Tagged: Accelerator Science Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • richardmitnick 2:05 pm on October 17, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , , ,   

    From FNAL- “Frontier Science Result: CMS Off the beaten path” 


    Fermilab is an enduring source of strength for the US contribution to scientific research world wide.

    Friday, Oct. 17, 2014
    Jim Pivarski

    The main concern for most searches for rare phenomena is to control the backgrounds. Backgrounds are observations that resemble the one of interest, yet aren’t. For instance, fool’s gold is a background for gold prospectors. The main reason that the Higgs boson was hard to find is that most Higgs decays resemble b quark pair production, which is a million times more common. You not only have to find the one-in-a-million event picture, you have to identify some feature of it to prove that it is not an ordinary event.

    This is particularly hard to do in proton collisions because protons break apart in messy ways — the quarks from the proton that missed each other generate a spray of particles that fly off just about everywhere. Look through a billion or a trillion of these splatter events and you can find one that resembles the pattern of new physics that you’re looking for. Physicists have many techniques for filtering out these backgrounds — requiring missing momentum from an invisible particle, high energy perpendicular to the beam, a resonance at a single energy, and the presence of electrons and muons are just a few.

    nu
    Most particles produced by proton collisions originate in the point where the beams cross. Those that do not are due to intermediate particles that travel some distance before they decay

    A less common yet powerful technique for eliminating backgrounds is to look for displaced particle trajectories, meaning trajectories that don’t intersect the collision point. Particles that are directly created by the proton collision or are created by short-lived intermediates always emerge from this point. Those that emerge from some other point in space must be due to a long-lived intermediate.

    A common example of this is the b quark, which can live as long as a trillionth of a second before decaying into visible particles. That might not sound like very long, but the quark is traveling so quickly that it covers several millimeters in that trillionth of a second, which is a measurable difference.

    In a recent analysis, CMS scientists searched for displaced electrons and muons. Displaced tracks are rare, and electrons and muons are also rare, so displaced electrons and muons should be extremely rare. The only problem with this logic is that b quarks sometimes produce electrons and muons, so one other feature is needed to disambiguate. A b quark almost always produces a jet of particles, so this search for new physics also required that the electrons and muons were not close to jets.

    CERN CMS New
    CERN CMS

    With these simple selection criteria, the experimenters found only as many events as would be expected from standard physics. Therefore, it constrains any theory that predicts displaced electrons and muons. One of these is “displaced supersymmetry,” which generalizes the usual supersymmetry scenario by allowing the longest-lived supersymmetric particle to decay on the millimeter scale that this analysis tests. Displaced supersymmetry was introduced as a way that supersymmetry might exist yet be missed by most other analyses. Experiments like this one illuminate the dark corners in which supersymmetry might be hiding.

    See the full article here.

    Fermilab Campus

    Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), located just outside Batavia, Illinois, near Chicago, is a US Department of Energy national laboratory specializing in high-energy particle physics.

    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 2:52 pm on October 16, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , , ,   

    From LC Newsline: “Full ILC-type cryomodule makes the grade” 

    Linear Collider Collaboration header
    Linear Collider Collaboration

    16 October 2014
    Joykrit Mitra

    For the first time, the ILC gradient specification of 31.5 megavolts per metre has been achieved on average across all of the eight cavities assembled in an ILC-type cryomodule. A team at Fermilab reached the milestone earlier this month. It is an achievement for scientists, engineers and technicians at Fermilab and Jefferson Lab in Virginia as well as their domestic and international partners in superconducting radio-frequency (SRF) technologies.

    The cryomodule, called CM2, was developed and assembled to advance superconducting radio-frequency technology and infrastructure at Americas-region laboratories. The CM2 milestone achievement has been nearly a decade in the making, since US scientists started participating in ILC research and development in 2006.

    cryo
    CM2 cryomodule being assembled at Fermilab’s Industrial Center Building (2011). Photo: Reidar Hahn

    “We’ve reached this important milestone and it was a long time coming,” said Elvin Harms, who leads the cryomodule testing programme at Fermilab. “It’s the first time in the world this has been achieved.”

    An accelerating gradient is a measure of how much of an energy boost particle bunches receive as they zip through an accelerator. Cavities with higher gradients boost particle bunches to higher energies over shorter distances. In an operational ILC, all 16,000 of its cavities would be housed in cryomodules, which would keep the cavities cool when operating at a temperature of 2 kelvins. While cavities can achieve high gradients as standalones, when they are assembled together in a cryomodule unit, the average gradient drops significantly.

    The road to the 31.5 MV/m milestone has been a long and arduous one. Between 2008 and 2010, all of the eight cavities in CM2 had individually been pushed to gradients above 35 MV/m at Jefferson Lab in tests in which the cavities were electropolished and vertically oriented. They were among 60 cavities evaluated globally for the prospects of reaching the ILC gradient. This evaluation was known as the S0 Global Design Effort. It was a build-up to the S1-Global Experiment, which put to the test the possibility of reaching 31.5 MV/m across an entire cryomodule. The final assembly of the S1 cryomodule setup took place at KEK in Japan, between 2010 and 2011. In S1, seven nine-cell 1.3-gigahertz niobium cavities strung together inside a cryomodule achieved an average gradient of 26 MV/m. An ILC-type cryomodule consists of eight such cavities.

    cm2
    CM2 in its home at Fermilab’s NML building, as part of the future Advanced Superconducting Test Accelerator. Photo: Reidar Hahn

    But the ILC community has taken big strides since then. Americas region teams acquired significant expertise in increasing cavity gradients: all CM2 cavities were vertically tested in the United States, initially at Jefferson Lab, and were subjected to additional horizontal tests at Fermilab. Further, cavities manufactured by private vendors in the United States have improved in quality: three of the eight cavities that make up the CM2 cryomodule were fabricated locally.

    Hands-on experience played a major role in improving the overall CM2 gradient. In 2007, a kit for Fermilab’s Cryomodule 1, or CM1, arrived from DESY, and by 2010, when CM1 was operational, the workforce had adopted a production mentality, which was crucial for the work they did on CM2.

    “I would like to congratulate my Fermilab colleagues for their persistence in carrying out this important work and for the quality of their work, which is extremely high,” said the SRF Institute at Jefferson Lab’s Rongli Geng, who led the ILC high-gradient cavity project there from 2007 to 2012. “We are glad to be able to contribute to this success.”

    But achieving the gradient is only the first step, Harms said. “There is still a lot of work left to be done. We need to look at CM2’s longer term performance. And we need to evaluate it thoroughly.”

    Among other tasks, the CM2 group will gently push the gradients higher to determine the limits of the technology and continue to understand and refine it. They plan to power and check the magnet—manufactured at Fermilab— that will be used to focus the particle beam passing through the cryomodule. Also in the works is a plan to study the rate at which the CM2 can be cooled down to 2 kelvins and warmed up again. Finally, they expect to send an actual electron beam through CM2 in 2015 to understand better how the beam and cryomodule respond in that setup.

    Scientists at Fermilab also expect that CM2 will be used in the Advanced Superconducting Test Accelerator currently under construction at Fermilab’s NML building, where CM2 is housed. The SRF technology developed for CM2 also has applications for light source instruments such as LCLS-II at SLAC in the United States and DESY’s XFEL.

    And it’s definitely a viable option for a future machine like the ILC.

    See the full article here.

    The Linear Collider Collaboration is an organisation that brings the two most likely candidates, the Compact Linear Collider Study (CLIC) and the International Liner Collider (ILC), together under one roof. Headed by former LHC Project Manager Lyn Evans, it strives to coordinate the research and development work that is being done for accelerators and detectors around the world and to take the project linear collider to the next step: a decision that it will be built, and where.

    Some 2000 scientists – particle physicists, accelerator physicists, engineers – are involved in the ILC or in CLIC, and often in both projects. They work on state-of-the-art detector technologies, new acceleration techniques, the civil engineering aspect of building a straight tunnel of at least 30 kilometres in length, a reliable cost estimate and many more aspects that projects of this scale require. The Linear Collider Collaboration ensures that synergies between the two friendly competitors are used to the maximum.

    Linear Collider Colaboration Banner

    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 2:30 pm on October 16, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , ,   

    From LC Newsline: “Calorimeters enjoy beam time” 

    Linear Collider Collaboration header
    Linear Collider Collaboration

    16 October 2014
    Barbara Warmbein

    There are prototypes and there are prototypes. Some are needed to verify that a chosen detection technology actually works, some help scientists test one technology against another, some help them design sturdy detector infrastructure with little material budget, working power supply and cooling, while others set out to prove that it is possible to have full detector functionality with all electronics set up like in the final detector. And then there are those that do it all at the same time.

    calice
    CALICE crowd around detector setup in the T9 beamline at CERN. All images by Katsushige Kotera

    The CALICE collaboration’s analogue hadronic calorimeter, or AHCAL, is an example of the last type. It is a prototype for a calorimeter – a subdetector that measures the energies of passing particles – that might one day be part of the ILD detector. It would work together with trackers, electromagnetic calorimeter and muon system to record, reconstruct, track and identify every particle produced in the collisions at the future ILC. The CALICE scientists are currently testing a prototype that takes a close look at detector infrastructure like cooling and power supply while at the same time comparing different kinds of silicon photomultipliers or SiPMs. These do the actual job of detection, and the collaboration is testing the latest and much advanced commercial silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs) from Russia, Ireland, Japan and Germany.

    fd
    Flying detectors: after craning the hadronic calorimeter into its test beam destination…
    in
    …it gets installed and set up before starting its data taking run.

    The HCAL prototype consists of one module, which corresponds to a slice of one sector of the future calorimeter barrel of the final detector. It has 1000 channels per square metre and it shares the space in the test beam area with CALICE electromagnetic calorimeter prototype modules from Japan – a true collaboration that also shares the same readout electronics. It’s also the first time that these calorimeters are taking data in a hadron beam after a few runs in electron beams at DESY in Germany.

    …it gets installed and set up before starting its data taking run.

    See the full article here.

    The Linear Collider Collaboration is an organisation that brings the two most likely candidates, the Compact Linear Collider Study (CLIC) and the International Liner Collider (ILC), together under one roof. Headed by former LHC Project Manager Lyn Evans, it strives to coordinate the research and development work that is being done for accelerators and detectors around the world and to take the project linear collider to the next step: a decision that it will be built, and where.

    Some 2000 scientists – particle physicists, accelerator physicists, engineers – are involved in the ILC or in CLIC, and often in both projects. They work on state-of-the-art detector technologies, new acceleration techniques, the civil engineering aspect of building a straight tunnel of at least 30 kilometres in length, a reliable cost estimate and many more aspects that projects of this scale require. The Linear Collider Collaboration ensures that synergies between the two friendly competitors are used to the maximum.

    Linear Collider Colaboration Banner

    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 1:51 pm on October 15, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , , , ,   

    From Symmetry: “Top quark still raising questions” 

    Symmetry

    October 15, 2014
    Troy Rummler

    Why are scientists still interested in the heaviest fundamental particle nearly 20 years after its discovery?

