Banner
    LHC Breaks World Intensity Record for Hadron Colliders
    By Tommaso Dorigo | April 22nd 2011 06:44 AM | 10 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Tommaso

    I am an experimental particle physicist working with the CMS experiment at CERN. In my spare time I play chess, abuse the piano, and aim my dobson...

    View Tommaso's Profile
    It was bound to happen, and well predicted in advance, but it still feels good to report it here. The LHC last night exceeded by a good 15% the previous record instataneous luminosity for hadron collider beams, previously held by the Tevatron collider at 4.024x10^32 cm^-2 s^-1. The new record (soon to be surpassed by the LHC itself, anyway) is now 4.67x10^32.

    If you wonder what this all means, I will try to explain. Luminosity is a measure of the amount of particles you get to collide with other particles in a small region in the core of your detector. By circulating more particles in the beams, and by squeezing the beams to be as narrow as possible near the interaction region, you can increase the rate of their collisions. This is exceedingly important for a discovery machine, which needs to study very rare processes and thus is critically dependent on the maximization of the number of collisions that get produced.

    With the new record, comes of course a good bunch of new data for researchers to analyze. Of course analysts want as much "integrated luminosity" as possible, and they would actually not mind if the "instantaneous luminosity" were smaller. To get the former, you need to integrate the latter in the time of the data taking; since instantaneous luminosity decreases quickly after beams start to collide (due to particles being removed from the beams when they collide, or because of small losses during their travel in the beam pipe), the peak luminosity -what makes the record today- is not the only important parameter in determining how large is the total size of analyzable data that get eventually collected in the data tapes. Further, the higher instantaneous luminosity comes at a price: more protons are collided in the same instant, with a correspondingly harder job for physicists to figure out what exactly happened in the "event" they study.

    In any case... Way to go, LHC!

    Comments

    rholley
    Viva!
    Robert H. Olley Quondam Physics Department University of Reading England
    Fine, thats good news for all of us eagerly waiting for signs of new physics at the LHC! But when we compare this pp intensity record to the former achievement of the Tevatron we should put things into perspective recognizing that it is pretty much harder to produce and store a beam of some 10^13 antiprotons as compared to protons.

    dorigo
    Good point anon. The Tevatron's might remain forever the most intense antiproton beam.

    Cheers,
    T.
    The Stand-Up Physicist
    Why is something so universal - the scalar Higgs field - so darn rare? As I understand the proposal, I cannot go anywhere in this Universe without there being a Higgs field. That in itself strikes me as odd. There are some places I can go to have beer, many others that do not. Diversity in supply is a character of our Universe. Look, not many particles here a million kilometers north of the north pole, an absurd number a kilometer down from the surface of the Earth. The Higgs field has universal coverage with variations, impressive.

    Part of the reason I know has to do with its large mass requiring these impressive luminosities. That raises a different question. Is the Higgs field "busy" doing lots of things to make sure all the particles have masses? I would think not, or it would be easier to spot. My guess is that my question is garbled on technical level. We need to find a few. Then take down the LHC for an upgrade, focusing on those few to characterize what the finally spotted Higgs does. Once those questions are answered, then we can get a sense of the day to day live of a scalar gauge boson.

    Patience, grasshopper.
    Doug
    If I understand correctly, it is not the Higgs field that is rare (as you pointed out correctly, it is everywhere), but rather the Higgs boson as a real (non-virtual) particle is rare at our present energies in the particle colliders. The Higgs boson is a virtual particle when it gives masses to elementary particles. It only becomes a real particle (that can be observed experimentally in a direct way) when there is enough energy to produce the mass of the Higgs boson. For a Standard Model Higgs, this is roughly between 115 and 185 GeV/c^2.

    You also have to be carefully what you mean by rare. Rare also refers not only to the absolute number but also to the ratio between Higgs event counts (signal) and the number of events that mimic Higgs but are not Higgs (background). So even with higher energies, the total number of Higgs events will increase, but also the backgrounds will increase.

    Adrian,

    You say

    "Rare also refers not only to the absolute number but also to the ratio between Higgs event counts (signal) and the number of events that mimic Higgs but are not Higgs (background). So even with higher energies, the total number of Higgs events will increase, but also the backgrounds will increase."

    The question is this: what stops the overall background from growing larger than the signal at sufficiently high energy and luminosity? For instance, is it fair to say that QCD processes such as gluon-gluon fusion may simply over-number standard decay channels and produce false positive Higgs events?. Isn't it what ATLAS is seeing?

    Multumesc,

    Ervin

    Hi Ervin, I will try to answer below. But please note that I am in no way expert on these issues, but barely a PhD student (at Tevatron) learning as I go along. My understanding is that indeed when you increase the center of mass of collisions, as is the case when going from the Tevatron to the LHC, both the cross section from signal and background increase. The background processes are specific to each signal process. Therefore, there is no general answer a priori. One has to investigate for each particular analysis channel. There are tables of cross sections as a function of the center of mass energy for several processes and thus a quick study can be done by how much a signal would increase and how much a dominant process can increase. I remember that also Tommaso did such a study about the Higgs at the LHC a few months ago. ATLAS and CMS had many years to analyze this in detail and I am sure they did decide for each channel what are the relevant backgrounds and what would be their relative ratio. Therefore I am sure that they devised analyses techniques to remove more background than signal and thus improve the signal over background ratio.

    Luminosity increase is another issue. It does not change the relative signal over background ratio, but merely collects more events with the same ratio. Additional problems appear though, which can be understood as more proton-proton collisions happen in the same bunch crossing and are reconstructed by the detector in the same "instant photo" it takes of the collision. The particles produced in these collisions overlap and it is harder to reconstruct correctly the real electron, muon, jets, missing transverse energy in the events. This poses addition challenges to the analysis. As a general rule, the higher the instantaneous luminosity, the better, as you have more collisions to analyze, but you have to keep creating smarter reconstruction methods in order to reconstruct the particles correctly.

    I hope this general answer helps.

    Adrian

    The Stand-Up Physicist
    This discussion has helped. The Higgs as a virtual particle must interact with any and all W and Z particles so they have a non-zero mass.  With the increases in luminosity, we get more data to analyze, which means more week or month long efforts by a distributed collection of super computers to chew through a well-chosen slice of the data. I find the idea of letting a super computer crunch numbers for a week frightening. I don't program so precisely. The search is for the byproducts of a free Higgs boson.  Confinement is a property of the strong force which is what has kept a free gluon from being spotted in the wild.  I worry that a different process might decide to hide a free Higgs.

    The Higgs is also put to good use for fermion masses using Yukawa couplings. One issue that bothers me is there are so many fermions with different mass values out there. This tag team of a scalar field with a Yukawa coupling has to get each one right exactly every time. Odd, but I am hoping for a calculation someday that will say, "Crank on this, and the answer is 0.511 MeV/c2".
    Hi Doug Sweetser, I am glad if the discussion helped. Here are a few clarifications to your comments.

    You say that you understood that with an increase in luminosity, one gets more data to analyze which takes a longer time in terms of CPU power to analyze. It it not quite so. By the "number of data" we actually mean "the number of events", which actually means "the number of bunch crossings", or in simple terms the number of "photos" we take with our detector. When we increase the luminosity, the number of bunch crossings per second remains the same, but the number of proton-proton collisions inside one bunch crossing increases. It is as if in earlier photos in the day of a park you see two pair of kids playing and later in the day a photo would see three pairs of kids playing. You can argue that maybe each event will need a 1.05 MB to store compared to the lower luminosity case, but at first approximation it is the same. Indeed, your algorithms might run 1.05 slower, but that is not the main issue. The main issue is that scientists have to come up with ideas how to deal with the many collisions in the same bunch crossings. It is something that LHC scientists will have to face very soon, as the LHC is doing amazing progress in luminosity.

    About the other topics. I understand that the theory proposes no confinement for the Standard Model Higgs boson. If it exists, the LHC will see it, if it does not, LHC will not see it. Also, you raise a good point that the Higgs mechanism does not predict the masses for elementary particles, but merely gives a mechanism so that these masses may have non zero values. The theory that will predict the mass of the electron from first principles is still waited by us all. Not even string theory was able to do that.

    Adrian

    "The theory that will predict the mass of the electron from first principles is still waited by us all"

    Various models predicting SM parameters (with and without the Higgs) have been developed. They usually fall outside the mainstream body of ideas in theoretical HEP, at least for now.

    Ervin