Report From International Committee on Future Accelerators (ICFA) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Report From International Committee on Future Accelerators (ICFA) PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 85165-ZDc1Z


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Report From International Committee on Future Accelerators (ICFA)


Indeed the long-term health of the field depends critically on truly global cooperation ... Finally, particle physics must achieve unprecedented (for any field) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:18
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 19
Provided by: ajsm7


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Report From International Committee on Future Accelerators (ICFA)

Report From International Committee on Future
Accelerators (ICFA)
  • By Jonathan Dorfan, Chair ICFA
  • Global Design Effort Meeting Frascati, December
    7-9, 2005

The Role of ICFA
  • Charter and Aegis
  • ICFA was created to facilitate international
    collaboration in the construction and use of
    accelerators for high energy physics. It was
    created in 1976 by IUPAP
  • Its purpose, as stated in 1985, are as follows
  • To promote international collaboration in all
    phases of the construction and exploitation of
    very high energy accelerators
  • To organize regularly world-inclusive meetings
    for the exchange of information on future plans
    for regional facilities and for the formulation
    of advice on joint studies and uses
  • To organize workshops for the study of problems
    related to super high-energy accelerator
    complexes and their international exploitation
    and to foster research and development of
    necessary technology

  • Canada D. Karlen
  • CERN Member States T. Akesson
  • R. Aymar
  • A. Wagner
  • China H. Chen
  • Japan S. Komamiya
  • Y. Totsuka
  • Russia V. Rubakov
  • Y. Tikhonov
  • USA J. Dorfan (Chair)
  • P. Oddone
  • S. Dawson
  • Other Countries S. Novaes
  • Albrecht Wagner will take
  • over as the next Chair of ICFA
  • in January 2006

Global Planning and Cooperation ? A Must for HEP
  • Never before has a field of science attempted to
    globalize itself as extensively as HEP has done
    recently. It is a challenging task, but one that
    must be accomplished. Indeed the long-term
    health of the field depends critically on truly
    global cooperation
  • The necessity for global coordination was
    formalized by ICFA in its May 1993 ICFA Statement
    entitled International Collaboration in the
    Construction of Future Large Accelerator
  • ICFAs role was crucial for the ultimate
    realization of a global LHC and is crucial for
    launching the ILC

ICFA and the Linear Collider
  • ICFA has been helping guide international
    cooperation on the Linear Collider since the mid
    1990s. Major early steps
  • 1995 First ILC Technical Review Committee
    (TRC) Report,
  • with Greg Loew as Chair
  • 1999 ICFA Statement on Linear Collider
  • 2002 ICFA commissioned the second Report,
  • with Greg Loew as Chair
  • 2002 ICFA Forms the International Linear
  • Steering Committee ( ILCSC)
  • 2003 ILCSC establishes International
  • Recommendation Panel (ITRP)
  • 2005 ICFA/ILCSC Establishes GDE

The International Linear Collider (ILC) is Born
  • The ITRP recommendation to base linac design on
    SCRF was presented to ILCSC ICFA on August 19,
    2004 in a joint meeting in Beijing.
  • ICFA unanimously endorsed the recommendation on
    August 20, 2004
  • Global concept and cooperation endorsed by the
    worlds HEP Lab Directors
  • Global project is named International Linear
    Collider (ILC)

Global Design Effort (GDE) Established March
  • February 2005, at TRIUMF, ILCSC and ICFA
    unanimously endorsed the sub-Committees choice
    for GDE Director
  • On March 18, 2005
  • Barry Barish
  • officially accepted
  • the position at
  • the opening of
  • LCWS 05 meeting
  • at Stanford

The World of Linear Colliders a Scant Two Years
Ago Four Options
December 2005 --- Enormous Progress in 2 years
International Community centered on One Option
GDE Baseline Params about to be adopted
The parameters are slightly revised since the
tentative parameter set (Suggested ILC Beam
Parameter Space.) which was distributed in
February 2005 in order to take into account the
following new features from the Snowmass
Workshop.The nominal accelerating gradient should
be 31.5 MV/m for the 500 GeV stage, and 36 MV/m
for the upgrade stage with Q01010 for both
  • .
  • min nominal max
  • Bunch charge N 1 2 3 2x1010
  • Number of bunches nb 1330 2820 5640
  • Linac bunch interval tb 154 308 461 ns
  • Bunch length sz 150 300 500 mm
  • Vertical emittance gey 0.03 0.04 0.08 mm.m
  • IP beta (500GeV) bx 10 21 21 mm
  • by 0.2 0.4 0.4 mm
  • IP beta (1TeV) bx 10 30 30 mm
  • by 0.2 0.3 0.6 mm

WWS Working in Close Coordination with GDE
  • SiD Silicon Detector SiD BR2
  • Small, all silicon
  • LDC Large Detector Concept LDC B R2
  • TPC based
  • GLD Global Large Detector GLD B R2

Main Tracker EM Calorimeter Had
Calorimeter Cryostat / Solenoid Iron Yoke / Muon
3 detector concepts under study with full
international involvement and active cooperation
  • The GDE Plan and Schedule

2005 2006 2007 2008
2009 2010
Global Design Effort
LHC Physics
Baseline configuration
Reference Design
Technical Design
ILC RD Program
Expression of Interest to Host
International Mgmt
  • The GDE is off to a terrific start
  • We have outstanding leadership and an aggressive
    plan which defines the key milestones
  • We have realized an organization that is truly
    internationally constituted representation and
    influence are extremely well balanced across the
    three regions
  • But time is passing and we CANNOT fail to meet
    our near term milestones. Having set them, the
    world is watching
  • To the GDE Leadership I offer
  • You need to pick up the pace of the technical
    workthe accelerator troops are getting anxious
    to see faster progress
  • To the Community, especially the leadership, I
  • Provide the leeway and support to the GDE so
    they do not have to balance every action
    regionally. For each important action, we must
    work to our strengths.
  • The ILC is a very challenging machine The
    most important imperative now is to produce the
    technically best, most cost-optimized design
    possible. That means utilizing the best talent
    and centers of excellence we have. Every
    decision that the GDE leadership makes cannot be
    expected to balance regional representation
    rather taken as a whole, the GDE process will
    achieve regional balance

The Role of Governments
  • Governments are the key they will make the
    decisions that lead to the establishment of an
    ILC project
  • The scientific community, through ICFA, are
    maintaining close contact with the key government
  • The main forum is the Funding Agencies for Linear
    Collider (FALC), which meets about twice a year.
    Major strategy steps (like ITRP, GDE etc) are
    discussed with FALC to ensure acceptance by the
    governments of ICFAs actions
  • FALC has now established a Resource Group to make
    coordination yet more frequent and responsive

The Momentum is Picking Up Worldwide
  • Serious discussion within governments in all
    three regions is intensifying. Recognition of
    the ILC as a crucial element of international
    science is growing
  • This is strongly driven by our communitys
    fervent and demonstrated commitment to make the
    difficult choices needed to ensure a truly
    international project
  • Funding for RD worldwide is about 70M. Even in
    these difficult financial times, one sees growth
    in all three regions
  • Studies of the future of HEP, ongoing in all
    three regions, are anticipated to endorse even
    more strongly the tri-regional unanimity for the
    rapid realization of the ILC. We anticipate
    these studies to conclude before Summer 2006

Science MagazineEditorial Bullish on Particles
by Michael S. Turner
  • Particle physics was, until recently, the
    flagship of U.S. physics, if not U.S. science.
    With ever larger "atom smashers" and such
    charismatic figures as J. Robert Oppenheimer and
    Richard Feynman, the field attracted the best and
    the brightest. These U.S. scientists garnered
    Nobel Prizes and public fame, becoming academic
    leaders and government advisors. The close
    association with national security that grew out
    of the Manhattan Project guaranteed both
    prominence and funding priority. But in 1993, the
    perfect storm hit The 10 billion
    Superconducting Super Collider was canceled, the
    Cold War ended, and life sciences rose to
    prominence. Since then, we've seen flat budgets,
    more canceled projects, and no firm prospects for
    high-energy accelerator experiments on U.S. soil
    after 2009. In today's "flat world" where
    technology has made science around the world
    tightly interconnected, the future of particle
    physics everywhere can be no brighter than it is
    in the United States, and that future looks dark.
  • Despite this, I am bullish on the future of U.S.
    particle physics, and my reason is simple. Right
    now, the field is poised for breakthroughs as
    stunning as those that followed Einstein's annus
    mirabilis 100 years ago. The focus has shifted
    from searching for the smallest subatomic seed to
    understanding the universe and the nature of
    matter, energy, space, and time. Big questions
    are ripe for answering. What is the "dark matter"
    that holds our galaxy together? Where did space
    and time come from, and how many space-time
    dimensions are there? How did the universe begin,
    and what is the mysterious dark energy
    accelerating its expansion? And perhaps the
    biggest question of all, one whose answer
    probably underlies all the others How are the
    two pillars of modern physics--quantum mechanics
    and general relativity--to be reconciled and a
    unified understanding of the forces of nature
    achieved? Particle physics is on the verge of
    something really big, as if the past 50 glory
    years were just preparation.

  • As exciting as these opportunities are, the
    challenges are great and morale in the U.S.
    particle physics community is low. With its link
    to national security severed, particle physics
    must now compete for funding and students with
    other fields that also have exciting
    agendas--from astrophysics and genomics to
    computer science and biophysics. Telescopes and
    underground laboratories to study dark energy and
    dark matter are now as essential as accelerators,
    making planning more complicated and the cost of
    discovery higher. And all of this in a time of
    constrained budgets for all science.
  • As a U.S. scientist, I can't imagine the United
    States not taking part in the grand scientific
    adventure ahead. Moreover, a reality of the flat
    world is that the field's big dreams will go
    unrealized if particle physics can't right itself
    in the United States. Three things are essential
    to correct the situation. If particle physics is
    to be successful in garnering the needed funding
    and attracting the best people, the field must
    lead with a broad scientific agenda, rather than
    defining itself by big atom-smashers as in the
    past. Hosting a 5 billon electron-positron
    linear collider to follow the Large Hadron
    Collider now being built in Geneva would bring
    high-energy physics back to the United States and
    make a strong statement of U.S. commitment to
    this field, but it must be the science, not
    merely the desire to reclaim the energy frontier,
    that dictates whether to push forward with such
    an endeavor. There must also be a commitment to
    diverse approaches. Recent discoveries (dark
    matter, dark energy, and neutrino mass) remind us
    that other tools are just as essential. Finally,
    particle physics must achieve unprecedented (for
    any field) global coordination. Many of the
    critical projects on the path to answering the
    big questions exceed the financial resources of
    any one country or region. A strong national
    presence must be balanced against a strategic
    global program. Not every facility can be located
    here, and a new strategy of U.S. leadership must
    replace the old strategy of U.S. dominance.
  • In their zeal to explore the world of the
    unimaginably small, particle physicists have
    repeatedly shown that they can blaze new trails
    and overcome formidable barriers. I am willing to
    bet that particle physicists in the United States
    and around the world will come through again.
    With unprecedented opportunities for
    revolutionary breakthroughs, all of science
    should be pulling for them.
  • Michael S. Turner is Rauner Distinguished
    Service Professor at the University of Chicago
    and Assistant Director for Mathematical and
    Physical Sciences at the U.S. National Science

ILCSC Next Steps
  • ILCSC will continue to coordinate the worldwide
    ILC in accordance with its Charter
  • GDE will continue to report to ILCSC until such
    time as the GDE gets organized under a federation
    of worldwide government agencies. At that time
    ICFA will step aside
  • A natural time for ICFA/ILCSC to hand off the GDE
    oversight to such a body would be at the end of
    next year when the Reference Design is complete
  • You will hear more about ILCSC in the next talk

  • We Live in Extraordinary Times
  • At no time in the history of particle physics has
    the scientific landscape presented us with such
    an exciting spectrum of unanswered questions!
    The LHC will make major discoveries that
    challenge that agenda, but to engage the fullness
    of the scientific quest will take a companion TeV
    Linear Collider
  • The success of the GDE process is essential we
    must achieve the near term milestones if we
    expect to secure the increased government support
    both for the RD funds to complete the design and
    for building the project