PPAP has arranged three one-day community review meetings to help provide input to the STFC roadmap. Further details can be found on the PPAP web pages.
The second of these meetings, to be held on July 14 in Birmingham, is on energy frontier physics. The agenda, together with the membership of the Programme Committee, can be found on the INDICO page.
This forum is intended for discussion prior to this meeting. In particular, the Programme Committee would appreciate comments in response to the questions outlined below. Responses should preferably be made by posting a comment below (please register so that comments can be appropriately attributed). Alternatively, confidential comments can be sent by email to the Programme Committee chair and deputy chair (please do this only if there is a need for comments to be kept confidential).
Please note that these questions are intended to provoke discussion and do not necessarily reflect the views of PPAP or the Programme Committee.
1. What should be the main UK priorities for neutrino and non-accelerator physics over the next ten years?
2. How should the UK be preparing for the long term Long-Baseline Neutrino Oscillation experimental programme (in the US, Europe or Japan)?
3. What should be the UK strategy for Neutrinoless Double Beta-decay for the next ten years and beyond. What level of funding is desirable/reasonable?
4. What should be the UK involvement in Dark Matter experiments and what level of funding is desirable/reasonable?
5. What level of investment should there be in the Boulby underground laboratory or at other sites world-wide?
6. What should be the level of investment in the development of Liquid Argon for neutrino physics?
7. What should be the level of UK involvement in detector and accelerator R&D for the neutrino factory (including MICE)?
Wednesday, 8 July 2009
Discussion for PPAP Community Review meeting on Energy frontier physics
PPAP has arranged three one-day community review meetings to help provide input to the STFC roadmap. Further details can be found on the PPAP web pages.
The second of these meetings, to be held on July 14 in Birmingham, is on energy frontier physics. The agenda, together with the membership of the Programme Committee, can be found on the INDICO page.
This forum is intended for discussion prior to this meeting. In particular, the Programme Committee would appreciate comments in response to the questions outlined below. Responses should preferably be made by posting a comment below (please register so that comments can be appropriately attributed). Alternatively, confidential comments can be sent by email to the Programme Committee chair and deputy chair (please do this only if there is a need for comments to be kept confidential).
Please note that these questions are intended to provoke discussion and do not necessarily reflect the views of PPAP or the Programme Committee.
1. Should investment in future colliders be dependent upon and await LHC results?
2. If the UK had to choose between major investment in LHC upgrades and a 500-1000 GeV linear collider, what would the decision criteria be?
3. Under what circumstances should the UK commit significant funds to LHeC? Is this mutually exclusive with the construction of other high energy facilities?
4. Should the UK participate in R&D on very long-term colliders such as a muon collider, or a higher energy hadron collider?
5. Should the UK be a player in the design of future high-energy accelerator facilities, or should we concentrate on physics and detectors?
6. Within theoretical physics what should the balance be between research into fundamental questions not yet directly accessible to experiment and more phenomenological research?
Question added 10 July 2009
7. How can the community maintain the UK's strong tradition of theoretical research in fundamental physics?
The second of these meetings, to be held on July 14 in Birmingham, is on energy frontier physics. The agenda, together with the membership of the Programme Committee, can be found on the INDICO page.
This forum is intended for discussion prior to this meeting. In particular, the Programme Committee would appreciate comments in response to the questions outlined below. Responses should preferably be made by posting a comment below (please register so that comments can be appropriately attributed). Alternatively, confidential comments can be sent by email to the Programme Committee chair and deputy chair (please do this only if there is a need for comments to be kept confidential).
Please note that these questions are intended to provoke discussion and do not necessarily reflect the views of PPAP or the Programme Committee.
1. Should investment in future colliders be dependent upon and await LHC results?
2. If the UK had to choose between major investment in LHC upgrades and a 500-1000 GeV linear collider, what would the decision criteria be?
3. Under what circumstances should the UK commit significant funds to LHeC? Is this mutually exclusive with the construction of other high energy facilities?
4. Should the UK participate in R&D on very long-term colliders such as a muon collider, or a higher energy hadron collider?
5. Should the UK be a player in the design of future high-energy accelerator facilities, or should we concentrate on physics and detectors?
6. Within theoretical physics what should the balance be between research into fundamental questions not yet directly accessible to experiment and more phenomenological research?
Question added 10 July 2009
7. How can the community maintain the UK's strong tradition of theoretical research in fundamental physics?
Discussion for PPAP Community Review meeting on Flavour-changing physics + QCD, July 13
PPAP has arranged three one-day community review meetings to help provide input to the STFC roadmap. Further details can be found on the PPAP web pages.
The first of these meetings, to be held on July 13 in Birmingham, is on flavour-changing physics + QCD. The agenda, together with the membership of the Programme Committee, can be found on the INDICO page.
This forum is intended for discussion prior to this meeting. In particular, the Programme Committee would appreciate comments in response to the questions outlined below. Responses should preferably be made by posting a comment below (please register so that comments can be appropriately attributed). Alternatively, confidential comments can be sent by email to the Programme Committee chair and deputy chair (please do this only if there is a need for comments to be kept confidential).
Please note that these questions are intended to provoke discussion and do not necessarily reflect the views of PPAP or the Programme Committee :
1. How important will measurements of flavour-changing observables be in the post ~2014 landscape?
2. What are the connections between flavour-changing physics and (i) physics at the energy frontier and (ii) neutrino and non-accelerator physics?
3. What developments are needed from theory (including lattice QCD and phenomenology) to support and/or lead the UK experimental effort in this sector?
4. Should the UK focus its effort in flavour-changing physics on a few key observables, or aim for wider coverage?
5. How many experiments, in the flavour-changing physics sector, should the UK aim to participate in?
6. What factors should be used to determine the prioritisation of projects?
7. Are there areas of commonality between experiments (whether in the flavour-changing physics sector or otherwise) that can be exploited?
8. In which areas relating to flavour changing physics is the UK internationally leading?
9. Does the UK have the technological base to contribute to future flavour facilities?
The first of these meetings, to be held on July 13 in Birmingham, is on flavour-changing physics + QCD. The agenda, together with the membership of the Programme Committee, can be found on the INDICO page.
This forum is intended for discussion prior to this meeting. In particular, the Programme Committee would appreciate comments in response to the questions outlined below. Responses should preferably be made by posting a comment below (please register so that comments can be appropriately attributed). Alternatively, confidential comments can be sent by email to the Programme Committee chair and deputy chair (please do this only if there is a need for comments to be kept confidential).
Please note that these questions are intended to provoke discussion and do not necessarily reflect the views of PPAP or the Programme Committee :
1. How important will measurements of flavour-changing observables be in the post ~2014 landscape?
2. What are the connections between flavour-changing physics and (i) physics at the energy frontier and (ii) neutrino and non-accelerator physics?
3. What developments are needed from theory (including lattice QCD and phenomenology) to support and/or lead the UK experimental effort in this sector?
4. Should the UK focus its effort in flavour-changing physics on a few key observables, or aim for wider coverage?
5. How many experiments, in the flavour-changing physics sector, should the UK aim to participate in?
6. What factors should be used to determine the prioritisation of projects?
7. Are there areas of commonality between experiments (whether in the flavour-changing physics sector or otherwise) that can be exploited?
8. In which areas relating to flavour changing physics is the UK internationally leading?
9. Does the UK have the technological base to contribute to future flavour facilities?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)