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

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 Convention 1, 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: 1.“the construction and operation of one or more international laboratories" with "one or more particle accelerators” 2."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

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 CERN Council 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.

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 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." Position of CERN Council in July 2004:

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

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 Timeline, major milestones Sept. 2005: Announcement Web page: http://council-strategygroup.web.cern.ch/council-strategygroup/ 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 30 th of January to 1 st 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 2 nd - 6 th of May 2006 Draft strategy document CERN Council meeting in Lisbon 14 th of July 2006 Aim: unanimous approval of the Draft Strategy Document

Written submissions to the SG (to 15 th March)

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 Timeline, major milestones Sept. 2005: Announcement Web page: http://council-strategygroup.web.cern.ch/council-strategygroup/ 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 30 th of January to 1 st 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 2 nd - 6 th of May 2006 Draft strategy document CERN Council meeting in Lisbon 14 th of July 2006 Aim: unanimous approval of the Draft Strategy Document

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 The Physics Topics discussed in Orsay 1.The physics of the high energy frontier (K. Desch, Freiburg) 2.High energy frontier: accelerators (P. Raimondi, Frascati) 3.Oscillations of massive neutrinos (P. Huber, Wisconsin and A. Cervera, Geneva ) 4.Flavour Physics (A. Höcker, CERN) 5.Precision Measurements (G. Onderwater, Groningen) 6.Non-accelerator and astroparticle physics (N. Palanque-Delabrouille, Saclay) 7.Strong Interactions (J. Butterworth, UC London and J. Ollitrault, Saclay) 8.Theoretical Physics (N. Glover, Durham)

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

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 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-P T 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 = 10 33 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

LHC machine status and a “likely” startup scenario See : http://lhc-new-homepage.web.cern.ch/lhc-new-homepage/DashBoard/index.asp 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 Plan: terminate installation in February 2007 Cryogenics + dipole installation on critical path to be ready for beam in Summer 2007

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 Examples of SLHC improvements 3000 fb -1 (5  ) 3000 fb -1 (95% CL) Heavy SUSY Higgs: observable region increased by ~100 GeV. Broad resonances in no-Higgs scenarios:

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 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

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…)

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 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 →  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.

Roadmap (A. Cervera, Geneva Univ.) 1 st step: transition era Improve the precision on the atm. parameters looking at  disappearanceImprove the precision on the atm. parameters looking at  disappearance Confirm (atm. osc) = (  →  )  and first look at  → eConfirm (atm. osc) = (  →  )  and first look at  → e 2 nd step:  13 era Demonstrate visibility of sub-leading transitions:   → e, e → eDemonstrate visibility of sub-leading transitions:   → e, e → e Explore  13 down to 2 0 (today <10 0 )Explore  13 down to 2 0 (today <10 0 ) Existing facilities could reach itExisting facilities could reach it … but with very small sensitivity to… but with very small sensitivity to  CP and mass hierarchy  CP and mass hierarchy Ongoing: 2005-2010 Approved/Proposed: 2008-2015 To be prepared: 2015-2025 No access for ongoingNo access for ongoing experiments at that time experiments at that time 3 rd step: precision era   > 3 0   < 3 0 Known by 2011 Cleaner and more intense beams + larger detectors

The role of Europe (A. Cervera @ Orsay) Double-Chooz (2008) First dedicated attempt to  13First dedicated attempt to  13 CERN to GS (2006) OperaOpera T2K (2009) Major contribution to near detectors ND280 (2009) and 2Km (2011)Major contribution to near detectors ND280 (2009) and 2Km (2011) 120 people from 23 European institutes120 people from 23 European institutes CERN recognised experimentCERN recognised experiment Detector and accelerator R&D Liquid Argon TPC (experience from ICARUS)Liquid Argon TPC (experience from ICARUS) Silicon PMTsSilicon PMTs BENE (= Beams for European Neutrino Experiments)BENE (= Beams for European Neutrino Experiments) Accelerator: HARP, MERIT, MICEAccelerator: HARP, MERIT, MICE Past experiments NOMAD, CHORUS, Chooz, Gallex, MacroNOMAD, CHORUS, Chooz, Gallex, Macro Options for a Precision Neutrino Facility: (i)Low-energy (sub-GeV to GeV) avenue: high intensity  superbeam combined with a  beam and a megaton detector (water Cherenkov or Liquid Argon) (ii) High-energy avenue: Neutrino factory

Improved Super-beams (A. Cervera @ Orsay) Increase by one order of magnitude beam power: ~4MW detector mass Three proposals: Memphys (Frejus) 60 m T2HK (T2K-II)Japan0.6 GeV295 Km1000 KT Water Cherenkov SPL-MemphysEurope0.25 GeV130 Km440 KT Water Cherenkov NuMI-SuperNOvAUS2 GeV890 Km130 KT fully active calorimeter Systematics unchanged Beam contamination Cross section Detector efficiency Hyper-Kamiokande(Japan) SuperNOvA (US)

Courtesy of Mats Lindroos Beta-beam (A. Cervera @ Orsay) Pure e or e beam small beam systematics and backgrounds missing feasibility study for high    option Ion production Acceleration Neutrino source CERN layout ongoing R&D for ion production EURISOL EURISOL design study LHC  ~1500 7 GeV3000 Km0.1 MT TCCERN-Canarias Tevatron or S-SPS  ~350 1.5 GeV730 Km1 MT W-Ch.CERN-GS/Canfranc SPS (max energy)  ~150 0.6 GeV300 Km1 MT W-Ch.? SPS  ~100 0.35 GeV130 Km1 MT W-Ch.CERN-Frejus Low  High  Performace 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.) New ideas: Monocromatic beam: Bernabeu et al.Monocromatic beam: Bernabeu et al. Efficient ion production: C. Rubbia et al.Efficient ion production: C. Rubbia et al.

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 50%  50% e small beam systematics … but charge required High energy beam small cross section systematics A wide variety of studies are possible: MICE, HARP, MERITChallenging Ongoing R&D: MICE, HARP, MERIT Neutrino factory (A. Cervera @ Orsay) India CERN layout bronze goldensilver Atmospheric osc. and also: Insufficient R&D: AccelerationAcceleration Global designGlobal design unitarity CP violation T, CPT

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 Summary: Main “wishes” of the European Community 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, NO A) 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.

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 Other important experiments with a significant European contribution KATRIN in Karlsruhe / Germany (worldwide collaboration, Mainz, Troitzk, US,….) Measurement of tritium  decay endpoint → absolute value of mass Sensitivity: ~ 0.2 eV Start of data taking: 2008 Experiments to search for neutrinoless double  decay: GERDA (Gran Sasso, Ge) NEMO3 (Frejus, tracking+calorimetry, various isotopes) Gotthard (Xe-TPC)

Activities and Plans on Dark Matter Search l 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 (CaWO 4, PbWO 4, BGO) CRESST, EDELWEISS CDMS CDMS-II, EDELWEISS-II, CRESST-II XENON, XMASS - sensitivity goal 1-ton sensitivity goal 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

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

Complementarity liquid argon vs. water Cherenkov p  e +  0 (larger mass) p  K + (higher detection eff.) p  e +  0  e +  UNO (Underground Nucleon decay and neutrino Observatory) Mine in US440 kT MEMPHYS (MEgaton Mass PHYSics) Fréjus440 kT HyperK Japan550 kT Liquid Argon TPCs (FLARE (US), GLACIER (Europe)) ?100 kT Proton decay experiments, future initiatives (N. Palanque-Delabrouille @ Orsay)

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 Manpower situation in European Particle Physics in European Particle Physics ECFA survey ECFA survey (released 13. April 2006)

ECFA survey of European Particle Physics (Apr. 2006)

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 ECFA survey (cont.)

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 ECFA survey (cont.) – a few examples- Germany France The Netherlands Finland

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 Results for  13 If  13 is not measured by ~2011, the probability to measure it with ongoing experiments would be very smallIf  13 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 yearsBuilding new facilities will take more than 5 years 10 0 Decision about 3 rd step Courtesy of M. Mezzetto 5050 3030 2020 90% CL

 13 era: Reactors (A. Cervera @ Orsay) High rate e by inverse beta decayHigh rate e by inverse beta decay Unambiguous determination of  13Unambiguous determination of  13 … but cannot test mass hierarchy or CP violation… but cannot test mass hierarchy or CP violation Reduce systematic errors by a factor 5 with two identical detectorsReduce systematic errors by a factor 5 with two identical detectors Still pending for full fundingStill pending for full funding Double-Chooz (2008) Europe: Double-ChoozEurope: Double-Chooz Others sites: Brazil, China, Japan, Russia, US, …Others sites: Brazil, China, Japan, Russia, US, … Chooz site (France) Agreement with EDF in 2005 Far site: ready for integration (2007) Near site: 40 m shaft to build (2009) Collaboration France, Germany, USA, Russia Approved in France LOI’s: hep-ex/0405032 & hep-ex/0410081 http://doublechooz.in2p3.fr go down to  13 ~4-5 0 With e disappearance

K. Jakobs P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006 Activities and Plans on Dark Matter Search Scintillation Ionization Heat DAMA CRESST ZEPLIN EDELWEISS, CDMS Ge NaI Liquid Xe CaWO 4 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

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

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Karl Jakobs Universität Freiburg Germany Planning Activities in Europe ……."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

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

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Karl Jakobs Universität Freiburg Germany Planning Activities in Europe ……."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback