1 / 35

Karl Jakobs Universität Freiburg Germany

Planning Activities in Europe. Karl Jakobs Universität Freiburg Germany. ……. Who can speak for Europe ? . CERN was established in 1953 as an intergovernmental Organization and plays a special role and has special status on the European particle physics scene:

reyna
Download Presentation

Karl Jakobs Universität Freiburg Germany

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Planning Activities in Europe Karl Jakobs Universität Freiburg Germany …….

  2. Who can speak for Europe ? • CERN was established in 1953 as an intergovernmental Organization and plays a special role and has special status on the European particle physics scene: • Under the terms of the CERN Convention1, its mission is to • “provide for collaboration among European States in nuclear research of a pure scientific and fundamental character, and in research essentially related thereto.” • The Convention provides that this mission be implemented through two kinds of activity: • “the construction and operation of one or more international laboratories" with "one or more particle accelerators” • "the organization and sponsoring of international co-operation in nuclear research, including co-operation outside the Laboratories" 1. http://legal-service.web.cern.ch/legal-service/convention.htm/FP3

  3. Initiative from CERN Council • Sept. 2005: Establish an ad hoc Scientific Advisory Group (Strategy Group) • Mandate: produce a Draft Strategy Document (DSD) addressing the main lines of Particle Physics in Europe - accelerator-based - non-accelerator based - including R&D for novel accelerator and detector technologies • In the DSD, the Strategy Group shall aim: • to enhance the visibility of existing European particle physics programmes; • to foster increased collaboration among Europe's particle physics laboratories and institutes; • to promote a coordinated European participation in world-wide projects; • to re-iterate the CERN Council's 2004 position on the European strategy for the International Linear Collider; • to encourage knowledge transfer to other disciplines, industries, and society; • to outline priorities; • to consider time scales.

  4. Position of CERN Council in July 2004: • After extensive discussion, the Council agreed that it could go on record with the following statement: • "The Council: • Confirms that the first priority for the world particle physics community is to complete • the LHC and its detectors in order to unveil, as soon as possible, the physics at the • new energy frontier; • Encourages the effort towards the design and development of a linear collider as a • unique scientific opportunity at the precision frontier, complementary to the LHC; • Confirms its endorsement of accelerated R&D activities for CLIC; • Recognises the overall value for the world particle physics community of a decision to construct • a TeV linear collider, and encourages the efforts of the leading players in that direction; • Takes the view that, in the course of this process, it will be appropriate to take stock of the LHC • and accelerator R&D results and produce a new assessment of the physics and the technology • by 2010; • Is of the opinion that, in the initial phase (2004-2007), the organisational structure of the global • design initiative, in particular the Central Design Team, should be light."

  5. The Strategy Group Co-chairpersons T. Åkesson, Lund K. Peach, Oxford Preparatory group R. Aleksan, Saclay S. Bertolucci, Frascati-INFN A. Blondel, Geneva M. Cavalli-Sforza, IFAE R. Heuer, DESY F. Linde, NIKHEF E. Rondio, Warsaw B. Webber, Cambridge Lab Directors R. Aymar, CERN M. Calvetti, LNF-INFN E. Coccia, LNGS-INFN J. Engelen, CERN R. Eichler, PSI A. Wagner, DESY J. Womersley, EPP @ RAL G. Wormser, LAL/Orsay J. Zinn-Justin, Dapnia/CEA • Members from delegations • Austria: W. Majerotto, Vienna • Belgium: R. Gastmans, Leuven • Czech Rep.: J. Chyla, Prague • Denmark: H. Boggild, Copenhagen • Finland: J. Tuominiemi, Helsinki • France: J. Feltesse, DAPNIA • Germany: G. Herten, Freiburg • Greece: D. Nanopoulos, Athens • Hungary: G. Vesztergombi, KFKI • Italy: L. Cifarelli, Bologna • Netherlands: S. de Jong, Nijmegen • Norway: S. Stapnes, Oslo • Poland: J. Nassalski, Warsaw • Portugal: G. Barreira, LIP • Spain: M. Aguilar, CIEMAT • Sweden: B. Åsman, Stockholm • Switzerland: A. Rubbia, ETH Zurich • Scientific Secretary • M. Mangano, CERN Observer states (USA, Japan, Israel, Turkey, India and Russia) + APPEC, NuPECC, FALC, invited as observers

