Synoptic Te V Telescopes Recent Results Future Plans

Synoptic Te. V Telescopes: Recent Results & Future Plans Gus Sinnis Los Alamos National Laboratory Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Detectors in Gamma-Ray Astrophysics High Sensitivity Low Energy Threshold Large Aperture/High Duty Cycle HESS, MAGIC, CANGAROO, VERITAS EGRET/GLAST Milagro, Tibet, ARGO, HAWC Energy Range. 05 -50 Te. V Area > 104 m 2 Background Rejection > 99% Angular Resolution 0. 05 o Aperture 0. 003 sr Duty Cycle 10% Energy Range 0. 1 -100 Ge. V Area: 1 m 2 Background Free Angular Resolution 0. 1 o - 0. 3 o Aperture 2. 4 sr Duty Cycle > 90% Energy Range 0. 1 -100 Te. V Area > 104 m 2 Background Rejection > 95% Angular Resolution 0. 3 o - 0. 7 o Aperture > 2 sr Duty Cycle > 90% High Resolution Energy Spectra Studies of known sources Surveys of limited regions of sky Unbiased Sky Survey (<100 Ge. V) Extended Sources Transients (AGN, GRBs) <100 Ge. V Simultaneous Observations Unbiased Sky Survey Extended Sources Transients (GRB’s) Simultaneous Observations Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Milagro Tibet III Current Generation EAS Arrays Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

The Tibet Air Shower Array • 4300 m asl • Scintillator array • 497 detectors – 0. 5 m 2 each – 5 mm lead on each • • 5. 3 x 104 m 2 (phys. area) 3 Te. V median energy 680 Hz trigger rate 0. 9 o resolution Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Milagro 10 m • 2600 m asl • Water Cherenkov Detector • 898 detectors – 450(t)/273(b) in pond – 175 water tanks • 4000 m 2/3. 4 x 104 m 2 (phys. area) • 2 -12 Te. V median energy • 1700 Hz trigger rate • 0. 3 o-0. 5 o resolution • 99% background rejection e g 8 meters 50 meters 80 meters Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Background Rejection in Milagro Hadronic showers contain penetrating component: ’s & hadrons – Cosmic-ray showers lead to clumpier bottom layer hit distributions – Gamma-ray showers give smooth hit distributions g MC Proton MC Data Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Background Rejection (Cont’d) New Rejection Parameter: A 4 Apply a cut on A 4 to reject hadrons: A 4 > 3 rejects 99% of Hadrons retains 18% of Gammas S/B increases with increasing A 4 mx. PE: maximum # PEs in bottom layer PMT f. Top: fraction of hit PMTs in Top layer f. Out: fraction of hit PMTs in Outriggers n. Fit: # PMTs used in the angle reconstruction

Analysis Example: The Crab Nebula A 4 > 3. 0 A 4 > 12. 0 Weight each event by Expected S/B Excess Signal = 2, 074 Background = 60, 637 S/B = 3. 4% Excess Signal = 44 Background = 74 S/B = 60%

Cosmic-Ray Anisotropy: Tibet Array 4. 0 Te. V 6. 2 Te. V 12 Te. V 50 Te. V 300 Te. V Excess from the Cygnus region Energy dependence to anisotropy Anisotropy fade away ~ 300 Te. V (Statistics? ) From Science, V 314, pp. 439 – 443 (2006), by the analysis method (I) (slide from C. T. Yan, Texas in Australia) Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Milagro Sky Survey Cygnus region shows two new Te. V gamma-ray sources Ø Diffuse emission from Cygnus region: ~ 2 x Fcrab (120 square degrees) l (65, 85), b (-3, 3) Ø A new Te. V source at low declinations Ø Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Galactic Longitude Flux Profile MGRO J 1909+06 Longitude Profile |b|<2° MGRO J 2019+37 MGRO J 2033+42 GALPROP optimized to fit EGRET Cygnus Region below horizon • Flux calculations assume a Crab spectrum (-2. 62) • 3 sources detected, MGRO J 1909+06, 1 MGRO J 2019+37, and MGRO J 2033+42 1 Abdo et al. , ar. Xiv: astro-ph/0611691, to appear Ap. J Letters Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Diffuse Emission from Cygnus Region Strong & Moskalenko on a st d ar nd ize im t op d rs ve In e on pt m Co g lun rah st ms bre – Fit to EGRET – Increase 0 and IC component throughout Galaxy – Milagro flux ~2. 5 x prediction – Hard spectrum cosmic ray sources? – Unresolved point sources? GALPROP model of Cygnus Region Pi • Exclude an area of 3 x 3 degree square bin around MGRO J 2019+37 • Strong & Moskalenko optimized model

MGRO J 2019+37 Statistical Sig. 11. 3 σ Coincident with 2 EGRET sources (unidentified) 3 EG J 2016+3657 3 EG J 2021+3716 (PWN G 75. 2+0. 1? ) Flux @ 12 Te. V ~500 m. Crab Width = 0. 32 o ± 0. 12 o Location: l = 75. 1 o ± 0. 1 ostat ± 0. 3 osys b = 0. 3 o ± 0. 1 ostat ± 0. 3 osys MGRO J 2019+37

MGRO J 2033+42 Statistical Sig. 7. 1 σ Coincident with: HEGRA Te. V J 2032+4130 EGRET 3 EG J 2033+4118 Flux @ 12 Te. V ~ 350 m. Crab Location: l = 80. 4 o ± 0. 4 ostat ± 0. 3 osys b = 1. 0 o ± 0. 3 ostat ± 0. 3 osys Will put in Galactic coordinates and change color scale y i r a n e r P lim

MGRO J 1909+06 Statistical Sig. 8. 2 σ Flux @ 12 Te. V ~850 m. Crab Location: l = 40. 5 o ± 0. 1 ostat ± 0. 3 osys b = -1. 0 o ± 0. 1 ostat ± 0. 3 osys Will put in Galactic coordinates and change color scale y i r a n e r P lim

>5 post-trials Galactic Plane Survey Summary Significance (pre-trials) Flux (x 10 -14) (/Te. V/cm 2/s) -175. 4± 0. 1 stat , -5. 7± 0. 1 stat 15. 2 4. 8± 0. 5 stat MGRO J 2019+37 75. 1± 0. 1 stat , 0. 3± 0. 1 stat 11. 3 2. 4± 0. 4 stat MGRO J 1909+06 40. 5± 0. 1 stat , -1. 0± 0. 1 stat 8. 2 4. 1± 0. 9 stat MGRO J 2033+42 80. 4± 0. 4 stat , 1. 0± 0. 3 stat 7. 1 1. 7± 0. 4 stat 76. 3± 0. 1 stat , -1. 9± 0. 2 stat 5. 8 0. 9± 0. 2 stat 77. 2± 0. 2 stat , -4. 0± 0. 2 stat 5. 6 1. 2± 0. 2 stat 34. 1± 0. 3 stat , 0. 0± 0. 2 stat 5. 1 5. 5± 1. 4 stat 106. 4± 0. 5 stat , 1. 7± 0. 8 stat 4. 5 1. 0± 0. 4 stat Object Crab 1 Position 1 • • (l, b) 0. 3° systematic error on position 2 30% systematic error on flux MGRO J 2019+37 is coincident with 3 EG J 2016+3657 and 3 EG J 2021+3716 MGRO J 2033+42 is coincident with Te. V 2032+4130 (d. N/d. E = (0. 5± 0. 2)x 10 -14 /Te. V/cm 2/s) and 3 EG J 2033+4118 Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

The Multi-Wavelength Sky Milagro HESS Te. V gamma ray Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Future Synoptic Te. V Telescopes Tibet w/Muon Detectors Proposal submitted China-Japan collaboration 4300 m asl (YBJ, Tibet) Tibet w/buried water tanks Emphasis 10 -1000 Te. V ARGO Complete summer 2007 Chinese-Italian collaboration 4300 m asl (YBJ, Tibet) RPC carpet 10 -15 /√year on Crab HAWC Proposal submitted >4100 m asl (Tibet or Mexico) Water Cherenkov 100 /√year on Crab Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

ARGO Central carpet (130 clusters/5800 m 2) in DAQ No Pb installed 24 Cluster with Analog. RO Schedule End summer 2006 154 Cluster mounted Start data taking w/out Pb Early 2007 Install Pb Summer 2007 Fully operational with Pb + Analog. RO Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Tibet w/Muon Detector 7. 2 m x 1. 5 m depth　Water pool 20” PMT x 2　 (HAMAMATSU R 3600) Underground 2. 5 m ( ~515 g/cm 2~19 X 0) Material: Concrete pool White epoxy resin paint 184 detectors Total muon area　9540 m 2 Future AS+MD Array (Type 2) Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Tibet MD: Sensitivity 10 Te. V: Cut value SNPE=~40 Background: ~99%　Rejection Gamma rays: ~60% Survival Sensitivity: ~6 times Improved 100 Te. V: Cut value SNPE=~600 Background: >99. 8%　Rejection Gamma rays: ~100% Survival Sensitivity: >20 times Improved Almost background free! 1000 Te. V: Cut value SNPE=~8000 Background: >>99. 8% Rejection Gamma rays: ~100% Survival Sensitivity: Background free! Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

HAWC High Altitude Water Cherenkov Telescope g A proposal to redeploy the Milagro PMTs In a Large Reservoir (22, 500 m 2) at Higher Altitude 10 -15 times more sensitive than Milagro Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Milagro Detector Layout HAWC Milagro: 450 PMT (25 x 18) shallow (1. 4 m) layer 273 PMT (19 x 13) deep (5. 5 m) layer 175 PMT outriggers HAWC: 900 PMTs (30 x 30) 5. 0 m spacing Single layer with 4 m depth Instrumented Area: PMT spacing: Total Area: det Area: ~40, 000 m 2 2. 8 m 3500 m 2 22, 500 m 2 5. 0 m 22, 500 m 2 Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

gammas protons Gamma/Hadron Separation n. Hit/cx. PE>5. 0 Eff g = 34% Eff CR = 3% n. Hit/cx. PE>5. 0 Eff g = 56% Eff CR = 1. 5% Circles are EM particles > 1 Ge. V Circles are ’s & hadrons > 1 Ge. V Circles are 30 m radius (~area of Milagro layer) Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Sensitivity vs. Source Size Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

HAWC Sky Survey Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Sensitivity of Synoptic Te. V Telescopes Cra b GLAST HE SS Wh /VE RIT A S ippl Tibet e ARG O Milagro HAWC Tibet. M D s. HAWC Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007

Conclusion • Enormous progress has been made in the past decade in Te. V survey technology – – – Measurement of cosmic-ray anisotropy Discovery of diffuse Te. V gamma rays from the Galactic plane Discovery of diffuse Te. V gamma rays from the Cygnus region Discovery of a new extended Te. V source in the Cygnus region Discovery of at least 2 additional sources in the Galactic plane • HAWC can attain high sensitivity over an entire hemisphere – – – ~15 times the sensitivity of Milagro ~5 sigma/√day on the Crab 30 m. Crab sensitivity over hemisphere Unsurpassed sensitivity to extended sources Unique Te. V transient detector • (5 x Crab in 10 minutes!) – Can be built quickly @ low cost Gus Sinnis CTA Workshop, Paris, March 2007