One terse reaction, below.
On Aug 23, 2013, at 8:06 PM, "Graham W. Wilson" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
wrote:
Dear All,
This looks very reasonable to me. I do have a number of suggestions.
They are embedded below.
regards
Graham
On 8/23/2013 4:56 PM, Peskin, Michael E. wrote:
Folks,
We met today to discuss the Snowmass summaries. In fact, the whole hour was taken up with a
discussion of the paragraphs in the top-level executive summary.
I attach a new version, then the minutes. Here is the new version:
--------------------
Energy Frontier. The mysteries of the newly discovered Higgs boson were a major theme at Snowmass. The properties of the Higgs boson raise crucial questions that guide large parts of the future particle physics program. Indeed, this discovery changes everything. It calls for a three-pronged research program at high energy accelerators: first, to determine the properties of the Higgs boson as accurately as possible, second, to make precise measurements of the heavy particles $W$, $Z$, and the top quark, which can carry the imprint of the Higgs field; and, third, to search for new particles
with TeV masses
Why call out TeV masses. We want to test the existence of new particles whatever their mass is.
I think the current most model-independent limit on the NLSP is at most 100 GeV. I think it falsely devalues
the discovery potential with a 1 TeV e+e- collider. If you look at the recent pMSSM paper it is clear
that TeV masses can be mis-representative of the NLSP for that model of EWSB.
Suggest deleting "with TeV masses".
predicted by models of electroweak symmetry breaking. Questions about the Higgs boson also inspire the search for the dark matter particles and for flavor-changing rare decays, since in both cases the motivating theory often comes from models of the Higgs boson and its role in symmetry-breaking.
For at least the next fifteen years, the experiments at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN will drive the Energy Frontier program forward. The Higgs boson discovery at the LHC now becomes a precision study of the properties of this particle. The high-luminosity LHC will measure Higgs boson couplings at the few-percent level and provide the first measurement of the Higgs self-coupling. The steps of the LHC to 300 fb$^{-1}$ and then to 3000 fb$^{-1} will explore deeply for new particles produced through either the strong or the electroweak interactions. They will probe for new dynamics of $W$, $Z$, and Higgs at TeV energies and study rare decays using a sample of billions of top quarks. The LHC experiments have already proven their ability to work as global collaborations. Detector and accelerator components, technology and physics insight, and leadership from the US have played indispensible roles.
There is a strong scientific motivation for continuing this program with lepton colliders.
strong - seems a little weak.
Continuing also may not be the best word choice.
What about
"There is compelling scientific motivation to continue exploring this physics in unique and complementary ways with lepton colliders."
Experiments at lepton colliders can reach sub-percent precision in the Higgs boson properties in a model-independent way, enabling discovery of percent-level deviations predicted in theoretical models. They can improve the precision of our knowledge of the $W$, $Z$, and top properties by an order of magnitude, allowing the discovery of predicted new physics effects. They search for new particles with unequivocal discovery or exclusion, complementing new particle searches at the LHC. A global effort has now completed the technical design of the International Linear Collider (ILC) accelerator and detectors that will provide these capabilities. The Japanese high energy physics community has named this facility as its first priority.
The last sentence seems to beg for some kind of recommendation. I guess we did that before in 2001....
Would it not be feasible to have a more positive ending statement here like in the European Strategy document.?
No.
As it stands it reads as if we're afraid to reach the obvious conclusion, that we, as a community, still aspire to
be part of this scientific opportunity wherever it can be built in the world.
The Snowmass study considered many other options for high-energy colliders that might be realized over a longer term. These included higher energy linear colliders, circular e+e- colliders, muon colliders, and photon colliders. The study called out in particular the potential of a 100 TeV hadron collider for the exploration of electroweak symmetry breaking and dark matter and recommended more concerted work on its design and its physics capability.
In all of the projects listed above, US leadership in developing experimental and accelerator technology is playing a critical role. These US initiatives are essential to meet the world-wide scientific goals in particle physics.
-------------------------------
It is still not perfect. Please send proposed changes to this list by the end of the day tomorrow (Saturday).
Now to the minutes of the meeting
Present were:
Chip, Michael, Sally, Markus, Tom L., Daniel, Andrei, Cecilia, Rick, Kaustubh, Reinhardt, Yuri, Graham, Andy W., Soeren, Liantao, Robin
The main criticisms of the previous version were:
Not enough emphasis on Higgs. Higgs should be first in all lists.
Among longer-term accelerator projects, there was special interest in VLHC, and this out to be called out.
Some emphasis needed on US contributions and US "leadership"
Chip and I hope that these concerns are addressed in the new version above.
Thanks,
Michael
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael E. Peskin [log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/<http://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
--
Graham W. Wilson
Associate Professor
Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
University of Kansas
Lawrence, KS 66045
Office Tel. 785-864-5231
Web: http://heplx3.phsx.ku.edu/~graham/
########################################################################
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
---------------------------------------------------------------
Raymond Brock * University Distinguished Professor
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Michigan State University
Biomedical Physical Sciences
567 WIlson Road, Room 3210
East Lansing, MI 48824
sent from: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
cell: (517)927-5447
MSU office: (517)353-1693/884-5579
open fax: (517)355-6661
secure fax: (517)351-0688
Fermilab office: (630)840-2286
CERN Office: 32 2-B03 * 76-71756
Twitter: @chipbrock
Home: http://www.pa.msu.edu/~brock/
ISP220: http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/ISP220/
ISP213H: http://www.pa.msu.edu/courses/2007spring/ISP213H/
Facebook: http://msu.facebook.com/profile.php?id=2312233
########################################################################
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
