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 to comment.

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 explicitly.

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... http://www.hep.anl.gov/mcg/mapmap.ppt

Steve Geer's Slides
Deborah Harris
Last modified: Wed Apr 10 17:09:55 CDT 2002