Fermilab TodayFriday, June 10, 2005  
Hopes and Stakes Are High As Users Ponder the Future

Fred Bernthal presented the URA Thesis Award to Konstantin Anikeev yesterday.
The Office of Science hopes a new advisory panel can open doors that are "not easily opened." The advisory panel, EPP2010, hopes to reverse a five-year budget trend of "systematically dis-investing in physics." Fermilab hopes that both succeed in clearing a path to the proposed International Linear Collider that would ensure its long-term future and its return to the high-energy frontier. And the recently-appointed director of the Global Design Effort believes Fermilab "can position itself well — if we go forward — to bid to host the ILC, without mortgaging the rest of its program."

Thursday's presentations demonstrated the high stakes for the field, as the Annual Users' Meeting drew to a conclusion with talks by Robin Staffin, Associate Director for High-Energy Physics in the DOE Office of Science; Charles Shank, former director of Berkeley Lab and a member of the National Academies' EPP2010 panel on the future of high-energy physics; Pier Oddone, Fermilab Director-Designate, and Barry Barish, head of the Global Design Effort for the proposed International Linear Collider.

Personifying the future of the field, Konstantin Anikeev, of MIT and CDF, received the URA Thesis Award for his measurements of the lifetimes of B-meson states, including a world-best measurement of the B(s) average lifetime; while Reinhard Schwienhorst, of Michigan State University and DZero, received the Alvin Tollestrup Award for postdoctoral research, for his work in searching for single Top production. Both awards are funded by Universities Research Association, Inc. While reading the citation for the postdoc award, Tollestrup added a comment that could serve as a memorable if unintentional metaphor for current issues: "The physics of today is limited by the background of the physics of yesterday."

Fermilab's role in the physics of the future could hinge on bringing the ILC to reality, but Barish raised a critical word of caution. "The linear collider will never exist," he said, "if we cannot contain the cost. The highest-cost areas will be superconducting RF and civil construction, and those are the parts being worked on here at Fermilab."

Work on the design will take a major step forward during workshops held at Snowmass, Colorado in mid-August, while Barish continues filling out his GDE team with directors for the regions of Europe, Asia and the Americas. Barish intends to have a "configuration" for the machine come out of the Snowmass meetings. That concept will be the foundation for a Baseline Configuration Document to be completed by the end of 2005, followed by what Barish described as a Reference Design Report. Beyond integrating what he termed the "very dispersed" global effort, Barish made it clear that his team faces a serious challenge. "The last thing we want to do," he said, "is to build a machine that is obsolete as soon as we finish building it."

Staffin tossed a near-term challenge at Fermilab, although couching it in humor. "Can you give us just one blockbuster discovery?" he asked. "I'm sure there's one just around the corner, although we would like it to be close corner." Staffin quoted several comments from the lab's most recent DOE program review, all highly complimentary: "the quality of the physics program is outstanding;" "the ongoing operations perform like a well-oiled machine;" "the program is a solid foundation for future initiatives;" "the strategic plan is now shaped, focused and well-articulated." Staffin summed up what he termed "our perspective on things" from HEP in Washington: "The present Fermilab program is a GREAT one."

Shaping an equivalent future with the proposed ILC, Staffin emphasized, would require extraordinary measures. "At the multibillion-dollar level," he said, "you are competing with a whole lot of other priorities, throughout society as a whole. That's why we thought it was important to go to the National Academies [for an advisory panel]. It gives us a broader base. The people on that committee can open doors that are not easily opened, by their prominence and their credibility."

The EPP2010 panel, formed at the request of both DOE and the National Science Foundation, includes three Nobel Laureates: David Gross of the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, Harold Varmus of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Canter, and Jerome Friedman of MIT. It also includes several members who are not particle physicists, including the chair, economist and president emeritus Harold Shapiro of Princeton University. "It's a very interesting attempt," Shank said, "to bring together views from outside the field [of particle physics] and try to build a consensus on major construction project, and reverse some of the trends in the budget."

Shank noted the slow but steady growth in research investment before 2000 contrasted greatly with the "flat-flat" budgets after 2000. He posed several questions the panel is trying to confront, including whether money spent in particle physics is capable of generating the return on investment in fields such as biology. "I don't like talking about spinoffs," Shank said. "Yet while the goal of understanding our world, and understanding the universe itself, is worthwhile, it doesn't make a compelling argument. We're asking for help to turn around this systematic dis-investment in particle physics."

Oddone must deal with the funding situation first-hand beginning July 1, though he referred wryly to the "protracted transition" after he was named director-designate in November, 2004 and said he has spent his time in "due diligence" becoming familiar with the lab and participating in several review processes. Concluding the day's program, Oddone opted for a "conversation" rather than a presentation. He addressed four specific areas-the state of the lab, the changing nature of the field, the lab's strategic plan, and issues for the immediate future-before opening the floor to questions.

The lab is in "a remarkable state," he said, with "a fantastic opportunity" for the Tevatron during the remainder of its run. He cited the launch of the neutrino program and the Particle Astrophysics Center, described the lab's safety record as "quite extraordinary," and viewed the lab as the "leanest and meanest" of organizations when measured by the limited overhead the lab has to work with. The result, he said, was a strong platform to talk about taking the lab to the next level. "We are in a great position to be ambitious," he said, "to pursue ILC approval, and position ourselves to host and exploit this machine at our lab."

The changing field apparently will leave Fermilab as the only place with high-energy accelerators devoted to discovery, Oddone said, "but we must not take for granted that we are the center of everything." He referred to the importance of enhancing participation in the LHC, and of the possibility of working with other labs to build accelerators to be used in Basic Energy Sciences.

Strategically, Oddone was clear about the need to make the ILC a priority. "We must work with Barry [Barish, who will have an office at Fermilab] to make sure all organizational issues and technical issues are taken care of by the end of the decade," Oddone said. "The only decision remaining will be the decision to construct. This will put the ILC on a fast track. At the end of the decade, it is imperative that we determine what the future is. There must be confirmation by LHC that the physics is there, and [the ILC] must be affordable." Oddone said a Proton Driver, with its superconducting linac, could be developed in synergy with the ILC for the next two years, but a decision will loom in two years: whether to go ahead with the ILC or to take the direction with a Proton Driver and continued neutrino experiments. He added that the Proton Driver could preserve the option to build the ILC because of their similarities.

The immediate problems Oddone saw involved the ongoing program as the foundation for the near term, and the need to concurrently devote resources to developing the ILC. In addition, Oddone saw the lab's support of the LHC as a critical component for any long-term success. "The success of the ILC depends on the success of the LHC," he said. "We must turn on the LHC and operate it in the proper way. Oddone was also clear about painful decisions ahead, sacrificing smaller projects for the good of the larger goals in the context of limited resources. And all the while, trying to deliver on Staffin's call for "just one blockbuster discovery."

"We cannot afford to fail in the near term," Staffin said. "It will affect how we are seen and funded in the long term."

—Mike Perricone

Fermilab Today