1:
2:
3: \documentclass{article}
4: %\documentclass{amsart}
5:
6: \usepackage{amssymb}
7:
8: \usepackage{epsfig}
9:
10: \usepackage{graphicx,psfrag,amsmath}
11:
12:
13:
14: \begin{document}
15:
16:
17:
18: %\usepackage{epsfig}
19:
20:
21:
22:
23:
24: %\def\beq#1\eeq{\begin{equation}#1\end{equation}}
25: %\def\bea#1\eea{\begin{align}#1\end{align}}
26: %\newcommand{\bea}{\begin{align}}
27: %\newcommand{\eea}{\end{align}}
28: %\newcommand{\limfunc}[1]{\mathop{\rm #1}}
29: %\newcommand{\Tr}{\limfunc{Tr}}
30:
31:
32:
33: \title{ Some
34: Practical
35: Applications of Dark Matter Research }
36:
37:
38: \author{
39: Presented at the CISNP Conference (Columbia 2008)\\
40: in Honor of Frank Avignone, E. Fiorini, and Peter Rosen\\
41: ~~~\\
42: L. Stodolsky\\
43: Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Physik
44: (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut)\\
45: F\"ohringer Ring 6, 80805 M\"unchen, Germany}
46:
47: \maketitle
48:
49:
50:
51:
52: %\newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
53: %\newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
54: \def\beq#1\eeq{\begin{equation}#1\end{equation}}
55: %\newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
56: %\newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
57: \def\bea#1\eea{\begin{eqnarray}#1\end{eqnarray}}
58: \newcommand{\Z}{{\mathbb Z}}
59: \newcommand{\N}{{\mathbb N}}
60: \newcommand{\C}{{\mathbb C}}
61: \newcommand{\Cs}{{\mathbb C}^{*}}
62: \newcommand{\R}{{\mathbb R}}
63: \newcommand{\intT}{\int_{[-\pi,\pi]^2}dt_1dt_2}
64: \newcommand{\cC}{{\mathcal C}}
65: \newcommand{\cI}{{\mathcal I}}
66: \newcommand{\cN}{{\mathcal N}}
67: \newcommand{\cE}{{\mathcal E}}
68: \newcommand{\cA}{{\mathcal A}}
69: \newcommand{\xdT}{\dot{{\bf x}}^T}
70: \newcommand{\bDe}{{\bf \Delta}}
71:
72:
73:
74:
75:
76: %\newcommand{\tfrac}[2]{{\textstyle\frac{#1}{#2}}}
77: \newcommand{\ket}[1]{| #1 >}
78: \newcommand{\bra}[1]{< #1 |}
79: \newcommand{\ome}[2]{<#1|{\cal O}|#2>}
80: \newcommand{\gme}[3]{<#1|#3|#2>}
81: \newcommand{\spr}[2]{<#1|#2>}
82: \newcommand{\eq}[1]{Eq\,\ref{#1}}
83: \newcommand{\xp}[1]{e^{#1}}
84:
85:
86:
87: \def\dr{detector }
88: \def\drn{detector}
89: \def\dtn{detection }
90: \def\dtnn{detection}
91:
92:
93: \def\pho{photon }
94: \def\phon{photons}
95: \def\phos{photons }
96: \def\phosn{photons}
97: \def\mmt{measurement }
98: \def\an{amplitude}
99: \def\a{amplitude }
100: :\def\co{coherence }
101: \def\con{coherence}
102:
103: \def\st{state }
104: \def\stn{state}
105: \def\sts{states }
106: \def\stsn{states}
107:
108: \def\cow{"collapse of the wavefunction"}
109: \def\de{decoherence }
110: \def\dm{density matrix }
111: \def\dmn{density matrix}
112:
113: \newcommand{\mop}{\cal O }
114: \newcommand{\dt}{{d\over dt}}
115: \def\qm{quantum mechanics }
116: \def\qms{quantum mechanics }
117: \def\qml{quantum mechanical }
118:
119: \def\qmn{quantum mechanics}
120: \def\mmtn{measurement}
121: \def\pow{preparation of the wavefunction }
122:
123: \def\me{ L.Stodolsky }
124: \def\T{temperature }
125: \def\Tn{temperature}
126: \def\t{time }
127: \def\tn{time}
128: \def\wfs{wavefunctions }
129: \def\wf{wavefunction }
130: \def\wfn{wavefunction}
131: \def\wfsn{wavefunctions}
132: \def\wvp{wavepacket }
133: \def\pa{probability amplitude }
