Paper detail

Heavy-neutrino decays at neutrino telescopes

It has been recently proposed that a sterile neutrino ν_h of mass m_h=40--80 MeV, mixing |U_{μh}|^2=10^{-3}--10^{-2}, lifetime τ_h \lsim 10^{-9} s, and a dominant decay mode (ν_h \to ν_μγ) could be the origin of the experimental anomalies observed at LSND, KARMEN and MiniBooNE. Such a particle would be abundant inside air showers, as it can be produced in kaon decays (K -> ν_h μ, K_L -> ν_h πμ). We use the Z-moment method to evaluate its atmospheric flux and the frequency of its decays inside neutrino telescopes. We show that the ν_h would imply around 10^4 contained showers per year inside a 0.03 km^3 telescope like ANTARES or the DeepCore in IceCube. These events would have a characteristic energy and zenith-angle distribution (E_ν= 0.1--10 TeV and θ< 90^o), which results from a balance between the reach of the heavy neutrino (that disfavors low energies) and a sizeable production rate and decay probability. The standard background from contained neutrino events (ν_e N \to e X and neutral-current interactions of high inelasticity) is 100 times smaller. Therefore, although it may be challenging from an experimental point of view, a search at ANTARES and IceCube could confirm this heavy-neutrino possibility.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.