1. Astroparticles (CR’s &  ) in the nearby universe & Virtual Observatory … one Universe, two worlds Giuseppe Longo 1,2,3 & Gennaro Miele 1,2 1-Department of Physical Sciences – University Federico II Napoli 2 - INFN Italian Institute of Nuclear Physics – Napoli Unit 3 - INAF Italian Institute of Astrophysics – Napoli Unit longo@na.infn.it miele@na.infn.it longo@na.infn.it miele@na.infn.it

2. Part I Why do astroparticles need V.Ob. ?

3. ….. Because they look at nearby universe (D<100/200 Mpc) 10 TeV 1 TeV 100 GeV Photon interactions at TeV energies give a gamma horizon comparable in size to the GZK horizon The main interaction is:  e + e - Pair production with e + e - cascading. The gamma photons scatter on the extra- galactic background light. knee ankle UHECR GZK horizon: CR (E>10 18.5 eV) interact with CMB photons and decay No UHECR’s from D > R GZK ≈ 100 Mpc UHECR gamma Nearby universe means large f.o.v. (i.e., surveys) for statistics

4. Ground based gamma ray Cherenkov telescopes Cosmic ray showers and Hybrid detectors ….. Because are going through a similar technological breakthrough (D<100/200 Mpc)

5. gamma-ray observatories (with small field-of-view) CANGAROO III (Australia & Japan) Spring 2004 4 telescopes 10 meters Ø Woomera, Australia Windhoek, Namibia HESS (Germany & France) Summer 2002 4 (  16) telescopes 12 meters Ø Roque de los Muchachos, Canary Islands MAGIC (Germany, Spain, Italy) Summer 2003 1 telescope 17 meters Ø Montosa Canyon, Arizona VERITAS (USA & England) 2005? 7 telescopes 10 meters Ø + Wide-angle instruments surveying ~ 2-3 sq. deg. “Threshold”Sens. (1 y) Milagro ~ 2 TeV~ 0.5 Crab Tibet III shower array ~ 3 TeV~ 1 Crab ARGO YBJ 0.5 – 1 TeV~ 0.5 Crab Crab signal Tibet array

6. “Keck mirror segment” equivalent UHECR’s telescopes look really WEIRD!

7. UHECR - The Pierre Auger Giant Array Observatory 1600 tanks + 24 Fluorescence Telescopes 3000 events yr -1 with energies above 10 19 eV 30 events yr -1 above 10 20 eV Sampling on nanosecond scale; events last 30-100 ns Angular resolution 30’ < p.r. <1.5° ns!

8. Gamma rays begin to approach optical resolution But: Objects visible in gamma are not always visible in optical light 30 arcmin UHECR’s are still far from it Angular resolution is small p.r. > 30 ‘ Magnetic fields -> 1.5° < Deflection < 5.0° In one resolution element, Up to 50.000 potential sources

9. One universe Energetic objects (GRB, SN, BH, AGN, etc.) Dark Matter composition & distribution Cosmological constants Correlation functions &c. Two worlds Astronomy Large redshift range Avalanche of complex data Missing data Heterogeneous Low time resolution High angular resolution Few large simulations V.Obs. standards Problems known Astroparticles Local Universe Fewer and/or simpler data Sparse and uneven sampling Heterogeneous Medium/high time resolution (Often) low angular resolution Very many small simulations No standards Problems to be explored Huge technological development Large international collaborations Proprietary data Security issues Many common science goals Common methodology of research

10. Part II – an example Identifying the sources of UHECR

11. Correlation of the Highest-Energy Cosmic Rays with Nearby Extragalactic Objects by The Pierre Auger Collaboration * Using data collected at the Pierre Auger Observatory during the past 3.7 years, we demonstrated a correlation between the arrival directions of cosmic rays with energy above 6 x 10 19 electron volts and the positions of active galactic nuclei (AGN) lying within 75 megaparsecs. We rejected the hypothesis of an isotropic distribution of these cosmic rays with at least a 99% confidence level from a prescribed a priori test. The correlation we observed is compatible with the hypothesis that the highest-energy particles originate from nearby extragalactic sources whose flux has not been substantially reduced by interaction with the cosmic background radiation. AGN or objects having a similar spatial distribution are possible sources. Science 9 November 2007: Vol. 318. no. 5852, pp. 938 - 943 Hundreds of citations in less than 2 months ground zero for a very harsh debate mainly Related to how to integrate astroparticle data with astronomical ones !!

12. Events (t, E, ,  ) Deconvolution for magnetic fields Reconstructed Events (t, E,  ’+ ,  ’+  ) Matched catalogues Source Identifications? Astroparticles world V.Obs. world Problems: 1. Low angular resolution of UHECR data (1 event -> hundreds possible sources) 2. Poor knowledge of galactic/extragalactic B fields Statistical approach to be preferred Deterministic approach Ill posed problem GRID Astronomical catalogues

13. Experiment 1: UHECRs sources follow the distribution of LSS (either AGN in clusters or WIMPS in DM haloes) GZK is on/off (quite a consequence…) Standard propagation of protons Magnetic fields not very strong Since you cannot identify sources, you must work on correlations of asrrival directions 2006, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2006/01/009 (astro-ph/0510765)astro-ph/0510765

14. Propagation of protons IRAS - PSC 15.000 galaxies with spect. z Production of protons Resulting UHECRs flux integrated from a lower threshold of 5x10 19 eV E cut =30 EeVE cut =50 EeV E cut =70 EeVE cut =90 EeV GZK filter (D<200 Mpc) Bright galaxies selection biases, etc…

15. How many events to detect anisotropies? Auger aperture function Montecarlo simulations isotropic distribution of events 200 events ISO LSS 93 events compatible with IRAS-PSC

16. This function vanishes if any of P or 1-P vanishes and has the theorethical maximum value of 1/4. So, the higher its value the more consistent the data are with the underlying hypothesis. 18

17. W z 3TeV 1TeV 3GeV Window Function = Combine W(E,z) and survey +

18. Synthetic sky maps (low-l angular powerspectrum)

19. Astronomical catalogues Filter on astronomical catalogues Specific BoK’s of candidate sources convolution for galactic magnetic fields Events (t, E, ,  ) predictions Simulations/convolution extragalactic fields comparisons Falsification/validation BoK’s/Hypotheses GRID Statistical approach Astroparticles world V.Obs. world Specific candidates GZK selection effects, etc. Radio data etc. Instrumental signature

20. Conclusions ? Standards (for integration with VO & for simulations) for data federation Visualization and analysis tools Access to multi-epoch data Easier access to astronomical knowledge