Neutrino Physics Alain Blondel University of Geneva 1

Neutrino Physics Alain Blondel University of Geneva 1. What are neutrinos and how do we know ? 2. The neutrino questions 3. Neutrino mass and neutrino oscillations 3. Future neutrino experiments 4. Conclusions 1

e 1930 Neutrinos: the birth of the idea Pauli's letter of the 4 th of December 1930 Dear Radioactive Ladies and Gentlemen, d. N d. E e- spectrum in beta decay few Me. V E As the bearer of these lines, to whom I graciously ask you to listen, will explain to you in more detail, how because of the "wrong" statistics of the N and Li 6 nuclei and the continuous beta spectrum, I have hit upon a desperate remedy to save the "exchange theorem" of statistics and the law of conservation of energy. Namely, the possibility that there could exist in the nuclei electrically neutral particles, that I wish to call neutrons, which have spin 1/2 and obey the exclusion principle and which further differ from light quanta in that they do not travel with the velocity of light. The mass of the neutrons should be of the same order of magnitude as the electron mass and in any event not larger than 0. 01 proton masses. The continuous beta spectrum would then become understandable by the assumption that in beta decay a neutron is emitted in addition to the electron such that the sum of the energies of the neutron and the electron is constant. . . I agree that my remedy could seem incredible because one should have seen those neutrons very earlier if they really exist. But only the one who dare can win and the difficult situation, due to the continuous structure of the beta spectrum, is lighted by a remark of my honoured predecessor, Mr Debye, who told me recently in Bruxelles: "Oh, It's well better not to think to this at all, like new taxes". From now on, every solution to the issue must be discussed. Thus, dear radioactive people, look and judge. Unfortunately, I cannot appear in Tubingen personally since I am indispensable here in Zurich because of a ball on the night of 6/7 December. With my best regards to you, and also to Mr Back. Your humble servant. W. Pauli Wolfgang Pauli 2

Neutrinos direct detection 1953 Reines and Cowan The target is made of about 400 liters of water mixed with cadmium chloride The anti-neutrino coming from the nuclear reactor interacts with a proton of the target, giving a positron and a neutron. The positron annihilates with an electron of target and gives two simultaneous photons. The neutron slows down before being eventually captured by a cadmium nucleus, that gives the emission of photons about 15 microseconds after those of the positron. All those 4 photons are detected and the 15 microseconds identify the "neutrino" interaction. 4 -fold delayed coincidence 3

1956 Parity violation in Co beta decay: electron is left-handed (C. S. Wu et al) 1957 Neutrino helicity measurement (M. Goldhaber et al): 1958 neutrinos have negative helicity (If massless this is the same as left-handed) 1959 polarization is detected by absorbtion in (reversibly)magnetized iron 1960 1959 Ray Davis established that (anti) neutrinos from reactors do not interact with chlorine to produce argon reactor : n p e- e these e do not do they are anti-neutrinos e + 37 Cl 37 Ar + e- 4

Neutrinos the properties 1960 In 1960, Lee and Yang are realized that if a reaction like - e- is not observed, this is because two types of neutrinos exist and e Lee and Yang 5

Two Neutrinos 1962 AGS Proton Beam Neutrinos from p-decay only produce muons (not electrons) Schwartz Lederman Steinberger - W- N when they interact in matter hadrons 6

Neutrinos the weak neutral current Gargamelle Bubble Chamber CERN Discovery of weak neutral current + e + N + X (no muon) previous searches for neutral currents had been performed in particle decays (e. g. K 0 -> ) leading to extremely stringent limits (10 -7 or so) early neutrino experiments had set their trigger on final state (charged) lepton! 7

Z e- e- elastic scattering of neutrino off electron in the liquid 1973 Gargamelle experimental birth of the Standard model 8

The Standard Model: 3 families of spin 1/2 quark and leptons interacting with spin 1 vector bosons ( , W&Z, gluons) charged leptons neutral leptons = neutrinos quarks e mc 2=0. 0005 Ge. V e mc 2 ? =? <1 e. V d mc 2=0. 005 Ge. V u mc 2=0. 003 Ge. V First family t 0. 106 Ge. V 1, 77 Ge. V t <1 e. V strange <1 e. V beauty 0. 200 Ge. V charm 1. 5 Ge. V top mc 2=175 Ge. V Seconde family Third family 9