    “What happens to a quark deferred?” the poet Langston Hughes may have asked, had he been a physicist. If scientists lost interest in a particle after its discovery, much of what it could show us about the universe would remain hidden. A niche of scientists, therefore, stay dedicated to intimately understanding its properties.

    tq
    Photo by Reidar Hahn, Fermilab

    Case in point: Top 2014, an annual workshop on top quark physics, recently convened in Cannes, France, to address the latest questions and scientific results surrounding the heavyweight particle discovered in 1995 (early top quark event pictured above).

    Top and Higgs: a dynamic duo?

    A major question addressed at the workshop, held from September 29 to October 3, was whether top quarks have a special connection with Higgs bosons. The two particles, weighing in at about 173 and 125 billion electronvolts, respectively, dwarf other fundamental particles (the bottom quark, for example, has a mass of about 4 billion electronvolts and a whole proton sits at just below 1 billion electronvolts).

    Prevailing theory dictates that particles gain mass through interactions with the Higgs field, so why do top quarks interact so much more with the Higgs than do any other known particles?

    Direct measurements of top-Higgs interactions depend on recording collisions that produce the two side-by-side. This hasn’t happened yet at high enough rates to be seen; these events theoretically require higher energies than the Tevatron or even the LHC’s initial run could supply. But scientists are hopeful for results from the next run at the LHC.

    “We are already seeing a few tantalizing hints,” says Martijn Mulders, staff scientist at CERN. “After a year of data-taking at the higher energy, we expect to see a clear signal.” No one knows for sure until it happens, though, so Mulders and the rest of the top quark community are waiting anxiously.

    A sensitive probe to new physics

    Top and anti-top quark production at colliders, measured very precisely, started to reveal some deviations from expected values. But in the last year, theorists have responded by calculating an unprecedented layer of mathematical corrections, which refined the expectation and promise to realigned the slightly rogue numbers.

    Precision is an important, ongoing effort. If researchers aren’t able to reconcile such deviations, the logical conclusion is that the difference represents something they don’t know about—new particles, new interactions, new physics beyond the standard model.

    sm
    The Standard Model of elementary particles, with the three generations of matter, gauge bosons in the fourth column, and the Higgs boson in the fifth.

    The challenge of extremely precise measurements can also drive the formation of new research alliances. Earlier this year, the first Fermilab-CERN joint announcement of collaborative results set a world standard for the mass of the top quark.

    CERN LHC Map
    CERN LHC Grand Tunnel
    CERN LHC particles
    LHC at CERN

    Such accuracy hones methods applied to other questions in physics, too, the same way that research on W bosons, discovered in 1983, led to the methods Mulders began using to measure the top quark mass in 2005. In fact, top quark production is now so well controlled that it has become a tool itself to study detectors.
    Forward-backward synergy

    With the upcoming restart in 2015, the LHC will produce millions of top quarks, giving researchers troves of data to further physics. But scientists will still need to factor in the background noise and data-skewing inherent in the instruments themselves, called systematic uncertainty.

    “The CDF and DZero experiments at the Tevatron are mature,” says Andreas Jung, senior postdoc at Fermilab. “It’s shut down, so the understanding of the detectors is very good, and thus the control of systematic uncertainties is also very good.”

    FNALTevatron
    Tevatron at Fermilab

    FNAL CDF
    CDF experiment at the Tevatron

    FNAL DZero
    DZero at the Tevatron

    Jung has been combing through the old data with his colleagues and publishing new results, even though the Tevatron hasn’t collided particles since 2011. The two labs combined their respective strengths to produce their joint results, but scientists still have much to learn about the top quark, and a new arsenal of tools to accomplish it.

    “DZero published a paper in Nature in 2004 about the measurement of the top quark mass that was based on 22 events,” Mulders says. “And now we are working with millions of events. It’s incredible to see how things have evolved over the years.”

    See the full article here.

    Symmetry is a joint Fermilab/SLAC publication.


    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 7:38 pm on October 14, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , , , ,   

    From New Scientist vis FNAL: “Two new strange and charming particles appear at LHC” 

    NewScientist

    New Scientist

    08 October 2014
    Nicola Jenner

    Two new particles have been discovered by the LHCb experiment at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland. One of them has a combination of properties that has never been observed before.

    CERN LHCb New
    LHCb

    CERN LHC Map
    CERN LHC Grand Tunnel
    CERN LHC particles
    LHC at CERN

    The particles, named DS3*(2860)– and DS1*(2860)–, are about three times as massive as protons.

    Physicists analyzed LHCb observations of an energy peak that had been spotted in 2006 by the BaBar experiment at Stanford University in California, but whose cause was still unknown.

    “Our result shows that the BaBar peak is caused by two new particles,” says Tim Gershon of Warwick University, UK, lead author of the discovery.
    The force is strong

    Mesons are particles that contain two quarks – subatomic particles that make up matter and are thought to be indivisible. These quarks are bound together by the strong force, one of the four fundamental forces that also keeps the constituents of nuclei together within atoms. This force is one of the less well-understood parts of the standard model of particle physics, the incomplete theory that describes how particles interact.

    sm
    The Standard Model of elementary particles, with the three generations of matter, gauge bosons in the fourth column, and the Higgs boson in the fifth.

    Quarks come in six different flavours known as up, down, strange, charm, bottom and top, in order from lightest to heaviest. The new particles each contain one charm antiquark and one strange quark.

    Significantly, DS3*(2860)– also has a spin value of 3, making this discovery the first ever observation of a spin-3 particle containing a charm quark.

