• Frank
  • Simon
  • MPI for Physics
  • Germany

Latest Posts

  • Flip
  • Tanedo
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Aidan
  • Randle-Conde
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Jonathan
  • Asaadi
  • Syracuse University
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Byron
  • Jennings
  • TRIUMF
  • Canada

Latest Posts

  • Seth
  • Zenz
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Alexandre
  • Fauré
  • CEA/IRFU
  • FRANCE

Latest Posts

  • Jim
  • Rohlf
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Emily
  • Thompson
  • USLHC
  • Switzerland

Latest Posts

  • Ken
  • Bloom
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

Posts Tagged ‘ICHEP’

Dark matter: No model, just guesses

Wednesday, July 11th, 2012

On the last day of the International Conference on High Energy Physics dark matter took a central seat.

As many of you know, ourselves, the earth, all stars and galaxies are made of atoms. These atoms emit light when they are excited and that is how astronomers can explore the vast universe. But this matter only accounts for 4% of the content of the universe while dark matter makes up 24% of it. An unknown type of energy dubbed “dark energy” makes up the remaining 76%.

Dark matter was discovered in 1933 by Swiss physicist Fritz Zwicky. But to this day, scientists still don’t know what it is made of. This matter emits no light, which is why it was called “dark matter”.

Dark matter seems to react only to gravitational force and this is how it was discovered. Zwicky realized there was more matter in the universe than what was visible from the light emitted by stars and galaxies. This matter creates a much stronger gravitational field than what can be accounted for if you only rely on visible matter.

Neal Weiner, a theorist from New York University, started his lecture saying that contrary to the Higgs boson, for dark matter “we have no model, only guesses”. There is nothing within the Standard Model of particle physics to account for dark matter. This is one key reason we physicists are all convinced there is a bigger theory hiding behind the current known one.

So theorists and experimentalists are in the dark… As Neal stressed, there are many manifestations of dark matter. Different experiments observe strange signals where dark matter could be the explanation. But formulating an explanation is far from being trivial.

For example, several experiments have reported seeing more positrons than electrons coming from outer space. Positrons are the antimatter for electrons. Recently, the Pamela and the Fermi experiments both saw an excess of positrons, particularly at high energy. Given that the universe is made of matter, one needs to explain where these anti-electrons come from.

Some astronomers think it could be produced by pulsars but the jury is still out on this. Others argue that dark matter could annihilate into a pair of electron and positron, creating more positrons than expected. But it is not easy to cook up a theory that would do that. Hopefully, new data will come in 2013 from the Planck satellite to resolve this issue.

The DAMA/Libra experiment has been reporting a loud and clear signal (8.7 sigma) from dark matter for years. Unfortunately, nobody else can detect this signal as Lauren Hsu from Fermilab explained in her review of dark matter experiments. One possibility is that their detector, which is made of iodine, is sensitive to dark matter particles but other chemical elements used by the other experiments were not. Two new experiments were built using iodine, COUPP and KIMS, and should soon have enough data to get the final word on this long-standing anomaly.

Dark matter might interact with the Higgs boson. If that’s the case, now that we have a mass for it, we can test specific hypotheses. The XENON100 experiment is just at the limit of sensitivity for this and new results will come soon.

This is a huge, open question in particle physics. Let’s hope the new (Higgs?) boson discovery will soon be followed by some clues on the nature of dark matter. Exciting times ahead.

Pauline Gagnon

To be alerted of new postings, follow me on Twitter: @GagnonPauline or sign-up on this mailing list to receive and e-mail notification.

