W

e

d

u

d

d

u

u

θei

θeν

~precoil

~pe ~pν

Fundamentally Cool Physics

with Trapped Atoms and Ions

Dan MelconianApril 23, 2017

Overview

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 1

1. Fundamental symmetries

what is our current understanding?

how do we test what lies beyond?

2. TAMU Penning Trap

physics of superallowed β decay

ion trapping of proton-rich nuclei at T-REX

3. TRIUMF Neutral Atom Trap

angular correlations of polarized 37K

recent results

Scope of fundamental physics

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 2

uu

d d

ud

d uu

d du

quarks

nucleons

electrons

the atom

from the very smallest scales . . .

Scope of fundamental physics

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 2

uu

d d

ud

d uu

d du

quarks

nucleons

electrons

the atom

from the very smallest scales . . .

GeV

10–1

3×10–1010–12

2×10–13

10191015

1.67 min

109 y12×109 y

10–37 s10–44 s

10–10 s10µs

3×105 y

102

10–4

. . . to the very largest

The Standard Model

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 3

All of the known elementary particles and their interactions are

described within the framework of

The Standard Model

The Standard Model

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 3

All of the known elementary particles and their interactions are

described within the framework of

The Standard Model

quantum + special rel ⇒ quantum field theory

The Standard Model

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 3

All of the known elementary particles and their interactions are

described within the framework of

The Standard Model

quantum + special rel ⇒ quantum field theory

Noether’s theorem: symmetry ⇔ conservation law

The Standard Model

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 3

All of the known elementary particles and their interactions are

described within the framework of

The Standard Model

quantum + special rel ⇒ quantum field theory

Noether’s theorem: symmetry ⇔ conservation law

Maxwell’s eqns invariant under

changes in vector potential⇔

conservation of

electric charge, q

The Standard Model

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 3

All of the known elementary particles and their interactions are

described within the framework of

The Standard Model

quantum + special rel ⇒ quantum field theory

Noether’s theorem: symmetry ⇔ conservation law

Maxwell’s eqns invariant under

changes in vector potential⇔

conservation of

electric charge, q

and there are other symmetries too:time ⇔ energy

space ⇔ momentum

rotations ⇔ angular momentum...

The Standard Model

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 3

All of the known elementary particles and their interactions are

described within the framework of

The Standard Model

quantum + special rel ⇒ quantum field theory

Noether’s theorem: symmetry ⇔ conservation law

12 elementary particles, 4 fundamental forces

1st 2nd 3rd Q

lep

ton

s (

νee

)(

νµµ

)(

νττ

)

0−1

qu

ark

s (

ud

) (

cs

) (

tb

)

+2/3−1/3

mediator force

g strong

W±

weakZ

γ EM

The Standard Model

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 3

All of the known elementary particles and their interactions are

described within the framework of

The Standard Modelnew

quantum + special rel ⇒ quantum field theory

Noether’s theorem: symmetry ⇔ conservation law

12 elementary particles, 4 fundamental forces

and 1 Higgs boson

1st 2nd 3rd Q

lep

ton

s (

νee

)(

νµµ

)(

νττ

)

0−1

qu

ark

s (

ud

) (

cs

) (

tb

)

+2/3−1/3

mediator force

g strong

W±

weakZ

γ EM

That’s all fine and dandy, but. . .

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 4

does the Standard Model work??

That’s all fine and dandy, but. . .

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 4

does the Standard Model work??

it predicted the existence of the W±, Z, g, c and t and now the Higgs!

is a renormalizable theory

GSW ⇒ unified the weak force with electromagnetism

QCD explains quark confinement

That’s all fine and dandy, but. . .

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 4

does the Standard Model work??

it predicted the existence of the W±, Z, g, c and t and now the Higgs!

is a renormalizable theory

GSW ⇒ unified the weak force with electromagnetism

QCD explains quark confinement

aµ×1010−11659000

±1 part-per-million!!(PRL 92 (2004) 161802)

aµ ≡ 12(g − 2)

That’s all fine and dandy, but. . .

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 4

does the Standard Model work??

it predicted the existence of the W±, Z, g, c and t and now the Higgs!

is a renormalizable theory

GSW ⇒ unified the weak force with electromagnetism

QCD explains quark confinement

aµ×1010−11659000

±1 part-per-million!!(PRL 92 (2004) 161802)

aµ ≡ 12(g − 2)

Wow . . . this is

the most precisely tested theory ever conceived!

But there are still questions . . .

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 5

parameters values: does our “ultimate” theory really need 25 arbitrary con-stants? Do they change with time?

dark matter: SM physics makes up less than 5% of the energy-matter of theuniverse!

baryon asymmetry: why more matter than anti-matter?

strong CP: do axions exist? Fine-tuning?

neutrinos: Dirac or Majorana? Mass hierarchy?

fermion generations: why three families?

weak mixing: Is the CKM matrix unitary?

parity violation: is parity maximally violated in the weak interaction? Noright-handed currents?

gravity: of course can’t forget about a quantum description of gravity!

How we all test the SM

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 6

colliders: CERN, SLAC, FNAL, BNL, KEK, DESY . . .

nuclear physics: traps, exotic beams, neutron, EDMs, 0νββ, . . .

cosmology & astrophysics: SN1987a, Big Bang nucleosynthesis, . . .

muon decay: Michel parameters: ρ, δ, η, and ξ

atomic physics: anapole moment, spectroscopy, . . .

How we all test the SM

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 6

colliders: CERN, SLAC, FNAL, BNL, KEK, DESY . . .

nuclear physics: traps, exotic beams, neutron, EDMs, 0νββ, . . .

cosmology & astrophysics: SN1987a, Big Bang nucleosynthesis, . . .

muon decay: Michel parameters: ρ, δ, η, and ξ

atomic physics: anapole moment, spectroscopy, . . .

all of these techniques are complementary and important

• different experiments probe different (new) physics

• if signal seen, cross-checks crucial!

How we all test the SM

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 6

colliders: CERN, SLAC, FNAL, BNL, KEK, DESY . . .

nuclear physics: traps, exotic beams, neutron, EDMs, 0νββ, . . .

cosmology & astrophysics: SN1987a, Big Bang nucleosynthesis, . . .

muon decay: Michel parameters: ρ, δ, η, and ξ

atomic physics: anapole moment, spectroscopy, . . .

all of these techniques are complementary and important

• different experiments probe different (new) physics

• if signal seen, cross-checks crucial!

often they are interdisciplinary

(which makes it extra fun!)

How does high-energy physics test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 7

colliders: CERN, SLAC, FNAL, BNL, KEK, DESY, . . . .

direct search of particles

27 km

How does high-energy physics test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 7

colliders: CERN, SLAC, FNAL, BNL, KEK, DESY, . . . .

direct search of particles

27 km

large multi-national collabs

billion $ price-tags

How does nuclear physics test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 8

How does nuclear physics test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 8

How does nuclear physics test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 9

nuclear physics: radioactive ion beam facilities

indirect search via precision measurements

How does nuclear physics test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 9

nuclear physics: radioactive ion beam facilities

indirect search via precision measurements

How does nuclear physics test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 9

nuclear physics: radioactive ion beam facilities

indirect search via precision measurements

smaller collaborations

contribute to all aspects

“table-top” physics

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Begin by looking at the rate for β decay

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Begin by looking at the rate for β decay

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Expand to the often-quoted angular distribution of the decay:

(Jackson, Treiman and Wyld, Phys Rev 106 and Nucl Phys 4, 1957)

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2ξ

(

1 +

β−ν correlation︷ ︸︸ ︷

aβν

~pe · ~pνeEeEνe

+

Fierz term︷ ︸︸ ︷

bΓme

Ee

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Expand to the often-quoted angular distribution of the decay:

(Jackson, Treiman and Wyld, Phys Rev 106 and Nucl Phys 4, 1957)

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2ξ

(

1 +

β−ν correlation︷ ︸︸ ︷

aβν

~pe · ~pνeEeEνe

+

Fierz term︷ ︸︸ ︷

bΓme

Ee

scalar

aβν =−|CS |

2 − |C′

S |2

|CS |2+|C′

S |2

vector

aβν =|CV |2+|C′

V |2

|CV |2+|C′

V |2

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Expand to the often-quoted angular distribution of the decay:

(Jackson, Treiman and Wyld, Phys Rev 106 and Nucl Phys 4, 1957)

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2ξ

(

1 +

β−ν correlation︷ ︸︸ ︷

aβν

~pe · ~pνeEeEνe

+

Fierz term︷ ︸︸ ︷

bΓme

Ee

scalar

aβν =−|CS |

2 − |C′

S |2

|CS |2+|C′

S |2

vector

aβν =|CV |2+|C′

V |2

|CV |2+|C′

V |2

aβν =|CV |

2 + |C ′V |

2 − |CS |2 − |C ′

S |2

|CV |2 + |C ′V |

2 + |CS |2 + |C ′S |

2= 1??

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Expand to the often-quoted angular distribution of the decay:

(Jackson, Treiman and Wyld, Phys Rev 106 and Nucl Phys 4, 1957)

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2ξ

(

1 +

β−ν correlation︷ ︸︸ ︷

aβν

~pe · ~pνeEeEνe

+

Fierz term︷ ︸︸ ︷

bΓme

Ee

aβν =|CV |

2 + |C ′V |

2 − |CS |2 − |C ′

S |2

|CV |2 + |C ′V |

2 + |CS |2 + |C ′S |

2= 1??

This correlation is quadratic in the couplings. . . not as sensitive as the

Fierz parameter, which is linear:

bF =−2ℜe(C∗

SCV + C ′∗S C

′V )

|CV |2 + |C ′V |

2 + |CS |2 + |C ′S |

2= 0??

see Gonzalez-Alonso and Naviliat-Cuncic, PRC 94, 035503 (2016)

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Expand to the often-quoted angular distribution of the decay:

(Jackson, Treiman and Wyld, Phys Rev 106 and Nucl Phys 4, 1957)

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2ξ

(

1 +

β−ν correlation︷ ︸︸ ︷

aβν

~pe · ~pνeEeEνe

+

Fierz term︷ ︸︸ ︷

bΓme

Ee

+〈~I〉

I·

[

Aβ~peEe

︸ ︷︷ ︸

β asym

+Bν~pνEν

︸ ︷︷ ︸

ν asym

+D~pe × ~pνEeEν

︸ ︷︷ ︸

T–violating

]

+ . . .

