Towards Coherent Neutrino Detection Using Low-Background Micropattern Gas Detectors

ArXiv hep-ex/0212034 (2002)

Authors:

P Barbeau, JI Collar, J Miyamoto, I Shipsey

Abstract:

The detection of low energy neutrinos ($<$ few tens of MeV) via coherent nuclear scattering remains a holy grail of sorts in neutrino physics. This uncontroversial mode of interaction is expected to profit from a sizeable increase in cross section proportional to neutron number squared in the target nucleus, an advantageous feature in view of the small probability of interaction via all other channels in this energy region. A coherent neutrino detector would open the door to many new applications, ranging from the study of fundamental neutrino properties to true "neutrino technology". Unfortunately, present-day radiation detectors of sufficiently large mass ($>$ 1 kg) are not sensitive to sub-keV nuclear recoils like those expected from this channel. The advent of Micropattern Gas Detectors (MPGDs), new technologies originally intended for use in High Energy Physics, may soon put an end to this impasse. We present first tests of MPGDs fabricated with radioclean materials and discuss the approach to assessing their sensitivity to these faint signals. Applications are reviewed, in particular their use as a safeguard against illegitimate operation of nuclear reactors. A first industrial mass production of Gas Electron Multipliers (GEMs) is succinctly described.

B Physics at Hadron Colliders

ArXiv hep-ex/0212022 (2002)

Abstract:

Hadron colliders have played, and will continue to play, a crucial role in the understanding of CP violation. Their impact is expected to be especially important in the study of CP asymmetries in rare decays and the $B_s$ meson. The experimental challenge and reach of current and future experiments is discussed.

Comparison of the isolated direct photon cross sections in pp̄ collisions at √s = 1.8 TeV and √s = 0.63 TeV

Physical Review D 65:11 (2002)

Authors:

D Acosta, T Affolder, H Akimoto, MG Albrow, D Ambrose, D Amidei, K Anikeev, J Antos, G Apollinari, T Arisawa, A Artikov, T Asakawa, W Ashmanskas, F Azfar, P Azzi-Bacchetta, N Bacchetta, H Bachacou, W Badgett, S Bailey, P De Barbaro, A Barbaro-Galtieri, VE Barnes, BA Barnett, S Baroiant, M Barone, G Bauer, F Bedeschi, S Belforte, WH Bell, G Bellettini, J Bellinger, D Benjamin, J Bensinger, A Beretvas, JP Berge, J Berryhill, A Bhatti, M Binkley, D Bisello, M Bishai, RE Blair, C Blocker, K Bloom, B Blumenfeld, SR Blusk, A Bocci, A Bodek, G Bolla, Y Bonushkin, D Bortoletto, J Boudreau, A Brandl, S Van Den Brink, C Bromberg, M Brozovic, E Brubaker, N Bruner, J Budagov, HS Budd, K Burkett, G Busetto, A Byon-Wagner, KL Byrum, S Cabrera, P Calafiura, M Campbell, W Carithers, J Carlson, D Carlsmith, W Caskey, A Castro, D Cauz, A Cerri, AW Chan, PS Chang, PT Chang, J Chapman, C Chen, YC Chen, MT Cheng, M Chertok, G Chiarelli, I Chirikov-Zorin, G Chlachidze, F Chlebana, L Christofek, ML Chu, JY Chung, WH Chung, YS Chung, CI Ciobanu, AG Clark, M Coca, AP Colijn, A Connolly, M Convery, J Conway, M Cordelli, J Cranshaw

Abstract:

We have measured the cross sections d2σ/d P Tdη) for production of isolated direct photons in pp̄ collisions at two different center-of-mass energies, 1.8 TeV and 0.63 TeV, using the Collider Detector at Fermilab. The normalization of both data sets agrees with the predictions of quantum chromodynamics for a photon transverse momentum (PT) of 25 GeV/c, but the shapes versus photon PT do not. These shape differences lead to a significant disagreement in the ratio of cross sections in the scaling variable xT(≡ 2PT/√s). This disagreement in the xT ratio is difficult to explain with conventional theoretical uncertainties such as scale dependence and parton distribution parametrizations. © 2002 The American Physical Society.