Total neutrino – nucleon CC cross sections neutrino We distinguish: • quasi-elastic • single pion production („RES region”, e. g. W<=2 Ge. V) • more inelastic („DIS region”) anti-neutrino Below a few hundred Me. V neutrino energies: quasi-elastic region. Plots from Wrocław MC generator 10

Quasi-elastic reaction (from Naumov) Huge experimental uncertainty The limiting value depends on the axial mass Under assumption of dipole vector form-factors: (A. Ankowski) 11

Quasielastic scattering off electrons ( “Leptons and quarks” L. B. Okun) J=0 Cross section is isotropic in c. m. system 12

Quasielastic scattering off electrons J=1 Differential cross section in c. m. system Total cross section 13

At high energies interactions on quarks dominate: DIS regime: neutrinos on (valence) quarks x= fraction of longitudinal momentum carried by struck quark y= (1 -cos )/2 for J=0 isotropic distribution d(x)= probability density of quark d with mom. fraction x J=0 s = x. S = 2 m. E x p d u u multi-hadron system with the right quantum number 14

At high energies interactions on quarks dominate: DIS regime: anti-neutrinos on (valence) quarks x= fraction of longitudinal momentum carried by struck quark y= (1 -cos )/2 for J=1 distribution prop. to (1 -y)2 (forward favored) u(x)= probability density of quark u with mom. fraction x J=1 s = x. S = 2 m. E x p d u u multi-hadron system with the right quantum number 15

some remarkable symmetries: each quark comes in 3 colors sum of charges is Electron charge -1 Neutrino charge 0 -1 + 0 + 3 x ( 2/3 - 1/3) = 0 this turns out to be a necessary condition for the stability of higher order radiative corrections Quark up charge 2/3 Quark down charge -1/3 16

1989 The Number of Neutrinos collider experiments: LEP • N determined from the visible Z cross-section at the peak (most of which are hadrons): the more decays are invisible the fewer are visible: hadron cross section decreases by 13% for one more family of neutrinos in 2001: N = 2. 984 0. 008 17

Neutrino mysteries 1. neutrinos are massless or nearly so mass limit of 2. 2 e. V/c 2 from beta decay mass limit of <~ 1 e. V/c 2 from large scale structure of the universe 2. neutrinos appear in a single helicity (or chirality? ) but of course weak interaction only couples to left-handed particles and neutrinos have no other known interaction… So… even if right handed neutrinos existed, they would neither be produced nor be detected! 3. if they are not massless why are the masses so different from those of other quark and leptons? 4. 3 families are necessary for CP violation, but why only 3 families? …… 18

19

KATRIN experiment programmed to begin in 2008. Aim is to be sensitive to m e < 0. 2 e. V 20

What IS the neutrino mass? ? ? The future of neutrino physics There is a long way to go to match direct measurements of neutrino masses with oscillation results and cosmological constraints 21

Direct exploration of the Big Bang -- Cosmology measurements of the large scale structure of the universe using a variety of techniques -- Cosmic Microwave Background -- observations of red shifts of distant galaxies with a variety of candles. Big news in 2003/2004 : Dark Energy or cosmological constant àlarge scale structure in space, time and velocity is determined by early universe fluctuations, thus by mechanisms of energy release (neutrinos or other hot dark matter) much attention in 2004/2005 to understand the robustness of the Neutrino mass limits…. 22

Formation of Structure Smooth Structured Structure forms by gravitational instability of primordial density fluctuations A fraction of hot dark matter suppresses small-scale structure 23

24

Halzen adding hot neutrino dark matter erases small structure m = 0 e. V m = 1 e. V m = 7 e. V m = 4 e. V 25

Halzen Authors Sm /e. V / Priors Recent Cosmological Limits on. Data Neutrino Masses (limit 95%CL) Spergel et al. (WMAP) 2003 0. 69 [astro-ph/0302209] WMAP, CMB, 2 d. F, s 8, HST Hannestad 2003 [astro-ph/0303076] 1. 01 WMAP, CMB, 2 d. F, HST Tegmark et al. 2003 [astro-ph/0310723] 1. 8 WMAP, SDSS Barger et al. 2003 [hep-ph/0312065] 0. 75 WMAP, CMB, 2 d. F, SDSS, HST Crotty et al. 2004 [hep-ph/0402049] 1. 0 0. 6 WMAP, CMB, 2 d. F, SDSS & HST, SN Hannestad 2004 [hep-ph/0409108] 0. 65 WMAP, SDSS, SN Ia gold sample, Ly- data from Keck sample Seljak et al. 2004 [astro-ph/0407372] 0. 42 WMAP, SDSS, Bias, Ly- data from SDSS sample NB Since this is a large mass this implies that the largest neutrino mass is limit/3 26

