There is a technical question I always curious about to ask a CERN expert? I have read, http://nordberg.web.cern.ch/PAPERS/JINST08.pdf, page 5,
that the data sampling rate, number of stills taken from the collisions on the LHC’s Detectors Atlas and CMS are about 40KHz and probably this number to be upgraded up to 100KHz at the end of this year when the LHC is restarted with the higher luminosity beams (i.e. more collisions per second, currently at 1GHz). From these 40K/s (one event still, sampled every 25μs) to 100K/s (one event still every 10μs, upgraded later this year) sampled detector events from the collisions via the L1-trigger system only 200/s events are selected and recorded as being statistical important. All the other sampled events are ignored and deleted. Thus, in the best case one sampled event (still) every 10μs! (also, recorded events 200Hz thus about one event recorded as possible significant every 5ms in average).
Don’t you believe this rate to be too SLOW and that a very fast decay event could be missed out and therefore a potentially statistical significant result being never recorded for further analysis especially now where we are looking for new very high energy physics at dimensions of the order of 10E-17 cm?
I mean I find this sampling rate used, too slow and a bottleneck and low probability in order to catch these new hypothetical high energy particles?
Of course this could be statistically fixed by recording data for many years like the latest LHCb possible related to leptoquarks 3.1σ potential discovery. They collected these data for the last 10 years!! to reach only at 3.1σ:
But then again what if a decay event duration is much less than 10μs, a fraction of the sampling period wouldn't that imply that more and more significant collision events would be more and more totally missed out and more and more years of recording events will be needed as we probe higher and higher energies to come to a statistical significant result? Maybe in the worst case scenario an exponential function?
What is the time-of-flight resolution of the detector sensors? I expect this to be a millionth fraction of a picosecond ? Right?
I believe the CERN members are aware of this bottleneck of the detectors and are blaming it on budgetary limitations on CERN.