The Last Decade in Particle Physics — Where We Are & Where We Are Going

0:00 So that's one of the possibilities that you can do. Of course, the other possibility is that the electron neutrinos can convert into something else. And that's basically what you do by studying solar neutrinos. So that was very, you can develop that by SNOW, and SNOW is a very well-known and famous Oxford experiments, I'm sure you're all familiar with it, so I can skip over this fairly quickly, is SNOW science, One of the most awful places on Earth, I'm sure, is the CNN Tower, and you can see one other way underground, which you need, of course, to shield yourself against the cosmic rays. This is the snow carbon with the deuterium tank, which is shown there, and this is a picture of its construction. So, with the effect, you can charge nuclear elastic scattering. Here are the processes, so you've got euterium in here. Your euterium comes in, it goes to a charged current scattering, and then it converts itself to an electron. This electron you detected in the experiment. The w converts from the b-corp to e-corp. You have two photons, the eutron falls apart, and you see just this electron you detected. There are other interactions. And the current interactions where you have three types of neutrons interacting. They just basically break off the unicorn. And what you do to detect this is afterwards you can detect the capture of the neutrons of the earth, of the neutrons which give up tamper rays, so tamper rays. You can detect them. And then finally, with the elastic scattering where the neutrons come in, if it says zero, it just comes from one of the electrons of the neutrons. So those are the three spots of the detector that you can detect. So Snow spent a long time with the view of Eukirium, and then went to the sea of Eukiris, and by the result of the water, the efficiency of the detector was greatly improved, and allowed them to make beautiful observations. So these are just some pictures of the Snow reconstructed detectors. This is a muon, I think, coming from below and leaving the detector here. It's got an enormous amount of energy here. This, I guess, is a deleterate, which is the second ring of the ray of light. This is a much more typical event where you have neutrinos, poking and interacting, giving you an electron,

2:30 and this ring of the ray of light here is strongly electron. So by using these sort of signatures, they were able to make this beautiful measurement here. to these three reactions, some of which, like the neutral current, are sensitive to the sum of all the total neutrino fluxes, while the others, the charter, are sensitive to all these neutrino-electron fluxes. Now, you can measure that there's a deficit of the neutrino electrons, but also you can measure that the total number of neutrinos is absolutely what the standard solar model predicts. So that, I think, is the real smoking code to tell you that there's nothing wrong with the standard solar model, but there are not the alphabet of neutrinos, and therefore the neutrinos must be obsolete. It was a very useful result, and, of course, an experiment which obviously played in an Asian part. And so how does this, how does this kind of thing come together? It tells you that the mass difference between electron and mu-on-heel type between us is something that the order of 10 to the minus 4, here are the components you'll see. Also, the mixing angle now is much different from the 4, and that's, again, a very interesting phenomenon that most would be almost one, but they don't speak about a much more complicated structure, which is really interesting. So now we know the two mass differences are struggling. Antropi-minos, which is another experiment that will tell us more, the military has started taking data in 2005, and you've got its sensitivity against this scale of mixing angle against the mass square, difference square, these two different types of muon and oscillations. that you left on the tau-yumine-hande results, then here is the camion-hande result I was just showing you, and you will be sensitive with a controlled accelerated-based experiment to basically use tau to lower way the equation of the camion-hande, so that the internal minerals will tell us how we're all about the tau-yumine-hande, mass differences. So, unfortunately, these experiments on human-yumine-rosolation tell you only about the absolute mass differences. you to look at absolute mass, and maybe one way to do that is to look at your tunerals so quickly decay. So here's an example of two-electron, two-mutenon interactions about it's a standard-horror process, and happens, although rarely, it happens quite frequently if you find the right isotope. And this is an observation of the number of events that

5:00 look like this from the DmO3 experiment looking at seven kilograms of monibbonum. And you you get a pattern for the energy of the electrons going out here, which is, looks like that, you get many participants over a few days. So that's a well-known reaction, but there is no other reaction which could occur. It could only occur if, if you're using a myo-anolite, which means that there are random particles, and if they're direct-like, which means that there are distinct random particles, and this is not clear at all. But mostly we think that And then this reaction can happen, where essentially the two neutrinos you saw before were more or less than I led to each other, with my hands secrecy, and you'd get only two electrons coming out. And then what you would see from the normal lipid of this spectrum as well, you'd also see a spike of mono-energetic electrons, which would then use a very clear signal for this neutrinos. but it's clearly an area which is going to be pretty hot in the next few years, and there's enormous activity in all of this area of neutrinos, both of the scutum chemo, which could well take place in trade use, with the UK cloud rates, though not alone from Oxford. So I think it's clear that this observation of Nufino-Mass is the first really clear crack we have in the standard model. It's one which, as I said, is behaving in a rather unexpected way, because the small Nufino-Mass scale implied that it was a mass scale very close to the distinct footprint mass, where our projection effects become non-dimensional. So I think this pattern of mixing under and mass is really rather surprising and also very interesting to see what happens. I really don't have any time to talk about this as it continues, there have been a awful lot, but I'm confident to summarize it. Just to point one more, two things, the Latinx Gage Street has now really become of age, and now people have been using for many years of power, power, and bell in the CP violation. quantities that can only be predicted by this case, in particular the BDK function, I think a very important in the medium of the success of Lava Arnfeld. But of course, there have been many levels of stream theory and lots of things which are called public imagination, like the idea of curve of the dimensions, super streams, mini blackboard production, NHC, various other things. And then on a more historic basis, these dual theories

7:30 between super-streams and other theories have been, that impacts also QCT and EDWP on comics, which has been quite surprising. But of course, on the other hand, I don't have the least idea whether any of this stuff has got anything to do with reality. And indeed, John Ellis, who for 20 years has been going around saying he's happy to see what he discovered has been sounding that's served now over the last few years, so that's an interesting project for the future. So we're talking about funding for the future, in the last five minutes or so I'll just briefly skirt through the IHC project with you here. And that's probably now empty of that finance and filling with the IHC finance. There they are being stored in, I think that's Ansaldo. The other space is, this is a picture about two weeks old, you can see that there's a person there. So, what are these large experiments? The general search is the CMS, which is also involved with the so-called compact spectrometer, so you can see how compact it is. There's quite a lot of person there. Atlas is one of which it is involved. It isn't compact. This is about the size of some pattern in the fields, I think. So the aesthetic potential of the IHC is vast. If you just think about the Higgs, then if the Higgs mass is rather light, then you can detect it by opening your Higgs close to GALC power, and that's the sort of signal you expect to see after about a month's running. If it's in a medium mass wave, about 150 Gb, then it's enormously easy to see if you just need to turn on the LHC and it will stand up and bite you. If it's not massive, then again, it's quite easy to see, though you need to run the signal a little bit longer. But again, you get a nice signal above a very small spectrum. So, if the heat is there, we're going to see the LHC. So the LHC will turn on in 2007, but it's not the only thing that we need in order to do pilot physics. The LHC will assume we find something wonderful. But we also need to measure and understand as well as to discover. And just like in space and astronomy, you often need ground and space-based instruments to complement horribly. You also need that in particle physics. We need not only a discovery machine in LHC, but we also need another software machine which can tell us

10:00 the exact things that we're looking at. So we need these fundamentally EPC-minus-minus-glider and ideally all of them would run at the same time as LHC since in the past we've all of us found running these two sorts of machines together as we're going to bring some symbiosis cross-fertilization. The problem was until recently we didn't know how to build an EPC-minus-glider We can't build a circular one because it costs too much energy to pump back into synchronization. But not only do we do know how to build it, we have indeed the environment of which we have two complete designs. So the LHC is basically a discovery machine, you band the two programs together, there are a horrible mess of corks and luons. You don't have any control over precisely what their energy is, but for linear clarity you steer two very simple point-like electrons together with the human energy, and therefore you can scan across with very high accuracy, energy thresholds, and look in detail at particularly particles. So there are two different technologies that I said, and there's a panel sitting at the moment which is going to tell us which one we should build about the end of the Earth, hopefully about the summer in fact, and then we have to get some money. Here's a design that could be built in Hamburg, starting from And the data machine I showed you earlier goes almost to the Peer Canal, not quite. This is the precursor of the test facility. There's a hole here. Here's the digital battery going through here. And if you look in some detail about that, this has now been extended in the last year. will reach a 1gb linear accelerator, which is already a useful machine, and can be used to do very interesting biological and solid-state physics projects by using the three-lectron laser that you can build rather easily by using these linear electronic machines as well. So there are two very important people in PPAR inspecting part of this tunnel. This is the Wiggler Magnus that produced the three-retinal laser action inside this beam here. And there's an aerial view which shows you this user hall here, and here is the test hall, and there's the hall here, which is the tunnel, which comes down here into the test hall. So this is all, this is about four months old, this is now all completely filled and ready to work and we should be getting some interesting results from this and biology of this machine in the next few years.

