 |
 |
------------------- Energy Frontier Conveners' meeting April 25, 2013 Attending, at least: Yuri, Rick, Heather, Chip, John, Daniel, Soeren, Kaustubh, Markus, Michael P, Michael S.,Doreen, Sanjay, Liantao, Eric, plus a few others who joined after discussion began. Agenda: 1. We discussed the experience with using vidyo to host remote participants at the BNL meeting. The consensus was that hosting vidyo on personal laptops was acceptable but far from optimal. It would be better to have a dedicated videoconference setup for each room, or, at least, a computer and screen on a cart that can be wheeled into each conference room. The Seattle organizers should assume that this facility will be needed for all sessions and do their best to provide it. Chip and Michael will communicate this to Gordon Watts. 2. We discussed briefly the schedule for Seattle. Chip and Michael will distribute a schedule soon. They warn that there will be less time for contributed papers than at BNL, especially if you would like time for discussion in your working group. 3. We discussed session titles and content for the parallel sessions at Seattle. Michael will process the discussion and send an updated list. If you have additional suggestions, please send them to [log in to unmask] The list expanded into the following incomplete draft: a. Dark Matter b. lepton-flavor violation c. quark-flavor violation (anticipating, though that IF will also suggest this) d. future of the Higgs Boson e. Instrumentation matters f. proton decay...esp SUSY connections g. precision parameter measurements - why and how well. 4. We discussed questions that we will address to the other frontiers. The two most important topics in this discussion were: (1) estimation of the reach of lepton-number-violation and quark flavor probes in terms of new particles and how that correlates with direct production sensitivities at LHC. (2) question of determining the properties of dark matter particles. DM only gravitational? What properties could be measured? What if nothing is found? How to distinguish more than one species of DM? Michael will process the discussion and send an updated list. If you have additional suggestions, please send them to [log in to unmask] 5. We had an open-ended discussion of the question of what the justification is for future machines at higher energy after LHC, e.g., 33 or 100 TeV pp colliders. We need to think further about this and to articulate a point of view. Likewise, the HL-LHC justification will require careful arguments. 6. We briefly discussed the comparison of precision W, Z measurements with measurements of the triple gauge couplings. Doreen emphasized that such comparisons can be made in an effective Lagrangian framework, and that this will be the approach of the Electroweak WG. Does this give insight into the physics of the various possibilities? That is less clear and needs more discussion. We will hold these meetings every week from now until Minnesota: 11 am PDT/ 2 pm EDT. Chip and Michael will circulate the agenda for each week a day or two in advance. However, much of the meeting will be devoted to continuing discussion of the key high-level issues. Respectfully submitted, Michael and Chip ######################################################################## 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