Showing posts with label Relativistic Muons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Relativistic Muons. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Muon Detection

An image of the shadow of the Moon in muons as produced by the 700m subterranean Soudan 2 detector in the Soudan Mine in Minnesota. The shadow is the result of approximately 120 muons missing from a total of 33 million detected in Soudan 2 over its 10 years of operation. The cross denotes the actual location of the Moon. The shadow of the Moon is slightly offset from this location because cosmic rays are electrically charged particles and were slightly deflected by the Earth's magnetic field on their journey to the upper atmosphere. The shadow is produced due to the shielding effect the Moon has on galactic and cosmic rays, which stream in from all directions. The cosmic rays normally strike atoms high in the upper atmosphere, producing showers of muons and other short lived particles.

Just an update here while looking at Sean Carroll's blog post article, entitled," Scientists Confirm Existence of Moon." While we understand the need for confirmation of the existence of things, seeing how our perception is used in order to make such a statement,  is a statement of such a measure then as to what is real.

 We report on the observation of a significant deficit of cosmic rays from the direction of the Moon with the IceCube detector. The study of this "Moon shadow" is used to characterize the angular resolution and absolute pointing capabilities of the detector. The detection is based on data taken in two periods before the completion of the detector: between April 2008 and May 2009, when IceCube operated in a partial configuration with 40 detector strings deployed in the South Pole ice, and between May 2009 and May 2010 when the detector operated with 59 strings. Using two independent analysis methods, the Moon shadow has been observed to high significance (> 6 sigma) in both detector configurations. The observed location of the shadow center is within 0.2 degrees of its expected position when geomagnetic deflection effects are taken into account. This measurement validates the directional reconstruction capabilities of IceCube. See: Observation of the cosmic-ray shadow of the Moon with IceCube,

So I have spent some time here looking at how this measure is used in term sof such clarifications and this to me is an exciting off shoot of what particle research has done for us. The skies the limit then as to our use of such a measure then is seen and understood in the post written by Sean Carroll.

Friday, March 01, 2013

Muon Tomography

The same nuclear reaction described above (i.e. hadron-hadron impacts to produce pion beams, which then quickly decay to muon beams over short distances) is used by particle physicists to produce muon beams, such as the beam used for the muon g − 2 experiment
 Can you create relationships of Pierre Auger cosmic particle collision's energy toward the level of energy being producing as these values in LHC? How many cosmic events can be directly related? These hold value in correlations as perceptions of relevance for me when it comes to what happens at point sources. Can we consistently say that such point source of this energetic value produce all the time QGP emissions which provide for the place that faster then light entities are possibly created?

You must know I have had a long journey in terms of putting the pieces together and of course I find it interesting that we can make use of and see into nature in ways that we had not seen before. The understanding of reducible elements makes it necessary to understanding the natural processes going on around us. To understand this Tommaso Dorigo brings the imaging back for us all to look at and possibly make use of new ways in which to measure radiative metals in amongst a full load of metal materials in a dump truck.

He reminds us of what has been sitting in the open reawakens the process of seeing  this decay chain as a necessary in the use of technologies as an example of what happens around being us caught naturally. To me this is part of the tracking I have been doing so as to see further then we had seen before.

It is really important that while I see the environment around earth as playing an instrumental part of the back drop measure of what we see as Cerenkov,  to me it asked for the evidences of things that go "Faster then the Speed of light." I know the motto here, so it is not necessary to correct me on that issue.

Fig. 1: Cerenkov radiation involves the nearly continuous emission of photons by a charged particle moving faster than the speed of light in its vicinity. The charged particle gradually radiates away its energy. Cohen-Glashow emission involves the occasional creation, near a speeding neutrino, of an electron-positron pair, in which the neutrino loses a large fraction of its energy in one step.Is the OPERA Speedy Neutrino Experiment Self-Contradictory?
 In such an environment of earth I find it appealing that this process is unfolding as we see the medium as allowing such transitions necessary as the after affect of the collision process that is taking place. So when the OPERA experiment results was announced,  I was of course interested in what they had to say. Suffice to say that such a thing as a loose wire did settle the issue once and for all.

