From: Chip Brock <[log in to unmask]>

Subject: Fwd: EF Conveners Meeting Thursday, 5/2

Date: May 1, 2013 10:47:37 PM EDT

To: snowmass-ef <[log in to unmask]>

Cc: Chip Brock <[log in to unmask]>, "Michael E. Peskin" <[log in to unmask]>

Hello EF Conveners,

We will have our weekly EF Convener's phone call tomorrow, Thursday.

Energy Frontier Conveners' meeting

  May 2: 11:00 PDT / 2:00 EDT

         Contact information:

        You call:    domestic...     (877)287-0283
                         international...(303)433-0165

        participant code: 290-043

We will start the meeting promptly and end promptly after 1 hour.

Agenda items

0. Update on CMS and ATLAS requests for Snowmass and Minneapolis.

1. We will send you a block layout draft for the Seattle meeting before the meeting tomorrow.

2. Any further thoughts on general parallel session titles for Seattle from the minutes, below (item 3)?

3. We really didn't talk about one of the Cosmic Questions to us: 

""HE1": • The message from the LHC seems to be that with data in hand, we consistently outperform expectations for extraction of Higgs properties. How much is there really for an ILC to contribute? What key assumptions are we making now that we could relax with ILC inputs?"

And here's another one of theirs for us to discuss:

""HE4". The current data seem to put large amounts of MSSM parameter space in an uncomfortable position. Clearly some interesting regions remain. When do we expand to alternatives, such as the NMSSM? Which ones do we choose? Are there new paradigms?"

Thank you,

Chip and Michael 

Begin forwarded message:

From: Chip Brock <[log in to unmask]>

Subject: EF 2013.04.25 Conveners Meeting Minutes

Date: April 26, 2013 10:39:00 AM EDT

To: snowmass-ef <[log in to unmask]>

Cc: Chip Brock <[log in to unmask]>

-------------------

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