Laboratory Astrophysics Working Group Summary : Laboratory Astrophysics Working Group Summary Pisin Chen
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Stanford University
Introduction
Calibration of Observations
Investigation of Dynamics
Probing Fundamental Physics
Summary
SABER Workshop
March 15-16, 2006, SLAC
Slide2 : LabAstro WG Participants P. Chen (KIPAC) (Chair)
C.-W. Chen (KIPAC/NTU) (Scientific Secretary)
C.-C. Chen (KIPAC/NTU) (Scientific Secretary)
E. do Couto e Silva (KIPAC)
C. Field (SLAC)
R. Fiorito (UMD)
Wei Gai (ANL)
J. S.-T. Ng (KIPAC)
R. Noble (SLAC)
C. Pellegrini (UCLA)
K. Reil (KIPAC)
B. Remongton (LLNL)
P. Sokolsky (Utah)
A. Spitkovsky (KIPAC)
D. Walz (SLAC) G. Barbiellini (Rome) (in absentee)
Slide3 : March 15 (Wed.)
WG Parallel Session 1 (11:00-12:00)
Pierre Sokolsky (Utah), "Some Thoughts on the Importance of Accelerator
Data for UHE Cosmic Ray Experiments" Pisin Chen (KIPAC, SLAC), "ESTA: End Station Test of ANITA"
WG Parallel Session 2 (13:30-15:00)
Robert Bingham (RAL, UK), "Tests of Unruh Radiation and Strong Field
QED Effects"*
Anatoly Spitkovsky (KIPAC, SLAC), "Pulsars as Laboratories of Relativistic Physics,"
Eduardo de Silva (KIPAC, SLAC), "Can GLAST Provide Hints on GRB Parameters?"
WG Parallel Session 3 (15:30-17:00)
Robert Noble (SLAC), "Simulations of Jet-Plasma Interaction Dynamics"*
Johnny Ng (KIPAC, SLAC), "Astro-Jet-Plasma Dynamics Experiment at SABER"
Kevin Reil (KIPAC, SLAC), "Simulations of Alfven Induced Plasma Wakefields"
* Absent LabAstro Working Group Program
Slide4 : March 16 (Thur.)
WG Parallel Session 4 (08:30-10:00)
Bruce Remington (LLNL), "Science Outreach on NIF: Possibilities for Astrophysics Experiments" Bruce Remington (LLNL), "Highlights of the 2006 HEDLA Conference“
G. Barbiellini (Rome), “Stochastic Wakefield Particle Acceleration in
(presented by Silva) GRB”
**Round Table Discussion**, "Considerations of Labaratory Astrophysics"
WG Summary Preparation (10:20-12:00)
LabAstro Working Group Program
Three Categories of LabAstro : Three Categories of LabAstro -Using Lasers and Particle Beams as Tools -
1. Calibration of observations
- Precision measurements to calibrate observation processes
- Development of novel approaches to astro-experimentation
Impact on astrophysics is most direct
2. Investigation of dynamics
- Experiments can model environments not previously accessible in terrestrial conditions
- Many magneto-hydrodynamic and plasma processes scalable by extrapolation
Value lies in validation of astrophysical models
3. Probing fundamental physics
- Surprisingly, issues like quantum gravity, large extra dimensions, and spacetime granularities can be investigated through creative approaches using high intensity/density beams
Potential returns to science are most significant
1. Calibration of Observations : 1. Calibration of Observations
Some Thoughts on Laboratory Astrophysics for UHE Cosmic Rays : Some Thoughts on Laboratory Astrophysics for UHE Cosmic Rays Pierre Sokolsky
University of Utah
SABRE Workshop
SLAC, March, 2006
UHE Cosmic Ray detection (N, gamma, neutrino) : UHE Cosmic Ray detection (N, gamma, neutrino) Indirect - Extensive Air Shower in atmosphere or solid/liquid.
Energy not directly measured - surrogate such as air fluorescence, cherenkov radiation, radio emission, electron/muon density at surface is measured instead
Depending on surrogate, calibration or validation of detailed modeling of EAS cascade is required.
