Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

High Mass Dilepton Pairs in Proton-Nucleus Collisions, Thesis of Particle Physics

A thesis submitted by David Chu Hom in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Pure Science at Columbia University in 1977. The thesis is on an experiment proposed to search for high mass dilepton pairs in proton-nucleus collisions. an introduction, experimental apparatus, data acquisition, data analysis and results, summary and conclusions, acknowledgments, and several appendices.

Typology: Thesis

Pre 2010

Uploaded on 05/11/2023

sheela_98
sheela_98 🇺🇸

4.2

(12)

234 documents

1 / 156

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Nevis
Laboratories
Columbia
University
Physics
Department
Irvington-on-Hudson
New
York
$
and
¢'
Production
in
Hadron
Collisions
DAVID
CHU
HOM
Reproduction
in
whole
or
in
part
is
permitted
for
any
purpose
of
the
United
States
Government
Submitted
in
partial
fulfillment
of
the
requirements
for
the
degree
of
Doctor
of
Philosophy
in
the
Faculty
of
Pure
Science,
Columbia
University
1977
National
Science
Foundation
NSF
PHY
76-84396
R-1110
CU-328
NEVIS-222
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe
pff
pf12
pf13
pf14
pf15
pf16
pf17
pf18
pf19
pf1a
pf1b
pf1c
pf1d
pf1e
pf1f
pf20
pf21
pf22
pf23
pf24
pf25
pf26
pf27
pf28
pf29
pf2a
pf2b
pf2c
pf2d
pf2e
pf2f
pf30
pf31
pf32
pf33
pf34
pf35
pf36
pf37
pf38
pf39
pf3a
pf3b
pf3c
pf3d
pf3e
pf3f
pf40
pf41
pf42
pf43
pf44
pf45
pf46
pf47
pf48
pf49
pf4a
pf4b
pf4c
pf4d
pf4e
pf4f
pf50
pf51
pf52
pf53
pf54
pf55
pf56
pf57
pf58
pf59
pf5a
pf5b
pf5c
pf5d
pf5e
pf60
pf61
pf62
pf63
pf64

Partial preview of the text

Download High Mass Dilepton Pairs in Proton-Nucleus Collisions and more Thesis Particle Physics in PDF only on Docsity!

Nevis Laboratories ColumbiaPhysics DepartmentUniversity Irvington-on-Hudson New York

$ and ¢' Production in Hadron Collisions

DAVID CHU HOM

Reproduction in whole or in part is permitted for any purpose of the United States Government

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Pure Science, Columbia University 1977 National Science Foundation NSF PHY 76-

R-

CU-

NEVIS-

-ii-

is found to be 0.018 + 0.006 at 400 GeV and 0.014 + 0.

at 300 GeV. This result was not expected in current theories which try to understand w production as a direct res~lt of quark collisions.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction II. Experimental Apparatus A. Design Requirements B. Overview c. Apparatus Description III. Data Acquisition A. Fast Logic B. DC Logic c. Readout System D. On-Line Computer System E. Data Taking IV. Data Analysis and Results A. Description of Analysis B. Results c. Studies v. Summary and Conclusions

Page 1

7 8 8

14 15 17 18 19

21 25 30

A. Summary of Results 35 B. Theoretical Significance 35 VI. Acknowledgments 39 Appendix I: Lead Glass Calorimeter 41 Appendix II: Digitizers and Digitizer Readout System 46 Appendix III: Lead Glass Calibration 49 Appendix IV: Proportional Wire Chamber Reconstruction 52

I. INTRODUCTION

This thesis is on an experiment proposed to search for high mass dilepton pairs in proton nucleus collisions.

p + Be .... "'Y" + anything

Lepton pair production is a second generation experiment of a series of lepton experiments by the Columbia-Fermilab Collaboration. The first generation lepton experiment was single lepton production. 1 The motivations for this experiment are at least twofold: probe the nucleon structure and search for possible resonances. In this experiment we probe the electromagnetic structure of the nucleon by studying the continuum dilepton spectrum in an unexplored mass range. We are looking at the process shown in Fig. 1. This is analogous to deep inelastic lepton-nucleon scattering (Fig. 2), where the virtual photon is spacelike. 2 We are looking at a timelike virtual photon. In both cases a known probe, the photon, is used to study the nucleon electro- magnetic structure. The lepton-photon vertex is totally understood by QED. It is then the photon-hadron vertex we are studying. Measurements of the hadronic vertex function give us information about the nucleon structure. Another related process is hadron production in colliding e+e- beam experiments 3 (see Fig. 3). Again the photon is timelike. There are of course theoretical models of how a photon interacts with hadrons. One of the most studied of these

models is the parton model as deployed by Bjorken. 4 In this model the hadron is composed of pointlike constituents. This decomposition allows calculations to be done exactly_ (except for sums over parton distributions) as the hadronic vertex is reduced to QED. This picture of the hadron can easily be shown to predict Bjerken scaling in deep inelastic lepton nucleon scattering. That is the cross section is a function of x = q 2 / 2Mv (see Fig. 2), instead of both q 2 and v· Drell and Yan^5 showed how massive lepton pairs could be produced in hadron- hadron collisions using the parton model. Their model is shown in Fig. 4. Their differential cross section also exhibits scaling: f (T)

where f (,-)

