Large Neutrino and Nucleon Decay detectors in Europe (and some - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
large neutrino and nucleon decay detectors in europe and
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Large Neutrino and Nucleon Decay detectors in Europe (and some - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 25, 2022 308 likes •694 views

Large Neutrino and Nucleon Decay detectors in Europe (and some ideas on interregional coordination) S. Katsanevas* NNN 2010 Toyama 15 December 2010 In memory of Jacques Bouchez, Leading Kigure in Neutrino Physics Coorganiser of

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Large Neutrino and Nucleon Decay detectors in Europe (and some ideas on interregional coordination)

  • S. Katsanevas*

NNN 2010 Toyama 15 December 2010

In memory of Jacques Bouchez, Leading Kigure in Neutrino Physics Co‐organiser of NNN05 in Aussois “The rebirth of annual NNN”

* Based on discussions with A. Rubbia (ASPERA SAC slides), T.Patzak, L. Mosca, M. Mezetto,MY BIASES…

slide-2
SLIDE 2
slide-3
SLIDE 3
slide-4
SLIDE 4
slide-5
SLIDE 5
slide-6
SLIDE 6
slide-7
SLIDE 7
slide-8
SLIDE 8
slide-9
SLIDE 9
slide-10
SLIDE 10
slide-11
SLIDE 11
slide-12
SLIDE 12
slide-13
SLIDE 13

FAST FEEDBACK ON NEW IDEAS E.g. FREJUS 2 shafts 100 m high , better V/S, cost, FV

slide-14
SLIDE 14
slide-15
SLIDE 15
slide-16
SLIDE 16
slide-17
SLIDE 17
slide-18
SLIDE 18
slide-19
SLIDE 19
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Complementarities

slide-21
SLIDE 21

 Japan has an existing J‐PARC beam with an upgrade plan to 1.66MW (>2014) and two Kixed possibilities for the baseline (Kamioka @ 300km and Okinoshima @ 658 km).  In US LBNE is proceeding with both water and LAr with a baseline that is Kixed to 1300 km. It needs a new beamline and at least one far detector. The beam power will be 700 kW until ProjectX is operational (>2020?).  What is the strategy in Europe ? In deKinition:  CERN European Strategy (2012),  ASPERA (Astroparticle coordination) roadmap update (end 2011)  Cons: The European NNN program has to develop in a regional context where LHC and upgrades has the highest priority and a reasonable distribution of accelerator developments on a global scale is felt necessary  Pros: Europe has a priori the beneKit of more Klexibility in choice of both beam and baseline. Possible focus options: 1. existing CNGS beam/baseline ➠ Umbria (or LNGSʼ) 650‐732km 2. longest baseline, matter effect ➠ Pyhäsalmi 2300 km 3. shortest baseline, no matter effect ➠ Fréjus 130km

How can LAGUNA be imbedded in a world­wide strategy of LBL studies?

slide-22
SLIDE 22
slide-23
SLIDE 23

sin22θ13  0.002 (eyeball 66% CP fraction) For sin2θ13 ≥ 0.002 Sign(Δm23

2)

(eyeball 66% CP fraction) For sin2θ13 ≥ 0.005  δCP (eyeball 66% CP fraction)

Also above threshold for τ production

Exemple #1 a superbeam to long distances (e.g. Pyhasalmi) and LAr

slide-24
SLIDE 24

CERN­Frejus (low Q, γ= 100) beatabeam starts appearing feasible (on paper)

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Exemple #2 CERN‐Frejus potential with betabeam (M. Mezzetto) sin22θ13  0.0004 (75% CP fraction) For sin2θ13 ≥ 0.03  Sign(Δm23

2)

(75% CP fraction) For sin2θ13 ≥ 0.001  δCP (60% CP fraction)

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Example #3 work in progress: LENA Reconstructing GeV tracks in Liquid Scintillator (Pyhasalmi or Fréjus) Borexino

slide-27
SLIDE 27

A strategy for the next generation should be clear by 2013‐2014 But already 2011 will be exciting (T2K, DCHOOZ sensitivity  sin22θ13 ≈ 0,06) Decisions? 6 months shift for all

DAYABAY Baseline syst 0,36% Goal syst 0,18% Correlated/ uncorrelated

slide-28
SLIDE 28
slide-29
SLIDE 29
slide-30
SLIDE 30
slide-31
SLIDE 31

International policy context

 ASTROPARTICLE: The OECD GSF established in 2008 a WG to make a 2 year

study of the options of world wide coordination

 On October 2010 the WG presented a report with 3 main items:

  • 1. A worldwide deKinition of the Kield, despite porous frontiers
  • 2. A roadmap of possible coordination issues
  • 3. The establishment of a more permanent forum for the discussion of

coordination issues (Kirst mandate 3 years). The forum under the name APIF (Astroparticle Physics International Forum) will consist of ofFicials of funding agencies that make signiFicant investments in the Field. APIF would be a subsidiary body of the OECD Global Science Forum.

  • First meeting April 5 2011 in Paris .