Now of course it is important that where this collision process takes place with "the point in the environment with earth" such decimation reduced to decay change is necessarily seen. While we reproduce this naturally in our experimental processes we are also recording also in the AMS 02 outside our environment.


IN a vacuum the motto above about faster than light stands true here so it forces me to question that if such a case was possible then what says that what we see in the vent of information reliance toward blackhole emission would not show something in the nature of the universe that is connected that we do not understand? This then again may be a redundant factor for consideration while we wait for AMS 02 to reveal their results

Thus too,  it is of relevance that particle reductionism has taken us to that place where we wonder about the interconnectedness of the cosmos in ways that we did not understand before. It is important for this consideration to have such a point deliver the effect of QGP recognition that such traverses of particle decay as a relevant distribution point of all that we see here on earth. While it is dismissive that such emission would be quickly dispersive it is of natural consequence that we can see things here on earth such as muons as presented by Tommaso.

A black hole is an object so massive that even light cannot escape from it. This requires the idea of a gravitational mass for a photon, which then allows the calculation of an escape energy for an object of that mass. When the escape energy is equal to the photon energy, the implication is that the object is a "black hole". 

See Also:

Thursday, August 16, 2012

Sarah Parcak: Archeology from space and more

 Sarah Parcak: Archeology from space

 Sarah Parcak is an archaeologist and Egyptologist, and specializes in making the invisible past visible using 21st-century satellite technology. She co-directs the Survey and Excavation Projects in the Fayoum, Sinai, and Egypt's East Delta with her husband, Dr. Greg Mumford. Parcak is the author of Satellite Remote Sensing for Archaeology, the first methods book on satellite archaeology, and her work has seeded several TV documentaries. She founded and directs the Laboratory for Global Observation at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

While most Google Earth hobbyists are satisfied with a bit of snapping and geotagging, some have far loftier ambitions. Satellite archaeologist Angela Micol thinks she's discovered the locations of some of Egypt's lost pyramids, buried for centuries under the earth, including a three-in-a-line arrangement similar to those on the Giza Plateau. Egyptologists have already confirmed that the secret locations are undiscovered, so now it's down to scientists in the field to determine if it's worth calling the diggers in.

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Message Sent Through Rock Via Neutrino Beam

See:Cern Courier:The right spin for a neutrino superfluid

If like myself you are watching the history of communication,  it becomes important to understand the advances we have on the horizon for when we are looking across the expanse of space for consideration of that information transference.

MINERvA: Bringing Neutrinos into Sharp Focus

Like radio waves, neutrino beams spread out. Moving farther away from the neutrino source is somewhat like driving away from a radio tower: Eventually you lose the signal. Until physicists create more intense beams of neutrinos or build more powerful detectors, the goal of using neutrinos to communicate with people under the sea or outside Earth’s orbit will remain out of reach.See:Scientists send encoded message through rock via neutrino beam
  While relativistic interpretations are understood with Muon detection scenarios we are able to understand some things about the earth that we had not known before. So in this case we see where such communications are already defining for us some information about the world we live in.



 Beams of neutrinos have been proposed as a vehicle for communications under unusual circumstances, such as direct point-to-point global communication, communication with submarines, secure communications and interstellar communication. We report on the performance of a low-rate communications link established using the NuMI beam line and the MINERvA detector at Fermilab. The link achieved a decoded data rate of 0.1 bits/sec with a bit error rate of 1% over a distance of 1.035 km, including 240 m of earth.

ICARUS: the neutrino speed discrepancy is 0, not 60 ns

 We examine the possibility to employ neutrinos to communicate within the galaxy. We discuss various issues associated with transmission and reception, and suggest that the resonant neutrino energy near 6.3 PeV may be most appropriate. In one scheme we propose to make Z^o particles in an overtaking e^+ - e^- collider such that the resulting decay neutrinos are near the W^- resonance on electrons in the laboratory. Information is encoded via time structure of the beam. In another scheme we propose to use a 30 PeV pion accelerator to create neutrino or anti-neutrino beams. The latter encodes information via the particle/anti-particle content of the beam, as well as timing. Moreover, the latter beam requires far less power, and can be accomplished with presently foreseeable technology. Such signals from an advanced civilization, should they exist, will be eminently detectable in neutrino detectors now under construction. See:Galactic Neutrino Communication by John G. Learned, Sandip Pakvasa, A. Zee

See Also:

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Relativistic Mechanical Quantities

A number of ordinary mechanical quantities take on a different form as the speed approaches the speed of light.

