Physics with first data in ATLAS at the LHC

1. 1. Status of the LHC 2. The ATLAS detector 3. Towards physics 4. Physics with first data 5. Conclusion Physics with first data in ATLAS at the LHC Frédéric Derue Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies de Paris, IN2P3-CNRS et Université Pierre et Marie Curie-Paris6 et Université Denis Diderot-Paris7 Reunión de Física de Altas Energias, FAE0611-13 de Diciembre de 2006 Caracas

2. TOTEM (integrated with CMS): pp, cross-section, diffractive physics TOTEM ATLAS and CMS : general purpose 27 km LEP ring 1232 superconducting dipoles B=8.3 T ALICE : ion-ion, p-ion LHCb : pp, B-physics, CP-violation The Large Hadron Collider at CERN • pp s = 14 TeV Ldesign = 1034 cm-2 s-1 (after 2009) • Linitial  few x 1033 cm-2 s-1 (until 2009) • Heavy ions (e.g. Pb-Pb at s ~ 1000 TeV) LHC

3. Revised LHC schedule (cf. CERN council on 23 June 2006) • last magnet installed : March 2007 • machine and experiments closed : 31 August 2007 • first collisions (s=900 GeV, L~1029 cm-2 s-1) : November 2007 commissioning run at injection energy until end 2007, then shutdown (3 months ?) • first collisions at s=14 TeV (followed by first physics run) : spring 2008 goal: deliver integrated luminosity of few fb-1 by end 2008 • LHC commissioning • sectors 7-8 and 8-1 will be fully commissioned up to 7 TeV in 2006-2007 If other sectors are commissioned up to 7 TeV no beam will circulate in 2007 • the other sectors will be commissioned up to the field needed for de-Gaussing • initial operation will be at 900 GeV (CM) with a static machine (no ramp, no squeeze) to debug machine and detectors • full commissioning up to 7 TeV will be done in the winter 2008 shutdown Status of the machine and schedule

4. The ATLAS collaboration (As of the September 2006) 35 Countries 161 Institutions 1830 Scientific Authors total (1470 with a PhD, for M&O share) Albany, Alberta, NIKHEF Amsterdam, Ankara, LAPP Annecy, Argonne NL, Arizona, UT Arlington, Athens, NTU Athens, Baku,IFAE Barcelona, Belgrade, Bergen, Berkeley LBL and UC, HU Berlin, Bern, Birmingham, Bologna, Bonn, Boston, Brandeis, Bratislava/SAS Kosice, Brookhaven NL, Buenos Aires, Bucharest, Cambridge, Carleton, Casablanca/Rabat, CERN, Chinese Cluster, Chicago, Clermont-Ferrand, Columbia, NBI Copenhagen, Cosenza, AGH UST Cracow, IFJ PAN Cracow, DESY,Dortmund, TU Dresden, JINR Dubna, Duke, Frascati, Freiburg, Geneva, Genoa, Giessen, Glasgow, LPSC Grenoble, Technion Haifa, Hampton,Harvard, Heidelberg, Hiroshima, Hiroshima IT, Indiana, Innsbruck, Iowa SU, Irvine UC, Istanbul Bogazici, KEK, Kobe, Kyoto, Kyoto UE,Lancaster, UN La Plata, Lecce, Lisbon LIP, Liverpool, Ljubljana, QMW London, RHBNC London, UC London, Lund, UA Madrid,Mainz, Manchester, Mannheim, CPPM Marseille, Massachusetts, MIT, Melbourne, Michigan, Michigan SU, Milano, Minsk NAS, Minsk NCPHEP, Montreal, McGill Montreal, FIAN Moscow, ITEP Moscow, MEPhI Moscow, MSU Moscow, Munich LMU, MPI Munich, Nagasaki IAS, Naples, New Mexico, New York, Nijmegen, BINP Novosibirsk, Ohio SU, Okayama, Oklahoma, Oklahoma SU, Oregon, LAL Orsay, Osaka, Oslo, Oxford, Paris VI and VII, Pavia, Pennsylvania, Pisa, Pittsburgh, CAS Prague,CU Prague, TU Prague, IHEP Protvino, Ritsumeikan, UFRJ Rio de Janeiro, Rochester, Rome I, Rome II, Rome III, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, DAPNIA Saclay, Santa Cruz UC, Sheffield, Shinshu, Siegen, Simon Fraser Burnaby, SLAC, Southern Methodist Dallas, NPI Petersburg, Stockholm, KTH Stockholm, Stony Brook, Sydney, AS Taipei, Tbilisi, Tel Aviv, Thessaloniki, Tokyo ICEPP, Tokyo MU, Toronto, TRIUMF, Tsukuba, Tufts, Udine, Uppsala, Urbana UI, Valencia, UBC Vancouver, Victoria, Washington, Weizmann Rehovot, Wisconsin, Wuppertal, Yale, Yerevan