12:30 So, that's the co-design. It's also magnetic technology. There's also a warm machine, which is a normal magnetic technology. This has been worked on mostly in SLAC and in Japan and KUK. This is a very thin laser which can scan across the beams and which tells you a lot about beam properties by looking at backs of the content radiation . This is a technology that we're getting into in the context of the accelerator risk issue, which I'll tell you about at the end. So, the future of particles depends not only on building the experiments, but on developing new ideas and accelerators. And so in the UK, we were in a situation where, because we transferred our expertise to CERN, and we thought Nimrod had brought the lab, we essentially have a very small community of accelerated physicists, and the UK government, or less than one, now realise that that's a strategic weakness. So people are investing in a major way to regenerate this expertise and they're investing in a major programme of accelerated R&D. So in April, two institutes performance, and one of them is here in Oxford with our partners in Royal Hallway, and the other one is based around the Desiree in the North West. So these are now starting, and we're crafting in particular for a director, and we hope to make four or so appointments and staff here in Oxford in the next year or two. That's not the other thing, there's a challenge also, there's a computing challenge in LHC, we'll produce enormous quantities of data, and to cope with this we need what's called the grid. So here in Oxford we're also investigating significant resources in grid computing, generally through the sciences, but also specifically in particle physics, because we would be the first people to use the grid in ANGRE, because LHC would start sticking on the enormous comparative data, hopefully in the middle of 2007, so we'd better be ready. So here in Oxford we host what's called the Southern Tier 2, which is a center which serves all of the particle physicists in these universities here, and we collaborate very closely with CCLRC, but also the grid is a technology which has a large number of applications outside particle 30s, and we're engaging in strong outreach to other areas of university, for instance, we're collaborating with the business school, and the economics of the grid, and also with industry, and indeed

15:00 which is really partnership with IBM, which we're joining, and they're developing a joint project. So that's a very exciting area of growth in science. This is just an amusing postscript before I get to the last slide. So another thing that happened, of course, in the last decade is it's difficult to remember that 10 years ago the World Wide Web existed, didn't it? Changed all of our lives. So it turned out the financial times a few weeks ago So we did a poll of the most influential human beings in the past 25 years. It's the 25th anniversary of the National Times New Green Edition. So many of these people will not be surprised to me. I think that's all the job. Michael Thatcher. Who has been surprised to me? Apparently she was behind the time change conference. Helmut Kohl, Tim Bernad-Reef, John DeLauw. I wish I had a bet on it 20 years ago that in the Times poll of the most commercial Europeans, the sixth place would be a part of the system, and I've got a pair of more odds from that commercial thing. So, I've got a very remarkable thing that some of this has been thought of in the six months interview. I think it's actually a fact. The world has changed the way we did almost everything. It gives, I think, a lie to all the simplistic sense of 21st century, especially biology. The thing that's changed most people's lives, and most strongly in the past ten years, is what we can't even do with biology or the genomes of the world. So, in summary, I think the last decade has seen, paradoxically, both the strengthening of the experimental basis of the standard model, and the first sign of the plaximism, rather than the integral mass. We are at the threshold of the decade of major discoveries in particle physics. I can say that without any doubt, because even if we find nothing in the LHC, which is extraordinarily likely, but if we found nothing, it would be an absolute sky. which is accurate, because many of the models of our mission tells us that the Higgs is around the corner, so if we don't mind it, that there's something radically wrong with our entire picture. And in some ways, that will be more exciting than the time in some ways, but still, I'm sure we will. So I think in Oxford we're deeply involved in virtually all of the developments I've talked to about,