Neutrinos Ray Davis astrophysical neutrinos Homestake Detector since ~1968 Solar Neutrino Detection 600 tons of chlorine. • Detected neutrinos E> 1 Me. V • fusion process in the sun solar : pp pn e+ e (then D gives He etc…) these e do e + 37 Cl 37 Ar + e- they are neutrinos • The rate of neutrinos detected is three times less than predicted! solar neutrino ‘puzzle’ since 1968 -1975! solution: 1) solar nuclear model is wrong or 2) neutrino oscillate 27

The Pioneer: Chlorine Experiment 37 Cl( The interaction Signal Composition: (BP 04+N 14 SSM+ osc) 37 Ar (E = 813 ke. V) , e) e thr Kshell EC t = 50. 5 d 37 Cl + 2. 82 ke. V (Auger e-, X) pep+hep 7 Be 8 B CNO Tot Expected Signal (BP 04 + N 14) 8. 2 SNU 0. 15 0. 65 2. 30 0. 13 SNU SNU ( 4. 6%) (20. 0%) (71. 0%) ( 4. 0%) 3. 23 SNU ± 0. 68 1 s +1. 8 – 1. 8 1 s 28

e solar neutrinos Sun = Fusion reactor Only e produced Different reactions Spectrum in energy Counting experiments vs flux calculated by SSM BUT. . . 29

expected (no osc) Generalities on radiochemical experiments Chlorine (Homestake Mine); South Dakota USA GALLEX/G NO Data used for R determina tion N runs 19701993 106 19912003 124 Average Hot Sourc efficienc chem e calib check y 0. 958 ± 0. 007 36 Cl ? ? 37 As Baksan Kabardino Balkaria 1990 ongoing 104 ? ? 2. 55 ± 0. 17 ± 0. 18 6. 6% 7% 2. 6 ± 0. 3 8. 5+-1. 8 LNGS Italy SAGE No Rex [SNU] No Yes twice 51 Cr source 69. 3 ± 4. 1 ± 3. 6 Yes 51 Cr 37 Ar 70. 5 ± 4. 8 ± 3. 7 5. 9% 5% 131+-11 6. 8% 5. 2% 70. 5 ± 6. 0 131+-11 30

Super-K detector Water Cerenkov detector 50000 tons of pure light water 10000 PMTs 41. 3 m 39. 3 m C Scientific American 31

32

Missing Solar Neutrinos Only fraction of the expected flux is measured ! Possible explications: wrong SSM NO. Helio-seismology wrong experiments NO. Agreement between different techniques or e’s go into something else Oscillations? 33

neutrino definitions the electron neutrino is present in association with an electron (e. g. beta decay) the muon neutrino is present in association with a muon the tau neutrino is present in association with a tau (pion decay) (W t decay) these flavor-neutrinos are not (as we know now) quantum states of well defined mass (neutrino mixing) the mass-neutrino with the highest electron neutrino content is called 1 the mass-neutrino with the next-to-highest electron neutrino content is 2 the mass-neutrino with the smallest electron neutrino content is called 3 34

Lepton Sector Mixing Pontecorvo 1957 35

Neutrino Oscillations (Quantum Mechanics lesson 5) source detection propagation in vacuum -- or matter L weak interaction produces ‘flavour’ neutrinos weak interaction: (CC) Energy (i. e. mass) eigenstates propagate e. g. pion decay p ¦ > = ¦ 1 > ¦ 2 > ¦ 3 > ¦ (t)> = ¦ 1 > exp( i E 1 t) ¦ 2 > exp( i E 2 t) ¦ 3 > exp( i E 3 t) N - C or e N e- C or t N t- C P ( e) = ¦ < e ¦ (t)>¦ 2 t = proper time L/E is noted U 1 is noted U 2 is noted U 3 etc…. 36

Oscillation Probability Dm 2 en ev 2 L en km E en Ge. V Hamiltonian= E = sqrt( p 2 + m 2) = p + m 2 / 2 p for a given momentum, eigenstate of propagation in free space are the mass eigenstates! 37