134: \def\sy{system }
135: \def\sys{systems }
136: \def\syn{system}
137: \def\sysn{systems}
138: \def\ha{hamiltonian }
139: \def\han{hamiltonian}
140: \def\rh{$\rho$ }
141: \def\rhn{$\rho$}
142: \def\op{$\cal O$ }
143: \def\opn{$\cal O$}
144: \def\yy{energy }
145: \def\yyn{energy}
146: \def\yys{energies }
147: \def\yysn{energies}
148: \def\pz{$\bf P$ }
149: \def\pzn{$\bf P$}
150: \def\pl{particle }
151: \def\pls{particles }
152: \def\pln{particle}
153: \def\plsn{particles}
154:
155:
156: \def\plz{polarization }
157: \def\plzs{polarizations }
158: \def\plzn{polarization}
159: \def\plzsn{polarizations}
160:
161: \def\sctg{scattering }
162: \def\sctgn{scattering}
163:
164: \def\crs{`cracks' }
165:
166: \begin{abstract}
167: Two practical spin-offs from the development of cryogenic dark
168: matter
169: \drn s
170: are presented. One in materials research, the other in biology.
171: \end{abstract}
172:
173:
174: \section{Introduction}
175: I know it's hard to believe and I certainly would never have
176: believed it
177: myself when the field started back in the 80's, but there can be
178: what could be called a ``practical'' aspect to research on direct
179: \dtn of dark matter.
180:
181:
182: This is because with a very small \yy left behind in a dark
183: matter interaction, we must develop very sensitive \drn s.
184: In particular there has been an intensive development of cryogenic
185: \drn s which in virtue of their operation at very low
186: temperature
187: show a strong repsonse to very small \yysn \cite{cry}.
188: This can have unexpected consequences. I'd like to present two
189: we have been involved with, one related to materials science and
190: one in biology.
191:
192: \section{Cracks-the scare}
193:
194: The first begins with
195: the early runs of the
196: CRESST Cryogenic Dark Matter Detector
197: in Gran Sasso in 1999 \cite{cresst}.
198: Much careful effort went into the design and construction of a low
199: background setup,
200: aimed at achieving only a
201: few events per day. When it finally ran in Gran Sasso we found--
202: to our horror-- rates in the 1000's per hour instead.
203:
204: There followed several months of feverish search with all kinds
205: of
206: hypotheses, some plausible and others less so
207: ...electronics?...suspensions?
208: ...somebody touch the crystal with bare hands?...
209: correlation
210: with traffic in the Gran Sasso tunnel?...
211:
212: The worst nightmare would of course have been a radioactive
213: contamination. But on this there was one thing that saved us from
214: complete desperation.
215: Even if there is a fearsome radioactive background you don't
216: know anything about, there
217: is one thing
218: you {\it do} know: it must be Poisson distributed in time.
219: However, the mysterious events were not Poissonian. They seemed
220: to rather
221: come in `bursts', and this was confirmed by statistical anaylsis.
222: So it wasn't a radioactive contamination.
223: But what the devil was it?
224:
225:
226:
227:
228: \begin{figure} \label{engy}
229: \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{crack.ps}
230: \caption{ Sapphire crystal surface at contact point with sapphire
231: ball}\label{fig:photo}
232: \end{figure}
233: Fig.\,\ref{fig:photo} shows the culprit.