)

θe,i

~pe ~pν

θν,i

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Expand to the often-quoted angular distribution of the decay:

(Jackson, Treiman and Wyld, Phys Rev 106 and Nucl Phys 4, 1957)

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2ξ

(

1 +

β−ν correlation︷ ︸︸ ︷

aβν

~pe · ~pνeEeEνe

+

Fierz term︷ ︸︸ ︷

bΓme

Ee

+〈~I〉

I·

[

Aβ~peEe

︸ ︷︷ ︸

β asym

+Bν~pνEν

︸ ︷︷ ︸

ν asym

+D~pe × ~pνEeEν

︸ ︷︷ ︸

T–violating

]

+ . . .

)

θe,i

~pe ~pν

θν,iE.g. Aβ = −2ρ

1+ρ2

[

(1−xy)√

3(1+x2)5(1+y2)

− ρ(1−y2)5(1+y2)

]

where x ≈ (ML/MR)2− ζ

and y ≈ (ML/MR)2 + ζ

are right-handed current parameters that are zero in the

SM, and ρ ≡CAMGT

CV MF

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Expand to the often-quoted angular distribution of the decay:

(Jackson, Treiman and Wyld, Phys Rev 106 and Nucl Phys 4, 1957)

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2ξ

(

1 +

β−ν correlation︷ ︸︸ ︷

aβν

~pe · ~pνeEeEνe

+

Fierz term︷ ︸︸ ︷

bΓme

Ee

+〈~I〉

I·

[

Aβ~peEe

︸ ︷︷ ︸

β asym

+Bν~pνEν

︸ ︷︷ ︸

ν asym

+D~pe × ~pνEeEν

︸ ︷︷ ︸

T–violating

]

+ . . .

)

θe,i

~pe ~pν

θν,iE.g. Aβ = −2ρ

1+ρ2

[

(1−xy)√

3(1+x2)5(1+y2)

− ρ(1−y2)5(1+y2)

]

where x ≈ (ML/MR)2− ζ

and y ≈ (ML/MR)2 + ζ

are right-handed current parameters that are zero in the

SM, and ρ ≡CAMGT

CV MF

β-decay parameters depend on the currents mediating the

weak interaction

⇒ sensitive to new physics ⇐

How specifically do I plan to test the SM?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 10

Expand to the often-quoted angular distribution of the decay:

(Jackson, Treiman and Wyld, Phys Rev 106 and Nucl Phys 4, 1957)

d5W

dEedΩedΩνe

=

basic decay rate︷ ︸︸ ︷

G2F |Vud|

2

(2π)5peEe(A − Ee)

2ξ

(

1 +

β−ν correlation︷ ︸︸ ︷

aβν

~pe · ~pνeEeEνe

+

Fierz term︷ ︸︸ ︷

bΓme

Ee

+〈~I〉

I·

[

Aβ~peEe

︸ ︷︷ ︸

β asym

+Bν~pνEν

︸ ︷︷ ︸

ν asym

+D~pe × ~pνEeEν

︸ ︷︷ ︸

T–violating

]

+ . . .

)

θe,i

~pe ~pν

θν,iE.g. Aβ = −2ρ

1+ρ2

[

(1−xy)√

3(1+x2)5(1+y2)

− ρ(1−y2)5(1+y2)

]

where x ≈ (ML/MR)2− ζ

and y ≈ (ML/MR)2 + ζ

are right-handed current parameters that are zero in the

SM, and ρ ≡CAMGT

CV MF

β-decay parameters depend on the currents mediating the

weak interaction

⇒ sensitive to new physics ⇐

Goal must be . 0.1% to complement LHC

Naviliat-Cuncic and Gonzalez-Alonso, Ann. Phys. 525, 600 (2013)Cirigliano, Gonzalez-Alonso and Graesser, JHEP 1302, 046 (2013)

Vos, Wilschut and Timmermans, RMP 87, 1483 (2015)

How to acheive our goal?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 11

dud

duu

We

ν

θei

θeν

~precoil

~pe ~pν

perform a β decay experiment on

short-lived isotopes

How to acheive our goal?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 11

θei

θeν

~precoil

~pe ~pν

dud

duu

We

ν

perform a β decay experiment on

short-lived isotopes

make a precision measurement of

the angular correlation parameters

How to acheive our goal?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 11

θei

θeν

~precoil

~pe ~pν

dud

duu

We

ν

perform a β decay experiment on

short-lived isotopes

make a precision measurement of

the angular correlation parameters

compare the SM predictions to obser-

vations

How to acheive our goal?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 11

θei

θeν

~precoil

~pe ~pν

dud

duu

We

ν

perform a β decay experiment on

short-lived isotopes

make a precision measurement of

the angular correlation parameters

compare the SM predictions to obser-

vations

look for deviations as an indication of

new physics

How to acheive our goal?