    In other mesons, the quarks can be configured in one of several different ways to give the particle an overall spin value less than three, and this makes the quarks’ exact properties ambiguous. However, for a spin value of three there is no such ambiguity, making DS3*(2860)–’s precise configuration clear.

    Combined with the particle’s charm quark, this may make DS3*(2860)– a key player for exploring the strong force, because the calculations involved are more straightforward for heavy quarks than for lighter ones.

    The LHCb team used a technique known as Dalitz plot analysis to untangle the data peak into its two components, a complex technique that had never before been used on LHC data.

    The technique helps separate and visualise the different paths a particle can take as it decays. Now that it has been used successfully on the LHCb dataset, says Gershon, it can hopefully be applied to more LHC data to help discover further particles and understand how they are bound together.

    “This is a lovely piece of experimental physics,” says Robert Jaffe of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. “Although it doesn’t probe the limits of the standard model, it may shine light on the dynamics of quarks and gluons. The fact that LHCb was able to use Dalitz plot methods is a testimony to the quantity and high quality of the data they’ve accumulated. We can look forward to other similar discoveries in the future using this method.”

    See the full article here.

    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 1:29 pm on October 9, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , , , University of Warwick   

    From Warwick: “Discovery of new subatomic particle sheds light on fundamental force of nature “ 

    University of Warwick

    University of Warwick

    9 October 2014
    No Writer Credit

    The discovery of a new particle will “transform our understanding” of the fundamental force of nature that binds the nuclei of atoms, researchers argue.

    Led by scientists from the University of Warwick, the discovery of the new particle will help provide greater understanding of the strong interaction, the fundamental force of nature found within the protons of an atom’s nucleus.

    what
    Credit: Science and Technology Facilities Council

    Named Ds3*(2860)ˉ, the particle, a new type of meson,[1] was discovered by analysing data collected with the LHCb detector at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC)[2]. The LHCb experiment, which is run by a large international collaboration, is designed to study the properties of particles containing beauty and charm quarks and has unique capability for this kind of discovery.

    CERN LHCb New
    LHCb

    CERN LHC Map
    CERN LHC Grand Tunnel
    CERN LHC particles
    CERN LHC

    The new particle is bound together in a similar way to protons. Due to this similarity, the Warwick researchers argue that scientists will now be able to study the particle to further understand strong interactions.

    Along with gravity, the electromagnetic interaction and weak nuclear force, strong-interactions are one of four fundamental forces. Lead scientist Professor Tim Gershon, from The University of Warwick’s Department of Physics, explains:

    “Gravity describes the universe on a large scale from galaxies to [Isaac] Newton’s falling apple, whilst the electromagnetic interaction is responsible for binding molecules together and also for holding electrons in orbit around an atom’s nucleus.

    “The strong interaction is the force that binds quarks, the subatomic particles that form protons within atoms, together. It is so strong that the binding energy of the proton gives a much larger contribution to the mass, through [Albert] Einstein’s equation E = mc2, than the quarks themselves.[3]”

    Due in part to the forces’ relative simplicity, scientists have previously been able to solve the equations behind gravity and electromagnetic interactions, but the strength of the strong interaction makes it impossible to solve the equations in the same way.

    “Calculations of strong interactions are done with a computationally intensive technique called Lattice QCD,” says Professor Gershon. “In order to validate these calculations it is essential to be able to compare predictions to experiments. The new particle is ideal for this purpose because it is the first known that both contains a charm quark and has spin 3.”

    There are six quarks known to physicists; Up, Down, Strange, Charm, Beauty and Top. Protons and neutrons are composed of up and down quarks, but particles produced in accelerators such as the LHC can contain the unstable heavier quarks. In addition, some of these particles have higher spin values than the naturally occurring stable particles.

    “Because the Ds3*(2860)ˉ particle contains a heavy charm quark it is easier for theorists to calculate its properties. And because it has spin 3, there can be no ambiguity about what the particle is,” adds Professor Gershon. “Therefore it provides a benchmark for future theoretical calculations. Improvements in these calculations will transform our understanding of how nuclei are bound together.”

    Spin is one of the labels used by physicists to distinguish between particles. It is a concept that arises in quantum mechanics that can be thought of as being similar to angular momentum: in this sense higher spin corresponds to the quarks orbiting each other faster than those with a lower spin.

    Warwick Ph.D. student Daniel Craik, who worked on the study, adds “Perhaps the most exciting part of this new result is that it could be the first of many similar discoveries with LHC data. Whether we can use the same technique, as employed with our research into Ds3*(2860)ˉ, to also improve our understanding of the weak interaction is a key question raised by this discovery. If so, this could help to answer one of the biggest mysteries in physics: why there is more matter than antimatter in the Universe.”

    The results are detailed in two papers that will be published in the next editions of the journals Physical Review Letters and Physical Review D. Both papers have been given the accolade of being selected as Editors’ Suggestions.

    [1] The Ds3*(2860)ˉ particle is a meson that contains a charm anti-quark and a strange quark. The subscript 3 denotes that it has spin 3, while the number 2860 in parentheses is the mass of the particle in the units of MeV/c2 that are favoured by particle physicists. The value of 2860 MeV/c2 corresponds to approximately 3 times the mass of the proton.

    [2] The particle was discovered in the decay chain Bs0→D0K–π+ , where the Bs0, D0, K– and π+ mesons contain respectively a bottom anti-quark and a strange quark, a charm anti-quark and an up quark, an up anti-quark and a strange quark, and a down anti-quark and an up quark. The Ds3*(2860)ˉ particle is observed as a peak in the mass of combinations of the D0 and K– mesons. The distributions of the angles between the D0, K– and π+ particles allow the spin of the Ds3*(2860)ˉ meson to be unambiguously determined.