Relativistic Mechanical Quantities(Link)

Kinematic Time Shift Calculation 

Hafele and Keating Experiment

Usefulness of the Quantity pc

Calorimeters for High Energy Physics experiments – part 1

April 6, 2008 by Dorigo



first tau-neutrino “appearing” out of several billion of billions muon neutrinos

Also See:


Beta Negative Decay.svg
Leptons are involved in several processes such as beta decay.
Composition Elementary particle
Statistics Fermionic
Generation 1st, 2nd, 3rd
Interactions Electromagnetism, Gravitation, Weak
Symbol l
Antiparticle Antilepton (l)
Types 6 (electron, electron neutrino, muon, muon neutrino, tau, tau neutrino)
Electric charge +1 e, 0 e, −1 e
Color charge No
Spin 12
A lepton is an elementary particle and a fundamental constituent of matter.[1] The best known of all leptons is the electron which governs nearly all of chemistry as it is found in atoms and is directly tied to all chemical properties. Two main classes of leptons exist: charged leptons (also known as the electron-like leptons), and neutral leptons (better known as neutrinos). Charged leptons can combine with other particles to form various composite particles such as atoms and positronium, while neutrinos rarely interact with anything, and are consequently rarely observed.
There are six types of leptons, known as flavours, forming three generations.[2] The first generation is the electronic leptons, comprising the electron (e) and electron neutrino (ν
); the second is the muonic leptons, comprising the muon (μ) and muon neutrino (ν
); and the third is the tauonic leptons, comprising the tau (τ) and the tau neutrino (ν
). Electrons have the least mass of all the charged leptons. The heavier muons and taus will rapidly change into electrons through a process of particle decay: the transformation from a higher mass state to a lower mass state. Thus electrons are stable and the most common charged lepton in the universe, whereas muons and taus can only be produced in high energy collisions (such as those involving cosmic rays and those carried out in particle accelerators).

Leptons have various intrinsic properties, including electric charge, spin, and mass. Unlike quarks however, leptons are not subject to the strong interaction, but they are subject to the other three fundamental interactions: gravitation, electromagnetism (excluding neutrinos, which are electrically neutral), and the weak interaction. For every lepton flavor there is a corresponding type of antiparticle, known as antilepton, that differs from the lepton only in that some of its properties have equal magnitude but opposite sign. However, according to certain theories, neutrinos may be their own antiparticle, but it is not currently known whether this is the case or not.

The first charged lepton, the electron, was theorized in the mid-19th century by several scientists[3][4][5] and was discovered in 1897 by J. J. Thomson.[6] The next lepton to be observed was the muon, discovered by Carl D. Anderson in 1936, but it was erroneously classified as a meson at the time.[7] After investigation, it was realized that the muon did not have the expected properties of a meson, but rather behaved like an electron, only with higher mass. It took until 1947 for the concept of "leptons" as a family of particle to be proposed.[8] The first neutrino, the electron neutrino, was proposed by Wolfgang Pauli in 1930 to explain certain characteristics of beta decay.[8] It was first observed in the Cowan–Reines neutrino experiment conducted by Clyde Cowan and Frederick Reines in 1956.[8][9] The muon neutrino was discovered in 1962 by Leon M. Lederman, Melvin Schwartz and Jack Steinberger,[10] and the tau discovered between 1974 and 1977 by Martin Lewis Perl and his colleagues from the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.[11] The tau neutrino remained elusive until July 2000, when the DONUT collaboration from Fermilab announced its discovery.[12][13]

Leptons are an important part of the Standard Model. Electrons are one of the components of atoms, alongside protons and neutrons. Exotic atoms with muons and taus instead of electrons can also be synthesized, as well as lepton–antilepton particles such as positronium.