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 11

θei

θeν

~precoil

~pe ~pν

dud

duu

We

ν

perform a β decay experiment on

short-lived isotopes

make a precision measurement of

the angular correlation parameters

compare the SM predictions to obser-

vations

look for deviations as an indication of

new physics

perform a nuclear measurement

– often using atomic techniques –

to test high-energy theories

C.S. Wu’s experiment – Parity violation

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 12

C.S. Wu’s experiment – Parity violation

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 12

so much scattering!

low polarization

short relaxation time

poor sample purity

pain to flip the spin

need long t1/2

Traps around the world

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 13

Many groups around the world realize the potential of using traps for

precision weak interaction studies

Fr

He

Na

K,Fr

atom traps ion traps

(Na)

Overview

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 14

1. Fundamental symmetries

what is our current understanding?

how do we test what lies beyond?

2. TAMU Penning Trap

physics of superallowed β decay

ion trapping of proton-rich nuclei at T-REX

3. TRIUMF Neutral Atom Trap

angular correlations of polarized 37K

recent results

T = 2 superallowed decays

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 15

β+

0+, T =2

γp

0+, T =2

N

Z Stable

T = 1

T = 2

44Cr40Ti

28S

36Ca

24Si

20Mg

32Ar

β − ν correlations

model-dependence of δC calcs seem to depend on T . . .

new cases for Vud

T = 2 superallowed decays

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 15

N

Z

β+

0+, T =2

γp

0+, T =2

vector

scalar

Stable

T = 1

T = 2

44Cr40Ti

28S

36Ca

24Si

20Mg

32Ar

β − ν correlations

model-dependence of δC calcs seem to depend on T . . .

new cases for Vud

Recall: pure Fermi decay ⇔ minimal nuclear

structure effects; decay rate is simply given by:

peEe(A − Ee)2ξ(

1 + aβν~pe · ~pνEeEν

+ bFΓme

Ee

)

β − ν correlation from 32Ar

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 16

Doppler shape of delayed proton

depends on ~pe · ~pν !vector

scalar

β − ν correlation from 32Ar

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 16

Doppler shape of delayed proton

depends on ~pe · ~pν !vector

scalar

β − ν correlation from 32Ar

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 16

Doppler shape of delayed proton

depends on ~pe · ~pν !vector

scalar

p

32Ar

B = 3.5T

e+

detector

But why throw away useful information??

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 17

We can improve the correlation measurement

by retaining information about the β

But why throw away useful information??

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 17

We can improve the correlation measurement

by retaining information about the β

utilize technology of Penning traps to provide a

backing-free source of localized radioactive ions!!

But why throw away useful information??

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 17

We can improve the correlation measurement

by retaining information about the β

utilize technology of Penning traps to provide a

backing-free source of localized radioactive ions!!

But why throw away useful information??

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 17

We can improve the correlation measurement

by retaining information about the β

utilize technology of Penning traps to provide a

backing-free source of localized radioactive ions!!

Ring

Electrode

Compensation

Electrode

Compensation

Electrode

Po

sitio

n-s

en

sitiv

ed

ete

cto

r

End Cap End Cap

~B

But why throw away useful information??

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 17

We can improve the correlation measurement

by retaining information about the β

utilize technology of Penning traps to provide a

backing-free source of localized radioactive ions!!

Ring

Electrode

Compensation

Electrode

Compensation

Electrode

Po

sitio

n-s

en

sitiv

ed

ete

cto

r

End Cap End Cap

But why throw away useful information??

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 17

We can improve the correlation measurement

by retaining information about the β

utilize technology of Penning traps to provide a

backing-free source of localized radioactive ions!!

But why throw away useful information??

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 17

We can improve the correlation measurement

by retaining information about the β

utilize technology of Penning traps to provide a

backing-free source of localized radioactive ions!!

But why throw away useful information??

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 17

We can improve the correlation measurement

by retaining information about the β

utilize technology of Penning traps to provide a

backing-free source of localized radioactive ions!!

A Penning trap at T-REX CI/TAMU

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 18

The Texas A&M University Penning Trap

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 19

will be the world’s most open-geometry ion trap!

uniquely suited for studying β-delayed proton decays:

β − ν correlations, ft values/Vud

mass measurements, EC studies, laser spectroscopy, . . .

re−commissioned

K150 cyclotron

production

target

BigSol

separator multi−RFQ

heavy−ion guide

TAMUTRAPto charge−breeder

and K500 cyclotron

ortho−TOF

gas−catcher

ANL−type

The Texas A&M University Penning Trap

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 19

will be the world’s most open-geometry ion trap!

uniquely suited for studying β-delayed proton decays:

β − ν correlations, ft values/Vud

mass measurements, EC studies, laser spectroscopy, . . .

