1. Future Planning for SLAC Persis S. Drell

2. 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?

3. December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios3 Process: surveyed the major themes in HEP and Particle Astrophysics & Cosmology  B day: 10 36 (or 2 x 10 35 ?) 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)

4. 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

5. 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

6. The High Energy Frontier

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. Flavor Physics

11. December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios11 Future B-Physics Program  A 2 x 10 35 (~$200M) or 10 36 (~$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

12. 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

13. Science with Synchrotron Light

14. 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

15. Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology

16. 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  150-200 technical personnel by 2010

17. Scenarios

18. 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

19. 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 10 36 B-factory at KEK Full Linac capability preserved Advanced accelerator R&D doubling in 10 years  Scenario 4 LC off shore 10 36 B-factory at SLAC Advanced accelerator R&D grows by 50% in 10 years

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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’

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

26. December 5, 2003SLAC Scenarios26 6%/year

27. 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