minutes of the EF phone meeting 10/8
attending: Chip, Michael, Sally, Daniel, LianTao, Ashutosh, Cecilia, Reinhard, Markus, Andy White
There are many items in these minutes that all of you need act on more or less immediately. Please read these minutes carefully. We summary the action items at the end.
Our reports are overdue. We would like to send our reports to the Snowmass conveners on Tuesday, October 15.
All line numbers refer to the 10-3 versions sent out last Friday.
1. From the group on the phone, and from the emails that we have received, you seem to be happy with the reports that we put together except for some specific points discussed below. Michael emphasized that, if you are not happy, you must speak up now. This is best done by sending email to snowmass-ef. Urgently, please.
2. Many of the people on the phone were uncomfortable with the language on likes 40-41 of the short report: "These puzzles imply that new particles with masses of the order of 1 TeV which resolve these questions will be found -- and will be accessible to existing and planned accelerators." They felt that "imply" was too strong and that the implication of 1 TeV rather than, say, 5 TeV was made in this sentence.
Michael suggested the minor change:
"These puzzles lead to the expectation that new particles with masses of the order of 1 TeV which resolve these questions will be found -- and will be accessible to existing or planned accelerators."
This did not seem to resolve the problem, though at least one person on the call thought the statement was now too weak.
Here is the assignment:
Go back to line 31 and rewrite the text up through line 41 so that it has the correct level of strength. A sentence or, maybe better, a new very short paragraph calling out WIMP dark matter should also be added. We would like to have your suggestions for this by NOON FRIDAY.
Michael emphasized that whatever appears should be as strong as we are comfortable with.
Naturalness is discussed in the long document in section 1.2.2, p.5. The people who were uncomfortable with the above were happy with this section. Are you?
Any guidance you can give is in pointing out other too-strong statements in the documents would be appreciated.
3. The language used in the conclusions, e.g. line 179 of the short document, for the triple Higgs coupling measurement at the HL-LHC was considered too strong. "Observation" has a specific connotation (3 sigma) which we expect will not be met. However, we agreed that the access to the triple Higgs coupling is an important motivation for the HL-LHC. We would like to have your suggestions for how to reword this conclusion, in line 179 of the short document, and in line 1009 of the long document.
4. We asked whether the language on the importance of renewed study of the VLHC is as strong in these documents as the language in the executive summary. Please look especially at lines 1093 and 1192 of the long document and the discussion of the VLHC in the discovery stories on p. 34-35. If this is not OK with you, suggest a specific change in the language.
5. Finally, please go through the section of your working group in each of the documents and confirm that the numbers given are correct and up to date. If not, send to Chip and Michael the specific changes needed. (The Higgs group has done this in a very thorough way -- Thank you!)
again, action items - send by Friday October 11 !!
1. If you are not happy with the overall structure and tone of the EF summaries, send a complaint to snowmass-ef
2. Suggest rewrite of line 31 and following of the short document
3. Suggest language concerning the triple Higgs coupling
4. Suggest language concerning the VLHC
5. Check that the numbers given are consistent with your working group report, and send notice of any variance.
Thanks to all -- but, the work is not done.
Michael will send revised versions of the summaries in the next day or so -- but, do not wait for these to do the homework requested.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael E. Peskin [log in to unmask]
HEP Theory Group, MS 81 -------
SLAC National Accelerator Lab. phone: 1-(650)-926-3250
2575 Sand Hill Road fax: 1-(650)-926-2525
Menlo Park, CA 94025 USA www.slac.stanford.edu/~mpeskin/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
To unsubscribe from the SNOWMASS-EF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SNOWMASS-EF&A=1
|