re−commissioned

K150 cyclotron

ion

RIB from

cooler & buncher

HV cageASR magnet7T/210mm

source

K150/HI guide

The Texas A&M University Penning Trap

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 19

will be the world’s most open-geometry ion trap!

uniquely suited for studying β-delayed proton decays:

β − ν correlations, ft values/Vud

mass measurements, EC studies, laser spectroscopy, . . .

re−commissioned

K150 cyclotron

ion

RIB from

cooler & buncher

HV cageASR magnet7T/210mm

source

K150/HI guide

Status in 2013

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 20

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Prototype (45-mm diam) trap installed

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Prototype (45-mm diam) trap installed

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Prototype (45-mm diam) trap installed

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Prototype (45-mm diam) trap installed

Able to transport cooled and bunched beam through

magnet

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Prototype (45-mm diam) trap installed

Able to transport cooled and bunched beam through

magnet

Began trapping off-line ions summer 2016

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Prototype (45-mm diam) trap installed

Able to transport cooled and bunched beam through

magnet

Began trapping off-line ions summer 2016

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Prototype (45-mm diam) trap installed

Able to transport cooled and bunched beam through

magnet

Began trapping off-line ions summer 2016

Currently working on rf excitation (magnetron for

cleaning and dipole for mass measurements)

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Recent Milestones

RFQ commissioned with high efficiency [Mehlman PhD]

Prototype (45-mm diam) trap installed

Able to transport cooled and bunched beam through

magnet

Began trapping off-line ions summer 2016

Currently working on rf excitation (magnetron for

cleaning and dipole for mass measurements)

Connect to heavy ion guide this summer (?)

Current Status

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 21

Overview

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 22

1. Fundamental symmetries

what is our current understanding?

how do we test what lies beyond?

2. TAMU Penning Trap

physics of superallowed β decay

ion trapping of proton-rich nuclei at T-REX

3. TRIUMF Neutral Atom Trap

angular correlations of polarized 37K

recent results

The β+-decay of 37K

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 23

Almost as simple as 0+→ 0+:isobaric analogue decay

strong branch to g.s.

3.6697.89(11)%

4.96

6.35

3.79

6.88

7.51

7.39

5/2+ 2796 keV

3/2+ 3938 keV

3/2+ 3602 keV

5/2+ 3170 keV

3/2− 2490 keV

7/2− 1611 keV1/2+ 1410 keV

37Ar

9.7(

12)

215(

11)

9(3)

27(2

)2.

04(1

1)%

43(3

)26

3(14

)27

(4)

289(

15)

96(6

)

42.2(75)25(20)

29(4)

2.07(11)%27(2)

224(12)

11.6(13) 5.78

37K β+QEC = 6.14746(23) MeV

1.2365(9) s 3/2+

The β+-decay of 37K

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 23

Almost as simple as 0+→ 0+:

5/2+

3/2+

3/2+

3718Ar

1.225(7) s

β+3719K

3/2+0.022%

2.07(11)%

97.99(14)%

isobaric analogue decay

strong branch to g.s.

polarization/alignment

mixed Fermi/Gamow-Teller

⇒ need ρ ≡ GAMGT/GV MF

to get SM prediction for correlation

parameters

get ρ from the comparative half-life: ρ2 =2Ft0

+→0+

Ft− 1

The β+-decay of 37K

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 23

Almost as simple as 0+→ 0+:

5/2+

3/2+

3/2+

3718Ar

1.225(7) s

β+3719K

3/2+0.022%

2.07(11)%

97.99(14)%

isobaric analogue decay

strong branch to g.s.

polarization/alignment

mixed Fermi/Gamow-Teller

⇒ need ρ ≡ GAMGT/GV MF

to get SM prediction for correlation

parameters

get ρ from the comparative half-life: ρ2 =2Ft0

+→0+

Ft− 1

QEC : ±0.003%

BR: ±0.14%

Ft = 4562(28) ⇒

t1/2: ±0.57%

ρ = 0.5874(71)

The β+-decay of 37K

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 23

Almost as simple as 0+→ 0+:

5/2+

3/2+

3/2+

3718Ar

1.225(7) s

β+3719K

3/2+0.022%

2.07(11)%

97.99(14)%

isobaric analogue decay

strong branch to g.s.

polarization/alignment

mixed Fermi/Gamow-Teller

⇒ need ρ ≡ GAMGT/GV MF

to get SM prediction for correlation

parameters

get ρ from the comparative half-life: ρ2 =2Ft0

+→0+

Ft− 1

QEC : ±0.003%

BR: ±0.14%

Ft = 4562(28) ⇒

t1/2: ±0.57%

ρ = 0.5874(71)

The lifetime limited the Ft value

and hence precision of ρ

and hence the SM predictions

of the correlation parameters

The β+-decay of 37K

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 23

Almost as simple as 0+→ 0+:

5/2+

3/2+

3/2+

3718Ar

1.225(7) s

β+3719K

3/2+0.022%

2.07(11)%

97.99(14)%

isobaric analogue decay

strong branch to g.s.

polarization/alignment

mixed Fermi/Gamow-Teller

⇒ need ρ ≡ GAMGT/GV MF

to get SM prediction for correlation

parameters

get ρ from the comparative half-life: ρ2 =2Ft0

+→0+

Ft− 1

QEC : ±0.003%

BR: ±0.14%

Ft = 4562(28) ⇒

t1/2: ±0.57%

ρ = 0.5874(71)

The lifetime limited the Ft value

and hence precision of ρ

and hence the SM predictions

of the correlation parameters

so we measured the lifetime

at the CI:

a 4.4× improvement:

t1/2 =1236.51

± 0.47±0.83 ms

P. Shidling et al., Phys. Rev. C 90, 032501(R) (2014)

Angular distribution of a 32

+→ 3

2

+decay

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 24

dW ∼ 1 + aβν~pe·~pνEeEν

+ bΓm

Ee+

~I

I·

[

Aβ

~peEe

+Bν

~pνEν

+D~pe×~pνEeEν

]

Correlation Expectation

β − ν correlation: aβν = 0.6580(61)

Fierz interference parameter: bFierz = 0 (sensitive to scalars and tensors)

β asymmetry: Aβ = −0.5739(21)

ν asymmetry: Bν = −0.7791(58)

Time-violating D coefficient: D = 0 (sensitive to imaginary couplings)

...

a β−recoil observable Rslow ∼1−aβν−2calign/3 − (Aβ−Bν)

1−aβν−2calign/3 + (Aβ−Bν)= 0

specific to our geometry

Recall: measurements of these correlations to . 0.1%complement collider experiments and test the SM

Angular distribution of a 32

+→ 3

2

+decay

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 24

dW ∼ 1 + aβν~pe·~pνEeEν

+ bΓm

Ee+

~I

I·

[

Aβ

~peEe

+Bν

~pνEν

+D~pe×~pνEeEν

]

Correlation Expectation

β − ν correlation: aβν = 0.6580(61) → 0.6668(18)

Fierz interference parameter: bFierz = 0 (sensitive to scalars and tensors)

β asymmetry: Aβ = −0.5739(21) → −0.5719(7)

ν asymmetry: Bν = −0.7791(58) → −0.7703(18)

Time-violating D coefficient: D = 0 (sensitive to imaginary couplings)

...

a β−recoil observable Rslow ∼1−aβν−2calign/3 − (Aβ−Bν)

1−aβν−2calign/3 + (Aβ−Bν)= 0

specific to our geometry

Recall: measurements of these correlations to . 0.1%complement collider experiments and test the SM

(data in hand for improved branching ratios)

E.g.: Right-handed currents

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 25

The Electroweak Interaction: SU(2)L×U(1) ⇒ W±L , Z, γ

E.g.: Right-handed currents

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 25

The Electroweak Interaction: SU(2)L×U(1) ⇒ W±L , Z, γ

Built upon maximal parity violation:

HSM = GF Vud e(γµ − γµγ5)νe u(γµ − γµγ5)d

Vector P |Ψ〉 = −|Ψ〉

Axial − vector P |Ψ〉 = +|Ψ〉

E.g.: Right-handed currents

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 25

The Electroweak Interaction: SU(2)L×U(1) ⇒ W±L , Z, γ

Built upon maximal parity violation:

HSM = GF Vud e(γµ − γµγ5)νe u(γµ − γµγ5)d

Vector P |Ψ〉 = −|Ψ〉

Axial − vector P |Ψ〉 = +|Ψ〉

low-energy limit of a deeper SU(2)R×SU(2)L×U(1) theory?

E.g.: Right-handed currents

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 25

The Electroweak Interaction: SU(2)L×U(1) ⇒ W±L , Z, γ

Built upon maximal parity violation:

HSM = GF Vud e(γµ − γµγ5)νe u(γµ − γµγ5)d

Vector P |Ψ〉 = −|Ψ〉

Axial − vector P |Ψ〉 = +|Ψ〉

low-energy limit of a deeper SU(2)R×SU(2)L×U(1) theory?

⇒ 3 more vector bosons: W±R , Z ′

Simplest extensions: “manifest left-right symmetric” models

only 2 new parameters: W2 mass and a mixing angle, ζ

|WL〉 = cos ζ|W1〉 − sin ζ|W2〉

|WR〉 = sin ζ|W1〉+ cos ζ|W2〉

RHCs would affect correlation parameters

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 26

Aβ =−2ρ1+ρ2

(√35 − ρ

5

)

Bν =−2ρ1+ρ2

(√35 + ρ

5

)

and Rslow = 0

RHCs would affect correlation parameters

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 26

In the presence of new physics, the angular distribution

of β decay will be affected.

Aβ =−2ρ1+ρ2

(√35 − ρ

5

)

→ −2ρ1+ρ2

[

(1−xy)√

3(1+x2)5(1+y2)

− ρ(1−y2)5(1+y2)

]

Bν =−2ρ1+ρ2

(√35 + ρ

5

)

→ −2ρ1+ρ2

[

(1−xy)√

3(1+x2)5(1+y2)

+ ρ(1−y2)5(1+y2)

]

and Rslow = 0 → y2

where x ≈ (ML/MR)2 − ζ and y ≈ (ML/MR)

2 + ζ

are RHC parameters that are zero in the SM.

RHCs would affect correlation parameters

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 26

In the presence of new physics, the angular distribution

of β decay will be affected.

Aβ =−2ρ1+ρ2

(√35 − ρ

5

)

→ −2ρ1+ρ2

[

(1−xy)√

3(1+x2)5(1+y2)

− ρ(1−y2)5(1+y2)

]

Bν =−2ρ1+ρ2

(√35 + ρ

5

)

→ −2ρ1+ρ2

[

(1−xy)√

3(1+x2)5(1+y2)

+ ρ(1−y2)5(1+y2)

]

and Rslow = 0 → y2

where x ≈ (ML/MR)2 − ζ and y ≈ (ML/MR)

2 + ζ

are RHC parameters that are zero in the SM.

Again, goal must be . 0.1% to have an impact

Thank you, AMO physicists!!

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 27

Atomic methods have opened up a new vista in precision workand provide the ability to push β decay measurements to . 0.1%

laser-cooling and trapping (magneto-optical traps)

sub-level state manipulation (optical pumping)

characterization/diagnostics (photoionization)

Thank you, AMO physicists!!

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 27

Atomic methods have opened up a new vista in precision workand provide the ability to push β decay measurements to . 0.1%

laser-cooling and trapping (magneto-optical traps)

σ−

σ+

I

σ−

σ+

σ−

σ+

I

Thank you, AMO physicists!!

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 27

Atomic methods have opened up a new vista in precision workand provide the ability to push β decay measurements to . 0.1%

laser-cooling and trapping (magneto-optical traps)

Thank you, AMO physicists!!

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 27

Atomic methods have opened up a new vista in precision workand provide the ability to push β decay measurements to . 0.1%

laser-cooling and trapping (magneto-optical traps)

Traps provide a backing-free, very cold (. 1 mK), localized

(∼ 1 mm3) source of isomerically-selective, short-lived

radioactive atoms

Thank you, AMO physicists!!

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 27

Atomic methods have opened up a new vista in precision workand provide the ability to push β decay measurements to . 0.1%

laser-cooling and trapping (magneto-optical traps)

Traps provide a backing-free, very cold (. 1 mK), localized

(∼ 1 mm3) source of isomerically-selective, short-lived

radioactive atoms

Detect ~pβ and ~precoil

⇒ deduce ~pν event-by-event!! ⇐

The TRINAT lab

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 28

The measurement chamber

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 29

Shake-off e− detection

know decay occured from trap

Better control of OP beams

less heating, higher P

Bquad → BOP quickly: AC-MOT

better duty cycle, higher polar-

ization

Increased β/recoil solid angles

better statistics

Stronger E-field (one day. . . )

better separation of charge

states, higher statistics

...

z

x

229µm thickBe foil

(anti)Helmholtz

coils

ScintillatorBC408

90 mm

Light

Ele

ctr

on

MC

P

Pola

rization

axis

Dete

ction

axis

Recoil

MC

P

Electrostatic

hoops

LightSi-strip detector

40x40mm2x300µmSiC substrate

254µm thick

Mirror with

Outline of polarized experiment

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 30

Outline of polarized experiment

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 30

Helmholtz

D2 MOT

anti-

Outline of polarized experiment

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 30

20mF −2=

Helmholtz

D1OP

~F = ~I + ~J

P1/2

S1/2σ±

1−1

Outline of polarized experiment

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 30

E-field

MC

PK

+

Helmholtz

D1OP

photoionization

20mF −2=

~F = ~I + ~J

P1/2

S1/2σ±

355 nm

1−1

Atomic measurement of P

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 31

Deduce P based on a model of the excited state populations

P1/2

mF

S1/2

0 2

σ±

−2= −1 1

Atomic measurement of P

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 31

Deduce P based on a model of the excited state populations

P1/2

mF

S1/2

0 2

σ±

−2= −1 1

Polarization error budget

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 32

∆P [×10−4] ∆T [×10−4]Source

σ− σ+ σ− σ+

Systematics

Initial alignment 3 3 10 8Global fit vs. average 2 2 7 6Uncertainty on sout3 1 2 11 5Cloud temperature 2 0.5 3 2Binning 1 1 4 3Uncertainty in Bz 0.5 3 2 7Initial polarization 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4Require I+ = I− 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2

Total systematic 5 5 17 14

Statistics 7 6 21 17

Total uncertainty 9 8 27 22

Polarization error budget

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 32

∆P [×10−4] ∆T [×10−4]Source

σ− σ+ σ− σ+

Systematics

Initial alignment 3 3 10 8Global fit vs. average 2 2 7 6Uncertainty on sout3 1 2 11 5Cloud temperature 2 0.5 3 2Binning 1 1 4 3Uncertainty in Bz 0.5 3 2 7Initial polarization 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4Require I+ = I− 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2

Total systematic 5 5 17 14

Statistics 7 6 21 17

Total uncertainty 9 8 27 22

Polarization error budget

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 32

∆P [×10−4] ∆T [×10−4]Source

σ− σ+ σ− σ+

Systematics

Initial alignment 3 3 10 8Global fit vs. average 2 2 7 6Uncertainty on sout3 1 2 11 5Cloud temperature 2 0.5 3 2Binning 1 1 4 3Uncertainty in Bz 0.5 3 2 7Initial polarization 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4Require I+ = I− 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2

Total systematic 5 5 17 14

Statistics 7 6 21 17

Total uncertainty 9 8 27 22

⇒ 〈Pnucl〉 = 99.13(8)%

(c.f. neutrons: 99.7(1)% [PERKEOII], 99.3(3)% [UCNA])

and

〈Talign〉 = −0.9767(25)

Scintillator spectra — June 2014

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 33

Just the raw data; a slight lower-energy cut to get rid of 511s

Scintillator spectra — June 2014

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 33

Requiring a shake-off e− ⇒ decay occured from trap!

Scintillator spectra — June 2014

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 33

Requiring a ∆E coincidence ⇒ remove γs

Scintillator spectra — June 2014

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 33

Put in all the basic analysis cuts ⇒ clean spectrum!!

Energy Spectrum Compared to GEANT4

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 34

Asymmetry Measurement (briefly)

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 35

Asymmetry Measurement (briefly)

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 35

Aobs(Ee) =1− S(Ee)

1 + S(Ee), where S(Ee) ≡

√

r−1 (Ee)r+2 (Ee)

r+1 (Ee)r−2 (Ee)

Asymmetry Measurement (briefly)

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 35

Aobs(Ee) =1− S(Ee)

1 + S(Ee), where S(Ee) ≡

√

r−1 (Ee)r+2 (Ee)

r+1 (Ee)r−2 (Ee)

Aβ Error Budget

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 36

Source Corr Uncert [×10−4]

Backgrounds 1.0013 7

Trap parameters position 4

velocity 5

temp, width 1

Thresholds/cuts ∆E pos 5

∆E energy agreement 2

∆E threshold 1

E threshold 0.3

G4 phys list 4

Shake-off e− TOF 3

E +∆E 1

E calibration 0.1

Total systematics 12

Statistical 13

Polarization 5

Total uncertainty 18

Impact of Aβ Measurement

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 37

In terms of CKM unitarity, our Aβ result improved Vud by nearly a

factor of five: |Vud| = 0.981+12−10 → 0.9745(25).

Impact of Aβ Measurement

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 37

In terms of CKM unitarity, our Aβ result improved Vud by nearly a

factor of five: |Vud| = 0.981+12−10 → 0.9745(25).

In terms of right-handed currents, our result is the best nuclear limit:

MWR> 351 GeV (in minimal left-right symmetric models)

Impact of Aβ Measurement

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 37

In terms of CKM unitarity, our Aβ result improved Vud by nearly a

factor of five: |Vud| = 0.981+12−10 → 0.9745(25).

In terms of right-handed currents, our result is the best nuclear limit:

MWR> 351 GeV (in minimal left-right symmetric models)

Analysis of Fierz and second-class currents (E-dependent

observables) to be finished soon

Summary

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 38

The SM is fantastic, but not our “ultimate” theory

There are many exciting avenues to find more a complete model

Nuclear approach: precision measurement of correlation

parameters

Penning trap + RIB CI = cool physics

largest open-area Penning trap especially suited for β-delayed

proton decays

will search for scalar currents via aβν and bFierz

(AC-)MOT + opt. pumping = cool physics

extremely precise, high nuclear polarization: 〈P 〉 = 99.13(8)%best nuclear limit on MWR

> 351 GeV (at ζ = 0).

on the way to a 0.1% measurement of Aβ and other

(un)polarized correlations

The Mad Trappers/Thanks

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 39

TAMU: S. Behling, E. Bennett,

Y. Boran, B. Fenker, M.

Mehlman, J. Patti, P. Shidling

+ TAMU/REU undergrads

+ ENSICAEN interns

TRINAT: J.A. Behr, A. Gorelov, L. Kurchananov,

K. Olchanski, K.P. Jackson, . . .

D. Ashery, I. Cohen M. Anholm, G. Gwinner

Funding/Support: DE-FG02-93ER40773, ECA ER41747

TAMU/Cyclotron Institute

The Mad Trappers/Thanks

Dan Melconian Tel Aviv ColloquiumApr 23, 2017

– 39

TAMU: S. Behling, E. Bennett,

Y. Boran, B. Fenker, M.

Mehlman, J. Patti, P. Shidling

+ TAMU/REU undergrads

+ ENSICAEN interns

TRINAT: J.A. Behr, A. Gorelov, L. Kurchananov,

K. Olchanski, K.P. Jackson, . . .

D. Ashery, I. Cohen M. Anholm, G. Gwinner

Funding/Support: DE-FG02-93ER40773, ECA ER41747

TAMU/Cyclotron Institute

And thank you for your

attention!