The Race To Build The ILC

Happy New Year!

This article describes briefly the need for the International Linear Collider, and why the US is losing its grip on its ability to build one. It is another indication of the sad state of high energy physics in the US.

To physicists, a circular collider like the one at CERN is like a telescope, Brau says. It reveals where all sorts of new particles hang out like a telescope discovering new stars. But a straight-line linear collider like the ILC is more of a microscope. It offers very precise views of what is going on at pre-set magnifications, locations that have to be revealed by the circular collider discoveries.

Japan wants to build it, Europe wants to build it, and Russia wants to build it. The ILC effort in the US, on the other hand, is languishing  in a sea of uncertain funding. While this describes science funding in general in the US, the high energy physics, and the ILC in particular, has not had that much of a financial support.

If this track continues, the next big particle physics experiment would  not be built on US soil. Now, this may not mean much to those who don't have a clue on such an impact, but it means that it will be DECADES dramatic impact. This is because the planning of such a facility now takes at least a decade. Construction adds another several years. You just can't get back into the game that easily and that quickly. Not having the ILC in the US means that it will be another 20-30 years before it can even be considered to host another such large-scale facility. That is a very long time to go without.

Zz.

LHC - Coldest Place In The Universe?

This news report covers the recent high energy physics meeting in France. One of the most important outcome of the meeting was the urge to build the ILC as the next generation particle collider to refine the results obtained at the LHC.

That is all fine and dandy. However, my eyes widened when I read this paragraph:

In March, the Large Hadron Collider produced a tiny bang, the most potent force on the tiny atomic level that humans have ever created.

Two beams of protons were sent hurtling in opposite directions toward each other in a 17-mile (27-kilometer) tunnel below the Swiss-French border — the coldest place in the universe at slightly above absolute zero.

Two problems with this last part:

1. LHC uses superconducting magnets to steer and control the proton beams. The beams do not collide under cryogenic temperatures. As far as I know, none of the detectors (ATLAS, CMS, etc.) are "superconducting".

2. While the magnets are cooled using liquid Helium, I can't imagine them being any lower than 1K. This is not "cold" at all, considering that we can get to milli Kelvin temperatures in many experiments already. So even on earth, the LHC is not the coldest place. I would guess that the rest of the Universe will have quite a say in that claim.

I suppose this is another example of a bit of bad reporting.

Zz.

Overview of CLIC

While the International Linear Collider (ILC) has been getting more of the publicity as the next possible e-p collider to follow the LHC, it is not the only game in town that has a realistic technology and the physics to produce TeV scale e-p collider. The Compact Linear Collider (CLIC) at CERN is also a serious contender to be the next accelerator technology for such a collider.

There is an excellent review of the technique published in the latest issue of PRST-AB[1]. Note that this journal is open access. It means that you can access the article for free.

With the ILC currently on its deathbed, CLIC may emerge as the leading contender.

Zz.

[1] R. Tomas Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams v.13, p.014801 (2010)

Should a Photon-Photon Collider Precede the ILC?

Symmetry Breaking published a rather fascinating scenario presented by the former director of Japan’s KEK Hirotaka Sugawara. Sugawara proposed that the HEP community should build a photon-photon collider first ahead of the ILC.

Sugawara emphasizes that cost is the primary motivating factor for building a photon-photon collider first. The ILC can’t materialize unless organizers can get governments and funding agencies to support it. With high-energy physics suffering budget cuts world wide, and the LHC still trying to get on its feet, it’s a tough time to pitch such an idea. Sugawara predicts that the cost of a photon-photon collider would be well under half that of the ILC, making it more appealing to potential funders.

“If there is a financial threshold over which a government will not fund the ILC, and if that threshold is half the cost, then a photon-photon collider might make sense,” says Tor Raubenheimer, head of the Accelerator Physics Group at SLAC. But if governments are willing to fully fund the ILC, Raubenheimer says it is unlikely that the community will hold back from building it. Sugawara supports building one either way.

Then again, Sugawara argues that a photon-photon collider could also advance accelerator technology before the ILC is built. “From the time that it is decided to build a particle accelerator to the time the physics actually starts can easily be a decade,” Raubenheimer says. Right now the ILC would operate at 500 GeV, but by the time it is fully constructed scientists may well want it to operate at 1 or 2 TeV. Such an upgrade might not be fiscally or technologically possible on a fully constructed machine. As Sugawara puts it, “We would build the machine to study the machine.” In other words he believes the potential collider would advance accelerator technology and understanding before a major investment is made in the ILC.

