Neutrino Oscillations
Suggested reading:
C. Giunti and C.W. Kim, Fundamentals of Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics, Oxford University Press (2007; 728 pages)
Elisa BernardiniDeutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron DESY (Zeuthen)
2
Neutrino oscillations in vacuum • Idea: interference of different massive neutrinos
• The mass differences must be small: ν’s are produced and
detected coherently• Assumptions for the derivation of oscillation probability:
– Neutrinos are ultra-relativistic– Neutrinos are produced in a defined flavor state
– The experimental resolution in energy-momentum does not allow the determination of the individual masses
• Neutrino flavor states να can then be described by
a superposition of mass (Hamiltonian) eigenstates νk: Eq. 1
Bruno Pontecorvo
3
Neutrino propagation• The Schroedinger equation implies that they evolve in
time as plane waves:
• The time evolution of a flavor state is then:
• U†U=1 implies that:
• Combining Eq 2 and Eq 3 we obtain that a pure flavor state at t=0 becomes a superposition of different flavors states at t>0
Eq. 3
Eq. 2
Eq. 4
4
Neutrino oscillation probability• The coefficient
gives the probability of transition as a function of time:
• For relativistic neutrinos:
Eq. 5
5
Neutrino oscillations in vacuum• The transition probability between two different states is then
• In experiments, the distance to the source L is measured (not the time t)
• Neutrino oscillations can shed light on the squared-mass differences and the elements of the mixing matrix
• Phases of neutrino oscillations:
• Symmetry transformation of states:– CP violated:– T violated:– CPT conserved:
Eq. 6
6
Two-neutrino mixing• Consider only two massive neutrinos out of three• The two flavor states are superposition of the two mass
states ν1 and ν2 with coefficients given by the elements of the effective mixing matrix:
• There is one mixing angle 0 ≤ θ ≤ π/2 and one squared-mass difference Δm2
• The transition probability (α≠β) is:
• And its average (in energy and distances):
7
• Two classes of experiments:– Appearance: observe
transitions between different flavors
– Disappearance: measure the survival probability of a flavor
• According to the ratio L/E:– The transition between
flavors cannot be observed if
– Only the average of the transition probability manifests itself if
Sensitivity to neutrino oscillations
8
Strumia, Vissani
Sources of neutrinos
• Reactor/Accelerator• Supernova • Solar• Atmospheric
Neutrino fluxes
11
Reactor neutrinos• Fission reactors are strong sources of anti-νe from β-
decay of neutron-rich nuclei (235U, 238U, 239Pu, 241Pu)
• Very intense ~ 1020 s-1 per GWth of thermal power
• Neutrino flux is isotropic
• Energy ~ few MeV (only νe disappearance)
• Anti-νe detected via inverse β-decay (Eth 1.8 MeV)
• Sensitivity to oscillations:– Source-detector distance– Neutrino energy (and cross sections)– Detector mass– Background level (e.g. hadronic component in cosmic rays)
12
Reactor experiments• Search for disappearance of anti-νe
The ratio of observed to measured neutrino flux from reactor experiments as a function of their source distance L
SBL LBL VLBL
important to interpret Atmospheric neutrino data
important to interpret solar neutrino data
13
KamLAND• Detect anti-νe produced by 53 reactors in Japan!
Schematics of the KamLAND detector: 1200 m3 of scintillator in a spherical balloon of 13 m
diameter and watched by 1879 PMTs
14
Evidence for reactor anti-neutrino disappearance
Ratio of the measured to expected anti-neutrino spectrum versus L/E
• Deficit in the observed flux of electron anti-neutrinos (disappearance)R = 0.658 ± 0.044 ± 0.047
• The spectrum shows the signature of neutrino oscillations (L/E dependency)
15
Accelerator neutrinos• Neutrinos produced by the decay of pions, kaons and
muons from a proton beam onto a target– Pion decay in flight: mostly muon neutrinos (OR anti-neutrinos)
with energies ~ GeV or more; e.g. SBL: CHORUS, NOMAD, CHARM, LSND; LBL: MINOS, OPERA, ICARUS, T2K …
– Muon decay at rest: muon anti-neutrinos of low energy from muon decay, with energy ~ tens MeV; e.g. KARMEN, LSND
– Beam dump: protons of very high energy are completely stopped by a target; muon and electron neutrinos with energy ~ 100 GeV
16
LSND• All experiments did not find
any indication of oscillations
• Except LSND:– Signal in – Weak signal
• Combined analyses did not exclude this results
• Three-neutrinos mixing scheme to be extended (sterile neutrinos?)
