Fermilab and the EPP2010Fermilab and the EPP2010

Users Meeting 6/1/06

Pier Oddone

22

The reportThe report

Above all: enormously supportive of the science of particle physics

Clearly enunciated principles, with the central role of Fermilab elevated to a principle!

Clearly stated set of scientific priorities: The energy frontier: LHC and ILC The connection between particle physics and astrophysics The understanding of the neutrino sector The understanding of the quark flavor sector

Overwhelming support to host the ILC in the US

33

How do we line up?How do we line up?

At the energy Frontier

Tevatron: essential to show success now – it is how the field gets measured – not really addressed by EPP2010

LHC: unprecedented opportunity and expected revolution! Will have to be successful before we can ask for the ILC

ILC: our main goal - the machine will be needed soon to explore the terascale

While ILC is the first priority for a new facility wherever it is built, we want to host the machine at FNAL

44

Tevatron PerformanceTevatron Performance

55

BBss Flavor Oscillation Flavor OscillationWorld average ms > 14.4 ps-1 (Summer 2005)

CDF (1 fb-1) April 2006

ms = 17.33 +0.42-0.21 ± 0.07 ps-1

DØ (1 fb-1) March 2006

17 < ms < 21 ps-1 at 90% CL

hep-ex/0603029

66

Other Results since September 2005Other Results since September 2005

DØ Preliminary: 1 fb-1

Many of these are world’s best or first measurements!

77

Making LHC successfulMaking LHC successful

88

LHC: delivering on the promiseLHC: delivering on the promise

Huge increase in physics reach: 7 times the energy, 100 times the luminosity of the Tevatron

With increase in energy and luminosity come special challenges (e.g., 300 Megajoules of stored energy in the beam!)

Fermilab: principal US support for the commissioning – have operated the only hadron collider in the last decade

99

CMS: Compact Muon DetectorCMS: Compact Muon DetectorComing together: aimed at completion by end of 2007

Muon detectors Magnet cold mass

1010

US CMS: and Fermilab’s roleUS CMS: and Fermilab’s role

Only major US lab associated with CMS: a central support role for the US community in construction, commissioning and physics

Attention now to huge data and physics discovery challenge: the LHC Physics Center (LPC)

1111

Remote operation centerRemote operation center In support of

accelerator operations and CMS operations, we are creating remote operation center. Shared for CMS and accelerator

Aim: as good as being there for US institutions!

1212

ILC StrategyILC Strategy Deliver on the present program: more than $3B in the next four years (a must).

Make the LHC a success (a must).

Make early decision with the agency that ILC path will be supported (RDR).

Be ready by the end of the decade with site specific

design/cost/international arrangements, completed component R&D, industrialization plans.

CoveredAbove

1313

Third element: Support for RDRThird element: Support for RDR

Secretary Bodman: How much …….?

The RDR is now key element: it determines whether DOE leadership states intent to bid-to-host and makes necessary investment.

1414

Fermilab’s Role in the RDRFermilab’s Role in the RDR

GDE goal = complete the Reference Design Report (RDR) and a cost estimate by the end 2006 established RDR organization

Design & Cost Board (coordinates machine design) Responsible for producing the RDR and the cost estimate 9 members ( 3/region) + Chairman P Garbincius ( FNAL) = chair, R. Kephart (FNAL) member

Change Control Board (ILC baseline configuration control) 9 member board (3/region), N Toge = Chairman S. Mishra (FNAL) is one of 3 U.S. Members

1515

Fermilab’s Role in the RDRFermilab’s Role in the RDR

ILC Machine “Area Leaders” (typically 3 Ldrs 1/region) Civil and Site: Vic Kuchler (FNAL) = Americas Ldr Main Linac Design: N. Solyak (FNAL) = 1 of 2 Americas Ldrs Cryomodule: H. Carter (FNAL) = Americas Ldr Cryogenics system: T. Peterson (FNAL) = Americas Ldr Magnet systems: J. Tompkins (FNAL) = Americas Ldr Communications: E. Clements (FNAL) = Americas Ldr

FNAL is playing a major role in the GDE & ILC machine design

1616

What do we want with the RDR?What do we want with the RDR? Cost will not be precise: no known time scale, no real

engineering design, no detailed site design; R&D not finished; no industrialization; done outside DOE costing rules ……

So what good is it?

Hopefully it allows the DOE to decide we really want to do this and to make the large investment necessary in the next few years to do real design and industrialization.

