Project SummaryLaser trapping and cooling facility for weak interaction experiments with

francium isotopes at TRIUMFApplicant: University of MarylandProject Participants: Seth Aubin, Co-Principal Investigator, Department of Physics, Col-lege of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795.Dan Melconian, Co-Principal Investigator, Department of Physics, Texas A&M University,College Station, TX 77843-4242.Luis A. Orozco, Project Director and Principal Investigator, Department of Physics andJoint Quantum Institute, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-4441.

AbstractThis proposal presents a program to construct a Francium Trapping Facility (FTF) at theIsotope Separator and Accelerator (ISAC) of TRIUMF in Vancouver, Canada, where theFrPNC international collaboration has its home. This facility will be used to study fun-damental symmetries with high resolution atomic spectroscopy. The primary scientific ob-jective of the program is a measurement of the anapole moment of francium in a chain ofisotopes by observing its parity violating character, induced by the weak interaction. Theanapole moment of francium and associated signal are expected to be ten times larger thanin cesium, the only element in which an anapole moment has been observed. The measure-ment will provide crucial information for better understanding weak hadronic interactionsin the context of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). The methodology combines nuclearand particle physics techniques for the production of francium with precision measurementsbased on laser cooling and trapping and microwave spectroscopy. The program builds onan initial series of atomic spectroscopy measurements of the nuclear structure of francium,based on isotope shifts and hyperfine anomalies, before conducting the anapole momentmeasurements.

The FTF will also be usable for measurements of optical parity non-conservation, nuclearstructure (hyperfine anomalies and octupole deformations) in francium, and a search for anelectron dipole moment (EDM). The FTF infrastructure is designed to be transportable ifthe opportunity arises for re-location to the future Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB).The FTF can also be adapted to measurements of anapole moments, nuclear structure, andeventually EDM in other atomic systems due to the broad applicability of the proposedmethods and the wide tunability of the laser and microwave instruments.

This project is part of the FrPNC collaboration, headed by Prof. Gerald Gwinner,University of Manitoba, Canada.

1

Introduction

This document is the result of the invitation by the Office of Nuclear Physics to submit aproposal in response to the Funding Opportunity Announcement DE-PS02-08ER08-10. Weare investigators in three institutions in the United States: The College of William and Mary,Texas A&M University, and the University of Maryland. We are all part of the FranciumParity Non Conservation (FrPNC) International collaboration. The request is for equipmentto construct a Francium Trapping Facility (FTF) at TRIUMF, in Vancouver Canada.

The FrPNC Collaboration

The FrPNC international collaboration led by Prof. Gerald Gwinner (spokesperson) fromthe University of Manitoba, Canada was the result of an extended interest in fundamentalsymmetries studies in francium atoms (See his letter of support at the end of the proposal). Itstarted after the closure of the Nuclear Structure Laboratory at Stony Brook in the summer of2005. The collaboration presented proposal E 1065 to the TRIUMF Experiments EvaluationCommittee in the fall of 2005 and received the highest priority for starting a program tostudy parity non-conservation in francium. Currently the collaboration includes members ofthe permanent staff of TRIUMF: John A. Behr, Matthew Pearson, and K. Peter Jackson,Prof. Dan Melconian from Texas A&M University, who got his PhD working at TRIUMF; thedistinguished theorist from the University of New South Wales, Australia, Victor Flambaum;Prof. Seth Aubin from the College of William and Mary and Prof. Eduardo Gomez fromthe Universidad Autonoma de San Luis Potosi, Mexico, who were members of the originalStony Brook team, as well as Prof. Gene D. Sprouse from the American Physical Societyand SUNY Stony Brook, and Prof. Luis A. Orozco from the University of Maryland.

Scientific goals and their merit

Parity non-conservation (PNC) is a unique signature of the weak interaction. Our currentunderstanding of the weak interaction derives from the Standard Model (SM) of particlephysics [1, 2]. The weak interaction produces two types of PNC effects in atoms: nuclear spinindependent and nuclear spin dependent [3]. Nuclear spin dependent PNC occurs in threeways [4, 5]: an electron interacts weakly with a single valence nucleon (nucleon axial-vectorcurrent AnVe), an electron experiences an electromagnetic interaction with a nuclear chiralcurrent created by weak interactions between nucleons (anapole moment), and the combined

1

action of the hyperfine interaction and the spin-independent Z0 exchange interaction fromnucleon vector currents (VnAe) [6, 7, 8].

This proposal seeks support for the construction of a Francium Trapping Facility (FTF)at the Isotope Separator and Accelerator (ISAC) of TRIUMF in Vancouver, Canada. TheFTF will enable a program to measure the anapole moment of francium in a series of isotopesproduced at ISAC. The methodology combines nuclear and particle physics techniques withprecision measurements based on laser trapping and microwave spectroscopy. The ultimategoal is to further our understanding of the hadronic weak interaction through its study ina system whose atomic properties are very well known. The measurements and systematicstudy of the anapole moments in a series of isotopes will provide critical and crucial informa-tion for enhancing our understanding of the delicate interplay of Quantum Chromodynamics(QCD) with the weak interaction in the nucleus.

Hadronic weak interaction

The weak interaction in hadrons is richer than in leptons since it occurs in the presence of thestrong interaction which renormalizes the axial current. Its history starts shortly after thediscovery of parity violation in beta decay [9, 10, 11] and continues to date with advancesboth in theory and experiment that are increasing our knowledge of this subject. Thesedevelopments have brought with them the need to better understand QCD at low energy.

The recent review of Ramsey-Musolf and Page [12] shows the different avenues currentlyfollowed. There is an impressive theoretical development based on QCD that has producedan effective field theory (EFT) for the hadronic weak interaction [13]. The EFT relies on theimportant degrees of freedom of low-energy QCD. This EFT has connections with observablesin a series of experiments proposed and/or currently under way. These include: −→n +p→ d+γreactions, low energy −→p − p scattering, low energy −→p − α scattering, spin rotation ofpolarized neutrons passing through hydrogen, spin rotation in helium, and the asymmetry inlow energy photodisintegration of deuterium by polarized photons. The measurement of theobservables form the core for hadronic PNC that is laid out in Ref. [14]. The program involvesperforming a set of few-body measurements to determine the coefficients of the operatorsappearing in the EFT [15]. The situation of N-N parity violation, that is central to thelow mass program, is not exempt from the small size of the weak amplitudes relative to thestrong amplitudes at low energies. Theoretically the task to relate the underlying electroweakcurrents to low energy observables is complicated by the fact that in this regime QCD in non-perturbative [16]. In addition to its intrinsic interest, the understanding of how hadronicweak interactions are changed in nuclei has practical phenomenological implications. Forexample, it could eventually become important for corrections to double beta decay from

2

the exchange of heavy non-standard model particles in EFT approaches [12].

Parity violation in atoms

Parity violating atomic transitions are generated primarily by the exchange of weak neutralcurrents between electrons and nucleons. Assuming an infinitely heavy nucleon withoutradiative corrections, the hamiltonian is [17]:

H =G√

2(κ1iγ5 − κnsd,iσn · α)δ(r), (1)

where G = 10−5 m−2p is the Fermi constant, mp is the proton mass, γ5 and α are Dirac

matrices, σn are Pauli matrices, and κ1i and κnsd,i (nuclear spin dependent) with i = p, n fora proton or a neutron are constants of the interaction. At the tree level κnsd,i = κ2i, and inthe standard model these constants are given by κ1p = 1/2(1−4 sin2 θW ), κ1n = −1/2, κ2p =−κ2n = κ2 = −1/2(1 − 4 sin2 θW )η, with sin2 θW ∼ 0.23 the Weinberg angle, and η = 1.25.κ1i (κ2i) represents the coupling between nucleon and electron currents when the electron(nucleon) is the axial vector.

In an atom, we must add the contribution from Eq. 1 for all the nucleons. It is convenientto work in the approximation of a shell model with a single valence nucleon of unpaired spin.The second term of Eq. 1 is nuclear spin dependent and due to the pairing of nucleons itscontribution has smaller dependence on Z. The result for this second term is [18]:

Hnsd,iPNC =

G√2

KI · αI(I + 1)

κnsdδ(r), (2)

where K = (I + 1/2)(−1)I+1/2−l, l is the nucleon orbital angular momentum, and I is thenuclear spin. The terms proportional to the anomalous magnetic moment of the nucleonsand the electrons have been neglected.

The interaction constant is given now by [18]:

κnsd,i = κa,i −K − 1/2

Kκ2,i +

I + 1

KκQW

, (3)

where κ2,p = κ2,n = −(1/2)1.25(1− 4 sin θW2) ∼ −0.05 within the tree level approximation;

and we have two radiative corrections, the effective constant of the anapole moment κa,i,and κQW

that is generated by the nuclear spin independent part of the electron nucleoninteraction together with the hyperfine interaction. Nuclear calculations give [18]

κa,i =9

10giµi

αA2/3

mpr0, κQW

= −1

3

(QW

A

)µN

αA2/3

mpr0, (4)

3

where α is the fine structure constant, µi and µN are the magnetic moment of the externalnucleon and of the nucleus, respectively, in nuclear magnetons, r0 = 1.2 fm is the nucleonradius, A = Z + N, the weak charge QW is approximately equal to the negative of thenumber of neutrons −N [3], and gi gives the strength of the weak nucleon-nucleon potentialwith gp ∼ 4 for protons and 0.2 < gn < 1 for neutrons [17]. Since both κa and κQW

scale as A2/3, the interaction is stronger in heavier atoms. The anapole moment is thedominant contribution to the interaction in heavy atoms, for example in 209Fr, κa,p/κQW

'15.κnsd,i = κa,i is assumed unless stated otherwise for the rest of the proposal.

The anapole moment is defined by

a = −π∫d3rr2J(r), (5)

with J the nuclear current density. The anapole moment in francium arises from the weak in-teraction between the valence nucleons and the core. By including weak interactions betweennucleons in their calculation of the nuclear current density, Flambaum et al. [5] estimate theanapole moment from Eq. 5 of a single valence nucleon to be

a =1

e

G√2

Kj

j(j + 1)κa,i = Canj, (6)

where j is the nucleon angular momentum. For the case of a single valence nucleon thesevalues correspond to the nuclear values.

Flambaum, Khriplovich and Shushkov [5, 19, 20] estimated the magnitude of the anapolemoments of various nuclei, demonstrating the A2/3 scaling under the valence nucleon as-sumption. This is for a shell model with a single valence nucleon carrying all the angularmomentum. Flambaum and Murray [18] took the parametrization of DDH [21] and foundthe corresponding coupling constants associated with the anapole moment of Cs under theseassumptions.

Figure 1 on the left shows the current overall situation of the parameters, while the rightshows the possible experimental limits based on the model with a single valence nucleon orthe vectorial addition of the proton and the neutron in the outer shell that induce the anapolemoment. Testing the striking predictions of this simple model near closed shells, such asin francium, and its even-odd staggering behavior, could clarify such a phenomenologicaltreatment to allow the extraction of the weak hadronic physics. If the prediction fails, thenit would provide necessary information as input to more sophisticated shell model treatmentsto extract the weak interaction physics. This simple approach gives results consistent withthe more detailed calculations of Ref. [22] and confirms their assessment that new anapolemeasurements in odd-neutron nuclei would have great impact, defining a band of the weak

4

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

-5-2 3 8 13

fπ1-0.12hρ

1-0.18hω1

-(h ρ

0 +0.

7hω

0 )

Cs resultFr 20%Fr 3%

210Fr

209Fr

-10 0 10 20fπ

1-0.12hρ1-0.18hω

1

30

40

20

10

0

-(h ρ

0 +0.

7hω

0 )

Figure 1: Left: Range of meson coupling parameters (DDH parametrization) updated by J.A. Behr from the review by Haxton and Weiman [6] colored by experiment. Right: Rangeof meson coupling parameters for the expected values of the anapole moment for two Frisotopes 209 and 210.

meson-nucleon coupling plane roughly perpendicular to the Cs and Tl bands . The modelof Fig. 1 right predicts that measuring the anapole moment on two isotopes gives an almostorthogonal crossing in the two linear combinations of the meson coupling constants from theDDH model. The experimental realization of this figure is one of the central objectives of thisproposal. It would certainly be a strong confirmation of an effect and that we understandsome of the very basic physics that is occurring in the nucleus.The values plotted in thisfigure are slightly different from the 133Cs band in Ref. [6] as a different choice of values ofthe “best paramenters” were used.

Manifestation of PNC in heavy atoms

The PNC measurements in heavier nuclei, ranging from 18F to 133Cs and 205Tl provide impor-tant input in the quest for understanding the hadron-hadron weak interaction. The interpre-tation of their results has relied on a meson exchange model that contains seven phenomeno-logical meson-nucleon couplings, which was first proposed by Desplanques, Donoghue, andHolstein (DDH) in their seminal paper [21]. The limited existing measurements do not pro-vide a self-consistent set of values for these seven couplings. The longest-range part of the

5

interaction is dominated by the pion-nucleon coupling constant hπ. Values extracted fromthe pp and Cs anapole measurements [23, 24] are consistent with each other, however theydisagree by an order of magnitude with the value extracted from the circular polarization ofγ decay in 18F and the anapole limit in 205Tl [25]. Despite the inconsistency, all numbersare still within the reasonable range defined by DDH.

The picture is complicated and it is important to encompass different approaches toelucidate the subtleties of the weak interaction in heavy nuclei. Erler and Ramsey-Musolfstate in Ref. [15] that a study of the anapole moment provides a probe of the strangenessnumber conservation, ∆S = 0, of hadronic weak interaction in nuclei. The disagreementbetween the results obtained with light mass systems compared to the anapole moment ofCs is puzzling. Haxton et al. suggest in Ref. [22] that strong interactions modify the isospinof weak meson-nucleon couplings in a nontrivial way. The results of this research will shedlight onto this puzzling question.

General considerations for a PNC experiment in francium

In order to enhance the small parity non-conservation effect in francium it is necessary toperform a measurement based on an ‘electroweak interference’ between a weak- interactionamplitude Fpnc associated with a Z0 exchange, and a parity conserving electromagneticamplitude F associated with photon exchanges [17]. The means of looking for such an effectconsist in preparing a handed experiment, one that can be performed in either a right-handedor a left-handed configuration. One measures the transition rate in the two configurations.The results of the two experiments differ by the electroweak interference term. In terms ofa right-left asymmetry

ARL = 2Re(F Fpnc)

|F 2 + F 2pnc|

(7)

The electromagnetic amplitude is much larger than the weak-interaction amplitude andthe experiments are designed to make the argument of the numerator real to maximize theeffect, so the right-left asymmetry is simply:

ARL = 2FpncF

(8)

Typical numbers for the asymmetry from the cesium experiments are a few parts per mil-lion [24]. The difficulty of the experiment consists in discriminating the tiny parity violating

6

ERF

BRF , BDC

ERaman1

x

z

y

ERaman2

Figure 2: Left: Schematic setup of the proposed apparatus, adapted from Ref. [29]. Thethick green arrows indicate the propagation direction of the Raman beams and the blackarrows show their respective polarizations. The dipole trap, which confines the franciumatoms at an antinode of the cavity electric field, is not shown. Right: Francium vacuumsystem at U. of Maryland. The anapole apparatus will go on the bottom chamber

interference against parity-conserving signals that are many orders of magnitude larger. Sys-tematic errors come from an imperfect reversal of the handedness of the experiment and givefalse parity violating signals that need to be checked for consistency.

Anapole measurement in francium

Zel’dovich postulated in 1957 that the weak interactions between nucleons generate a parityviolating, time reversal conserving moment called the anapole moment [26]. Flambaum andKhriplovich calculated the effect it would have in atoms [5]. Experiments in 205Tl gave a limitfor its value [25], and it was measured for the first time with an accuracy of 14% through thehyperfine dependence of PNC in 133Cs [23, 24]. There are currently several efforts to studythe anapole moment in Yb [27] and in polar molecules [28].

The measurement strategy of the nuclear anapole moment, presented at length in the pa-per by Gomez et al [29], relies on PNC. Our method looks for the parity forbidden microwave

7

electric dipole (E1) transition between the ground state hyperfine levels in a chain of isotopesof Fr, the heaviest alkali atom. Measurements in a series of isotopes offer the advantage thatthey can focus on the differences appearing as the number of neutrons changes.

The E1 transition between hyperfine levels is parity forbidden, but becomes allowed bythe anapole-induced mixing of levels of opposite parity. The general approach has beensuggested in the past [27, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36]. Briefly, francium atoms are placedinside a microwave Fabry-Perot cavity and held in a blue-detuned dipole trap. The trappedatoms interact with the microwave field and with a Raman field generated by a pair oflaser beams, in the presence of a static magnetic field (see Fig. 2 left). Confinement ofthe atoms to the anti-node (node) of the electric (magnetic) microwave field drive only anE1 transition between hyperfine levels. The atoms interact with the electric field of themicrowave together with the Raman transition that creates a superposition of both states,this second interaction serves as an amplifier through interference of a parity conservingamplitude with a PNC transition. The excitation rate is a signal linear in the E1 transition,which is proportional to the anapole moment of the nucleus.

Method for the anapole moment measurement

We calculate the transition amplitude for 209Fr between the hyperfine level F=4, m=0 toF=5, m=-1 with a microwave electric field of 476 V/cm oscillating along the x-axis and astatic magnetic field of 1553 Gauss along the z-axis, and with the total anapole moment (κa)resulting from the vectorial addition of the valence proton and neutrons in 209Fr as 0.45. Weobtain [29]

AE1/h = ΩE1 = ¯〈f | − eE · r ¯|i〉/h = 0.01i

[E

476V/cm

] [κa

0.45

]rad/s. (9)

Once the atoms are in the dipole trap we would optically pump them into a single Zeemansublevel to prepare a coherent superposition of the hyperfine ground states with a Ramanpulse of duration tR. We would drive the E1 transition with the cavity microwave field fora fixed time tE1, and then measure the population in the upper hyperfine level (normalizedby the total number of atoms N) through a cycling transition. At the end of each sequencethe excited state population is given by

Ξ± = N |ce|2 = N sin2(

ΩRtR2± ΩE1tE1

2

), (10)

where ce is the upper hyperfine amplitude, ΩR and ΩE1 are the respective Rabi frequenciesof the Raman and E1 transition, and the sign depends on the handedness of the coordinate

8

system defined by the external fields as explained below. For a π/2 Raman pulse (or a 50-50coherent superposition) and small ΩE1 this equation becomes

Ξ± = N |ce|2 ∼ N(

1

2± ΩE1tE1

2

). (11)

The second term contains the PNC signal (E1 transition) that becomes linear through theinterference with the Raman transition. We measure the population transfer for both signsand define the signal, proportional to κa, as

S = Ξ+ − Ξ− = NΩE1tE1. (12)

The atoms (located at the origin as indicated in Fig. 2 left) are prepared in a particularZeeman sublevel |F,m〉. We apply a static magnetic field B = Bz. The atoms are excitedby an standing-wave microwave electric field E(t) = E cos(ωmt + ψ) cos(kmy)x. The mi-crowave frequency ωm is tuned to the Zeeman-shifted hyperfine transition frequency ω0. Themicrowave magnetic field M is deliberately aligned along B; since (for a perfect standingwave) M is out of phase with E, we thus have M(t) = M sin(ωmt + ψ) sin(kmy)z, withM = E in cgs units. Proper alignment of M and positioning of the standing-wave nodeis critical for suppressing systematic effects and line-broadening mechanisms. The Ramantransition is driven by two plane-wave optical fields, ER1(t) = ER1 cos(ωRt + φR)x andER2(t) = ER2 cos((ωR + ωm)t + φR)z. We assume that the Raman carrier frequency ωRis detuned sufficiently far from optical resonance that only the vector part of the Ramantransition amplitude (V ∝ iER1 × ER2) is non-negligible [37].

The various electric and magnetic fields of the apparatus define a coordinate systemrelated to the measured rate Ξ±. The transition rate Ξ± depends on three vectors: Thepolarization of the E1 transition, the polarization of the Raman transition (V), and the staticmagnetic field B which defines magnetization of the atoms. We combine these three vectorsto produce the pseudoscalar i(E× (ER1×ER2))·B proportional to the measured quantity.We include no discussion about systematic effects in this contribution, as this is presentedat great length in Ref. [29].

The measurement of the upper hyperfine state population collapses the state of eachatom into one of the two hyperfine levels. The collapse distributes the atoms binomiallybetween the two hyperfine levels and leads to an uncertainty in the measured excited state

fraction called projection noise [38]. The projection noise is NP =√N |ce|2(1− |ce|2). For a

projection noise limited measurement, the signal-to-noise ratio is

SNP

= 2ΩE1tR√N, (13)

9

With 106 francium atoms, which combined with ΩE1 given by Eq. 9 for a field of 476 V/cmand κa = 0.45 in tR = 1 s, Eq. 13 gives a signal-to-noise ratio of 20. Another way to state thesame is that with 300 atoms we will need 104 cycles of tR duration to reach a 3% statisticaluncertainty.

There are other sources of noise such as the photon shot noise, that scales as√N |ce|2,

or technical noise that is independent of ce. About a 50-50 initial superposition of statesmaximizes the signal-to-noise ratio when we include shot noise and some technical noisebeyond projection noise.

Other possible measurements

The attractiveness of Fr for atomic parity nonconservation (APNC) experiments has beendiscussed since the early 1990s in the context of searches for new physics beyond the SM[39]. APNC arises from the parity-violating exchange of Z-bosons between electrons and thequarks in the nucleus, leading to a mixing of atomic levels of opposite parity. The atomictheory of Fr, on the other hand, can be understood at a level similar to that of Cs (Z = 55),yet the APNC effect is almost 20 times larger [40, 41]. The running of sin2 θw and differentsensitivities to physics beyond the SM require additional electroweak tests in addition tothe very accurate LEP results at the Z-pole (see Fig. 3, right). The NuTeV data disagreewith the SM, and only a recent reevaluation of atomic theory brought Cs APNC into itscurrent agreement with the SM. This clearly shows the need for additional, independentmeasurements. Among the existing and upcoming experiments, APNC is very competitiveconcerning searches for leptoquarks, compositeness, and extra gauge bosons [15].

The weak interaction in atoms induces a mixing of states of different parity, observablethrough PNC measurements. Transitions that were forbidden due to selection rules becomeallowed through the presence of the weak interaction. The transition amplitudes are generallysmall and an interference method is commonly used to measure them. A typical observablehas the form

|APC + APNC |2 = |APC |2 + 2Re(APCA∗PNC) + |APNC |2, (14)

where APC and APNC represent the parity conserving and parity non-conserving amplitudes.The second term on the right side corresponds to the interference term and can be isolatedbecause it changes sign under a parity transformation. The last term is usually negligible.

All recent and on-going experiments in atomic PNC rely on the large heavy nucleus (largeZ) enhancement factor proposed by the Bouchiats [42, 43, 44]. These experiments follow twomain strategies (see the review by M.-A. Bouchiat [45]). The first one is optical activity in an

10

1/2

3/27P

7P

817 nm

718 nm

21 nsec

29 nsec

7S1/2

8S1/2

46.7 GHz

506 nm

1721 nm

1334 nm

Figure 3: Left: Energy level diagram for francium showing the relevant Optical PNC tran-sition between the 7S1/2 and the 8S1/2 . Right: The running of sin2 θw , future results areplaced arbitrarily on the vertical axis, APV is the Cs experiment and the SM prediction isfrom Ref. [15].

atomic vapor. The asymmetry introduced by PNC makes the atoms interact preferentiallywith right (or left) circularly polarized light. A linearly polarized light beam propagatingthrough an atomic vapor experiences a rotation of the polarization plane analogous to theone observed in the Faraday effect except that in this case there is no magnetic field present.The measurement strategy uses interference with an allowed transition to enhance the smalleffect. The amount of rotation is related to the weak charge, which quantifies the effect ofthe weak force. The method has been applied to reach a precision of 2% in bismuth,[46]1.2% in lead [47, 48] and 1.2% in thallium [25].

The second strategy measures the excitation rate of a highly forbidden transition. Theelectric dipole transition between the 6s and 7s levels in cesium becomes allowed throughthe weak interaction. Interference between this transition and the one induced by the Starkeffect due to the presence of an static electric field generates a signal proportional to the weakcharge. The best atomic PNC measurement to date uses this method to reach a precision of0.35% [23, 24]. The exquisite precision reached on the cesium experiment at Boulder allowedthe extraction of the anapole moment from their measurement [23, 24]. The transition isdominated by the spin independent contribution, which is proportional to the weak charge.They observed a small difference on the signal depending on the hyperfine levels used for thetransition. The difference corresponds to the spin dependent contribution which for cesium

11

is dominated by the anapole moment. They extracted the spin dependent contribution withan accuracy of 14% giving the first measurement of an anapole moment.

Other methods have been proposed and some work is already on the way. The Bouchiatgroup in Paris worked also on the highly forbidden 6s to 7s electric dipole transition ina cesium cell but detects the ocurrence of the transition using stimulated emission ratherthan fluorescence [49]. The Budker group in Berkeley has been pursuing measurements inytterbium, which has many stable isotopes available [50, 51]. There is an on-going experimentin the Fortson group in Seattle using a single barium (or alternatively radium) ion [36, 52].

Optical Atomic PNC

So far, there has been no parity non-conservation measurement in neutral atoms performedutilizing the new technologies of laser cooling and trapping. In order to create a road-mapfor an experiment one could assume a transition rate measurement following closely thetechnique used by the Boulder group in cesium [53]. Start with a Stark shift to induce aparity conserving amplitude between the 7s and 8s levels of francium (Fig. 3 left) and lookhow this electromagnetic term will interfere with the weak-interaction amplitude giving riseto a left-right asymmetry with respect to the system of coordinates defined by the staticelectric field E, static magnetic field B, and the Poynting vector S of the excitation field,such that the observable is proportional to B · (S× E).

Francium atoms would accumulate in a MOT. Then, after further cooling to control theirvelocities, they would be transferred to another region where a dipole trap will keep themready for the measurement. The measurement would be performed by moving the dipoletrap with the atoms into the mode of a high finesse interferometer tuned to the 7s to 8stransition in a region with a DC electric field present. If an atom gets excited it will decayvia the 7p state, but could also be ionized. Optical pumping techniques allow one to recyclethe atom that has performed the parity non-conserving transition many times enhancingthe probability to detect the signature photon. Redundancy in the reversal of the system ofcoordinates would help identify and suppress systematic errors. There is a strong assumptionimplicit in this statement that needs to be thoroughly studied: the trap does not affect themeasurement.

To estimate the requirements for a parity non-conservation measurement in francium itis good to take the Boulder Cs experiment as a guide (See article by C. Wieman in reference[54]). The most important quantity to estimate is the signal-to-noise ratio since that willdetermine many of the requirements of the experiment.

The approach of Stark mixing works as an amplifier in the full sense of the word, itenlarges the signal, but it also brings noise. The Stark induced part of the signal in photons

12

per second is given in Eq. 15, this signal will contribute the shot noise to the measurement,

Sstark =16π3

3hεoλ3E2β2IoN (15)

While the parity non-conservation signal in photons per second is:

Spnc =16π3

3hεoλ32EβIm(Epnc)IoN (16)

where β is the vector Stark polarizability, E is the dc electric field used for the Stark mixinginterference, N the number of atoms in the interaction volume, λ the wavelength of thetransition, Im(Epnc) is the parity non-conservation amplitude expressed as an equivalentelectric field, and Io the normalized (to atomic saturation) intensity of the excitation source.Assuming only shot noise as the dominant source of noise, the signal-to-noise ratio achievedin one second is:

SpncNoise

= 2(

16π3

3hεoλ3

)1/2

Im(Epnc)√IoN (17)

For francium in the 7s to 8s state, the ratio becomes:

SpncNoise

= 7.9× 103Im(Epnc)√IoN (18)

This last expression gives a result in (√

Hz)−1 when using atomic units for the PNC term.It illustrates where a future measurement with francium is stronger. The calculated valuefrom Dzuba et al. [40] for Im(Epnc) of 1.5 × 10−10 in atomic units is eighteen times largerthan in cesium.

The ratio does not depend on the particular details of the interference experiment used;that is, the value of the vectorial Stark polarizability of the 7s→ 8s transition β nor in theparticular value of the DC electric field chosen E. These factors enter in the signal to noiseratio once the technical noise is considered.

The very high intensities available in a standing wave will exert a repelling force thatwill tend to move the cold atoms to a region of low intensity. FM modulation at integers ofthe free spectral range of the cavity can create a slowly moving travelling envelope to solvethis problem as already suggested by the Boulder group. Another possible complication isthe ionization of the Fr atoms that have been excited by a second photon of 507 nm. Theionization potential is only 4.07 eV and two of those photons add to 4.89 eV. Taking a typicalionization cross section of 10−18 cm2 and an intracavity intensity of 106 W/cm2 the resulting

13

ionization rate could amount to 1/6 of the decay rate from the 8S to the 7P state. Asthe measurement should proceed alternating periods of cooling and trapping with periods ofexcitation, each time there is excitation, some of the atoms will be lost. A careful balancebetween intracavity power and signal loss will be needed to find the optimal operating point.

Hyperfine anomaly

The FTF will be used extensively for nuclear structure studies such as isotope shift andhyperfine anomaly measurements [55]. They will lay the ground work for the anapole momentmeasurement. These nuclear structure measurements will provide crucial information on thecharge radius and the nuclear magnetization of the isotopes of interest.

Our previous measurements of the hyperfine structure of the 7P1/2 level for the isotopesavailable at Stony Brook 208−212Fr reached a precision of 300 ppm [55]. These measure-ments along with previous ground state hyperfine structure measurements reveal a hyperfineanomaly from the Bohr-Weisskopf effect [56].

Precise measurements of hyperfine structure can probe the nuclear magnetization distri-bution. The Bohr-Weisskopf effect [56, 57] has been known for many years, but experimentaland theoretical advances have now allowed more broadly based and detailed investigations[58, 59, 60, 61]. Comparison of adjacent isotopes allows extraction of the nuclear magneti-zation distribution of the last neutron, a quantity that is in general very difficult to study[62]. More recently we have shown that it is possible to measure a hypefine anomaly in anexcited s level for the two stable isotopes of Rb [63, 64].

Bohr-Weisskopf effect measurements usually require detailed knowledge of both hyper-fine structure constants and magnetic moments. Precision measurements of the hyperfinestructure in atomic states with different radial distributions can give information on thehyperfine anomaly [65] and be sensitive to the nuclear magnetization distribution.

Coc et al. [66, 67] measured the 7S1/2 ground state hyperfine constants for sixteen Frisotopes. We have focused on extracting hyperfine anomaly information using the availabledata in the literature and our new precision spectroscopy of the 7P1/2 hyperfine structure onfive francium isotopes. Previous measurements of the hyperfine splitting of the 7P1/2 level[68, 67] were not of sufficient precision to observe the small hyperfine anomaly effects. The7P1/2 electron probes the nucleus with a more uniform radial dependence of the interactionthan does the 7S1/2 electron. The ratio of the hyperfine constants is sensitive to the nuclearmagnetization distribution [65]. Since both states are spin-1

2, the measurements are inde-

pendent of quadrupole effects that complicate the extraction of precise magnetic hyperfinestructure constants.

14

The magnetic hyperfine interaction can be written as [57]

W lextended = W l

point(1 + ε(A, l)) (19)

where ε is a small quantity that depends on the particular isotope, A, and an atomic state,l = S or P . The ratio, ρ, of hyperfine structure constants in the S and P states is given by

ρA =W Sextended

W Pextended

=W Spoint(1 + ε(A, S))

W Ppoint(1 + ε(A,P ))

ρA ≈ ρ0(1 + ε(A, S)− ε(A,P )) (20)

where ρ0 is the ratio of hyperfine structure constants for a point nucleus. Here, we haveneglected the weak dependence of the hyperfine constants on the finite size of the chargedistribution (Breit-Crawford-Rosenthal-Schawlow correction [69, 70]). Equation 20 showsthat the ratio ρA can have a different value for different isotopes because the S and P stateshave different sensitivity to the nuclear magnetization distribution. Since the error in themeasurement comes from two hyperfine splittings, it is very important to have numbers asaccurate as possible, and in particular for the excited state splitting.

Success in any of these measurements requires enough resolution to resolve well the twolines that form the splitting. The work done in the past at Stony Brook [55] used a techniqueto make a direct frequency measurement of the hyperfine splitting using an electro-opticmodulator to frequency modulate (FM) a probe laser. Ref. [64] provides more details of themethod.

The signal-to-noise ratio and the quality of the scan limited the resolution to about 5000kHz. This precision was more than adequate to observe the changes in the magnetizationas the hyperfine splitting for those neutron deficient isotopes is around 6 GHz, limitingthe accuracy to about 1 × 104. The use of an optical frequency comb should provide animprovement in the frequency resolution of at least four orders of magnitude [71]. Thiswould allow a systematic study of many other Fr isotopes, both in the neutron rich and theneutron poor sides of the stability line without the constraint of large hyperfine splitting.

Other measurements

In a broader context, the basic research infrastructure of the FTF can serve as the basisfor future measurements of fundamental symmetries in francium and other exotic atomic

15

systems. The francium cooling and trapping facility is designed to be transportable so thatit can be relocated at another rare isotope production facility if the opportunity arises.

The entire apparatus can be also be used to search for an electron dipole moment (EDM)[8] in a cold atomic fountain of francium, as has been proposed by the group of H. Gould[72]. It can also be used for studies of the nuclear magnetic octupole (M3) [73], whichwould benefit from the high precision achievable with the optical frequency comb. The lasersystems can be re-used for trapping and cooling a wide range of exotic atomic species. Thetitanium-sapphire (Ti:Sapph) laser systems can provide a narrow band laser cooling andtrapping light over the entire wavelength range of 700-1000 nm. The addition of a doublingcrystal can be used to access wavelength in the range of 350-500 nm. The dipole traplaser can trap a broad range of atomic and molecular species. The microwave equipmentis broadly applicable to microwave spectroscopy in other atomic species for nuclear g-factormeasurements and anapole moment measurements.

Scientific opportunity afforded by U.S. investments

at TRIUMF, US participation and relevance for the

planned FRIB

The report of the National Academy of Sciences on Scientific Opportunities with a Rare-Isotope Facility in the United States [74] says “Another important interaction that is stillpoorly understood is the parity-violating interactions that lead to a nuclear spin distributioncalled an anapole moment. A non-zero anapole moment has been detected so far in only onenucleus, 133Cs, and its size is not consistent with theoretical estimates. The size of parityviolation is enhanced in heavy atoms, making it possible to perform anapole measurementson a string of Fr isotopes. Additional such measurements would continue to expand thehorizons of parity-violation studies in nuclear matter.”

This experiment is precisely designed to address this scientific opportunity. TRIUMF isdeveloping now the actinide target that will deliver at least two orders of magnitude moreFr than at Stony Brook. Preliminary measurements during August and September clearedconcerns about safety and possible contamination. We have ample experience working withradioactive beams. Our group developed the trapping of Fr at Stony Brook and over thecourse of eight years was able to improve the collection of atoms to a record over a quartermillion atoms [75]. We are developing the third generation apparatus which should have animproved efficiency and allow use to perform these measurements.

The members of the collaboration supported by the U.S. will be in charge of the FTF,

16

which is the heart of the experiment. We will provide all the laser and precision spectroscopyexpertise to perform the measurements and study the systematic effects. Many of the devel-opments necessary for this measurement will be applicable to other precision measurementscurrently of interest to the rare isotope community, such as precision spectroscopy to measurehyperfine splittings to extract nuclear structure information, including hyperfine anomalies[55, 63], and isotope shifts to also understand better the charge radius of the Fr isotopes.Students and postdoctoral researchers CWM, TA&M and UMD will have the opportunityto contribute significantly to the experiment. These researchers will have the expertise nec-essary for developing future laser trapping and precision atomic measurements relevant tonuclear and particle physics at a future FRIB facility.

This proposal directly addresses the need for experiments probing fundamental symme-tries of nature in heavy, exotic nuclei as identified in the NSAC RIB final report. The reportstates that experiments that probe “fundamental symmetries of nature will similarly be con-ducted at a FRIB through the creation and study of certain exotic isotopes. These nucleicould enable important experiments on basic interactions because aspects of their structuregreatly magnify the size of the symmetry-breaking processes being probed.”

The future FRIB facility will have experiments that utilize atomic spectroscopy to extractnuclear physics information. The FTF will develop transportable solutions to the manychallenges of doing precision atomic physics measurements in an accelerator environment.

Technical scope

The funds from a successful DOE grant will support the construction and commissioning ofthe FTF at TIRUMF. This facility will consist of a modular laboratory room with dedicatedtemperature and humidity control for the lasers and optics as well as appropriate RF andmagnetic noise isolation. Preliminary measurements by our TRIUMF collaborators of theenvironment requires us to take this steps in the design. The room will house lasers, op-tics, detectors, microwave equipment and vacuum hardware and will be able to handle theradioactive beam of Fr with the appropriate radiation safety precautions.

The PNC and anapole moment measurements will require a significant amount of equip-ment. While the FrPNC collaboration already has a substantial fraction of the necessaryinstruments, a significant investment in new equipment is required for the PNC and anapolemeasurements (See Table 1). The experiment needs non-magnetic optic tables, lasers, mi-crowave equipment, power supplies, computers, and control electronics. The rough layout ofthe experiment is shown in Fig. 4 right.

Table 1 is a summary of the required equipment for the project, both existing and to be

17

purchased with project funds. There are five groups of equipment: shielding and interfaces,microwave systems, lasers and references, optics and electronics, and Ultra high vacuumapparatus. The table shows what we already have and what we are requesting. The list isnot exhaustive, many smaller optics items are needed for the experiment, but all of thoseare already in existence at the University of Maryland and from SUNY Stony Brook.

The FTF is designed to be a transportable facility. The modular laboratory can beeasily disassembled, crated, and shipped to another location where it can be reassembled.The optics tables, laser systems, vacuum apparatus and other scientific equipment can becrated, shipped, and re-installed in the modular laboratory at an alternate location, such asthe future Rare Isotope Beam facility. We estimate six months to dismantle and reassemblea working apparatus at an alternate location.

The following details our equipment requests including, where possible, the model num-bers. At the end of each relevant paragraph with the explanation of the equipment weinclude a statement in parenthesis with the cost and the year the equipment is requested orif it is already available.

Shielding and interfaces

Modular Francium Laboratory Room The project will construct a temperature andhumidity stabilized room within the ISAC beamline facility as shown in Fig. 4 left . The roomwill have a footprint of 20 ft × 18 ft with a 12 ft height and will house the entire experiment,including the optics tables, lasers and other sensitive equipment that require temperatureand humidity stability. The room is designed to be easily assembled and disassembled sothat it can be relocated to the Rare Isotope Beam facility when the opportunity arises. Thecompanies under consideration to manufacture the modular laboratory are Terra Universal,Pacific Environmental Technologies, and Hemco Corporation.

The TRIUMF beamline reserved for the Francium Trapping Facility is located in theISAC building. The temperature and relative humidity of the ISAC area of TRIUMF havea short-term stability of ±3 C and ± 15% relative humidity, respectively. The instrumentsnecessary for the atomic spectroscopy and parity non-conservation experiments will requirean environment with a stability of ± 1 C and ± 5% relative humidity. The modular labo-ratory is designed to provided this level of stability. The stability is necessary for ensuringthe reliable and repeatable operation of two Titanium-Sapphire lasers, an optical frequencycomb, and Fabry-Perot reference cavities for the multiple weeks of beamtime allocated eachyear. This stability will ensure also that available human resources are allocated to datataking and scientific discovery rather than monitoring and maintaining the proper operationof sensitive optical instruments.

18

Table 1: Summary table of required equipment

Contributed Equipment Requested EquipmentShielding and

Interfaces Modular room2 × optics tables

MicrowaveSystems Gigatronics microwave source Fabry Perot cavity

Frequency doubler Spectrum AnalyzerFabry Perot cavity Waveguides and Detectrors

Lasers andReferences 2 × Coherent 899 Ti:Sapph lasers Raman beam system

Verdi V10 pump laser for Ti:Sapph 1064 nm dipole trap fiber laserVerdi V18 pump laser for Ti:Sapph Optical Frequency comb

817 nm diode laserFaby-Perot for laser locks

WavemeterOptics andElectronics Low-noise scientific CCD camera Low-noise scientific CCD camera

industrial grade CCD camera 3 × industrial grade CCD cameras2 × PMT single photon detectors 2 × PMT single photon detectors2 × magnetic coil power supplies 2 × magnetic coil power supplies

3 × computers 3 × computersPulse generator 2 × pulse generator

3 × data acquisition cards 3 × data acquisition cardsUH VacuumApparatus 2 × vacuum chambers

2 × ion pumps2 × getter pumps

Miscellaneous vacuum parts

19

Figure 4: Left: Layout of the ISAC Hall at TRIUMF, including the francium trappingfacility. Right: Layout of francium beamline, optics tables, and control equipment.

The room will be constructed with sheet metal walls, floor, and ceiling especially designedto screen out external radio frequency (RF) magnetic and electric fields. The RF noise inthe ISAC hall is significant and must be suppressed to avoid perturbing the environment ofthe francium atoms.

While we will not shield the entire room against quasi-static magnetic fields, a multi-layer mu-metal shield will provide magnetic field shielding in the vicinity of the trappedatoms (custom made by The MuShield Company, Inc.). Measurements at ISAC near thefuture room location indicate that the DC magnetic field varies on the order of 100 mGover the course of several days. The shielding is necessary to maintain a high stabilitymagnetic field environment for precision PNC and anapole moment measurements. Activestabilization of the magnetic field in the immediate vicinity of the atoms, in addition toatomic co-magnetometry, will be implemented if necessary. ($ 106,562 1st year)

Optics tables The apparatus will be built on two non-magnetic optics tables (5’ × 10’and 5’ × 8’, Newport RS4000 or TMC 780 series). One table will be used to produce andmanipulate all the laser beams necessary for trapping, cooling, probing, and controlling thefrancium atoms. (See Fig. 4 right for layout). The second table will support the magneto-optical trap for producing the cold francium sample and the vacuum chamber where the PNCand anapole moment measurements are conducted. In order to reduce the susceptibility ofthe apparatus to residual magnetization and associated hysteresis, the second table will

20

be constructed non-magnetic 304 steel. We will also need appropriate overhead shelvingsystems. ($46,859 1st year).

Microwave equipment

The anapole moment measurement will require microwave equipment at 46 GHz. The projecthas already made a significant investment in microwave parts and electronics, but new equip-ment is still necessary. The project already has a 26.5 GHz Gigatronics source with a fre-quency doubler and a microwave Fabry-Perot test cavity, but the following equipment is stillneeded:

Waveguide system: The project will purchase a number of waveguides to direct themicrowaves from the source to the Fabry-Perot cavity within the UHV environment of thescience vacuum chamber. The waveguide parts will be purchased from Custom MicrowaveInc. ($ 20,336 2nd year).

Fabry-Perot cavity: The research on the prototype Fabry-Perot cavity has already iden-tified a number of necessary improvements for the final cavity. The project will pay for theseimprovements which include high stability translation stages (New Focus part # 80327X-C,8766-KIT, and 8757), precision machined gold-coated copper mirrors (manufactured by CeN-ing Optics), and UHV-compatible 45 GHz feedthroughs (manufactured by SRI Hermetics).($16,269 2nd year).

Microwave characterization: The project will purchase two microwave detectors (Agi-lent 8474E) to actively stabilize the power flowing into the two ends of the Fabry-Perot cavity.The project will also purchase a 50 GHz spectrum analyzer (Agilent 4448A) to carry outthe systematic studies (for example phase noise) of the frequency resonances in the anapolemoment experiments. A rubidium atomic clock standard will also be acquired to stabilizethe microwave frequency to 1 part in 1011 (Stanford Research Systems FS725). ($122,0185th year).

Lasers and references

The project will employ a number of lasers. Many of these lasers exists and come fromSUNY Stony Brook and the University of Maryland. The laser frequencies will be locked bymeans of an already existing apparatus consisting of a wavemeter (Burleigh WA-1500) andan optical Fabry-Perot cavity referenced to a stabilized He-Ne laser [76]. (Available).

21

Magneto-optical trap lasers: The magneto-optical trap (MOT) which produces thesample of cold francium atoms requires two lasers: a trapping laser and a repumper laser. Wewill use a titanium-sapphire (Ti:Sapph) lasers (Coherent MBR-110) pumped by a CoherentVerdi V18, which are being supplied by Prof. Orozco, to produce up to 1.5 W of laser coolingand trapping light at 718 nm. The repumper light will be provided by a diode laser at 817nm which is already owned by the project. (Available).

