1: %%%%%%%%%% espcrc1.tex %%%%%%%%%%
2: %
3: % $Id: espcrc1.tex 1.2 2000/07/24 09:12:51 spepping Exp spepping $
4: %
5: \documentclass[fleqn,12pt]{article}
6: %\usepackage{espcrc1}
7:
8: % change this to the following line for use with LaTeX2.09
9: % \documentstyle[12pt,twoside,fleqn,espcrc1]{article}
10:
11: % if you want to include PostScript figures
12: %\usepackage{graphicx}
13: % if you have landscape tables
14: %\usepackage[figuresright]{rotating}
15:
16: % put your own definitions here:
17: % \newcommand{\cZ}{\cal{Z}}
18: % \newtheorem{def}{Definition}[section]
19: % ...
20: \newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134}
21: \newcommand{\AmS}{{\protect\the\textfont2
22: A\kern-.1667em\lower.5ex\hbox{M}\kern-.125emS}}
23:
24: % add words to TeX's hyphenation exception list
25: \hyphenation{author another created financial paper re-commend-ed Post-Script}
26:
27: % declarations for front matter
28: \title{Neutrino Geophysics at Baksan (Part II):
29: Possible Studies of Antineutrino- and Radiogenic Heat Sources in Earth Interior}
30:
31: \author{G. Domogatsky$^1$, V. Kopeikin$^2$, L. Mikaelyan$^2$, V. Sinev$^2$ \\
32: \\
33: $^{1}$Institute for Nuclear Research RAS, Moscow, \\
34: $^{2}$Russian Research Center "Kurchatov Institute"}
35:
36: \begin{document}
37:
38: % typeset front matter
39: \maketitle
40:
41: %\tableofcontents
42:
43: \begin{abstract}
44: Antineutrinos born inside the Earth (``geoneutrinos'') carry out information of fundamental importance
45: for understanding of the origin and evolution of our planet. We show that Baksan Neutrino Observatory
46: is one of the best sites for detection and analysis of geoneutrinos using large liquid scintillation spectrometer.
47: Also we present a short story of concept of Earth as antineutrino source (1960 - 2004 yy).
48: \end{abstract}
49:
50: \section*{Introduction}
51:
52: In this paper we consider future studies at BNO (Baksan Neutrino Observatory of Institute for Nuclear Research RAS)
53: of terrestrial antineutrinos $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ coming from beta decay of Uranium and Thorium daughter products
54: (``Geoneutrinos''). Geoneutrinos bring information on the Uranium and Thorium abundances and radiogenic heat sources inside
55: the Earth, which are of a key importance for understanding of the formation and subsequent evolution of our planet [1].
56: Geoneutrino is a part of future studies at BNO of low energy $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ fluxes of natural origin aimed for obtaining
57: information on their sources, which is otherwise inaccessible. For this purpose a large target mass $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ scintillation
58: spectrometer is planned with the inverse beta decay
59:
60: \begin{equation}
61: \bar{{\nu}_e}+p \rightarrow n + e^{+}
62: \end{equation}
63: as the detection reaction.
64:
65: The program also includes:
66: \begin{itemize}
67: \item Estimation of frequency of gravitational collapses in the Universe by detection of isotropic flux of $\bar{{\nu}_e}$,
68: [2, 3].
69: \item Test of the hypothesis that a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction is burning at the center of the Earth (``Georeactor'')
70: [4$-$7].
71: \item Search for solar antineutrinos, which can be produced through $^{8}$B neutrino spin-flavor precession.
72: \item We note also that no spectroscopic information has so far been obtained on the solar pep, $^{7}$Be and CNO
73: neutrinos (${{\nu}_e}$). We hope that in this important field progress can be achieved at BNO with ${{\nu}_e},e$ scattering
74: as detection reaction.
75: \item Quite recently old ideas [8] on using detection for nuclear reactor control (Plutonium production, nonproliferation etc.)