    [3] Quarks are bound by the strong interaction into one of two types of particles: baryons, such as the proton, are composed of three quarks; mesons are composed of one quark and one anti-quark, where an anti-quark is the antimatter version of a quark.

    See the full article here.

    Warwick Campus

    The establishment of the University of Warwick was given approval by the government in 1961 and received its Royal Charter of Incorporation in 1965.

    The idea for a university in Coventry was mooted shortly after the conclusion of the Second World War but it was a bold and imaginative partnership of the City and the County which brought the University into being on a 400-acre site jointly granted by the two authorities. Since then, the University has incorporated the former Coventry College of Education in 1978 and has extended its land holdings by the purchase of adjoining farm land.

    The University initially admitted a small intake of graduate students in 1964 and took its first 450 undergraduates in October 1965. In October 2013, the student population was over 23,000 of which 9,775 are postgraduates. Around a third of the student body comes from overseas and over 120 countries are represented on the campus.

    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 1:00 pm on October 7, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , TRIUMF ARIEL   

    From Triumf: “E-Linac Produces First Beam” 


    Triumf Lab

    07 October 2014
    No Writer Credit

    On September 30th, TRIUMF’s newly constructed superconducting electron linear accelerator (e-linac) produced its first particle beam at an initial energy of 23 MeV. The cutting-edge accelerator technology was designed and built in cooperation with institutions and industry across the country. Acceleration of first beam through the complete e-linac system culminates a series of recent successes for the Advanced Rare Isotope Laboratory (ARIEL) project and sets ARIEL on its path forward.

    spot

    ARIEL is on track to become one of the most sophisticated rare-isotope facilities in the world. The successful completion of the project is a consequence of a remarkable collaboration between TRIUMF, Canadian industry, and 13 Canadian universities led by the University of Victoria. The project was jointly funded by the Government of British Columbia through the BC Knowledge Development Fund (BCKDF), the Government of Canada through the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (CFI), and the National Research Council Canada through TRIUMF and in-kind contributions.

    “This is a tremendous accomplishment for these scientists, their teams, and for British Columbia,” said Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens’ Services Andrew Wilkinson. “Through cutting-edge research and innovation – like ARIEL – British Columbia is set to become a global leader in the field of superconductors and rare-isotope research.”

    “This is a remarkable achievement,” said Dr. Gilles Patry, President and CEO of the CFI. “The technology developed at TRIUMF has the potential to open new avenues for a whole host of innovative products and applications in science and medicine that will benefit Canadians. Congratulations to the entire ARIEL and TRIUMF team!”

    ARIEL’s e-linac is composed of many complex systems––including superconducting radiofrequency (SRF) accelerator cavities––whose thousands of components must work in concert at extreme tolerances in order to deliver beam successfully.

    “It is breathtaking how quickly the e-linac came together! It’s a testament to the tremendous collaboration between TRIUMF, Canada’s universities, and our industrial partner, PAVAC Industries, all driven by the hard work and superb technical expertise of dedicated scientists and students here and abroad,” said Dr. Lia Merminga, TRIUMF Accelerator Division Head and co-leader of the ARIEL project.

    “Through our technology and knowledge transfer to industry, Canada is now one of only a handful of countries in the world with industrial capacity in SRF,” said Dr. Jonathan Bagger, TRIUMF Director. “PAVAC Industries is now in a position to sell leading-edge SRF accelerators to customers around the globe.”

    ARIEL is recognized internationally for its cutting-edge technical and scientific capabilities. The Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre (VECC) in Kolkata, India and TRIUMF have entered into a partnership to jointly develop accelerator and isotope production technologies for each facility.

    Thirteen institutions from across Canada contributed on building, installing, and commissioning the e-linac. Dr. Dean Karlen, Principal Investigator from the University of Victoria said, “In collaborating on this e-linac project, we developed a strong partnership with TRIUMF. The University of Victoria put forward the proposal to CFI and also provided oversight for the project. Within the Physics Department, a group of students and staff designed, built, and commissioned the system that examines the electron beam inside the accelerator. In addition, the e-linac project allowed the University to develop a graduate program in Accelerator Physics with TRIUMF.”

    “The ARIEL project continues to signal to the world that Canada is at the leading edge of accelerator physics and engineering,” said Dr. David Castle, Vice-President Research at the University of Victoria. “The remarkable success of this project has also brought many Canadian and international universities together in the spirit of true collaboration and intellectual inquiry.”

    The next phase of the ARIEL project will further expand the collaboration to 19 Canadian universities and five provincial governments. New partnerships will be created with industry, and greater opportunities will arise for the training of the next generation of scientists and engineers. Over the next five years, ARIEL will advance scientific and technical capabilities, will yield even greater societal and economic benefits for Canada, and will solidify TRIUMF as an international hub for cutting-edge rare-isotope research.

    For more information on ARIEL, please visit http://www.triumf.ca/ariel

    See the full article here.

    World Class Science at Triumf Lab, British Columbia, Canada
    Canada’s national laboratory for particle and nuclear physics
    Member Universities:
    University of Alberta, University of British Columbia, Carleton University, University of Guelph, University of Manitoba, Université de Montréal, Simon Fraser University,
    Queen’s University, University of Toronto, University of Victoria, York University. Not too shabby, eh?

    Associate Members:
    University of Calgary, McMaster University, University of Northern British Columbia, University of Regina, Saint Mary’s University, University of Winnipeg, How bad is that !!
    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 12:56 pm on October 3, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , , , , ,   

    From FNAL- “Frontier Science Result: CMS Subatomic hydrodynamics” 


    Fermilab is an enduring source of strength for the US contribution to scientific research world wide.

    Friday, Oct. 3, 2014
    This column was written by Don Lincoln
    FNAL Don Lincoln
    Dr. Don Lincoln

    It’s hard for most people to imagine what it’s like at the heart of a particle collision. Two particles speed toward one another from opposite directions and their force fields intertwine, causing some of the particles’ constituents to be ejected. Or possibly the energy embodied in the interaction might be high enough to actually create matter and antimatter. It’s no wonder the whole process seems confusing.

    crash
    The same basic equations that govern the flow of water are important for describing the collisions of lead nuclei. In today’s article, we’ll get a glimpse of how this works.

    Things get a little easier to imagine when the particles are the nuclei of atoms (note that I said easier, not easy). For collisions between two nuclei of lead, one can imagine two small spheres, each containing 208 protons and neutrons, coming together to collide. Depending on the violence of the collision, some or many of the protons and neutrons might figuratively melt, releasing their constituent quarks so they can scurry around willy-nilly. Physicists call this form of matter a quark-gluon plasma, and it acts much like a liquid.

    pro
    The quark structure of the proton. The color assignment of individual quarks is arbitrary, but all three colors must be present. Forces between quarks are mediated by gluons

    neut
    The quark structure of the neutron. The color assignment of individual quarks is arbitrary, but all three colors must be present. Forces between quarks are mediated by gluons

    Part of this liquid-like behavior is due to the fact that so many particles are involved. An LHC collision between two lead nuclei might involve thousands or tens of thousands of particles. Because these particles are quarks and gluons, they experience the strong nuclear force. So as long as they are close enough to each other, the particles interact strongly enough that they clump a bit together. The net outcome is that the flow of particles from collision between lead nuclei looks vaguely like splashes of water. In these cases, the equations of hydrodynamics apply. Mathematical descriptions like these have been used to make sense of other features we see in LHC collisions between lead nuclei.

    glu
    In Feynman diagrams, emitted gluons are represented as helices. This diagram depicts the annihilation of an electron and positron.

    However, there is more to understand. We can imagine collisions between the collective 416 protons and neutrons of lead nuclei as splashes of water, but when a pair of protons collide, the collision doesn’t yield enough particles to exhibit hydrodynamic behavior. So as the number of particles involved goes down, the “splash” behavior must slowly go away. In addition, in the first studies of lead nuclei collisions, only the grossest features of the collision were studied. This is because it is impossible to identify individual quarks and gluons.

    There are ways to dig into these sorts of questions. One way is to look at collisions in which one beam is a proton and the other is a lead nucleus. This is a halfway point between the usual LHC proton-proton collisions and the lead-lead ones. In addition, we can turn our attention to quarks that we can unambiguously identify, such as bottom, charm and strange quarks, to better understand the hydrodynamic behavior.

    In this study, physicists looked at particles containing strange quarks. Since strange quarks don’t exist in the beam protons, studying them gives a unique window into the dynamics of lead-lead collisions. By combining studies of particles with strange quarks in lead-lead and lead-proton collisions, scientists hope to better understand the complicated and liquid-like behavior that is just beginning to reveal its secrets.

    See the full article here.

    Fermilab Campus

    Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), located just outside Batavia, Illinois, near Chicago, is a US Department of Energy national laboratory specializing in high-energy particle physics.

    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 8:21 pm on October 2, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , , , ,   

    From LBL: “A Closer Look at the Perfect Fluid” 

    Berkeley Logo

    Berkeley Lab

    October 2, 2014
    Kate Greene 510-486-4404

    Researchers at Berkeley Lab and their collaborators have honed a way to probe the quark-gluon plasma, the kind of matter that dominated the universe immediately after the big bang.

    gp
    A simulated collision of lead ions, courtesy the ALICE experiment at CERN. – See more at: http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2014/10/02/a-closer-look-at-the-perfect-fluid/#sthash.LuD3V5BH.dpuf

    By combining data from two high-energy accelerators, nuclear scientists have refined the measurement of a remarkable property of exotic matter known as quark-gluon plasma. The findings reveal new aspects of the ultra-hot, “perfect fluid” that give clues to the state of the young universe just microseconds after the big bang.

    The multi-institutional team known as the JET Collaboration, led by researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (Berkeley Lab), published their results in a recent issue of Physical Review C. The JET Collaboration is one of the Topical Collaborations in nuclear theory established by the DOE Office of Science in 2010. JET, which stands for Quantitative Jet and Electromagnetic Tomography, aims to study the probes used to investigate high-energy, heavy-ion collisions. The Collaboration currently has 12 participating institutions with Berkeley Lab as the leading institute.

    “We have made, by far, the most precise extraction to date of a key property of the quark-gluon plasma, which reveals the microscopic structure of this almost perfect liquid,” says Xin-Nian Wang, physicist in the Nuclear Science Division at Berkeley Lab and managing principal investigator of the JET Collaboration. Perfect liquids, Wang explains, have the lowest viscosity-to-density ratio allowed by quantum mechanics, which means they essentially flow without friction.

    Hot Plasma Soup

    To create and study the quark-gluon plasma, nuclear scientists used particle accelerators called the Relativistic Heavy-ion Collider (RHIC) at the Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York and the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN in Switzerland. By accelerating heavy atomic nuclei to high energies and blasting them into each other, scientists are able to recreate the hot temperature conditions of the early universe.

