 Okay, we are live. Welcome everybody, my name is Alejandro Cardenas Aventaño and I'm going to be today's host of this very nice topic and talk by Francisco Salesa. Francisco got his PhD in 2010 from Instituto de Física Corpuscular in Spain. Then he moved to Colorado State University as a postdoc where he worked in mainly two projects, the Piri-Augur Cosmic Ray and also with the Hog Gamma Ray Observatory which is what he's going to talk about today mainly. Then in 2013 he moved to Penn State as a research associate and keep working in also both in these two collaborations. Then in 2015 he moved to Krakow, Poland as a postdoc to work full time in Hog. Then in 2017 he got a joint position which is similar to an associate professor in this institution which is the Institute of Nuclear Physics of Polish Academy of Science. Today he's going to talk about TEV Gamma Ray Astronomy with the Hog Observatory. The Hog is the Water Charing Cove Observatory. Let us just remind you that you can ask your questions using the YouTube channel or you can use Twitter and then we will read the questions for you. So thank you Francisco, Bako for being with us and I think it's your turn. Okay, so we hope that you are able to see my slides. Okay, there we go. So first thanks for the invitation. I will be talking today about the TEV Gamma Ray Astronomy with the Hog Observatory. So I will start with the outline of what I plan to talk about first. I will give a brief introduction like what is the motivation and what Gamma Ray Astronomy, we will perform Gamma Ray Astronomy. Then I will talk a little bit about the Hog Observatory. It is located, how it's been done, what is the status. Then I will start with some highlights of the recent results that the collaboration has been publishing and working recently and at the end I will mention what are the future prospects of the collaboration. So first let me start with the high energy astronomy. So here I am showing the plot of the cosmic ray spectrum. So we know that the nature is able to accelerate a cosmic ray to very high energies. My very high would mean that even greater than 10 to the 20 electron volts. But still there are things that we want to know that we don't know yet. For instance, what is the origin of the high energy cosmic rays? What are the sources and how they, I mean these sources are able to accelerate to such high energy, how they propagate and even sometimes you can even learn something about new physics from the observational of the highest energy cosmic messengers. In this case, I mean the approach that we have to study higher, I mean to do higher energy astronomy is to use some different cosmic messengers. For instance, we can directly just measure cosmic rays. The problem with cosmic rays is they are charged particles, mostly protons that they are deflected by the magnetic field, the magnetic field in the galaxy for instance and they are not pointed back to the source unless you are at very, very high energies. So this is for instance what is trying to do the pyrrogera observatory or the telescope array. Then we can use other messengers for instance gamma rays that this will be what I will be talking today, especially with what we do with Hock. And also, as you probably know, there is also a neutrino detector like ice cube and that is our future country net. Also, more recently they joined the party by gravitational waves my life on Virgo detector. Sorry. So yeah, this is light. It's like a little bit like we are going to be focusing photons, especially at the high energies. So this basically reflects what is how light is absorbing our atmosphere. So unlike visible light that you can just use your telescope at home and you can just point to your sources and gamma rays that they don't make it up to the ground, fortunately for our health in fact. So if you want to directly I mean detect the primary gamma rays you need to use, I mean the natural way to detect them will be just send satellites. Okay, so in order to, because the gamma rays interact with the atmosphere and produce a shower of electromagnetic shower. So you want to have it, you know, you want to detect the primary you basically need something up in the atmosphere. So in a light fight, I will be mentioning what is the way, I mean the current gamma ray observatories, how they do this thing. So the first method is like the natural approach, I would say you send satellites. They are very nice. They can detect the primary gamma ray. They have a very good energy and angular resolution. But the problem is that, you know, you cannot send very big detectors to space. And they are expensive to send up there. And you basically end up with the detector that are on the order of square meters. So if you want to go to TV sensitivity, basically your detector is too small and you run out of statistics. You cannot detect because you are running out of statistics. Then the approach that we do is, okay, we construct, instead of detecting the primary, we detect the second. Basically, we have the gamma ray that interacts in the atmosphere, like typically like a 10 kilometers high in the atmosphere, I mean from the sea level. And then there is an electromagnetic shower that develops. So this electromagnetic shower particle is the one that we want to detect in this ground base arrays. And this ground array has, I mean, the limitation is just, I mean, they are, you can just build them big. And you have, in general, to go to TV sensitivities. In this case, there are two approaches. One is this called Cherenkov telescope. So basically, you have your primary, you have your electromagnetic shower that develops in the atmosphere. And then there is Cherenkov light because these particles are very energetic. This Cherenkov light is attached by this Cherenkov telescope. And a typical example of that are Hayes magical veritas. And it will be the technique that will be used in the future Cherenkov telescope array. These detectors are very nice and they have a good anti-annual resolution. But the drawback is that they have a reduced field of view. So they basically need to point to the source. And in addition, they can only operate when the atmospheric conditions are good. And for instance, you cannot operate when they are, that is daylight, sorry. Then the other approach is what I will be talking today, this Hawke observatory that's called extensive air showers. In this case, we detect the Cherenkov light, but we detect the shower, but at the ground. So