High Energy Physics FY 2007 OMB Presentation

1. High Energy PhysicsFY 2007 OMB Presentation Dr. Robin Staffin, Associate Director Office of High Energy Physics Office of Science September 26, 2005

2. High Energy Physics • Answering the most basic questions of our quantum universe • What IS the universe? Standing at the door of the third revolution. • First revolution: discovery of the atom on • Chemistry, electronics, biology, medicine, communications, and materials ... • Second revolution: understanding the nucleus on • The stars, sun’s energy, nuclear energy, nuclear weaponry, and medical diagnostics & treatment • Third revolution: the fundamental basis for matter, energy, space and time. (Trillions of electron volts) • Provides answers to how the universe came to be and how it will evolve. A telescope that views the very beginning of the universe and shows how it evolved to the present.

3. Particle Physics, Science and Society • Big science • International visibility, prestige, Nobels, • Huge international collaborations • Workforce well-prepared for industry and technical careers • About 80% of HEP PhDs end up in industry or government (present company included) • Enabling science • Accelerators: HEP accelerator and detector technology enables many other scientific disciplines and medical applications • High Speed Networking and the Grid • A field which is combined with practical usefulness and intellectual excitement

4. Outline (content?) of Briefing • Compelling Science Objectives • Emabling Science and Technology for Society • Training the Technological Workforce • Budget Impact

5. A Critical Time for HEP • In the course of the next decade, we may discover a very different universe • The field of High Energy Physics is poised on the threshold of discovery. • HEP can address the important questions: • What is the path to unification (“Einstein’s Dream”)? • What is the origin of mass? • Are there new dimensions of space & time? • What can neutrinos tell us? • Why more matter than antimatter? • What is Dark Matter? • What is Dark Energy (acceleration of the universe)?

6. Who will miss this science? “To remain near the top, we must continue to look at new discoveries and new information.” – Speaker of the House, Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) “We can continue down the current path, as other nations continue to narrow the gap, or we can take bold, dramatic steps to ensure U.S. economic leadership in the 21st century and a rising standard of living for all Americans.” – Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) “…[the U.S. is] unilaterally disarming in high-energy physics at a time which may well be one of the most exciting periods of physics research in history.” – Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House “It looks as though the innovation pipeline is slowly being squeezed dry.... [We] are losing the skills race…[and] are beginning to lose our preeminence in discovery as well.” – William Brody, President, Johns Hopkins

7. Top 5 HEP Results in FY2005 • Excellent Tevatron Run II Performance • Factor of 2 increase in peak & integrated luminosity since FY04 • Closing in on the SM Higgs • NuMI starts up: the era of precision neutrino physics begins • Smooth turn on and steady operation • Babar/Belle results show potential surprise • CDMS II data rules out light SUSY particles as dark matter candidates • QCD comes of age • Nobel for Gross, Politzer and Wilczek • Lattice QCD now a predictive science

8. HEP FY2005 news “below the fold” • SDSS observes acoustic vibrations of matter in the early universe • Initial results from (partially completed) Auger on ultra-high energy cosmic rays • Advances in future accelerator concepts • First photonic bandgap accelerator structure • Beam-driven plasma wakefield acceleration experiment achieves gradient of 45 GV/meter over 30 cm • Laser-driven plasma wakefield achieves similar gradients over few mm with excellent beam quality • Handheld 5 GeV accelerators for a variety of applications? • Multi-TeV accelerators in the future?

9. Accelerator R&D Program in OHEP • Purpose: Provide the scientific and technology base for the highly specialized accelerators which are essential to a forefront high energy physics research program • Provide the key developments for advances in structural biology, materials science, nuclear physics and medical applications • Strategy: Support a broad program of accelerator technology R&D addressing needs for • short-term: improvements for existing specific facilities (Tevatron, B-factory) • mid-term: generic R&D for a class of possible facilities or applications (superconducting magnet, superconducting rf, electron-position collider, hadron collider etc) • long-term (advanced accelerator R&D): advancing fundamental science and technology of accelerator concept and technology independent of application (plasma & laser acceleration, wakefield acceleration which brings connections between present program and future applications. Mid-term and Long-term R&D programs in OHEP are unique