  6. Timeline, major milestones • Sept. 2005: Announcement • Web page:http://council-strategygroup.web.cern.ch/council-strategygroup/ • (Link from CERN homepage) •  Interface to the community • Call for input from the community • (more than 60 proposals / statements received) • Open Symposium in Orsay • 30th of January to 1st of February 2006 • Summary talks + Collect the view of the community • Well attended, > 400 participants, all countries, lively discussion • Summaries in Briefing Books 1-3, appeared 13. April, • available from the web • → scientific information to the Strategy Group • Workshop in Zeuthen / Berlin • 2nd - 6th of May 2006 • Draft strategy document • CERN Council meeting in Lisbon • 14th of July 2006 • Aim: unanimous approval of the Draft Strategy Document

  7. Written submissions to the SG (to 15th March)

  8. Timeline, major milestones • Sept. 2005: Announcement • Web page:http://council-strategygroup.web.cern.ch/council-strategygroup/ • (Link from CERN homepage) •  Interface to the community • Call for input from the community • (more than 60 proposals / statements received) • Open Symposium in Orsay • 30th of January to 1st of February 2006 • Summary talks + Collect the view of the community • Well attended, > 400 participants, all countries, lively discussion • Summaries in Briefing Books 1-3, appeared 13. April, • available from the web • → scientific information to the Strategy Group • Workshop in Zeuthen / Berlin • 2nd - 6th of May 2006 • Draft strategy document • CERN Council meeting in Lisbon • 14th of July 2006 • Aim: unanimous approval of the Draft Strategy Document

  9. The Physics Topics discussed in Orsay • The physics of the high energy frontier (K. Desch, Freiburg) • High energy frontier: accelerators (P. Raimondi, Frascati) • Oscillations of massive neutrinos (P. Huber, Wisconsin and A. Cervera, Geneva ) • Flavour Physics (A. Höcker, CERN) • Precision Measurements (G. Onderwater, Groningen) • Non-accelerator and astroparticle physics (N. Palanque-Delabrouille, Saclay) • Strong Interactions (J. Butterworth, UC London and J. Ollitrault, Saclay) • Theoretical Physics (N. Glover, Durham)

  10. The Physics of the High Energy Frontier LHC – SLHC – DLHC LHeC µC Klaus Desch University of Freiburg

  11. Summary on LHC + upgrades: • First data set with excellent prospects for discoveries (10-30 fb-1) may be expected • for 2009/10. • Analysis needs detailed understanding of detectors and backgrounds. • Full LHC luminosity allows for discovery of very broad range of high-PT phenomena • and measurements of new particle properties. • LHC luminosity upgrade (SLHC) increases discovery reach by 20-30%, • better precision for statistically limited processes. • Energy upgrade (DLHC) has larger discovery reach but represents a significantly • larger effort. • New proposal submitted: supplement LHC by a 70 GeV e±storage ring to allow for • ep collisions at s = 1.4 TeV (4x HERA) and L = 1033 cm-2 s-1 (20x HERA) • physics motivation: unique for eq resonances (Leptoquarks, squarks in RPV-SUSY,…) • precise analysis of LQ quantum numbers would be possible over the full • LHC discovery range

  12. LHC machine status and a “likely” startup scenario • Plan: terminate installation in • February 2007 • Cryogenics + dipole installation • on critical path to be ready for • beam in Summer 2007 A “likely” startup scenario: (HEP06 conf., Lyn Evans, ATLAS Coll. Meeting, Feb.06) Late 2007: Proton run ~ 10 - 100 pb-1(for 10 pb-1: number of tt events comparable to Tevatron with 1 fb-1) → detector and trigger commissioning, calibration, early physics By end 2008: Physics runs: ~ 1 – 10 fb-1 By end 2009: Physics runs: > 15 fb-1 See : http://lhc-new-homepage.web.cern.ch/lhc-new-homepage/DashBoard/index.asp

  13. Summary on LHC + upgrades: • First data set with excellent prospects for discoveries (10-30 fb-1) may be expected • for 2009/10. • Analysis needs detailed understanding of detectors and backgrounds. • Full LHC luminosity allows for discovery of very broad range of high-PT phenomena • and measurements of new particle properties. • LHC luminosity upgrade (SLHC) increases discovery reach by 20-30%, • better precision for statistically limited processes. • Energy upgrade (DLHC) has larger discovery reach but represents a significantly • larger effort. • New proposal submitted: supplement LHC by a 70 GeV e±storage ring to allow for • ep collisions at s = 1.4 TeV (4x HERA) and L = 1033 cm-2 s-1 (20x HERA) • physics motivation: unique for eq resonances (Leptoquarks, squarks in RPV-SUSY,…) • precise analysis of LQ quantum numbers would be possible over the full • LHC discovery range

  14. 3000 fb-1 (5) 3000 fb-1 (95% CL) Examples of SLHC improvements Heavy SUSY Higgs: observable region increased by ~100 GeV. Broad resonances in no-Higgs scenarios:

  15. Summary on LHC + upgrades: • First data set with excellent prospects for discoveries (10-30 fb-1) may be expected • for 2009/10. • Analysis needs detailed understanding of detectors and backgrounds. • Full LHC luminosity allows for discovery of very broad range of high-PT phenomena • and measurements of new particle properties. • LHC luminosity upgrade (SLHC) increases discovery reach by 20-30%, • better precision for statistically limited processes. • Energy upgrade (DLHC) has larger discovery reach but represents a significantly • larger effort. • New proposal submitted: supplement LHC by a 70 GeV e±storage ring to allow for • ep collisions at s = 1.4 TeV (4x HERA) and L = 1033 cm-2 s-1 (20x HERA) • physics motivation: unique for eq resonances (Leptoquarks, squarks in RPV-SUSY,…) • precise analysis of LQ quantum numbers would be possible over the full • LHC discovery range

  16. The ILC physics case (K. Desch in Orsay) • 0. Top quark at threshold • 1. ‘Light’ Higgs (consistent with precision EW) •  verify the Higgs mechanism is at work in all elements • 2. ‘Heavy’ Higgs (inconsistent with precision EW) •  verify the Higgs mechanism is at work in all elements •  find out why precision EW data are inconsistent • 3. 1./2. + new states (SUSY, Extra Dimensions, little H, Z’, …) •  precise spectroscopy of the new states •  precision measurements of couplings of Standard Model & new states properties of new particles above kinematic limit • 4. No Higgs, no new states (inconsistent with precision EW) •  find out why precision EW data are inconsistent •  look for threshold effects of strong/delayed EWSB • Early LHC data likely to guide the direction • choice of ILC options and upgrade to 1 TeV depends on LHC+ILC(500) results • LHC + ILC data analyzed together  synergy

  17. Accelerator and Detector R&D in Europe CARE: Integrated Infrastructure Initiative supported by the European Commission (EC) withîn Framework Program FP6 (2004 – 2008) built around three network activities (8 institutes, including CERN & DESY): ELAN = Electron Linear Accelerator Network BENE = Beams in Europe for Neutrino Experiments HHH = High energy, High intensity Hadron beams EUROTeV: European Design Study towards a Global TeV Linear Collider (28 institutes) EUROTeV addresses some of the high ranking issues identified by the ILC Technical Review Committee → input to the ILC Conceptual Design Report (CDR) and thereafter the ILC Technical Design Report (TDR) Items: Beam delivery system, damping rings, diagnostics, metrology, …. Activities are expected to be complemented by studies in the US and in Japan EUDET: Detector R&D towards the ILC (31 institutes + 20 associated institutes) 2006 - 2010 provides framework for ILC detector R&D with larger prototypes Main items: Tracking (large TPC prototype, Silicon TPC readout, Silicon tracking) Calorimetry (scalable ECAL and HCAL prototypes, readout…)

  18. Physics case for a 3-5 TeV e+e- CLIC Viewpoint (i): Candidate machine for the ILC Viewpoint (ii): Natural upgrade path of ILC program if physics demands; Physics justification needs TeV-scale data Physics highlights (ii): 1. Rare Higgs decays, e.g. H → mm 2. Improve on Higgs self coupling + extend mass range 3. More complete SUSY spectrum 4. Extending mass reach new resonances, scans 5. Study resonances of strong EWSB if within kinematic reach Technology: significant R&D needed,…., Experimentation more difficult.

  19. nRoadmap (A. Cervera, Geneva Univ.) • 1st step: transition era • Improve the precision on the atm. parameters looking atnmdisappearance • Confirm (atm. osc) = (nm→nt )and first look atnm→ne Ongoing: 2005-2010 Approved/Proposed: 2008-2015 • 2 nd step:q13era • Demonstrate visibility of sub-leading transitions:nm→ne , ne→ne • Explore q13 down to 20 (today <100) To be prepared: 2015-2025 3 rd step: precision era q13> 3 0 q13< 3 0 Known by 2011 • Existing facilities could reach it • … but with very small sensitivity to • dCP and mass hierarchy • No access for ongoing • experiments at that time Cleaner and more intense beams + larger detectors

  20. The role of Europe (A. Cervera @ Orsay) • Past experiments • NOMAD, CHORUS, Chooz, Gallex, Macro • CERN to GS (2006) • Opera • T2K (2009) • Major contribution to near detectors ND280 (2009) and 2Km (2011) • 120 people from 23 European institutes • CERN recognised experiment • Double-Chooz (2008) • First dedicated attempt to q13 • Detector and accelerator R&D • Liquid Argon TPC (experience from ICARUS) • Silicon PMTs • BENE (= Beams for European Neutrino Experiments) • Accelerator: HARP, MERIT, MICE • Options for a Precision Neutrino Facility: • Low-energy (sub-GeV to GeV) avenue: high intensity nm superbeam combined with a • b beam and a megaton detector (water Cherenkov or Liquid Argon) • (ii) High-energy avenue: Neutrino factory

  21. Improved Super-beams (A. Cervera @ Orsay) • Increase by one order of magnitude • beam power: ~4MW • detector mass • Three proposals: • Systematics unchanged • Beam contamination • Cross section • Detector efficiency SuperNOvA (US) Memphys (Frejus) Hyper-Kamiokande (Japan) 60 m

  22. ongoing R&D for ion production EURISOL design study Beta-beam (A. Cervera @ Orsay) Purene or ne beam small beam systematics and backgrounds CERN layout Neutrino source Acceleration Ion production missing feasibility study forhighgoption • New ideas: • Monocromatic beam: Bernabeu et al. • Efficient ion production: C. Rubbia et al. Courtesy of Mats Lindroos • Performance increases with beam energy if L/E is kept at oscillation max: • Higher flux and cross section. Better energy binning (no Fermi motion) • Smaller systematics from cross section and detector efficiency (Burget et al.) High g Performace Low g

  23. India Neutrino factory (A. Cervera @ Orsay) • 50% nm 50% ne small beam systematics … but charge required • High energy beam small cross section systematics • A wide variety of studies are possible: • Challenging Ongoing R&D: MICE, HARP, MERIT CP violation unitarity T, CPT and also: silver golden bronze Atmospheric osc. CERN layout • Insufficient R&D: • Acceleration • Global design

  24. Summary: Main “wishes” of the European nCommunity • Strong support should be made available to make success of the • present and near-future program. • The Double-CHOOZ experiment should be strongly supported. • The involvement of European neutrino physicists in the neutrino physics • program abroad (e.g. T2K, NOnA) should be supported in a way that would • assure a viable and significant contribution. • Europe should get ready to host a major neutrino facility for the precision era, • or to play a major role in the preparation and construction of this facility should • it be located elsewhere.