SLAC has been a leader in calibration experiments FFTB! : SLAC has been a leader in calibration experiments FFTB! LPM effect
Askaryan effect
FLASH - air fluorescence
Are there other such? : Are there other such? Follow-up on FLASH - increase precision, effects of impurities
ANITA radio detection efficiency tests
Validation of low energy electromagnetic shower codes at large Moliere radii.
Atmospheric EAS radio detection - what is the balance of Askaryan vs Earth’s magnetic field effects? - Possible controlled experiment producing shower in dense material with B field?
Radio signals from EAS in Air : Radio signals from EAS in Air Mechanism is Askarian + curvature of charged particles in Earth’s B field (coherent geosynchrotron radiation).
Exact balance not well known
First convincing demonstration by French and German groups (LOPES with Kascade-Grande, CODALEMA) - coincidence with particle ground arrays.
May be the next big step??
Laboratory Issues for UHECR Experiments : Laboratory Issues for UHECR Experiments Calibration
- Air fluorescence efficiency
- Radio detection
Validation
- Air fluorescence modeling of EAS shower development
- Askarian effect Cherenkov modeling of EAS shower
- LPM effect modeling
Issues, continued : Issues, continued Low energy shower modeling validation
- GEANT, FLUKA predictions for e, gamma and hadron subshowers - very significant for understanding muon content of EAS, even at EHE
High energy interaction models
- pp cross-section, p-air cross section
- pion and kaon multiplicities, forward direction physics - important for Xmax composition measurement
ESTA: End Station Test of ANITA A SLAC-ANITA Collaboration : ESTA: End Station Test of ANITA A SLAC-ANITA Collaboration Pisin Chen
Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Stanford University
Introduction- Neutrino Astrophysics
Askaryan Effect
ESTA
Future Outlook
SABER Workshop
March 15-16, 2006, SLAC
Slide15 : ANITA: Antarctic Neutrino Transient Antenna
Slide16 : ESTA: End Station Test of ANITA SLAC-ANITA Collaboration Expected date: June 2006
2. Investigation of Dynamics : 2. Investigation of Dynamics
The Main Questions : The Main Questions Is there any connection between the SABER program and the GRB science with GLAST?
Can we create an environment similar to that of the shock dissipation phase in GRBs?
see poster (Stochastic wake field particle acceleration in Gamma-Ray Bursts, Baribiellini et al)
Can we quantify the relative importance of magnetic fields during the shock dissipation phase in GRBs?
GLAST Observatory : Overview : GLAST Observatory : Overview GLAST will measure the direction, energy and arrival time of celestial g rays Orbit
565 km, circular
Inclination
28.5o
Lifetime
5 years (min)
Launch Date
Sep 2007
Launch Vehicle
Delta 2920H-10
Launch Site
Kennedy Space Center Will follow on the measurements by its predecessor (EGRET) with unprecedented capabilities LAT
will record gamma-rays in the energy range
~ 20 MeV to >300 GeV GBM
will provide correlative observations of transient events in the energy range
~10 keV – 25 MeV Observing modes
All sky survey
Pointed observations
Re-pointing Capabilities
Autonomous
Rapid slew speed
(75° in < 10 minutes)
Principal Investigator: Peter Michelson
Back to the Main Questions : Back to the Main Questions Is there any connection between the SABER program and the physics interests of GLAST?
Can we simulate in the laboratory an environment similar to that of the shock dissipation phase in GRBs?
Can we quantify the relative importance of magnetic fields during the shock dissipation phase in GRBs?
A deeper question:
Are B fields generated locally or at the central engine?
Simulation of Relativistic Jet-Plasma Interactions : Simulation of Relativistic Jet-Plasma Interactions Johnny Ng and Bob Noble
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
SABER Workshop, Laboratory Astrophysics WG
SLAC, March 15-16, 2006
Slide28 : Issues and Questions
What are the plasma microphysics that cause particle acceleration and deceleration, and radiation in jet-plasma interactions?
What are the parameters for scaled lab experiments that can explore this physics, benchmark the codes, and connect this plasma physics to the astrophysical observations?
Real astrophysical outflows are larger than anything we can simulate with a PIC code. We focus on the physics at the plasma wavelength scale.
Slide29 :
Weibel instability (1959) is the spontaneous filamentation of the jet into separate
currents and the generation of associated azimuthal magnetic fields.
. j j . e+ e- small B field
perturbation
from plasma noise Γ = f(β ,βz) ωp(b) /γ1/2
~ (n/γ)1/2 Davidson and Yoon (1987)
Weibel growth rate: Transverse scale size: B d = g(β ,βz) c/ωp(b)
~ (1/n)1/2 Mass
flow but
je=0 ┴ magnetic field perturbation
magnified by filaments … then
hose, pinch,
streaming
instabilities! Past simulations: Saturated EM energy density/particle KE density ~ 0.01 – 0.1 - + ┴ typ. f <1 ┴ typ. g >1 Streaming Neutral Plasma Systems: Plasma Filamentation
Slide30 : c/ ωp 1/ ωp ∫ E2dV ∫ B2dV Jet e+ e- density contours E & B
fields Plasma e- density contour Illustrative Case: gamma =10, jet/plasma density = 10 105 10-5 Avg plasma part.KE/mc2
Slide31 : Summary of Simulation Results 1. General results:
We observe the correct (n/γ)1/2 scaling of the Weibel instability growth rate, transverse filament size of few skin depths, and approximately the correct absolute growth rate.
Neutral jets in unmagnetized plasmas are remarkably unstable. One expects stability to improve if a background longitudinal B field existed.
2. Plasma filamentation sets up the jet for other instabilities.
Separation of electron and positron filaments.
Separating positron filaments generate large local EZ
Charge filaments excite longitudinal electrostatic plasma waves
We observe two local acceleration mechanisms:
Inductive “Faraday acceleration”
Electrostatic Plasma Wakefield acceleration.
Robust general result: only requires Weibel filamentation
Acceleration in Relativistic Jet-Plasma Interactions at SABER : Acceleration in Relativistic Jet-Plasma Interactions at SABER Johnny S.T. Ng
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Stanford University
SABER Workshop, March 15-16, 2006, SLAC.
Cosmic Acceleration at SABER : Cosmic Acceleration at SABER Create a relativistic electron-positron plasma “jet” by showering a high energy beam in solid target
Investigate acceleration mechanisms in jet-plasma interactions over a scale of tens of collisionless skin-depths
Current simulation techniques can accurately resolve physics on this scale (see Bob Noble’s talk) Applicable to astronomical collisionless plasmas
Important tests of our ability to simulate these
effects in astronomical environments
Schematic Layout of Experiment : Schematic Layout of Experiment High-energy-density e- beam Solid target Electron-positron
plasma jet (10-100 MeV) Jet-plasma interaction:
Inductive acceleration
Wakefield acceleration Particle and radiation detectors e- e+ e- Magnetic field
diagnostics
FLASH Experiment: Thick Target : FLASH Experiment: Thick Target
General Requirements for Jet-plasma Experiment at SABER : General Requirements for Jet-plasma Experiment at SABER Beam:
Energy above 10 GeV
Ne = 2 to 4 x 1010
Size: sxy = 10 to 50 mm, sz = 40 mm
Energy density ~ 1016 J/m3 !
Facility infrastructure:
Radiation shielding: 6 to 7 Xrad target
Space to mount experiment: 4 m by 10 m
Beam line diagnostics (toroids, BPM, OTR)
Beam time:
Program will last 3 to 5 years
3-week runs, total 2 months per year
Measurement Parameters : Measurement Parameters Filamentation:
Image jet down stream; micron resolution required
Magnetic field diagnostics based on Faraday rotation: sensitivity? Electron and positron filaments cancellation?
