Search For Extra Dimension

Experimental Aspects of Extra Dimensions
Andy Parker
Cambridge University
Outline
• Experimentalists view of the theory

• Gravity experiments
• Other limits
• Large extra dimensions at LHC
– Real and virtual effects
– Tevatron limits
– NLC
• Warped extra dimensions
• Black hole production
10/22/08 Helsinki 2
An experimentalists view of the theory
• SM is wonderful!
– All experimental data is explained to high precision
– Theory checked at distance scales of 1/MW= 2.5 x
10-18 m
– Only one state is unaccounted for - the Higgs
– There is only one free parameter which is unknown
- MH
– No contradiction between the best fit Higgs mass
and search limit.
• But theorists don’t agree!

– Higgs mass is unstable against quantum
corrections
– Hierarchy problem - MW=80 GeV, MH<1 TeV,
MPl=1019 GeV
10/22/08 Helsinki 3
Higgs search limit at LEP
In SM framework, Higgs mass

is well constrained.
Only a matter of time ….
In SUSY models, very difficult

to raise lightest higgs mass
10/22/08 Helsinki 4
Two views of the world….
Supersymmetry …. Extra dimensions….

…different scales
….hidden perfection
10/22/08 Helsinki 5
Epicycles
Typical Ptolemaic planetary

model
Symmetry is assumed: all

orbits are based on circles
But the Earth is not at the

centre of the circle (the
eccentric)
The planet moves on an

epicycle
From Michael J. Crowe, The epicycle moves around

Theories of the World from Antiquity the equant
to the Copernican Revolution.
10/22/08 Helsinki 6
Supersymmetry
Conventional method to fix Higgs mass:
Invoke SUSY
Double the number of states in model
Invoke SUSY breaking
Fermion/boson loops cancel (GIM)
Higgs mass stabilised!
105 new parameters (MSSM)

+48 more free parameters if RP not conserved
=> SUSY is a good pension plan for experimentalists!
10/22/08 Helsinki 7
Extra Dimensions
Hypothesize that there are extra space dimensions

Volume of bulk space >> volume of 3-D space
Hypothesize that gravity operates throughout the bulk
SM fields confined to 3-D
Then unified field will have “diluted” gravity, as seen in 3-D
If we choose n-D gravity scale=weak scale then…

Only one scale -> no hierarchy problem!
Can experimentally access quantum gravity!
But extra dimension is different scale from “normal” ones

-> new scale to explain
Extra dimensions are more of a lottery bet than a pension plan!

10/22/08 Helsinki 8
Scale of extra dimensions
For 4+n space-time dimensions
M »M
2
Pl
2+n
Pl(4 +n ) R n
For MPl(4+n) ~ MW
1TeV 1+2 / n
R » 10 30 / n- 17
cm ( )
mW
n=1, R=1013 cm ruled out by planetary orbits
n=2, R~100 µm-1mm OK (see later)
10/22/08 Helsinki 9
-> Conclude extra dimensions must be compactified at <1mm
Kaluza Klein modes
Particles in compact extra

M dimension:
4-D brane •Wavelength set by periodic
1/R
boundary condition
•States will be evenly spaced
in mass
– “tower of Kaluza-Klein
r modes”
•Spacing depends on scale of
ED
Compactified – For large ED (order of
dimension mm) spacing is very
small - use density of
p = h /l , hc = 0.2GeVfm states
– For small ED, spacing
l = 1mm, p = 0.2 /10 = 2.10 GeV can be very large.
12 - 13
10/22/08 Helsinki 10
Why are SM fields confined to 3-D space?
Interactions of SM fields
measured to very high
precision at scales of 10-18 m
If gauge forces acted in bulk,

deviations would have been
measured
KK modes would exist for SM

particles
For large ED, mass splitting

would be small.
H1 results on excited fermions
95% cl
Many channels examined: no evidence for f*.
Gravity in 3-D space
Gauss’s theorem:
Field at r given by
 r
òF /m dS = 4p GM
M
r F /m 4p r 2 = 4p GM
m
F = GMm /r 2
Gravity in 4-D space
4-sphere
Compute volume of 4-sphere
p
V4 (r) = òV (r sinq) r sinq dq
3
r
r sinθ
r 4 sin 4 q dq
p
θ = ò 4p
0 3
= 12 p 2 r 4
d
S4 = V4 = 2p r 2 3
dr
3-sphere
F / m S4 = 4p GM
2GMm
F=
G = 8pR M n - (2+n )
D pr 3
ED signature in Gravity experiments
x r>R Get 3-D result
r<R Get 4-D result

y
R F
Gaussian
surfaces
R r
Measuring Gravity in the lab
Torsion balance
Henry Cavendish 1778 (apparatus by