 

 

Share

Lors de la dernière journée de la Conférence Internationale sur la Physique des Hautes Energies, on a fait le point sur la matière noire. Comme plusieurs d’entre vous le savent, nous sommes tous: nous-mêmes, la terre, les étoiles et les galaxies faits d’atomes. Ces atomes émettent de la lumière lorsqu’ils sont excités, ce qui permet aux astronomes d’étudier l’univers. Mais toute cette matière ne compte que pour 4% du contenu total de l’univers alors que la matière noire en fait 24%. Les 76% restant viennent d’énergie d’un type inconnu surnommée « énergie noire. »

La matière noire fut découverte en 1933 par le physicien suisse Fritz Zwicky. Mais on ignore toujours de quoi il s’agit. Cette matière n’émet aucune lumière, d’où son nom.

La matière noire semble jusqu’à maintenant ne réagir qu’à la force gravitationnelle et c’est ce qui a permis de la déceler. Zwicky constata qu’il y avait plus de matière dans l’univers que ce qu’il voyait basé sur la lumière émise par les étoiles et les galaxies. Cette matière crée un champ gravitationnel bien plus fort que ce que la matière visible peut engendrer.

Neal Weiner, un théoricien de l’université de New York, a ouvert sa présentation en disant que, contrairement au boson de Higgs, pour la matière noire « on n’a aucun modèle, que des hypothèses ». Il n’y a rien dans le Modèle Standard de la physique des particules qui la décrive. C’est d’ailleurs un point clé indiquant clairement que le modèle standard a ses limites, et qu’une autre théorie plus globale devra le remplacer.

Les théoriciens et les expérimentatrices sont donc tous dans le noir… Come Neal l’a souligné, il y a déjà plusieurs manifestations de cette matière noire. Plusieurs expériences observent d’étranges signaux qui pourraient s’expliquer en termes de particules de matière noire. Mais formuler la bonne explication s’avère compliqué.

Par exemple, plusieurs expériences mesurent un excès de positons par rapport au nombre d’électrons observés venant du cosmos. Les positons sont l’antimatière des électrons. Récemment, les satellites Pamela et Fermi ont mesuré que cet excès est plus prononcé à haute énergie. Mais comme l’univers est fait de matière, d’où viennent ces positons?

Certains astronomes pensent qu’ils pourraient provenir de pulsars mais cela reste à prouver, ce qui est difficile. D’autres proposent plutôt qu’ils émanent de l’annihilation de particules de matière noire en une paire d’électron et positon.

Mais encore là, ce n’est pas facile à justifier théoriquement. Espérons que les nouvelles données attendues en 2013 par le satellite Planck aidera à résoudre ce problème.

Et puis il y a l’expérience DAMA/Libra qui clame depuis des années avoir obtenu un signal très fort (8.7 sigma). Le seul hic est que personne d’autre ne le capte comme l’a expliqué Lauren Hsu de Fermilab dans sa revue des résultats expérimentaux. Il est possible que les autres détecteurs n’y soient pas sensibles puisque seul DAMA/Libra utilisait un détecteur à l’iode. Deux nouvelles expériences COUPP et KIMS sont maintenant en cours ayant elles aussi de l’iode comme détecteur. Elles devraient avoir bientôt suffisamment de données pour trancher la question.

Autre possibilité: la matière noire interagit peut-être avec le boson de Higgs. Maintenant qu’on en connaît la masse, il se pourrait que l’expérience XENON100 puisse bientôt atteindre la sensibilité nécessaire pour tester cette hypothèse.

C’est donc une énorme question encore ouverte en physique des particules.

Peut-être que le nouveau boson (de Higgs?) apportera quelques indices qui nous permettront d’en apprendre plus.  Ça promet.

Pauline Gagnon

Pour être averti-e lors de la parution de nouveaux blogs, suivez-moi sur Twitter: @GagnonPauline ou par e-mail en ajoutant votre nom à cette liste de distribution

 

Share

There’s an interesting New York Times article out today, titled “New Data on Elusive Particle Shrouded in Secrecy”. The headline is misleading. There’s nothing to keep secret about our Higgs boson search, because we’re simply not done.

It’s true that we looked at some of our preliminary results last Friday. Every part of the search has more to do, and some don’t have their 2012 updates in their final form at all. And we’ve allowed ourselves only two or three weeks to go from first-pass results to the final product!