Acceleration:
Electron and positron energy spectrum
Radiation:
Spectra and angular dependence
Summary : Summary SABER is unique: high-energy-density
beams providing relativistic plasma jets “To understand the acceleration mechanisms of these [UHECR] particles, a better understanding of relativistic plasmas is needed”
“Laboratory work [thus] will help to guide the development of a theory of cosmic accelerators, as well as to refine our understanding of other astrophysical phenomena that involve relativistic plasmas.” Turner Committee on the Physics of the Universe:
“Eleven Science QuestionsFor the New Century”, NRC, 2003
Alfven-Shock Induced Plasma Wakefield Acceleration : (Chen, Tajima, and Takahashi, PRL, 2001) Generation of Alfven waves in relativistic plasma flow
Inducing high gradient nonlinear plasma wakefields
Acceleration and deceleration of trapped e+/e-
Power-law (n ~ -2) spectrum due to stochastic acceleration Alfven-Shock Induced Plasma Wakefield Acceleration
e+e– Laser e– e+ 1 m B0 Spectrometer Bu Solenoid Undulator
Stochastic Wake Field particle acceleration in GRB : Stochastic Wake Field particle acceleration in GRB G. Barbiellini(1), F. Longo(1), N.Omodei(2), P.Tommasini(3), D.Giulietti(3), A.Celotti(4), M.Tavani (5)
(1) University and INFN Trieste (2) INFN Pisa, (3) University of Pisa
(4) SISSA Trieste (5) INAF Roma & Roma2 University
(image credits to CXO/NASA)
Gamma-Ray Bursts in laboratory : Gamma-Ray Bursts in laboratory (Ta Phuoc et al. 2005) Laser Pulse tlaser = 3 10-14 s
Laser Energy = 1 Joule
Gas Surface = 0.01 mm2
Gas Volume Density = 1019 cm-3
Power Surface Density W= 3 1018 W cm-2 WakeField Acceleration
SABER proposal : SABER proposal Proposal for SABER
Create a pulsed beam to very scaling relations of density
not focused on a particular model
Measure the X-ray spectrum vs the density of the plasma.
Experimental Set-up (beam parameters)
Laser Pulse tlaser
3 10-14 s
Laser Energy
1 Joule
Gas Surface
0.01 mm2
Gas Volume Density
1019 cm3
Power Surface Density (W)
3 1018 W cm-2
Slide48 : Science outreach on NIF: possibilities
for astrophysics experiments
Presentation to the SABER workshop,
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center,
March 15-16, 2006
Bruce A. Remington
Group Leader, HED Program
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Slide49 : fy05 fy06 fy07 fy08 fy09 fy10 fy11 fy12 We are implementing a plan for university use of NIF Start 3 university
teams Add 1-2 university teams/year Start university experiments
(goal: ~10% of NIF shots) Issues:
funding for the universities
targets
coordination with the other facilities
- Omega/NLUF, Z/ZR, Jupiter, Trident, …
proposal review committee
- assess science impact, facility capability, readiness Select, prepare for 1st
univ. use experiment Intro Develop full-NIF
univ. use proposals
Slide50 : Astrophysics -
hydrodynamics Planetary
physics - EOS Nonlinear optical
physics - LPI Three university teams are starting to prepare
for NIF shots in unique regimes of HED physics Paul Drake, PI, U. of Mich.
David Arnett, U. of Arizona,
Adam Frank, U. of Rochester,
Tomek Plewa, U. of Chicago,
Todd Ditmire, U. Texas-Austin
LLNL hydrodynamics team Raymond Jeanloz, PI, UC Berkeley
Thomas Duffy, Princeton U.
Russell Hemley, Carnegie Inst.
Yogendra Gupta, Wash. State U.
Paul Loubeyre, U. Pierre & Marie
Curie, and CEA
LLNL EOS team Chan Joshi, PI, UCLA
Warren Mori, UCLA
Christoph Niemann,
UCLA NIF Prof.
Bedros Afeyan, Polymath
David Montgomery, LANL
Andrew Schmitt, NRL
LLNL LPI team Intro
Slide51 : Highlights from HEDLA-06
Presentation to the SABER workshop,
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center,
March 15-16, 2006
Bruce A. Remington
HED Program
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Slide52 : High energy density (HED) implies large Energy/Volume,
which is the prevailing condition in high energy astrophysics Log r(g/cm3) Log T(K) Log kT(eV) Log n(H)(/m3) [NRC X-Games report, R. Davidson et al. (2003)]
Slide53 : Peter Celliers: EOS of dense He showing reflectivities, 5% ionization thermally generated
Ray Smith: ICE drive on laser to 2 Mbar at Omega along a quasi-isentrope
Jonathan Fortney, Gilles Chabrier: planetary interior structure sensitive to EOS models, experiments
Jim Hawreliak: dynamic diffraction of shocked Fe showing transition at 120 kbar in sub-nsec
Barukh Yaakobi: dynamic EXAFS of shocked Fe showing transition at 120 kbar in sub-nsec
Marcus Knudson: EOS of water, showing refreeze (Dan Dolan)
Michel Koenig: absolute EOS msmt capability for Al, using K radiography
Tomek Plewa: “solved” the core-collapse SN1987A problem?