Michell)
Measured mean density of Earth (no
definition of the unit of force).
Sir Charles Boys inferred G=6.664x10-

11
Nm2/kg2 from Cavendish’s data a century
later.
Modern value
G = (6.6726 ± 0.0001)x10-11 Nm2/kg2.
Measuring Gravity in the lab
Recent experiment of Long et

al
hep-ph/0009062
Source mass oscillates at
1kHz
Signal is oscillation of test
mass
Must isolate masses from
acoustic vibrations, EM
coupling
•Run in vacuum
•Isolation stacks
•ConductingCapacitor
shield
•Low temperature
1 kHz Detector
Shield
10/22/08 Helsinki
Source mass 17
Deviations from Newtonian gravity
Gravity experiments present results in terms of Yukawa

interaction of form
Gr 1 (r1 )r 2 (r2 )
V (r) = - òdr1 òdr2 [1+ a e- r12 / l ]
r12
λ gives range of force
α gives strength relative to Newtonian gravity.
α depends on geometry of extra dimensions
Sensitive to forces of 4x10-14 N

Limited by thermal noise: next step, cool detector
Limits on deviations from Newtonian gravity
Planetary orbits set

very strong limits on
gravity at large
distances….
…but forces many

orders of magnitude
stronger than gravity
are not excluded at
micron scales.
Parameterized as a
Yukawa interaction of
strength α relative to
gravity and range λ
“moduli” = scalars in
string theories
hep-ph/0009062
1m
10/22/08 mHelsinki 19
Submillimetre gravity measurements: Eot-
Wash
Torsion pendulum experiment
“Masses” are 10 holes in each
ring
Lower attractor has two rings
with displaced holes, rotates
slowly
Geometry designed to
suppress long range signals
without affecting shortrange
ones
Membrane shields EM forces

All surfaces gold plated.
Separation down to 218µm

Torsional pendulum data
Data from one turn of base

plate, with fitted expected
curve
Angular precision 8nrad
Signal would have higher

harmonic content and
different dependence on
distance.
Deviations in data
Measured torques at 3
frequencies
α=3 λ=250mm
Deviations from Newtonian
prediction
Limit from torsional pendulum
New limit
sensitive to
scales <3.5 TeV
for n=2
n=2
Casimir effect
r
Casimir (1948) predicted force
between 2 plates from field
fluctuations
p hc 2
Fc = A
240 r 4
Plate area A
This will become a background at
distances around 1µm
Gold probe
Scan gold probe across surface
d
d
Fgrav varies as probe moves, but Fc
2d is constant.
Pioneer 10
Pioneer 10 is leaving the solar

system after 30 years in
flight.
Orbit shows deccelaration

from force of 10-10 g
Radiation pressure?
– Solar?
– Antenna?
– Heat?
– Gas leaks
Time dependence?
Limits from g-2 experiments
g-2 is best measured number in

physics:
Theory:
α SM = (g-2)/2
= 11659159.7(6.7)x10-10
Experiment (PDG):
= 11659160(6)x10-10
LED can give contributions from

KK excitations of W, Z, γ, Ο(10 −10
)
(Cirelli, Moriond)
10/22/08 Helsinki Brookhaven experiment: hep- 26

ph/0105077
Astrophysical Constraints
Supernova remnants lose

energy into ED, but
production of KK states
restricted to O(10MeV)
Remnant cools faster
Data from SN1987A implies

MD > 50 TeV for n=2
PRL 83(1999)268
Neutrino oscillations
Neutrino oscillations could occur into sterile neutrinos

