Transcript 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.

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:
•
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:
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
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
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."
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
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
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
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
Written submissions to the SG (to 15th March)
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
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)
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
The Physics of the High Energy Frontier
LHC – SLHC – DLHC
LHeC
µC
Klaus Desch
University of Freiburg
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
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
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
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
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
Examples of SLHC improvements
Heavy SUSY Higgs:
observable region increased
by ~100 GeV.
Broad resonances in no-Higgs
scenarios:
3000 fb-1 (5)
3000 fb-1 (95% CL)
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-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
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
K. Jakobs
 synergy
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
Accelerator and Detector R&D in Europe
CARE:
EUROTeV:
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
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…)
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.
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
n Roadmap
(A. Cervera, Geneva Univ.)
Ongoing: 2005-2010
1st step: transition era
• Improve the precision on the atm. parameters looking at nm disappearance
• Confirm (atm. osc) = (nm → nt ) and first look at nm → ne
2 nd step:
Approved/Proposed: 2008-2015
q13 era
• Demonstrate visibility of sub-leading transitions: nm → ne , ne →ne
• Explore q13 down to 20 (today <100)
3 rd step: precision era
q13> 3 0
Known by 2011
• Existing facilities could reach it
• … but with very small sensitivity to
dCP and mass hierarchy
To be prepared: 2015-2025
q13< 3 0
• No access for ongoing
experiments at that time
Cleaner and more intense beams + larger detectors
The role of Europe
(A. Cervera @ Orsay)
Past experiments
• NOMAD, CHORUS, Chooz, Gallex, Macro
CERN to GS (2006)
T2K (2009)
• Opera
Double-Chooz (2008)
• First dedicated attempt to q13
• Major contribution to near detectors
ND280 (2009) and 2Km (2011)
• 120 people from 23 European institutes
• CERN recognised experiment
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:
(i)
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
Improved Super-beams
• Increase by one order of magnitude
• beam power: ~4MW
• detector mass
• Three proposals:
(A. Cervera @ Orsay)
Systematics unchanged
• Beam contamination
• Cross section
• Detector efficiency
T2HK (T2K-II)
Japan
0.6 GeV
295 Km
1000 KT Water Cherenkov
SPL-Memphys
Europe
0.25 GeV
130 Km
440 KT Water Cherenkov
NuMI-SuperNOvA
US
2
890 Km
130 KT fully active calorimeter
GeV
SuperNOvA (US)
Memphys (Frejus)
Hyper-Kamiokande
(Japan)
60 m
Beta-beam
Pure ne or ne beam
6
2
He  36Li  n e e
18
10
(A. Cervera @ Orsay)
small beam systematics and backgrounds
CERN layout
Ne  189F νe e
Ion production
ongoing R&D for ion production
Neutrino source
Acceleration
EURISOL design study
missing feasibility study
for high
g option
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:
Performace
• Higher flux and cross section. Better energy binning (no Fermi motion)
• Smaller systematics from cross section and detector efficiency
(Burget et al.)
High
g
LHC
g~1500
7 GeV
3000 Km
0.1 MT TC
CERN-Canarias
Tevatron or S-SPS
g~350
1.5 GeV
730 Km
1 MT W-Ch.
CERN-GS/Canfranc
g
SPS (max energy)
Low
g~150
0.6 GeV
300 Km
1 MT W-Ch.
?
SPS
g~100
0.35 GeV
130 Km
1 MT W-Ch.
CERN-Frejus
Neutrino factory
(A. Cervera @ Orsay)
• 50% nm 50% ne
small beam systematics … but charge required
• High energy beam
small cross section systematics
CP violation
• A wide variety of studies are possible: unitarity
and also:
n m  n m n m  nt
• Challenging
n e  nt
Atmospheric osc.
silver
ne nm
golden
T, CPT
nm ne
bronze
Ongoing R&D: MICE, HARP, MERIT
CERN layout
Insufficient R&D:
• Acceleration
• Global design
India
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
Summary: Main “wishes” of the European
n 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, 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.
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 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)
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
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)
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
l
…. many proposals for detectors of that scale (US, Japan, Europe)….
calls for an international collaboration
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)
Gravitationally
distorted
galaxies
SNAP
DUNE: Dark Universe Explorer
weak shear analysis
Statistics of grav. distortions depend
on geometry of universe
~ 2012 (French CNES) or ~ 2015 (ESA)
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
Complementarity liquid argon vs. water Cherenkov
p  K+ n
(higher detection eff.)
p  e+ 0
(larger mass)
p

e+ 0

e+ g g
Manpower situation
in European Particle Physics
ECFA survey
(released 13. April 2006)
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
ECFA survey of European Particle Physics (Apr. 2006)
ECFA survey (cont.)
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
ECFA survey (cont.) – a few examples-
France
Finland
The Netherlands
Germany
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
Results for q13
Decision about 3rd step
Courtesy of
M. Mezzetto
100
50
90% CL
30
20
• 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
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006
q13 era: Reactors
(A. Cervera @ Orsay)
• High rate ne by 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
go down to q13~4-50
With ne disappearance
• Reduce systematic errors by a
factor 5 with two identical detectors
• Still pending for full funding
Chooz site (France)
• Agreement with EDF in 2005
• Far site: ready for integration (2007)
• Near site: 40 m shaft to build (2009)
Activities and Plans on Dark Matter Search
Detection principle: elastic scattering of WIPS on detector nuclei
Liquid Xe
 1evt / kg / day
ZEPLIN

Ionization
- Deep underground
- Low radioactivity materials
- Discrimination against
radioactive background
Scintillation
DAMA
NaI
EDELWEISS,
CDMS
Ge
CRESST
Heat
CaWO4
Nuclear recoil (Wimp signal)
versus
electronic recoil (radioactive background)
l
K. Jakobs
P5 Meeting, SLAC, April 2006