76: have been revived: (See ``Neutrino and Arms Control'' 2004, http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~jgl/ nacw.html). BNO can join
77: international efforts in this field.
78: \end{itemize}
79:
80: KamLAND Collaboration in Japan, using reaction (1) has recently demonstrated revolutionary progress in $\bar{{\nu}_e}$
81: detection technique. KamLAND has already reported that a few geoneutrino events have been observed [9] and moves
82: towards detection of soft solar neutrinos. BOREXINO Collaboration at LNGS, Italy, is planning to start soon experiments
83: in the same direction. Under the circumstances question can be asked: Is it necessary to start new projects in the same field?
84:
85: As far as geoneutrinos are concerned, the answer is that their flux is expected to depend strongly on the point of observation.
86: The intensity of $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ is predicted to be maximal at high mountains sites (Himalaya, Caucasus where BNO is
87: situated), to be minimal in the ocean far from continents (Hawaii, and may be Curacao [7]) and have intermediate values in
88: Japan and Italy.
89:
90: We note also that for success of the experiments listed above the level of the backgrounds is of a decisive importance. To
91: a great degree the background is produced by cosmic muons and by $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ flux from power reactors. At BNO
92: located at the 4800 mwe rock overburden, the muon flux is much lower than in KamLAND and BOREXINO experiments
93: (Fig. 1). The flux of reactor $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ at BNO is also 10 and 2 times lower than it is at mentioned laboratory sites
94: respectively [6].
95:
96: We conclude that BNO is one of the most promising sites to build a massive antineutrino scintillation spectrometer for these
97: studies. Essentially we propose to prepare the next step in low energy antineutrino and neutrino physics, which, using
98: experience accumulated in KamLAND and BOREXINO projects, will provide further progress in the fields discussed here.
99: Importance of this goal is confirmed by recently published idea of LENA experiment [10].
100:
101: In the next sections we give a short overview of the history of geoneutrino problem, which is now almost 45 years old, next we
102: consider geoneutrino models and will finish with the results we hope to obtain at BNO.
103:
104: \section{Geoneutrinos: First Estimations of Fluxes and\quad Search\quad for\quad Detection\quad Reaction\\
105: (1960-1984)}
106:
107: Marx and Menyard [11] in 1960 were the first to point out that the Earth is a source of antineutrinos, which are produced in U
108: and Th daughter product beta decay, in decay of $^{40}$K and of some other long-lived nuclei. They assumed that natural
109: radioactivity is concentrated in a thin upper layer of the Earth and estimated the $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ flux at the surface:
110:
111: \begin{equation}
112: F \sim 6.7\times {}10^6 \: {\rm cm^{-2} s^{-1}},
113: \end{equation}
114: which is not far from modern values. Radioactivity inside the Earth is unknown. If the concentration were not to decrease with
115: the depth, the flux could be hundred times higher.
116:
117: ``In the far future an experiment will be needed to set an upper limit on the antineutrino activity of the Earth. This probably is the
118: only way to get information on the composition of the substance in the deep layers of the Earth'' wrote M. A. Markov in 1964
119: [12]. Markov, as far as we know, was the first to mention the process (1) as a possible geoneutrino detection reaction.
120: ``Because of high threshold, $-$ he continued, $-$ the number of active $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ in this case is very low''. He stressed
121: also the importance of finding a detection reaction with lower energy threshold. (Typical geoneutrino energy spectrum is shown
122: in Fig. 2.)
123:
124: Two years later Eder [13] explained the gradual slowing down of the circulation rate of the Earth and the increase of its
125: radius by a large amount of radiogenic heat sources in the mantel, ``sufficient to blow up our planet''. The relevant geoneutrino
126: flux was found two orders of magnitude higher than (2). Eder also mentioned process (1) as a possible detection reaction. No
127: details of detector layout and detection principle were discussed at that early time.
128:
129: Antineutrinos of sufficiently low energy can, principally, be detected via resonant reactions of induced orbital electron capture in
130: otherwise stable nucleus $A(Z)$ [14]:
131:
132: \begin{equation}
133: \bar{{\nu}_e} + e^{-} + A(Z)\rightarrow A(Z-1).
134: \end{equation}
135:
136: The reaction signature can be appearance of radioactive nucleus $A(Z-1)$ in the irradiated target (radiochemical method).
137: Antineutrinos are captured only in a narrow energy band near the resonant energy $E_{res}\approx T_{max}$, where
138: $T_{max}$ is maximal kinetic energy of the electrons in the decay of $A(Z-1)$:
139: $A(Z-1)\rightarrow A(Z)+e^{-}+\bar{{\nu}_e}+T$. Clearly, the resonant energy $E_{res}$ is $2mc^{2}=1.02$ MeV
140: lower than the threshold energy in the ``usual'' inverse beta decay reaction on the same nucleus:
141: $$
142: \bar{{\nu}_e}+A(Z)\rightarrow A(Z-1)+e^{+}.\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \eqno (3.1)
143: $$
144: The transition probability $w$ per unite time between initial and final states in reaction (3) can be written as:
145:
146: \begin{equation}
147: w\sim {(ft)}^{-1}\mid \psi (0)\mid ^{2}dF{(E_{res})}/dE.
148: \end{equation}
149:
150: Here $\mid \psi (0)\mid ^{2}$ is the probability density for atomic electron at nuclear surface, $ft$ is the reduced lifetime of
151: beta decay (3.1) and $dF{(E_{res})}/dE$ ${\rm cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}\,MeV^{-1}}$ is the spectral density of incoming
152: $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ flux at resonant energy. The density $\mid \psi (0)\mid ^{2}$ rapidly increases with atomic number,
153: approximately as $Z^{3}$, the spectral density is high at energies lower than 1.8 MeV (Fig. 2), the inverse beta decay
154: reaction (3.1) at high $Z$ is suppressed by positron repulsion in the final state. As a result the resonant capture dominates
155: over (3.1) for sufficiently heavy target nuclei.
156:
157: Potentially, the resonant capture reaction, unlike reaction (1), can search for terrestrial $^{40}$K antineutrinos, which is
158: of a vital importance for geophysics.
159:
160: In 1968 y Markov and Zatsepin organized in Moscow an International Workshop on Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics,
161: which later transformed to regular ``NEUTRINO'' Conferences. At this Workshop R. Davis considered for geoneutrino
162: detection purposes two resonant reactions:
163:
164: \begin{equation}
165: {\rm ^{35}Cl\rightarrow ^{35}\!\!S, {\it E_{res}}= 0.17\: MeV\; and\; ^{209}Bi \rightarrow ^{209}\!\!Pb, {\it E_{res}}=
166: 0.64\: MeV}
167: \end{equation}
168: with subsequent radiochemical separation of radioactive $^{35}$S and $^{209}$Pb.
169:
170: Marx ([15], 1969) considered various models of terrestrial U, Th and K distribution, estimated relevant $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ fluxes
171: and recognized the importance of both resonant and inverse beta decay reactions for geoneutrino detection.
172:
173: Krauss, Glashow and Schramm ([16], 1984) calculated radiogenic heat powers, $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ spectra and fluxes due to
174: U, Th and K (Table 1).They assumed spherically symmetric distribution of radioactive isotopes in a 100 km thick
175: outer layer of the Earth; thus their results correspond to some average point on the surface. Most attention in [16] is given
176: to geoneutrino registration via resonant and inverse beta decay reactions; the cross-sections for large number of nuclei have
177: been calculated. In the most favorable cases the transition probability (4) was found to be:
178:
179: \begin{equation}
180: w\sim (3-6)\times 10^{-31}/{\rm year}.
181: \end{equation}
182:
183: \noindent This is several thousand times lower than is observed in solar Ga$\rightarrow$ Ge experiments\dots ``Detection of
184: terrestrial antineutrinos will require sophisticated new technology. We can envision several generations of experiments aimed at
185: measuring different parts of the antineutrino spectrum''. The first of these generations based on reaction (1) has surpassed in
186: 2002 y the sensitivity level (6) and started detection of U and Th antineutrinos. Potassium antineutrinos still wait for their
187: opportunity.
188:
189: \section{ Radiogenic\quad Heat -\quad and\quad Antineutrinos\quad Models}
190:
191: Here we widely use information taken from book [1], encyclopedias, from Hofmann papers [17] and Fiorentiny group [18]
192: publications. Modern models distribute the Earth's antineutrino- and radiogenic heat sources U, Th and K between
193: the crust and the mantle. The Earth's structure schematically shown in Fig. 3 includes components:
194: \begin{itemize}
195: \item The crust. Thickness of the continental crust varies from $\sim $70 km (at mountain sites like Hymalaya, Baksan etc.) to
196: about 10 km, averaging around $\sim$ 35 km. The continental crust contains a considerable part of the Earth's radioactivity.
197: The oceanic crust is 5-6 km thick, covers about $3/4$ of the Earth's surface; the U, Th and K concentrations are
198: much lower than in the continental crust.
199: \item The outer frontier of the Earth's core lies at the depth of 2900 km. It is believed to be in a molten state because transverse
200: seismic waves do not penetrate inside it. Inside the molten core is (partially) crystallized inner core. It is assumed that both
201: cores are built up of iron, nickel and some amount of lighter elements; it is believed (by the majority of geochemists) that
202: there is no radioactivity in the core, because U, Th and K are chemically ``incompatible'' with the main components.
203: \item The mantle, which is between the crust and molten core, is subdivided in two layers: the upper and the low. Volcanic
204: outflows coming from the upper mantle show, that this layer is strongly ``depleted'' of radioactive elements. The lower mantle
205: seems to be not so much depleted, but no systematic information is available on the subject.
206: \end{itemize}
207:
208: \bigskip
209: How much of U, Th and K is contained in the Earth (crust + mantle)? It is believed that meteorites of a special type
210: (carbonaceous chondrites) originate from the same substance that formed the primordial Earth 4.55 billion years ego.
211: Starting from this point geochemists deduce the result:
212:
213: \begin{equation}
214: a({\rm U}) = 2\times 10^{-8}{\rm g/g},\quad a({\rm Th})/a({\rm U}) = 3.9,
215: \end{equation}
216: where $a({\rm U})$ and $a({\rm Th})$ are element mass abundances.
217:
218: Using (7) one can find total mass of Uranium $M$(U) and total mass of Thorium $M$(Th), contained in the crust + mantle
219: and can calculate relevant radiogenic heat powers $H$(U) and $H$(Th):
220:
221: $$
222: {\rm Crust + Mantle: {\it M}(U) = 0.8\times10^{17} kg, \,\, {\it M}(Th) = 3.15\times 10^{17}kg},
223: $$
224:
225: \begin{equation}
226: {\rm Crust + Mantle: {\it H}(U) = 7.6\, TW,\, {\it H}(Th) = 8.3\, TW}
227: \end{equation}
228:
229: Some features of U and Th decay are given in Tables 2, 3.
230: The Earth in this model radiates $L_\nu = 1.1\times 10^{25}\, {\bar{{\nu}_e}}/s$ emitted in U- and Th decay chains,
231: which carry away $1.1$ TW.
232:
233: The outlined model (sometimes called Bulk Silicate Earth, BSE) is shared by a great majority of geochemists and geophysicists.
234:
235: However, the BSE prescription does not work with K. Average K to U concentration ratio in carbonaceous chondrites
236: is $\sim$ 6 higher than is typical for terrestrial samples. This problem has been debated for decades. Two ideas have been
237: proposed to explain K deficit in Earth's crust + mantle.