• Design dedicated experiment: MiniBooNE
Region of squared-mass difference and mixing angle allowed at 90% CL by a combined analysis of LSND and KARMEN (green) and exclusion curves by KARMEN and other experiments
17
MiniBooNE• Concept of sterile neutrino:
– non-interacting light particle– Singlet in the
SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) group– It is mixed with active neutrinos
The MiniBooNE detector
• Test LSND studying • Changes:
– Higher energy (500 MeV compared to 30 MeV
– Longer baseline (500 m compared to 30 m)
The MiniBooNE excluded region compared with LSND results
18
LBL accelerator experiments• K2K designed to test atmospheric
neutrino oscillations based on observation of muon neutrino disappearance. Beam: almost pure νµ
with mean energy 1.3 GeV• Other LBL: MINOS, ICARUS, OPERA
• K2K observed muon neutrino disappearance
Energy spectrum of the muon-neutrino events observed in the
K2K experiment
Best-fit with oscillations
No oscillations
important to interpret Atmospheric neutrino data
19
Atmospheric neutrinos• Generated in the interaction of primary cosmic rays with the Earth’s
atmosphere
• Secondaries are generated which include all the hadrons and their decay products
• Energy spectrum is peaked at ~ GeV and extends to higher energies with a power-law
≈ 15 Km
Cosmic Ray
π+ µ+
e+
νeνµ
νµ
20
The up-down symmetry/asymmetry1. The production of high energy atmospheric neutrinos is uniform
around the globe
2. A neutrino passing at point A with angle θ, reaches B at an angle π−θ
A
B
να
θ
π−θ
⇒The fluxes of neutrinos of a given flavor from opposite directions are the same at any location
⇒Up/down symmetry expected
21
Atmospheric neutrinos• Mostly pions are produced, which decay into muons and
neutrinos
• In the 1960s (neutrino induced) muon tracks detected deep underground (~ 8000 mwe)
• The Kamiokande and IMB detectors: detect charged particles via Cherenkov radiation in water
• Observed less muon than expected• Atmospheric neutrino anomaly To detect charged particles, the
KAMIOKANDE detector utilizes Cherenkov radiation in the water.
22
(Super-)kamiokande
The inside of the Superkamiokande detector
• Underground detector with arrays of PMTs:– IMB, (Super-)Kamiokande, SNO
23
Wave front
Charged Particle v > c / n
24
How to tell a νµ from a νe
25
The up-down asymmetry• Asymmetry observed: a model independent proof of neutrino
oscillations
Up/down asymmetry of the neutrino flux as a function of the neutrino energy for the Kamioka and Sudan sites. Right: muon neutrinos. Left: electron neutrinos
26
The atmospheric neutrino anomaly• First indication: the number of Sub-GeV muon-like events
was less than expected, while the number of electron-like events was compatible to the prediction
• Deficit of muon-like events
Zenith angle distribution of the through-going muon flux observed in Kamiokande
Data from Kamiokande alone cannot separate between νµ → νe and νµ → ντbut results from CHOOZ excluded νµ → νe
27
Solution of the atm. anomaly: flavor• The results of CHOOZ and Paolo Verde disfavor νµ → νe
• The results of Superkamiokande favor νµ → ντ and disfavor νµ → νs (s=sterile neutrino)
• Confirmed by K2K (extremely important since rather different concepts and systematic uncertainties)
28
Solar neutrinos• Powerful source of electron
neutrinos• Neutrino produced in two
groups of reactions:– pp chain– CNO cycle
• Energy ~ 1 MeV
29
The pp chain of stellar thermonuclear reactions
30
Standard Solar Model (SSM)• Rate of radio-chemical detectors is measured in Solar Neutrino Units (SNU) =
10-36 events atom-1s-1
Predicted energy spectra of neutrino fluxes
31
Detection• Energy ~ MeV• σ = 10-44 cm2
• Interaction probability ~ 10-12
• Detection of solar neutrinos– First Homestake in 1970– Gallex/GNO in the ‘90s– Super-Kamiokande and SNO
later• Proof of the theory of
thermonuclear energy generation is stars!
• Discovery of the solar neutrino problem in favor of neutrino oscillations
Pauli: I have done a very bad thing today by proposing a particle that cannot be detected: it is something no theorist should ever do
32
Detection of Solar Neutrinos• The Homestake experiment:
detect the radioactive Ar nucleus produced by interaction of a solar neutrino with the nucleus of a Cl atom (Eth=814 KeV):
• Expected 1.5 ± 0.6 atoms/day)• Found fewer (~ 1/3) neutrinos
than expected from the SSM ….