5. How huge is ATLAS ? • Size of collaboration • 35 countries • 161 institutions • 1830 scientific authors (1470 with PhD for M&O share) • Size of detectors • volume : 20 000 m3 • weight : 7000 tons • ~80 million pixel readout channels near vertex • 175 000 readout channels for the liquid argon electromagnetic calorimeter • 1 million channels and 10 000 m2 area of muon chambers • very selective trigger/DAQ system (online rate reduction > 105) • large scale offline software and worldwide computing (GRID) share) • Time scale will have been about 25 years from first conceptual studies (Lausanne 1984) to solid physics results confirming that LHC will have taken over the high-energy frontier from Tevatron (Chicago) (early 2009 ?) ATLAS superimposed to the 5 floors of building 40 in CERN

6. The ATLAS detector The ATLAS detector 1800 physicists Length : ~ 46 m Diametre : ~ 25m Weight : ~ 7000 tons ~108 electronic channels ~3000 km of cables Cost : ~ 340 M€ / 10 y Muon spectrometer (||<2.7) : air-core toroids with muon chambers Muon spectrometer (||<2.7) : air-core toroids with muon chambers Calorimeters (||<5): -- EM : Pb-LAr with accordion shape -- HAD: Fe/scintillator (central), Cu/W-LAr (fwd) Tracking system (|h|<2.5, B=2T): -- Si pixels and strips -- Transition radiation Detector (e/p separation) Tracking system (|h|<2.5, B=2T): -- Si pixels and strips -- Transition radiation Detector (e/p separation) Calorimeters (||<5): -- EM : Pb-LAr with accordion shape -- HAD: Fe/scintillator (central), Cu/W-LAr (fwd) • Transverse plane projected physical quantities are measured: • pT • ET, ETmiss Tracking system (|h|<2.5, B=2T): -- Si pixels and strips -- Transition radiation Detector (e/p separation)

7. The underground cavern at pit-1 for the ATLAS detector (Across the street from the CERN main entrance) Length = 55 m Width = 32 m Height = 35 m Deep = 90 m

8. Generic features required of ATLAS Detectors must survive for ten years or so of operation Radiation damage to materials and electronics component Problem pervades whole experimental area (neutrons) : NEW ! Detectors must provide precise timing and be as fast as feasible 25 ns is the time interval to consider : NEW ! Detectors must have excellent spatial granularity Need to minimise pile-up effects : NEW ! Detectors must identify extremely rare events, mostly in real time Lepton identification above huge QCD background (e.g electron/jet ratio at the LHC is ~10-5, i.e factor 50 worse than at Tevatron) Signal cross-sections as low as 10-14 of total cross-section : NEW ! Online rejection to be achieved is ~107 : NEW ! Store huge data volumes to disk/tape (~109 events of 1 Mbyte size per year) : NEW !

9. Generic features required of ATLAS • Detectors must measure and identify according to certain specificities • tracking and vertexing : ttH with Hbb • electromagnetic calorimetry : H and HZZ eeee • muon spectrometer HZZ mmmm • missing transverse energy : supersymmetry • Detectors must please • collaboration : physics optimisation, technology choices • funding agencies : affordable cost (originally set to 475 MCHF per experiment) • young physicist who will provide the main thrust to the scientific output of the collaborations : how to minimise formal aspects ? How to recognise individual contributions ?