2011 Review of Particle Physics.
  Please use this CITATION: K. Nakamura et al. (Particle Data Group), Journal of Physics G37, 075021 (2010) and 2011 partial update for the 2012 edition.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

first tau-neutrino “appearing” out of several billion of billions muon neutrinos

Layout of the CNGS beam line.
The OPERA neutrino experiment [1] at the underground Gran Sasso Laboratory (LNGS) was designed to perform the first detection of neutrino oscillations in direct appearance mode in the νμ→ντ channel, the signature being the identification of the τ− lepton created by its charged current (CC) interaction [2]. See: Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam-

Computer reconstruction of the tau candidate event detected in the OPERA
experiment. The light blue track is the one likely induced by the decay of a tau lepton
produced by a tau-neutrino. See: The OPERA experiment


See Also:

Proton Collision ->Decay to Muons and Muon Neutrinos ->Tau Neutrino ->

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Energy Boost From Shock Front

Main Components of CNGS
A 400 GeV/c proton beam is extracted from the SPS in 10.5 microsecond short pulses of 2.4x1013 protons per pulse. The proton beam is transported through the transfer line TT41 to the CNGS target T40. The target consists of a series of graphite rods, which are cooled by a recirculated helium flow. Secondary pions and kaons of positive charge produced in the target are focused into a parallel beam by a system of two pulsed magnetic lenses, called horn and reflector. A 1 km long evacuated decay pipe allows the pions and kaons to decay into their daughter particles - of interest here is mainly the decay into muon-neutrinos and muons. The remaining hadrons (protons, pions, kaons) are absorbed in an iron beam dump with a graphite core. The muons are monitored in two sets of detectors downstream of the dump. Further downstream, the muons are absorbed in the rock while the neutrinos continue their travel towards Gran Sasso.microsecond short pulses of 2.4x1013 protons per
 For me it has been an interesting journey in trying to understand the full context of a event in space sending information through out the cosmos in ways that are not limited to the matter configurations that would affect signals of those events.

In astrophysics, the most widely discussed mechanism of particle acceleration is the first-order Fermi process operating at collisionless shocks. It is based on the idea that particles undergo stochastic elastic scatterings both upstream and downstream of the shock front. This causes particles to wander across the shock repeatedly. On each crossing, they receive an energy boost as a result of the relative motion of the upstream and downstream plasmas. At non-relativistic shocks, scattering causes particles to diffuse in space, and the mechanism, termed "diffusive shock acceleration," is widely thought to be responsible for the acceleration of cosmic rays in supernova remnants. At relativistic shocks, the transport process is not spatial diffusion, but the first-order Fermi mechanism operates nevertheless (for reviews, see Kirk & Duffy 1999; Hillas 2005). In fact, the first ab initio demonstrations of this process using particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations have recently been presented for the relativistic case (Spitkovsky 2008b; Martins et al. 2009; Sironi & Spitkovsky 2009).
Several factors, such as the lifetime of the shock front or its spatial extent, can limit the energy to which particles can be accelerated in this process. However, even in the absence of these, acceleration will ultimately cease when the radiative energy losses that are inevitably associated with the scattering process overwhelm the energy gains obtained upon crossing the shock. Exactly when this happens depends on the details of the scattering process. See: RADIATIVE SIGNATURES OF RELATIVISTIC SHOCKS

So in soliton expressions while trying to find such an example here in the blog does not seem to be offering itself in the animations of the boat traveling down the channel we are so familiar with that for me this was the idea of the experimental processes unfolding at LHC. The collision point creates shock waves\particle sprays as Jets?


Solitary wave in a laboratory wave channel.
In mathematics and physics, a soliton is a self-reinforcing solitary wave (a wave packet or pulse) that maintains its shape while it travels at constant speed. Solitons are caused by a cancellation of nonlinear and dispersive effects in the medium. (The term "dispersive effects" refers to a property of certain systems where the speed of the waves varies according to frequency.) Solitons arise as the solutions of a widespread class of weakly nonlinear dispersive partial differential equations describing physical systems. The soliton phenomenon was first described by John Scott Russell (1808–1882) who observed a solitary wave in the Union Canal in Scotland. He reproduced the phenomenon in a wave tank and named it the "Wave of Translation".

