetry - Unanswered questions 2 Format and goals Each Session : ~30 minute mini-lecture ~15 discussion ~30 minute mini-lecture ~15 discussion The discussion is important some of the ideas will be very new to you … there are no foolish questions ! COURSE GOALS: develop a good qualitative understanding of the main ideas in MODERN particle physics. A few words about me: D.Phil Oxford in 1991 : particle-astrophysics CERN 1992-2000 : working on the LEP accelerator studying the Z and W bosons Cambridge 2000- : mainly working on the MINOS neutrino experiment and the ILC 3 Introduction to the Standard Model of Particle Physics Particle Physics is the study of MATTER : the fundamental constituents which make up the universe FORCE : the basic forces in nature, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • HPQCD Predictions for Excited Bc States Come up Trumps!
    HPQCD predictions for excited Bc states come up trumps! Particles that are ‘excited’ bound states of a bottom quark and a charm antiquark have been discovered at the Large Hadron Collider and their masses are in agreement with predictions made by the HPQCD collaboration back in 2012. HPQCD used a numerical technique known as lattice QCD to solve the theory of the strong force, Quantum Chromodynamics. This enabled them to calculate the masses of several bound states of bottom and anticharm, each with the quarks in a different configuration, collectively known as the Bc mesons. The CMS and LHCb collaborations have both now reported in 2019 the first clear evidence for two members of this set called the Bc’ and Bc*’ mesons. The lightest Bc meson, known simply as the Bc, has the bottom and anticharm quarks spinning in opposite directions so that its spin is zero. This is the lowest energy configuration for bottom-anticharm and simplest to calculate in lattice QCD. In 2005 HPQCD (with the Fermilab lattice collaboration) successfully predicted the mass of the Bc meson, ahead of its discovery by the CDF experiment at the Fermilab Tevatron collider. The large mass of this meson, 6.27 GeV/c2 (where the proton mass is 0.94 GeV/c2), along with its quark-antiquark content that meant a proton collider was needed to produce it, made it hard to find experimentally. In 2012, armed with the computing power of the UK STFC’s DiRAC facility and the much-improved QCD calculations that that allowed, HPQCD were able to revisit the topic and calculate the masses of many more states.
    [Show full text]