Minutes from April 8 Meeting
We continued our discussion about arriving at a consensus in this
community (or at least in this group) on a prioritized list of what
the goals are in this field. The discussion was lead by Maury and
Steve, and they
showed the same slides as last week, only this time people had more time
One initial statement is that there are many opportunities in the next
few weeks to get people's input face to face
on this consensus document. Many of this
group will be going to Neutrino 2002, plus
there's the workshop described below, etc.
There was initially much discussion about adding an evening session to
the New Initiatives for the NUMI Neutrino Beam Workshop
that will take place at Fermilab on May 2-4. Since there will be lots of
people there it would be good to have a session about what our priorities
in this field are as a larger community than just this study group.
There was a worry that people might want
to come to this session who are not already coming to the workshop, so the
sooner we define it the better. It was suggested that we invite members
of the Fermilab Directorate to this as well.
There is also going to be a workshop in Aspen this summer about
underground labs that was originally going to focus on what the Homestake
site could offer, however the idea now is to have it focus on more than
just that site. Mayda commented that the possibility of a NUSL there is
not looking as good as it looked previously. A few days later, Fritz
emailed a message to the group whose text is available here , from the
American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Science Policy
News, Number 42: April 9, 2002.
We also should, in drafting up this roadmap or consensus document or
whatever we're calling it, take advantage of all the summaries that have
been written earlier--tables exist from Jeff Wilkes, and also in the
Neutrino Factory Study that we wrote oh-so long ago.
In going through Steve's list of goals, there was some discussion on
what the ultimate precision one should aim for on different quantities.
Fritz suggested that one would want to know (1-sin^2 (2 theta_23)
to 10^-3, although
Debbie was concerned that one would never untangle uncertainties on
delta m_23 from uncertainties on theta_23 at that level. While it was
mentioned that the precision on theta-23 one could achieve depends on if
it was maximal or near-maximal, Gabriela pointed out that one would want to
know that number to a certain precision regardless of how close it was
to 45 degrees.
So our homework assignment
is to look at Steve's list of goals (pages 4 and 5
of Steve's Talk
) for this field,
try and prioritize them if possible, and also decide if you think the
quantitative goals are the right numbers. Debbie suggested that although
some of these measurements implied "a few measurements at a few baselines or
energies", it might be nice in this consensus document to state that more
Maury Goodman's Slides
Slide 1 (jpeg version)
Slide 2 (jpeg version)
Slide 3 (jpeg version)
Slide 4 (jpeg version)
Or Get the whole file here...
Steve Geer's Slides
Last modified: Wed Apr 10 17:09:55 CDT 2002