So in a sense the shock front\horn for me in respect of Gran Sasso is the idea that such a front becomes a dispersive element in medium expression of earth to know that such densities in earth have a means by which we can measure relativist interpretations as assign toward density determinations in the earth.  Yet,  there are things not held to this distinction so know that they move on past such targets so as to show cosmological considerations are just as relevant today as they are while we set up the experimental avenues toward identifying this relationship here on earth.

 For more than a decade, scientists have seen evidence that the three known types of neutrinos can morph into each other. Experiments have found that muon neutrinos disappear, with some of the best measurements provided by the MINOS experiment. Scientists think that a large fraction of these muon neutrinos transform into tau neutrinos, which so far have been very hard to detect, and they suspect that a tiny fraction transform into electron neutrinos. See: Fermilab experiment weighs in on neutrino mystery

When looking out at the universe such perspective do not hold relevant for those not looking past the real toward the abstract? To understand the distance measure of binary star of Taylor and Hulse,  such signals need to be understood in relation to what is transmitted out into the cosmos? How are we measuring that distance? For some who are even more abstractedly gifted they may see the waves generated in gravitational expression. So this becomes a means which which to ask if the binary stars are getting closer then how is this distance measured? You see?

Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detectorin the CNGS beam 

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Seeing Underlying Structures

 There is  gap between,  "Proton Collision ->Decay to Muons and Muon Neutrinos ->Tau Neutrino ->[gap] tau lepton may travel some tens of microns before decaying back into neutrino and charged tracks." Use the case of Relativistic Muons?

 An analysis of four Fermi-detected gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) is given that sets upper limits on the energy dependence of the speed and dispersion of light across the universe. The analysis focuses on photons recorded above 1 GeV for Fermi detected GRB 080916C, GRB 090510A, GRB090902B, and GRB 090926A. Upper limits on time scales for statistically significant bunching of photon arrival times were found and cataloged. In particular, the most stringent limit was found for GRB 090510A at redshift z & 0.897 for which t < 0.00136 sec, a limit driven by three separate photon bunchings. These photons occurred among the first seven super-GeV photons recorded for GRB 090510A and contain one pair with an energy difference of E & 23.5 GeV. The next most limiting burst was GRB 090902B at a redshift of z & 1.822 for which t < 0.161, a limit driven by several groups of photons, one pair of which had an energy difference E & 1.56 GeV. Resulting limits on the differential speed of light and Lorentz invariance were found for all of these GRBs independently. The strongest limit was for GRB 090510A with c/c < 6.09 x 10−21. Given generic dispersion relations across the universe where the time delay is proportional to the photon energy to the first or second power, the most stringent limits on the dispersion strengths were k1 < 1.38 x 10−5 sec Gpc−1 GeV−1 and k2 < 3.04 x 10−7 sec Gpc−1 GeV−2 respectively. Such upper limits result in upper bounds on dispersive effects created, for example, by dark energy, dark matter or the spacetime foam of quantum gravity. Relating these dispersion constraints to loop quantum gravity
energy scales specifically results in limits of M1c2 > 7.43 x 1021 GeV and M2c2 > 7.13 x 1011 GeV respectively. See: Limiting properties of light and the universe with high energy photons from Fermi-detected Gamma Ray Bursts

The point here is that Energetic disposition of flight time and Fermi Calorimetry result point toward GRB emission and directly determination of GRB emission allocates potential of underlying structure W and the electron-neutrino fields?

Fig. 3: An electron, as it travels, may become a more complex combination of disturbances in two or more fields. It occasionally is a mixture of disturbances in the photon and electron fields; more rarely it is a disturbance in the W and the electron-neutrino fields. See: Another Speed Bump for Superluminal Neutrinos Posted on October 11, 2011 at, "Of Particular Significance"
What I find interesting is that Tamburini and Laveder do not stop at discussing the theoretical interpretation of the alleged superluminal motion, but put their hypothesis to the test by comparing known measurements of neutrino velocity on a graph, where the imaginary mass is computed from the momentum of neutrinos and the distance traveled in a dense medium. The data show a very linear behaviour, which may constitute an explanation of the Opera effect: See: Tamburini: Neutrinos Are Majorana Particles, Relativity Is OK

See Also:

Friday, October 07, 2011

Cohen-Glashow Argument

Bee:And for all I know you need a charge for Cherenkov radiation and neutrinos don't have one.