We hope it will allow DOE to initiate international discussions on process for a bid-to-host

1717

Fourth element: ready for decision by Fourth element: ready for decision by the end of the decadethe end of the decade

After the RDR, will need site specific designs

Agreement on a site? How many? 0,1,2,3…. All regions will contribute to generic elements of the design but individual regions to their site-specific designs

Decision at the end of the decade will be based on success of R&D, full site specific design, credible cost estimate.

No engineering test facility (2-3% of ILC) will be possible outside the project – if we want an early start of the ILC

1818

Getting ready for decisionGetting ready for decision Fermilab ILC R&D activities following GDE:

ILC Machine Design Development of SCRF technology & infrastructure Conventional Facility & Site Studies for a US ILC site Industrialization & Cost Reduction ILC Physics, Detector Design, and Detector R&D

Support activities of and build partnerships with laboratories and universities

Support GDE and transition to follow-on organization

1919

ILC Machine Design ILC Machine Design Fermilab has focused its R&D

efforts on the ILC Main Linacs. Broad collaboration.

Main Linac activities: Accelerator physics design Demonstrate feasibility of all

Main Linac technical components. RF Cavities

Engineering design of ML technical systems

Estimates of the ML cost & methods for cost reduction

U.S. Industrialization of high volume ML components

2020

Civil and Site DevelopmentCivil and Site Development"The U.S. Department of Energy has expressed its interest in the possibility of hosting a linear collider, at Fermilab, subject to the machine being affordable and scientifically validated by physics discoveries at the LHC.“

Our goal is to determine the best possible host site for a prospective ILC bid in northern Illinois

With the GDE we are developing the ILC Civil Design Tunnel Design Geological and environmental studies

Build up community support

2121

How do we line up ?How do we line up ?

Neutrino program: for us higher priority because we provide the accelerator facilities:

Present neutrino program: most powerful through 2010: MINOS, MiniBoone; SciBooNE; MINERVA

Near term program: proposed NOvA program, complementary to T2K; does this qualify as a “phased” approach and part of a coherent international effort as recommended by EPP2010? Can we get the support above the ILC R&D?

2222

Present Neutrino Program: MINOSPresent Neutrino Program: MINOS

Minos Far detector: 5.4 ktonMinos near detector: 1 kton

735 km

2323

Producing the neutrino beamProducing the neutrino beam

Moveable target relative to horn 1 – continuously variable neutrino spectrum

2424

Best-fit spectrumBest-fit spectrum

Measurement errors are 1 sigma, 1 d.o.f.

nbins

iiiiii eoooem

1

222 )/ln(2)(2)2sin,(

2525

Projected sensitivity of MINOSProjected sensitivity of MINOS

m2 = 0.003 eV2

disappearance e

•With increased statistics, we should be able to make a very precise measurement of m223 and

also search for sub-dominant e oscillations well-below the current exclusion limit

•In addition, by making a precise measurement of the CC spectrum, we should be able to test/rule out alternate models such as neutrino decay.

2626

Present Neutrino ProgramPresent Neutrino ProgramMiniBooNE

- 1 GeV neutrinos (Booster)

- 800 ton oil cerenkov

- Operating since 2003

- e appearance

- Results in a few months

2727

What next in neutrinos?What next in neutrinos?

Understanding the Neutrino matrix:

What is sin22

What is the Mass Hierarchy What is the CP violation parameter

Fermilab is in the best position to make vital contributions to answer these questions with complementary program to T2K facility in Japan

2828

Construction of NOConstruction of NOA A “Totally Active”

25 kT Dtector: 32 cells/extrusion12 extrusions/plane

132 m

15.7m

15.7m

32-planeblock

Admirer

2929

Proton Development PlanProton Development Plan

Run II era (“Proton Plan”; in process) 5.4x1013 ppp @ 120 GeV @ 2.2 sec

1.0x1013 to antiproton target; 4.4x1013 to NuMI target (380 kW)

Post Run II: Utilization of the Recycler for proton accumulation

5.4x1013 ppp @ 120 GeV @ 1.5 sec No antiproton target; 5.4x1013 to NuMI target (700 kW);

Post Run II: Utilization of the Accumulator for momentum stacking

7.2x1014 ppp @ 120 GeV @ 1.3 sec 7.2x1014 to NuMI target (1000 kW)

Goal: 1 MW beam power onto the neutrino production target, utilizing accelerator assets available after Run II.

3030

Neutrino ProgramNeutrino Program

2005 2010 2015

dete

ctor

sac

cele

rato

rs

Minos run

MiniBoone run

NOvA R&D and Construction NOvA run

Detector construction International Planning for Long Term Neutrino Program

Proton plan first stage0.2 MW moving to 0.4 MW

Proton plan 2nd stage(If no proton driver)

1 MW at 120 GeVDepending on investment

ILC RDR

ILC RDR ILC TDR Decision Construction

Test Facility/injector

3131

Neutrinos and EPP2010Neutrinos and EPP2010

Carry out a “phased neutrino program…. internationally” NOvA as first step?

Nothing to negotiate now other than giving up on the domestic program. Loss to world’s program.

Decision largely up to the US since the Japanese will not consider coming here to do the neutrino program in the initial phases

The elephant in the room is the ILC – EPP2010’s clear hope is that we can help the Japanese in exchange for their help on the ILC. This is a fine approach, but is the timing right?

The key question is for P5: is the complementary reach of NOvA a compelling physics program.

3232

P5 and neutrinosP5 and neutrinos

P5 has two scenarios: 1) out year scenarios given by DOE to Congress: FY07=+7%;

FY08=+1.5%; FY09=+3.0% and 10% increases per year for the next administration

2) 7% increases per year (approximately 3.5% real growth) In the first scenario: no room to do anything except

continue ILC R&D unless we shut down facilities almost immediately.

The second scenario is very tight but allows for initiatives to get started and supported to conclusion when we shut down facilities after FY08 and FY09.

3333

How do we line up?How do we line up?

Astrophysics-Particle Physics Connection key opportunities identified by EPP2010:

direct detection of dark matter CMB polarization towards physics of inflation properties of dark energy

We are attacking 2 of these three areas with modest, feasible, high impact facilities that do not affect significantly the rate of ILC development.

3434

Dark Matter: CDMS Dark Matter: CDMS

Measured background rejection: 99.995% for EM backgrounds using charge/heat 99.4% for ’s using pulse risetime as well Much better than expected in CDMS II proposal!

Detectors with excellent event-by-event background rejection

Tower of 6 ZIPs

Tower 14 Ge2 SiTower 22 Ge4 Si

gammas

betas

neutrons

neutronsbetas

gammas

3535

What next ? : 5 Tower operation is almost ready

30 detectors (5 towers x 6 detectors) – 4.75 kg of Ge, 1.1 kg of Si detectors – Run through 2006--2007 – Improve sensitivity further 10x

Now commisioningNow commisioning

Result today

CDMS II projected

3636

SuperCDMS and Accelerator reach

Result today

SuperCDMS-A: 25kg

CurrentAcc bound LHC ILC

LCC1

3737

Sloan Digital Sky SurveySloan Digital Sky Survey

3838

The Dark Energy Survey (DES)The Dark Energy Survey (DES) Proposal:

Perform a 5000 sq. deg. survey of the southern galactic cap

constrain the Dark Energy parameter w to ~ 5% with 4

complementary techniques begin to constrain dw/dz

New Equipment: Replace the PF cage on the CTIO

Blanco 4m telescope with a new 2.2 deg. FOV optical CCD camera

Time scale: Instrument Construction 2005-2009

Survey: 30% of the telescope time from 2009-

2013

3939

SNAP Instrument ConceptSNAP Instrument ConceptBaffled Sun Shade

Solar Array, ‘Sun Side’

3-mirror anastigmat2-meter Telescope

Spacecraft Bus

Solar Array, ‘Dark Side’

Instrument Radiator

Instrument Suite

4040

Strategic context: U.S. contributionStrategic context: U.S. contribution

2005

2015

2010

= secondary= leading Neutrino

FrontierFlavorfrontier

EnergyFrontier

Domestic accelerator program with new and redirected investment

X

First Priority

4141

Summary of Main IssuesSummary of Main Issues

Transition Tevatron LHC program: how to complete the Tevatron program successfully

Neutrino program: solve tritium issue, cost of NOvA and how (and if) it fits in the US roadmap

ILC: need to ramp up the effort – not possible with present out-year budget plans (HEP part of ACI?) until closure of facilities. Situation might be much better.

4242

Many reasons to be optimisticMany reasons to be optimistic

Extraordinary level of support for the field

Extraordinary level of support for an ambitious next stage: the ILC

The laboratory is aligned with EPP2010.

4343

Thank You!Thank You!

Thank you UEC and Sacha Kopp – great meeting!

Thanks to all the speakers: great talks!

Thank you! audience