4~a 2 /3Q 2 is the total cross section for e+e- _,^ μ+ -^ μ^.^ is

essentially a sum over parton distributions. A· l is the charge of the ith parton type. T is the scaling variable: T = Q^2 /s where Q^2 is the lepton pair mass squared and s is the pp c.m. energy squared. x.l is the parton fractional momentum. The F 2 i and F 2 i are vw 2 as measured in deep inelastic scattering. 2 The ~, v measurements for the antiparton distributions are at the moment very uncertain. 6 This makes comparison of the parton model with lepton pair production very difficult. 7 We can turn

the theory was not renormalizable. It is hoped, that at high energies and high transverse momentum (pt> 1 GeV/c), the electromagnetic and weak interactions would be competitive with the strong interactions. If that is the case there is the possibility of studying and improving our knowledge of weak and electromagnetic interactions at high energy. Using the full energy of the primary beam at Fermilab, we explore the highest accessible masses. Predictions of intermediate bosons have been made for a 1 ong t .ime.^ So f^ ar t h^ ey h^ ave not been found. Yamaguc h.15l , using eve, has been able to relate the electromagnetic process of ~ + - t^ production to the production of w-.+ A measurement of lepton pair production can be used to set limits on the W mass l'f i't i's not found. 16 A (^) prac t'ica (^1) use o f d'li ep t (^) on measuremen ts with the use of scaling is to determine the parameters of a w-^ + search experiment or of an accelerator designed to produce w-.^ +

Lee and Wick 17 have introduced a theory of QED with finite renormalization. The photon propagator is modified by the introduction of a new particle, the B^0 • B^0 , being massive, can decay into lepton pairs directly. Recently there has been a great deal of interest in gauge theories. It started when Weinberg and Salam^18 independently succeeded in unifying weak and electromagnetic interactions into one theory. The w-^ + and the photon became gauge bosons in their model. The disparity between the weak

and electromagnetic interactions was attributed^ / to a spon- taneous breaking of the gauge symmetry. The symmetry breaking gave the w± its mass. It was suggested that the theory might be renormalizable as the gauge bosons are massless at the start. In addition to the charged vector bosons w±, a neutral boson, was predicted: z^0 • The z^0 could be detected by its

R,^ + - R, decay mode.

Georgi and Glashow 19 proposed an alternative model without

neutral currents (z 0 ). Instead they predicted heavy lepton

counterparts of the electron and muon (E,^0 E,+^ M,^0 M+ ). As of

this writing neutral currents have been observed 20 , but the existence of heavy leptons is an open question. 21 Th~re are models which have both neutral bosons as well as heavy leptons.^.^22 Before the advent of renormalizable gauge theories, Bjorken and Glashow 23 motivated the introduction of a fourth "charmed" quark. Their argument was based upon the leptons being a pair of doublets and arguing for a similar symmetry for hadrons. \le c (^ u e d μ (^) s Glashow, Iliopoulos and Maiani 24 provided a better basis for such a conjecture when they found that strangeness changing weak currents were suppressed to first order in G (Fermi coupling constant) in accord with experiments.

II. EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS A. Design Requirements Since we are looking at a process of the Drell-Yan gender, we expect a very small cross section. To be able to pick up any unusual pearls in this debris of hadronic sand, we would require a hadron pair rejection of order 10 7 • There are two approaches to this problem. The first approach is to observe electron-positron pairs. Here we must be able to distinguish between hadrons and electrons. The problem with this approach is that we would be limited in incident beam intensity by the large hadronic flux. The second approach is to absorb the hadrons before they can reach the apparatus. Here we must observe muon pairs. This approach suffers from loss of resolution due to energy loss and multiple scattering in a hadron absorber. Our decision was to perform the experiment with the first method. A followup experiment will try to increase the sensitivity in the high mass region using.^ muon pairs..^31 To observe electron-positron pairs we require a hadron rejection of 10 3 to 10 4 per arm of the spectrometer. Since there is a large flux of hadrons we must be able to take high counting rates to explore small cross sections. A problem created by high rates is accidentals. To alleviate part of this problem we must have good time resolution. Due to the beam structure (18.9 ns), a resolution of 15 ns was sufficient.

