Transcript www.iucaa.ernet.in

Why LIGO-Australia??



1) the science is ground-breaking and the technology that it
involves can have impact beyond just the project.
2) LIGO-Australia is a great opportunity for Indian scientists to
engage with both Australian and US scientists, and Indian
participation might be the difference between it happening or
not.
3) the IndIGO Consortium is committed to pursue this research,
even if LIGO-Australia does not happen. If LIGO-Australia
doesn't come about, IndIGO still intends to pursue membership
in the LSC and GWIC and will continue to work to develop the
capability for an Indian detector, but the path will be longer and
harder.
What is presently needed for LIGO-Australia?


At the moment, a strong expression of interest from India is the
most important factor, with the amount being somewhat
secondary. I believe that scientific collaboration with India is a
priority for Australia, and this is one of our strongest points.
It may be that, if the Australian government gets interested in
the project, they might ask India for a larger contribution. No
need to raise that issue now
LIGO-Australia Manpower


~50 members. Professors, post-docs, Ph.D students and
Technicians who are fully engaged with GW research
(including data analysis)
Project staff would be about 25-30 (mix of scientists (~10),
engineers (~5-8), and technicians.



Staff level would smoothly transition to the operating staff.
During the construction, a small number of these staff
(mostly the engineers) would be responsible for over-seeing
the work of the companies doing the buildings, site
preparation and the vacuum system construction installation
and testing.
Others during this time (mostly the scientists) would spend
time at LIGO-US to learn about Advanced LIGO,so that they
are ready to lead the detector installation once that starts in
Strategy



Most of the scientists would start off at the postdoc level (during
their training time with Advanced LIGO) and then become the
core operating staff for the facility as well as working on
improvements and upgrades. Many of these younger scientists
would be recruited from the current postdoc staff in ACIGA.
Suresh Doravari at LIGO is one of these scientists
Expect leaders of the main experimental groups (Jesper, David
McClelland and David Blair, and the 1-2 other younger faculty
that each has working with them) would assist with training the
scientists and helping to understand and commission the
detectors once they are operating. They would keep their
faculty positions at their home university, and spend part of their
time at the site in Gingin doing this work and supervising the
work of the less experienced scientists.
Abhay Ashtekar


Indeed, chances in Australia as per their Ministry are low. But
because they are not zero, NSF does not want to be seen as
doing anything to discourage them.
They do strongly encourage India to develop plans for possibly
hosting the site in India. They appear to be satisfied, to first
order,that at least some Indian sites would not be that much
different from the Australian sites in terms of polarization
measurements, source location etc. I understand that their
knowledge comes from Bernie Schutz which in turn may have
come from Sathya. HOWEVER, NSF will have to do a proper
review before making a decision. This is where our worries
about adequacyof human resources and infra-structure become
very important. It would be a pity if you put in a lot of work and
even secured funding but the review is negative.
Abhay Ashtekar



The National Science Board has been told that NSF will report to
them on foreign locations by October. Strictly they do not have to
2Km put the detector back in the Hanford site right away. But political
realities are such that they will not be able to delay too long in
absence of concrete opportunities from abroad that they can point to
and say that they are waiting to move the detector there (or they will
be asked: if the 2Km detector is not essential did they mislead the
science board and the congress when they requested funding for it?)
In October there does not have to be a complete commitment of
funds. But there should be concrete plans on Indian (or
Australian) side on achieving the stated goals.
Suppose no one comes through in time and the 2Km detector is
buried in Hanford. It is not out of question that a year or two
later they could dig it out and send it elsewhere if a golden
opportunity arose. But this is not guaranteed because it will cost
some 10-20Million dollars to dig it out.
Bernard Schutz - AEI


A few senior LIGO people are talking about maybe "mothballing" the
second Hanford detector and finding another site. People have talked
about Europe (not an option) and S America (no local project). To me
it seems like the most natural alternative would be India. Have you
thought about getting yourselves ready to put in a bid for it, of course
only when and if the Australian option fails? I would certainly strongly
support the idea, provided you yourselves felt you could handle the
creation of the infrastructure needed for it.
I am reassured that you have already taken this up. I would be very happy
to cooperate with Abhay. I am quite sure the AEI would support a credible
initiative in this direction. We supply the Advance LIGO laser, and have
already given LIGO permission to use it in Australia instead of Hanford. I am
quite sure that there would be no problem switching this to India if people
knew there was sufficient support from the government for infrastructure. I
am pretty sure this would also apply to the suspension work that Glasgow
puts into Advanced LIGO. I will alert Jim, Sheila, and Karsten to this but not
spread the word more widely at the moment.
JV Narlikar


My first reading of it shows that it is a well thought out programme and
deserves to be followed up by the Indian scientific community.
I understand that the Indian Institute of Space Science and
Technology, Thiruvananthapuram has an arrangement whereby the
undergraduates who are recruited at IISST are fully supported by
ISRO and they have to sign a bond under which they will work for
ISRO for a certain number of years after their graduation. This
arrangement provides ISRO with much needed human resources and
also on the other side, gives the students an assurance that they
have a job waiting for them after their graduation. I suggest that your
Consortium could consider instituting scholarships for bright students
studying in some IISERs with a somewhat similar arrangement. This
may solve your human resource problem when the bigger versions of
the prototype are under construction.
ACIGA in LIGO-India??? Difficulties..


While all of ACIGA universities are within an easy single plane
flight of Gingin, so that the university-based staff can easily
participate and still fulfill their university obligations. Australia
to India travel is still at least a 12 hour trip (and possibly more
depending on where in India) so this will reduce the amount of
help the university based ACIGA members can give.
May not be as easy to recruit the core scientific staff (the 10
younger scientists) from the current postdoc/PhD student pool
in ACIGA to come to LIGO-India. Some might find that a grand
adventure, both scientifically and culturally, but it is never easy
for people to leave their home country (cultural ties, family ties).
IndIGO Strategy



Need a very aggressive training program to bring Indian
experimenters up to speed quickly if this project goes forward.
Rana can give the most help by agreeing to be responsible for
training the core team of Indian scientists in the US, working on
Advanced LIGO. He would be willing to do that, placing people
into the right places here to contribute and learn, before
returning to India to lead the installation and commissioning of
LIGO-India (Stan)
Stan supports the idea, and will make every effort to help that
he can, within the constraints he has. An advisory role from
the US, with perhaps periodic visits, a maximum time in India
might be 6-8 weeks per year.
Sendhil Raja RRCAT

If we have to switch roles with Australia in the LIGO-Australia project,
and implement it it in India, it is "do-able" from a technology point of
view as the key components (optics and lasers) of the interferometer
(which would take a sizable development time) would be made
available by LIGO. So in collaboration with LIGO setting up the
interferometer is definitely a realisable project from a technical point
of view, but we need to take into account other issues such as
decision on location/site, site development, civil infrastructure and
rapid manpower generation/training(so the time scale be longer than
what LIGO-Australia has projected). We also would have to prioritize
this work over other commitments that we are currently in. From a
financial standpoint we may have an advantage, my estimate is that
we can do the project at 25% lower cost than the estimate by LIGOAustralia. So in my opinion it is definitely worth a try to pitch for LIGOIndia if the offer is made.
Anil Prabhakar IITM


If Australia helps with technical know-how/transfer and we have the experts
currently available for LIGO-Australia, then yes, LIGO-India is feasible.
10 people working full-time can be organized if we
a) create Indigo positions and hire on it. (e.g. see attached proposal to DBT that
was just submitted)
b) get people to move on deputation (see attached ministry recommendations
for such projects)
Unni to Anil

I looked at the sample proposal that you sent. I also looked at the technology
objectives mentioned. We cannot attract people by just offering large
salaries speculating that they will do well (the NCBS young investigator
program so far only has given out 'standard' researchers, like any other good
post-docs) -salaries that exceed PM's for ordinary researchers. I do not think
IndIGO can operate in that mode. But that is not the main point. Let me just
say that we are talking about a sophistication level for GW detector that is
order of magnitude larger and more precise and demanding than anything
that has been actually done by most of us on technology front. Perhaps you
know it already. Perhaps some of us can meet the demands, with good
effort, but this needs to be proved and that is why we have fairly precise
proposals for the 12th plan. Of course we are really good at what will happen
after the detector is commissioned - using it for astronomy.

Some IndiGO position can be created, perhaps at a larger salary than what
the government usually recommends, but that by itself will not help unless
people who are already experienced volunteer to build up the team of 10 that
you mention.
Unni - TIFR




The answer to your question depends on many factors. If you are asking
whether LIGO-India can be built with ACIGA and IndiGO roles reversing,
then I would put a 6-8 year time scale for completion even after 10 people
here volunteer to do full time. So, it is possible in principle, but not efficient.
Without LIGO full help (as in LIGO Australia), if we think of a parallel
detector to be completed in that time scale, I think it will not be possible
given the constraints on lead manpower.
Question of expertise is not really the full issue. There are a few isolated
experts doing other things. So, if these people come together a detector over
much larger time scale is possible (perhaps 10+ yrs), with some help from
LIGO/ACIGA and related industrial partners.
So, as Sendhil pointed out, the only practical path is to work with LIGOAustralia and then built up from that experience. In any case, if the event rate
is very small in advanced detectors for some reason (a few per year), it is not
clear to me that whether one should go for one more, except for improved
duty cycle.
Unni TIFR

I do not think that we can keep the time line that LIGO is demanding even if
such a scenario is discussed. LIGO/NSF wants the detector ready with other
ones, latest by 2017 perhaps. IndIGO will not be able to do this because of
the many many steps that needs to be climbed locally, apart from site and so
on. ACIGA a good team in place already and we do not have it, and that is
worth anything between 3-5 years.
I think this piece of communication is one of the most important that has
happened so far in the context of IndIGO. It clearly reflects how much
confidence has been built up in our interactions with people who are the top
in the community trying to build the next detector. Today decision makers in
NSF and LIGO are willing to consider the possibility of a LIGO-IndIGO. As all
of you know I was not so supportive of even taking up the suggestion of
LIGO-IndIGO at this stage. However, after seeing mails from Abhay and Stan
I will not discourage at any stage a discussion in this matter. Some of my
guesses regarding it are true as mentioned in Stan's mail (his not being able
to spend time here, ACIGA's much reduced expected contribution etc.) I told
Dr. Kaw that NSF perhaps will not consider an offer to India, but that may
turn out to be wrong finally.
Unni

As I see it that kind of suggestion can be taken forward if Sathya, Rana and
Sukanta can come together for LIGO-IndIGO, and not in any other way
practically. So, Plan B according to me will be something like that. You can
see that NSF may feel confident with such a team