we have our detection units that will be water Cherenkov detectors. So we detect the Cherenkov light that is produced inside the tanks, these water Cherenkov tanks. In this case, the advantages of that is we have a large field of view and we can operate almost 24-7. We have a high duty cycle. And the drawback then is that we are, I mean, our angular and energy resolution is not as good as, for instance, the Cherenkov telescopes. But at the end, I mean, as we will show later, I mean, basically we can complement the different detection techniques and complement each other. So here I will just present some of the Hawke's and scientific goals. So because of this large, I mean, it's able to have the large field of view and it's able to operate almost 24-7. One of the scientific goals when we talk about galactic sources is that we can do a plane survey of the galactic plane. And we can be very, we have very good sensitivity at high energies and the order of more than 10 TB. Also, since we have a large field of view, we are sensitive to sources that are, for instance, difficult to detect or for the Cherenkov telescopes. And in this case, I mean, this example is the Chiminga region or even the Fermi bubbles. Okay. And then if we talk about astralactic sources, then since we have a high duty cycle, we are working, operating most of the time. We are also advantageous because we can monitor the HENs, we can produce the life curves of the HENs. We don't need to take data now, stop with the take-through because now we cannot take data and then take the following there. We basically can take all the time. He asked, I mean, if the source is up in the sky, we can just take data regardless of the conditions. And also it's very good if we want to try to catch gamma-ray bars, you know, that gamma-ray bars occur in a position that are not predicted in the sky. So, I mean, if you have a large field of view, your chances of catching one of them are basically better. And then it's not only in gamma-ray astronomy that we can do, we have a huge background of comet ray that I will talk a little bit later, so we can do some cosmic ray physics and also even some fundamental physics, like trying to search for dark matter, like from annihilation or decay of dark matter, trying to catch gamma-ray signatures. One of the things that we are also very interested in is in working in multi-messenger. We have a lot of memorandum of understanding with other experiments. For instance, with Cherenkov's telescope, we share our results pretty privately, so we have like, okay, these are the sources that we see, these are interesting sources that we might want to look and study. And also we have that, like with particle attacks, like ice cube or even gravitational waves. And I will give some examples later in the talk. So then talking about Hock, Hock collaboration is mainly U.S. and Mexican institutions. And more recently, in 2016, it was joined by the Institute of Nuclear Physics, that is the one that my home institution now, and also by the Max-Pan-Distituting in Helleberg in Germany. And this here you can see, like, a picture of one of the recent collaboration meetings. So the Hock Observatory is located in central Mexico. You can see the other, like, assuming in the region, it's like in the state of Puebla. It's next to Picoli-Horizaba. Picoli-Horizaba is one of the highest peaks in North America. And it's like in between the Sierra Negra Volcano and Picoli-Horizaba. It's like in a slope of the Sierra Negra Volcano. And it's also a place that, in fact, at the top of Sierra Negra, you have the large millimeter telescope that is another telescope, but this is for lower energies. So here you can see a zoom in with a picture of the detector. We have all this water chain of tanks. And I put, like, a scheme here. You can see, I guess, I mean, the size is five meters every time. And it's full of water. And they have four-footed multipliers inside. And that is distributed, like, in a triangle with one at the center. So just a little bit, I mean, how the detector looks like. So this is the, how a water chain of detector is. This is the, you have the steel frame. And then you have, like, a plastic, a big plastic bag that goes inside. And it's full of water. And we have water that we're going up to the mountain with trucks. It's a huge amount of water. And this is to pay 100,000 liters per water. So we have 300 of those at the side. And then the instrumentation is four-footed multipliers. Three of them are eight-inch photo multipliers that were reused from a previous experiment, from a Milagro experiment. It was basically the predecessor of Hock. And one is brand new, 10-inch photo multiplier. Okay. So then about how we detect gamma rays. So in the, we have the cartoon in the left. So basically, you have your primary that arrives extracting the atmosphere and produce this electromagnetic shower that develops in the atmosphere. So we want to catch this at the ground with our array of detectors, all the detector units. So basically, at the end, you know the position of your detectors, your photo multipliers. You know the timing when you have the heat, you know the charge. So you basically are able to reconstruct the primary. Okay. So the case, what is the energy and what is the direction of the primary gamma ray. And one of the things that's important to mention is this detector you want to build it as high as possible. So in the plot that I'm showing here in the middle and the bottom in the middle is how the number of electromagnetic particles. So basically, how big is the shower? Depending on the distance from the interactive point. So basically, if you have a detector at the sea level, you see two orders of magnitude less particles that you catch if you are at the altitude that the hawk is. And as you can imagine, this is good because the more particles you have, the more information you have and the better you can reconstruct your primary. And here, one of the things that is one of the main challenges of the detector is to discriminate between gammas and hadrons. Because the thing here is that we have a huge amount of gamma rays of hadrons. So we have like 15,000 cosmic rays per second that are reaching our detector. And from one of the brightest sources in gamma rays, that is the crab level, we expect only 400 gammas per day. So as you see, this is like several orders of magnitude this background. So the way that we want to discriminate that is, okay, you can see that they are, in fact, the showers that are developed from gammas and hadrons are slightly different. And thanks to this, we are able to discriminate gammas from hadrons. So on the left, you have what is the result from a simulation. But on the right, you have real data. And this is our event display. So basically the size of the circle that you can see there, these color circles, represents the charge. I mean, it's like a factor of the charge. It's kind of proportional to the charge, right? So the bigger means like a big charge. And the color means the timing. So in the gamma case, you have most of the high charge hits are in the center. It's like more compact. This is what you expect from electromagnetic shower. In the case of hadrons, you expect that this shower is like more like break apart. You have like million contribution outside, let's say. So we can't lead to a like high charge hits outside of the quite distance from what is the reconstructed core here. The reconstructed core is this red star. So based on that, based on the pattern of the footprint of the shower that lives in your array, you are able to discriminate from gammas to hadrons. So then, now that you already know how Hock works, I will go through some highlight of some of the results that we recently published. So on the left here, you have, I mean, you can go to the list of the whole the publications that we have. Most of our publications were done the previous year and there is happening now. So now it's like the time where we are more active, in fact, because I think I forgot to mention, but basically Hock was completely operational since 2015. So we have like two or three years of data accumulated. So now we are going there to live in the results. And one of the nice features also here is that in our way pet, you have also the access to the some of the of the data that were used to produce some of the papers that we presented. And for instance, you can see here like what is like a sky view. So you have even the catalog that we publish with the sources that we see, you can just go there and you select your position in the sky and see what exactly what we saw in our data set. It's quite nice. Okay, so first thing is that Hock sky map. This is the most recent sky map. This is and these are galactic coordinates. Okay, the big holes that you see there, the white holes is basically this thing that are out of our field of view. Okay, because we are basically the earth. I mean, you are part of the sky that you cannot see this is what this white holes represents. Right. And the the this map is done in significance. So, you know, the sources are basically this yellowish white thing. So here you can already recognize probably some of the known sources in gamma rays. For instance, the mercariant blazers. These are known active blazers as extra galactic. Also, you can recognize the galactic plane. So you know, this is galactic coordinates, right? So you have in at zero, you have basically the galactic plane. So you have most of the sources are detected in the galactic plane. And then there is also the Jeminga region or the club Nebula source. And yeah, and this is like what I'm showing just a comparison what the gamma radius sky map looks like for Fermi. This is five years above one GB for Fermi compared to Hawk and also with Hess. And you know, Hess is like a pointing instrument. So you don't have like the whole sky. And you have like basically the places where you have looked at in this particular case, I'm showing just the galactic plane because they did a deep survey and along the galactic plane. Okay, but you can more or less see the difference. And you know, this implies also different energies. And this is what I will mention here also in the Hawk sensitivities. So this plot reflects what is the flux that you need from a source in order to you will detect a five Sigma. Okay. And this you can see what is the sensitivity of Fermi that is a lower energies. Then you have the Cherenkov telescope like has various magic, the ones that are operating. And then you have Hawk. So one of the things I mentioned here is that the Cherenkov telecos are more sensitive, have better energy and angular resolution. So they are instantaneous sensitivities better that for instance, the extensive air showers like Hawk. Okay, but we have in advantage, we have a large portion we can operate all the time. So I mean, you cannot compare one day of data of Hawk with that data of Cherenkov telescope. That's the point. So you usually compare like five hours of observation, which is quite a deep observation for a Cherenkov telescope with for instance, one year and in this case, I'm plotting 507 days because was the first catalog of Hawk was done with this amount of this number of days, always one year and a half more or less. But you know, you can see that also the take home metrics here is that about 10 TV, basically, Hawk sensitivities comparable to a deep observation from a Cherenkov telescope. So basically about 10 TV is one Hawk, I mean, is a can have like an important contribution, let's say. And this is light is what I'm showing here is the crab nebula. So the crab nebula is a very well known source in gamma rays. Okay, so basically we use that with that source, observing that source to test our angular resolution, for instance, to get our gamma hardware separation and also improvements in our energy resolution. So what I'm showing here is called being three and eight. So the way we analyze our data, we basically been our events, depending on the size of the events. So the smaller the size, the lower is the being, which is basically when the smaller the size of the event in the detector means that the energies is also smaller, right? And the higher the tech, the event is, and you know, they have more PM test hits in order to endure detector, it means that the primary has higher energy. So you can see there, this is not a significant as but event map. So you can see like a cluster of events from the position that the crab nebula should be at the center of this, of this map. And you can see the clustering of the events and you can see that the cluster differently for being three and eight. So basically, from that image, we can more or less get what what is our angular resolution. And if you define your angular resolution with the criteria of 68 per se containment of the events, basically, you have like of the order of 0.25 degrees for events for events that and that are fit hitting the detector like 50% of the like half size of the detector. When you have events that have hit 50% of the detector, you respect the angular resolution of 0.25 and you have even higher energy, your energy, your angular resolution can even be slightly even better. That's one thing. Also, one thing that is nice is that high energies, our signal to background discrimination reaches the order of 10 to 1, which as I mentioned before, if you remember, I was mentioning that we get several order of magnitude more cosmic rate than gamma rays. And our selection cuts at high energy, we are able to reach signal to background ratio, which is 10 to 1, which is really nice. And finally this plot here is our measurement of the crab spectrum, the crab nebula spectrum. So then the solid red line is the fit. The red band is the systematic error and the light red band is sorry, there's a statistical error and the light red band is our systematic and this is compared with measurements from other experiments. So basically, we have good agreement. Then one of our results was also that we observed the sky and we released the catalogue of the sources that we observed. So this is the zoom in the galactic plane region where we expect most of your sources to be. And here we basically have tax of the sources. The tax on the upper part are sources that we're already known before HAWK. And the sources in below are the sources that were detected by HAWK. And in there, so this is for half of the galactic plane is for one part of the galactic plane and the one in the bottom is for another part of the galactic plane. So the next thing here is that we were in our catalogue we were claiming 39 sources but from out of these 39 sources there were 19 that were without a counterpart of TV energies. And by counterpart we defined that there are sources that are detected at least half a degree away. So basically we are seeing regions of emission of gamma rays that are of interest to study. Okay, this is a more recent map so I can just go back and forth. You can see that increase of the significance. So basically it's with twice the data. This is the most recent map. And for instance thing that you can study from our observations is like trying to see what are these new sources. So for instance we have this HAWK 1953 source that was not previously known but was not detected at TV. And you will share information with other instruments as I said at the beginning. So it's very fast, it's magic, it's Fermi. So they can look at our source. And this is very nice because it was like the first source that we detected that was not detected and they were able this, you can see this yellowish region, this is a significance region that was detected afterwards after the MOU with Peritas that were able to also detect this source that they observed this region in fact but they didn't have, they didn't observe enough time. So since we point to that interesting region they would take more data and they finally saw that this source was showing up. And not only this but there are also other different regions. I just highlighted another one which is quite interesting also. And that is this, first there is one source that is detected already by other TV instruments. And there is another source that's kind of next to the other one that is infal more significant for us that is not the same. So as I said you know Hock discovered triggers other instruments observations and for instance Telenkov Telescope can perform a more detailed observation. So the sources that were, I mean interesting sources that were discovered by Hock were being observed by other instruments and we have a couple of papers that are in preparation and hopefully will be submitted soon and published during this year where we have observations from Telenkov Telescope and for Fermi observations of the Hock sources. Okay moving a little bit forward we have the Yeminga region that we observed. This is a very interesting region also. First thing this Yeminga was detected by Milagro they wanted was Hock predecessor. This is our maps from Milagro here. This is the what you see if you have to perform a point source analysis. The funny thing here is that this exhibition is very extended. So Spain very extended was challenging for Telenkov Telescope so they were not able to detect this emission and only after Hock came later of Milagro to confirm that that source. And this is what is what's observed by Milagro after eight years of observation. Milagro was like an order of magnitude even a little bit more less sensitive than Hock. So this extension is interesting because it's like two radius extension but what you see in X-rays is an extension that is the order of arc minutes. Basically something like it's two order of magnitude larger in gammas that you ought to see in X-rays. So because of that, I mean we're suggesting that these regions can be what we was probably going on there is that you have the electrons that are accelerated by the by the the the Xemina pulsar and then probably this is what you see is that like gammas producing after inverse content of these high energy electrons. And it was very interesting because you have like a nearby source that is producing leptons and this can be like I was pointed by some theoreticians like can be like the reason why you see the Lepamela positron excess in the cosmic rays. So we have this positron fraction that you expect to decrease but suddenly about 10 GB you see an increase by Pamela that was confirmed by MAS and other experiments that was not expected. So Yeminga was confirmed by Hock. This is a map from Hock. It's a significance map. It's a with under a point source assumption. The white contours are the after extended morphology assumptions. So these are five, seven and ten sigma contours. Okay, but not only that, apart from Yeminga, it was also we also found a similar extension for the first time from the pulsar Ausis 56. Also people know about like monogen. So this is very interesting because you know both pulsar would have been like the main one of the main candidates. If you know with this astrophysical source producing this positron fraction, many authors were pointed to this to be the main suspects. Okay, what we measure with Kobi, we were able to measure that and apart from measuring the flux, we also were able to measure the profile distribution. We just discovered that it's very extended. It's about five degrees. And if you think about five degrees, how extended is that? If we were able to see the gamma ray sky, you will see that the Yeminga region is about 10 times the moon size. Okay, so it's very, very large source. And then you can understand why it's difficult for the Cherenkov telescope to discover. So from this radial profile, okay, because you have the gamma emission is associated with the electron and positron accelerate. Right, so from this gamma profile, you can guess, you can infer what we did like the diffusion coefficient. So your model is basically that the particles are diffusing away, accelerated and diffusing away from the pulsar, and you have gamma rays, thanks to the inverse contour. You have gamma rays accelerated, for instance, picking up background CMB photons, ambient CMB photons, and then you can accelerate that to gamma rays energy. I think here is that the measured diffusion, I mean, we found out that from this profile, the diffusion is like a slower than the that was thought. So from the information that we get from the flux that we measure on the profile, and under our assumption that was like there is isotropic and homogeneous diffusion from these sources, then we can estimate what will be the positron flux at the earth, and is this plot here. So this blue solid line is what we expect from our observation. And we test different things, like for instance, what will be the different assumption from the luminosity of the pulsar and different assumptions of how the diffusion coefficient changes with the energy, and also the systematic errors, that is this black line, and also the statistical, but at the end, I mean, our observations were unable to explain what we see there, the positron excess, and it was published in Science by the end of the last year. So then the question is, well, where is the positron excess coming from then? So first thing that we want to mention is that, I mean, we want to mention is that we only study two sources, it's true that is to pulsar, it's true that there are main suspects, but there are other sources that can be contributed. In fact, there is a paper that was published by Lyndon and Al after our catalogue, that we were predicting that we will see similar TV hellos from other pulsars. And in fact, they even predict that even pulsars that are not beam to earth, that are difficult to detect in other counterparts web lands, that they call invisible pulsars can be thanks to this extended gamma ray emission, can be detected by Hawk. And in this plot, what we're showing here is what they did, this is from this paper from them, is basically they put like 80 NF pulsars, to basically 80 NF is a catalogue of pulsars, is the gray dots, they highlight it in green, the ones that are in the Hawk field of view. And they estimated which ones probably we should be able to see if this is, I mean, this are emitting this TV hellos. And in fact, one of the sources that we think came in the catalogue, and we discovered later, and we guys basically released an astronomical telegram announcing that is one of these sources that were mentioned here, which is a sort that is kind next to the crop and is also mentioned like extended. So, yeah, we are, in fact, we are likely to catch and discover more of these TV hellos from pulsars. Also, one of the, you know, it's always, one of the hypotheses can be like this is this positive fraction can be from the annihilation or decay that matter into standard model particles. Or even there are recent papers also, some after the publication, that they claim that, I mean, one way to explain that is you have like the, our assumption that the diffusion constant is, you know, that is constant. I mean, that does not change. It's not true, but you have like a different diffusion constant next to the pulsars and how and then you have a different diffusion constant. So there are, you know, some papers that have been written that they are still that they think that they still can be explained with the minga, but you have to take into account that the diffusion constant is, in fact, can change. And also there are other theories that I mean this style like can be other cosmic accelerator, not only pulsars and also even theories about secondary production. So I'm going to extend more on that. I will now show you also because we are half large people. We want to do a high duty cycle. We want to measure transients and do multi messenger analysis. Fortunately, we don't have any detection yet, but we were trying to look at some interesting ice cube neutrinos. For instance, the plot on the upper right is one of one multi PV neutrinos detected by ice cube. So this is a very high energy neutrino. And the good thing is it's a myonotrino. And this probably, you know, the myonotrinos have a better localization, a better angular resolution. So we may easily maybe you don't have to look in a large extension to have like less trial factors. And so we look, they are unfortunately, we didn't see anything. And they are already interesting events like multiple of neutrinos that were kind of close in time. And also one recent ice cube neutrino that has a likely in gamma ray counterpart. Unfortunately, we look at all them. We have the details that we sent, even a paper here, also where we didn't see anything. Also, we are trying to catch gamma ray bars to have a recent paper also published. I see where we study the gamma ray bars from trigger by other experiments, like, for instance, Fermi Fermi. And we observe some of these gamma ray bars, but we didn't see any indication yet of a TB gamma ray bars. And then it's very nice also gravitational wave, the couple of events that were, you know, detected by Ligo and Virgo. And we study some of them. Here I show one of the ones that we studied. That was the trigger time was fall within our field of view. So this blue line is the half field of view. This red contours are the most probable location of the gravitational wave happening. And we, you know, our best candidate was like a spot that have a 0.08 p value posterior significance, but it's not enough to claim anything. And we also observe this very nice event that is binary neutron star merger. But unfortunately, it was out of our field of view at the time of the trigger. And we were only able to measure that now hours later. So we were only able to set upper limits. And also this plot here is a kind of nice plot, where we kind of, this is the sensitivity, depending on the zenith angle, at different assumptions, what will be our capabilities of the tech, a short gamma ray bar. Short gamma ray bar is probably what you expect from a gravitational wave event. And for a nearby gamma ray bars, and it's like redshift up to 0.1. Okay. So to see that we plot a couple of gamma ray bars that were detected by Fermilad. So we should be sensitive to such type of short gamma ray bars if they are high enough and they fall like in a good zenith angle for us. So basically, we are just waiting for the more events from Ligra and Virgo as I think it will happen in fall, they will start taking it again. So we are just waiting for more events and increase our statistics. So I will try to go because I think I'm already a little bit short on time. So he has mentioned in that Markarian galaxies, they are HEMs, very well known and extra galactic, but our advantage of Hock is that now we can monitor it and bias and continuously. This is a light curve that covers more than one year, one year and a half, more or less. When you can see that you have this, you know, you can see like high variability. In fact, this is consistent with constant flag by more than six sigma and you can see like different like flaring events. So now we are even able to take these flaring events and others to other experiments to tell them that this is something interesting happening. You should observe to that source. Also, like we asked, quickly Fermi bubbles. As I said, we are, we have a large field of view so we can cover part of the North Fermi bubbles. If you choose probably familiar with the Fermi bubbles are a large and symmetrical structure that extends five kilo years about the galactic plane that were detected by Fermi. So, I mean, this is a good candidate to be detected by Hock. In this plot here is what we are able to get. We didn't see, we have no detection, but we were able to infer a relevant upper limit. So this dash lines, sorry this, yes, the dash black lines is like the upper limits that we get with Hock and we have the point by Fermi and different models that are trying to explain the data. With Hock, we are already able to constrain a couple of models. There are some models that we are not able to constrain yet, but some models we are already able to constrain on this or information in this publication. Then also, even if it's not a Darmatter detector, you with Hock, you have like a large field of view. So there is this map, you have good candidates that are expected to contain a large amount of Darmatter and having like low luminosity in gamma. So you are very good target to study. So we study some of them, have some publication. I will be not spend much time here, but basically we were able to set upper limits in the cross section and the lifetimes or annihilation and decay. These limits basically complement other experiments that are quite competitive and relevant for what the Darmatter masses are more than 10 TB. Also, even if it's not a cosmic ray experiment, as I mentioned before, is we have a lot of cosmic rays in our data. So we can use them and we can perform still fishes with cosmic rays. So for instance, one of the nice things that was discovered in my lab, and was then verified by Hock, is that there is a cosmic ray anisotropy. So this map here, this is the intensity. So there looks like some, we get more cosmic rays from some direction on the other. But this anisotropy is seen at large and the smallest scales. This is a plot of large scale. Okay, so we just see that the blue line is like a kind of deficit that you expect from anisotropy and this reddish is what like excess. And we are, we published a paper already, one of the analysis that's very nice. We are combining data with ice cubes. So we know that we can cover both hemisphere, the north and the south. And this is a preliminary plot of what is Hock and ice cube combined analysis. And it will be also a paper submitted very soon and we will have paper probably this year. And also we can detect the moon shadow, which can be the cosmic ray moon shadow. It can be used is the plot here can be used for validate our ponding and energy response. And also we can even put points on the oldest all particle. You remember the plot that they show the cosmic ray the very beginning. So there is a range of energies that we covered and we can measure the all particle cosmic ray spectrum. And this was also publication that is this blue dots and this is the systematic error in our measurement. And now briefly I will comment a bit on the papers that we are, that will be published in submitting and publishing probably this year. One is the signal region. This is a very interesting region is the region on the left. Fermilat discovered a cocoon that is a region that of star forming region that is good candidate for cosmic ray acceleration. And I think is that is large extended so we can be detected by Hawk and it would be nice and interesting to see what is the maximum energy, what is the spectrum that we can measure with Hawk. If there is a cutoff in the energy and what is the implication this cutoff can have. And also this another source that Milagro 2019, which is extended a very hard spectrum. And also this next to them there is another source that is quite nice also because it's extended but has no counterpart. And it's one of these I mentioned invisible pulses are the previous in the talk and can be also like a good nice candidate for that. Then another nice source is SS43 which is a X-ray binary and we have an indication of a first TV emission from the lobes. It was a porcimapetrial hint by Berita that was announced in the ICRC but we now have like a detection at TV and about preliminary results. It seemed that leptom's models of emission of gamma rays may be favorable in for that source. But as I said this is a work that will be finished soon and will be submitted to the journal. So you will have to wait for the final results during this year. Also a very nice thing is the high energy. So we will not extend much here but basically we are improving our energy reconstruction and we will be sensitive. We are sensitive to very high energy so about 50 TEBs. Basically this energy basically Hock is the one that performs outperforms any other gamma ray detector right now. We can even see a very huge event from the Crab Nebula. We can detect the Crab Nebula more than 10 sigma and we have very interesting sources that we can see some of that are known. We will be interested to see what is how are detected and what is the spectrum of how, what is the maximum energy and how long the this spectrum extends to higher energies. Because these are very good candidates to be pebatrons like the cosmic ray acceleration in the galaxy. So it will be nice to study them. And just very briefly I will comment a little bit about the future of Hock. So we are already deploying what do we call out triggers. So our triggers are small water Cherenkov tanks. You can see from these pictures so we finish deploying all of them. So this is the the main array on the small water Cherenkov tanks. We are now in the instrumentation phase. We have 40 percent of them already instrumented and we expect to have them fully operational by the end of this summer. The nice thing of that is that there are some events especially peak events that where you have like your detector can see the heat from the shower that is produced by the primary at the very high energy primary but your core is reconstructed outside the array. So your determination of the position is not very good and your energy determination and location of the position of the primary is not very good. So with these out triggers we will improve our effective area especially about 10 TB by a factor of four. So it will be very nice to for studying this high energy sources that I just mentioned. And if we look in the more like a longer future we have there are plans in the collaboration together with other external not it's not only hope but other external physicists, elemental physicists to to world what is called a software and gamma rays survey observatory which plans to be like similar to Hock but in the south and this I mean now they are discussing of what will be the the good better side. I mean they are candidates in Argentina or even Chile that really like a good size so they do have like high altitude enough to you know to host this type of detectors and will be nice because with that we will have a full coverage together with Hock and we can be a very good complement for the south version of CTA and we plan some improvements on that not only just with the same thing we plan to go higher because higher is better because you can detect more particles for the shower and have a larger area. So yeah so the summary I think I will skip because I'm running a bit I think short on time basically you can read that later I will be posting the slides and yeah and now I think it's I would like to thank you for your attention and I will be taking some questions that you have trying to solve them thank you very much. Okay thank you let me see what's going on. Okay thank you very much Paco for this very interesting talk about all this cool science can be that has been done already and all the things that are going to happen in the near future regarding particle physics so yes the slides will be posted later you can check that in our channel so we can start with a few questions from our coordinators. Do we have questions guys? I have one so thanks Paco for the super nice talk so can you please go back to your slide 29 I think where you showed the dark matter limits? Just a second I need to share the screen again sorry for that let me put in full screen yeah so I cannot see the axis the mass goes till 10 to the 5 GV? 10 to the 5 GV yeah that's that's called this is GV so basically this is a 1 TV this is 110 TV so our lines are the solid lines and the different lines represent different targets. I see and the lower plot is yeah I mean you know in the in the publication you have yeah it's a bunch of plots you have different channels this I pick just one like an example this is BB bar and the one on the upper part is annihilation and the one on the bottom is decay but I mean in the publication you have other channels that were tested. Okay okay so these are actual limits not projections no these are these are limits these are upper limits okay thanks okay then we have any other questions yeah yes Camilo hi hello Francisco thanks for the nice talk I have two questions or three questions so one very basic one so concerning like the the physics of these detectors what can you do with water terrain called telescope that you cannot do with a telescope like HES or with CTA so what would be the main difference between what you can do with those things that's one of the questions I have okay you want me to answer that first yep so okay so the thing is they have different properties so a Cherenkov telescope is very good I mean they can study better the source but there are things like monitoring of the light curve for instance of the place that you cannot do I mean you can catch part of the light curve let's say but you cannot spend your money we will in CTA and be pointing all the time to Arcadian Galaxy right and this you can be done for instance with Hawk because we don't you either need to point we have the data there I mean you just need the source to be up in the sky and that's it so one of us I think is very important so we have an unbiased like monitoring so you so how can you collect information from entire sky whereas these telescopes just point to a fixed direction so they basically they have targets that are interest for them and they schedule they have like a schedule of the time they have limited time but they have to schedule what do I want to see tonight because they observe at night we need the dark sky so did okay tonight we are going to observe this source we are going to scan this part of the galactic plane so they did do these things or for instance there is an alert that marcarionics flaring because Hawk saw that flaring and say okay go fast and point to that source or let's say there is a neutrino that is detected by the ice cube very interesting so they go fast and they point that they have like kind of priority list let's say and then point to that source this is how this telescope works and the drawback is that they cannot point to all the places right but on the contrary Hawk can point to all the places but the drawback is that it's not sensitive as these telescopes okay okay thanks so that was my first question and my second question has to do with this this results that you were mentioned mentioning concerning gaminga and this other pulsar so as a hypothesis for explaining the the excess in Pamela so my question is why people why do people discuss these two particular pulsars and not all their nearby sources okay so the interests of these pulsars are two mainly one is that they are very nearby so we are talking about 250 parsecs which in cosmic scale is our neighborhood but so are they the closest to us or they are not the closest but very close but it's not only this I mean you have to be like powerful let's say so they have like a spin power also energetics matter and also matters that they are old enough because if the pulsar is very young these particles didn't make it to the earth yet right have these pulsars are of the order of of 10 to the 5 years so this is the electron diffusion I mean they have enough time to diffuse away and finally reach the earth okay this is why I mean the main two reasons one is that they are nearby and they are old enough to be able to produce I mean because they need to be like the right age because if they are too young they basically didn't reach this particle didn't reach the earth and if they are too old they are banished and they are used and detect them anymore so it's not possible to let's say try to explain the Pamela excess with all their pulsars that are closer to us just because they are not rotating fast enough so I mean the for the ones that we see at these ones are the best my personal opinion is that we have the south to explore yet and in fact this Yeminga pulsar was only discovered by by my Milagro I mean that was unknown until then I mean not the pulsar but you know this extended region in gammas until Hock didn't come and so this is true I mean something we didn't know about that and it might happen that also there are sources in the in the south and maybe have like contribution of other pulsars that we as I mentioned before we didn't discover yet that they're making a contribution and they have a lot of them that can be contributed and this was some of the hypothesis that people say that yeah when you have a lot of pulsars and they can at the end contribute but one of the main hypothesis was they say that Yeminga was the main the Minga was the main culprit let's say and the other ones were contributing increasing also the the depository class I mean there are theoretical papers that you put the Yeminga contribution the other pulsars and they make it able to match the Pamela excess okay but as I said I mean these two are more interesting because of these two properties they are nearby and they are kind of like the right age let's say okay then and my final question in just one minute so you were saying that in the near future there will be improvements so that Hock is some sort of a counterpart on the northern hemisphere of cta right yep so what what so what could you do if that's the case I mean if cta has a counterpart in the northern hemisphere so you know what would happen if there is no counterpart of cta on the northern hemisphere what could we miss yeah I mean that the other thing I mean this is like well I mean the physics case is one of the things that has been studied now and this is what we what you want and this is because I mean the detector is not designed yet so we want to have a detector that is able to provide useful physics and apart from cta so one of the things is that they can make it higher altitude to make me more sensitive about the area depending on how you distribute the tanks you know how they are you are also sensitive to a different range of energies lower energies of higher energies so these things are still not decided yet and are being discussed as well as the site but for sure things that will be able to help is like for for like transient sources like the cta is still will be a point in telescope so there are transient things that probably are going to be hard to do with cta and still hawk can can and can do and also it will be explored of of the south without any bias so we don't need two points so there are sources that I don't know maybe there is like we have also like for instance self-triggered alerts let's say let's say happen something and I've got my red bars and we are able to detect when the hawk starts because it's more sensitive than the one the hawk let's say it's an order of magnitude more sensitive but we are sensitive to gamma ray bars and we exceed like 10 in a year then I mean this is very important to have this detection and and see if ice cube can see that then also and for cta you will need to point and it's not going to be trivial to catch one of the gamma ray bars so I mean as I said there is still not plan there is still planning how well the detector will will be the physics case of the detector but yeah in principle there is still room for things that we can do and a bicycle I mean of cta okay thank you very much thank you bako I think we have time for one question that was made on the youtube channel by mukarbeck organoff I apologize for differentiation and you can bako you can read the question on the group chat which is that do the light curves or some sources already a bible up to 2017 for example that's from daily monitor paper for 17 month yeah in fact I got yeah yeah yeah so the light curves you want the information of the light curves right yeah and it doesn't if it's if it's if it's not a viable even by a public it is in fact and it's a question that they usually get because people are interested on this information so there is this public data just put the slides like well okay let me first say okay yeah we can see it so basically you have that I mentioned only the catalogue but it is in a paper so you can even reproduce because it's a requirement by science in fact that you provide the data set and the code that you use so you can reproduce the result and this also that is called late light curves so they are asking files where they're basically the points that they show there you have the this point like in a I think it's asking five format this point they are in this plot they are there so you can get this information there it is even a written me file that explains you what does it mean in a so you have that information so you can access that in our public page yes okay perfect I think that answers the question for this person yeah perfect okay so thank you very much for this night talk Paco this was really nice so thank you everybody for tuning in today our next webinar will be next in in two weeks by Shaby Bertot from Centro Atomico Bariloche and then the next one is going to be by Eduardo Sheteja from Maple Software talking about how to do physics with Maple Software so stay tuned remember to follow us on YouTube, Twitter and all our social media and stay tuned thank you very much thank you Paco