238: \begin{enumerate}
239: \item Tiny particles of which the Earth was formed 4.55 billion years ago had at that time higher temperatures than chondrites
240: and had lost most part of original K through evaporation. In this case K contribution to the radiogenic heat is
241: {\it H}(K) $\sim$ 2.5 TW.
242: \item Actually there is no K deficit at all; just the major part of primordial K has gone into the core. In this case
243: {\it H}(K) $\sim$ 16 TW, most part of this power comes from the core. Recent laboratory experiments provide evidence that
244: actually large quantity of K could enter the iron rich Earth's core [19].
245: \end{enumerate}
246:
247: Questioned is the theory that there is no U in the Earth's core. As already mentioned a self-sustaining fission reaction is
248: supposed to burn there with a power release of 3$-$9 TW [4]. Also questionable is the type of meteorites, which ought to be
249: used as a starting point for finding the amount of Earth's radioactivity [20].
250:
251: In the BSE model the total radiogenic power $H_{rad} = H({\rm U}) + H({\rm Th}) + H({\rm K})\approx 19$ TW is
252: slightly lower than one half of the total Earth heat outflow ($H_{tot}\approx 40-42$ TW). As an upper limit sometimes is
253: considered a ``fully radiogenic'' model with U etc. masses increased by a factor $\sim$ 2.2 so that $H_{rad} = H_{tot}$.
254:
255: \section{Strategy of Research, Geoneutrino Fluxes, Observables}
256:
257: Progress in the low energy $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ detection technique (the CHOOZ experiment, KamLAND and BOREXINO
258: proposals) opened practical opportunities to detect geoneutrinos. In 1997-1998 yy Rothschild, Chen and Calaprice [21]
259: and Raghavan et al. [22] proposed to use large target mass liquid scintillation detectors to investigate the geoneutrinos with
260: the inverse beta decay (1) as a detection reaction.
261:
262: Authors of [21] recognized that measurements are to be done at a number of geographical positions:
263: \begin {itemize}
264: \item in mountain regions where contribution of core radioactivity is dominant and geoneutrino intensity is expected to be
265: maximal,
266: \item in the ocean far from continents with dominant contribution from the mantle and minimal expected geoneutrion flux and
267: \item at Kamioka site in Japan and at LNGS in Italy with an intermediate level of geoneutrino intensity.
268: \end {itemize}
269:
270: Since 2002 y Fiorentini group in Italy has started extensive calculations of expected geoneutrino fluxes, detection rates and
271: their dependence on the point of observation on the Earth's surface (see e.g. [18]).
272:
273: In scintillation detectors geoneutrino energy spectrum at $E >1.806\,$ MeV is measured using delayed coincidences between
274: spatially correlated positron and neutron produced in reaction (1). $T\approx E-1.806$ gives relation between positron
275: kinetic energy $T$ and the energy of incoming $\bar{{\nu}_e}$. In large target mass detectors the positron annihilation quanta
276: are absorbed in the feducial volume and positron energy release $E_{vis}$ is :
277:
278: \begin{equation}
279: E_{vis}\approx E - 0.8\, \, ({\rm MeV}),
280: \end{equation}
281:
282: Thus the minimal positron energy release at the reaction threshold when $T$ = 0 is $E_{vis(min)} = 1.02$ MeV.