I'm not sure if any of these can be answered yet. It still depends very much on what the LHC will produce, so at some level, the future of what the next major project for the HEP community depends very much on the results coming out of the LHC, be it positive or negative. Till then, I don't see any impetus from any funding agency (certainly not here in the US) to make a decision to build anything. But then again, countries like Japan and China can make their own unilateral decision and run away with it, leaving Europe, and especially the US, holding an empty bag.

Zz.

Barry Barish and the GDE

Barry Barish of Caltech heads the Global Design Effort (GDE) for the International Linear Collider (ILC). As anyone who has followed the news since December 2007, the ILC has had two major, and possibly fatal blow to its plan: the UK pull-out and the drastic reduction in funding in the US.

This is a good article on Barish and his effort within the GDE, including his take on the future of the ILC. I think most people kinda agree that even if the ILC gets built, it will probably be the last of its kind because the cost to go beyond that is no longer realistic. Unless new acceleration schemes that are currently still in basic, fundamental research stages (such as plasma wakefield, etc.), particle accelerator for high energy physics will probably not get any bigger than the ILC-like design.

Zz.

UK Confirms Withdrawal From ILC

The funding council for the UK has refused to reconsider the withdrawal from the International Linear Collider (ILC) consortium (link requires free registration for full access).

But despite strong protests from physicists, the STFC says in a statement released today that it has “reaffirmed its decision to stop funding the ILC”, which is seen as the next big experiment in particle physics after the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. The statement was released following a meeting of the STFC’s council last week.

Of course, this doesn't sit well with many people.

Brian Foster from Oxford University in the UK, who is European director of the ILC’s global design effort, says he regrets — but is not surprised by — the STFC council’s decision to withdraw from the ILC.

“At no time has council or any of its subsidiary bodies, or the chief executive, seen fit to discuss this ill-informed decision with me or our international partners, but has instead presented it as a fait accompli,” Foster told physicsworld.com. “While I am grateful that various STFC officials are working constructively with me to try to rescue some of the world-leading work in the UK, I can never accept the legitimacy of the deeply flawed process that has led to the STFC’s withdrawal from the ILC. I will continue to make the case for this vital world project in the hope that STFC will rejoin in the future.”

There's a prevailing "doom" around many places that were involved in the ILC. It is quite conceivable that the ILC is dead, and that even with some restored funding, the momentum for it is lost forever, at least for the US and UK. The possible hope for the resurrection of the ILC would be to site it in either Japan or China. It certainly would signify the complete and final end to particle collider experiment in the US.

Zz.

Federal Cuts May Doom Fermilab's Prized Project

To celebrate today being the most depressing day of the year, here are more gloomy outlook on the Fermilab getting the ILC built on its grounds.

But now, collider project planners worry that any delay in research and development funding could have scientists and designers abandoning Fermilab for labs in countries and facilities that seem more supportive of high-energy physics exploration, such as Japan, the European Union's CERN laboratory in Switzerland or China.
.
.
"It (the ITER cut) calls into question the reliability of the United States as an international partner in big science projects," said Judy Jackson, Fermilab's communications director. "It makes it harder to site the ILC in the United States."

The news article actually focuses on Fermilab's effort to explain to its neighbors on the ILC project and to get them involved in the decision making process if the ILC gets built at Fermilab. They are certainly trying to avoid the mistake they made when they competed for the ill-fated SSC.

At the bottom of the article is a very good list of facts on how the ILC could possibly affects the surrounding neighborhood and what issues are involved in building such a facility as far as the landscape is concerned.

But then again, all of this could be moot.....

Zz.

The APS Press Release On The 2008 Omnibus Spending Bill

The American Physical Society put out a press release in response to the disastrous US spending bill.

APS Urges Congress and White House to Revisit Fiscal Year 2008 Science Funding in January

Current legislation is disastrous for U.S. physical sciences and technology enterprise.

(Press release issued 4:45 pm, December 19, 2007)

The American Physical Society, representing more than 46,000 physicists in universities, industry and national laboratories, regards the fiscal year 2008 omnibus spending bill as extraordinarily damaging to the nation's science and technology enterprise. The bill fails to fund appropriately the research and education programs authorized in the bipartisan America COMPETES Act, which President Bush signed into law only four months ago. The consequential layoffs of scientists and engineers throughout the nation will discourage American youth from pursuing these fields, just as the country needs their participation to sustain economic growth and national security.