234: The \drn s were sapphire ($\mathrm{Al_2O_3}$) crystals held
235: tightly
236: in place by small ($\sim$mm) sapphire
237: balls. One sees some kind of fracture at the point of contact--
238: ``cracks'' we called them.
239: Apparently
240: the ``tight holding'' which is used in cryogenic work to
241: avoid
242: problems with ``microphonics'' was {\it too}
243: tight; enough to crack the very hard material sapphire.
244: As soon as the sapphire balls were replaced by plastic stubs,
245: which
246: are evidently somewhat softer, the rate went down to
247: to the expected level.
248:
249: We all breathed a sigh of relief and that seemed the end of the
250: story.
251: \begin{figure} [h]
252: \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{4Espln.eps}
253: \caption{Energy spectra from `crack' events with
254: a power law fit to one of the curves, yielding $E^{-1.9}$ (solid
255: line). } \label{spec}
256: \end{figure}
257: \section{Cracks--the analysis}
258: Several years later, however, the realization sudenly hit that
259: we must have the worlds' greatest data sample on `cracks'. Since
260: the rate went down from thousands per hour to a few per day, the
261: pulses detected in that period must have been essentially all
262: ``cracks''. And these were taken
263: with good energy and time resolution, under low background
264: conditions
265: and with many, many, thousands of events.
266: This splendid collection of well observed ``cracks'' ought to
267: be of interest to
268: somebody.
269:
270:
271: Indeed, several years later, in Finland, we found
272: people
273: knowledgeable about the subject and we began to look at the data
274: \cite{ast}.
275:
276: The first thing we did was to plot the \yy spectrum. This
277: is shown in Fig.\,\ref{spec}. ``Looks just like earthquakes''was
278: the first observation. Indeed the spectra seem to follow a
279: power law, $dN/dE \sim E^{-\beta}$ as do the magnitudes (Richter
280: scale) of earthquakes.
281:
282: Interpretation here is simpler than in seismology. In
283: seismology it is non-trivial to find the \yy spectrum for quakes
284: since working
285: back from the Richter scale (a kind of
286: amplitude) to the whole \yy of the event involves various
287: assumptions and calculations. But the cryo\dr is a
288: type of
289: calorimeter, one is just measuring the total \yy directly.
290: (On the other hand, it must be said that earthquake data has a
291: much larger range, covering
292: five or six orders of magnitude compared to the one or two here.)
293:
294: But if we follow the standard lore of how to translate the Richter
295: scale to an \yy scale, we get a power $\beta \approx 1.7$ for
296: earthquakes. Over different CRESST data sets the power was
297: $\beta\sim$ 1.7-- 2.0, suggestively close to the earthquake number.
298: I'm not aware of any simple, basic, explanation for this power,
299: nor for any of other ones we found in the analysis.
300:
301:
302:
303: With this wealth of data various other interesting statistical
304: aspects of the data
305: can be studied. One is the ``waiting time'', a statistic suitable
306: for intermittent phenomena and often used in this kind of work.
307: To every event we associate the time until the next event, and then
308: plot
309: the distribution of these ``waiting'' times.
310:
311: \begin{figure}[h]
312: \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{w.comb.ps}
313: \caption{Distributions of waiting times for `cracks' (upper curve)
314: and \phos from an external calibration source (lower
315: curve). The lines are fits to (lower) a simple Poissonian
316: $e^{-w/w_o}$ and to (upper) $w^{-\alpha }e^{-w/w_o}$ with
317: $\alpha= 0.3$.}\label{wt}
318: \end{figure}
319: For an ideal Poissonian source the waiting time distribution should
320: be $e^{-w/w_o}$ where $w_o$ is the average waiting time or the
321: inverse of the event rate.
322: Fortunately we had such data available, since CRESST \drn s
323: are periodically calibrated with an external $\gamma$
324: source--necessarily
325: Poissonian.