As we are one of the first experiments to look at such a high mass region, we also want to be sensitive to resonances. Resonances would appear as peaks sitting on a continuum. Very good mass resolution is required so that any peaks would not be smeared out (a= 1%). Since there is a large 7f^0 and 11 flux, care must he taken to avoid conversion of ~ rays from their decay. B. Overview The apparatus is a double arm spectrometer with each arm on the opposite side of 90° in the pp c.m. for 300 and 400 GeV proton beams. Each arm covered a solid angle of 0.06 srad-in the pp c.m. system. Each arm consisted of a 9-plane wire chamber-hodoscope magnetic spectrometer. No detectors were placed before the magnet so that we could take high beam flux. Charged particles were deflected in the vertical plane and the target is viewed in the horizontal nonbending plane. Electron identification was provided by a lead glass spectra- meter sitting behind the magnetic spectrometer. A detailed description of the apparatus follows. c. Apparatus Description Our description of the apparatus will proceed in the same order as the beam would see it. The experiment was performed in the Proton Center Laboratory of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. We will describe only one arm of the spectrometer since the arms were symmetric. The two arms were identical

into the secondary beam. About 1 ft after the filters, a 2 in. tungsten collimator defined the actual vertical apertures of+ 3.5 mrad. Next came the shielding anq 7-ft collimator. The collimated beam saw only vacuum from the upstream end of the collimator until the exit of the analyzing magnet. The 10-ft long analyzing magnet was a dipole magnet with the fields in the horizontal plane perpendicular to the spectrometer axis. It sat 35 ft from the target. At a setting of 1300 A the integral field was 35 kG-meters or equivalently a pt kick of 1.05 GeV/c. The major part of the data taking was at four settings of the spectrometer: 600, 800, 1100, 1300 A. In the left arm of the spectrometer, charged particles were bent upward. This arm was referred to as the up arm (up). The right arm had charged particles bent down into it. This arm was referred to as the down arm (dn). The reason for this bending up and down was that we gained 30% in acceptance. The two magnets were always set to symmetric fields strengths although the polarities were varied. Helium bags were placed between the magnets and the first detectors to minimize conversions. The first detector station occurred after the magnet 80 ft from the target. This allowed the low momentum charged particles to be swept out. A separation between charged and neutral particles allowed us to place the detectors in the charged beam only.

The neutral beam which views the target directly consisted of a tremendous flux of ~·s and neutrons. The first counters were a set of three planes of multiwire proportional chambers (MWPC) with 2 mm wire spacing (Y 1 , P 1 , Q 1 ). One chamber had horizontal wires. The other two were 'small angle stereo

chamber (+ arctan(l/8) with respect to horizontal). Right

behind the wire chambers was a plane of 38 strips of vertical scintillation counters (denoted by v 1 ). v 1 was then followed by a plane of trigger counters called T 0. Two meters behind the 80 ft station was a set of counters used to monitor our targeting efficiency. These counters sat in the neutral beam. They should not have seen any charged particles therefore they should have had no magnet setting dependence. They did in fact have a magnet dependence of < 10%. This dependence was attributed to scattering of soft charged particles off the magnet polefaces. These counters will be denoted by NDN (or NDNBY). The so-called neutral beam blockers were between the 80 ft and 100 ft stations. Their purpose was to stop the neutral beam before it reached that part of a lead glass spectrometer which would have intercepted the neutral beam envelope. They consisted of slabs of steel backed by concrete blocks stacked outside of the aperture. A one-plane wire chamber (Y 2 ) was placed at the 100 ft station. The chamber had horizontal wires of 3 mm spacing. A plane of trigger counters called T 1 was placed immediately behind the chamber.

The other function of the lead glass spectrometer was to measure the energy of the electron. Its resolution increased with energy whereas the magnetic spectrometer resolution decreased. Thus they complemented each other very well 32 (see Fig. 8). The lead glass was 25.8 radiation lengths and 1. absorption lengths deep. Table I gives the various properties of the lead glass.

III. DATA ACQUISITION

A. Fast Logic We will follow the data acquisition process in a natural order: from triggering until it is recorded onto magnetic tape. The basic fast trigger required a track through the apparatus and an associated electromagnetic shower in the lead glass. A track was defined by a coincidence of three trigger counters: T = TO • T 1 · (^8 ) A typical T rate was about 1 MHz. The uncorrelated counting rates in the separate planes (singles rates) were typically four times higher. Note that s 2 counts single minimum ionizing particles here. A coincidence was then made with T 2 • We required that the pulse height in T 2 correspond to greater than 15 minimum ionizing particles. This signaled a shower of some sort after the first layer of lead glass. E = T • T (^2) A typical E rate was 100 kHz. E was defined as the fast trigger for a single electron. An electron-positron pair trigger was formed by the coincidence of an electron in one arm and a positron in the other: Eun = EUP • EDN (where EUP = E for up arm, EDN = E for down arm) • The Eun rate was about 1 kHz. The fast logic is schematically