The article itself actually gets this more or less right:

Right now, most of the physicists doing the work do not even know what they have. In order to avoid bias, the physicists involved avoided looking at most of the crucial data until last week, when they “unblinded” it. About 500 physicists on each team are analyzing eight different ways a Higgs boson, once produced in the collider, might decay and leave its signature.

And, as it quotes Joe Incandela, the spokesperson for my experiment:

Our final [ICHEP] results will not be even seen by the collaboration before the last day of June and then will require the usual final cosmetics for presentation.

So you’ll have to forgive us if we keep quiet for a few more weeks about our results. They’ll be shown at ICHEP in Melbourne, Australia starting on July 4. Here at CERN, we’ll be dealing with the suspense by working on the final answer almost up to the very last minute.

Share

A Physicist’s Dinner in Paris

Thursday, August 19th, 2010

One of the nights at ICHEP, I ended up by myself and wandered around the middle of Paris a bit. At last I was hungry, and decided I wanted something easy and affordable if at all possible. The best solution for this, in Paris, is one of the touristy restaurants. So what I ate is below. Some aspects of it are typically French, but there is nothing unfamiliar to an American about it except the concept of an omelet at dinner.

Dinner in Paris

You can also see what I was reading: a book of papers on the “multiverse hypothesis” adapted from some conference lectures. Among some theoretical physicists trying to build a fundamental theory of life, the universe, and everything, there is serious research and debate on this subject — but to me as an experimentalist, it’s crazy far-out philosophy. But it’s also amusing dinner reading, and the university publishers who had booths set up at ICHEP were the only source of English-language books I knew of in Paris.

Share

ICHEP: what to watch for

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010

At long last, the 35th International Conference on High Energy Physics begins tomorrow. It’s the largest particle-physics conference of the year, and the first major conference since the start of LHC operations at 7 TeV, If the US LHC blog has seemed to be a bit quiet lately, it might be because so many bloggers have been working hard to get results ready. Now, it’s highly unlikely that there will be any surprising LHC discoveries announced there; we just don’t have nearly enough data yet. But that doesn’t mean that this conference will be boring! Here are a few things that you might want to be watching for:

  • How well are the experiments keeping up with the LHC? The LHC has now delivered about 350 nb-1 of integrated luminosity to the experiments. What fraction of that data will the experiments show? This is a measure of the operational efficiency of the experiments, and of their ability to get the data through reconstruction and analysis. If the experiments are able to show a large fraction of the delivered data, then we can be optimistic about how quickly results will come out as the collision rates rise.
  • How competitive is the LHC with the Tevatron? The Tevatron experiments have collected a huge amount of data over the past nine years, and have an excellent understanding of how their detectors work. They will still be in the lead on many, many physics topics. (Disclaimer: I also work on one of the Tevatron experiments.) However, because of the LHC’s higher collision energy, there might be a few measurements for which the LHC can produce stronger results, even with a tiny amount of data. Will there be any such results, and what will they be?
  • How competitive is the Tevatron with the LHC? Everyone is eager to hear the latest limits on the standard-model Higgs boson from the Tevatron. The excluded Higgs masses are the ones that would have been the easiest for the LHC to see too. How much harder will new Higgs limits make it to find a Higgs at the LHC?
  • Any surprises from elsewhere? Let’s not forget that this conference covers all of particle physics, and there’s a lot more going on out there than just the LHC!
  • How tired do the presenters look? A lot of that 350 nb-1 came at the last minute — did everyone stay up all night to finish their data analysis?

I won’t be attending the conference, but I’ll try to provide some commentary from lovely Lincoln as events unfold. Good luck to all involved — this is going to be a lot of fun!

Share

Marathons and sprints

Sunday, March 28th, 2010

I thought it best to write a post now, as I won’t have a chance to during this Tuesday’s excitement — not because I’ll be so wrapped up in first 7 TeV collisions, but because it’s going to be the first day of Passover, which will take me partially offline. (Who exactly thought that this would be a good day for the big event? Well, it had to be on some day or another.) Just like last time, I plan on sleeping through the big event, as I thoroughly expect it to be uneventful.

For instance, don’t expect any radically new science to emerge from the first days of collisions. While it appears that the experiments are really in excellent shape, based on the work done with the December collisions, it will take a long time to accumulate and analyze enough data before we can definitively say that we have observed any new physics. The amount of data we expect to take in these next two years is enough to make the LHC experiments competitive in discovering new phenomena, or constraining what new phenomena might look like, but that’s still two years worth of data. So, as the old saying goes, this is a marathon, not a sprint, and we have to pace ourselves.

But on the other hand, everyone is motivated to get out some kind of result as soon as possible, to demonstrate that the experiments do work and that we’ve got what it takes to complete the marathon. The major milestone is the International Conference on High Energy Physics, which starts on July 22. By then, everyone is hoping to have a bunch of real physics results (even if they are merely confirmation of known phenomena rather than discoveries) that can set the baseline for the performance of the experiments. July 22 is sixteen weeks from this Thursday. To go from having no data at all to high-quality measurements in sixteen weeks is going to be quite a feat. Put on top of that the uncertainty of just how well the LHC will perform over this time — by ICHEP, we definitely expect to have a million times as much data as we recorded in December. But it could turn out to be be ten million times as much! Whether any particular measurement is feasible or not could depend on which end of that range we end up on, and there might be many course corrections to make as we go along as a result.

So even though the real LHC physics program is a marathon, on your marks, get set….

KB

Share

Today marks the start of the 34th International Conference on High Energy Physics, the biggest particle-physics conference of the year. It is held in even-numbered years, and when the conference started, it was always held at the University of Rochester, and hence some people still refer to it as “the Rochester meeting.” But now it moves from country to country, and this year it is in the United States, jointly hosted by Princeton and Penn in Philadelphia. (I’d be there myself but for some other exciting events going on; see a future post on that.) It’s a big deal; people work hard to produce new science results specifically for this conference. Obviously, at this point the LHC experiments only have so much to say, as we don’t have any LHC data yet. There will be several talks about the status of the machine and detectors, plus presentations on the prospects for various measurements.

But even though a lot of people are focused on the jungle, meanwhile back in the states, there is a lot of physics going on! (See here for this week’s obscure reference.) In particular, the two big experiments at Fermilab’s Tevatron, CDF and D0, continue to put out new results every week. This week there are more results than usual; they were presented in a pair of seminars last Friday. Of particular note (so far) is D0′s observation of pairs of Z bosons. This process is not unexpected, but definitely rare; the fact that the Tevatron experiments can even observe this final state shows that CDF and D0 have enough data that they can think seriously about the possibility of excluding — or observing! — a standard-model Higgs boson.

Increasingly rare processes observed at the Tevatron

OK, so what about that Higgs boson? As of a few months ago, the two experiments together had accumulated enough data to be able to come oh-so-close to being able to exclude some range of Higgs boson masses. Since then, more data has been analyzed, and the experimenters have been working hard to improve their data-analysis techniques to be sensitive to processes with even smaller rates. It’s possible that the analyses to be shown at this conference will actually be able to exclude the Higgs at some masses. If that can be done, it will be the first new direct information about the mass of the Higgs since the end of CERN’s LEP program.

As of this writing, not all the numbers have been crunched yet and not all the results have been approved for release, so we don’t yet know what the answer is! But keep an eye out for news sometime next week, probably. Here is a plot that shows the Higgs results from earlier this year. A new plot will be shown at ICHEP. If the solid black line goes below 1 on the vertical axis, it will indicate that the data do not support the existence of a Higgs boson at the mass values on the horizontal axis. We await the news….

Share