Physics of Neutrinos at Ultra High Energiesringwald/astroparticle/talks/frascati_fin.pdf– Physics...

Physics of Neutrinos atUltra High Energies

Andreas Ringwaldhttp://www.desy.de/˜ringwald

DESY

“The UHE Universe: a vision for the next decade”

Centro Congressi Villa Mondragone, Monteporzio Catone, Italy

June 19-21, 2006

– Physics of Neutrinos at UHE – 1

1. Introduction

• Existing observatories for Ultra HighEnergy Cosmic ν’s provide sensibleupper bounds on flux

• Upcoming decade: progressively lar-ger detectors for UHECν’s

⇒ E ≥ 1016 eV:

→ Astrophysics of cosmic rays

⇒ E ≥ 1017 eV:

→ Particle physics beyond LHC

⇒ E ≥ 1021 eV:

→ Cosmology: relics of phase tran-sitions; absorption on big bang re-lic neutrinos

A. Ringwald (DESY) The UHE Universe, Monteporzio Catone/I, June 2006


• Further content:

2. Sources and fluxes of UHEC neutrinos

3. Fundamental physics opportunities of UHEC neutrinos

4. Conclusions


– Physics of Neutrinos at UHE – 32. Sources and fluxes of UHEC neutrinos

• Paradigm for astrophysical extra-galactic source of protons and neu-trinos: shock acceleration– p’s, confined by magnetic fields,

accelerate through repeated scat-tering by plasma shock fronts

– production of π’s and n’s throughcollisions of the trapped p’s withambient plasma produces γ’s, ν’sand CR’s (n diffusion from source)

Hillas: Ep <∼ 1021 eV⇒ Eν <∼ 1020 eV

⇒ UHEC (Eν >∼ 1020 eV) neutrinos

← yet unknown acceleration sites← other acceleration mechanism← decay of superheavy particles

p

π+

µ+

e+

νµ

ν̄µ

νe

n

SHO

CK

[Ahlers PhD in prep.]






Hillas: Ep <∼ 1021 eV⇒ Eν <∼ 1020 eV



Hillas-plot

(100 EeV)

(1 ZeV)

Γ

Neutronstar

maxE ~ ZBL

maxE ~ ZBL

White

dwarf

Protons

(candidate sites for E=100 EeV and E=1 ZeV)

GRB

Galacticdisk

halo

galaxiesColliding

jets

nuclei

lobes

hot-spots

SNR

Active

galaxies

Clusters

(Fermi)

(Ultra-relativistic shocks-GRB)

1 au 1 pc 1 kpc 1 Mpc

-9

-3

3

9

15

3 6 9 12 15 18 21

log(Magnetic field, gauss)

log(size, km)

Fe (100 EeV)

Protons

[Pierre Auger Observatory]






Hillas: Ep <∼ 1021 eV⇒ Eν <∼ 1020 eV








Hillas: Ep <∼ 1021 eV⇒ Eν <∼ 1020 eV

⇒ Eν >∼ 1020 eV (super-GZK) ν’s:


[Barbot,Drees ‘02]






Hillas: Ep <∼ 1021 eV⇒ Eν <∼ 1020 eV

⇒ Eν >∼ 1020 eV (super-GZK) ν’s:




Top-down scenarios for super-GZK neutrinos

• Existence of superheavy particleswith 1012 GeV <∼mX <∼ 1016 GeV,produced during and after inflationthrough e.g.– decomposition of topological de-

fects from late phase transitionsinto their constituents

⇒ super-GZK ν’s from constituentdecay

– particle creation in time-varyinggravitational field

⇒ super-GZK ν’s from decay or anni-hilation of superheavy dark matter(for τX >∼ τU) [Ringeval,Sakellariadou,Bouchet ‘06]








⇒ super-GZK ν’s from decay or anni-hilation of superheavy dark matter(for τX >∼ τU)

1e+22

1e+23

1e+24

1e+25

1e+26

1e+27

1e+18 1e+19 1e+20 1e+21 1e+22E (eV)

E3 J(E)(eV2 m�2 s�1 sr�

1 ) MX = 1� 1014 GeV�p

p+

[Aloisio,Berezinsky,Kachelriess ‘04]








⇒ super-GZK ν’s from decay or anni-hilation of superheavy dark matter(for τX >∼ τU) [Kolb,Chung,Riotto ‘98]








⇒ super-GZK ν’s from decay or anni-hilation of superheavy dark matter(for τX >∼ τU)

[Aloisio,Berezinsky,Kachelriess ‘04]




• How generic?

– Topological defects: generic pre-diction of symmetry breaking (SB)in GUT’s, and even fundamentalstring theory, e.g.∗ G→ H×U(1) SB: monopoles∗ U(1) SB: ordinary or supercon-

ducting strings∗ G→ H×U(1)→ H× ZN SB:

monopoles connected by strings– Superheavy dark matter: need

symmetry to prevent fast X decay∗ gauge ⇒ X stable∗ discrete⇒ stable or quasi-stable

x

y

z

Reφ

Imφ

[Rajantie ‘03]




• How generic?

– Superheavy dark matter: needsymmetry to prevent fast X decay∗ gauge ⇒ X stable∗ discrete⇒ stable or quasi-stable

– Topological defects: generic pre-diction of symmetry breaking (SB)in GUT’s, including fundamentalstring theory, e.g.∗ G→ H×U(1) SB: monopoles∗ U(1) SB: ordinary or supercon-


monopoles connected by strings

SO(10)1

−→ 4C 2L 2R

8>>>>>>>>>>>>><>>>>>>>>>>>>>:

1−→ 3C 2L 2R 1B−L

8<: 1−→ 3C 2L 1R 1B−L

2 (2)−→ GSM (Z2)

2′ (2)−→ GSM (Z2)

1−→ 4C 2L 1R

8<: 1−→ 3C 2L 1R 1B−L

2 (2)−→ GSM (Z2)

2′ (2)−→ GSM (Z2)

1−→ 3C 2L 1R 1B−L

2 (2)−→ GSM (Z2)

1 (1,2)−→ GSM (Z2)

[Jeannerot,Rocher,Sakellariadou ‘03]




• How generic?

– Topological defects: generic pre-diction of symmetry breaking (SB)in GUT’s, and even fundamentalstring theory, e.g.∗ G→ H×U(1) SB: monopoles∗ U(1) SB: ordinary or supercon-




NECKLACE

M M

M

M M

M

MS NETWORK

[Berezinsky ‘05]




• How generic?

– Topological defects: generic pre-diction of symmetry breaking (SB)in GUT’s, including fundamentalstring theory, e.g.∗ G→ H×U(1) SB: monopoles∗ U(1) SB: ordinary or supercon-






3. Fundamental physics opportunities with UHEC neutrinos

• Cν’s with Eν >∼ 108 GeV probe νN

scattering at√

sνN >∼ 14 TeV (LHC)

• Perturbative Standard Model (SM)≈ under control (← HERA)

[Gandhi et al. ’98; Kwiecinski et al. ’98; ...]

⇒ Search for enhancements in σνN

beyond (perturbative) SM:

⋄ Electroweak sphaleron production(B + L violating processes in SM)⋄ Kaluza-Klein, black hole, p-brane

or string ball production in TeVscale gravity models⋄ . . .

[Tu ‘04]





scattering at√






⋄ Electroweak sphaleron production(B + L violating processes in SM)

⋄ Kaluza-Klein, black hole, p-braneor string ball production in TeVscale gravity models⋄ . . .

sphaleronE

N0 1cs

instanton





scattering at√








IW/Sph bL

bL

tL

sL

sL

cL

dL

dL

uL

νe

νµ

ντ





scattering at√








[AR ‘03]





scattering at√








[Fodor,Katz,AR,Tu ‘03; Han,Hooper ‘03]





scattering at√








j

i

R (s) S

3−brane

b

[Scientific American ‘00]





scattering at√







⋄ Kaluza-Klein, black hole, p-braneor string ball production in TeVscale gravity models⋄ . . . [Barklow,De Roeck ‘01]





scattering at√








[AR,Tu ‘01; Tu ‘04]



TeV scale physics with UHEC neutrinos

dN

dt∝

∫dEν Fν(Eν)σνN(Eν)

⇒ Non-observation of deeply-penetra-ting particles, together with lowerbound on Fν (e.g. cosmogenic ν’s)⇒ upper bound on σνN

[Berezinsky,Smirnov ‘74; Morris,AR ‘94; Tyler,Olinto,Sigl ‘01;..]

• Recent quantitative analysis:[Anchordoqui,Fodor,Katz,AR,Tu ‘04]

⋄ Best current limits from exploi-tation of RICE search results

[Kravchenko et al. [RICE] ‘02,03]

⋄ Auger will improve these limits byone order of magnitude [Anchordoqui,Fodor,Katz,AR,Tu ‘04]




dN

dt∝

∫dEν Fν(Eν)σνN(Eν)

⇒ Non-observation of deeply-penetra-ting particles, together with lowerbound on Fν (e.g. cosmogenic ν’s)⇒ upper bound on σνN

[Berezinsky,Smirnov ‘74; Morris,AR ‘94; Tyler,Olinto,Sigl ‘01;..]

• Recent quantitative analysis:[Anchordoqui,Fodor,Katz,AR,Tu ‘04]

⋄ Best current limits from exploi-tation of RICE search results

[Kravchenko et al. [RICE] ‘02,03]

⋄ Auger will improve these limits byone order of magnitude [Anchordoqui,Fodor,Katz,AR,Tu ‘04]




• Bounds exploiting searches for dee-ply-penetrating particles applicableas long as σνN <∼ (0.5÷ 1) mb

• For even higher cross sections, e.g.via sphaleron or brane production:

⇒ Strongly interacting neutrino sce-nario for the post-GZK events

[Berezinsky,Zatsepin ‘69]

• Quantitative analysis:[Fodor,Katz,AR,Tu ‘03; Ahlers,AR,Tu ‘05]

– Very good fit to CR data– Need steeply rising cross section,

otherwise clash with nonobservati-on of deeply-penetrating particles

[Ahlers,AR,Tu ‘05]




• Bounds exploiting searches for dee-ply-penetrating particles applicableas long as σνN <∼ (0.5÷ 1) mb

• For even higher cross sections, e.g.via sphaleron or brane production:

⇒ Strongly interacting neutrino sce-nario for the post-GZK events

[Berezinsky,Zatsepin ‘69]

• Quantitative analysis:[Fodor,Katz,AR,Tu ‘03; Ahlers,AR,Tu ‘05]

– Very good fit to CR data– Need steeply rising cross section,

otherwise clash with nonobservati-on of deeply-penetrating particles

[Ahlers,A.R.,Tu ‘05]

[AR ‘03;Han,Hooper ‘04] - - - sphalerons

[Anchordoqui,Feng,Goldberg ‘02] – – – p-branes

[Burgett,Domokos,Kovesi-Domokos ‘04] ...string

excitations



GUT scale physics with super-GZK neutrinos

• Strong impact of measurement for

– particle physics

∗ GUT parameters, e.g. mX

∗ particle content of the desert,e.g. SM vs. MSSM

– cosmology

∗ window on early phase transition∗ Hubble expansion rate H(z)∗ existence of the big bang relic

neutrino background

[Fodor,Katz,AR,Weiler,Wong,in prep.]








– cosmology


neutrino background









– cosmology


neutrino background[Barbot,Drees ‘02]








– cosmology


neutrino background (CνB)




4. Conclusions

• Exciting times for ultrahigh energycosmic rays and neutrinos:

– many observatories under con-struction

⇒ appreciable event samples

• Expect strong impact on

– astrophysics– particle physics– cosmology


Physics of Neutrinos at Ultra High Energiesringwald/astroparticle/talks/frascati_fin.pdf– Physics...

Documents

Transcript of Physics of Neutrinos at Ultra High Energiesringwald/astroparticle/talks/frascati_fin.pdf– Physics...