 |
 |
Here is a specific proposal for language on the VLHC to be included in the executive summary after the paragraph on ILC. We have already discussed it in the NP group, and we feel that it reflects the high-level conclusions of our part of the report. A complementary option with great promise is a 100 TeV hadron collider, which has unprecedented potential reach for new physics associated with electroweak symmetry breaking, naturalness, and dark matter. However, physics studies and technical design are at an early stage, so this cannot be considered an option in the near term. Markus Luty ============================================ Physics Department University of California, Davis One Shields Avenue Davis, CA 95616 Phone: +1 530 554 1280 Skype: markus_luty On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 6:18 PM, marina artuso <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > I agree with this! > Marina > marina artuso > Professor of Physics > Syracuse University > 201 Physics Building > Syracuse NY 13244 > [log in to unmask] > > > > On Aug 20, 2013, at 6:16 PM, "James D. Olsen" <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > On the point about timelines, while concepts like the VLHC are in the > ‘far future’, what is in the ‘here and now’ is the R&D on the technology > that will enable that vision. As we heard at Snowmass, much of this > know-how exists in the USofA, and I think we have an opportunity here to > inspire the next generation of accelerator and magnet physicists. As > Michael points out, this is touched upon in the latest draft of the > high-level executive summary, but I think we could make this point even > stronger simply by noting the importance and leadership of the US community > in this area. > > > > Best, > > Jim > > > > From: [log in to unmask] [mailto: > [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yuri Gershtein > > Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 5:22 PM > > To: Peskin, Michael E. > > Cc: Raymond Brock; Jianming Qian; Markus A. Luty; Tom LeCompte; > snowmass-ef > > Subject: Re: [SNOWMASS-EF] VLHC in the snowmass summary > > > > Hi Michael, > > > > I understand the point about the timelines, but I think if we are > talking about > > "consensus" points, I think it became fairly clear at Snowmass that it's > almost > > inconceivable that we can get complete understanding of the higgs / DM / > EWSB > > without building something like VLHC, and we should state that we > recognize that > > such machine is necessary in the future. > > > > -y > > > > On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Peskin, Michael E." < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > I do agree that VLHC received wide interest at Snowmass. > > > > However, it is also important to recognize that the time scales for ILC > and VLHC are > > very different. On the practical side, no one today is entertaining a > proposal for a > > 100 TeV pp collider. On the physics side, we are just beginning the > serious studies > > of the capabilities of a 100 TeV collider. Only a few results were > shown at Snowmass > > for the 33 TeV machine, and only one, I think, for the 100 TeV machine. > (There will > > be more 100 TeV results in the final writeups.) > > > > In the summaries, Chip and I put a statement about ILC into the highest > level > > executive summary. P5 will need to make a statement about ILC, so this > input, which > > is strictly limited to the physics case and does reflect a consensus at > Snowmass, is needed. > > > > There is a brief statement about the 100 TeV machine in the latest > version of the > > Executive Summary, and a longer statement in the 5-page Energy Frontier > summary. > > These reflect our attitude that the 100 TeV is important, but the issue > is getting > > ready for a proposal in 2020, not making a decision today. > > > > If you would like it another way, please send some explicit language to > this group. > > And, please take into account that space in the highest level executive > summary is > > extremely limited. We can make two points strongly -- which is what we > tried to do -- > > or make many points of which none registers above background. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Michael > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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/ > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ________________________________________ > > From: Jianming Qian [[log in to unmask]] > > Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 1:24 AM > > To: Yuri Gershtein > > Cc: Markus A. Luty; Raymond Brock; Tom LeCompte; Peskin, Michael E.; > snowmass-ef > > Subject: Re: [SNOWMASS-EF] Snowmass summary and Phone meeting request > > > > Hello all, > > > > I'd like to echo Markus and Yuri's comments. I think the support for an > eventual 100 TeV pp collider is very strong, certainly not less strong than > a Higgs factory. > > > > Cheers, Jianming > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Yuri Gershtein < > [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> > wrote: > > > > On Aug 19, 2013, at 1:07 PM, "Markus A. Luty" <[log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > > > > I believe it is imperative that the high-level Snowmass summary include > a statement that VLHC also represents an exciting possibility for the next > step forward. > > > > I strongly agree. > > Even given different timescales for VLHC and ILC, the way Markus phrased > it is right on. > > > > -y > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > -------------------------- > > Prof. Yuri Gershtein > > [log in to unmask] > > http://physics.rutgers.edu/~gershtein > > (732)445-5500 x1794 > > W316 Serin Building > > Department of Physics and Astronomy > > 136 Frelinghuysen Rd > > Rutgers University > > Piscataway, NJ 08854 > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > 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 > > > > ######################################################################## 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