326: This is shown in Fig\,\ref{wt} by the lower curve, and it has
327: indeed
328: the expected Poissonian form. On the other hand,
329: the same plot for the cracks (upper curve) is well above a
330: Poissonian
331: at small waiting times, and in fact is well fit by a Poissonian
332: times a power law, namely
333: \begin{equation} \label{pow}
334: w^{-\alpha }e^{-w/w_o}
335: \end{equation}
336: with $\alpha\approx 0.3$.
337: Interestingly enough, an analysis of earthquake waiting times
338: came up with the same fit with the same power \cite{corral}.
339: Our power is
340: not very well determined and this could be a coincidence, but it
341: certainly is intriguing.
342:
343: Another point concerns not earthquakes but
344: material
345: studies. As can be seen from Fig\,\ref{engy} the \yy threshold in
346: this data
347: was in the keV's. This corresponds to breaking only some hundreds
348: of bonds in
349: sapphire. It turns out
350: this is many orders of magnitude more sensitive than previous work
351: in the subject, where it's more like $10^7$ bonds \cite{ast}.
352: Possibly, with a dedeicated setup, one could get down to the
353: single bond level. This would be an exciting possibility and we
354: have some thoughts
355: about what such an apparatus might look like \cite{ph}.
356:
357: Briefly, we can advertise the following points
358: from this study and for the cryo\dr :
359:
360:
361: $\bullet$ A new technology for studying microfracture.
362: With unparalled sensitivity. Perhaps to the few atom level
363: with a dedicated setup.
364:
365: $\bullet$ The method provides a direct, absolute measurement of
366: the {\it total} energy, as opposed to previous work either in
367: seismology or materials study.
368:
369:
370:
371: $\bullet$ There are striking similarities with earthquakes.
372: Despite the stupdenous difference in \yy scale, and big
373: material differences, there appear to be close and even
374: quantitative
375: similarities. Something universal
376: must be at work. This is a challenge to theory. Is there,
377: for example, a relation between the exponents $\alpha$ and
378: $\beta$?
379:
380: \section{The cryo\dr in mass spectrometry}
381:
382: My second story begins even earlier, in 1991. It rests upon a
383: very deep physical insight, namely:
384:
385: \begin{equation} \label{ins}
386: 20~ {\rm keV}=20~ {\rm keV}
387: \end{equation}
388: The history of this profound observation is the following.
389: Mass spectroscopy with macromolecules is a valuable and frequently
390: used tool in molecular biology. In such fields as genomics and
391: proteomics time-of-flight studies are performed with very
392: big molecules and their fragments. The biologist will have a, say,
393: 20 keV accelerator
394: in the basement. As opposed to the
395: particle or nuclear physicist who at most will deal with heavy
396: nuclei, the biologists is concerned with macromolecules in the
397: many kD range. (One D= Dalton= 1 H atom.)
398: With such enormous masses, and given that
399: $E=\frac{1}{2}Mv^2$, a chunk with 20 keV will not be moving very
400: fast at all.
401: \begin{figure}[h]
402: \includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{hellp.eps}
403: \caption{Time-of-flight spectra comparing the cryo\dr (upper curve)
404: and a conventional \dr (lower courve) in the study of proteins
405: associated with the liver disease HELLP. Numbers attached to the
406: peaks are the masses. Fig 2 of ref \cite{hlp}.} \label{hllp}
407: \end{figure}
408:
409: Now in practically all familiar detectors, Geiger counters,
410: scintillation counters,.. the
411: initiating event is the ejection of an electron, leading to
412: ionization, scintillation...
413: But as we learn in elementary atomic physics, the cross section for
414: hitting an electron
415: depends on {\it velocity} and is maximum when
416: $v(projectile)\approx v(atomic
417: ~electron)$. Thus with big, slow, molecules, as we get into the
418: hundreds of kD or more, \dtn becomes more and more difficult and
419: inefficient.
420:
421:
422: Mulling upon this problem now and then, one day I suddenly came
423: upon the deep insight \eq{ins}.
424: The cryodetector, being a kind of calorimeter, doesn't care if the
425: molecule is slow. It works on heat, {\it energy}, not velocity.
426: For a cryodetector a huge, slow, 20 keV protein is the same
427: thing as a 20 keV electron !?
428:
429:
430:
431: ...Theoretically. As many of our senior,
432: seasoned participants at the conference will know, most
433: good, simple-sounding ideas have a catch. Could this really work?
434: But after discussion with my brother Marv,
435: who is a microbiologist and who found the idea interesting, it was
436: actually tried out by Damien Twerenbold and collaborators
437: \cite{twe}. It actually worked!
438:
439: This in turn has lead to the production of commercial devices. A
440: result with one of these is shown in Fig\,\ref{hllp}, where the
441: results with
442: a cryo\dr are compared with that for a conventional \dr in
443: looking for rare proteins associated with the liver disease HELLP
444: \cite{hlp}.
445: A couple of nice peaks (masses in boldface), lost in the noise with
446: the conventional
447: \drn, show up nicely with the cryo\drn.
448:
449:
450:
451: Our group at the MPI, has furthermore developed improved \drn s
452: optimized for good timing for improved time-of-flight accuracy.
453: This also naturally leads to background reduction and tests showed
454: very high sensitivty, reaching attomoles \cite{christ}.
455:
456: For the application of the cryo\dr in mass spectrometry
457: we can thus note
458:
459: $\bullet$ It {\it really} appears to be
460: true that ``$20\,{\rm keV}\approx 20\,{\rm keV}$''
461: for the cryodetector
462:
463: $\bullet$ In principle the technique has no mass limitation (one
464: of our students once tried to launch a whole virus--results
465: unclear)
466:
467: $\bullet$ The technique has a very high sensitivy, useful in
468: rare protein studies and diagnostics
469:
470: $\bullet$ Good timing can give high mass resolution; one
471: could possibly see the modification of a single base
472:
473:
474: \section{Conclusions}
475: These two examples of \crs and mass spectrometry
476: are not the last we'll
477: see from this still relatively young technology and many are being
478: actively discussed and tried out \cite{recent}. It will be
479: interesting to
480: see what's still coming.
481:
482:
483: \begin{thebibliography}{00}
484:
485: \bibitem{cry} For a popular introduction to cryo\drn s see
486: L. Stodolsky, Neutrino and Dark Matter Detection at Low
487: Temperature {\it Physics Today}, August, 1991.
488:
489:
490:
491: \bibitem{cresst} For recent CRESST results on dark matter see
492: G. Angloher et al., arXiv:0809.1829 [astro-ph].
493:
494: \bibitem{ast} J. Astrom et al., Phys. Lett.{\bf A356} 262 (2006);
495: arXiv:physics/0504151.
496:
497: \bibitem{corral} A. Corral, Phys Rev. {\bf E 68}, 035102
498: (2003); A. Corral, Physica (Amsterdam) {\bf A 340}, 590 (2004).
499:
500: \bibitem{ph} ``Brittle fracture down to femto-Joules -- and
501: below",
502: J. Astrom, P. C. F. Di Stefano, F. Probst, L. Stodolsky, and J.
503: Timonen, arXiv:0708.4315.
504:
505:
506: \bibitem{twe} D. Twerenbold et al, Appl. Phys. Lett.
507: 68, 3503 (1996).
508:
509: \bibitem{hlp} C. Koy et al., Proteomics {\bf 5}, 3079 (2005).
510:
511: \bibitem{christ} P. Christ et al., European Journal of Mass
512: Spectrometry 10, 469-476 (2004).
513:
514:
515: \bibitem{recent} Recent developments on cryo\drn s, including
516: diverse applications, are presented at the LTD meetings. See LTD-11
517: in Tokyo (2005) and LTD-12 in Paris (2007).
518:
519: \end{thebibliography}
520:
521: \end{document}
522:
523:
524: