DOCSLIB.ORG

Technical Challenges and Scientific Payoffs of Muon Beam Accelerators for Particle Physics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Technical Challenges and Scientific Payoffs of Muon Beam Accelerators for Particle Physics 4P-2-02 1 Technical Challenges and Scientific Payoffs of Muon Beam Accelerators for Particle Physics Michael S. Zisman trend started with electrostatic accelerators (Cockcroft-Walton Abstract—Progress in particle physics has largely been and van de Graaff devices) and continued with cyclotrons, determined by development of more capable particle synchrocyclotrons, synchrotrons, and most recently colliders accelerators. This trend continues today with the recent advent of (both circular and linear). Advances in accelerator high-luminosity electron-positron colliders at KEK and SLAC performance come only with corresponding advances in operating as “B factories,” the imminent commissioning of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, and the worldwide accelerator technology, including magnets, vacuum systems, development effort toward the International Linear Collider. RF systems, feedback systems, diagnostic systems, etc. Looking to the future, one of the most promising approaches is In the early days of accelerators, building the accelerator the development of muon-beam accelerators. Such machines have and building the detectors were not considered separate tasks, very high scientific potential, and would substantially advance that is, such activities were simply part of preparing the the state-of-the-art in accelerator design. A 20–50 GeV muon experiment. Modern accelerators—and their technical storage ring could serve as a copious source of well-characterized electron neutrinos or antineutrinos (a Neutrino Factory), subsystems—require a high degree of specialization, and providing beams aimed at detectors located 3000–7500 km from experts in all aspects are needed. the ring. Such long baseline experiments are expected to be able to observe and characterize the phenomenon of charge- II. PARTICLE PHYSICS QUESTIONS conjugation-parity (CP) violation in the lepton sector, and thus provide an answer to one of the most fundamental questions in Particle physics is a broad subject, and it is neither practical science, namely, why the matter-dominated universe in which we nor desirable to try to do it justice here. From the perspective reside exists at all. By accelerating muons to even higher energies of accelerator-related efforts, there are two main thrusts. First, of several TeV, we can envision a Muon Collider. In contrast to we desire to gain an understanding of the origins of the masses composite particles like protons, muons are point particles. This of the fundamental particles. These cover a huge range. The means that the full collision energy is available to create new recently observed top quark has a mass of about 171,000 particles. A Muon Collider has roughly ten times the energy 2 reach of a proton collider at the same collision energy, and has a MeV/c , nearly the mass of a gold nucleus, and the Z and W much smaller footprint. Indeed, an energy frontier Muon bosons, carriers of the weak force, have masses of 91,000 and Collider could fit on the site of an existing laboratory, such as 80,000 MeV/c2 (comparable to a mid-range nucleus). At the Fermilab or BNL. The challenges of muon-beam accelerators are other end of the spectrum, neutrinos are nearly massless (and related to the facts that i) muons are produced as a tertiary indeed were thought until recently to be exactly massless) with beam, with very large 6D phase space, and ii) muons are a mass in the neighborhood of 0.000001 MeV/c2. unstable, with a lifetime at rest of only 2 µs. How these challenges are accommodated in the accelerator design will be described. The second main topic is to understand why we live in a Both a Neutrino Factory and a Muon Collider require large matter-dominated universe. In essence, this question asks why numbers of challenging superconducting magnets, including we are all here, so it is pretty fundamental from a provincial large aperture solenoids, closely spaced solenoids with opposing viewpoint. At the time of the Big Bang, equal amounts of fields, shielded solenoids, very high field (~40–50 T) solenoids, matter and anti-matter were created. In a symmetric universe, and storage ring magnets with a room-temperature midplane all of the matter and anti-matter would have annihilated. The section. Uses for the various magnets will be outlined, along with R&D plans to develop these and other required components of reason it did not is believed to be due to a slight asymmetry in such machines. reaction rates between matter and anti-matter, referred to as “charge-conjugation–parity” (CP) violation. Index Terms—Accelerator cavities, Accelerator magnets, CP violation is a well-known phenomenon in the quark Particle beams, Solenoids. sector, having been observed in the K meson system more than 40 years ago [1]. In the past 10 years, the study of CP I. INTRODUCTION violation has centered on the heavier B meson system. Two ISTORICALLY, particle physics has depended on advances high luminosity “B factories” have been built, PEP-II [2] at H in accelerator design to make scientific progress. This SLAC and KEKB [3] at KEK. Both of these machines have reached a luminosity in excess of 1 × 1034 cm–2 s–1. Results to Manuscript received September 25, 2007. This work was supported by the date have shown that the observed CP violation is consistent U.S. Department of Energy, Office of High Energy Physics, under contract number DE-AC02-05CH11231. with Standard Model predictions, and thus is insufficient to Michael S. Zisman is with the Accelerator & Fusion Research Division, explain the observed baryon asymmetry in the universe. The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA (phone: prevalent view is that the required additional CP violation 510-486-5765; fax: 510-486-5788; e-mail: [email protected]). 4P-2-02 2 must have been due to the lepton sector. CP violation in the beams had to be of opposite charge and beams of particles and lepton sector has never been observed, but neutrinos are their corresponding anti-particles were utilized, e.g., electrons considered a good candidate to exhibit the effect. and positrons or protons and antiprotons. To get higher luminosity, modern colliders [2]–[5] use two III. ACCELERATOR DELIVERABLES separate rings, and thus no longer require the beams to have Particle accelerators are designed to deliver two parameters opposite sign. Use of a two-ring collider decouples the beams 1 to the user—energy and luminosity. Of these, energy is by far completely , and permits beams of different magnetic rigidity the easier parameter to deliver. In practice, the two to be used, though there are typically rather complicated deliverables are often, but not always, interchangeable. At the constraints on the design of the common IP optics. LHC [4], where beam commissioning will begin in mid-2008, A. Machine Limitations of Hadron Colliders the discovery reach can be enhanced either by increasing the The most serious limitation of hadron colliders is that beam energy (an upgrade referred to as “DLHC”) or by protons are composite particles, comprising quarks and increasing the luminosity (an upgrade referred to as “SLHC”). gluons. Thus, only about 10% of the beam energy is available In general, an energy increase is easier for the experimenters for the “hard” collisions that can lead to production of new to accommodate. Substantially higher luminosity invariably particles. In effect, a 10 TeV hadron collider is required to requires significant upgrades to the detector capabilities, probe the 1 TeV mass scale. which are themselves expensive and sometimes risky. A Another limitation stems from the difficulty in producing substantial energy increase requires replacing or upgrading all antiprotons. The available antiproton intensity tends to limit of the ring dipoles, and perhaps other magnets as well. A the peak luminosity, and the slow production rate means that it luminosity upgrade typically requires fewer new magnets, but takes many hours to replace them if the beam is lost, thereby they are the most challenging magnets to design and build. reducing the integrated luminosity. Luminosity, L, is a measure of the collision rate per unit The use of a proton-proton collider bypasses the second area. If the probability for a particular event type (quantified limitation, but not the first one. by its “cross section” in units of cm2) is denoted σ, then the event rate, R, for that event type is given by B. Machine Limitations of Lepton Colliders R = Lσ (1) The main challenge of present lepton colliders is dealing with the emitted power from synchrotron radiation. The power –2 –1 where L is in units of cm s . In practice, it is the integrated in kW emitted by electrons or positrons in a circular collider is luminosity, ∫ L dt, that is the figure-of-merit for looking at rare given by: events. Integrated luminosity is often quoted in units of 4 –1 24 –2 88.5 E I inverse barns, where 1 b = 10 cm . For today’s colliders, PSR = (3) integrated luminosity might be quoted in units of pb–1, fb–1, ρ and, before much longer, the first data set representing 1 ab–1 where E is the beam energy in GeV, I is the beam current in will be available. For a peak luminosity of 1 × 1034 cm–2 s–1 A, and ρ is the bending radius in the ring dipoles, in m. For a 1 and a “year” of 107 s, the integrated luminosity would be 100 TeV center-of-mass (c.m.) collider in the LHC tunnel (C = 27 fb–1. km), a 1 mA beam would produce roughly 2 GW of radiated For a collider with equal beam sizes at the interaction point power. Operating such an accelerator would require (IP), the luminosity is given by replenishing the lost beam power with an RF system and also removing this much power from the vacuum chamber walls.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:1901.06150V1 [Physics.Acc-Ph] 18 Jan 2019
    Input to the European Particle Physics Strategy Update Muon Colliders The Muon Collider Working Group Jean Pierre Delahaye1, Marcella Diemoz2, Ken Long3, Bruno Mansoulié4, Nadia Pastrone5 (chair), Lenny Rivkin6, Daniel Schulte1, Alexander Skrinsky7, Andrea Wulzer1;8 1 CERN, Geneva, Switzerland 2 INFN Sezione di Roma, Roma, Italy 3 Imperial College, London, United Kingdom 4 CEA, IRFU, France 5 INFN Sezione di Torino, Torino, Italy 6 EPFL and PSI, Switzerland 7 BINP, Russia 8 LPTP, EPFL, Switzerland and University of Padova, Italy Muon colliders have a great potential for high-energy physics. They can offer collisions of point-like par- ticles at very high energies, since muons can be accelerated in a ring without limitation from synchrotron radiation. However, the need for high luminosity faces technical challenges which arise from the short muon lifetime at rest and the difficulty of producing large numbers of muons in bunches with small emittance. Addressing these challenges requires the development of innovative concepts and demanding technologies. The document summarizes the work done, the progress achieved and new recent ideas on muon colliders. A set of further studies and actions is also identified to advance in the field. Finally, a set of recommen- dations is listed in order to make the muon technology mature enough to be favourably considered as a candidate for high-energy facilities in the future. arXiv:1901.06150v1 [physics.acc-ph] 18 Jan 2019 Contact: Nadia Pastrone, [email protected] Webpage: https://muoncollider.web.cern.ch 1 1 Introduction The quest for discovery in particle physics has always required experiments at the highest possible en- ergies.
