1 / 61

Black Holes at colliders: progress since 2002

Black Holes at colliders: progress since 2002. Seong Chan Park (SNU) SUSY08, COEX, SEOUL June 21, 2008. What’s BH? (1 min summary). Best known as classical solutions to the Einstein equation. Classically stable (nothing can come out)

leora
Download Presentation

Black Holes at colliders: progress since 2002

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Black Holes at colliders:progress since 2002 Seong Chan Park (SNU) SUSY08, COEX, SEOUL June 21, 2008

  2. What’s BH? (1 min summary) • Best known as classical solutions to the Einstein equation. • Classically stable (nothing can come out) • Quantum mechanically unstable (Hawking radiation~Thermal radiation, anything can come out of it) • T=surface gravity~1/r (smaller hotter) • S=surface area~ r^(D-2) • BH is unique (4D), not unique (D>4) • Black Ring (S^2XS), Black String (S^2XR) etc. SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  3. Black hole is interesting • Everybody knows it is interesting. • Perfect place to do ‘quantum gravity’ • Has provided a nice testing ground for theory calculations (e.g. microscopic entropy counting of stringy-BH etc.) • Has deep implication to ‘energy-distance’ relation. • Even it is real!! SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  4. Black Hole Candidates in Binary Star Systems Observed Black Holes in the sky The list goes more than 100 now. Cygnus X-1 Circinus galaxy That’s great. But notice that they all Indirectly observed . SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  5. ‘energy-distance’ relation “To probe smaller distance, you need higher energy” W. Heisenberg This is exactly the reason why we want to build big colliders. distance energy SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  6. Big Question Does this curve keep going and touch 0?? Will this program go on forever? distance ?? energy Answer: No! SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  7. ‘t Hooft picture of Trans-Planckian domain ‘t Hooft (1987) • Gravity becomes strong/dominate in Ultrahigh-Energy Scattering. New window of bh production opens. • The smallest distance scale we can probe is now determined by the size of event horizon (~GE) which becomes larger with higher E! distance energy SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  8. The big Picture:Heisenberg-‘t Hooft Planck domain E~Mp -Quantum Gravity -String theory -no concrete prediction , yet distance UV-IR duality Classical Gravity energy Sub-Planckian domain E<<Mp -gauge interaction -(broken)SUSY -GUT Trans-Planckian Domain E>>Mp -gravity dominance -new windows of bh production open -Classical gravity!! Quantum Gravity SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  9. D>4 distance energy If MD~TeV, as is the case in ADD(1998) and RS(1999), the Heisenberg-’t Hooft picture is actually relevant at the LHC **TeV dimension was first suggested by I. Antoniadis(1990) SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  10. LHC: a BH factory Banks-Fischler (1999), Dimopoulos- Lansberg (PRL87,2001), Giddings-Thomas(PRD65, 2002) • Large Cross-Section. Because there is no small dimensionless constant, analogous to alpha, suppress the production of BHs. • 10^5 fb (M>5TeV, 10D), 10fb (M>10TeV, 10D) • Hard, Prompt, Charged Leptons and Photons Because thermal decays are flavor-blind. This signature has practically vanishing SM background. • Little Missing Energy. > G. Landsberg SUSY02 SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  11. Around 2002 • Several different communities started talking about ‘Mini-Black holes’ • Particle physics, String theory, GR community even SF-community etc.. People got excited SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  12. Seoul in 2002 SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  13. Some people concerns if bh eats us :a survey by BBC SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  14. Official comment by the CERN CERN homepage: http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/en/LHC/Safety-en.html SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  15. BHs from cosmic rays • Anchordoqui-Feng-Goldberg-Shapere (PRD 2002) Pierre-Auger Ice Cube Etc.. are searching for these events. If the LHC can produce microscopic black holes, cosmic rays of much higher energies would already have produced many more. Since the Earth is still here, there is no reason to believe that collisions inside the LHC are harmful. SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  16. Two major Progresses since 2002 Production Decay Greybody factors of black hole in D>4 for brane fields with spin s=0,1/2,1 (i.e. for all the SM particles) obtained Ida-Oda-SCP (2003,2004,2005,2006) Duffy-Harris-Kanti-Winstanley(2005), Casals-Kanti-Winstanley (2006), Casals-Dolan-Kanti-Winstanley(2007) • BH production by collision proved. • (b=0,D>4) Eardley-Giddings (2002) • (b>0, D>4) Yoshino-Nambu (2003) ** Penrose (b=0, D=4) long ago SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  17. Production: Hoop Conjecture(Kip Thorne 1972) • “An imploding object forms a Black Hole when, and only when, a circular hoop with a specific critical circumference could be placed around the object and rotated. The critical circumference is given by 2 times Pi times the Schwarzschild Radius corresponding to the object’s mass.” • big energy in a small space, BH always appears!! I am a BH (M) This is the hoop r = GM SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  18. It’s like putting an elephant into a freezer.. It is hard to do this. But once you can do it, you will have a BH. R= RBH(M) Mass=M SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  19. Classical BH formation provedusing two Aichelberg-Sexl shocks Eardley-Giddings 2002 Yoshino-Nambu PRD66, 2003 Yoshino-Nambu PRD67, 2003 Yoshino-Rychkov PRD71, 2005 =t-z =t+z • Boundary Value Problem: • Setup: two particles (BHs) with • boost→∞, • mass→0, • energy: fixed. t z • Close Trapped Surface forms when b<b(max) • (CTS=a closed spacelike surface on which the outgoing • orthogonal null geodesics converge) • The Area Theorem : Classically the horizon area of the ultimate bh must be • greater than the original CTS. i.e. BH really forms SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  20. Latest result: bmax/rs Yoshino-Rychkov PRD71, 2005 SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  21. Another approach:(based on Hoop conjecture, taking angular momentum into account) SCP-Song 2001 Ida-Oda-SCP 2003 M/2 b M/2 Hoop Conjecture: Error ~3% (D=5)-17%(D=11) SUSY08, Seong Chan Park This picture is essentially correct

  22. Angular momentum Most of BHs are produced with “large” angular momentum! SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  23. Signal: How will we know if we’ve seen one? • Black hole decays by emitting Hawking radiation. • We will see the radiated particles. • Smaller black holes are hotter and radiate more efficiently. (T~ TeV, every SM particles can come out of the bh!) • Live short!! Life Time~10^-25 sec or shorter. • So please don’t worry about the possible destroy of the earth by mini black holes.  SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  24. Closer look: Hawking radiation • Here is the master equation S. Hawking (1975) T= surface gravity ~1/rh :Smaller bh is hotter :The probability is not equal to every particle but crucially depends on spin and angular mode . Anisotropic and nontrivial Hawking radiation is expected. We have to know this “greybody factor” to understand Hawking Radiation. SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  25. Greybodyfactor Modification factor to take the curved geometry NH into account. = Absorption Probability of wave mode (s, l, m) Looks not black to me. It looks Grey! T SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  26. Brief History of greybody factors for rotating BHs • Derivation of Teukolsky equation (Kerr) • =Wave equation for general (s,l,m) wave for 4D Kerr BH • S. Teukolsky 1972,1973) • Generalized to (D=4+n, Meyers-Perry) for brane fields • Ida-Oda-SCP, PRD67(2003) Solution to Teukolsky eq./ Greybody Factors (D=4, Kerr) : Analytic and Numerical methods were developed by Teukolsky-Press, Starobinsky, Unruh, Page in 1973-1976 Analytic sol.(5D),low energy limit,s=0,1/2,1: Ida-Oda-SCP, PRD67(2003) Numerical (D>4),full energy,s=0 Ida-Oda-SCP PRD71(2005) Result Presented at JGRG meeting by SCP (Dec.2004, arXiv:0501210) Duffy-Harris-Kanti-Winstanley (arXiv:0507274, JHEP0509, 2005) SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  27. For s=0,D>4 Ida, Oda, SCP (s=1/2,1, arXiv:0602188, PRD73, 2006) Casals,Kanti,Winstanley (for s=1 only) (arXiv: 0511163 JHEP 0602, 2006) Casals, Dolan, kanti,Winstanley (s=1/2) JHEP 0703, (2007) Finally!! Hawking radiation and its evolution : Hawking 1975, Page 1976 (4D) Ida, Oda, SCP ,PRD73, 2006(D>4) including all the SM fields. Still s>1 modes (i.e. s=3/2, 2) missing Graviton part can be important when D>>4 Because of large number of helicity states SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  28. Generalized Teukolsky eq. Ida,Oda,SCP PRD67, 2003 • Meyers-Perry sol. (rating D>4 BH) • Define Null tetrad • Use ‘Newman-Penrose’ formalism, derive the equation • Turned out to be separable (Petrov Type-D) +angular part spin-weighted spheroidal harmonics +radial  2nd order ODE with singular BCs. Believe me. This guy is tough! SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  29. Schematic view of the greybody factor calculation Ida, Oda, SCP I, II, III Generalized Teukolsky Eq. Far from the Horizon Sol (FF) Near the Horizon Purely ingoing Sol (NH) Analytic or Numeric integration “Matching” Sol (whole space) Greybody factor (Absorption Probability) =[In]/[Out] SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  30. D=5,S=1/2 Non-rotating rotating Highly Rotating Greybody Number Energy Angular mom Ida, Oda, Park PRD 06’ SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  31. Non-rotating rotating Highly Rotating D=10,s=1/2 Greybody Number Energy Angular mom Ida, Oda, Park PRD 06’ SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  32. D=5, s=1 Non-rotating rotating Highly Rotating Greybody Energy Angular mom Ida, Oda, Park PRD 06’ SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  33. D=10, s=1 Non-rotating rotating Highly Rotating Greybody Energy Angular mom Ida, Oda, Park PRD 06’ SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  34. Evolution of BH s f SM Obtained by integrating Hawking’s Formula with the calculated Greybody Factors. M v 5D • The full result (SM) is almost • exactly described by ‘Vector’. • Vector emission is the most efficient • way to extract angular momentum. • Large Gluon emission • 10D similar J SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  35. Time ? Black Hole’s Life made simple Balding Phase (Production of BHs. Study “Dynamics” required.) Spin Down Phase (Losing energy and angular momentum :60-80% Energy lost For D>4, to mostly gluons, anisotropic) Schwarzschild Phase (Losing Mass: 20-40% energy, spherical, to every fields) Planck Phase (Remnant ???, Stringy study required ) SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  36. New MC event generators are available. • BlackMax [arXiv:0711.3012 ], Dai,Stojkovic,Issever,Rizvi,Tseng • Greybody factors for rotating BH implemented. • “Most realistic MC” simulation for bh events at the LHC. (N.B.)Yesterday (James Frost’s talk P6 (on behalf of ATLAS)) I’ve learned that BlackMax has some bugs which should be removed. • CHARIBDIS ver.2. is under development with Greybody factors for rotating BH. SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  37. It seems we are more or lessready now but.. • There are still rooms to be improved (mostly theoretical) • Balding phase should be understood by dynamical simulation (most probably numerical) (cf) success of Bh-Bh merging process (this is important!!) • For D>>4, spin-2 graviton emission can be sizable. non-rotating case done for D>4 • BH final state: Full QG (string theory )calculation is required. • Many other issues :Chromosphere (Alig-Drees-Oda , Anchordoqui et.at.), recoil(Stojkovic et.al), split-brane (Stojkovic), etc • Unification of ‘convention’ required. Cardoso,Cavaglia,Gualtieri JHEP0602(2006) SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  38. Conventions • Planck scale (I would take PDG convention) • In the PDG convention

  39. Physical quantities (PDG convention)

  40. Two most importantcharacteristics of BH signal • Large Entropy  high Multiplicity. • Thermal radiation Flavor Blind. Typically, BH signals contains -Many jets -Statistically, N(e)=N(mu)=N(tau) SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  41. Multi-’hard’-jet J. -H. Kim, SCP, S. Schumann (in preparation) BlackMax1.0 SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  42. Multi-`harder’-jet J. -H. Kim, SCP, S. Schumann (in preparation) BlackMax1.0 Again, there is Chromospher issue here. Dense jets look not really like Jets but fuzzy Chromospher. (Alig,Drees,Oda JHEP0612 (2006) Anchordoqui , Goldberg PRD67 (2003) ) SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  43. SM background –(Njet ≤ 6) Message from Steffen Schumann • For the background calculation I used Sherpa. • In my setup I combined matrix element calculations for 2,3 and 4jet production with parton showers attached. • The underlying method is referred to as CKKW (Catani-Krauss-Kuhn-Webber) and it avoids any double counting of jet configuration emerging from the matrix element or the parton shower. • However, in this approach the 5th jet is produced from the parton shower, what means it may be underestimated and a full matrix element calculation could yield a higher rate here, but this is a very complicated computation and cutting edge with present day tools. • Anyhow, at some point we may want to include higher matrix elements yielding an improved background estimate for Njet>5. However, I do not expect the overall pattern to change and the difference between the QCD background and your multijet rates is significant. Wonderful Collaboration! SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  44. Finally, some comments onRandall-Sundrum UV IR ‘Scale’ runs with the position: UV/IR hierarchy is explained by ‘Warping’: AdS5 Y=d Y=0 Relevant energy scale for IR-localized scattering is M(d)~TeV SUSY08, Seong Chan Park

  45. BH production on UV brane IR UV AdS5 We will not see this event since it is Mpl suppressed! Y=0 Y=d

  46. BH production at an arbitrary `y’ IR UV AdS5 Y=0 Y=d

  47. BH production on IR brane IR UV AdS5 *Note: (E/M) is scale invariant. *Cross section~1/TeV^2. Y=0 Y=d

  48. RS1-orginal • All the SM particles lie on the IR brane. • They `feel’ strong gravity at the IR scale. • BH production rate ~1/TeV2 • The LHC as a BH factory IR UV AdS5 Y=0 Y=d

  49. Profile: RS1-bulk SM (See K. Agashe’s PL talk) Higgs Up, Down Gluon, W, Z, photon Top, bottom IR UV • Higgs, top, bottom as well as the longitudinal components of (W, Z) `feel’ the TeV gravity. • The IR-tip of gluon, photon and the transverse components of (W, Z) `feel’ the TeV gravity. • Others (such as 1st, 2nd generation fermions) `feel’ the Planck –weak- gravity. AdS5 Zero-mode graviton KK graviton, KK gluon, Other KK states Y=0 Y=d

  50. Closer look: bb+bbbar x1 x2 Suppressed by PDF!

More Related