Search for Long-lived Charged Massive Particles in anti-p p Collisions at s**1/2 = 1.8 TeV

ArXiv hep-ex/0211064 (2002)

Measurement of B(D+-->K(*0)l(+)nu(l)).

Phys Rev Lett 89:22 (2002) 222001

Authors:

G Brandenburg, A Ershov, DY-J Kim, R Wilson, K Benslama, BI Eisenstein, J Ernst, GD Gollin, RM Hans, I Karliner, N Lowrey, MA Marsh, C Plager, C Sedlack, M Selen, JJ Thaler, J Williams, KW Edwards, R Ammar, D Besson, X Zhao, S Anderson, VV Frolov, Y Kubota, SJ Lee, SZ Li, R Poling, A Smith, CJ Stepaniak, J Urheim, S Ahmed, MS Alam, L Jian, M Saleem, F Wappler, E Eckhart, KK Gan, C Gwon, T Hart, K Honscheid, D Hufnagel, H Kagan, R Kass, TK Pedlar, JB Thayer, E Von Toerne, T Wilksen, MM Zoeller, SJ Richichi, H Severini, P Skubic, SA Dytman, S Nam, V Savinov, S Chen, JW Hinson, J Lee, DH Miller, V Pavlunin, EI Shibata, IPJ Shipsey, D Cronin-Hennessy, AL Lyon, CS Park, W Park, EH Thorndike, TE Coan, YS Gao, F Liu, Y Maravin, I Narsky, R Stroynowski, J Ye, M Artuso, C Boulahouache, K Bukin, E Dambasuren, R Mountain, T Skwarnicki, S Stone, JC Wang, AH Mahmood, SE Csorna, I Danko, Z Xu, G Bonvicini, D Cinabro, M Dubrovin, S McGee, A Bornheim, E Lipeles, SP Pappas, A Shapiro, WM Sun, AJ Weinstein, G Masek, HP Paar, R Mahapatra, RA Briere, GP Chen, T Ferguson, G Tatishvili, H Vogel, NE Adam, JP Alexander, C Bebek, K Berkelman, F Blanc, V Boisvert, DG Cassel, PS Drell, JE Duboscq, KM Ecklund, R Ehrlich, L Gibbons, B Gittelman, SW Gray, DL Hartill, BK Heltsley, L Hsu, CD Jones, J Kandaswamy, DL Kreinick, A Magerkurth, H Mahlke-Krüger, TO Meyer, NB Mistry, E Nordberg, M Palmer, JR Patterson, D Peterson, J Pivarski, D Riley, AJ Sadoff, H Schwarthoff, MR Shepherd, JG Thayer, D Urner, B Valant-Spaight, G Viehhauser, A Warburton, M Weinberger, SB Athar, P Avery, H Stoeck, J Yelton, CLEO

Abstract:

Using 13.53 fb(-1) of CLEO data, we have measured the ratios of the branching fractions R(+)(e),R(+)(mu) and the combined branching fraction ratio R(+)(l), defined by R(+)(l)=[B(D+-->K(*0)l(+)nu(l))]/[B(D+-->K-pi(+)pi(+))]. We find R(+)(e)=0.74+/-0.04+/-0.05, R(+)(mu)=0.72+/-0.10+/-0.05, and R(+)(l)=0.74+/-0.04+/-0.05, where the first and second errors are statistical and systematic, respectively. The known branching fraction B(D+-->K-pi(+)pi(+)) leads to B(D+-->K(*0)e(+)nu(e))=(6.7+/-0.4+/-0.5+/-0.4)%, B(D+-->K(*0)mu(+)nu(mu))=(6.5+/-0.9+/-0.5+/-0.4)%, and B(D+-->K(*0)l(+)nu(l))=(6.7+/-0.4+/-0.5+/-0.4)%, where the third error is due to the uncertainty in B(D+-->K-pi(+)pi(+)).