While other nations are aggressively challenging American leadership in physical sciences and technology, the omnibus bill sets our country on the wrong course. It fails to provide the necessary resources for long- term research in the physical sciences and engineering. It fails to provide the requisite resources for developing new cutting-edge scientific laboratories and even for operating existing national user facilities. It fails to provide adequate funding for university- based research that is so essential for educating the next generation of scientists and engineers. It also fails to provide the appropriate incentives for American industry to innovate at an accelerated pace.

Furthermore, as we as a nation strive to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, mitigate global warming and put a lid on escalating energy costs, the omnibus bill abandons the long- term transformational research that is necessary to achieve all these essential goals. The bill is bad for our energy future and economic future.

Finally, apart from its failings on global competitiveness and energy, the omnibus legislation also places at grave risk committed U.S. participation in two large international scientific collaborations. Just one year ago, the United States made a major commitment to the construction of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). Today, Congress has pulled the plug. In so doing, it critically damages American credibility as a reliable scientific partner throughout the world and compromises the nation's standing as a host of future international scientific facilities. Congress has also cut the lifeline of the International Linear Collider, which represents the future of American high- energy physics. This action sends a strong message to the world: The U.S. is prepared to jettison support for one of our flagship areas of science that probes fundamental laws of the universe.

The APS notes with some dismay that had Congress applied the same discipline to earmarking as it did last year, the damage to the science and technology enterprise could have been avoided.

For these reasons, the American Physical Society strongly urges Congress and the White House to revisit Fiscal Year 2008 science funding after Congress convenes in January with an eye to reflecting better the nation's long term needs and obligations.

... and here are more news coverage on the disaster that will take into effect at Fermilab starting in January. I tell ya, if they survive this, and that there are new discoveries made at Fermilab, none of the current legislator should attend to bask in the glory, because all of them tried to kill not only this laboratory, but also high energy physics.

Zz.

Introduction to the Photon Collider

With the International Linear Collider (ILC) on life-support system due to the pull-out of the United Kingdom and the severe funding slash by the US Congress, maybe it is a bit moot to talk about possible experiments at the ILC. Still, it one can always dream of what could have been. The ILC would certainly be the most logical facility to start considering the possibility of having a photon collider. This article gives a rather thorough "introduction" to the physics we gain out of a photon collider.

Ah, the good old days of optimism.....

Zz.

ILC Reference Design Report Volume 1 - Executive Summary

I don't know if this is now moot, especially after the future of ILC is in jeopardy with the pullout of the United Kingdom, which is a major blow to the ILC effort. Still, if you're interested, this is Volume 1 of the ILC Design Report Executive Summary. It should tell you everything you wanted to know about the ILC design, but were afraid to ask.

:)

Zz.

UK Pulls Out Of The ILC

This is a MAJOR bombshell and could spell doom to the International Linear Collider project.

The United Kingdom has decided to pull out of the ILC due to budget cutbacks.

The ILC, which will collide beams of electrons and positrons, is being planned as the next accelerator following the Large Hadron Collider, which is set to come online at CERN in 2008. The UK has played a significant role in building the LHC and the withdrawal will come as a blow for the particle-physics community.

The US, via the Dept. of Energy, has already indicated that no decision on the building of the ILC will be made before 2020 (or even later), prompting Fermilab to come up with an interim Project X. With the withdrawl of the UK, would the US (or maybe Japan) be next to pull out? Any one of these countries pulling out will signal the death of the ILC, I would think.

Zz.

New Particle Accelerator To Be Built In Germany

Without much fanfare, and without much fuss, a new particle accelerator will be built in Germany. Named the Facility for Antiproton and Ion Research (FAIR), it will cost a total of $1.7 billion.

One of its goals is to try and recreate the conditions during the Big Bang.

"This laboratory will be recreating a mini version of the Big Bang," Horst Stöcker, scientific director of the German Society for Heavy Ion Research (GSI), which will oversee the facility, told the news agency DPA. "The substance we will be making resembles that in the first microseconds of the Big Bang, when it was a million times hotter than the center of the sun. We're talking a million times 10 million degrees Celsius."

How will this new accelerator differ than the LHC being constructed at CERN?

The project differs from the massive new particle accelerator currently nearing completion at CERN near Geneva in Switzerland in that it will focus more on the intensity of its particle beam rather than on the speed achieved. The CERN project, which hopes to begin experiments in 2008, hopes to find subatomic particles and antiparticles to help provide evidence backing up string theory.