10. Tracking of charged particles : the Inner Detector • The inner detector is organized into three sub-systems • pixels (0.8108 channels) • silicon tracker (SCT) 6106 channels • transition radiation tracker (TRT) 4105 channels • Magnet system • solenoid integrated with the LAr cryostat • 2T field with a stored energy of 38 MJ TRT SCT Three completed Pixel disks (one end-cap) with 6.6 M channels

11. Tracking of charged particles : reconstruction • At high luminosity per bunch crossing (25 ns) • more than 200 tracks • about 15-20 vertex candidates Complex task for tracking and Vertexing because of pile-up. Triggering algorithms have to be fast and robust to avoid to miss rare events

12. Electron/g : the electromagnetic calorimeter • The electromagnetic calorimeter • EM barrel : (|n|<1.475) [Pb-LAr] • EM end-caps : (1.4<|n|<3.2) [Pb-LAr] • lead/Liquid argon sampling calorimeter with accordion shape • Physics requirements • discovery potential of Higgs (into gg or 4e) determines most of the requirements • largest possible acceptance (accordion) • large dynamic range from 20 MeV to 2 TeV • energy resolution sE/E~10%/E0.7% • linearity ~0.1% (W-mass precision measurement) • particle identification • position and angular measurement : 50 mrad/E E

13. Barrel/Encap LAr Calorimeter Installation 170 tons assembly One end-cap calorimeter (LAr EM, LAr HAD, LAr Forward inside same cryostat, surrounded by HAD Fe/Scintillator Tilecal) being moved inside the barrel toroid

14. The hadronic calorimeter and jet reconstruction November 4th 2005: Calorimeter barrel after its move into the center of the ATLAS detector

15. Muon spectrometer Toroidal field to bend muons The Muon Spectrometer is instrumented with precision chambers and fast trigger chambers Precision chambers: - MDTs in the barrel and end-caps - CSCs at large rapidity for the innermost end-cap stations Trigger chambers: - RPCs in the barrel - TGCs in the end-caps TGC big wheel

16. Trigger system • Level 1 trigger • hardware trigger (2.5 ms latency) • calorimeter + muon chambers • defines Regions Of Interest (ROI) • Level 2 • processing in parallel info from ROI,uses ID information (latency 10 ms) • Event Filter • uses tools similar to “offline” code thanks to longer latency ~1s • Challenge • have tracking, b-tagging and time information at trigger level  speed ! 25 ns is the time interval to consider ! 40 MHz 75 kHz ~2 kHz ~ 200 Hz

17. The data treatment at the LHC • Needs for LHC experiments • each event is independent of the others • computing power ~100000 PC (P4 3 GHz, 2 GB ram) • storage capacity for LHC experiments • 20 petabytes/y on magnetic tape • 1 petabyte/y on disc for the analysis • possibility to access data from institutes • production of Monte Carlo data necessary to the understanding of results of the analysis (30 mn/event) • ATLAS computing model • first publication mid-2005 (Technical Design Report), first modifications in 2006, will have to adapt with first data • grid part • use as much as possible standard LCG (LHC Computing Grid) tools • have to be fully operational (low error rate in production, error monitoring …)

18. Towards physics 1: Testbeams 2: Subdetector Installation, Cosmic Ray Commissioning 2.5: Spring ’07: Global cosmic run 3: Single beam 4: First LHC collisions 5: First Physics 2005 2006 2007 2008

19. Towards physics : test beams 2001-2002H6 & H8 beam lines at CERN • TRT experimental setup • TRT prototypes • p, e and m beam from 1-300 GeV • LArEM series modules • 4 barrel and 3 end-cap production modules • e and g beam from 10-300 GeV Beam chambers Si layers Cerenkov counter Calorimeter Studies presented : - transition radiation for e/ separation Studies presented : - energy resolution, constant term - shower development - / separation

20. Full « vertical slice » of Atlas tested on CERN H8 beam line between May-November 2004 • 90 millions events collected • 4.6 Tbytes of data • beams: • e±,± 1250 GeV • ±,±,p  350 GeV •  ~30 GeV • B from 01.4 T G4 simulation of subdetectors setup Muon LArEM TRT Tile beam For the first time, all Atlas sub-detectors integrated and run together with: - « final » electronics - common DAQ - slow control - common Atlas software to analyse the data Pixels + SCT First experience with : - Inner Detector alignment - ID/Calo alignment - ID/Calo track matching - ID/Calo combined reconstruction Towards physics : combined test beam 2004

21. Electron identification makes use of the large energy depositions due to the transition radiation (X-rays) when they traverse the radiators Results from TB 2002 @20 GeV Results from CTB2004 @9 GeV Preliminary 90% electron efficiency210-2 pion efficiency Typical TR photon energy depositions in the TRT are 8-10 keV Pions deposit about 2 keV e/ separation using the TRT

22. Performance of the LArEM Calo TB 2001-2002 CTB 2004 (preliminary) Energy resolution 10.00.1 % /E 0.210.03 % Run 2102478 Ebeam=180 GeV  = 0.3 E/E ~0.83 % Constant term rms  cL=0.37% Energy (GeV) Energy (GeV) rms  cL = 0.45 % Performance of the LArEM similar in both test beams and in agreement with what expected @245 GeV @245 GeV 4.5‰ P13 production module> 7  (middle cell unit)  (middle cell unit)

23. Electromagnetic shower shapes LArEM beam test 2001-2002Comparison between data and G4 standalone simulation Longitudinal development Lateral development presampler Fraction of Erec. in 1st samp. Ebeam = 10 GeV Ebeam = 60 GeV 2rd samp. Fraction of Erec. in 3rd samp. Ebeam = 100 GeV Ebeam = 180 GeV The  contamination and the non-uniform distribution of dead material located in the beam line and not described in the Monte Carlo might explain the small discrepancy Shower profile in agreement between data/simulation from 10 to 180 GeV

24. The identification of photons is based on set of cuts applied on calorimeters information (no leakage in HCAL, narrow shower in EM2 Calorimeter). After application of HCAL + EM2 criteria, the remaining background is composed at ~80% of isolated 0’s produced by jet fragmentation A /0 separation ~3 is needed for =90%. For this the fine granularity of the EM sampling 1 is used G4 full simulation Test beam 2002 @50 GeV  0→ --- Data --- G3 MC E2nd max - Emin R. Sacco (ATLAS Coll.) NIM A(550), 2005 Fraction of energyoutside shower core R (data) = 3.18 ± 0.12 (stat)R (MC) = 3.29 ± 0.10 (stat) R (G4) = 3.2 ± 0.2  = 90 % /0 separation in full simulation and test beam

25. Primary electron Converted photon Inner Detector tracks extrapolated to ECAL and compared to calo clusters Run 2102857 event # 88  track primary electron  converted   cluster Towards physics : g-conversions ATLAS preliminary ATLAS @ LHC: -conversion probability in tracker is > 30%  important to develop (and validate !) efficient reconstruction tools

26. The large-scale system test facility for alignment, mechanical, and many other system aspects, with sample series chamber station in the SPS H8 beam Towards physics : m-system Shown in this picture is the end-cap set-up, it is preceded in the beam line by a barrel sector Example of tracking the sagitta measurements, following the day-night variation due to thermal variations of chamber and structures, and two forced displacements of the middle chamber

27. Towards physics : cosmic rays runs • First cosmics rays • registered in the underground cavern • barrel muon chambers (MDT and RPC) and level-1 m trigger In December 2005 in MDTs and in June 2006 in RPCs

28. Towards physics : cosmic rays runs • Cosmic rays runs • event display in the barrel TRT and in the SCT End of February 2006 the barrel SCT was inserted into the barrel TRT, and this component will be ready for the final installation in ATLAS in August 2006 after further commissioning at the surface with cosmics Integrations of the two end-caps (SCT and TRT) are ongoing for installation end of 2006

29. Towards physics : cosmic rays runs • Cosmic rays runs • event display from the first LAr+Tile calorimeter barrel cosmic run The barrel LAr and scintillator tile calorimeters have been since January 2005 in the cavern in their ‘garage position’ (on one side, below the installation shaft)

30. Towards physics : beam-halo events From April-May 2007 ? Only one beam in the machine : here physics data are beam-halo and beam-gas events

31. Towards physics : beam-gas events • Collisions are essentially minimum bias • 23 m : ~1.2105/s (integrated : 21011) • 3 m : ~1.5104/s (21010; ID size) • 20 cm : ~1103/s (2109; ID soft acceptance) • Particles : consider 3 m and ask pT>1 GeV • p : ~1.5109 over two months • g: ~5.5108 of one beam operation • spectrum is soft : few Hz of electromagnetic clusters with ET>2 GeV • trigger is an issue

32. What samples in 2007 ? ATLAS preliminary s =900 GeV, L = 1029 cm-2 s-1 • First collisions (s = 900 GeV, L~1029 cm-2 s-1) : November 2007 • commisioning run at injection energy until end 2007 • 30% data taking efficiency included (machine+detector) + trigger and analysis efficiencies • start to commission triggers and detectors with collision data (min. bias, jets…) in real LHC environment • may be first physics measurements (min. bias, underlying events, QCD jets..) ? • observe a few Wln, mm, J/ mm Jets pT > 15 GeV Jets pT > 50 GeV Jets pT > 70 GeV   J/ W  e,  Z  ee,  30 nb-1 100 nb-1 (b-jets: ~1.5%) + 1 million minimum-bias/day

33. First physics run (s = 1400 GeV, L~1032 cm-2 s-1) : spring 2008 • 1 fb-1 (100 pb-1)  6 months (few days) at L=1032 cm-2 s-1 • with 50% data taking may collect a few fb-1 per experiment by end 2008 • With these data • understand and calibrate detectors in situ using well-known physics samples • Zee,mm tracker, ECAL, muon chambers calibration and alignment, etc. • tt bln bjj jet energy scale from W jj, b-tagging performance, etc. • measure SM physics at s = 14 TeV : W, Z, tt, QCD jets… (also because omnipresent backgrounds to New Physics) Total collected before start of LHC s(pb) Process N/year N/s W  ln 3104 30 108 104 LEP / 107 FNAL Zee 1.5103 1.5 107 107 LEP tt 830 1 107 104 Tevatron bb 5108 106 1013 109 Belle/BaBar First physics run in 2008 prepare the road to discovery …… it will take time …

34. W.Verkerke ATLAS preliminary • Example of initial measurement: understanding detector and physics with top events • can we observe an early top signal with limited detector performance ? • in addition, excellent sample to : • commission b-tagging, set jet energy scale using W jj peak • understand detector performance for e, m, jets, b-jets, missing ET, … • understand / constrain theory and MC generators using e.g pT spectra 4 jets pT> 40 GeV 50 pb-1 2 jets M(jj) ~ M(W) W+n jets (Alpgen) + combinatorial background Isolated lepton pT> 20 GeV NO b-tag !! ETmiss > 20 GeV Top physics in 2008 • tt 250 pb for tt  bW bW  bl bjj 3 jets with largest ∑ pT

35. Our field, and planning for future facilities, will benefit a lot from quick determination of scale of New Physics. e.g. with 100 (good) pb-1 LHC could say if SUSY accessible to a 1 TeV ILC BUT: understanding ETmissspectrum (and tails from instru- mental effects) is one of the most crucial and difficult experimental issue for SUSY searches at hadron colliders • If SUSY at TeV scale  could be found “quickly” … thanks to : • large cross section ~10 events/day ar 1032 for • spectacular signatures (many jets, leptons, missing ET) M (TeV) q 2.5 02 q Z 2 01 1.5 1 ATLAS + CMS 100 10 1 Luminosity/expt (fb-1) 100 pb-1 Example of “early” discovery : Supersymmetry ?

36. ATLAS preliminary S.Asai Jets + ETmiss (0l) Jets + 1l +ETmiss 1 fb-1 Run II V. Shary CALOR04 ETmiss spectrum contaminated by cosmics, beam-halo, machine/detector problems, etc. ATLAS preliminary 1 fb-1 I.Okawa et al. R: Z() +jets B: as estimated from W()+jets Missing ET (GeV) Example of “early” discovery : Supersymmetry ? Estimate physics backgrounds using data (control samples) after cleaning no cleaning

37. Current indications are for a ‘light Higgs’ : search for Higgs in mass region 114<mH<200 GeV is crucial SM Higgs boson with first data *July 2006. Combination of CDF+D0 Run I+II results mt = 171.4 1.2 (stat) 1.8 (syst) GeV Signal cross section (including BR) can be as low as 10-14 the total cross section

38. H key ingredients : • rare decay mode with BR~10-3 (2.186 10-3 for mH=120 GeV) • the signal should be visible as a small peak above the gg continuum background • good energy resolution of the electromagnetic calorimeter • Irreducible background consists of genuine photons pairs continuum. ~125 fb/GeV @ NLO for mH=120 GeV (after cuts and photon efficiency) • Reducible background comes from jet-jet and gamma-jet events in which one or both jets are misidentified as photons (reducible/irreducible cross section (LO-TDR) 2106 (jj) and ~8102 (gj) • excellent jet rejection factor (>103) for 80% g efficiency • sever requirements on particle identification capabilities of the detector especially the electromagnetic calorimeter SM Higgs boson with first data signal background

39. 3 (complementary) channels with similar (small) significances • different production and decay modes • different backgrounds • different detector/performance requirements • ECAL crucial for H (in particular response uniformity) : s/m ~1% needed • b-tagging crucial for ttH : 4 b-tagged jets needed to reduce combinatorics • efficient jet reconstruction over |h|<5 crucial for qqHqqtt (forward jet tag and central jet veto needed against background) H   ttHttbb  blbjjbb qqH  qq b b S=10, B=10, S/B=2.7 S=130, B=4300, S/B=2 S=15, B=45, S/B=2.2  H  SM Higgs boson with first data All three channels require very good understanding of detector performance and background control to 1-10%  convincing evidence likely to come later than 2008

40. NeededLdt (fb-1) per experiment 10 --- 98% C.L. exclusion  1 fb-1 for 98% C.L. exclusion  5 fb-1 for 5 discovery over full allowed mass range 1 Events / 0.5 GeV Signal expected in ATLAS after ‘early' LHC operation ATLAS + CMS preliminary 10-1 mH (GeV) SM Higgs boson with first data muon electron electron here discovery easier with gold-plated H  ZZ  4l by end 2008 ? H  4l : narrow mass peak, small background H  WW  ll (dominant at the Tevatron): counting channel (no mass peak)

41. Dms with BsDs • given the low value measured by CDF ATLAS will be able to measure Dms with ~10 fb-1 (one year) B physics with first data • CP violation in BsJ/ :fs = -2l2h = -2 tiny in SM (-0.0360.003 from CKMfitter) and not accessible by any of the LHC experiments • New Physics could lead to enhanced and measurable CP violation • 8 parameters extracted in maximum likelihood fir to angular distribution of the decayA||(t=0), AT(t=0), d1, d2, Dms, DGs • to avoid failing a fit due to high xs-fs correlation xs was fixed • s(fs)~0.046 for xs=20 ps-1, s(DGs)/DGs=13%, s(Gs)/Gs=1% Nevents after trigger + offline rec. 30 fb-1 Models used in MC or to confront experimental sensitivities. Signal Backgr fs DGs SM: Fleisher CERN-TH-2000-101 NP: Ball,Khalil, Phys.Rev.D69:115011,2004 15% Bs→J/y f 270k xs

42. BTW: why am I here ? • HELEN (High Energy Latin American European Network) • students in physics groups • engineers in computing groups • VenezuelaFrance • physics groups • A. Cimmarusti (ULA) in Paris for top quark • H. Martinez (ULA) in Paris for Higgs • computing groups • G. Diaz (CECALCULA) in Lyon for Tier1 • V. Mendoza (Paris for Tier2) • new “bunch” ~March 2007 • FranceVenezuela • physics groups • J. Malclès (Paris) in Mérida • F. Derue (Paris) in Mérida

43. New LHC schedule • machine and experiments closed 31 August 2007 • commissioning run at s=900 GeV end 2007 • first physics run at 14 TeV starting in spring 2008 • Experiments on track to meet above schedule. Test-beam and cosmics results indicate they work as expected • All efforts now to continue installation and commissioning of machine and detectors of unprecedented complexity, technology and performance • With the first collision data (1-100 pb-1) at 14 TeV: understand detector performance in situ in the LHC environment, and perform first physics measurements • measure particle multiplicity in minimum bias (a few hours of data taking…) • measure QCD jet cross-section to ~30% ? (expect >103 events with ET(j)>1 TeV with 100 pb-1) • measure W, Z cross-sections to 10% with 100 pb-1 ? • observe a top signal with ~30 pb-1 • measure tt cross-section to 20% and m(top) to 7-10 GeV with 100 pb-1 ? • improve knowledge of PDF (low-x gluons !) with W/Z with O(100) pb-1 ? • first tuning of MC (minimum bias, underlying event, tt, W/Z+jets, QCD jets…) Conclusion

44. And, more ambitiously • discover SUSY up to gluino masses of ~1.3 TeV ? • discover a Z’ up to masses of ~1.3 TeV ? • surprises ? • Later on the LHC will explore in detail the highly-motivated TeV-scale with a direct discovery potential up to m~5-6 TeV • if New Physics is there, the LHC will find it • it will say the final word about the SM Higgs mechanism and many TeV-scale predictions • it may add crucial pieces to our knowledge of fundamental physics  impact also on astroparticle physics and cosmology • most importantly : it will likely tell us which are the right questions to ask, and how to go on Conclusion