Fig. 1: Cerenkov radiation involves the nearly continuous emission of photons by a charged particle moving faster than the speed of light in its vicinity. The charged particle gradually radiates away its energy. Cohen-Glashow emission involves the occasional creation, near a speeding neutrino, of an electron-positron pair, in which the neutrino loses a large fraction of its energy in one step.

But these details almost don’t matter, because Cohen and Glashow then put another chunk of powerful evidence on the table. They point out that neutrinos have been observed, at two other experiments, SuperKamiokande and IceCube, 100 to 1000 times more energetic than the neutrinos in OPERA’s beam. These neutrinos come out of the earth having traveled many hundreds or thousands of kilometers across interior of the planet. The fact that these neutrinos did not lose most of their energy while traveling all that distance implies that they, too, did not undergo CG emission. In short, they must have traveled very close to, and conservatively no more than about fifteen parts per billion faster than, the speed of light in empty space. (The limit from IceCube data may be as good as ten parts per trillion!)See: Is the OPERA Speedy Neutrino Experiment Self-Contradictory?

Wednesday, October 05, 2011

Proton Collision ->Decay to Muons and Muon Neutrinos ->Tau Neutrino ->

.....tau lepton may travel some tens of microns before decaying back into neutrino and charged tracks

 Before I comment on the result, let me give you a little background on the whole thing. Opera is a very innovative concept in neutrino detection. Its aim is to detect tau neutrino appearance in a beam of muon neutrinos. A Six-Sigma Signal Of Superluminal Neutrinos From Opera!

The OPERA result is based on the observation of over 15000 neutrino events measured at Gran Sasso, and appears to indicate that the neutrinos travel at a velocity 20 parts per million above the speed of light, nature’s cosmic speed limit. Given the potential far-reaching consequences of such a result, independent measurements are needed before the effect can either be refuted or firmly established. This is why the OPERA collaboration has decided to open the result to broader scrutiny. The collaboration’s result is available on the preprint server arxiv.org

In order to perform this study, the OPERA Collaboration teamed up with experts in metrology from CERN and other institutions to perform a series of high precision measurements of the distance between the source and the detector, and of the neutrinos’ time of flight. The distance between the origin of the neutrino beam and OPERA was measured with an uncertainty of 20 cm over the 730 km travel path. The neutrinos’ time of flight was determined with an accuracy of less than 10 nanoseconds by using sophisticated instruments including advanced GPS systems and atomic clocks. The time response of all elements of the CNGS beam line and of the OPERA detector has also been measured with great precision.


By classifying the neutrino interactions according to the type of neutrino involved (electron-neutrino or muon-neutrino) and counting their relative numbers as a function of the distance from their creation point, we conclude that the muon-neutrinos are "oscillating." See: STATEMENT: EVIDENCE FOR MASSIVE NEUTRINOS FOUND by Dave Casper

We present an analysis of atmospheric neutrino data from a 33.0 kiloton-year (535-day)exposure of the Super-Kamiokande detector. The data exhibit a zenith angle dependent de ficit of muon neutrinos which is inconsistent with expectations based on calculations of the atmospheric neutrino flux. Experimental biases and uncertainties in the prediction of neutrino fluxes and cross sections are unable to explain our observation. . Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos


Tuesday, October 04, 2011

P.I. Chats: Faster-than-light neutrinos?

Measurements by GPS confirm that the neutrinos identified by the Super-Kamiokande detector were indeed produced on the east coast of Japan. The physicists therefore estimate that the results obtained point to a 99.3% probability that electron neutrino appearance was detected.Neutrino Oscillations Caught in the Act

The Gran Sasso National Laboratory (LNGS) is one of four INFN national laboratories.


PIRSA:11090135  ( Flash Presentation , MP3 , PDF ) Which Format?
P.I. Chats: Faster-than-light neutrinos?
Abstract: Can neutrinos really travel faster than light? Recently released experimental data from CERN suggests that they can. Join host Dr. Richard Epp and a panel of Perimeter Institute scientists in a live webinar to discuss this unexpected and puzzling experimental result, and some theoretical questions it might raise.
Date: 28/09/2011 - 12:15 pm
Thanks Phil 


Using the NuMI beam to search for electron neutrino appearance.