I wish the process in building the International Linear Collider (ILC) is as unfussy as this. Unfortunately, with a $10 billion price tag, the ILC is naturally more complicated and more involved.

Zz.

'X' Marks Fermilab Future

With the Tevatron shutdown looming and the International Linear Collider still a dream away, Fermilab is making its own effort to survive by proposing an intermediate project called Project X. It is meant to be a project that allows for the lab to remain in operation, continues to produce fundamental science, and also allows for the engineering expertise that is eventually needed for the ILC to be tested.

Fermilab's long-range ambition is to host a mammoth project called the International Linear Collider, but that idea will take decades to bring to fruition. Project X would incorporate many of the technologies needed for the ILC, yielding new experimental opportunities and potentially strengthening Fermilab's chances of landing the bigger device.

"This would be a world-class machine at a cost that is much lower than the ILC," said Fermilab Director Pier Oddone.

Of course, as the article has stated, everyone, including Fermilab officials, are aware of the possible downside to such a proposal and especially if it gets built. Certainly there's a perception that Fermilab may not get the ILC if this gets built, and that Project X may be a "light" version of the ILC, the same way RIA got downsized by half of the cost and morphed into an "Advanced Exotic Beam Laboratory".

Zz.

Getting the Neighbor's Support for the ILC

I reported earlier on Fermilab's effort to be more open on their plans to construct the International Linear Collider (ILC) if chosen. This is a similar article reported by the Chicago Tribune.

Fermilab should be applauded for learning from the mistakes made during the SSC bid, and also to make sure the residents are heavily involved in the planning at the very early stages. It is never too early to get rid of the misconception, and it takes time to get a plan that the majority can agree and support.

Zz.

Getting People to Understand, Support Fermilab's Effort

It looks like Fermilab has learned some lessons from its disastrous SSC campaign.

There is now a considerable effort from the lab to involve the surrounding community in the design of the proposed International Linear Collider (ILC). This involvement is crucial if Fermilab wants the approval of its neighbors and become a viable candidate to host this gigantic facility (and to sustain its life as a high energy physics collider facility).

Zz.

PAC Day 5

My "reporters" at the 2007 Particle Accelerator Conference haven't been reporting as frequently as I would like, so news and information coming out of it has been sparse. If I had gone, I'd probably had reported a lot more stuff and "gossips". :)

We finally got a short and brief message from Reporter 3

Reporter 3: Scientific progress is mostly incremental. So, PAC did not have any major breakthrough. SNS (Spallation Neutron Source) is producing some beam since 2006, but still ramping up (for another couple of years). Laser plasma acceleration did not achieve any extraordinary progress recently (i.e. since their last report/papers). Barry Barish declared that he is aware of Orbach's time horizon for the ILC (2020s), but chooses to develop a parallel "technical timeline".

So that's it. Today is the final technical day for PAC07. Tomorrow is mostly tours of Oak Ridge lab and the surrounding area. Most attendees would probably start leaving today and tomorrow.

Zz.

Review of US Program for Detector R&D for the ILC

Argonne is hosting a review of the effort from the US collaborators for the detector R&D for the International Linear Collider (ILC). The program and presentation viewgraphs for this review can be found at the here.

Zz.

U.S. Losing Its Lead in a Vital Branch of Physics

This news article is basically echoing the same thing that I've been saying on here, that by the end of 2009, for the first time since the emergence of the field of high energy/particle physics, the US will no longer have on its soil a single particle collider experiment. Not only has that field of study had barely enough funding to survive for the past decade or so, but now, it is being severely crippled by the lack of commitment to build the ILC.

Burton Richter, who was quoted in the article, had also talked about the future of particle physics. It is extremely rosey, but not here in the US.

Zz.

New Type of Detector Proposed for the ILC

I like reading stuff like this where a solid, new concept is proposed. A group of detector physicists are proposing a new time of collider detector for the International Linear Collider that is different than the 3 already on the table. Called the 4th Concept, it seems to be getting a foothold on the possible candidate for one of the 2 ILC detector to be in placed in the beamline.

The decision on this is still years away, especially with the recently announced delay in funding. It means that there's plenty of time to develop it into a viable candidate.

Zz.

ILC Design Report

This is a rather good and concise article on the details of the International Linear Collider design report. It also has a link to the ILC home page that has the full report, and basically everything anyone wants to know about the ILC but was afraid to ask.

Zz.