Would detectors optimized for the 4–6 pair window miss millicharged particles with different ionization signatures entirely?

The short answer: yes, detectors tuned to the 4–6 electron-hole pair window could miss millicharged particles with significantly different ionization signatures — but the archive suggests this is partly a *feature*, not a bug.

Here's why. When millicharged particles (particles with fractional electric charges, like 10⁻³ times the electron charge) pass through silicon detectors, their ionization signature depends heavily on their velocity and the material's response. The key insight comes from work on collective excitations: when you include the full quantum response of the detector material — especially the excitation of bulk plasmons (coherent oscillations of the electron gas) — the recoil ionization spectrum from relativistic particles *peaks around 4–6 electron-hole pairs* [AG-2024.02-1255]. This is notably *higher* than what older, simpler models predict (like the free-electron approximation).

This matters because millicharged particles produce much *weaker* ionization than ordinary charged particles. A millicharged particle with charge ε·e (where ε ≈ 10⁻³) will create roughly ε² times fewer ionization events. So a detector optimized for the standard 4–6 pair window — which is already quite low-threshold — is actually well-positioned for millicharged particles in a beam setting [AG-2024.12-1403].

However, there are important caveats:

1. Velocity matters. The 4–6 pair peak applies to *relativistic* particles. Slower millicharged particles (perhaps from cosmic rays or dark matter halo) would produce different spectra. A detector locked into one energy window might indeed miss a population with a notably different velocity distribution.

2. Different production mechanisms give different signatures. Particles from an electron beam dump will be highly relativistic; room-temperature millicharged dark matter would be non-relativistic; cosmic-ray secondaries span a range. Each has a distinct ionization profile [AG-2025.10-1119].

3. Complementary detection strategies exist. The archive also describes non-detector approaches — electric accumulators that concentrate millicharged particles by up to twelve orders of magnitude before measurement [AG-2025.10-1651, AG-2025.10-1649], and superconducting cavity deflection experiments [AG-2024.12-1286]. These sidestep ionization signatures altogether.

Practical takeaway: A 4–6 pair threshold is actually quite sensitive to beam-produced millicharged particles because the physics naturally pushes the signal into that window [AG-2024.02-1255]. But if you're hunting for millicharged dark matter or slow halo particles with a very different ionization profile, you'd want either a broader energy acceptance or a complementary detection method — like electric concentration or direct deflection in RF cavities.