To complicate things further: matter effects elastic scattering of (anti) neutrinos on electrons e, , t Z e- e- e W- e- e e- all neutrinos and anti neutrinos do this equally only electron neutrinos e e. W- These processes add a forward amplitude to the Hamiltonian, which is proportional to the number of elecrons encountered to the Fermi constant and to the neutrio energy. e. The Z exchange is diagonal in the 3 -neutrino space this does not change the eigenstates only electron anti- neutrinos The W exchange is only there for electron neutrinos It has opposite sign for neutrinos and anti-neutrinos (s vs t-channel exchange) D= 2 2 GF ne. E THIS GENERATES A FALSE CP VIOLATION e 38

D= 2 2 GF ne. E This is how YOU can solve this problem: write the matrix, diagonalize, and evolve using, Hflavour base= This has the effect of modifying the eigenstates of propagation! Mixing angle and energy levels are modified, this can even lead to level-crossing. MSW antineutrino , t effect neutrino m 2 e E or density oscillation is further suppressed oscillation is enhanced for since T resonance… enhances oscillation neutrinos if m 21 x >0, and suppressed for antineutrinos if m 21 x <0, and suppressed for neutrinos asymmetry uses neutrinos it is not affected 39

SMIRNOV 40

Solar Models R previsions for Radiochemical experiments from LUNA experiment on 14 N(p, g)15 O New S 0(14 N+p) = 1. 77 ke. V ± 0. 2 Flux (cm-2 s-1) BP 00 BP 04 + N 14 BP 04+ + N 14 Pee Dm 2 = 7. 1 x 10 -5 e. V 2 q 12 = 32. 5 pp (109) 59. 5 (± 1%) 5. 94 (± 1%) 59. 8 60. 3 0. 578 (vac) pep (108) 1. 40 (± 2%) 1. 42 1. 44 0. 531(vac) hep (103) 9. 24 7. 88 (± 16%) 7. 93 8. 09 ~ 0. 3 matter 4. 77 (± 10%) 4. 86 (± 12%) 4. 86 4. 65 0. 557 vac 5. 05 +20%-16% 5. 79 (± 23%) 5. 77 5. 24 0. 324 matter 7 Be 8 B (109) (106) 13 N (108) 5. 48 +21%-17% 5. 71 2. 30 0. 557 vac 15 O (108) 4. 80 +25%-19% 5. 03 1. 79 0. 541 vac 17 F (106) 5. 63 +25%-25% 5. 91 3. 93 increased accuracy in 7 Be(p, g)8 B measurement Columns 2, 3, 4 from BP 04 41

Oscillation Phenomena 42

SNO detector only e equally e + t z Aim: measuring non e neutrinos in-equally in a pure solar e beam ton of D 20 e + z How? Three possible neutrino reactionzin 1000 heavy water: 0. 1 ( t ) z 12 m diam. z 9456 PMTs 43

Charged current events are depleted (reaction involving electron neutrinos) Neutral current reaction agrees with Solar Model (flavour blind) SSM is right, neutrinos oscillate! 44

Kamland 2002 45

Kam. LAND: disappearance of antineutrinos from reactor (few Me. V at ~100 km) 46

Prerequisite for CP violation in neutrinos: Solar LMA solution Before Kam. LAND After Kam. LAND 7 10 -5 This will be confirmed and m 212 measured precisely by KAMLAND and maybe Borexino in next 2 -4 yrs 47

Kamland 2004 48

Kamland 2004 49

2003 2005 Solar oscillation parameters now at 10 -20% precision. 50

51

Atmospheric Neutrinos Path length from ~20 km to 12700 km 52

Super-K detector z Water Cerenkov detector z 50000 tons of pure light water z 10000 PMTs 41. 3 m 39. 3 m C Scientific American 53

/e Background Rejection e/mu separation directly related to granularity of coverage. Limit is around 10 -3 (mu decay in flight) SKII coverage OKOK, less maybe possible 54

Atmospheric : up-down asymmetry Super-K results e up down 55

Atmospheric Neutrinos Super. Kamiokande Atmospheric Result 56

57

58

More data for L/E analysis m 2 SK-I ( 2001) SK-II Preliminary FC&PC: 627 days up- : 609 days sin 22 Guide Line c 2 for Dm 2=2. 4 x 10 -3 e. V 2, sin 22 q=1. 02 c 2 osc = 42. 9/42 d. o. f. (43%) neutrino decay Dc 2 =16. 5 (4. 1 s) de-coherence Dc 2 =20. 9 (4. 6 s) combination will certainly exceed 5 sigma… L/E (km/Ge. V) 59

13 : Best current constraint: CHOOZ e disappearance experiment R = 1. 01 2. 8%(stat) 2. 7%(syst) Pth= 8. 5 GWth, L = 1, 1 km, M = 5 t (300 mwe) World best constraint ! e x @ m 2 atm=2 10 -3 e. V 2 sin 2(2θ 13)<0. 2 M. Apollonio et. al. , Eur. Phys. J. C 27 (2003) 331 -374 (90% C. L) 60

General framework : 1. 2. 3. 4. We know that there are three families of active, light neutrinos (LEP) Solar neutrino oscillations are established (Homestake+Gallium+Kam+SK+SNO) Atmospheric neutrino ( -> ) oscillations are established (IMB+Kam+SK+Macro+Sudan) At that frequency, electron neutrino oscillations are small (CHOOZ) This allows a consistent picture with 3 -family oscillations preferred: LMA: 12 ~300 m 122~8 10 -5 e. V 2 , 23 ~450 m 23 2~ 2. 5 10 -3 e. V 2, 13 <~ 100 with several unknown parameters => an exciting experimental program for at least 25 years *) including leptonic CP & T violations 5. There is indication of possible higher frequency oscillation (LSND) to be confirmed (mini. Boo. Ne) This is not consistent with three families of neutrinos oscillating, and is not supported (nor is it completely contradicted) by other experiments. (Case of an unlikely scenario which hangs on only one not-so-convincing experimental result) If confirmed, this would be even more exciting (I will not explore this here, but this has been done. See Barger et al PRD 63 033002 ) *)to set the scale: CP violation in quarks was discovered in 1964 and there is still an important program (K 0 pi 0, B-factories, Neutron EDM, BTe. V, LHCb. . ) to go on for 10 years…i. e. a total of ~50 yrs. and we have not discovered leptonic CP yet! 61

The neutrino mixing matrix: 3 angles and a phase 3 m 223= 2 10 -3 e. V 2 2 1 m 212= 8 10 -5 e. V 2 OR? 2 1 23 (atmospheric) = 450 , 12 (solar) = 320 , 13 (Chooz) < 130 3 m 212= 8 10 -5 e. V 2 m 223= 2 10 -3 e. V 2 Unknown or poorly known even after approved program: 2 13 , phase , sign of m 13 62

neutrino mixing (LMA, natural hierarchy) m 2 3 2 1 e is a (quantum) mix of 1 (majority, 65%) and 2 (minority 30%) with a small admixture of 3 ( < 13%) (CHOOZ) 63

Neutrinos have mass and mix This is NOT the Standard Model why cant we just add masses to neutrinos? 64

Majorana neutrinos or Dirac neutrinos? e+ e– since Charge(e+) = – Charge(e–). But neutrinos may not carry any conserved charge-like quantum number. There is NO experimetal evidence or theoretical need for a conserved Lepton Number L as L(ν) = L(l–) = –L(ν) = –L(l+) = 1 then, nothing distinguishes from violation of fermion number…. ! 65

Adding masses to the Stadard model neutrino 'simply' by adding a Dirac mass term implies adding a right-handed neutrino. No SM symmetry prevents adding then a term like and this simply means that a neutrino turns into a antineutrino (the charge conjugate of a right handed antineutrino is a left handed neutrino!) this does not violate spin conservation since a left handed field has a component of the opposite helicity (and vice versa) L - + + m/E 66

Pion decay with massive neutrinos p L + p L Lc = R (m /E)2 1 (. 05/30 106)2 = 10 -18 no problem 67

68

The mass spectrum of the elementary particles. Neutrinos are 1012 times lighter than other elementary fermions. The hierarchy of this spectrum remains a puzzle of particle physics. Most attractive wisdom: via the see-saw mwchanism, the neutrinos are very light because they are low-lying states in a split doublet with heavy neutrinos of mass scale interestingly similar to the grand unification scale. m. M = <v>2 with <v> ~= mtop =174 Ge. V m. = O(10 -2) e. V M ~10 15 Ge. V 69

70

food for thought: (simple) e (in K-capture for instance)? what result would one get if one measured the mass of a (in pion decay) ? what result would one get if one measured the mass of a Is energy conserved when neutrinos oscillate? future experiments on neutrino masses -- neutrinoless double beta decay -- oscillations and CP violation 71