 PARTICLE PHYSICS: ICFA (24 July Paris, next meeting CERN October 2011)  A steering committee was formed to provide guidance for a document

describing opportunities for particle physics across the world. It will show the physics opportunities, and give a list of currently open questions and possible future ways to answer them

slide-32
SLIDE 32
  • 1. What is the role of high energy phenomena in the

formation of cosmic structures? Multi-messenger studies (γ, CR, ν, GW)

A worldwide deFinition of the Field of Astroparticle Physics

  • 2. What is the Universe made of?

Nature of dark matter and energy

  • 3. Can we probe matter and interactions at the

smallest scales ?

Rare decays: proton lifetime , neutrino properties

Probe EW scale, Gravitation Detect dark matter, Limits of fundamental laws, Cosmological markers Access GUT scales

Large neutrino detectors adresse all 3

slide-33
SLIDE 33
  • The astroparticle physics community, despite its relatively short history, has achieved good

levels of international coordination. Nevertheless, the scale of the next generation of large infrastructures will require enhanced forms of international coordination. The high diversity of promising experimental methodologies implies that no single, universal degree of coordination will be appropriate across the entire Vield of astroparticle physics.

  • In some areas (e.g., dark matter, or neutrino mass searches) a healthy diversity and

competitiveness is desirable for the instruments under construction, even while procurement of rare materials needs to be coordinated, and convergence should be encouraged for future very large third‐generation experiments.

  • In other areas (high energy gamma rays, charged cosmic rays, or high­energy neutrinos)

the small number of existing observatories worldwide already operate (or intend to operate) as single integrated worldwide networks. In these areas, the planning of future projects should include consideration of enabling policy issues such as governance, site selection, access to the experimental resources and to data, and operating costs.

  • Lastly, there are very large‐scale projects (e.g., dark energy observatories, third­generation

gravitational wave antennas and “megaton”­scale proton decay and neutrino detectors) whose cost, complexity and multiple links to neighbouring scientiKic disciplines (astrophysics, cosmology, particle physics) present a strong case for worldwide convergence or, at a minimum, for avoidance of unnecessary duplication.

A roadmap of possible coordination issues

slide-34
SLIDE 34

W What does the Astroparticle Physics International Forum (APIF)

1. Exchange information about relevant national and regional developments, plans and priorities. Regularly update the strategic vision of the OECD report.

  • 2. Explore the prospects for joint actions (design studies for experiments, research

and development)

  • 3. Study options and solutions for governance structures and mechanisms for

potential new international collaborative projects.

  • 4. Consult on relevant generic science policy issues, such as access to research

facilities and to data, or contributions to operating costs of facilities by users.

  • 5. Analyse the needs and requirements for rare resources such as isotopes for

detectors and, if appropriate, promote sharing or joint procurements.

  • 6. Engage in a collective dialogue with governmental and non‐governmental

entities (space physics, high‐energy physics, nuclear physics, astrophysics)

  • 7. Develop strategies and procedures for promoting transfer of technology and
  • ther beneKits to industry and to society in general.
slide-35
SLIDE 35

 It is not a new super‐agency  The activities of APIF would not pre‐empt or interfere with national or regional mechanisms for planning, prioritising, authorising, funding or

  • verseeing speciKic research projects.

 It is not a scientiKic advisory body:  As needed, APIF would seek information and advice from the international scientiKic community. It could invite individual experts, spokespersons of projects or members of scientiKic bodies to attend APIF meetings or to participate in subsidiary activities.  The Working Group also recommends that the scientiKic community strengthen its activities aimed at ensuring vigorous, globally coherent progress in astroparticle physics. SpeciKically, the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics (IUPAP) could review and, if appropriate, adjust its mechanisms for promoting international scientiKic co‐

  • peration and discussions among scientists about the future of the Kield.

What does NOT the Astroparticle Physics International Forum (APIF)

slide-36
SLIDE 36
  • The world Kinancial crisis clearly raises the threshold of feasibility of a

megaton‐scale NNN detector. “Fast” regional solutions will most probably experience delays dues to budget problems.

– Y. Suzuki’s opening remarks: a Mt detector should have been done already

  • Need to go global. Can we use APIF as a forum to present a worldwide

strategy ?  E.g. form mixed WGs to study:

– Physics: deKine optimised scenarii in a common strategy paper – R&D: deKine common R&D issues

  • Common R&D effort seeds of proto‐collaboration
  • Many agencies positive about inter‐regional funding of R&D

– Procurement: work on issues of large procurement – Site issues: Share experience and studies – Governance issues and access to infrastructures and data (later)

  • As a Kirst step we could organize NNN‐2011 in a famously neutral country …

A proposal for the organisation of NNN11

slide-37
SLIDE 37

 LAGUNA has concluded an impressive industry‐assisted study on

cavern and tank issues up to detailed costing.

 The consortium proposes to the EU a complementary study LAGUNA‐

LBNO on instrumentation issues and beam scenarii

 They prepare in view of decisions in 2013‐2014 (after results on θ13 )

in the context of roadmapping in Europe (CERN Strategy, ASPERA)

 The European NNN community has to embed its strategy in a context

where LHC and upgrades has the highest priority but has also the advantage of many options on beam‐lines and detectors.

 A key issue is whether there is a European mid‐term LBL solution or

should Europe concentrate on the longer term.

 The global NNN community should move to closer coordination forms.

The OECD GSF Astroparticle Forum (APIF) could be a tool for promotion of a worldwide strategy

Conclusions