17:30 so it's going to be a very exciting time. Thank you. You've certainly painted a very exciting future. Could you just tell me why John Ellis is no longer still keen on civil society? I'm pleased to make it. Oh, okay. Yeah, I could give you a... I think I could turn you off on the road. Oh, I think that would be... You emphasize the interest of the neutrino mass, but it seems to be the fact that the neutrinos change into one another so that the transition between the electron and the muon and the tau sector is actually even more interesting than the mass. Well, it depends on what you're looking for. I mean, the reason why I said to emphasize the mass is that it has such a large cosmological implication in precisely what the mass is, which can continue a picture of the development of cosmology. So, mass really, it always strikes me as being more important to think about the mass. But, of course, from a part of a versus point of view, you're right. It's in many ways more interesting that people who were in the conservation world, which we all thought was very significant. Absolutely, and they've all pitched aspects of the phenomenon. So it clearly is a most fascinating area of research, probably the most exciting one that we do before. You said at the beginning that you did have a study of no interpretation of mass distribution of these particles. Is there any theoretical ambition to predict what the solution is? Oh, sure, there is an ambition. And I know that there is a theoretical framework within the equator. I think not a lot. You see, the trouble is that even if we find such a simple which, after all, is the only symmetry of the nature of the CPU, so you can see what you predict should be there. But if you find super symmetry, and you still don't have the real understanding of the past and the past, and what, although you get in there the solution with many technical difficulties, such as the current standard model, by the

20:00 fact that you have to tune the numbers to a grid, to a grid accuracy, to avoid problems you get these hypothetical effects, you pay a price because the number of parameters in society is much bigger than the number of parameters I showed in the sound model, so that towards the beginning of the plot was that list of parameters in the sound model. The number of parameters is five or six times bigger, and we can't read any of them. So, I'm not aware of the theoretical framework in which it would be possible to predict the masses of particles. String theory, I suppose in principle, would allow you to predict particles and masses because everything is an excitation of the string, but the string theory is soiled behind it. I think the chances that they won't be covered with any higher prediction of this mass ratio is very small. About CP variation, besides the results on B-physics, there is another great achievement of the last decade, which is a big achievement, though. Absolutely, I completely agree. I just had, as you saw, I had already almost around my hour, so I couldn't insert everything. So, it was a personalization. I wanted to be myself, so I didn't have any sense to lay down on the case of two people. I mean, you're supposed to be a national flag and city luggage. Absolutely. Absolutely. Well, as long as a few people brought up political things, where do you think the only a flyer should be built? Well, anyway, I'm not allowed to say this as a chairman of effort, but as an Oxford professor I can say quite clearly it should be filled with the facts. There are many reasons for that. We can't afford it in Europe. We don't have the money in the LHC and the red or the The US needs a major machine, since the SSC debacle, and the US Department of Physics and I view it's almost disturbed, I think they need to be helped by the rest of the world

22:30 to be gained under, to convince the administration that they should invest in basic science. It would be nice if the US community were somewhat more coherent and one mind to help us to get the PSB. But I do detect a strong change of view and regaining the confidence of it in the U.S. Largely, I must say, to be afraid, to be in holiday, I really engage the U.S. to the extent that they really are now talking about making concrete steps to trying to realize in the U.S. Of course, as you well know, the difficulties are enormous, not least because an international machine like this must have freedom and competitive access to all trees, It's difficult to see how we get from where we currently are to where we would have to be to hold the nuclear fire in the US. But one has to hope that this mindset is a transitory one, that we will get to the city where the U.S. is willing to allow people to provide the science centre to access the U.S. really in about 200. So I'm optimistic. I hope that the U.S. will take the lead. If they do, we are very willing and very keen. It seems like a good job to finish. I'd like again to thank you very much for an excellent talk, a fantastic summary, and I'd like to condense my position in the plaques player, I'm greatly impressed.

25:00 Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

27:30 Thank you. Thank you.