    BNL RHIC Campus
    BNL RHIC
    BNL RHIC schematic
    RHIC at BNL

    CERN LHC Map
    CERN LHC Grand Tunnel
    CERN LHC particles
    LHC at CERN

    Inside protons and neutrons that make up the colliding atomic nuclei are elementary particles called quarks, which are bound together tightly by other elementary particles called gluons. Only under extreme conditions, such as collisions in which temperatures exceed by a million times those at the center of the sun, do quarks and gluons pull apart to become the ultra-hot, frictionless perfect fluid known as quark-gluon plasma.

    “The temperature is so high that the boundaries between different nuclei disappear so everything becomes a hot-plasma soup of quarks and gluons,” says Wang. This ultra-hot soup is contained within a chamber in the particle accelerator, but it is short-lived—quickly cooling and expanding—making it a challenge to measure. Experimentalists have developed sophisticated tools to overcome the challenge, but translating experimental observations into precise quantitative understanding of the quark-gluon plasma has been difficult to achieve until now, he says.

    Looking Inside

    In this new work, Wang’s team refined a probe that makes use of a phenomenon researchers at Berkeley Lab first theoretically outlined 20 years ago: energy loss of a high-energy particle, called a jet, inside the quark gluon plasma.

    “When a hot quark-gluon plasma is generated, sometimes you also produce these very energetic particles with an energy a thousand times larger than that of the rest of the matter,” says Wang. This jet propagates through the plasma, scatters, and loses energy on its way out.

    Since the researchers know the energy of the jet when it is produced, and can measure its energy coming out, they can calculate its energy loss, which provides clues to the density of the plasma and the strength of its interaction with the jet. “It’s like an x-ray going through a body so you can see inside,” says Wang.

    we
    Xin Nian Wang, physicist in the Nuclear Science Division at Berkeley Lab and managing principal investigator of the JET Collaboration.

    One difficulty in using a jet as an x-ray of the quark-gluon plasma is the fact that a quark-gluon plasma is a rapidly expanding ball of fire—it doesn’t sit still. “You create this hot fireball that expands very fast as it cools down quickly to ordinary matter,” Wang says. So it’s important to develop a model to accurately describe the expansion of plasma, he says. The model must rely on a branch of theory called relativistic hydrodynamics in which the motion of fluids is described by equations from Einstein’s theory of special relativity.

    Over the past few years, researchers from the JET Collaboration have developed such a model that can describe the process of expansion and the observed phenomena of an ultra-hot perfect fluid. “This allows us to understand how a jet propagates through this dynamic fireball,” says Wang

    Employing this model for the quark-gluon plasma expansion and jet propagation, the researchers analyzed combined data from the PHENIX and STAR experiments at RHIC and the ALICE and CMS experiments at LHC since each accelerator created quark-gluon plasma at different initial temperatures. The team determined one particular property of the quark-gluon plasma, called the jet transport coefficient, which characterizes the strength of interaction between the jet and the ultra-hot matter. “The determined values of the jet transport coefficient can help to shed light on why the ultra-hot matter is the most ideal liquid the universe has ever seen,” Wang says.

    BNL Phenix
    PHENIX at BNL

    BNL Star
    STAR at BNL

    CERN ALICE New
    ALICE at CERN

    CERN CMS New
    CMS at CERN

    Peter Jacobs, head of the experimental group at Berkeley Lab that carried out the first jet and flow measurements with the STAR Collaboration at RHIC, says the new result is “very valuable as a window into the precise nature of the quark gluon plasma. The approach taken by the JET Collaboration to achieve it, by combining efforts of several groups of theorists and experimentalists, shows how to make other precise measurements of properties of the quark gluon plasma in the future.”

    The team’s next steps are to analyze future data at lower RHIC energies and higher LHC energies to see how these temperatures might affect the plasma’s behavior, especially near the phase transition between ordinary matter and the exotic matter of the quark-gluon plasma.

    This work was supported by the DOE Office of Science, Office of Nuclear Physics and used the facilities of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) located at Berkeley Lab.

    See the full article here.

    A U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory Operated by the University of California

    University of California Seal

    DOE Seal

    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
  • richardmitnick 3:21 pm on October 2, 2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Accelerator Science, , , , , ,   

    From LC Newsline: “From the world to America: seeding superconducting accelerator technology through the ILC” 

    Linear Collider Collaboration header
    Linear Collider Collaboration

    2 October 2014
    Leah Hesla

    The superconducting technology at the heart of the future International Linear Collider is one of the outstanding innovations of the machine’s design. Of international heritage, ILC-type superconducting acceleration has borne American offspring, including technology for the newest kid on the block, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory’s light source LCLS II, scheduled to begin operations in late 2018.

    SLAC LCLSII

    “ILC development is a breeding ground for LCLS II,” said Hasan Padamsee, head of Fermilab’s Technical Division and renowned SCRF expert. “Without that available technology, you couldn’t dream of applications that are now spread around for different purposes.”

    Central to the technology are superconducting cavities – niobium structures through which particles hurtle at close to the speed of light. To be superconducting, the cavities need to be kept cold, so researchers work diligently on cryogenic systems to refrigerate them efficiently.

    LCLS II will use superconducting radio-frequency technology, or SCRF, to generate extremely bright electron beams – not to investigate quarks and leptons, as the ILC will do – but to take snapshots of cellular structures and chemical reactions.

    “It’s a remarkable example of different corners of science in our country coming together for a common purpose,” said SLAC’s Marc Ross, cryosystems manager for LCLS II and former Americas region project manager for the Global Design Effort, the original governing entity for the ILC.

    Developments in superconducting accelerator technology at the ILC has begotten innovations in other accelerators for nuclear physics, materials sciences and in high-intensity proton accelerators for neutrino beams or muon beams.

    International roots

    Of course, the ILC’s superconducting radio-frequency technology has its own ancestry.

    SCRF had significantly advanced the field of particle physics around the world by 2004, when an international group of scientists was deciding on the acceleration technology to be implemented in a large, yet-to-be-named future linear collider. They had recognised decades of successful SCRF performance at other previous electron-positron colliders around the globe: CESR at Cornell University in the United States, FLASH at Germany’s DESY, KEK-B and TRISTAN at Japan’s KEK, and LEP II at CERN in France and Switzerland.

    There is also the ILC’s close relative at DESY, the European X-ray Free-Electron Laser, or European XFEL. Of more modest scale than the ILC – it calls for 800 cavities compared with the ILC’s 16,000 – it has served as the ILC’s SCRF training ground.

    “The idea was that, unless you had a more practical twin to serve as a precursor to the ILC, you really wouldn’t be able to demonstrate that you could build a 16,000-cavity machine,” Padamsee said.

    The accelerator community designed and began constructing the superconducting XFEL, planned to be commissioned in 2016. The accelerator will use X-rays to probe molecular structures and extreme states of matter. The free exchange of technological advances between it and the ILC pushed the design of both machines to the cutting edge. The advances would be inherited by future particle accelerators.

    The ILC would also bestow another gift to the next SCRF generation, one that only a machine of its size could offer: an infrastructure necessitated by its incredible scale.

    American heritage

    cryo
    Early on, the U.S. high-energy physics community built an infrastructure to accommodate the large scale of the International Linear Collider. Pictured here is an ILC-type cryomodule at one of Fermilab’s Industrial Complex buildings. Jefferson and SLAC laboratories, as well as institutions such as Cornell University, were a part of the U.S. infrastructure for ILC SCRF. Credit: Fermilab

    LCLS II and the ILC look nothing alike. LCLS II’s accelerator complex is a tenth of the length of the proposed 31-kilometre International Linear Collider. It will accelerate particles to a far lower energy – 4 GeV versus 500 GeV. LCLS II cavity specifications are very different from those of ILC cavities. Finally, LCLS II will not probe fundamental bits of matter, as the ILC will, but larger-scale, molecular structures.

    ILC schematic
    ILC schematic

    Nevertheless, LCLS II is taking advantage of ILC SCRF technology to graduate from its previous life as a normal-conducting accelerator to a superconducting one. It also draws on the connections formed by the ILC community – connections between scientific disciplines, between economic sectors, between institutions.

    Early on, the ILC connections were born of necessity to help manage its unprecedented scale. Seeing the need for a wide infrastructure to accommodate it, the high-energy physics community got to work.

    In 2007, the US community started gearing up to build prototypes for the now officially named ILC. It began tooling up Fermilab in Illinois, Jefferson Lab in Virginia and SLAC in California, as well as university partners such as Cornell University, to advance SCRF research specifically for the future collider. Because US researchers needed a way to fabricate enough cavities to fill a tunnel nearly one-and-a-half times the length of Manhattan, the community also formed important relationships with industry to enable cavities’ mass production.

    “The successful prototyping for ILC provided a proof of principle – it mitigated the risk of LCLS II,” Ross said. “We know how much these things cost. LCLS II can go ahead with this technology. It’s a dream come true.”

    LCLS II is planned to start operating in late 2018. By then, Ross says, SCRF research in the United States will likely have matured considerably. Fermilab and Jefferson Lab both currently contribute to LCLS II R&D at SLAC.

    “When we’re done, we’ll be able do this for a future cryomodule and to connect innovations in the way a cavity is built,” Ross said. “LCLS II is providing the US system with an opportunity to flex its muscle, so to speak.”

    LCLS II isn’t the only project in the United States taking advantage of the acceleration of SCRF development that the ILC helped establish. Fermilab’s future PIP-II, a plan for upgrading the lab’s accelerator complex to deliver high-intensity particle beams, will borrow from ILC advances in SCRF.

    Global dissemination

    The infrastructure for the international collider isn’t limited to the United States, of course. Laboratories around the world – notably DESY, IHEP in China, KEK – have promoted and continue to nurture SCRF research globally, both for the ILC and for future accelerators.

    The ILC’s SCRF technology and network has transferred across geographic borders and scientific disciplines, perpetuating its technological genes to help fulfil humankind’s penchant for discovery. As researchers press ahead on SCRF advances and build its attendant infrastructure, superconducting radio-frequency technology in the United States will have plenty of other opportunities to apply its strength – even beyond high-energy physics and the ILC.

    See the full article here.

    The Linear Collider Collaboration is an organisation that brings the two most likely candidates, the Compact Linear Collider Study (CLIC) and the International Liner Collider (ILC), together under one roof. Headed by former LHC Project Manager Lyn Evans, it strives to coordinate the research and development work that is being done for accelerators and detectors around the world and to take the project linear collider to the next step: a decision that it will be built, and where.

    Some 2000 scientists – particle physicists, accelerator physicists, engineers – are involved in the ILC or in CLIC, and often in both projects. They work on state-of-the-art detector technologies, new acceleration techniques, the civil engineering aspect of building a straight tunnel of at least 30 kilometres in length, a reliable cost estimate and many more aspects that projects of this scale require. The Linear Collider Collaboration ensures that synergies between the two friendly competitors are used to the maximum.

    Linear Collider Colaboration Banner

    ScienceSprings relies on technology from

    MAINGEAR computers

    Lenovo
    Lenovo

    Dell
    Dell

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 342 other followers

%d bloggers like this: