Future Planning for SLAC Persis S. Drell. December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios2 Scenarios Study 2003: Process  Started early in 2003  Inclusive of SLAC faculty,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Director’s Welcome Jonathan Dorfan 32 nd Annual SSRL Users Meeting October 17, 2005.
Advertisements

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.
Department of Energy Office of Science HEP FY08 Budget Status and Issues Robin Staffin preCRB Discussion April
Concluding remarks Ivan Schmidt. HEP at this University Carlos Contreras Post-docs: Zhun Lu Gorazd Cvetic Amir Razaeian Claudio Dib Cristian Valenzuela.
Sept. 18, 2008SLUO 2008 Annual Meeting Vision for SLAC Science Persis S. Drell Director SLAC.
F Future of Neutrino Program at FNAL NuMI Off-Axis Meeting Hugh Montgomery January 12, 2004.
Other Opportunities for SLAC in the Linear Collider Era SLAC Scenarios Study Kickoff Feb. 24, 2003 Lance Dixon.
February 19, 2008 FACET Review 1 Lab Overview and Future Onsite Facilities Persis S. Drell DirectorSLAC.
This is the last message in this gathering of North American PI’s with an interest in the INFN hosted SuperB project. I will try to deal with issues on.
TeV Particle Astrophysics 2009 Welcome & SLAC Connections David MacFarlane Associate Laboratory Director for PPA.
June 12, 2007DOE Program Review1 Emergency Information Be aware of exits in your building Be aware of exits in your building –Speaker will indicate locations.
The SLAC Scenarios Study A Long range planning exercise Tom Himel SLAC EPAC June 12, 2003.
A Possible Strategy Towards a Future Lepton Collider Tor Raubenheimer SLUO Annual Meeting September 17, 2009.
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.
Budget Briefing with OHEP Staff: March 3, 2009 Page 1 SLAC HEP Budget Meeting Summary Discussion Charts S. M. Kahn, D. B. MacFarlane, R. Alva SLAC Rev.
Performance Evaluations: PPA InterpretationsPage 1 Interpretations on Performance Evaluation Process D. MacFarlane June 4 th, 2009.
The International Linear Collider Barry Barish iThemba Cape Town 21-Oct-05.
September 26, 2005SLUO Meeting1 The State of the Laboratory Persis S. Drell Deputy Director, SLAC.
International collaboration in high energy physics experiments  All large high energy physics experiments today are strongly international.  A necessary.
HEPAP and P5 Report DIET Federation Roundtable JSPS, Washington, DC; April 29, 2015 Andrew J. Lankford HEPAP Chair University of California, Irvine.
3/6/2006FY07/08 DOE Budget Briefing1 FY07/08 Budget Briefing Jonathan Dorfan Director Persis Drell Deputy Director SLAC.
Future Accelerators at the energy frontier Peter Hansen february 2010 University of Copenhagen.
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.
BNL Overview DOE Annual HEP Program Review Brookhaven National Laboratory April 17-19, 2006 Sam Aronson.
Planning for Discoveries in Particle Physics Michael Witherell EPP2010 May 16, 2005.
Physics Priorities S. Dawson July 11, 2007 Fermilab Steering Committee Meeting.
SLUO LHC Workshop: Closing RemarksPage 1 SLUO LHC Workshop: Closing Remarks David MacFarlane Associate Laboratory Directory for PPA.
DOE Annual Review of SLAC HEP Research Program June 14-16, 2005 SLAC Charge to Committee Issues Procedures.
P5 and the HEP Program A. Seiden Fermilab June 2, 2003.
CLIC Implementation Studies Ph. Lebrun & J. Osborne CERN CLIC Collaboration Meeting addressing the Work Packages CERN, 3-4 November 2011.
Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy Raymond L. Orbach Director Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy Presentation to BESAC December 6, 2004.
24-Aug-11 ILCSC -Mumbai Global Design Effort 1 ILC: Future after 2012 preserving GDE assets post-TDR pre-construction program.
11 DOE Office of Science High Energy Physics Program AAAC Meeting October 15, 2009 National Science Foundation Dennis Kovar Associate Director of the Office.
Accelerators in our Future ILC and Beyond Barry Barish Caltech Neutrino Telescope - Venice 13-March-09.
P5 Meeting - Jan , US LHC The Role of the LHC in US HEP Dan Green US CMS Program Manager January 28, 2003.
Report from Fermilab Presentation to ICFA Symposium Daegu, Korea September 2005 Pier Oddone.
1 SPAFOA Capitol Hill Briefing December 2013 Harry Weerts International Linear Collider - progress & status SPAFOA meeting, Dec 11, 2013, H.Weerts.
Status Report on ILC Project in Japan Seiichi SHIMASAKI Director, Office for Particle and Nuclear Research Promotion June 19, 2015.
Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy 1 International Linear Collider In August 2004 ICFA announced their technology selection for an ILC: 1.The.
John Womersley Welcome Director of Particle Physics, CCLRC International Scoping Study Meeting, RAL April 2006.
Summary Comments and Discussion Pier Oddone 40 th Anniversary Users’ Meeting June 8, 2007.
Status and plans for role of Japan in HL-LHC Katsuo Tokushuku Institute of Particle Nuclear Studies (IPNS) High Energy Accelerator Research Organization.
SLAC Accelerator Development Program Tor Raubenheimer OHEP Accelerator Development Review January 24-26, 2011.
Department of Energy Office of Science  FY 2007 Request for Office of Science is 14% above FY 2006 Appropriation  FY 2007 Request for HEP is 8% above.
News Y2K June 25, Summary of June 12 Face-to-Face Meeting.
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.
Budget Outlook Glen Crawford P5 Meeting Sep
The Fermilab Program Michael Witherell Users’ meeting June 3, 2004.
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.
BNL Overview DOE Annual HEP Program Review Brookhaven National Laboratory April 17-19, 2006 Sam Aronson.
Round Table discussion Norbert Holtkamp SNS Oak Ridge National Laboratory August 11, 2004.
Perspective on the Future of HEP By Jonathan Dorfan, SLAC Director Snowmass 2001 Sunday, July 1, 2001.
Steering Group Meeting 10:30 – 12:30 am CDT Monday, July 23, 2007 Y2K.
SLAC All Hands Briefing: FY2008 Budget Persis S. Drell SLAC Director 1/7/08.
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.
Ionization Cooling for Muon Accelerators Prepared by Robert Ryne Presented by Jean-Pierre Delahaye MICE Optics Review Jan, 2016 RAL.
CPM 2012, Fermilab D. MacFarlane & N. Holtkamp The Snowmass process and SLAC plans for HEP.
Particle Physics Sector Young-Kee Kim / Greg Bock Leadership Team Strategic Planning Winter Workshop January 29, 2013.
Stanford Linear Accelerator
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.
Yasuhiro Okada, Executive Director, KEK
Requests of Future HEP e+/e-Facilities
Stanford Linear Accelerator
Introduction FY09 Linac Ops Review
SuperKEKB Proto-collaboration
Presentation transcript:

Future Planning for SLAC Persis S. Drell

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios2 Scenarios Study 2003: Process  Started early in 2003  Inclusive of SLAC faculty, staff and users.  Final Report early 2004  Context There will be a linear collider built and SLAC will be a major participant PEP-II/BaBar program has a clear future to 2010 Growth in particle astrophysics with initiation of KIPAC Future of SSRL to 2015 and beyond determined by SPEAR3 and LCLS  Charge Develop models for SLAC’s role in a future linear collider Explore other exciting science opportunities for laboratory in LC/LCLS era What will the lab look like a decade from now?

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios3 Process: surveyed the major themes in HEP and Particle Astrophysics & Cosmology  B day: (or 2 x ?) e+e- B factory  Neutrino day: accelerator/reactor/solar oscillations,   LHC day: accelerator & detector projects for luminosity upgrade  Z/Higgs day: 30 GeV; e+e- -> Z (10M -> 3G Z/yr); e+e- -> ZH  Two beam day: -> Higgs “shop”; 2 beam e+e- -> Z or ZH; CLIC R&D; plasma afterburner for ZH  Cosmology day: Dark matter/energy via SNAP, LSST, Clusters  Additional Seminars with discussion: An International Linear Collider and What it Might Mean for SLAC (Dave Burke) Colloquium on ITER, including management (Rob Goldston) Colloquium on ALMA, including management (Robert Brown)

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios4 Accelerator Physics and Detector Development The Ubiquitous Linac Science w/ Sync Light Particle Astro Physics High Energy Frontier Flavor Physics SLAC Scientific Excellence

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios5 Pillars of the SLAC Program  The High Energy Frontier  Flavor Physics  Science with Synchrotron Light  Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology  Criteria for Program Development Cutting edge science opportunites Opportunities to engage users Scope of SLAC’s contributions must be commensurate with SLAC’s role as a national lab  Assumption Linear Collider exits somewhere in the world

The High Energy Frontier

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios7 Models for SLAC Participation in LC  Linear Collider the highest priority for high energy program at the laboratory  SLAC continues to champion x-band RF technology choice and strongly supports a US site for the facility.  SLAC is committed to the LC, independent of location and independent of technology  Scenarios committee studied what are the component pieces of that commitment how does the laboratory’s on-site effort change depending on downstream decisions:  technology choice  location  Conclusion: The scope of SLAC’s effort supporting LC largely independent LC location and technology

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios8 Model of SLAC LC Participation  Model exercise led to conclusion that a reasonable target for SLAC responsibility ~10% of the TPC Conclusion site and technology independent Details of the involvement do depend on site and technology On-shore: US contribution 60% of TPC  40% of TPC to Project office  SLAC responsible for ~10% of TPC Off-shore: US contribution 25% of TPC  5% of TPC to Project office  SLAC responsible for ~10% of TPC SLAC & FNAL have major US portions  SLAC would like to have major responsibility for one of the two detectors 50% contribution to 350 M$ detector 50 physicists and main engineering group at SLAC Some prototyping and possibly responsibility for major assemblies SLAC should strive to be collaboration host

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios9 Models for SLAC Participation in LHC Upgrades  LHC is the high energy frontier  Complements involvement with LC  Opportunity for small but significant involvement Machine opportunities in this phase include:  RF upgrades to shorten bunch lengths  RF crab cavities to increase crossing angle Major detector challenge is inner tracker  Concern could divert resources from traditional role in electron-based accelerators linear collider

Flavor Physics

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios11 Future B-Physics Program  A 2 x (~$200M) or (~$500M) B factory: Quark flavor mixing sensitive to new physics  LHC can directly discover new physics of EWSB determine its mass scale  B factory would supply unique and complementary flavor and CP information  Example: SUSY LHC: measures flavor-diagonal squark masses B-factory: sensitive to flavor-off-diagonal squark mass and CP-violating phases  If there is new physics in the quark flavor sector, such a machine should be built. Complements LHC This is the major variable between scenarios. Requires accelerator R&D at luminosity frontier

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios12 Future Neutrino Program  Neutrinoless double beta decay () Mass potentially related to unification scale Majorana mass may have implications for baryon asymmetry of the universe Based on EXO technology if R&D successful  Consider other options if EXO finds showstopper  Participation of the SLAC community in long baseline neutrino oscillation experiments was considered. However, many others are working on this problem and there was not a clear SLAC role

Science with Synchrotron Light

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios14 Science with Synchrotron Light  Did not extensively review  Opportunities aggressively developed over past 5 years SPEAR3 LCLS  Enabling broad spectrum of science Materials Science Structural Biology Environmental Science Fempto-chemistry Nanoscale Dynamics.....  Path forward well determined  Includes doubling of SSRL staff by 2010 Plateau 2010 onward  Continued Accelerator R&D Important

Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios16 Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology  KIPAC  Area of growth Expect doubling of current effort  Did not want to interfere with birth of Institute Model on:  GLAST ISOC  Involvement with JDEM, LSST Future major projects? Identified level of effort  technical personnel by 2010

Scenarios

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios18 Pillars of the Program  High Energy Frontier Participation in LC Participation in LHC upgrades High Gradient Accelerator R&D  Science with Synchrotron Light SPEAR III LCLS Accelerator R&D aimed at machines past LCLS.V1  Flavor Physics m e Future B-factory program High Luminosity Accelerator R&D  Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology GLAST ISOC Scaled to example of LSST, JDEM participation

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios19 Scenarios: Details  Scenario 1: LC Anywhere no B-factory upgrade past 3x10 34 Advanced accelerator R&D doubling in 10 years  Scenario 2 LC Anywhere 2x10 35 B-factory at SLAC Advanced accelerator R&D grows by 50% in 10 years  Scenario 3 LC on shore B-factory at KEK Full Linac capability preserved Advanced accelerator R&D doubling in 10 years  Scenario 4 LC off shore B-factory at SLAC Advanced accelerator R&D grows by 50% in 10 years

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios20 Conclusions of Scenarios Study  Committee enthusiastic about rich program of science in all scenarios  Scope of the linear collider effort at SLAC independent of LC location and technology SLAC committed to warm x-band and US site  Committee recommends SLAC consider participating in LHC luminosity upgrades  Level of advanced accelerator R&D should grow  Greatest variable in scenarios is the future of the B- factory program  Future SSRL program has well defined growth path  Particle astrophysics should at least double  SLAC Linac will continue to be an essential part of the program

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios21 Since Scenarios....  ITRTP  SLAC ILC R&D aligning to cold decision  Decision not to pursue Super-B at SLAC  FY06 budget B-factory turns off 2008 at latest Beginning of transfer of responsibility for LINAC to BES  BES commits to support LINAC in LCLS era  KIPAC vision developed with focus on dark energy/dark matter JDEM & LSST focus of R&D effort

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios22 Major Budget Drivers Going Forward  BES commitment to support the linac potentially frees $96M for HEP to redirect to new initiatives Early transfer of responsibility from HEP to BES is helpful to HEP since can take advantage of these resources in advance of the B-factory turn off We will compete within the HEP for those resources to support and grow ILC R&D at SLAC  An additional ~$20M (people and M&S) is available with the ramp down of BaBar ($37M ramps to $15.5 in FY13) Since much of this is in people, we have tried to craft a program that uses those talents for smaller initiatives that provide science to the community in the ‘gap’ between B-factory turn off and ILC turn on

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios23 Elements of Proposed Mid-Term Particle and Astro-Particle Program  Non-Accelerator Based Neutrinoless double beta decay  Our technical approach: EXO Ground based dark energy telescope  Our technical approach: LSST Space based dark energy probe  Our technical approach: Join SNAP Collab.  Accelerator Based ILC/ILC detector  Details from Raubenheimer/Jaros Accelerator Research  SABER  Continued broad program New accelerator based initiative**  Revisit recommendations of scenarios study

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios24 Program Scenarios  Built ‘bottom up’ scenarios with program growth based on planned technological development Included ramp down of BaBar effort Included hoped for ramp up of ILC effort  Included distribution of technical resources, physicists and M&S These are ‘scenarios’ not ‘plans’

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios25 Scenarios 1: 5% Growth FLAT

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios26 6%/year

December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios27 Programmatic Priorities  For the near term: We must focus on B-factory performance and delivery of science to our largest user community  For the mid term: We must continue in our leadership role for the ILC  Highest priority new facility for the world community We must complete GLAST construction and develop the ISOC  Challenges here due to marriage of 2 cultures We must work to provide additional opportunities for science to the HEP user community in ~2012  e.g. LSST, EXO, JDEM,....  For the long term: The R&D in accelerator science is our hope for the future of the field  To make the next accelerator *after* the ILC technically feasible and affordable