Methodology to Search for Massive Particle in Cosmic Rays Takeshi SAITO Institute for Advanced Studies, Shinjyuku , Shinjyuku, Tokyo, Japan Yoshikazu HATANO Institute for Cosmic Ray Research, University of Tokyo Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Japan Tomotake YANAGITA Gunma College of Technology Toriba, Maebashi, Gunma , Japan

Ⅰ The existence of massive particle has been excluded in the past cosmic ray studies????? Ⅱ Possibility for observing the particles on the surface (ground) experiment. Scenario 1. Strange Quark Matter Scenario 2. Technibaryon-nucleus atom Ⅲ Proposed experiment and the preliminary results Contents

Exotic Phenomena at E > eV ～ 100 MeV ｰ GeV/nucleon A few m 2 detecotr A big area of detector → →

Ⅰ The existence of massive particle was excluded in the past cosmic ray studies? There had been a number of claims for detecting the massive particles in the history of the cosmic ray Studies. But, Almost of these discoveries were withdrew or rejected as experimental error or statistical fluctuation Some are still surviving! But, They were not rejected, but not confirmed. Almost were forgotten.

What is problem? Can the cosmic ray study contributes to the particle physics? We need “Particle Identification” to confirm the existence of the exotic particles/phenomena. If it is not the case, the exotic will remain as the exotic for ever. too much phenomenology too much speculative

Reconsideration of my past particle experiment

Ideology A + B → The Particles + anything Phenomenology Speculation Particle Identification Particle Identification ← ← ← Anomalous Cosmic Rays DNA Space Experiment Surface Experiment Not necessary for a large area detector but delicate/precisely instrument Similar/higher Fluxes DNA

Ⅱ Possibility for observing the particles on the surface experiment １． Strange Quark Matter, True ground state of QCD ! SQM:R.L.Jaffe, Phys.Rev.Lett. 38, 195(1977), E.Witten, Phys.Rev.D30,272(1984). and others; many publications! Cross Section: M.S.Barger and R.L.Jaffe, Phys. Rev.Lett.C35, 213(1986). Mass Formula:M.Kasuya,T.Saito and M.Yasue Phys.Rev.Lett. D47, 2153(1993). Production of light SQM: R.N.Boyd and T.Saito, Phys.Lett. B298, 6(1993) (1) Possible long mean free paths; L He ～ 180 g/cm 2 (Z=2, A ～ 40) (2) Produce the fragments, H, He, ・・・・・ shell-like structure (3)Increase of mass due to absorption of neutrons (N 2 ) dMs/dX={f(b)×Mn}/λ Propagation of SQM in the atmosphere

Z=14,A=400 λ=84 g/cm 2 Z=2, A=40 P iHe =0.8,λ=186 g/cm 2 Z=1,A=20 P iH =2, λ=236 g/cm 2 We can expect higher intensity of the PARTICLES than flux of Primary SQM at the top of the atmosphere Schematic v iew of propagation ( not include neutron absorption )

2. Negatively charged massive particles; X - Technibaryon- Nucleus Atom R.N.Cahn & S.L.Glashows 、 Science 213, 607 (1981). R.N.Boyd et al., Science 244, 1450(1989) 。 K.Mori and T.Saito, 24th ICRC, (1995). Spectroscopic Analysis on terrestrial materials: for C (1)Electromagnetic Collision Hamiltonian H = P 2 /2M N - 3Zα/2r 0 + Zα/2r 0 (r/r 0 ) 2, r < r 0 = P 2 /2M N - Zα/r, r > r 0 P : momentum, M N : mass of the nucleus, r 0 = 1.2 A 1/3 fermi α: fine structure constant A Z X → A Z ＋ X - (photoionization), A Z + X - → A Z X (capture) in a high temperature (Big Bang, in Star)

Primary: 4 He X (Z=1) Atomic collision and capture of atmospheric nuclei: 14 N X (Z=6) Singly charged: X - X-X- 14 N ● ● X- X- 4 He Technibaryon-nucleus atom in the atmpsphere Possible Observation Capture Cross Section Analogy to the proton-electron recombination e ～ 10Z 4 α 3 m e -3/2 /√T X = (m e /m A ) 3/2 e ～ 4× cm 3 s -1

Ⅲ Proposed experiment and the preliminary results T1T1 1m×1m ×3m height S1S1 C0C0 S５S５ S2S2 S3S3 C2C2 C1C1 S４S４ S７S７ S６S６ S８S８ T２T２ P１P１ P３P３ P２P２ P４P４ A A A A A

T1T1 1m×1m ×3m height S1S1 C0C0 S５S５ S2S2 S3S3 C2C2 C1C1 S４S４ S７S７ S６S６ S８S８ T２T２ P１P１ P３P３ P２P２ P４P４ A A A A A Composition of Instrument

Method for Mass Identification T1T1 S1S1 C0C0 S５S５ S2S2 S3S3 C2C2 C1C1 S４S４ S７S７ S６S６ S８S８ T２T２ P１P１ P３P３ P２P２ P４P４ A A A A A S２S２ S３S３ S４S４ S１S１ S５S５ S６S６ S７S７ S８S８

S 1 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6 S 7 S 8 C 0 =C 1 =C 2 =1, β=1

S 1 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6 S 7 S 8 C 0 =C 1 =C 2 =1, β=1

S 1 S 2 S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6 S 7 S 8 C 0 =C 1 =C 2 =0 → β ≦ TOF → β= m p >m>3m p

Conclusion 1.No event for particles of M ≧ 100 but only in 1 week test running 0.05 /m 2 sr hr 2. 10m p >m>3m p This may recall the forgotten events; ??? 3. Our instrument has enough sensitivity for M ≧ 10 The proposed 5 year running will reach; / m 2 sr hr 4.For region of M ≦ 10, our instrument is not perfect. We need more improvement. Past Balloon Experiment: 0.02/ m 2 sr hr AMS candidates (He): 0.18/ m 2 sr hr ～ 5m p events 0.072/ m 2 sr hr P.C.M.Yock, Phys. Rev D (1981) only in 1 week test running

Present Instrument Proposal 1 Tien-Shan

T1T1 1m×1m ×3m height S1S1 C0C0 S５S５ S2S2 S3S3 C2C2 C1C1 S４S４ S７S７ S６S６ S８S８ T２T２ P１P１ P３P３ P２P２ P４P４ A A A A A Proposal 2 Our detector is not special. This is very standard and very simple. Everybody can do. For example, TOF (β ≦ 0.5) The same one is not necessary. Methodology is the most important. I propose to construct the similar detector, using used detector of wreckage of detectors.

C(β ≧ ) ← C(β ≧ 0.5) ← TOF Present Instrument T1T1 T2T2