  25. Other important experiments with a significant European contribution • KATRIN in Karlsruhe / Germany (worldwide collaboration, Mainz, Troitzk, US,….) • Measurement of tritium b decay endpoint → absolute value of n mass • Sensitivity: ~ 0.2 eV • Start of data taking: 2008 • Experiments to search for neutrinoless double b decay: • GERDA (Gran Sasso, Ge) • NEMO3 (Frejus, tracking+calorimetry, various isotopes) • Gotthard (Xe-TPC)

  26. CRESST, EDELWEISS CDMS CDMS-II, EDELWEISS-II, CRESST-II XENON, XMASS - sensitivity goal 1-ton sensitivity goal Activities and Plans on Dark Matter Search EDELWEISS: Modane Lab, Frejus Ge detectors, heat + ionization Phase I, 1 kg Phase II, 9 kg (up to 36 kg) CRESST: Gran Sasso Lab. Light + phonon discrimination, works with different detector materials (CaWO4, PbWO4, BGO) Future European 1-ton projects: EURECA:EDELWEISS + CRESST collaborations + CERN, …. Multi target approach: Ge (phonon, ionization) CaWO4 (phonon, scintillation) Detector R&D ongoing ArDM, WARP: Use Liquid Argon as detector material, feasibility study ongoing …. many proposals for detectors of that scale (US, Japan, Europe)…. calls for an international collaboration l

  27. Dark Energy, Future plans in Europe ?(N. Palanque-Delabrouille @ Orsay) Dark energy modifies: expansion rate of the Universe  supernovae growth rate of structures gravitational distortions Future : characterization of dark energy  Space projects SNAP: several thousand SNIa Population study (environment, spectral features …) to reduce intrinsic dispersion > 2015 (NASA : Beyond Einstein) SNAP DUNE: Dark Universe Explorer weak shear analysis Statistics of grav. distortions depend on geometry of universe ~ 2012 (French CNES) or ~ 2015 (ESA) Gravitationally distorted galaxies

  28. Proton decay experiments, future initiatives(N. Palanque-Delabrouille @ Orsay) UNO(Underground Nucleon decay and neutrino Observatory) Mine in US 440 kT MEMPHYS(MEgaton Mass PHYSics) Fréjus 440 kT HyperK Japan 550 kT Liquid Argon TPCs (FLARE (US), GLACIER (Europe)) ? 100 kT p  e+0  e+ Complementarity liquid argon vs. water Cherenkov p  e+0 (larger mass) p  K+ (higher detection eff.)

  29. Manpower situation in European Particle Physics ECFA survey (released 13. April 2006)

  30. ECFA survey of European Particle Physics (Apr. 2006)

  31. ECFA survey (cont.)

  32. ECFA survey (cont.) – a few examples- Finland France The Netherlands Germany

  33. Decision about 3rd step 50 30 20 Results for q13 Courtesy of M. Mezzetto • If q13 is not measured by ~2011, the probability to measure it with ongoing experiments would be very small • Building new facilities will take more than 5 years 100 90% CL

  34. go down toq13~4-50 With ne disappearance q13era: Reactors (A. Cervera @ Orsay) • High rate neby inverse beta decay • Unambiguous determination of q13 • … but cannot test mass hierarchy or CP violation • Europe: Double-Chooz • Others sites: Brazil, China, Japan, Russia, US, … Double-Chooz(2008) • Collaboration • France, Germany, USA, Russia • Approved in France • LOI’s: hep-ex/0405032 & hep-ex/0410081 • http://doublechooz.in2p3.fr • Chooz site (France) • Agreement with EDF in 2005 • Far site: ready for integration (2007) • Near site: 40 m shaft to build (2009) • Reduce systematic errors by a factor 5 with two identical detectors • Still pending for full funding

  35. Liquid Xe ZEPLIN Ionization Scintillation DAMA NaI EDELWEISS, CDMS CRESST Heat CaWO4 Ge Activities and Plans on Dark Matter Search Detection principle: elastic scattering of WIPS on detector nuclei 1evt / kg / day  - Deep underground - Low radioactivity materials - Discrimination against radioactive background Nuclear recoil (Wimp signal) versus electronic recoil (radioactive background) l

More Related