The NOνA Experiment (Fermilab E929) will construct a detector optimized for electron neutrino detection in the existing NuMI neutrino beam. The primary goal of the experiment is to search for evidence of muon to electron neutrino oscillations. This oscillation, if it occurs, holds the key to many of the unanswered questions in neutrino oscillation physics. In addition to providing a measurement of the last unknown mixing angle, θ13, this oscillation channel opens the possibility of seeing matter/anti-matter asymmetries in neutrinos and determination of the ordering of the neutrino mass states.See:The NOνA Experiment at Fermilab (E929)


Image from a neutrino detection experiment. (Credit: Image courtesy of Southern Methodist University)

Hunting Oscillation of Muon to Electron: Neutrino Data to Flow in 2010; NOvA Scientists Tune Design

Bee:And for all I know you need a charge for Cherenkov radiation and neutrinos don't have one.

Monday, September 26, 2011

Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam

We know already why the neutrinos could go faster and what new experiments this suggests, why it does not imply time travel or violates causality, and why it is somewhat expected for neutrinos. Now let us focus on what kind of superluminal velocity is indicated.See:A Million Times The Speed Of Light

Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detectorin the CNGS beam
The OPERA neutrino experiment at the underground Gran Sasso Laboratory has measured the velocity of neutrinos from the CERN CNGS beam over a baseline of about 730 km with much higher accuracy than previous studies conducted with accelerator neutrinos. The measurement is based on highstatistics data taken by OPERA in the years 2009, 2010 and 2011. Dedicated upgrades of the CNGS timing system and of the OPERA detector, as well as a high precision geodesy campaign for the measurement of the neutrino baseline, allowed reaching comparable systematic and statistical accuracies.

An early arrival time of CNGS muon neutrinos with respect to the one computed assuming the speed of light in vacuum of (60.7 ± 6.9 (stat.) ± 7.4 (sys.)) ns was measured. This anomaly corresponds to a relative difference of the muon neutrino velocity with respect to the speed of light (v-c)/c = (2.48 ± 0.28 (stat.) ± 0.30 (sys.)) ×10-5. See:
Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detectorin the CNGS beam

Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detectorin the CNGS beam


See Also:

Sunday, September 25, 2011

Relativistic Time Dilation in Muon Decay

See: Relativistic Time Dilation in Muon Decay


Muons reveal the interior of volcanoes


It has been recently shown that puzzling excess events observed by the LSND and MiniBooNE neutrino experiments could be interpreted as a signal from the radiative decay of a heavy sterile neutrino (nu_h) of the mass from 40 to 80 MeV with a muonic mixing strength ~ 10^{-3} - 10^{-2}. If such nu_h exists its admixture in the ordinary muon decay would result in the decay chain mu -> e nu_e nu_h -> e nu_e gamma nu. We proposed a new experiment for a sensitive search for this process in muon decay at rest allowing to definitively confirm or exclude the existence of the nu_h. To our knowledge, no experiment has specifically searched for the signature of radiative decay of massive neutrinos from muon decays as proposed in this work. The search is complementary to the current experimental efforts to clarify the origin of the LSND and MiniBooNE anomalies. Bounds on the muonic mixing strength from precision measurements with muons are discussed. See: New muon decay experiment to search for heavy sterile neutrino and also The LSND/MiniBooNe excess events and heavy neutrino from muon and kaon decays


Some History of the Muon Experiment 

The historical experiment upon which the model muon experiment is based was performed by Rossi and Hall in 1941. They measured the flux of muons at a location on Mt Washington in New Hampshire at about 2000 m altitude and also at the base of the mountain. They found the ratio of the muon flux was 1.4, whereas the ratio should have been about 22 even if the muons were traveling at the speed of light, using the muon half-life of 1.56 microseconds. When the time dilation relationship was applied, the result could be explained if the muons were traveling at 0.994 c.

In an experiment at CERN by Bailey et al., muons of velocity 0.9994c were found to have a lifetime 29.3 times the laboratory lifetime.