283:
284: \bigskip
285: The numbers of Uranium $N$(U) and Thorium $N$(Th) geoneutrino events produced in the scintillator target exposed
286: to incident $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ fluxes $F$(U) and $F$(Th) are given by:
287:
288: $$
289: N({\rm U) /year\, 10^{32} H} = 13.2\, F({\rm U)\times 10^{-6}\, cm^{-2} s^{-1}}\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
290: $$
291:
292: \begin{equation}
293: N({\rm Th)/year\, 10^{32} H} = 4.1\, F({\rm Th)\times 10^{-6}\, cm^{-2}s^{-1}}
294: \end{equation}
295: (1 160 ton of ${\rm CH_{2}}$ – based scintillator contains $10^{32}\,$H atoms)
296:
297: Geoneutrino fluxes $F$(U) from Uranium decay calculated in BSE model in [18] and [21] for a number of sites are shown
298: in Fig. 4. In [18] higher values of Uranium abundances in the continental crust are assumed than those used in [21]. As a result
299: differences in calculated fluxes for the same point of observation are rather large, which demonstrates good sensitivity of the
300: neutrino method to the assumption on the distribution of radioactivity in the Earth. In Fig. 4 one can also clearly see a rapid
301: decrease of the flux when the point of observation shifts from the mountains to the oceanic site.
302:
303: The total numbers of the Uranium and Thorium events $N$(U) + $N$(Th) (Table 4) also demonstrate large scattering of
304: predictions found in [18,21,22]. The expected number of geoneutriono events at BNO near the Elbrus mountain is close
305: to that found for geographical maximum in Himalayas. As can be seen in Fig. 5 Uranium and Thorium events can be separated
306: and thus the ratio of U/Th abundances measured. One also can see that at BNO the background coming from nuclear
307: power reactors is sufficiently low.
308:
309: The size and construction of the future detector and backgrounds require special consideration. Partially these issues have been
310: considered in our recent publication on georeactor [6]. Good passive shield should protect the scintillator from the natural
311: radioactivity of the surrounding rock, from PhM's glass and metallic support constructions. The anticoincidence system should
312: effectively tag cosmic muons and showers. As already mentioned in the Introduction the muon flux at BNO is considerably
313: lower than at Kamioka and LNGS (Fig. 1). Experience accumulated in KamLAND and BOREXINO projects shows that
314: deepest purification of liquid scintillator can be achieved and extremely low level of radioactive contaminations can be reached,
315: such as $\sim 3\times 10^{-18}$ U$\;$g/g.
316:
317: In [6] we have considered LS volume sufficiently large $(10^{32}$ H atoms,\quad 1.16 kton) to confirm or reject theory that
318: a nuclear reactor is burning at the center of the Earth. The geoneutrino studies seem to require larger target mass detectors,
319: may be as large as $(1-2)\times 10^{33}$ H atoms. Indeed, (a) the detection rates due to oscillation effect will be $\sim$ two
320: times lower than those given in the Table 4; (b) good statistics is needed to separate U- and Th geoneutrinos (Fig. 5)
321: and, finally, (c) we consider here a new generation experiment, which will operate after KamLAND. With an exposition
322: $(50-100)\times 10^{32}\,{\rm H\cdot year}$ it would be possible to accumulate at BNO 2000-4000 geoneutrino events.
323: With statistics like this one can try to investigate the angular distribution of incoming geoneutrinos, which can give valuable
324: information on the location of U and Th masses in the interior of the Earth.
325:
326: \section* {Conclusion}
327:
328: Uranium and Thorium distribution in the Earh's interior and relevant radiogenic heat can be found via geoneutrino observations
329: at a number of geographical points.
330:
331: The Baksan Neutrino Observatory is one of the most promising sites to build a massive antineutrino scintillation spectrometer
332: for geoneutrino studies and also for investigations on low energy $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ and ${{\nu}_e}$ fluxes of natural origin
333: aimed for obtaining information on their sources, which are otherwise inaccessible.
334:
335: In 1984 y Krauss, Glashow, and Schramm wrote: ``'Neutrino and antineutrino astronomy and geophysics can open vast new
336: windows for exploration above us and below''. The first window is now opening at Kamioka. New windows can be opened
337: at Baksan and elsewhere. Detector for Potassium antineutrinos is still to be invented.
338:
339: \section*{Acknowledgments}
340: This work is supported by RF President grant 1246.2003.2 and by RFBR grant 03-02-16055. Authors thank Profs.
341: G. Fiorentini and E. Lisi for useful comments.
342:
343: \begin{thebibliography}{12}
344: \bibitem{Zhar} Zharkov V. N., Interior Structure of the Earth and Planets, Harwood Acad. Publ., Switzerland, 1986.
345: \bibitem{Dom} G. Domogatsky, Thesis, Nucl. Res. Inst ., Ac. Sc. USSR, Moscow, 1980;
346: Sov. Astron. 28 (1984) 30.
347: \bibitem{Ando} S. Ando et al., Astropart. Phys. 18 (2003) 307.
348: \bibitem{Her} J.M. Herndon, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100 (2003) 3047;\\
349: D.F. Hollenbach, J.M. Herndon, ibid. 98 (2001) 11085;\\
350: Herndon J.M., J. Geomagn. Geoelectr. 45 (1993) 423.
351: \bibitem{Rag} S. Raghavan, arXiv: hep-ex/0208038.
352: \bibitem{Domog} G. Domogatsky, V. Kopeikin, L. Mikaelyan, V. Sinev,
353: http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0401221, submitted to Phys At. Nucl.
354: \bibitem{Meij} R.J. de Meijer, E.R. van der Graaf, K.P. Jungmann, arXiv: physics/0404046.
355: \bibitem{Mika} L.A. Mikaelyan, Neutrino laboratory at atomic plant, fundamental and applied
356: research, Proc. Int. Conf. Neutrino-77, v.2, p.383, NAUKA, Moscow, 1978;\\
357: Yu.V. Klimov, V. I. Kopeikin, L.A. Mikaelyan, K.V. Ozerov, V.V. Sinev,
358: Neutrino method of remote measurement of reactor power, Atomic Energy, v. 76, No 2, 1994.
359: \bibitem{Kam} KamLAND Collaboration, Phys.Rev.Lett. 90 (2003) 021802,
360: (http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0212021); http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0310047.
361: \bibitem{Ober} L. Oberauer, arXiv: hep-ph/0402162.
362: \bibitem{Mar} G. Marx, N. Menyard, Mitteilungen der Sternwarte, Budapest, 48 (1960).
363: \bibitem{Mark} M.A. Markov, NEUTRINO, 1964, NAUKA, in Russian.
364: \bibitem{Eder} G. Eder, Nucl. Phys. 78 (1966) 657.
365: \bibitem{Lmika} L. Mikaelyan, V. Tsinoev, A. Borovoi, Yadernaya Fizika 6 349 (1967);
366: Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 6 (1968) 254.
367: \bibitem{Marx} G. Marx, Cech. J. Phys. B 19 (1969) 1471.
368: \bibitem{Kra} L. Krauss, Sh. Glashow, D. Schramm, Nature 310 (1984) 191.
369: \bibitem{Hof} A. W. Hofmann, Nature 385 (1997) 219; Nature 425 (2003) 24.
370: \bibitem{Fio} G. Fiorentini, M. Lissia, F. Mantovani, R. Vannucci, ArXiv: hep-ph/0401085;\\
371: F Mantovani, L. Carmignani, G. Fiorentini, M. Lissia, Phys.Rev. D69 (2004) 013001, hep-ph/0309013.
372: \bibitem{Rama} V. Rama Murthy, W Van Westrenen, Y. Fei, Nature 423 (2003) 163.
373: \bibitem{Hern} J.M. Herndon, ArXiv: hep-ph/0407148.
374: \bibitem{Roth} C.G. Rothschild, M.C. Chen,F.P. Calaprice, ArXiv: nucl-ex/9710001.
375: \bibitem{Ragh} R.S. Raghavan, S. Schoenert, S. Enomoto, J. Shirai, F. Suekane, A. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 (1998) 635.
376: \end{thebibliography}
377:
378: \vspace{6.5 cm}
379:
380: \begin{table}[htb]
381: \caption{Potassium, Thorium and Uranium in the Earth's lithosphere: Masses ($M$), fluxes of $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ ($F$) and
382: radiogenic heat powers ($H$) according to$\;$[16]}
383: \label{table}
384: %\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
385: %\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
386: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
387: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
388: \vspace{5pt}
389: \hspace{70pt}
390: \begin{tabular}{|c|ccc|}
391: \hline
392: Element & $M$ & $F$ & $H$ \\
393: & $10^{17}$ kg & $10^{6}\,{\rm cm^{-2} s^{-1}}$& $10^{12}$ W \\
394: \hline
395: U & 0.80 & 3.5 & 9.6 \\
396: Th & 3.8 & 3.5 & 7.3 \\
397: K & $5.2\times 10^{3}$ & 11 & 1.8 \\
398: \hline
399: & Total: & 18 & 19 \\
400: \hline
401: \end{tabular}
402: \end{table}
403:
404: \begin{table}[htb]
405: \caption{Energy balance (MeV/decay) in equilibrium $^{238}$U and $^{232}$Th decay chains:
406: Total energy $E_{tot}$, thermal (radiogenic) energy $E_{H}$ and energy carried away by antineutrinos $E_{\nu}$}
407: \label{table}
408: %\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
409: %\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
410: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
411: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
412: \vspace{5pt}
413: \hspace{55pt}
414: \begin{tabular}{|c|ccc|}
415: \hline
416: & $E_{tot}$ & $E_{H}$ & $E_{\nu}$ \\
417: \hline
418: $^{238}$U$\,\Longrightarrow\, ^{206}$Pb$\,+\,8\, ^{4}$He$\,+\,6\,\bar{{\nu}_e}$ & 51.7 & 47.7 & 4.0 \\
419: $^{232}$Th$\,\Longrightarrow\, ^{208}$Pb\,+\,$6\, ^{4}$He\,+\,4\,$\bar{{\nu}_e}$ & 42.7 & 40.0 & 2.3 \\
420: \hline
421: \end{tabular}
422: \end{table}
423:
424: \begin{table}[htb]
425: \caption{Specific radiogenic heat powers $H$, neutrino luminosities $L_{\nu}$ and radiated antineutrino powers $W_{\nu}$ }
426: \label{table}
427: %\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
428: %\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
429: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
430: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
431: \vspace{5pt}
432: \hspace{30pt}
433: \begin{tabular}{|c|ccc|}
434: \hline
435: & $H, {\rm TW}/10^{17}$kg & $L_{\nu},10^{24}{\rm s^{-1}}/10^{17}$kg & $W_{\nu},{\rm TW}/10^{17}$kg \\
436: \hline
437: $^{238}$U & 9.5 & 7.6 & 0.81 \\
438: $^{232}$Th & 2.6 & 1.6 & 0.15 \\
439: \hline
440: \end{tabular}
441: \end{table}
442:
443: \begin{table}[htb]
444: \caption{Expected rates of U + Th events at various sites (exposition $10^{32}\;{\rm H\cdot year}$, no oscillations)}
445: \label{table}
446: %\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
447: %\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
448: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
449: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
450: \vspace{5pt}
451: \hspace{20pt}
452: \begin{tabular}{|c|ccc|}
453: \hline
454: Site & Rothschild {\it et al.$^{*}$} & Raghavan {\it et al.} & Fiorentini {\it et al.}\\
455: & [21] & [22] & [18]\\
456: \hline
457: Himalaya & 65 & - & 112 \\
458: Baksan & - & - & 91 \\
459: Gran Sasso & 53 & Ia: 134; Ib: 50 & 71 \\
460: Kamioka & 48 & Ia: 75; Ib: 50 & 61 \\
461: Hawaii & 27 & - & 22 \\
462: \hline
463: \end{tabular}\\[2pt]
464: {\small $^{*}$ Calculated using Eqs. (10) and $\bar{{\nu}_e}$ Fluxes from Ref. [21]}
465: \end{table}
466:
467: \end{document}
468: