# Presentation: 885252

## Muon g-2 experiment (E969) to 0.25 ppmand deuteron EDM (dEDM) to 10-29 e∙cm

_**Yannis K. Semertzidis**_
_**Brookhaven National Laboratory**_

**Muon g-2: We made a presentation at P5 (27 March 2006) and expect a report from P5 ~summer 2006**
**dEDM: submit an LOI to BNL this Summer and proposal in 2007**

**Muon g-2; deuteron EDM**
**RHIC/AGS Users meeting **
**BNL,  9 June 2006**

##  The Muon Storage Ring:             B ≈ 1.45T, Pμ ≈ 3 GeV/c

** ****The Muon Storage Ring:             B ****≈**** 1.45T, P****μ ****≈ 3 GeV/c**

** ****Sitting idle waiting for the next challenge...**

## G.B. et al., Phys.Rev.Lett.92:161802,2004, hep-ex/0401008

**G.B. *****et al., *****Phys.Rev.Lett.92:161802,2004, hep-ex/0401008**

**Present result statistics limited**
**Theoretical error is expected to improve by a factor of ~2**
**Upgrade: More muons/proton; upgrade detectors to take the increased rate**
**0.25 ppm realistically achievable; up to 5-6 sigma difference possible**

**Muon g-2**

## A factor of 2 improvement in BOTH experiment and theory

- Upgrade the pion beamline to obtain more muons/proton
- Upgrade the experiment to cope with the increased rate
- Theoretical error is expected to be reduced by a factor of ~2
- ...sensitivity to new physics improves substantially

##  g - 2  for the muon

- Other standard model contributions :

**The muon g-2 is sensitive to physics effects in an integral way...**

## New Physics Sensitivity

- (W. Marciano, P5)

## Errors from Theory and Experiment

- (W. Marciano, P5)

## Motivation

- (W. Marciano, P5)

## The (g-2) discrepancy is consistent with other constraints on the SUSY LSP being the dark matter candidate.

**scalar mass**

**gaugino mass**

**CMSSM calculation Following Ellis, Olive, Santoso, Spanos, from K. Olive**

_**E821 error = 0.5 ppm**_

## Future Comparison:          E969 = 0.25 ppm;   E969 = now

## Muon g-2 beamline

**Open inflector ****	****	****   ****	****	****   ****	****x 2**
**Quadruple the quadrupoles  ****	****  ****	**** ****	****x 2 – 3**
**Beam increase design factor****	****	**** ****	****x ****4 – 6**

## New segmented detectors of tungsten / scintillating- fiber ribbons to deal with pile-up

**Prototype work and simulations underway**
**New custom electronics and DAQ**

## 4 Billion e+ with E>2GeV

- _4 Billion e__+__ with E>2GeV_

## Muon g-2

**Historically (g-2) has placed a major hurdle in the path of new theories beyond the standard model.**
**(See the letters from Altarelli, Davier, Ellis, Jackiw, Jaffe, Kane, Wilczek, Winstein sent to P5)**
**The (g-2) result must fit with other evidence into a consistent picture of new physics.**
**It will be important to particle physics even beyond the LHC era**
**e.g., determining the value of tan********

## Resonance Electric Dipole Moment Method

_**Resonance Electric Dipole Moment**__** Method**_

- In search of new physics through precision Electric Dipole Moment Experiments

## Resonance Electric Dipole Moment Method

_**Resonance Electric Dipole Moment**__** Method**_

- Novel, moderate cost experiment, offering the next sensitivity level in hadronic EDMs

**5m**

## A Permanent EDM Violates both T & P Symmetries:

##       CP-Violation is one of three conditions to enable a universe containing initially equal amounts of matter and antimatter to evolve into a matter-dominated universe, which we see today.... 

**      **_**Andrei Sakharov 1967:**_** **
**      ****CP-Violation is one of three conditions to enable**** a universe containing initially equal amounts of matter and antimatter to evolve into a matter-dominated universe, which we see today....**** **

## Main competition: Neutron EDM

**2005**

**Exp begin**
**data taking**

**Exp goal**

**2007**

**UCN-PSI**

**10****-27****e********cm**

**2008**

## Storage Ring Electric Dipole Moments

- D @ 10-29e·cm would be the best EDM sensitivity over *present* or *planned* experiments for QCD, quark, and quark-chromo (T-odd Nuclear Forces) EDMs.
- P, D, 3He, etc., i.e. a facility to pin down the CP-violation source.
- Systematics are different...

**Y. Orlov et al., PRL 96, 214802 (2006)**

## Dipole Moments in Storage Rings

- Dipole Moments in Storage Rings: Sensitive probes of physics beyond the SM
- EDM: Probe of new CP-violation source
- Muon g-2 upgrade at BNL (E969): March 2006, presentation to P5.  Report due this Summer
- dEDM: Submit an LOI to BNL for consideration this Summer and proposal in 2007.
- Moderate cost, high physics potential experiments should be supported...

## Extra Slides

## E969 Baseline – 0.25 ppm total error

**Systematic error goals:**
**for ********a****:    0.1 ppm**
**for ********p****:    0.1 ppm**
**Statistical error goal:**
**for ********a****:    0.2 ppm**
**Total Error Goal:**
**a********:   0.25 ppm**

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Status and goal

_**Status and goal**_

- (W. Marciano, P5)

## Future measurements at VEPP-2000

-  Factor >10 in luminosity
-  Up to 2 GeV c.m. energy
-  CMD-3: major upgrade of CMD-2 (new drift chamber, LXe calorimeter)

-  measure 2 mode to 0.2-0.3%
-  measure 4 mode to 1-2%
-  overall improvement in R        precision by factor 2-3

- Under construction. Data taking is expected to start is 2007-2008.

## Theory

_**Theory**_

- (W. Marciano, P5)

## Future Comparison:           E969 = 0.25 ppm;   E969 

- Historically (g-2) has played an important role in restricting models of new physics.

## Field systematic uncertainties, ordered by importance

| Source | E821
(ppm) | E969
(ppm) | Comment |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Calibration of trolley probe | 0.09 | 0.06 | Improved shimming in the calibration  region; improved registration of trolley location in ring |
| Interpolation with fixed probes | 0.07 | 0.06 | Repairs and retuning of a number of probes to improve the sampling of the ring field |
| Absolute calibration | 0.05 | 0.05 | Could improve using a 3He based probe  |
| Trolley measurements of B0 | 0.05 | 0.02 | More frequent trolley runs; mechanical maintenance of trolley drive and garage; Extensive measurements of trolley NMR probe active volumes |
| Muon distribution | 0.03 | 0.02 | Simulations of storage ring; improved shimming |
| “Other”
	eddy currents
	higher multipoles
	trolley temp and PS response
	 | 0.10 | 0.05 | 
in situ measurement of eddy currents
Improved shimming
Modifications to trolley and PS |
| Total | 0.17 | 0.11 |  |

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Precession frequency systematic uncertainties, ordered by importance

| Source | E821
(ppm) | E969
(ppm) | Comments |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Gain stability | 0.12 | 0.03 | Full WFD samples recorded; stability of laser calibration with local reference detectors; single-phase WFDs |
| Lost muons | 0.09 | 0.04 | New scraping scheme; improved kick |
| Pileup:	T method
	Q method (not applicable) | 0.08 | 0.07
 | Recording all samples, no threshold, will eliminate ambiguity from low-energy pulses |
| CBO: coherent betatron oscillations | 0.07 | 0.04 | Improved kick; new scraping; taller calorimeters |
| E and pitch correction | 0.05 | 0.05 | Should be improved with better storage ring simulation, but we keep it as is for now |
| Timing shifts | 0.02 | 0.01 | Laser calibration; precision determined by amount of data collected |
| AGS background | 0.01 | 0.01 | Sweeper magnet maintained |
| Fit procedure and bin width | 0.06 | 0.01 | Limited by number of simulated trials performed |
| Vertical waist | 0.03 | 0.01 | CBO related; see above |
| Other small effects | < 0.03 | < 0.02 | These either scale with the data set size or from the simulations demonstrating “no effect” |
| Total | 0.21 | 0.11 |  |

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## The error budget for E969 represents a continuation of improvements already made during E821

**Field improvements:**** ****better trolley calibrations,  better tracking of the field with time, temperature stability of room, improvements in the hardware**
**Precession improvements**** ****will involve new scraping scheme, lower thresholds, more complete digitization periods, better energy calibration**

| Systematic uncertainty (ppm) | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | E969
Goal |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Magnetic field – p  | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.24 | 0.17 | 0.1 |
| Anomalous precession – a   | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.31 | 0.21 | 0.1 |

| Statistical uncertainty (ppm) | 4.9 | 1.3 | 0.62 | 0.66 | 0.2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Total Uncertainty (ppm) | 5.0 | 1.3 | 0.73 | 0.72 | 0.25 |

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Funding Profile by Year

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## BNL E969 Collaboration

-     **R.M. Carey, I. Logashenko, K.R. Lynch, J.P. Miller, B.L. Roberts **
**Boston University**** **
**G. Bunce, W. Meng, W. Morse, P. Pile, Y.K. Semertzidis **
**Brookhaven National Laboratory****  **
**D. Grigoriev, B.I. Khazin, S.I. Redin, Y. M. Shatunov, E. Solodov  **
**Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics**
**F.E. Gray, B. Lauss, E.P. Sichtermann  **
**UC Berkeley and LBL**
** ****Y. Orlov – ****Cornell University**
** ****J. Crnkovic****, P. Debevec, D.W. Hertzog, P. Kammel, S. Knaack, R. McNabb**
** ****University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign**
**   ****K.L. Giovanetti – ****James Madison University**
** ****K.P. Jungmann, C.J.G. Onderwater – ****KVI Groningen****  **
**T.P. Gorringe, W. Korsch ****U. Kentucky**** **
**P. Cushman – ****University of**** ****Minnesota**
**M. Aoki, Y. Arimoto, Y. Kuno, A. Sato, K. Yamada **
** ****Osaka University**
** ****S. Dhawan, F.J.M. Farley – ****Yale University**

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Experimental Technique

**Inflector**

- Storage
- ring

- Injection orbit

**Pions**

**Target**

**Protons**

**(from AGS)**

**p=3.1GeV/c**

**Experimental Technique**

-  **Muon polarization**
** ****Muon storage ring**
** ****injection & kicking**
** ****focus by  Electric Quadrupoles**
** ****24 electron calorimeters**

**(1.45T)**

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Space limitations prevent matching the inflector exit to the storage aperture

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## The E821 inflector magnet had closed ends which scattered away half the beam.

**Length  = 1.7 m;   Central field = 1.45T**

**Open end prototype, built and tested**
**→****X2 Increase in Beam**

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Summary:  E821 and E969 Costs

| Baselining costs | 0.4 |
| --- | --- |
| AGS/Booster Rehab including ES&H | 11.7 |
| Construction (44% contingency) | 12.2 |
| Universities (27% contingency) | 2.4 |
| Operations (includes FTEs to support cryo and external beam operations) | 13.6 |
| Total Costs | 40.2 |

_**Summary:  E821 and E969 Costs**_

**E821 costs (M$)       (as spent $)**
**Capital          25.0 1989-1998**
**Operations   54.0 1998-2001**
**Total E821   79.0**

**E969 Costs (2006 M$)**

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Funds needed to baseline the costs (not included in construction cost estimate)

_**Funds needed to baseline the costs **__**(not included in construction cost estimate)**_

**1.0 g-2 Ring/Building maintenance**
**1 man month to engineer an air conditioning system for bldg 919**
**1.1 V/V1 Beam Lines**
**1 man-months engineering**
**1 man-months physicist**
**1.2 Inflector **
**A quote from the Furukawa Company for superconductor**
**1.3 E Quads**
**Nothing new, defendable**
**1.8 Kicker**
**Nothing new, defendable**
**1.11 Cryogenics (****to determine scope)**
**2 man-months engineering**
**1 man-month tech**
**1.12 Vacuum System**
**1 man-month engineering**
**1.14 Booster/AGS**
**0.5 man month engineering**
**0.5 man month physicist**

**ES&H – review operation within present guidelines**
**1 man-month physicist**
**1 man month engineer**
**Preparation of Cost Books, Resource Loaded Schedules, CD0-1 documents etc**
**4 man-months engineering**
**4 man--months physicist**
**Summary**
**11 man-month engineering**
**  ****7 man-month physicist**
**  ****1 man-month tech**
**Required Budget ~ $360K**
**Calendar Time Required           ~ 6-8 months**

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Cost Summary: E969 Construction

_**Cost Summary: E969 Construction**_

**Experiment Construction, Direct Costs****	**_**M$**_**	****       **_** Contingency**__** **_
**G-2 Ring and building****	****	****	****$   0.56****	****	****21%**
**V/V1 Beam Line modifications****	****	****$   2.59****	****	****18%**
**Inflector (open ends)****	****	****	****$   0.64****	****	****19%**
**E-Quad rebuild****	****	****	****$   0.13****	****	****15%**
**Additional muon Kicker****	****	****	****$   0.41****	****	****15%**
**Cryogenic plant rehab****	****	****	****$   0.74****	****	****233%**
**Ring Vacuum System ****	****	****	****$   0.16****	****	****29%**
**Equipment Testing****	****	****	****$   0.69****	****	****20%**
**Project Office****	****	****	****$   0.37****	****	****20%**
**Sub-Total, direct costs****	****	****	****$   6.3**
**Indirects (reduced)****	****	****	****$   2.2**
**Contingency (44%)****	****	****	****$   3.7**
**Sub-Total, with indirects****	****	****	****$ 12.2**
**University (Detectors/DAQ)****	****	****$   2.4**
**Total****	****	****	****	****$ 14.6**
**	****	**

_***FY 2006 $’s***_

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Cost  Summary: AGS/Booster Restoration to High Intensity

_**Cost  Summary:**__** AGS/Booster Restoration to High Intensity**_

**AGS/Booster, Direct Costs****	****	**_**M$**_**	****        **_**Contingency**__** **_
**Electrical Modifications****	****	****$   2.11****	****	****22%**
**Mechanical Modifications****	****	****$   1.25****	****	****20%**
**RF System Modifications****	****	****$   0.67****	****	****22%**
**Instrumentation****	****	****	****$   0.34****	****	****20%**
**Project Support****	****	****	****$   0.33****	****	****34%**
**Controls****	**** ****	****	****	****$   0.16****	****	****24%**
**ES&H (CAPS)****	****	****	****$   2.63****	****	****28%**
**Sub-Total, direct costs****	****	****$   7.5**
**Indirects (reduced)****	****	****	****$   1.9**
**Contingency (24%)****	****	****	****$   2.3**
**Total****	****	****	****	****$  11.7**
**	****	****	**

_***FY 2006 $’s***_

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## E969 Operations Cost Summary

_**E969 Operations Cost Summary**_

_**Year**__**	**_**    **_**Wks w/RHIC**_**	****  **_**Wks Alone**_**    **_**Physics Wks**_**  **_**Cost (M$)**_** **
**	****1****st****         12****	****	****      0****	****	****        3****	****	****    $   5.8**
**	****2****nd****	****     **_**20**__**	**__**	**__**      0**__**	**__**	**__**       15  **__**	**__**                 $   7.8**_
**Total          34                      0                           18                   $ 13.6**
**If warranted to push beyond 0.25 ppm, an additional 10-15 week run with RHIC adds ~$6-7M**
**	****	****	**

_***FY 2006 $’s***_

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## Milestones/Timeline  (by FY)

**CD0 ****  Beamline design – backward/forward decision; detector prototype; simulations of injection, scraping, CBO damping; decide on scope of cryo work; begin tube/base development**
**+9 Months  ****CD1****; Begin electronics engineering**
**CD2**** - Engineering on beamline, Cryo**
**CD3**** - Start to order long leadtime items e.g. Inflector, rad-hard front-end magnets, etc.;  Refurbish storage ring; develop on-line; develop NMR tools for 0.1 ppm.**
**Construction**** **
**Shim magnet, improve on absolute calibration**
**CD4**** - Finish construction, few weeks of  low intensity beam**
**Commission experiment, engineering and short physics run**
**Major data collection run**

**-1**
**0**
**+1**
**+2**
**+3**
**+4**
**+5**

- (L. Roberts, P5)

## The ± 1 ppm uniformity in the average field is obtained with special shimming tools.

- We can shim the
**dipole,**** **
**quadrupole**
**sextupole**** **
- independently
**E969 will require additional shimming, monitoring and calibration**

- 0.5 ppm contours

- (L. Roberts, P5)