KK excitations of SM fermion singlets can mix with
neutrinos to form sterile states
Oscillation data (SNO, Super-Kamiokande…) are well
fitted by oscillations into standard neutrino states
-> little room for sterile states
-> bound on ED models
-> model dependent limits on parameters
Eg LBNL-49369 gives R<0.82 µm
Signatures for Large Extra Dimensions at
Colliders
ADD model (hep-ph/9803315)
Each excited graviton state

has normal gravitational
x couplings
G -> negligible effect
LED: very large number of KK
states in tower
y Sum over states is large.
R
=> Missing energy signature
with massless gravitons
escaping into the extra
dimensions
LEP Searches for Extra Dimensions
Search for real graviton e e ® Gg

+ -
production
n
σ ∝( s /M ) 2
D
Cross section
No evidence for excess rate in

photon+Etmiss -> Set limits
e +e- ® G* ® f f ,VV
Search for deviations in di-
lepton and di-boson s = F(l / M s4 )
production
LEP Limits on direct graviton production
Limits on MD (TeV)
Number of extra dimensions
Energy 2 3 4 5 6 7
range GeV
ALEPH 1.28 0.97 0.78 0.66 0.57 -

189-209
DELPHI 1.38 - 0.84 - 0.58 -
181-209
L3 1.02 0.81 0.67 0.58 0.51 0.45
189
OPAL 1.09 0.86 0.71 0.61 0.53 0.47
189
LEP limits on virtual graviton interactions
Search for deviations from SM
in dilepton and diboson
production
MS ~ 1TeV? Set 95% CL

λ depends on quantum gravity
theory
e+e- λ=−1 λ=+1 M S
L3 0.98 1.06
limit
OPAL 1.00 1.15
s
γγ λ=−1 λ=+1
DELPH 0.70 0.77
I
L3 0.99 0.84
OPAL 0.89 0.83
Signatures at the LHC
Good signatures are LBNL-

45198
• Jet +missing energy channels: ATL-PHYS-
2001-012
– gg -> gG
– qg -> qG
– qq -> Gg
• Photon channels
– qq -> Gγ
– pp -> γγ X Virtual graviton exchange
• Lepton channels
– pp ->  X Virtual graviton exchange
Real graviton production
Cross section:
d 4s mGn- 2 Sn- 1 ds m f i (x1 ) f j (x 2 )

dm dpT jet,g dy jet,g dyG
2 2
=
2 MD n +2
dt
å i, j x1 x2
Note ED mass scale and n do not separate ->

difficult to extract n
Can use cutoff in MD from parton distributions
For n>6, cross section unobservable at LHC
Quantum gravity theory above MD unknown ->

Calculation only reliable at energies below MD
Missing ET analysis
pp -> jet + ETMiss Jet energies > 1 TeV
Dominant backgrounds:
Jet + Z -> ν ν
Jet + W-> τ ν } Use lepton veto
Jet + W-> e ν
Veto isolated leptons (<10 GeV within ∆R=0.2)

Instrumental background to ETMiss is small
High PT jet cross section
ETJet > 1 TeV
|η Jet |<3
100fb-1 of data
expected
SM Background
SM Background
~500 events
No prediction for
n>4
Lepton veto and trigger
Veto efficiency =
98% per lepton
Reject
0.2% signal
23.3% JWτ
74.3% JWe
61.1% JWµ
Jet multiplicity - signal scenarios
Jet multiplicity
in signal
increased by
gg production
process and
higher mass
Mean ~2.5
Jet multiplicity background
Background: lower
jet multiplicity
Lower mass
Less gg production
Mean ~2.0
But at high ET,

mean ~4 is similar
PT and η distributions
PT of jet is harder in
signal
Discrimination in η is
too poor to be useful
Rejection of W(τν) background
W(τν ) background
has jet near missing
ET
Cut at δφ =0.5
Reject :
6% signal
27% W(τν )
11% total
background
Final missing ET distributions
Signal and
backgrounds after
cuts for 100fb-1
Missing ET signal
Signal:
Excess of events at
high ET
Dominant
background
Z->νν
Calibration of Z-> νν background
Use Z-> ee
Two isolated electrons,

