The SLAC Scenarios Study A Long range planning exercise Tom Himel SLAC SLAC February 24, 2003

University of Oregon Colloquium Tom Himel 01/23/03 Today’s Schedule Introduction15’Himel Linear Collider15’Raubenheimer Other Physics15’Dixon Questions/discussions15’All

University of Oregon Colloquium Tom Himel 01/23/03 The Context The world HEP community has decided that a linear collider should be the next big thing SLAC will be a major participant in the design, construction, operation, and exploitation of this facility, independent of where it is sited and what technology is chosen. The PEP-II/BaBar program has an exciting future through this decade. With the Kavli institute, SLAC is extending into particle astrophysics in a big way. SPEAR-III and LCLS provide a bright future for the synchrotron radiation program

University of Oregon Colloquium Tom Himel 01/23/03 The Questions How will SLAC participate in a LC? How will this depend on its location? How will it depend on the RF temperature? How much of SLAC’s resources will this take? Are there other interesting physics projects that SLAC should be involved in? Where will we be a decade from now?

University of Oregon Colloquium Tom Himel 01/23/03 Why Now The world will soon (hopefully) decide to build a LC and split up the responsibilities between countries and laboratories. We need to have a better idea of what we want to do and how what we do affects the lab and its users to aid in the negotiations. There will only be 1 or 2 experiments at the LC. There are other interesting physics projects that SLAC and its users could contribute to. These may require R&D or resource planning in the near future. There is a broad range of opinions about what SLAC should do. This indicates a need to organize the information we have so we can make informed decisions. Fermilab is doing a similar exercise. But we were first

University of Oregon Colloquium Tom Himel 01/23/03 How If in doubt, form a committee. Jonathan Dorfan charged a committee of SLAC faculty, staff and users which has been dubbed the SLAC Scenarios Study. There will be a series of public seminars to gather information. These will have invited speakers and plenty of time for informal discussion. They will be web-cast for those who can’t attend in person. Input from users will be solicited (starting today) Then the committee will meet and write a report. The report won’t have absolute recommendations. Rather it will give a few illustrative scenarios, depicting the size and vitality of the lab in each case.

University of Oregon Colloquium Tom Himel 01/23/03 Who Persis Drell, Tom Himel co-chairs Subcommittee A (LC) Subcommittee B (other physics) Ewan Patterson co-chairLance Dixon co-chair Tor Raubenheimer co-chairJohn Seeman co-chair Jim BrauPat Burchat Marty BreidenbachEric Colby John GalaydaSu Dong Marc Ross Joann Hewett Bob Siemann Bob Jacobsen Andy Wolski Steve Kahn Homer Neal Bruce Schumm

University of Oregon Colloquium Tom Himel 01/23/03 When Jan-FebOrganize Mar-AprHold seminar days JuneDefine a finite number of scenarios for further study and give a progress report to the community. Jul-SeptDetail the scenarios, draft a report, submit it to Jonathan