• Deficit confirmed by other experiments and at other energies
• The solar neutrino problemThe Homestake solar neutrino detector
(1,500 m underground to filter out cosmic particles, 615 ton of C2Cl4)
33
Other radiochemical experiments
34
GALLEX/SAGE results
35
Electron scattering• Mostly electron neutrinos contribute to the process
• The cross section (T kinetic energy of the final electron)
• Strongly peaked for electron emission in the neutrino direction
36
Solar neutrino anomaly
Angular distribution of solar neutrino event candidates of SuperKamiokande (SK, 50
kton water tank)
elastic scattering peak
background events
• Recoil electron have a sharp forward peak
• Flux measured ~ 1/2 of expected
22400 ± 230 solar neutrino events
SuperKamiokande image of the Sun
37
Vacuum Oscillations of Solar ν’s• Pontecorvo & Gribov 1969• 1968, the Homestake experiment detects less neutrinos
than expected: the solar neutrino problem • Survival probability of solar neutrinos in case of two-ν’s
mixing (L distance Sun-Earth, L0=1 a.u., e eccentricity of Earth’s orbit):
• But from the analysis of solar neutrino data:– No significant seasonal variation observed– Energy spectra not compatible with the distortion expected due
to the transition probability • Vacuum oscillation are disfavored …
38
Modulation of solar neutrinos• The only periodic variation in the rate of solar neutrinos agrees
with what expected due to the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit.• No indication of other modulations due to neutrino oscillations
Seasonal variation of the solar ν flux measured in Superkamiokande
Solar neutrino flux as a function of time measured in Superkamiokande
Prediction based on the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit
39
The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO)• SNO detect solar neutrinos through
– CC: – NC:– ES:
• They provide a handle on– CC: energy spectrum of νe
– NC: total neutrino flux– ES: equivalent (independent) to SK,
measure the angular distribution of the events
• Measure Φ(νe) and ΣiΦ(νi)
• The flux of non-electron neutrinos (oscillated) is then: Φ(non−νe) = ΣiΦ(νi) - Φ(νe)
The SNO detector: one kiloton pure D2O in a spherical acrylic vessel
40
Neutrino reactions in SNO
41
Phys. Rev. C 75 045502 (2007)
Model prediction (no oscillations)
Flux of νµ and ντ as a function of νε
SNO results: solar νe deficit confirmed • The NC measurement of the total neutrino flux demonstrates that
about two electron neutrinos out of three change their flavor
• Fluxes needed to explain SNO data, assuming the energy spectrum of 8B:
• They largely disagree: proof that νe do change during propagation
• Good agreement between the NC SNO flux and what expected by the SSM
νe
Total ν flux
42
Neutrino oscillations in vacuum• The flavor states να do not coincide with the mass
eigenstates νk
• The flavor states are combinations of the eigenstates νk:
• The mass states νk are eigenstates of the Hamiltonian:– Admixture of mass eigenstates in a given neutrino state do not
change (there is no ν1↔ ν2 transition)
– The phase difference between eigenstates increases monotonously
• The process is periodic. • The oscillation length is the distance at which the system
returns to its original state
43
Resonant flavor transition in matter• Neutrinos in matter are subject to a potential due to
elastic scattering with the medium (electrons and nucleons), equivalent to an index of refraction
Feymann diagrams for the elastic scattering processes that generate the CC potential (VCC, left) and the NC potential (VNC, right). GF Fermi coupling
constant and Ne (Nn) number density of electrons (neutrons)
44
Propagation in matter• In the presence of matter the Hamiltonian changes
Ho → H = Ho + V (Ho Hamiltonian in vacuum)
• The Schroedinger equation can be written in terms of matter mixing angle and effective squared-mass difference
• The eigenstates and the eigenvalues (and therefore the mixing angle) depend on the matter density and on the neutrino energy
45
Matter effects in a medium with changing density
If the density changes during propagation:• The mixing angle changes
• The instantaneous eigenstates of the Hamitonian ν1m and ν2m are no longer eigenstates of propagation
• Transitions ν1m ↔ ν2m can take place
• If the density changes slowly (“adiabatic condition”) the transitions ν1m ↔ ν2m can be neglected
46
47
Global fit of solar neutrino data• “Large mixing angle” solution of the solar neutrino
problem:– The mixing angle is large but not maximal
48
Three neutrino mixing• The solar and atmospheric neutrino data provide evidence
of at least two squared-mass differences • Presence of sterile neutrinos disfavored in both cases• Three neutrino mixing: two independent squared mass
differences
49
Top Related