10. Office of Science Funding for Accelerator R&D From a recent SC- Survey (69%) (17%) (12%) (2%)

11. New Medium Initiatives • A number of requests for approval of CD-0 “Statement of Mission Need” were prepared and submitted: • A generic Reactor-based Neutrino Detector (RND) to measure 13 • A generic off-axis (EvA) accelerator-based neutrino experiment for 13 and to probe the neutrino mass hierarchy • A generic neutrinoless Double-Beta Decay Experiment (DBDE) to probe the Majorana nature and an absolute mass scale of neutrinos • A high intensity neutrino beam (Super Neutrino Beam: SNB) for neutrino CP-violation experiments • A generic ground-based dark energy (DES or LSST) experiment • A generic underground experiment to search for direct evidence of dark matter • In order to be ready to move forward expeditiously, this process has been moving in parallel with a Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) and P5 process. Note: JDEM, ILC are considered to be above “medium-scale.”

12. HEP Major Program Thrusts -- Target LHC LHC LHC ILC Tevatron DES LHC ILC Future DME CDMS, AXION Blue = In operationOrange = ApprovedPurple = Proposed

13. HEP Major Program Thrusts -- Target LHC LHC DBDE MiniBooNE MINOS EvA Super nBeam reactor LHC Tevatron/B-factory LHC Super nBeam B-factory Blue = In operationOrange = ApprovedPurple = Proposed

14. HEP Major Program Thrusts -- Over Target LHC LHC ILC ILC ILC ILC ILC LHC ILC ILC ILC Tevatron JDEM, LSST DES ILC LHC ILC ILC Future DME CDMS, AXION Blue = In operationOrange = ApprovedPurple = Proposed

15. HEP Major Program Thrusts-- Over Target LHC DBDE MiniBooNE MINOS EvA Super nBeam reactor LHC LHC Tevatron/B-factory LHC Super nBeam B-factory Blue = In operationOrange = ApprovedPurple = Proposed

16. Advisory Process- working together with NSF • Many of the new initiatives involve other agencies: existing advisory panels are not always adequately configured. A hierarchy of questions to be addressed: • Overall shape of field – “grand strategy” • National Academies study (EPP2010), HEPAP… • What priority to give to medium scale area X vs. area Y? – “strategy” • Re-establish the P5 panel • What is the best project in area X? – “tactics” • Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) • Anticipate several of these with different reporting lines to cover the various areas

17. Advisory Committee Flow Chart Tactics  Strategy Agencies DOE-NP NSF DOE-HEP Other agencies EPP 2010 HEPAP NSAC Other panels P5 future NuSAG Other SAG’s

18. OHEP Funding History- As Spent $ (Then Year $)

19. % Change in SC Fundingbetween FY 2000 and FY 2005

20. Planning for the Future- assumptions with recent budget trend • Current U.S. accelerator-based program is world-leading, but finite in lifetime • Termination of B-factory followed by Tevatron • MINOS will ramp down toward the end of the decade also • LHC participation will be a central piece of the program • The Linear Collider is our highest priority for a future major facility, • but timescale is uncertain and cannot be done without either an increase in resources or a reduction in cost • Agreements on international partnerships also have to be arranged Hence We are planning for a portfolio of medium scale, medium term experiments to start construction in the period 2007-10 • Scientific opportunities are compelling • neutrino physics (APS study); dark matter, dark energy… • Resources will become available, through redirection

21. HEP Future Scenario at Target Target Scenario: After ~2010, LHC is the only operating high-energy physics accelerator in the world + non-accelerator experiments (neutrinos, dark energy, dark matter) • Early termination of Run II and B-Factory • A new Neutrino program (EvA) after completion of MINOS • Slow construction of super neutrino beam facility • LC still in R&D phase (resource limited) • LHC addressing questions of unification, origin of mass, extra dimensions, and dark matter.But marginal coverage of dark energy, matter-antimatter asymmetry • Discovery at LHC of new physics is almost guaranteed. • Workforce issues: • Need to be reduced by ~25% • Without major new or upgraded facilities on the horizon, US HEP program activities would most likely move overseas or out of field, resulting in weakening of the domestic program • The U.S. will lose leadership in high-energy accelerator technology

22. The Big Issues in the Target Future of HEP facilities • B-Factory ops (total investment ~$0.8B) end after FY06 • Loss ~ a factor of two in data (vs over target) • Cede CP violation physics to Japan. • Large number (~300) of RIFs, bumpy transition to LCLS • Tevatron ops (total investment ~$1.5B) end after FY08 • Lose ~30-50% of data, possible indications of new physics before LHC • Large number (~300) of RIFs inevitable • No domestic HEP facilities from 2008 until (perhaps) super neutrino beam (2015). US as a user, not a leader. • ILC on slow track: construction start 2015(?), producing physics data 15 years after LHC turn-on. May lose to Europe or to Japan, who will question if they need the US.

23. Meaning of FY07-12 Target Budget for HEP • International reaction will be swift and strong. • Following BTeV, RSVP, and AMS • Weakening our bargaining role at CERN • Major impact on any international collaboration involving the US • “Why should we believe the US when it says it wants to pursue the ILC?” • Undercuts continuation of Run 2 and other near term programs • Eg. EvA and the UK The end of an era • US leadership role in the future of HEP -- one that it has led over the last half-century -- will essentially come to an end. • The outsourcing of US HEP (“Exit America”) • FY2007 will be a watershed year

24. HEP Dashboard 2007 Green = Healthy, Light Green = Issues,Yellow = Serious Issues,Red = Terminated

25. HEP Dashboard 2011 Green = Healthy, Light Green = Issues,Yellow = Serious Issues,Red = Terminated

26. HEP Future Scenario at Over Target Over Target Scenario: After ~2010, LHC is still the only operating high-energy physics accelerator in the world • Run II and B-Factory programs are complete as planned • Super Neutrino Beam will provide a world leadership for US in neutrinos • Neutrino program evolving after MINOS by utilizing super neutrino beam facility which is based on LC technology • JDEM is poised to probe the secrets of Dark Energy • Linear Collider will be ready to exploit LHC discoveries by later part of decade • LC in technically-limited R&D phase until 2009, then engineering design • LHC addressing questions of unification, origin of mass, extra dimensions, and dark matter.And LC will address this and more (see next slide). • Research program strengthened to enhance U.S. impact on LHC • Lattice QCD and SciDAC efforts exploit opportunities for U.S. to lead in targeted areas of computation and simulation This is an exciting and highly productive scientific program.

27. ILC & LHC Synergy • The high energy of the LHC will establish that new phenomena at the Terascale exist. The precision studies of the ILC will enable us to interpret these new discoveries. • In every scenario, the LHC discoveries require the ILC to illuminate their meaning. • The results from the LHC and ILC give a multiplicative (not additive) impact on understanding the new Terascale phenomena. Together, they provide a telescope that peers back to the time when the universe was formed.

28. World leading neutrino physics program A variety of near and mid term initiatives in a different scales can put the US as the world leader of neutrino physics program • Electron Neutrino Appearance Experiment (EvA): • MINOS follow-on experiment utilizing NuMI beam from Fermilab to Northern Minnesota (maximum use of existing investment) • Could obtain world best measurements on mixing angle and mass hierarchy • Reactor Neutrino Detector (RND) • Independent measurement on mixing angle • Options from $15M~$80M (off-shore vs on-shore) • Double Beta Decay Experiment (DBDE) • Measure absolute mass scale of neutrinos • Options from $10M~$200M (off-shore vs on-shore) • Super Neutrino Beam (SNB) • Study CP violation in neutrino sector • Synergetic relationship with ILC R&D technology Many as Jointly Supported Program with NSF and DOE-NP

29. Exciting Dark Energy & Dark Matter A variety of near and mid term initiatives in a different scales can put the US as the world leader of dark energy and dark matter physics program • Dark Energy Survey (DES): • Ground based dark energy experiment • Fabricate new camera for an existing telescope (~$20M) • Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) • Ground based dark energy experiment as a next generation of DES • New telescope, new camera (~$200M) • Joint Dark Energy Mission (JDEM) • Space based joint mission with NASA for a dedicated dark energy survey • DOE funds instrumentation ($300~500M) • Dark Matter Search • Detector to search for direct evidence of dark matter Many as Jointly Supported Program with NSF and NASA

30. Accelerator R&D with a promising future

31. Summary • International partnerships • Premature end of B-factory, Tevatron programs will set off a crisis for US standing (after cancellation of BTeV and RSVP) as a “good partner” for int’l HEP projects • Increases difficulty of getting foreign contributions for neutrino and dark energy initiatives, ILC R&D,… • Builds on existing uncertainty in the aftermath of US recent US terminations.

32. Tables & Charts

33. FY 2007 OMB Budget(B/A in Millions) *Includes $18.2M for SBIR/STTR in FY 2006 and $17.0M for SBIR/STTR in FY 2007 Target, $20.0M Over Target.

34. FY 2007 BudgetMajor Items of Equipment (B/A in Millions) 1The total US contribution (TPC) for this project is $163,750,000, including $60,800,000 from NSF. 2The total US contribution (TPC) for this project is $167,250,000, including $20,200,000 from NSF. 3The total TEC/TPC includes DOE scope only and reflects a rebaselining approved March 2005. 4The total TPC for this project is $18,143,000 including $3,068,000 from NSF and $4,356,000 from foreign partners. 5The total TPC for this project is $17,534,000 including $7,333,000 from NSF, $2,000,000 from the Smithsonian Institution, and $802,000 from foreign partners. 6The Over Target level supports a major role in a domestic experimental facility for a reactor based neutrino experiment, with a preliminary estimated TEC/TPC of $75,000,000 7At the Target, HEP and NP jointly support an initiative in neutrino-less double beta decay physics starting in FY 2008 with a combined preliminary estimated TEC/TPC of $63,000,000; the HEP TEC contribution is $5,000,000. At the Over Target, HEP pursues an independent competitive alternative technology double beta decay project starting in FY 2007 with a preliminary estimated TEC/TPC of $75,000,000.

35. High Energy PhysicsOutyear Funding Profile (B/A in Millions) • Note: New Initiative category covers R&D’s specific for Neutrino and Dark Energy facilities

36. High Energy PhysicsOutyear Funding Profile Over Target Profile Target Profile

37. FY 2007 OMB Budget

38. BACKUP SLIDES

39. Questions to be Answered

40. Quantum Universe Questions and Tools for a Scientific Revolution

41. Quantum Universe Questions and Tools for a Scientific Revolution

42. Quantum Universe- Major U.S. Facilities

43. Facility What it was Built to do What it is remembered for Example: Christopher Columbus route to India discovery of America AGS at BNL N interactions 2 kinds of , CP violation, J/ SLAC nucleon form factors quarks in the proton Fermilab fixed target neutrino physics b-quark collider W and Z top quark CERN collider W and Z W and Z PETRA at DESY top quark gluon jets LEP/SLC electroweak physics electroweak physics SuperK proton decay neutrino oscillation SNO neutrino oscillation neutrino oscillation Supernova decelerating universe accelerating universe surveys (dark energy) LHC Higgs ? All had a solid justification in “bread-and-butter” physics – but history shows thatunexpected discoveriesare common and can open up entirely new directions

44. State of the field • The Standard Model is still standing – just • Clear frontiers of research have appeared – we know surprises await • At the energy frontier (the TeV scale) • In dark matter and dark energy • In neutrino physics

45. APS neutrino study recommended Now Next decade Upgrade beamline And/Or New detector(s) And/Or Muon storage ring as neutrino factory New Reactor experiment Measure 13 Decision pointhow big is 13? New Accelerator experiment “off axis” Measure 13 and mass pattern CP violation? New Double beta decayexperiment Probe mass and Majorana nature

46. Neutrino surprises • Unlike quarks – there is a lot of mixing • Masses tiny – not from Higgs? From GUT scale physics? • Overall mass scale is unknown • Hierarchy unknown (2+1 or 1+2) • Are neutrinos their own antiparticles?  Or 

47. HEP Results in FY05

48. Tevatron: key is luminosity Run II projections L (fb-1) W boson mass (GeV) Standard Model Top quark mass (GeV) Closing in on the the SM Higgs

50. Other Windows to New Physics Observation of Bs mixing • Discovery Potential over most of Bs mixing expected region • SUSY Chargino Sensitivity to 270 GeV!