Carolyn Kuranz: deep nonlinear Omega experiments relevant to SN1987A
Lebedev, You, Kato: magnetic tower jets on Z-pinch, Cal Tech plasma simul. chamber, astrophys.
Marc Pound: synthetic observations of Eagle Nebula models to compare with actual observations
Amy Reighard: = 50 in radiative shock in Xe gas at Omega laser
Freddy Hansen: radiative shock precursor launches new shock
Gianluca Gregori: XTS to get Te, Ti, ne, Z in HDM and WDM
Steve Rose: photoionized plasmas (of Fe): models that put in all the levels poorly better
than models that put in only some of the levels well (leaving out others). Showed
Z distribution (Au, Fe) vs exp’ldata, w/, w/o rad. and/or dielectronic recomb/autoioniz
Jim Bailey: exp’l opacity of Fe at conditions approaching those of the solar radiative zone
Scott Wilks: PW experiments to reach high temperatures (200-300 eV) in solid-density Cu targets
Sebastien Le Pape, B = 500 MG using proton deflectometery
Karl Krushelnick: B = 750 MG using high harmonics cutoffl; speculation of reconnection signature
Dmitri Ryutov, John Castor, Gordienko: scaling in collisionless, intense laser experiments regime
Mikhail Medvedev: Weibel instability in GRB models and in intense laser experiments
Richard Klein: proposed NIF astro. exp. to achieve Te = 5 keV in (1mm)3 solid density
Anatoly Spitkovsky: pulsar winds and wind shocks Some highlights from HEDLA06
Slide54 : HED laboratory astrophysics allows unique, scaled testing of
models of some of the most extreme conditions in the universe Stellar evolution: opacities (eg., Fe) relevant to stellar envelopes;
Cepheid variables; sellar evolution models; OPAL opacities
Planetary interiors: EOS of relevant materials (H2, H-He, H20, Fe)
under relevant conditions; planetary structure - and
planetary formation - models sensitive to these EOS data
Core-collapse supernovae: scaled hydrodynamics demonstrated;
turbulent hydrodynamics within reach; aspects of the
“standard model” being tested
Supernova remnants: scaled tests of shock processing of the ISM;
scalable radiative shocks within reach
Protostellar jets: relevant high-M-# hydrodynamic jets;
scalable radiative jets, radiative MHD jets;
collimation quite robust in strongly cooled jets
Black hole/neutron star accretion disks:
scaled photoionized plasmas within reach
Slide55 : 1) Parameters very similar to FFTB - perhaps shorter
2) No laser thus far - users need to get it done - or at least let organizers know of needs
3) Calibration experiments (PS) - three categories.
4) Showering, poor beam is available first.
5) U Chicago - Airfly Paulo - result
6) Livermore charged particle in 1980s air fluorescence measures Simon Yu -
7) Radio detection ... issues saber can address?
8) Why no radio coherence at Corisika
9) Radio at SABER?
10) Studying Askaryan at different frequencies ()
Round-Table Discussion
Slide56 : Cosmic Particle Aceleration
“How do cosmic accelerators work and what are they accelerating?” Generally agreed by the LabAstro WG as the best niche of SABER in contributing to Laboratory Astrophysics in the “astro-dynamics” category.
Most appropriately by way of jet-dynamics studies.
Slide57 : Weibel instabilities -
GRB people
JNg et al moving forward with this.
Saber - a lot of different kinds of jets e+e- - other models - single component models Differentiate different models.
Differentiatability vs plausability
Prioritize - users have to do this
Techinical issues - different jet types - different location, etc
e-p+ jets Astro-Jet Dynamics
Slide58 : Laser and/or e-beam probe
e-p+ jets?
Softer beams allow more things
e164-e167 diagnostics exist.... Are they available for use?
Are the developed diagnostics going to be generally available tools?
Issues Related to SABER