HEPAP SUBPANEL Synopsis of the Long Range Plan for U.S. High Energy Physics Jon Bagger / Barry Barish Presentation to HEPAP October 29, 2001.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Brief Summary of the HEPAP Subpanel Report Oct 2001 draft version Purpose of this summary Format of the Report Chapter-by-Chapter Analysis Summary and.
Advertisements

Neutrinos in CHIPP Allan Clark Neuchâtel Meeting June 2004.
Broader Impacts: Meaningful Links between Research and Societal Benefits October 23, 2014 Martin Storksdieck I Center for Research on Lifelong STEM Learning.
ILCSC Report KILC12 / Daegu Jonathan Bagger Chair, ILCSC Johns Hopkins University 4/23/12.
Position of the Czech Republic on the European Strategy in Particle Physics Current main activities in particle physics * Plans for the future Recommendations.
European Strategy for Particle Physics 2013 Preparatory group->Strategy group Individual town meetings Town meeting in Krakow: september 2012 Drafting.
1 AAAS Meeting: February 2008  Particle Physics and the Responsible Use of Public Resources.
Beyond the ALCPG David B. MacFarlane Associate Laboratory Director for PPA.
The Importance of ILC Communications Barry Barish Communications Workshop VLCW06 17-July-06.
1 Personal Perspectives “Elementary Particle Physics in the 21st Century” Barry C. Barish Caltech EPP Nov-04 International Linear Collider.
Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy Board on Physics and Astronomy Committee on Setting Priorities for NSF’s Large Research Facility Projects.
Industry and the ILC B Barish 16-Aug May-05ILC Consultations - Washington DC2 Why e + e - Collisions? elementary particles well-defined –energy,
HEPAP SUBPANEL Long Range Plan for U.S. High Energy Physics Jon Bagger / Barry Barish HEPAP Presentation October 29, 2001.
Department of Energy Office of Science Yet Another Report from DOE Office of High Energy Physics Presented to SLUO September 10, 2006 Dr. Robin.
A Long Range Plan for U.S. High Energy Physics Jon Bagger & Barry Barish HEPAP January 28, 2002 HEPAP Subpanel on Long Range Planning.
New Frontiers in Particle Physics and The Splendors of a Linear Collider Barry Barish Caltech University of Iowa 16-Sept-02.
A Possible Strategy Towards a Future Lepton Collider Tor Raubenheimer SLUO Annual Meeting September 17, 2009.
Interdisciplinary and Interagency Cooperation in High Energy Physics Barry Barish BPA 5-Nov-02.
View from the NSF: Later Years J. Whitmore (EPP-PNA) M. Pripstein (LHC) M. Goldberg, J. Reidy (EPP) LEPP – CLEO CESR Symposium at Cornell, May 31, 2008.
The International Linear Collider Barry Barish IUPAP General Assembly Cape Town 26-Oct-05.
Review of last year: Global Design Effort Barry Barish ILC Consultations URA, Washington DC 12-May-05.
International collaboration in high energy physics experiments  All large high energy physics experiments today are strongly international.  A necessary.
Challenges For Realizing the ILC The View from HEPAP Fred Gilman Snowmass 2005 August 23, 2005.
1 Albrecht Wagner, Snowmass 0805 Albrecht Wagner DESY and Hamburg University Challenges for Realising the ILC.
HEPAP and P5 Report DIET Federation Roundtable JSPS, Washington, DC; April 29, 2015 Andrew J. Lankford HEPAP Chair University of California, Irvine.
Director, DG RTD, Directorate International Cooperation
Partnerships and Broadening Participation Dr. Nathaniel G. Pitts Director, Office of Integrative Activities May 18, 2004 Center.
Organizing the Linear Collider. Steps toward the ILC 1989 – 1996: Operation of the world’s only linear collider, the 90 GeV SLC at Stanford Linear Accelerator.
A new start for the Lisbon Strategy Executive summary Increase and improve investment in Research and Development Facilitate innovation,
Long Range Planning Pier Oddone September 24, 2007.
Round-table: Discussion on Future Machines. With the discovery of the Higgs Boson Self-consistent model (SM) accounting for all Particle Physics phenomena.
CLIC detector & physics study “news from the ET ” Lucie Linssen L. Linssen, IB meeting, 18 April
Three Horizon2020 priorities: 1.Excellent science 2.Industrial leadership 3.Societal challenges.
ESTELA Summer Workshop, 26 June 2013 The EU-SOLARIS project.
APEC ENERGY WORKING GROUP FRAMEWORK PROPOSAL FOR IMPLEMENTING ENERGY INVESTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS (November 2004).
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science High Energy Physics Advisory Panel Meeting FY 2009 Budget Request.
P5 and the HEP Program A. Seiden Fermilab June 2, 2003.
International Linear Collider The ILC is the worldwide consensus for the next major new facility. One year ago, the choice was made between the two alternate.
The time line Autumn 2011CERN Council initiated an update exercise to the European Strategy for Particle Physics which was approved by a special Council.
Understanding Matter, Energy, Space and Time: The Case for the e  e  Linear Collider  Document produced at the instigation of the World Wide Study of.
24-Aug-11 ILCSC -Mumbai Global Design Effort 1 ILC: Future after 2012 preserving GDE assets post-TDR pre-construction program.
NLC Status and Milestones D. L. Burke ISG9 KEK December 10-13, 2002.
11 DOE Office of Science High Energy Physics Program AAAC Meeting October 15, 2009 National Science Foundation Dennis Kovar Associate Director of the Office.
THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR FUTURE ACCELERATORS (ICFA) Roy Rubinstein2nd International Conference on New Frontiers in Physics - 4 September
US LHC Accelerator Research Program Jim Strait For the BNL-FNAL-LBNL LHC Accelerator Collaboration DOE Meeting 18 April 2003 brookhaven - fermilab - berkeley.
Accelerators in our Future ILC and Beyond Barry Barish Caltech Neutrino Telescope - Venice 13-March-09.
1 GUTs and Branes DESY Theory Workshop 2003 A brief introduction to the future of particle physics at DESY Albrecht Wagner Hamburg, 23 September 2003.
Status of the International Linear Collider and Importance of Industrialization B Barish Fermilab 21-Sept-05.
CERN Report (II) Rolf-Dieter Heuer ECFA Meeting Frascati 1 July
SiD – Beyond Snowmass Andy White University of Texas at Arlington for the SiD Concept 1/18/2013SiD Beyond Snowmass A. White.
F. Richard LAL/Orsay 1 ELAN in 2006 Annual Meeting.
9/17/041 The International Linear Collider Michael Witherell Presentation to The Funding Agencies for a Linear Collider September 17, 2004.
Atsuto Suzuki (KEK), Chair ICFA Report from ICFA ICFA mission and membershipICFA PanelICFA Activity.
1 Future Circular Collider Study Preparatory Collaboration Board Meeting September 2014 R-D Heuer Global Future Circular Collider (FCC) Study Goals and.
Glion Colloquium / June Accelerating Science and Innovation R.-D. Heuer, CERN HL-LHC, Aix-les-Bains, 1 Oct ECFA HL-LHC Experiments Workshop.
John Womersley 1/13 Fermilab’s Future John Womersley Fermilab May 2004.
ATTRACT is a proposal for an EU-funded R&D programme for sensor, imaging and related computing devlopment Its purpose is to demonstrate the value of European.
P5 Report: The Particle Physics Roadmap 1 A. Seiden Fermilab May 14, 2007.
SLAC and ILC Jonathan Dorfan, Director LCFOA, SLAC May 1, 2006 Particle & Particle Astrophysics.
Perspective on the Future of HEP By Jonathan Dorfan, SLAC Director Snowmass 2001 Sunday, July 1, 2001.
The ILC Outlook Barry Barish HEP 2005 Joint ECFA-EPS Lisbon, Portugal 23-July-05.
CERN-US Relations and the LHC Program Rüdiger Voss Head of International Relations, CERN USLUA Annual Meeting, Argonne| November 12-14, 2014.
1 Comments concerning DESY and TESLA Albrecht Wagner Comments for the 5th meeting of the ITRP at Caltech 28 June 2004 DESY and the LC What could DESY contribute.
Revealing the Hidden Nature of Space and Time Charting the Course for Elementary Particle Physics (in the U.S.) Committee on Elementary Particle Physics.
WP leaders meeting R. Aleksan October 5 th, 2009 TIARA 1.Objectives 2.General Context 3.Building TIARA 4.Conclusion.
CPM 2012, Fermilab D. MacFarlane & N. Holtkamp The Snowmass process and SLAC plans for HEP.
REFLECTED IN JAMAICA’S ENERGY POLICY
Process of the 2nd update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics FCC week, 29 May 2017, Berlin Sijbrand de Jong, President of the CERN Council (slides.
Yet Another Report from DOE Office of High Energy Physics
Particle Physics Theory
Presentation transcript:

HEPAP SUBPANEL Synopsis of the Long Range Plan for U.S. High Energy Physics Jon Bagger / Barry Barish Presentation to HEPAP October 29, 2001

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation2 Recommendation #1 We recommend that the U.S. take steps to remain a world leader in the vital and exciting field of particle physics, through a broad program of research focused on the frontiers of matter, energy, space and time. The U.S. has achieved its leadership position through the generous support of the American people. We renew and reaffirm our commitment to return full value for the considerable investment made by our fellow citizens. This includes, but is not limited to, sharing our intellectual insights through education and outreach, providing highly trained scientific and technical manpower to help drive the economy, and developing new technologies that foster the health, wealth and security of society at large.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation3 SLAC Fermilab Anti-Matter Asymmetry Recent Steps Top Quark Event

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation4 Matter, Energy, Space and Time From each of these goals flows a diverse research program that will be carried out in partnership with colleagues across the globe. Paths to the Goals of Particle Physics

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation5 Science Education and Society Public education is a responsibility and privilege of our field –Current program is very successful National security rests on the strength of our scientific and technological base. The entire portfolio must be maintained to ensure the health, welfare and security of the nation in years to come. National Security – U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century (Hart-Rudman Report) Activity on education and outreach should be doubled to ensure a viable, effective and sustainable program.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation6 Recommendation #2 We recommend a twenty-year roadmap for our field to chart our steps on the frontiers of matter, energy, space and time. The map will evolve with time to reflect new scientific opportunities, as well as developments within the international community. It will drive our choice of the next major facility and allow us to craft a balanced program to maximize scientific opportunity. We recommend a new mechanism to update the roadmap and set priorities across the program. We understand that this will require hard choices to select which projects to begin and which to phase out. Factors that must be considered include the potential scientific payoff, cost and technical feasibility, balance and diversity, and the way any proposed new initiative fits into the global structure of the field.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation7 The Particle Physics Roadmap We have many tools at our disposal from forefront accelerators to satellites in space to experiments deep underground. Accelerator LHC Magnet Space Our science requires forefront accelerators at the energy and luminosity frontiers. It also requires innovative experiments in space, underground, and away from accelerators. The Soudan Mine MINOS

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation8 The Particle Physics Roadmap Not all projects illustrated on the roadmap can be pursued. Some will have to be sacrificed because of limited manpower and resources in the field.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation9 Setting Priorities and Making Choices We recommend the creation of a Prioritization Panel for mid-scale projects. –Medium scale projects (total costs between $50M and $500M) make up a major part of the U.S. program and must be evaluated in competition with each other. We believe that prioritization is central to our plan for a diverse, aggressive program of particle physics, and to an optimal program of scientific investigation.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation10 Recommendation #3 We recommend that the highest priority of the U.S. program be a high-energy, high-luminosity, electron-positron linear collider, wherever it is built in the world. This facility is the next major step in the field and should be designed, built and operated as a fully international effort. We also recommend that the U.S. take a leadership position in forming the international collaboration needed to develop a final design, build and operate this machine. The U.S. participation should be undertaken as a partnership between DOE and NSF, with the full involvement of the entire particle physics community. We urge the immediate creation of a steering group to coordinate all U.S. efforts toward a linear collider.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation11 The Next Step: The TeV Scale Exploration of the TeV scale will begin, but not end, with the CERN LHC. There is now a worldwide consensus that the LHC and a linear collider are essential to understand the TeV scale. The centerpiece of our roadmap is the thorough exploration of the TeV scale.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation12 Why a Linear Collider? The initial state contains electrons and positrons, structureless particles that interact through precisely calculable weak and electromagnetic interactions. A linear collider can: –Determine the spins and quantum numbers –Measure cross sections and branching ratios –Carry out precision measurements Physics program endorsed by the Asian and European Committees for Future Accelerators, by the 2001 Snowmass Workshop, and by this subpanel.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation13 Linear Collider Technologies The international accelerator community now firmly believes that a TeV-scale linear collider can be built at a reasonable cost with the correct science-driven capabilities. There has been formal collaboration between laboratories around the world on R&D and discussion of direct collaboration in the construction of a TeV-scale linear collider.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation14 TESLA Superconducting Cavity NLC High Power Klystron JLC Accelerator Test Facility

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation15 We recommend that the United States prepare to bid to host the linear collider, in a facility that is international from the inception, with a broad mandate in fundamental physics research and accelerator development. We believe that the intellectual, educational and societal benefits make this a wise investment of our nation’s resources. We envision financing the linear collider through a combination of international partnership, use of existing resources, and incremental project support. If it is built in the U.S., the linear collider should be sited to take full advantage of the resources and infrastructure available at SLAC and Fermilab. Recommendation #4

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation16 The Case for Hosting in the U.S. The linear collider promises to be one of the greatest scientific projects of our time. –It will be at the frontier of basic science, advanced technological development, international cooperation, and educational innovation. –It will attract many of the top scientists in the world to participate in its scientific and technical opportunities. We believe that hosting the linear collider is a rare and timely opportunity, and one that should be seized by the U.S.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation17 The Case for Hosting in the U.S. A healthy worldwide physics program requires a distribution of major facilities around the globe. –The LHC is being constructed in Europe, and the JHF is underway in Japan. Past investments in accelerator facilities have enormously enriched our society. –History shows that accelerator facilities provide important platforms for major advances in physics and technology.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation18 The Case for Hosting in the U.S. Developing a truly international project would enable the U.S. to take the lead in forging a new approach to planning, collaboration and management in science on a global scale. Locating the facility in the United States would allow a greater portion of our economic investment to be recaptured through jobs and technological benefits.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation19 Financing the Linear Collider A significant fraction of the linear collider must be financed from the existing U.S. high-energy physics program. –If a linear collider is built in the U.S, the site should be at or near an existing high-energy physics laboratory, to take full advantage of existing resources. International investment is essential for a project of this scale. –Steps toward internationalization should begin immediately, independent of the final location of the facility. We believe that a bold new initiative like the linear collider merits new funding from the U.S. government.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation20 Recommendation #5 We recommend that vigorous long-term R&D aimed toward future high-energy accelerators be carried out at high priority within our program. It is also important to continue our development of particle detectors and information technology. These investments are valuable for their broader benefits and crucial to the long-range future of our field.

29-Oct-01LRP Subpanel – HEPAP Presentation21 Accelerator R&D Programs Making the technology choice for the linear collider –There are now at least two technologies that could be used to build a linear collider. During the next few years, we need increased R&D to enable the technology choice