PT>15, Mee within 10
GeV of MZ
Account for acceptance

differences e, µ, ν
BR’s differ by factor

3, so calibration
sample has less
statistics
Background estimates
ETmiss > Type Low L 30fb-1 High L 100fb-1
1 TeV jZ(νν) 120.6 414.0
jW(τν) 34.5 122.7
jW(eν) 2.7 8.8
jW(µυ) 3.3 11.0
Total 161.1 556.5
1.2 TeV jZ(νν) 36.1 124.7
jW(τν) 9.2 30.1
jW(eν) 0.6 2.0
jW(µυ) 0.9 2.9
Total 46.9 159.7
1.4 TeV jZ(νν) 11.1 37.4
jW(τν) 2.8 9.6
jW(eν) 0.1 0.6
jW(µυ) 0.2 0.8
Total 14.3 48.4
Signal event numbers ET>1TeV
n MD S S/sqrtB S/sqr7 S S/sqrB S/sqr7

B B
2 4 187.6 49.5 18.7 645.4 92.8 35.1
5 77.6 20.4 7.7 272.8 39.1 14.8
6 38.7 10.2 3.9 128.8 18.5 7.0
7 19.7 5.2 2.0 66.5 9.5 3.6
8 11.6 3.1 1.2 39.4 5.7 2.2
3 4 142.5 37.8 14.3 479.8 68.9 26.1
5 46.2 12.3 4.6 159.8 23.0 8.7
6 18.8 5.0 1.9 64.0 9.2 3.5
7 8.5 2.3 0.9 29.4 4.2 1.6
4 4 97.1 25.6 9.7 324.4 46.6 17.6
5 25.2 6.6 2.5 86.7 12.5 4.7
6 8.6 2.3 0.9 28.4 4.2 1.6
Discovery potential
5σ discovery limits, ET>1 TeV, 100fb-1
n MDmin MDMax (TeV) R
2 ~4 7.5 10 µm
3 ~4.5 5.9 300 pm
4 ~5 5.3 1 pm
Single photon signal at LHC
Potential confirmation of discovery pp ® Gg

Main background pp ® g Z ® gnn
Other backgrounds from W small, not simulated.
Require Etγ > 60 GeV and |η|<2.5 for trigger

Signal in region Etγ > 500 GeV
Calibrate background with γ Z-> ee sample

pTe>20 GeV, invariant mass within 10 GeV of Z
Sample is 6x smaller than sample, use S/sqr(6B)
Significance of single photon signal
ETMiss Type High L 100fb-1
Background
500 GeV γZ(νν) 80.7
γW(τν) 2.2
Total 82.9
Signal
n MD (TeV) S S/sqr(B) S/sqr(6B)
2 3 194.4 21.4 8.7
4 61.8 6.8 2.8
3 4 49.2 5.4 2.2
Only useful if n and MD small
Extracting n and MD
d 4s mGn- 2 Sn- 1 ds m f i (x1 ) f j (x 2 )

dm dpT jet,g dy jet,g dyG
2 2
=
2 MD n +2
dt
å i, j x1 x2
Cannot separate n and MD at fixed energy
Run LHC at 10 TeV as well as 14 TeV
MD limited kinematically by pdfs
-> can separate n and MD with precise

cross section measurement
Variation with ECM at LHC
Cross section ratio

(10 TeV/14TeV)
Need to measure to
5% to distinguish
n=2,3
Need O(10) more L

at 10 TeV
Need luminosity to
<5%
Virtual graviton processes at LHC
s-channel graviton exchange contributes to
qq ® gg qq ® ll
gg ® gg gg ® ll
Potential information from angular distribution
differences and interference between SM background
and graviton exchange
ATL-PHYS-2001-012
Diphoton production at LHC
SM background peaks at high η