Dipole trap lasers: After collecting and cooling the francium atoms in the MOT, theatoms will be transferred to the science vacuum chamber, where they will loaded into afar-detuned dipole trap. The project will purchase a 20 W 1064 nm fiber laser (IPG Pho-tonics YLR-20-1064-LP-SF) to produce a red-detuned dipole trap. Intensity modulationand control will be through acousto-optical modulators (Intra-Action) and opto-mechanicalcontrollers (New-Focus) The large power is necessary to produce a large trap for efficientloading from the MOT. Verdi V10 light at 532 nm from a Ti:Sapph pump laser will be usedto generate a blue-detuned dipole trap. ($ 70,161 2nd year and Available).

Raman beam system: We will drive the Raman transition for the anapole moment mea-surement with a laser detuned from the D1 line at 817 nm and an electro-optic modulator[EOM] at 23 GHz to generate two side-bands spaced by 46 GHz (EOspace 40 Gb/s modula-tor). Due to the low-damage threshold for EOMs at this frequency, the laser light will haveto be amplified with a tapered amplifier system from Eagle Yard. ($ 41,690 3rd year).

Optical frequency comb: The project will purchase an optical frequency comb (Men-loSystems FC1500-250 M-VIS) which will be used to stabilize all the laser fields of theapparatus. The frequency comb provides a very high stability, simple, and reliable methodfor quickly locking multiple laser frequencies in regions of the electromagnetic spectrumwhere there are no reliable frequency references. This item will require a set of offset lockRF electronics included in the budget. ($ 294,322 4th year)

Optics and Electronics

Photon Imaging Systems: The PNC and anapole moment signals will be a ratio ofpopulations in different hyperfine ground states. We will measure the population in each stateby spatially separating them via a Stern-Gerlach magnetic gradient pulse and then imagingthe two atomic clouds. Since we will need atomic shot-noise limited detection, we will needto use a very low noise scientific CCD camera (iXon-888 by Andor Technology or PIXIS

22

by Princeton Instruments). The project will also purchase three low-cost, industrial-gradeCCD cameras (IMB-52FT by IMI Technology) for monitoring the cold atom populations inthe collection-MOT and science chambers. ($ 44,333 3rd year).

Magnetic coil power supplies: The project will purchase two precision magnetic fieldpower supplies, with stabilities on the order of 1−10×105 (Delta Electronika SM6000 seriesand High Finesse BCS series). In practice, we expect to use active feedback in order to reachthe required accuracy on the magnetic fields. ($ 20,336 3rd year).

Experiment control and timing The PNC and anapole measurements require a seriesof highly stable and repeatable analog and digital control signals with microsecond timing torun a cycle of the experiment. The project will purchase a dedicated sequencer (AdWin ProII) to control all aspects of the experiment. The use of a dedicated sequencer will provide ahigh stability and repeatability apparatus, whose timing can be easily modified for testing,debugging, and regular operation. The project will also purchase DG535 and DG645 pulsegenerators (Stanford Research Systems) for the few signals that require sub-nanosecondtiming accuracy. ( $ 37,114 3rd year).

Other available equipment

Vacuum apparatus: The cold atomic francium sample will be collected, cooled, trappedwithin a vacuum system which consists of two vacuum chambers: a first chamber for collect-ing and cooling francium atoms in a high-efficiency MOT, and second chamber for conductinganapole moment, optical PNC, and spectroscopic measurements. The vacuum apparatus al-ready includes all the necessary pumps: two ion pumps and one getter pumps. The entirevacuum apparatus already exists (See Fig. 2 right) and tests with Rb show transfer fromthe capture chamber on the top to the science chamber on the bottom of better than 50%.(Available)

Experiment and Equipment Schedule

The funding request extends for five years starting around June 2009, and the schedule of theequipment purchases was drawn up according to our expected needs. The specific modelsfor each piece are in the previous section. The overall budget is in Table 2 separated by thefour general areas of requested equipment with the totals per year and per area.

23

Table 2: Five year budget

Item 1st year 2nd year 3rd year 4th year 5th year TotalShielding and interfaces 106,562 106,562

Microwave systems 36,605 122,018 158,623Lasers and references 70,161 41,690 294,322 406,173Optics and electronics 46,859 101,783 148,642

Total 153,421 106,766 143,473 294,322 122,018 $820,000

Tentative FrPNC schedule

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

anapole, off line preparation

actinide target

Set up and HF anomaly E 1010

7s to 8s M1 optical PNC

anapole E 1065

Equipment request schedule

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Shielding

Microwave Microwave

Lasers Lasers Lasers

Opt., Elec. Opt., Elec.

Figure 5: Top: Tentative schedule of experiments of the FrPNC collaboration at TRIUMF.Bottom: Equipment request schedule. Opt. Elec. stands for Optics and Electronics equip-ment.

24

Figure 5 presents the tentative schedule of experiments of the FrPNC collaboration.Two of those are approved experiments with highest priority E1010 and E 1064. During thelast Experiments Evaluation Committee (December 2008) our collaboration submitted theproposal S1218: “Towards an optical parity violation experiment in francium: Spectroscopyof the 7s - 8s transition” for consideration. If approved we will have three experiments in lineto perform at TRIUMF. The schedule allows to begin with simple experiments and buildup to the more difficult ones. There are many scientific publications on the way and thestudents will have ample material to graduate. The scientific community in Canada has givenfrancium a very high priority in the Canadian Sub-Atomic Physics plan, the equivalent of theHigh Energy Physics Advisory Panel (HEPAP) and the Nuclear Science Advisory Committee(NSAC) in the United States.

The top of Fig. 5 shows a tentative FRPNC schedule at TRIUMF. First year of work atTRIUMF includes the room where the FTF will be housed and should allow us to start usingthe facility to show trapping and cooling of Fr. Second, we will set up the trap and start themeasurements of the hyperfine anomalies and we will investigate the M1 7s to 8s transitionin francium. Finally in the third year, we will begin the anapole moment measurements withthe aim of observing a PNC signal during the fourth year, when the preparations for theoptical PNC will start.

The bottom of Fig. 5 shows the time line for the request of the equipment. We haveplanned the equipment acquisitions to coincide with FrPNC developments at TRIUMF, butwe do not yet have assigned beam time. We have based it on our requests and the fact thattwo of the experiments are approved.

25

References

[1] S. Weinberg, A Model of Leptons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19, 1264 (1967).

[2] A. Salam, in Elementary Particle Theory: Relativistic Groups and Analyticity (8th NobelSymp.), edited by N. Svartholm (Almqvist and Wicksell, Amsterdam, 1968), p. 367.

[3] M.-A. Bouchiat and C. Bouchiat, Parity violation in atoms, Rep. Prog. Phys. 60, 1351(1997).

[4] Y. B. Zel’dovich, Parity Nonconservation in the 1st Order in the Weak-InteractionConstant in Electron Scattering and Other Effects, Sov. Phys.-JETP 9, 682 (1959).

[5] V. V. Flambaum, I. B. Khriplovich, and O. P. Sushkov, Nuclear Anapole Moments,Phys. Lett. B 146, 367 (1984).

[6] W. C. Haxton and C. E. Wieman, Atomic Parity Nonconservation and Nuclear AnapoleMoments, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 51, 261 (2001).

[7] W. R. Johnson, M. S. Safronova, and U. I. Safronova, Combined effect of coherent Zexchange and the hyperfine interaction in the atomic parity-nonconserving interaction,Phys. Rev. A 67, 062106 (2003).

[8] J. S. M. Ginges and V. V. Flambaum, Violations of fundamental symmetries in atomsand tests of unification theories of elementary particles, Phys. Rep. 397, 63 (2004).

[9] C. S. Wu, E. Ambler, R. W. Hayward, D. D. Hoppes, and R. P. Hudson, ExperimentalTest of Parity Conservation in Beta Decay, Phys. Rev. 105, 1413 (1957).

[10] J. I. Friedman and V. L. Telegdi, Nuclear Emulsion Evidence for Parity Nonconservationin the Decay Chain π± → µ± → e±, Phys. Rev. 106, 1681 (1957).

[11] R. L. Garwin, L. M. Lederman, and M. Weinrich, Observations of the Failure of Con-servation of Parity and Charge Conjugation in Meson Decays: the Magnetic Momentof the Free Muon, Phys. Rev. 105, 1415 (1957).

[12] M. J. Ramsey-Musolf and S. A. Page, Hadronic Parity Violation: a New View throughthe Looking Glass, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 56, 1 (2006).

[13] S.-L. Zhu, C. Maekawa, B. Holstein, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and U. van Kolck, NuclearParity-Violation and Effective Field Theory, Nucl. Phys. A 748, 435 (2005).

1

[14] B. R. Holstein, Hadronic Parity Violation: Past, Present, and Future, Intersections ofParticle and Nuclear Physics: 8th Conference, AIP Conf. Proc. 698, 176 (2003).

[15] J. Erler and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, Low Energy Tests of the Weak Interaction, Prog.Nucl. Part. Phys. 54, 351 (2005).

[16] W. M. Snow, Neutron measurements and the weak nucleon nucleon interaction, Eur.Phys. J. A 24 s1, 119 (2005).

[17] I. B. Khriplovich, Parity Non-Conservation in Atomic Phenomena (Gordon and Breach,New York, 1991).

[18] V. V. Flambaum and D. W. Murray, Anapole moment and nucleon weak interactions,Phys. Rev. C 56, 1641 (1997).

[19] V. V. Flambaum and I. B. Khriplovich, P-odd nuclear forces as a source of paritynonconservation in atoms, Sov. Phys. JETP 52, 835 (1980).

[20] O. P. Sushkov, V. V. Flambaum, and I. B. Khriplovich, On the possibility of investigationof P- and T-odd nuclear forces in atomic and molecular experiments, Sov. Phys. JETP60, 873 (1984).

[21] B. Desplanques, J. F. Donoghue, and B. R. Holstein, Unified Treatment of the ParityViolating Nuclear-Force, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 124, 449 (1980).

[22] W. C. Haxton, C. P. Liu, and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, Nuclear anapole moments, Phys.Rev. C 65, 045502 (2002).

[23] C. S. Wood, S. C. Bennett, D. Cho, B. P. Masterson, J. L. Roberts, C. E. Tanner, andC. E. Wieman, Measurement of Parity Nonconservation and an Anapole Moment inCesium, Science 275, 1759 (1997).

[24] C. S. Wood, S. C. Bennett, J. L. Roberts, D. Cho, and C. E. Wieman, Precisionmeasurement of parity nonconservation in cesium, Can. J. Phys. 77, 7 (1999).

[25] P. A. Vetter, D. M. Meekhof, P. K. Majumder, S. K. Lamoreaux, and E. N. Fortson,Precise Test of Electroweak Theory from a New Measurement of Parity Nonconservationin Atomic Thallium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2658 (1995).

[26] Y. B. Zel’dovich, Electromagnetic Interaction with Parity Violation, Sov. Phys.-JETP6, 1184 (1958).

2

[27] D. Budker, in Physics Beyond the Standard Model, edited by P. Herczeg, C. M. Hoffman,and H. V. Klapdor-Kliengrethaus (World Scientific, Singapore, 1998).

[28] D. DeMille, S. B. Cahn, D. Murphree, D. A. Rahmlow, and M. G. Kozlov, UsingMolecules to Measure Nuclars Spin-Dependent Parity Violation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100,023003 (2008).

[29] E. Gomez, S. Aubin, G. D. Sprouse, L. A. Orozco, and D. P. DeMille, Measurementmethod for the nuclear anapole moment of laser-trapped alkali-metal atoms, Phys. Rev.A 75, 033418 (2007).

[30] C. E. Loving and P. G. H. Sandars, On the feasibility of an atomic-beam resonanceexperiment sensitive to the nuclear-spin-dependent weak neutral current interaction, J.Phys. B 10, 2755 (1977).

[31] V. G. Gorshkov, V. F. Ezhov, M. G. Kozlov, and A. I. Mikhailov, P-odd effects intransitions between the components of the hyperfine structure of hydrogen, potassium,and cesium, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 48, 867 (1988).

[32] V. E. Balakin and S. I. Kozhemyachenko, Possibility of Measuring the Weak Interactionin the HFS Transitions of Atoms, JETP Lett. 31, 297 (1980).

[33] V. N. Novikov and I. B. Khriplovich, Parity nonconservation in transitions betweenhyperfine structure components of heavy atoms, JETP Lett. 22, 74 (1975).

[34] E. A. Hinds and V. W. Hughes, Parity Nonconservation in Hydrogen InvolvingMagnetic-Electric Resonance, Phys. Lett. B 67, 487 (1977).

[35] E. G. Adelberger, T. A. Traino, E. N. Fortson, T. E. Chupp, D. Holmgren, M. Z. Iqbal,and H. E. Swanson, A technique for measureing parity non-conservation in hydrogenicatoms, Nuc. Instr. and Meth. 179, 181 (1981).

[36] E. N. Fortson, Possibility of measuring parity nonconservation with a single trappedatomic ion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2383 (1993).

[37] D. DeMille and M. G. Kozlov, Stark-Induced Electric Dipole Amplitudes for HyperfineTransitions, arXiv: physics, 9801034 (1998).

[38] W. M. Itano, J. C. Begquist, J. J. Bollinger, J. M. Gilligan, D. J. Heinzen, F. L. Moore,M. G. Raizen, and D. J. Wineland, Quantum projection noise: Population fluctuationsin two-level systems, Phys. Rev. A 47, 3554 (1993).

3

[39] W. J. Marciano and J. L. Rosner, Atomic parity violation as a probe of new physics,Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2963 (1990).

[40] V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, and O. P. Sushkov, Calculation of energy levels, E1transition amplitudes, and parity violation in francium, Phys. Rev. A 51, 3454 (1995).

[41] M. S. Safronova and W. R. Johnson, High-precision calculation of the parity-nonconserving amplitude in francium, Phys. Rev. A 62, 022112 (2000).

[42] M. A. Bouchiat and C. Bouchiat, Parity Violation Induced by Weak Neutral Currentsin Atomic Physics 1, J. Phys. (Paris) 35, 899 (1974).

[43] M. A. Bouchiat and C. C. Bouchiat, Weak Neutral Currents in Atomic Physics, Phys.Lett. B 48, 111 (1974).

[44] M. A. Bouchiat and C. Bouchiat, Parity Violation Induced by Weak Neutral Currentsin Atomic Physics 2, J. Phys. (Paris) 36, 493 (1975).

[45] M. A. Bouchiat and C. Bouchiat, An atomic linear Stark shift violating P but not Tarising from the electroweak nuclear anapole moment, Eur. Phys. J. D 15, 5 (2001).

[46] M. J. D. Macpherson, K. P. Zetie, R. B. Warrington, D. N. Stacey, and J. P. Hoare, Pre-cise measurement of parity nonconserving optical rotation at 876 nm in atomic bismuth,Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 2784 (1991).

[47] D. M. Meekhof, P. Vetter, P. K. Majumder, S. K. Lamoreaux, and E. N. Fortson, High-precision measurement of parity nonconserving optical rotation in atomic lead, Phys.Rev. Lett. 71, 3442 (1993).

[48] D. M. Meekhof, P. Vetter, P. K. Majumder, S. K. Lamoreaux, and E. N. Fortson,Optical-rotation technique used for a high-precision measurement of parity nonconser-vation in atomic lead, Phys. Rev. A 52, 1895 (1995).

[49] J. Guena, D. Chauvat, P. Jacquier, E. Jahier, M. Lintz, S. Sanguinetti, A. Wasan,M. A. Bouchiat, A. V. Papoyan, and D. Sarkisyan, New Manifestation of Atomic ParityViolation in Cesium: A Chiral Optical Gain Induced by Linearly Polarized 6S − 7SExcitation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 143001 (2003).

[50] D. DeMille, Parity nonconservation in the 6s2 1S0 → 6s5d3D1 transition in atomicytterbium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4165 (1995).

4

[51] J. E. Stalnaker, D. Budker, D. P. DeMille, S. J. Freedman, and V. V. Yashchuk, Mea-surement of the forbidden 6s21S0 → 5d6s3D1 magnetic-dipole transition amplitude inatomic ytterbium, Phys. Rev. A 66, 031403 (2002).

[52] T. W. Koerber, M. Schacht, W. Nagourney, and E. N. Fortson, Radio frequency spec-troscopy with a trapped Ba+ ion: recent progress and prospects for measuring parityviolation, J. Phys. B 36, 637 (2003).

[53] L. A. Orozco, in Trapped Particles and Fundamental Physics, Les Houches 2000, editedby S. N. Atutov, R. Calabrese, and L. Moi (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Amsterdam,2002).

[54] Precision Tests of the Standard Electroweak Model, edited by P. Langacker (World Sci-entific, Singapore, 1995).

[55] J. S. Grossman, L. A. Orozco, M. R. Pearson, J. E. Simsarian, G. D. Sprouse, and W. Z.Zhao, Hyperfine anomaly measurements in francium isotopes and the radial distributionof neutrons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 935 (1999).

[56] A. Bohr and V. F. Weisskopf, The Influence of Nuclear Structure on the HyperfineStructure of Heavy Elements, Phys. Rev. 77, 94 (1950).

[57] H. H. Stroke, R. J. Blin-Stoyle, and V. Jaccarino, Configuration Mixing and the Effectsof Distributed Nuclear Magnetization on Hyperfine Structure in Odd-A Nuclei, Phys.Rev. 123, 1326 (1961).

[58] A.-M. Martensson-Pendrill, Magnetic Moment Distributions in Tl Nuclei, Phys. Rev.Lett. 74, 2184 (1995).

[59] T. Kuhl, A. Dax, M. Gerlach, D. Marx, H. Winter, M. Tomaselli, T. Engel, M. Wurtz,V. M. Shabaev, P. Seelig, R. Grieser, G. Huber, P. Merz, B. Fricke, and C. Holbrow,New Access to the Magnetic Moment Distribution in the Nucleus by Laser Spectroscopyof Highly Charged Ions, Nucl. Phys. A626, 235 (1997).

[60] S. Buttgenbach, Magnetic hyperfine anomalies, Hyperfine Interact. 20, 1 (1984).

[61] J. R. C. Lopez-Urrutia, P. Beiersdorfer, K. Widman, B. B. Birkett, and A.-M.Martensson-Pendrill, Nuclear magnetization distribution radii determined by hyperfinetransitions in the 1s level of H-like ions 185Re74+ and 187Re74+, Phys. Rev. A 57, 879(1998).

5

[62] H. T. Duong, C. Ekstrom, M. Gustafsson, T. T. Inamura, P. Juncar, P. Lievens, I.Lindgren, S. Matsuki, T. Murayama, R. Neugart, T. Nilsson, T. Nomura, M. Pellarin,S. Penselin, J. Persson, J. Pinard, I. Ragnarsson, O. Redi, H. H. Stroke, J. L. Vialle, andthe ISOLDE Collaboration, Atomic beam magnetic resonance apparatus for systematicmeasurement of hyperfine structure anomalies (Bohr-Weisskopf effect), Nuc. Instr. andMeth. A 325, 465 (1993).

[63] A. Perez Galvan, Y. Zhao, L. A. Orozco, E. Gomez, F. J. Baumer, A. D. Lange, andG. D. Sprouse, Comparison of hyperfine anomalies in the 5S1/2 and 6S1/2 levels of 85Rband 87Rb, Phys. Lett. B 655, 114 (2007).

[64] A. Perez Galvan, Y. Zhao, and L. A. Orozco, Measurement of the hyperfine splitting ofthe 6S1/2 level in rubidium, Phys. Rev. A 78, 012502 (2008).

[65] J. R. Persson, New Access to the Magnetic Moment Distribution in the Nucleus by LaserSpectroscopy of Highly Charged Ions, Eur. Phys. J. A 2, 3 (1998).

[66] A. Coc, C. Thibault, F. Touchard, H. T. Duong, P. Juncar, S. Liberman, J. Pinard, J.Lerme, J. L. Vialle, S. Buttgenbach, A. C. Mueller, A. Pesnelle, and the ISOLDE Collab-oration, Hyperfine structures and isotope shifts of 207−−213,220−−228Fr; Possible evidenceof octupolar deformation, Phys. Lett. B 163B, 66 (1985).

[67] A. Coc, C. Thibault, F. Touchard, H. T. Duong, P. Juncar, S. Liberman, J. Pinard,M. Carre, J. Lerme, J. L. Vialle, S. Buttgenbach, A. C. Mueller, A. Pesnelle, and theISOLDE Collaboration, Isotope shifts, spins and hyperfine structures of 118,146Cs and ofsome francium isotopes, Nuc. Phys. A 468, 1 (1987).

[68] Z.-T. Lu, K. L. Corwin, K. R. Vogel, C. E. Wieman, T. P. Dinneen, J. Maddi, and H.Gould, Efficient Collection of Fr into a Vapor Cell Magneto-optical Trap, Phys. Rev.Lett. 79, 994 (1997).

[69] J. E. Rosenthal and G. Breit, The Isotope Shift in Hypergfine Structure, Phys. Rev. 41,459 (1932).

[70] M. F. Crawford and A. L. Schawlow, Electron-Nuclear Potential Fields from HyperfineStructure, Phys. Rev. 76, 1310 (1949).

[71] J. L. Hall, Nobel Lecture: Defining and measuring optical frequencies, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 1279 (2006).

6

[72] J. M. Amini, J. C. T. Munger, and H. Gould, Electron electric-dipole-moment experimentusing electric-field quantized slow cesium atoms, Phys. Rev. A 063416 (2007).

[73] V. Gerginov, A. Derevianko, and C. E. Tanner, Observation of the Nuclear MagneticOctupole Moment of 133Cs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 072501 (2003).

[74] N. A. S. B. on Physics and Astonomy, Scientific Opportunities with a Rare-IsotopeFacility in the United States (The National Academies Press, Washington D.C., 2007).

[75] S. Aubin, E. Gomez, L. A. Orozco, and G. D. Sprouse, High efficiency magneto-opticaltrap for unstable isotopes, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 74, 4342 (2003).

[76] W. Z. Zhao, J. E. Simsarian, L. A. Orozco, and G. D. Sprouse, A computer-based digitalfeedback control of frequency drift of multiple lasers, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 69, 3737 (1998).

7

Curriculum Vitae of PI’s

Seth AubinDepartment of Physics, College of William and Mary. Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795.office (757) 221 3545, fax (757) 221 3540saaubi@wm.eduhttp://saaubi.people.wm.edu/

Education: License de Physique, Sept. 1994, Ecole Normale Superieure (MIP), Paris,France. B. Sc. in Mathematics and Physics, May 1995 Yale University, New Haven,CT, USA. Ph.D. in Physics, August 2003. SUNY Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY,USA. Postdoctoral Fellow, 2003-2006, Department of Physics, University of Toronto,Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Professional experience: Assistant Professor 2007-present Department of Physics, Col-lege of William and Mary Williamsburg, VA, USA.

Professional memberships: American Physical Society

Awards and fellowships: Top prize, New Focus Award, CLEO/QUELS 2002 conference,Long Beach, CA. Outstanding Thesis Award, SUNY Stony Brook, 2003. NSERCPostdoctoral Fellowship, 2004-2006, Dept. of Physics, University of Toronto, Canada.

Other activities: Referee for Physical Review Letters, Physical Review A, and The PhysicsTeacher.

Publications in the last three years relevant to this proposal: E. Gomez, S.Aubin, L. A. Orozco, G. D. Sprouse, E. Iskrenova-Tchoukova, and M. S. Safronova,“Nuclear Magnetic Moment of 210Fr: A Combined Theoretical and Experimental Ap-proach,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 172502 (2008).

E. Gomez, S. Aubin, G. D. Sprouse, L. A. Orozco, and D. P. DeMille, “Measurementmethod for the nuclear anapole moment of laser-trapped alkali-metal atoms, ” Phys.Rev. A 75, 033418 (2007)

G. Gwinner, E. Gomez, L. A. Orozco, A. Perez Galvan, D. Sheng, Y. Zhao, G. D.Sprouse, J. A. Behr, K. P. Jackson, M. R. Pearson, S. Aubin, and V. V. Flambaum,“Fundamental symmetries studies with cold trapped francium atoms at ISAC,” Hyp.Int. 172 , 45 (2006)

1

Other publications: S. Aubin, S. Myrskog, M. H. T. Extavour, L. J. LeBlanc, D.McKay, A. Stummer, and J. H. Thywissen, “Rapid sympathetic cooling to Fermi de-generacy on a chip,” Nature Physics 2, 384 (2006).

M.H.T. Extavour, L.J. LeBlanc, T. Schumm, B. Cieslak, S. Myrskog, A. Stummer, S.Aubin, and J.H. Thywissen, “Dual-species quantum degeneracy of 40K and 87Rb on anatom chip”, Atomic Physics 20, 241-249 (2006).

S. Aubin, M. H. T. Extavour, S. Myrskog, L. J. LeBlanc, J. Estve, S. Singh, P. Scrutton,D. McKay, R. McKenzie, I. Leroux, A. Stummer, and J. H. Thywissen, “Trappingfermionic 40K and bosonic 87Rb on a chip”, J. Low Temp. Phys. 140, 377 (2005).

2

Dan MelconianCyclotron Institute, Department of Physics, Texas A&M University. College Station, TX77843.office (979) 8451411 ext 260, fax (979) 8451899dmelconian@physics.tamu.eduhttp://faculty.physics.tamu.edu/dmelconian/

Education: B. Sc. 1995 in Physics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada M.Sc.in Physics, 2001, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada. Ph.D.in Physics, 2005, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada. Post-doctoral research assistant at the Department of Physics and Centre for ExperimentalNuclear Physics and Astrophysics, University of Washington, 2005–2007, Seattle, WA,USA.

Professional experience: Assistant, Professor 2007- present Department of Physics TexasA&M University, College Station, TX, USA

Professional memberships: American Physical Society, Canadian Association of Physics.

Awards and fellowships: 2005/6 Division of Nuclear Physics Thesis Prize, Canadian As-sociation of Physics, 2006.

Other activities: Reviewer for Physical Review. Reviewer for NSF and DOE(SBIR/STTR) proposals.

Publications R.W. Pattie Jr. et al. (The UCNA Collaboration), “First Measurement ofthe Neutron β-Asymmetry with Ultracold Neutrons,” arXiv:0809.2941, Physical ReviewLetters (in press).

M. Bhattacharya, D. Melconian, A. Komives, S. Triambak, A. Garcıa, E. G. Adel-berger, B. A. Brown, M. W. Cooper, T. Glasmacher, V. Guimaraes, P. F Mantica, A.M. Oros-Peusquens, J.I. Prisciandoro, M. Steiner, H. E. Swanson, S. L. Tabor and M.Wiedeking, “FT value of the 0+ → 0+β+ decay of 32Ar: A measurement of isospinsymmetry breaking in a superallowed decay,” Phys. Rev. C 77 065503 (2008).

K. G. Leach, C. E. Svensson, G. C. Ball, J. R. Leslie, R. A. E. Austin, D. Bandyopad-hyay, C. Barton, E. Bassiachvilli, S. Ettenauer, P. Finlay, P. E. Garrett, G. F. Grinyer,G. Hackman, D. Melconian, A. C. Morton, S. Mythili, O. Newman, C. J. Pearson, M.R. Pearson, A. A. Phillips, H. Savajols, M. A. Schumaker, and J. Wong, “Internal γ

3

Decay and the Superallowed Branching Ratio for the β+ Emitter 38Km,” Phys. Rev.lett. 100, 192504 (2008).

T. A. D. Brown, C. Bordeanu, K. A. Snover, D. W. Storm, D. Melconian, A. L. Sallaska,S. K. L. Sjue and S. Triambak, “The 3He + 4He →7Be astrophysical S factor,” Phys.Rev. C 76, 055801 (2007).

D. Melconian, J. A. Behr, D. Ashery, O. Aviv, P. G. Bricault, M. Dombsky, S. Fostner,A. Gorelov, S. Gu, V. Hanemaayer, K. P. Jackson, M. R. Pearson and I. Vollrath,“Measurement of the Neutrino Asymmetry in the β Decay of Laser-cooled, Polarized37K,” Phys. Lett. B 649, 370 (2007).

B. Hyland, C. E. Svensson, G. C. Ball, J. R. Leslie, T. Achtzehn, D. Albers, C. An-dreoiu, P. Bricault, R. Churchman, D. Cross, M. Dombsky, P. Finlay, P. E. Garrett,C. Geppart, G. F. Grinyer, G. Hackman, V. Hanemaayer, J. Lassen, J. P. Lavoie, D.Melconian, A. C. Morton, C. J. Pearson, M. Pearson, A. A. Phillips, M. A. Schu-maker, M. B. Smith, I. S. Towner, J. J. Valiente-Dobon, K. Wendt and E. F. Zganjar,“Precision Branching Ratio Measurement for the Superallowed β+ Emitter 62Ga andIsospin-Symmetry Breaking Corrections in A 62 Nuclei,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 10250(2006).

A. Gorelov, D. Melconian, W.P. Alford, D. Ashery, G. C. Ball, J.A. Behr, P. Bricault,J.M. D’Auria, J. Deutsch, J. Dilling, M. Dombsky, P. Dube, S. Eaton, J. Fingler, U.Giesen, F. Glck, S. Gu, O. Hausser, K.P. Jackson, T.J. Stocki, T.B. Swanson and M.Trinczek, “Scalar interaction limits from the β − ν correlation of trapped radioactiveatoms,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 142501 (2004).

M. Trinczek, A. Gorelov, D. Melconian, W.P. Alford, D. Asgeirsson, D. Ashery, G. Ball,J.A. Behr, P. Bricault, J.M. D’Auria, J. Deutsch, J. Dilling, M. Dombsky, P. Dube, S.Eaton, J. Fingler, U. Giesen, S. Gu, O. Hausser, K.P. Jackson, B. Lee, J.H. Schmid,T.J. Stocki, T.B. Swanson and W. Wong, “Novel search for heavy ν mixing from theβ+ decay of 38mK confined in an atom trap,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 012501(1998).

4

Luis A. OrozcoJoint Quantum Institute, Department of Physics, University of Maryland and National In-stitute of Standards and Technology. College Park, MD 20742-4111.office (301) 405 9740, fax (301) 314 9525lorozco@umd.eduhttp://www.physics.umd.edu/rgroups/amo/orozco/index.html

Education: B. Sc. in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Dec. 1980 Instituto Tecno-logico y de Estudios Superiores de Occidente. Guadalajara, Jal., Mexico. Ph. Dr.Physics, August 1987. University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA. Postdoc-toral at Department of Physics Harvard University, 1987-1990. Cambridge, MA, USA.

Professional experience: Assistant, Associate and Full Professor 1991- August 2003 De-partment of Physics and Astronomy, SUNYSB Stony Brook, NY, USA. ProfessorSeptember 2003 - Department of Physics University of Maryland at College Park,MD, USA

Professional memberships: American Physical Society, Optical Society of America, So-ciedad Mexicana de Fisica.

Awards and fellowships: Outstanding Teacher, 1992 and 1994, Physics, SUNYSB.Guggenheim Fellowship 1998-99. Fellow of the American Physical Society. Fellow ofthe Optical Society of America. Fellow of the Institute of Physics (UK). DistinguishedTravelling Lecturer, Division of Laser Sciences, American Physical Society 2002-2008.Member Academia Mexicana de la Ciencia.

Other activities: Editorial Board Physical Review A (2002-2008). General Chair QELSOSA (2005). Chair of the Committee of Visitors of the Division of Physics, NSF (2006).

Publications in the last three years relevant to this proposal: A. Perez Galvan, Y.Shao, and L. A. Orozco “Measurement of the hyperfine splitting of the 6S1/2 level inrubidium,” Phys. Rev. A 78, 012502 (2008).

E. Gomez, S. Aubin, L. A. Orozco, G. D. Sprouse, E. Iskrenova-Tchoukova, and M. S.Safronova, “Nuclear Magnetic Moment of 210Fr: A Combined Theoretical and Experi-mental Approach,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 172502 (2008).

A. Perez Galvan, Y. Zhao, L. A. Orozco E. Gomez, A. D. Lange, F. Baumer, G. D.Sprouse, “Comparison of hyperfine anomalies in the 5S1/2 and 6S1/2 levels of 85Rb and87Rb,” Phys. Lett. B. 655, 114 (2007).

5

E. Gomez, S. Aubin, G. D. Sprouse, L. A. Orozco, and D. P. DeMille, “Measurementmethod for the nuclear anapole moment of laser-trapped alkali-metal atoms, ” Phys.Rev. A 75, 033418 (2007)

G. Gwinner, E. Gomez, L. A. Orozco, A. Perez Galvan, D. Sheng, Y. Zhao, G. D.Sprouse, J. A. Behr, K. P. Jackson, M. R. Pearson, S. Aubin, and V. V. Flambaum,“Fundamental symmetries studies with cold trapped francium atoms at ISAC,” Hyp.Int. 172 , 45 (2006)

E. Gomez, L. A. Orozco, and G. D. Sprouse, “Spectroscopy with trapped francium:advances and perspectives for weak interaction studies,” Rep. Prog. Phys 66, 79,(2006).

E. Gomez, F. Baumer, A. D. lange, G. D. Sprouse, and L. A. Orozco “Lifetime mea-surement of the 6s level of rubidium, ” Phys. Rev. A 72, 012502, (2005).

E. Gomez, L. A. Orozco, A. Perez Galvan, G. D. Sprouse “Lifetime measurement ofthe 8s level in francium,”Phys. Rev. A 71, 062504, (2005).

Other publications: F. E. Becerra, R. T. Willis, S. L. Rolston, and L. A. Orozco “Non-degenerate four-wave mixing in rubidium vapor: The diamond configuration” Phys.Rev. A 78, 013834 (2008).

M. L. Terraciano, R. Olson Knell, D. L. Freimund, L. A. Orozco, J. P. Clemens, andP. R. Rice “Enhanced spontaneous emission into the mode of a cavity QED system,”Opt. Lett. 32, 982 (2007).

P. R. Rice, J. Gea-Banacloche, M. L. Terraciano, D. L.Freimund, and L. A. Orozco“Steady State Entanglement in Cavity QED,” Opt. Express 14, 4514 (2006).

J. Gea-Banacloche, T. C. Burt, P. R. Rice, and L. A. Orozco “Entangled and Disen-tangled Evolution for a Single Atom in a Driven Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 053603(2005).

6

Current and Pending Support

Seth AubinCurrent:Source of Support: Jeffress Memorial Trust GrantPI: Seth AubinTitle of Grant: Fermion InterferometryTotal Award Amount: $ 25,000Period of the Award: 01/01/2008 - 12/31/2008Location of Project: College of William and MaryPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. Cal: 0 Acad: 0 Sumr: 2

Source of Support: ARO DURIP grantPI: Irina Novikova; Co-PI: Seth AubinTitle of Grant: Widely Tunable Laser System for Quantum Optics and Laser Spectroscopy.Total Award Amount: $ 152,000Period of the Award: 04/15/2008 - 04/14/2009Location of Project: College of William and MaryPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. Cal: 0 Acad: 0 Sumr: 0

Pending:Source of Support: Jeffress Memorial Trust GrantPI: Seth AubinTitle of Grant: Fermion Interferometry (renewal)Total Award Amount: $ 10,000Period of the Award: 01/01/2009 - 12/31/2009Location of Project: College of William and MaryPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. Cal: 0 Acad: 0 Sumr: 2

1

Dan Melconian

Outstanding Junior Investigator: Agency of grant: Department of EnergyPI: D. MelconianTitle of grant: Searching for New Physics via the Spin-Polarized Observables from the β-Decay of Laser-Cooled Radioactive Atoms.Total Award Amount: approx. $300,000Period of the award: pending approvalLocation of Project: Texas A&M University and TRIUMF (Vancouver, Canada)Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. Cal: 0 Acad: 0 Sumr: 0.5

Source of Support: Texas A&M University College of Science and the Cyclotron InstitutePI: D. MelconianTitle of grant: Start-up funding for new tenure-track professorTotal Award Amount: $902,680Total Award Period Covered: 01/16/08 – 10/30/10Location of the Project: Texas A&M UniversityPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the project. Cal: 0 Acad: 9 Sumr: 3

2

Luis A. Orozco

The JQI cooperative agreement:This cooperative agreement provides infrastructural and core research support for the

JQI. Additionally, portion of these funds are used to support NIST core research efforts andmay include funds from an EAO or MIPR when they support a student or postdoctoralcandidate in direct relation to the other agency program.

Current:Agency of grant: NISTPI: C. Lobb, CoPI: J. R. Anderson, L. A. OrozcoTitle of grant: Cooperative Research Program for the Joint Quantum InstituteTotal Award Amount: $ 20,722,583Period of the award: 09/01/06- 08/31/11Location of Project: University of Maryland/NISTPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. Cal: 0 Acad: 0 Sumr: 7.5

Physics Frontier Center at the Joint Quantum Institute: Agency of grant: Na-tional Science FoundationPI: W. D. Phillips, and all (26) members of the Joint Quantum Institute are senior investi-gators.Title of grant: Joint Quantum Institute: Processing Quantum Coherence, this proposal.Total Award Amount: $12,500,000Period of the award: 09/01/08- 08/31/13Location of Project: University of MarylandPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. Cal: 0 Acad: 0 Sumr: 0

Source of Support: National Science Foundation Grant ITR *PI: S. Rolston; CoPIs: W. T. Hill, III, B.-L. Hu, L. Orozco, and C. WilliamsTitle of grant: Distributed Quantum InformationTotal Award Amount: $1,650,000Total Award Period Covered: 09/01/04 08/31/09Location: University of MarylandPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. 0

Source of Support: National Science Foundation, Experimental Nuclear PhysicsPI: Luis OrozcoTitle of grant: Anapole Moment Studies in Francium

3

Total Award Amount: $372,000Total Award Period Covered: 07/01/07 - 06/30/10Location of the Project: U. Maryland, TRUMF CanadaPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the project. Sumr: 1

Source of Support: National Science Foundation, AMO PhysicsPI: Luis OrozcoTitle of grant: Quantum Optics with Cavity QED,Total Award Amount: $480,000Total Award Period Covered: 07/01/07 - 06/30/10Location of the Project: U. MarylandPerson-Months Per Year Committed to the project. Sumr: 1

4

Identification of Potential Conflicts of Interest/Bias in

Selection of Reviewers

Seth AubinOther collaboratorsProf. Irina Novikova, Prof. R. Ale Lukaszew, Prof. John Delos of the College of William andMary; Prof. Kunal Das of Fordham University; Prof. Thorsten Schumm of Vienna Universityof Technology (Austria); Prof. David. P. DeMille of Yale University; E. Iskrenova-Tchoukovaand Prof. M. S. Safronova of the University of Delaware; Prof. Joseph. H. Thywissen, Bar-bara Cieszlak, Marcius H. T. Extavour, Lindsay J. LeBlanc, Dr. Stefan Myrskog, PhillipScrutton, Alan Stummer, Dylan Jervis, Alma B. Bardon, Dr. Jason McKeever, David McKayof the University of Toronto. Dr. John A. Behr, Dr. Mathew R. Pearson, K. Peter Jacksonof TRIUMF; Prof. Gerald Gwinner, University of Manitoba (Canada); Prof. Victor Flam-baum University of Sydney (Australia);

Graduated students and Postdoctoral scholars over the past five yearsStudents: None.Postdoctoral scholars: None.

Graduate and post-graduate advisorsProf. Luis A. Orozco, University of Maryland, Ph.D. graduate advisor.Prof. Gene D. Sprouse, SUNY Stony Brook, Ph.D. graduate co-advisor.Prof. Joseph H. Thywissen, University of Toronto, post-doctoral advisor.

1

Dan MelconianOther collaboratorsMember of the TRINAT and UCNA Collaborations. Collaborators include: E. Adelberger(University of Washington), A. Algora (University of Valencia), C. Andreoiu (Simon FraserUniversity), D. Ashery (Tel Aviv University), J. Aysto (Univeristy of Jyvaskyla), G.C. Ball(TRIUMF), J. A. Behr (TRIUMF), M. Bhattacharya (Brookhaven National Laboratory),B.A. Brown (Michigan State University), J.M. D’Auria (Simon Fraser University), B. Fil-ippone (California Institute of Technology), A. Garcıa (University of Washington), P.E.Garrett (University of Guelph), T. Glasmacher (Michigan State University), G. Hackman(TRIUMF), T. Ito (Los Alamos National Laboratory), K.P. Jackson (TRIUMF), A. Komives(DePauw University), P.F. Mantica (Michigan State University), J. Martin (University ofWinnipeg), C. Morris (Los Alamos National Laboratory), M. R. Pearson (TRIUMF) M.Pitt (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University), F. Sarazin (Colorado School ofMines), A. Saunders (Los Alamos National Laboratory), S. Seestrom (Los Alamos NationalLaboratory), K. Snover (Center for Nuclear Physics and Astrophysics) D.W. Storm (Centerfor Nuclear Physics and Astrophysics) C.E. Svensson (University of Guelph), E. Tatar (IdahoState University), I.S. Towner (Queens University), R. Vogelaar (Virginia Polytechnic Insti-tute and State University), A. Young (North Carolina State University)

Graduated students and Postdoctoral scholars over the past five yearsStudents: None (new Assistant Professor). Postdoctoral scholars: None (new AssistantProfessor)Graduate and post-graduate advisorsDr. K.P. Jackson, TRIUMF/SFU, Graduate Advisor. Prof. A. Garcıa, University of Wash-ington/CENPA, Post-graduate advisor.

2

Luis A. OrozcoOther collaboratorsProf. Steven L. Rolston, Prof. Christopher Monroe, Prof. Christopher Lobb, Prof. FredWellstood, Prof. Robert Anderson, Prof. Wendell T. Hill III, Prof. Bei-Lok Hu of UMD; Dr.James Porto, Dr. Paul Lett, Dr. William D. Phillips, and Dr. Carl Williams of NIST; Prof.David DeMille of Yale University; Dr. John A. Behr, Dr. Mathew R. Pearson, K. PeterJackson, TRIUMF; Prof. Gerald Gwinner, University of Manitoba, Canada; Prof. VictorFlambaum University of Sydney, Australia; Prof. James Clemens, Prof. Perry Rice, MiamiUniversity, Ohio.

Graduated students and Postdoctoral scholars over the past five yearsStudents: Dr. Wade P. Smith (2003), University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Dr. SethAubin (2003), College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. Dr. Joseph E. Reiner (2003),NIST, Gaithersburg, MD. Dr. Eduardo Gomez (2005), Univesidad Autonoma de San LuisPotosi, San Luis Potosi, Mexico. Dr. Matthew L. Terraciano (2006), NRL, Washington,DC, Rebecca O. Knell (MSc) (2008), Maryland.

Postdoctoral scholars: Dr. Daniela Manuel (2005), Campinas, Brazil, Dr. DanielFreimund (2005), Lincoln, Nebraska, Dr. Yanting Zhao (2007), Shanxi University, Taiyuan,China, Dr. Jietai Jing (2008), Shanhai Normal University, China

Total to-date number of Master in Scientific Instrumentation students 2, MS 2, Ph. D.in Physics students 11, total post-doctoral scholars sponsored 4.

Graduate and post-graduate advisorsProf. H. Jeff Kimble, Cal-Tech, Graduate Advisor, Prof. Gerald Gabrielse, Harvard Univer-sity, Post-graduate advisor.

3

Budget justification

Although we have much of the basic infrastructure and equipment to initiate a measure-ment, the support from DOE will enable us to reach sooner a result on the anapole momentmeasurement in a chain of francium isotopes, enhance our program to measure atomic par-ity violation in Fr, and continue the successful characterization of the atomic and nuclearstructure of francium through precision spectroscopy.

We have identified four major technological areas that we have used to separate theequipment: 1) Microwave systems, 2) Lasers and references, 3) Shielding and interfaces, and4) Optics and electronics. Each one of these areas includes many pieces of equipment andthey are scheduled to be ordered in accordance to the overall scientific plan of the FrPNCcollaboration. The most expensive single piece of equipment is in the 4th year: opticalfrequency comb. This unit will allow us to improve our spectroscopic precision by at leastfour orders of magnitude from where our current apparatus allows. This will facilitate manymeasurements in atomic and nuclear structure; in particular the nuclear octupole moment.The other areas are rather similar in cost, but it is of great importance that we set-up theshielding and interfaces of the FTF before the rest of the experiments start. This part ofthe equipment will be the enabler and facilitator for the whole scientific program.

We expect to have a constant need for mirrors, lenses, polarizing optics and vacuumequipment during the five years of commissioning the FTF; however none of that is beingrequested in this proposal. We will use our other sources of funding in case somethingunexpected is needed.

We expect to train at least four graduate students during the duration of the commission-ing of the FTF. The cost of those students will be paid with other grants. Any postdoctoralassociate that also helps during the commissioning phase of the FTF will not be charged tothis grant.

1