• John
  • Felde
  • University of Maryland
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • USLHC
  • USLHC
  • USA

  • James
  • Doherty
  • Open University
  • United Kingdom

Latest Posts

  • Andrea
  • Signori
  • Nikhef
  • Netherlands

Latest Posts

  • CERN
  • Geneva
  • Switzerland

Latest Posts

  • Aidan
  • Randle-Conde
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles
  • Belgium

Latest Posts

  • TRIUMF
  • Vancouver, BC
  • Canada

Latest Posts

  • Laura
  • Gladstone
  • MIT
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Steven
  • Goldfarb
  • University of Michigan

Latest Posts

  • Fermilab
  • Batavia, IL
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Seth
  • Zenz
  • Imperial College London
  • UK

Latest Posts

  • Nhan
  • Tran
  • Fermilab
  • USA

Latest Posts

  • Alex
  • Millar
  • University of Melbourne
  • Australia

Latest Posts

  • Ken
  • Bloom
  • USLHC
  • USA

Latest Posts

Christine Nattrass | USLHC | USA

Read Bio

Working at heights

Thursday, December 2nd, 2010

I spent Tuesday at working at heights training.  Here you can see me in the ALICE hall on the crane track:

And here’s another picture of me hanging off the electromagnetic calorimeter insertion tool, the device used to physically install the electromagnetic calorimeter:

I need this training for when we install the rest of the electromagnetic calorimeter supermodules.  I won’t actually be working on physically installing the supermodules, but I’ll be working on installing the electronics and the cables to read out the data.  This means I may have to spend some time working where our detector is, well above the ground.  So on Tuesday I learned the proper way to use a harness, the proper way to climb a (very tall) ladder, how to secure ourselves to solid structures, and all of the rules and laws that apply at CERN.  And then we had practical exercises.  Yes this is supposed to be work, but it’s also fun!

Share

No place like CERN for the holidays

Sunday, November 28th, 2010

There are definitely fewer Americans around CERN today but some of us were determined to celebrate Thanksgiving.We had a celebration on Thursday with mostly ALICE people but two students from ATLAS, one detector guru who has worked with all of the LHC experiments, and one American theorist friend who came from Frankfurt for the privilege of eating turkey.  It’s a great chance to share American culture and an excuse to have a party.  17 people (all physicists), an 8.5 kg turkey, and 10 kg of potatoes.

We got a turkey – special ordered from a butcher – and we found  butternut squash in the market.  Here are some tips on how to find American foods around CERN – interesting to see what people miss when they’re away from home.  Hope you had a nice Thanksgiving!

Share

First heavy ion papers!

Thursday, November 18th, 2010

ALICE’s first two papers on lead-lead collisions were submitted yesterday, about a week and a half after the first lead-lead collisions.

One paper is a measurement of the charged particle multiplicity.  This analogous to the multiplicity measurements in proton-proton collisions, except a more particles are produced in a lead-lead collision.  In p+p the models were off by around 10-15%.  This is a plot from the lead-lead paper:

The red point shows the ALICE measurement.  The x-axis is a measure of the number of particles produced in the collision.  (Specifically it is the number of charged particles produced in the collision per unit pseudorapidity for pseudorapidities from -0.5 to 0.5.)  The black points are different predictions.  Notice is that the predictions vary from 1000-2000 particles.  This is a rather large theoretical uncertainty, especially compared to proton-proton collisions.  So less than two weeks after our first collisions, we have already gained a much deeper understanding of lead-lead collisions.

The other new paper is a bit more abstract than the number of particles created in the collision.  Think of a heavy ion collision as like slamming two ice cubes at each other.  If you slammed two ice cubes together fast enough, they’d melt when they hit each other.  If you did this in space – where it’s about 3K (about -270 Celcius and -454 Fahrenheit) – the water would immediately freeze again.  This is roughly what happens in a lead-lead collision.  Nuclei are basically frozen quarks and gluons, and when we collide them fast enough, they melt.  But by the time we see the remnants of the collision in our detector, the quarks and gluons have frozen again.  However, they went through a phase where they were a liquid.  A liquid can flow.  We can see evidence that the liquid of quarks and gluons was flowing because we can see in our detector that the particles are all moving in a preferred direction.

This plot compares ALICE’s measurement to earlier measurements:

The x-axis is the collision energy per nucleon (proton or neutron) in the center of mass.  The y-axis is a measure of how much the liquid is flowing.  [Technical audience:  The y-axis is the coefficient of the second term of the Fourier decomposition of the distribution of particles in azimuth with respect to the reaction plane.]  Measuring how much the Quark Gluon Plasma is flowing gives us some insight into its viscosity.  There are lots of technical details and subtleties in interpreting these data that I’m skipping over.  But already – less than two weeks after the first lead-lead collisions – we have two measurements that give us deep insight into the properties of the Quark Gluon Plasma.

Share

Live event displays

Wednesday, November 10th, 2010

You can see live event displays from ALICE here.  Perhaps you can identify the different detectors in the event display from the description of the ALICE detector.  And here’s an event display with our Time Projection Chamber in:

What you’re looking at is the charged particles we’ve seen in ALICE.  I’d tell you roughly how many we see except that I’m afraid that some theorists in our field would mistake that for a measurement.  (You know who you are!)

There’s more information about ALICE and more event displays here.

(ATLAS and CMS also have event displays.)

Share

First lead-lead collisions!

Sunday, November 7th, 2010

Very early this morning we got the first lead-lead collisions at the LHC!  I am all a twitter.  This is a very exciting time.  I just arrived at CERN today and I am very, very jet-lagged, so I’ll keep this short.

Pictures.  What you all want to see is pictures.

Here are some event displays with the first Pb+Pb collisions seen by ALICE.  This is an example:

These event displays only show information with the Inner Tracking System (ITS).  Our main tracking detector, the Time Projection Chamber (TPC), was off for these collisions.  The reason is that the beams were not perfectly stable for the first collisions and we did not want to damage our TPC.

And check out this video of an event display (the original video is here):

And now that we have lead-lead data, we have a lot of work to do.  Expect the first lead-lead paper soon.  It will be a multiplicity paper like ALICE’s first few proton-proton papers.  We will just measure the number of charged particles in an event.  This information alone will tell us a lot about heavy ion collisions – the first estimates for how many particles we should see in an event varied by a factor of 4, from 2000-8000 tracks.

Share

Gratuitous cool pictures of ALICE

Monday, November 1st, 2010

As I was writing a talk for a conference, I ran into a bunch of pictures of ALICE that I thought y’all might like to see.  In my last post I gave an overview of ALICE and described each of the subsystems in ALICE.  I don’t have a picture of every subsystem, but to give you an idea of what these pieces look like:

This is the ALICE magnet (which used to be the L3 magnet) in 2001, before any of the detectors were installed inside of it.

This is the hole inside the TPC where the ITS sits now

This is the whole ITS when it was being installed

Here you can see the PMD team in front of the PMD

This shows the PMD after it was installed in ALICE

Here you can see piece of the TRD right before it was installed

This is the HMPID right before it was installed

This is one of the trays of the TOF

And here you can see one of the EMCal supermodels right before it was installed

And this is the ALICE collaboration in front of ALICE

(Note to ALICE collaborators – if you didn’t see a picture of your favorite subsystem, email it to me.  If I get enough cool ALICE pictures for another post, I’ll do a follow up with more gratuitous cool pictures of ALICE.)

Share

Tasting quark soup

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010

A lot of the articles in the news talk about the physics we’re trying to learn, but there’s not much discussion of how we do it.  I spend most of my day thinking about our detectors, how they work, and how to interpret the data.  Our detectors are the way we see, hear, feel, smell, and taste what goes on in proton-proton and lead-lead collisions.  Just like the Mars rover explores places that are uninhabitable to people, our detectors explore places that are too small for us.

ALICE is made up of several subsystems, each of which helps us sense collisions in a different way.  Below is a picture of ALICE with each subsystem labeled:

Some detectors are like our eyes – they help us see particles coming out of the collision.  These are our tracking detectors.  The main tracking detector is the Time Projection Chamber (TPC).  We also have an Inner Tracking System (ITS), comprising three different silicon detectors, the Silicon Strip Detector, the Silicon Drift Detector, and the Silicon Pixel Detector.  The ITS is a bit like our glasses – we can see particles with just the TPC, but with the ITS, the picture comes into sharper focus.  Tracking detectors tell us the momentum and spatial location of particles that go through our detector.

Some detectors are our taste buds – they help us determine the flavor of the particles we’re measuring.  A lot of different types of particles are produced in both a proton-proton collision and a lead-lead collision.  The Time-Of-Flight (TOF), the Transition Radiation Detector (TRD), and the High Momentum Particle Identification Detector (HMPID) are all designed to identify particles.  These detectors all work by measuring a particle’s velocity.  Momentum is velocity times mass, so if we know the velocity and the momentum of a particle (which we can get from the tracking detectors), we can determine its mass and therefore figure out what kind of particle it is.  The TOF measures the velocity of particles by measuring how long it takes for a particle to reach the TOF.  Since velocity is the change in distance over time and the distance traveled is known, this measures the velocity of the particle.  Here you can see one of our physics performance plots showing different particles identified by the TOF:

The x-axis is the momentum, as measured by the TPC and the ITS, and the y-axis is the ratio of the velocity to the speed of light in a vacuum.  Pions (π) are the lightest particle (140 MeV/c2) so at a given momentum, they have the highest velocity.  Protons (p) are the heaviest (938 MeV/c2) particle visible in the plot above so at a given momentum they have the lowest velocity.

The HMPID and the TRD both work on the same principle.  The speed of light in a vacuum is constant, but the speed of light in a medium can be lower.  For example, the speed of light is lower in water than in air – this is why images get distorted when you look through water.  If a fast particle moves through a medium faster than the speed of light in that medium, it will emit photons – called Cherenkov radiation – until it slows down to the speed of light in the medium.  At a given momentum, lighter particles go faster, so lighter particles will emit photons at a larger angle relative to their path.  The medium in the TRD is optimized so that only electrons (0.5 MeV/c2) will radiate photons, so the TRD can be used to distinguish electrons from everything else.  The HMPID is a ring imaging Cherenkov detector.  The photons emitted by a particle are emitted in a cone and the radius of that cone depends on the velocity of the particle.  The HMPID is optimized for distinguishing pions, kaons, and protons.  Here you can see the signal from the HMPID:

The x-axis is the momentum and the y-axis is the angle of the cone of light emitted by the particle.  At a given momentum, a pion is going faster than a kaon or a proton.  The radius of the cone of light emitted by the particle is larger the further the particle’s speed is from the speed of light in the medium, so at a given momentum the pion band is above the kaon band, which is above the proton band.

The tracking detectors, the TPC and the ITS, can also identify particles.  They work by measuring how much energy a particle loses as it travels through the detector.  A heavier particle will loss more energy than a light particle.  Think of one of those ball pits for kids.  If you threw a tennis ball in, it would knock some of the balls out of the way.  If you threw in a bowling ball, a lot of balls would get knocked around.  We know the bowling ball lost more energy than the tennis ball because the lighter balls got knocked around more.  We can distinguish between heavier particles and lighter particles like this.  If the TOF, the HMPID, and the TRD are the way we taste the particles created in the collision, the ITS and the TPC help us smell them.  Below you can see the signal from the TPC:

The x-axis is rigidity, which is the momentum over the charge.  Charge is in units of the electron charge.  All of the particles here have a charge of ±1.  Positively charged particles are on the right and negatively charged particles are on the left.  The y-axis is proportional to the energy lost by the particle in the TPC.  We see the same three particles we saw before – pions, kaons, and protons – but now we also see deuterons and tritons.  At a given momentum, heavier particles lose more energy, so as you go up the y-axis the mass of the particles increases.

My last post was on the Electromagnetic Calorimeter (EMCal).  A calorimeter is used to measure particles’ energy.  This is a way of feeling the collision – it’s like laying in the sun.  When you lay in the sun, you don’t feel photons hitting you but when photons hit you, they warm you up.  Particles hitting the calorimeter do the same thing – they hit the calorimeter and deposit their energy.  (Everything loses energy except muons – muons travel right through the calorimeters.)   We look at the energy deposited in the calorimeter to determine how much energy the particle had.  (See my post on the electromagnetic calorimeter for more details.)  We have two more calorimeters in ALICE,  the Photon Spectrometer (PHOS) and the Zero Degree Calorimeter (ZDC).  The PHOS is optimized to measure photons.  The ZDC is a calorimeter very close to the beam pipe far away from the interaction point, at an angle close to zero degrees from the beam pipe.  The ZDC is useful in lead-lead collisions for both measuring nucleons which did not participate in the collision.  These particles are called “spectators” and are not deflected by the magnetics that keep the beam in the beam pipe because the spectators do not have the same charge to mass ratio as lead nuclei.  We can figure out of the collision was head-on or just glancing using this information.

We hear the collision in the VZERO, a scintillator detector.  When a particle hits it, the scintillator emits photons and we know there was a collision when we see these photons.  Think of it as like a fire alarm – it’s what tells us there was a collision.

There’s a few detectors that don’t really fit into this metaphor but I want to mention them anyways.  The Photon Multiplicity Detector (PMD) measures the multiplicity of photons at angles close to the beam pipe.  The muon arm measures muons, the heavy cousin of the electron.  The ALICE Cosmic Ray Detector (ACORDE) is designed to trigger on cosmic rays so that the rest of ALICE can be used to study cosmic rays.  Cosmic rays were used to calibrate ALICE before the first collisions at the LHC.

Each of these detectors helps us understand proton-proton and lead-lead collisions in a different way.  When we put them all together, we have a sort of Quantum Chromodynamics rover that helps us explore exotic places – the insides of protons and nuclei – that are near us all the time.

Share

Meet the ALICE electromagnetic calorimeter

Wednesday, October 13th, 2010

ALICE is made up of several detectors, each of them designed for a different purpose.  Here you can see a drawing of ALICE with the different detectors labeled:

In this post I introduced you to the Time Projection Chamber (TPC).  The US is mostly involved in the electromagnetic calorimeter (EMCal), which is positioned outside of the TPC (labeled “EMCAL”).  I work on the EMCal.

At some point in a chemistry or physics lab you probably did a lab with a calorimeter.  The standard calorimeter experiment involves heating something up, submerging it in cool water, and measuring the change in the temperature of the water in order to determine the specific heat of the object.  A calorimeter measures the energy deposited by an object.

In high energy physics calorimeters are used to measure the energy of particles.   When a high energy particle hits our detector, it initiates an electromagnetic shower, emitting electron/positron pairs and photons.  As the shower propagates through the calorimeter, it deposits more and more of its energy, until it either stops or comes out the other side of the calorimeter.   An electronic calorimeter is most sensitive to photons and electrons.

Of course sometimes a high energy particle will hit one of the nuclei of one of the atoms in the calorimeter and deposit some of its energy this way.  Hadrons – such as protons and pions – are more likely to do this than electrons because they interact strongly (through the strong force), unlike electrons and photons.  This is how a hadronic calorimeter works.  This would not happen in an ideal electromagnetic calorimeter, but no detector is ideal so some hadrons will leave a shower in our detector.

The TPC is used for measuring the tracks left by charged particles and can measure their momentum.  The EMCal can measure particles’ energy.  We can use the EMCal to measure photons, which the TPC cannot see.  We can also use the EMCal to distinguish electrons from hadrons because electrons will leave most of their energy in the calorimeter while hadrons will not.  The EMCal can be used to measure many neutral particles, whereas the TPC can only see charged particles.  By combining the information from both of these detectors, we can characterize events better.

A sampling calorimeter is made up of layers of something which produces the shower and something which can collect the energy from the shower.  In the ALICE EMCal we have 77 alternating layers of lead and scintillators.  A high energy particle produces an electromagnetic shower in the lead.  The photons released in the shower are collected by the layers of scintillators.  The light from the scintillators is collected by fiber optic cables, converted into an electrical signal, and read out as digital signals.

The ALICE EMCal is made up of 12,288 towers, each of which is about 6 cm2.  It covers about 107° around the beam pipe.  This is what it looks like:

Each green square is one tower.  For scale, in this post our piece of the EMCAL is 4×4 towers.  We have to read out data from the EMCal towers.  This takes a lot of cables and what we call Front End Electronics – electronic boards which manage the data until we record it.  All of these pieces have to be carefully tested before they’re installed.  Here you can see me testing one of the Front End Electronics boards at CERN:

Right now only about 36% of the EMCal is installed.  We got great news recently – we’ll be able to install the rest of it in January!  This is wonderful – but it means we have a lot of work to do.  I’ll be spending November at CERN testing parts and helping prepare the EMCal for installation.  Luckily there are plenty of places to get a Thanksgiving turkey in Geneva!

Share

Tour of the the EMCal test beam

Thursday, September 30th, 2010

I briefly mentioned the EMCal test beam – the reason for my latest post – but here’s some more details and some gratuitous cool pictures.  I am now back in the US and have more time for blog posts.

The goal of our time at the test beam was to calibrate our detector, an electromagnetic calorimeter, by measuring its response to known particles with a known momentum.  Then when we put in the rest of ALICE we can use it to help identify unknown particles and measure their energy.  Here’s a rough diagram of the test beam set up for the EMCal:


We use the beam from the Super Proton Synchrotron (SPS) to get our test beam.  The SPS is also used as a source of protons for the LHC.  The proton beam from the SPS is aimed at a target – a thin block of material.  When it hits this target it creates a lot of secondary particles – mostly pions and protons.  This beam is then directed through a magnet.  A particle with a charge q with a momentum p in a magnetic field B will move in a circle with a radius r=p/qB.  We aim the beam through an aperture, which fixes the radius.  Then we can change the magnetic field, which changes the momentum of the particles which pass through to our detector.  First we passed the beam through two multiwire proportional chambers, which let us measure the position of the incoming particles.  (These work because of the same physical principles as the Time Projection Chamber.  Charged particles moving through a gas ionize the gas and we can collect the electrons knocked out of gas molecules to see where the particles went.  The details of how multiwire proportional chambers work are different, however.)  Then the particles hit our detector.  We only have a few towers of the calorimeter in the test beam – enough to be representative of the whole detector.

The dashed line in the bending magnet shows an optional converter that we could put in or take out.  When a photon hits the converter, it changes into an electron and a positron.  The converter is only part of the way through the bending magnet, so electrons will not be bent as much as hadrons.  This meant we could choose between a beam with hadrons (pions and protons) or electrons.  We’re particularly interested in the difference between the response of our detector to hadrons and electrons.

Here you can see the set up from above:

I’ve labeled our EMCal towers and the multiwire proportional chambers.  The large cement blocks arranged like giant Legos are for shielding.  There are several cables leading from the detectors up to the barracks where we sat when taking data.  Some of these were used to carry data from the detectors up to us.

Here you can see the back of our detector and see our data acquisition system:

The big green object labeled “DESY” is a movable table that we used to move our detector around in the beam.  We could control it remotely.  Despite what it may look like, all of those cables are meticulously arranged.  We had to arrange the cables so that they stayed plugged in even when we moved the table around.  The computer is for data acquisition.  Here’s a different view:

And that’s me next to the set up – smiling, even though it’s about 1:30 AM and my shift just started.  I have my finger on the outside of one of the EMCal towers.  There’s one wire chamber to my left and one to my right, right in front of the EMCal towers.  The chain around my neck has a dosimeter on it, measuring how much radiation I get exposed to to make sure I’m not getting a dangerous dose of radiation.  (The risk is very low.  There was no beam when we took these pictures and a physical barrier preventing the beam from coming in anyways.)

And here you can see the beam pipe delivering beam to our set up:

With Betty, a post doc at Laurence Livermore National Laboratory.  Betty and I took the midnight to 8 AM shifts for the test beam together.

We got lots of valuable data on the EMCal response to electrons and hadrons from a momentum of 6 GeV/c to 225 MeV/c.  Now we have to analyze the data.  We’ll be able to use it to determine how good our detector is at separating electrons from hadrons.  We have an idea of how well it should work from simulations, but nothing beats a measurement.

Share

Exciting new results from CMS

Tuesday, September 21st, 2010

I’m giddy today because CMS just came out with some very exciting results.  I don’t think we understand what they mean at all – and as a scientist, there is nothing I love better than shocking data, data that challenge what we think we understand.  (For the technical audience, the slides from the talk at CERN are here and the paper is here.)  I might be biased because this topic is very closely related to my doctoral thesis, but I think it’s safe to say this is the first surprising result from the LHC, something that changes our paradigm.

In heavy ion collisions at the relativistic heavy ion collider we observed something called the ridge (from this paper):

We more or less understand the peak – called the “jet-like correlation” – but we don’t understand the broad structure the peak is sitting on.  This broad structure is called the ridge.  What I mean when I say we don’t understand the ridge is that we haven’t settled in the field how this structure is formed, where it comes from.  We have a lot of models that can produce something similar, but they can’t describe the ridge quantitatively.

Here’s what CMS saw:

It’s a slightly different type of measurement – I’ve put a box around the part with the ridge.  We see the same peak as we saw before – again, we pretty much understand where this comes from.  But there’s a broad structure beneath this peak.  It’s smaller than what we saw in heavy ion collisions above, but it’s there – the fact that it’s there is surprising.

In the models we have from heavy ion collisions the ridge is from:

  • A high energy quark or gluon losing energy in the Quark Gluon Plasma,
  • Collective motion of particles in the Quark Gluon Plasma, or
  • Remnants of the initial state (meaning the incoming particles)

In our current understanding of what goes on in a proton-proton collision, there is no Quark Gluon Plasma – so the conservative interpretation of these data would mean that the ridge is somehow some remnant of the initial state. Even conservatively, this would severely constrain our models.  Some physicists, such as Mike Lisa at Ohio State University, have proposed that there may be collective motion of particles in proton-proton collisions, similar to what we see in heavy ion collisions.  This would imply that we also see a medium in proton-proton collisions.  That would be a huge discovery.  (Just to be clear, CMS is not making this claim, at least at this point.)  It will take a while for the community to debate the meaning of these data and come to a consensus on what they mean.  But these data are definitely very exciting – this is the most exciting day for me since the first collisions!

Share