Signal events central
Diphoton signals at LHC
γγ invariant mass
distributions
(log scale)
Signal can be
optimised with cut
on Mγγ>Mmin
Cut value Diphoton reach at LHC
5σ reach for diphoton signal
for
10 fb-1 and 100 fb-1
Can optimise reach at any n

with cut on Mmin
Dilepton signals at LHC
Invariant mass of l+l-

pair
(log scale)
Forward-backward asymmetry in dileptons
Interference between G and SM modifies predicted FB

asymmetry
100fb-1
Dilepton reach at LHC
5σ reach for
diphoton signal for
10 fb-1 and 100 fb-1
Can optimise reach

at any n with cut
on Mmin
Limits from the Tevatron
Searches performed by D0
and CDF
D0 Run I data taken
without B field
-> use EM clusters only
Fake background from
miss id jets
No evidence for excess

events
hep-ex/0108015
D0 data
Compare data and

MC in
Mass/cosθ * plane
Data compatible with

expected
backgrounds from
SM and miss ID jets
hep-ex/0103009
D0 LED Signature
Dedicated MC generator
includes SM, ED and
interference terms.
Signal appears at large

M, low cosθ *
MD>1.44 TeV for n=3
MD>0.97 TeV for n=7
Run II will extend reach

to
3-4 TeV
Luminosity? 2? 10? 30 fb-
1
Single photons at the NLC
Finding signal is
one thing…
n=2,4,6
…interpreting it is
another …
Single
photon+ETMiss
signal at NLC
SM background
e e ® nn g
+ -
from
2E g
÷ G
e e ® G
+ - ÷ g xg =
s
Single photon angular distribution at NLC
Assume:
500 GeV LC
Pol(e-)=80%
Pol(e+)=60%
Cross-section
measured to 1%
precision
(>270fb-1 required)
Distinguish n=2 from

n=3 up to MD=4.6 TeV
Gravitino production is
indistinguishable from
n=6!
Warped 5-d spacetime
Higgs vev
suppressed by
“Warp Factor”
Gravity
Planck scale Our brane

brane y
x x y
z 5th space dimension r z
Warped Extra dimensions
Consider Randall and Sundrum type models as test case
Gravity propagates in a 5-D non-factorizable geometry
Hierarchy between MPlanck and MWeak generated by “warp
factor”
Need : no fine tuning
Gravitons have KK excitations with scale
This gives a spectrum of graviton excitations which can be

detected as resonances at colliders.
First excitation is at
where
Analysis is model independent: this model used for

illustration
Implementation in Herwig
Model implemented in Herwig to calculate general spin-2

resonance cross sections and decays.
Can handle fermion and boson final states, including the
effect of finite W and Z masses.
Interfaced to the ATLAS simulation (ATLFAST) to use

realistic model of LHC events and detector resolutions.
Coupling
Worst case when giving smallest couplings.
For m1=500 GeV, Λ π =13 TeV

Other choices give larger cross-sections and widths
Angular distributions
Angular distributions expected of decay products in CM

are:
qq -> G -> ff
gg -> G -> ff
qq -> G -> BB
gg -> G -> BB
This gives potential to discriminate from Drell-Yan

background with
Angular distributions of e+e- in graviton
frame
Angular distributions
are very different
depending on the
spin of the resonance
and the production
mechanism.
=>get information on
the spin and
couplings of the
resonance
ATLAS Detector Effects
Best channel G->e+e- Good energy and angular resolution

Jets: good rate, poor energy/angle resolution, large
background
Muons: worse mass resolution at high mass
Z/W: rate and reconstruction problems.
Main background Drell-Yan

Acceptance for leptons: |η|<2.5
Tracking and identification efficiency included
Energy resolution
Mass resolution
Graviton Resonance
Graviton resonance is
very prominent above
small SM background,
for 100fb-1 of
integrated luminosity
Plot shows signal for a

1.5 TeV resonance, in
the test model.
The Drell-Yan
background can be
measured and
subtracted from the
sidebands.
Detector acceptance
and efficiency included.
Signal and
500 1000 backgroun
GeV GeV d for
increasing
graviton
mass
1.5
2.0
TeV
TeV
Events expected from Graviton resonance
Signal Backgroun
100fb-1
d
MG Mass NS NB NSMIN=Max (σ 
(GeV) window (5ÃN B,10) 
(GeV)
             
            
              
               
               
               
               
Limit                 
                
Mass window is ±3x the mass

10/22/08 resolution Helsinki 72
Production Cross Section
10 events produced
for 100fb-1 at mG=2.2
TeV.
With detector
acceptance and
efficiency, search
Searc limit is at 2080 GeV,
h for a signal of 10
limit events and S/√B>5
10 events
Angular
distribution
changes with
graviton mass
Production more
from qq because
of PDFs as
graviton mass
rises
Angular distribution observed in ATLAS
1.5 TeV resonance

mass
Production
dominantly from
gluon fusion
Statistics for 100fb-1

of integrated
luminosity (1 year
at high luminosity)
Acceptance removes
events at high cos θ ∗
Determination of the spin of the resonance
With data, the spin can be determined from a fit to the
angular distribution, including background and a mix
of qq and gg production mechanisms.
Establish how much data is needed for such a fit to give

a significant determination of the spin:
One ATLAS run
1. Generate NDY background events (with statistical

fluctuations)
2. Add NS signal events
3. Take likelihood ratio for a spin-1 prediction and a
spin-2 prediction from the test model
4. Increase NS until the 90% confidence level is reached.
5. Repeat 1-4 many times, to get the average NSMIN
needed for spin-2 to be favoured over spin-1 at 90%
confidence
6. Repeat 1-5 for 95 and 99% confidence levels
Angular distribution observed in ATLAS
Model independent
minimum cross
sections needed to
distinguish spin-2
from spin-1 at 90,95
and 99%
confidence.
Assumes 100fb-1 of
integrated
luminosity
Discovery For test model case,

limit can establish spin-2
nature of resonance
at 90% confidence
up to 1720 GeV
10/22/08 Helsinki
resonance mass 77
Graviton discovery contours
Confidence limits in
plane of Λ π vs graviton
mass
Coupling = 1/ Λ π
Test model has

k/MPl=0.01, giving small
coupling.
For large k/MPl coupling

is large enough for width
to be measured.
(Analysis assumes
width<<resolution)
Muon analysis
Muon mass resolution

much worse than
electron at high mass
⇒
Discovery reach in muon
channel for MG<1700
GeV
Muons may be useful to

establish universality of
graviton coupling
Measurement of the graviton coupling to µ +
µ-
∆σ.B/σ.B plane of Λ π vs graviton
mass
Coupling = 1/ Λ π
Test model has

coupling.

to be measured.
(Analysis assumes
width<<resolution)
Photon analysis
Photon pair mass resolution
as good as electrons
But background uncertain.
For standard model
(ptmin=150 GeV)
σ HERWIG=0.36 pb
Included:
Not included:
for
example
FNAL data indicates σ HERWIG is

5x too small ⇒ use 1.8 pb
Graviton mass (GeV) Do not trust cosθ
distribution for background.
Measurement of the graviton coupling to γγ
plane of Λ π vs graviton
mass
Coupling = 1/ Λ π
Test model has

coupling.

to be measured.
(Analysis assumes
width<<resolution)
Graviton to jet-jet backgrounds
k/MPl = 0.08
(64x higher cross-
section)
Graviton to jet-jet signal at 1.9 TeV
Significant signal after

background
subtraction
k/MPl = 0.08
(64x higher cross-
section)
Graviton to jet-jet search reach
Reach is limited because of

high background
Graviton to WW
Look for
Select 1e, 0 µ, 2 jets, PTmiss from ATLFAST
η jet <2
Require Mjj compatible with W mass
take highest pT pair in mass window
Solve for pzν using W mass constraint
Plot MWW look for resonance above SM background
SM background from WW, WZ and ttbar
Graviton to WW: signal and background
WW
channel
is viable
for
graviton
Graviton to WW channel
Efficiency drops at very high jet ET
Reach of W+jets channel - low

10/22/08 cuts Helsinki 88
Exploring the extra dimension
Check that the coupling of the resonance is universal:

measure rate in as many channels as possible: µµ ,γγ ,
jj,bb,tt,WW,ZZ
Use information from angular distribution to separate gg
and qq couplings
Estimate model parameters k and rc from resonance
mass and σ .B
For example, in test model with MG=1.5 TeV, get mass to
±1 GeV
and σ .B to 14% from ee channel alone (dominated by
statistics).
Then measure
Black hole production
Low scale gravity in extra

dimensions allows black hole
production at colliders.
Decay by Hawking radiation

(without eating the planet)
8 TeV mass black hole

decaying to leptons and jets
in ATLAS
8 partons produced with

pT>500 GeV
Work in progress: Richardson,

Harris
Black hole production cross-sections at LHC
10000 evs/yr
Classical approximation to cross-sectionσ

BH ~ p rh2
(Controversial…)
Very large rates for n=2-6 hep-ph/0111230
Black hole decay
Decay occurs by Hawking radiation
Hawking Temperature TH TH = (n + 1) /4p rh
1
h æmh ö n +1
Black Hole radius rh rh ~ ç ÷
M Dc è M D ø
Use observed final state energy spectrum to measure TH

and hence n?
Particle spectra from black hole decays
Example:
All jets n=6 extra dimensions
MD = 2 TeV
Mh = 7-7.5 TeV
Hawking Temperature TH= 400

GeV
Isolated e’s Multiplicity N~ Mh/2 TH ~ 9
Electron spectrum deviates

from Black body
Black body -effect of isolation cut?
Fit -recoil effect?
Fit gives 388 GeV
Extracting n from Black Holes
Preliminary! Fit TH against

Black Hole
mass
No
experimental
resolution yet
(500 GeV
bins…)
Effect of
heating?
Input n=6
Fit gives
n=5.7+-0.2
pb Black hole production at the Tevatron
105
Rate expected to be large at
Tevatron
102
Events/yr
n=4 extra dimensions
100
Cross-section drops rapidly at
σ high mass
10-2
Assume 10fb-1
10-5
Non-observation implies MD>1.4
TeV
0.7 1.0 1.3 1.6
MD
hep-ph/0112186
Conclusions
Extra dimensional theories provide an exciting

alternative to the normal picture of physics beyond
the standard model
A wide variety of new phenomena are predicted within

reach of experiments.
Time to bet on the lottery!

Search For Extra Dimension

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Search For Extra Dimension

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Experimental Aspects of Extra Dimensions

• Experimentalists view of the theory

• But theorists don’t agree!

In SM framework, Higgs mass

Only a matter of time ….

In SUSY models, very difficult

Supersymmetry …. Extra dimensions….

Typical Ptolemaic planetary

Symmetry is assumed: all

But the Earth is not at the

The planet moves on an

From Michael J. Crowe, The epicycle moves around

Conventional method to fix Higgs mass:

105 new parameters (MSSM)

=> SUSY is a good pension plan for experimentalists!

Hypothesize that there are extra space dimensions

Then unified field will have “diluted” gravity, as seen in 3-D

If we choose n-D gravity scale=weak scale then…

But extra dimension is different scale from “normal” ones

Extra dimensions are more of a lottery bet than a pension plan!

For 4+n space-time dimensions

n=1, R=1013 cm ruled out by planetary orbits

n=2, R~100 µm-1mm OK (see later)

Particles in compact extra

If gauge forces acted in bulk,

KK modes would exist for SM

For large ED, mass splitting

Many channels examined: no evidence for f*.

r<R Get 4-D result

Henry Cavendish 1778 (apparatus by

Sir Charles Boys inferred G=6.664x10-

Recent experiment of Long et

Gravity experiments present results in terms of Yukawa

Sensitive to forces of 4x10-14 N

Planetary orbits set

…but forces many

Membrane shields EM forces

Separation down to 218µm

Data from one turn of base

Angular precision 8nrad

Signal would have higher

Pioneer 10 is leaving the solar

Orbit shows deccelaration

g-2 is best measured number in

LED can give contributions from

10/22/08 Helsinki Brookhaven experiment: hep- 26

Supernova remnants lose

Remnant cools faster

Data from SN1987A implies

Neutrino oscillations could occur into sterile neutrinos

Eg LBNL-49369 gives R<0.82 µm

Each excited graviton state

Search for real graviton e e ® Gg

No evidence for excess rate in

ALEPH 1.28 0.97 0.78 0.66 0.57 -

MS ~ 1TeV? Set 95% CL

Good signatures are LBNL-

d 4s mGn- 2 Sn- 1 ds m f i (x1 ) f j (x 2 )

Note ED mass scale and n do not separate ->

Quantum gravity theory above MD unknown ->

pp -> jet + ETMiss Jet energies > 1 TeV

Veto isolated leptons (<10 GeV within ∆R=0.2)