Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Status of Is the CKM matrix the only source of CP violation? Leo Bellantoni Fermilab Users' Meeting June 2002.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Status of Is the CKM matrix the only source of CP violation? Leo Bellantoni Fermilab Users' Meeting June 2002."— Presentation transcript:

1 Status of Is the CKM matrix the only source of CP violation? Leo Bellantoni Fermilab Users' Meeting June 2002

2 where (Buchalla & Buras, Falk et. al., D'Ambrosio and Isidori) Hadronic effects well understood K +    K+K+ ++ Compare B -  D 0 e - : HQET vs data

3 K +    0.79  0.10 <0.032 (BNL) From fit by D'Ambrosio and Isidore, PL B530 (2002) 108 using above constraints, |V ub / V cb |,  K, and  m(B d )

4 K +    The CKM result in the event of no new physics

5 K +    In SUSY, branching ratio could be up to 210% (conceivably, much more) of the Standard Model value, leading to the above CKM result Buras,Colangelo,Isidori,Romanino,Silvestrini Nucl.Phys B566(2000)3.

6 K +    In MSSM, branching ratio could be between 65 to 102% the Standard Model value, leading to the above CKM result Buras,Gambino,Gorban,Jager,Silvestrini Nucl.Phys B592(2001)55.

7 K +    Buras et.al. found an "unlikely" SUSY scenario that gives enhancements of Br(K +    ) up to 3x the SM level Baek,Jang,Ko,Park, Nucl.Phys., B609(2001)442 also show a SUSY scenario where Br(K +    ) differs markedly from the SM level Hattori,Hasuike,Wakaizumi, Nucl.Phys., B592(2001)55 also found large branching ratio enhancements in their 4 generation model D'Ambrosio and Isidori, Phys.Lett., B530(2002)108 discusses the case where new physics has led us to draw the wrong constraint from B d mixing

8 BNL E787 reports 2 clean events With recent ( ,  values, expect BNL E949 (upgrade of E787) expects to see 5 - 10 events using stopped K +  Run has started  Needs 2 more years worth of data  Joint collaboration with CKM (FNAL / BNL / IHEP) CKM plans to see 100 events using the Main Injector and decay in flight PRL 88, 041803 (2002) K +    at  3  level,

9 Other Physics Lepton flavor violation K +   +  + e - K +   +  - e + K +   -  + e + K +   -  +  + K +   - e + e + T violation in K +   0 l +  Search for pseudoscaler in K +  e + Direct CP violation in 3 ,  Form factors in K +   + l + l -

10

11 Detection Fiducial region limited by beam energy, background from K , use of RICH to measure  + velocity, need for K +  + vertex M 2 MISS = M 2 K (1 - p  /p K ) + m 2  (1 - p K /p  ) – p  p K  2 100 events @ 17% x 1.6% x (8 x 10 -11 )  Need ~4 x 10 14 K + !

12 Initial momentum-selected beam (  +, p, K + )  P/P ~ 2% RF deflection: Asin(  t) A ~ 15 MeV/c Transport L = (integer)   c /f  t then integer multiple of 2  for  + 2nd RF deflection e.g. 180 o out of phase: - Asin(  t+  t) For  +, no net deflection For K +, deflection is 2A sin(  n   /  K )  cos(wt+  n   /  K ) Stop  + with beam plug, collect K + X X 86.4 m 12.9 m RF separated K + beam

13 Turtle/GEANT simulation:  Debunched 22GeV beam (+2%)  33MHz of K + per 4 x 10 12 ppp  71% Kaon purity  Total charged particle rate into detector <50MHz; muon component is 7.4MHz  Achieves baseline CKM requirements Need 5MeV/m P  kick for 1sec spill  need superconducting cavities to create the deflection RF separated K + beam

14

15 Expressed as B MAX on inner Nb surface: This result:104mT Our design @ 5MeV/m: 77mT TESLA @25 MeV/m:110mT TESLA @35 MeV/m:160mT RF separated K + beam A recent 1-cell test result Q P  (MeV/m) Our Design Goal Thermal Breakdown Have similar results on 2 other small structures, but still need to improve (And have lots of tricks to try for that)

16 Detection What We Want: K+K+ ++ What We'll Get: K+K+ ++ Br = 63.5% Also K +  + K+K+ ++  0  (undetected) Br = 21.2% K+K+ ++ X (undetected) A Kinematics  + Veto  Veto Charged Veto Low Material Momentum, direction & position of K + and  +

17 Detection Redundant measurements essential

18 Tracking vs. RICHs

19 Straw Tubes Mechanical stress and leak rate testing 2 x 10 -7 atm-cc/sec-straw (N 2 ) Fe 55 source used to locate active region, wires Typically   0.002" from nominal Ru 106 source to measure drift times 20 straw prototypes testing in Lab 3

20 Photon Veto System Small prototypes studied 2 sector (0.3%) prototype being built now Tagged e - beam test at Jlab Sept/Oct 20 layers scintillator per PMT 4 PMTs per sector in VVS ~4200 PMTs in entire  veto system

21 We plan to explicitly test the factorization hypothesis in an early special / engineering run K +   0  + Veto Test We use the factorization to estimate the K +   0  + background; i.e., we multiply overall  0 veto inefficiency of 1.6 x 10 -7 by our kinematic rejection factor of 1/30000 BNL E787 has tested factorization by plotting P(  + ) line in K +   +  0 with (a) no  veto cuts, (b) online  veto cuts, (c) full analysis cuts

22 Electronics / DAQ 50MHz debunched beam  need continuous deadtimeless digitization TDC every (~30000) channel, QDC on ,  + vetos (~8000 channels) Recent history of detector activity is important Imagine 2 K +  +  0 events 10ns  PMT deadtime apart K+K+ K+K+ ++ ++    (Branching Ratio) 2 / (Number of  veto channels) 2 = 2 x 10 -8 >> 8 x 10 -11 Br we want to measure Studying triggerless DAQ (just say yes and trigger at level 3 in software) 

23 And at the end… M 2 MISS = M 2 K (1 - p  /p K ) + m 2  (1 - p K /p  ) – p  p K  2

24 Spares

25 Br(K +    ) =   + { [ I(V td V ts * ) X(M t /M W ) ] 2 CPV top loops +[ R(V td V ts * ) X(M t /M W ) CPC top loops +R(V cd V cs * ) P(M t,  s (  )) ] 2 } Charm contribution; P = 0.42  0.06  + =0.901 K +    3  2 Br(K +  0 e + ) 2  2 sin 4  W sin 2  C Known to +2.5% Charm contribution adds ~3% error in Br for any given I (V td V ts * ) With current V CKM values Br(K +    ) =(0.81  0.15)x10 -11 (Hocker et.al., 2001) (Buchalla & Buras)

26 RF separated K + beam

27 Preliminary Specs 3.9 GHz, TM 110  mode  15mm iris radius  47mm equator radius  38mm cell length 26 cells per meter 5 MeV/m P  kick; 15 MeV/station E peak = 19MV/m B peak = 77mT Transverse shunt impedance 702  /m Q x R SURF is 228  Stored energy 0.73 J/m 8.5 W/m dissipated into LHe 1.8 ~ 2.0 K Q:2.2 x 10 9 (unloaded) 6.0 x 10 7 ( loaded )

28 Measuring the K + UMS - high rate PWCs  2 stations of 6 planes each  Rate ≲ 0.90 MHz/cm 2 – compare HyperCP rates of 0.75 MHz/cm 2 K + RICH - velocity spectrometer  10m long N 2 radiator @ 1.1atmospheres with ~10 detected photons  22GeV beam gives K + resolution in (  ) to +0.5%

29 Measuring the  +  20m long Ne RICH @ 1atmosphere:  Straw Tube tracker: (total 13 layers)

30 K +,  + RICHs 22GeV beam gives K + resolution in (  ) to +0.5% K + RICH is 10m long CF 4 (or N 2 ) radiator with ~10 detected photons  + RICH is 20m long Ne radiator with 3000 PMTs Challenges include:  Need 0 2 contamination at O (10 -6 )  Low mass mirrors  High rate (~1MHz) photomultiplier tubes  Gaussian tails in resolution to 5 orders of magnitude Drawing heavily on the SELEX experience

31 SELEX RICH cm

32 Photon Veto System Design assumes the demonstrated performance of BNL-E787 system (1mm Pb / 5mm Scintillator) for vetoing low energy (20 - 200 MeV) photons  angle and E(  ) correlated in K +  +  0  50% coverage E(  ) > 1GeV in VVS  +  0 events critical

33 Online monitoring is crucial ~ Two seconds of undetected dead time in two years of data taking blows the inefficiency budget Photon Veto System Small prototypes studied 2 sector (0.3%) prototype being built now Tagged e - beam test at Jlab Sept/Oct Events with an E(  ) > 1GeV in VVS have the  enter at ~30 mrad angle GEANT simulation says 3 x 10 -5 inefficiency can be achieved over 1GeV Photoproduction effects (e.g.,  Pb   K 0 ) in > 1GeV region: Total cross section ~4mBarn  4 x 10 -5 inefficiency – but most of those final states will be detected Engineering problems are formidable!

34  + Veto Need to reject 14-20GeV  + from K +  2 decays at O (10 -5 ) level What could make a  + fake a  + ?  + bremsstrahlung  +  e + DIS Tested a 26 layer (41mm Fe) / (10mm scintillator) 0.6 x0.6 meter prototype in Nov 2000 at IHEP(Protvino) with ~19GeV momentum analyzed  + beam: 12 x 2 segmentation After cuts on shower shape,   acceptance (3~4) x10 -6, with   acceptance 75.3% Corresponding GEANT numbers are 2 x10 -6, 69%


Download ppt "Status of Is the CKM matrix the only source of CP violation? Leo Bellantoni Fermilab Users' Meeting June 2002."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google