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Colliders Come a Step Closer
    News & views those for particle colliders. For example, a Accelerator physics ‘Higgs factory’ is a highly desirable facility that would produce huge numbers of elementary particles known as Higgs bosons and allow the properties of these particles to be pre- Muon colliders cisely determined. A Higgs factory based on a conventional linear accelerator that collides come a step closer electrons and positrons (the antiparticles of electrons) would have to be 10–20 kilometres 3 Robert D. Ryne long . But one based on a circular muon col- lider would require a circumference of only Particle colliders that use elementary particles called muons about 0.3 km (ref. 4). In another example, if could outperform conventional colliders, while requiring muons could be stored in a racetrack config- much smaller facilities. Muon cooling, a milestone on the road uration that has long, straight sections, the decay of the muons in these sections would to these muon colliders, has now been achieved. See p.53 produce intense neutrino beams. Such a facil- ity, called a neutrino factory, would shed light on the mysteries of neutrinos and on physics “SMASH! Colossal colliders are unlocking the electrons (go.nature.com/3twyjba). This fact beyond the standard model. secrets of the universe.” The cover story of has ramifications for the size, and therefore Before a neutrino factory or a muon collider the 16 April 1990 issue of Time magazine dis- cost, of colliders, and for the energy that can can exist, scientists must learn how to manip- cussed giant particle accelerators, including be reached in their particle collisions (and thus ulate muon beams.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 TARGETRY and PION PRODUCTION
    Chapter 4 TARGETRY AND PION PRODUCTION Contents 4.1 Target and Collection Optimization for Muon Colliders . 149 4.1.1 BasicDescription............................ 149 4.1.2 Target Region Studies . 153 4.1.3 PionandMuonCollection....................... 170 4.1.4 Conclusions............................... 183 4.2 DesignStudiesofCaptureMagnetSystems........... 184 4.2.1 Introduction.............................. 184 4.2.2 TheCaptureSolenoidSystem..................... 184 4.2.3 Water-CooledBitterSolenoidInsert................. 185 4.2.4 Superconducting Outsert Solenoid . 187 4.2.5 TheTransferSolenoidSystem..................... 188 4.1 Target and Collection Optimization for Muon Col- liders 4.1.1 Basic Description To achieve adequate luminosity in a muon collider it is necessary to produce and collect large numbers of muons. The basic method starts with a proton beam impinging on a thick target 149 150 CHAPTER 4. TARGETRY AND PION PRODUCTION (one to two interaction lengths) followed by a long solenoid which collects muons resulting mainly from pion decay. Because of their short lifetime muons must be generated by a single proton pulse for each new acceleration cycle. Production and collection of pions and their decay muons must be optimized while keeping in mind limitations of target integrity and of the technology of magnets and debuncher cavities. Early estimates of muon yield, based on conventional lithium lens and quadrupole magnet collection methods, indicated that roughly 1000 protons are needed for every muon delivered to the collider rings [1]. This results from inherent limitations in the momentum acceptance of these systems (typically less than ±5 percent) which causes most (potential) muons produced to be wasted. Motivated by neutrino beamline experience, a solenoid collection scheme for pions has been suggested [2].
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Collider. a Path to the Future?
    Muon Collider. A Path to the Future? Daniel Schulte∗ CERN, Geneva, Switzerland E-mail: [email protected] Jean-Pierre Delahaye CERN, Geneva, Switzerland Marcella Diemoz INFN, Sezione di Roma, Roma, Italy Ken Long Imperial College London Bruno Mansoulié CEA, IRFU, France Nadia Pastrone INFN, Sezione di Torino, Torino, Italy Lenny Rivkin EPFL and PSI, Switzerland Alexander Skrinsky BINP, Russia Andrea Wulzer CERN, Geneva, Switzerland LPTP, EPFL, Switzerland and University of Padova, Italy A muon collider would be both a precision and a powerful discovery machine, because it can offer collisions of point-like particles at very high energies, strongly exceeding the energy reach of other lepton colliders. It can even match the discovery of a proton collider with much higher energy, since the muon collision energy is fully available at constituent level unlike for the protons. However, the need for high luminosity faces technical challenges which arise from the short muon lifetime at rest and the difficulty of producing large numbers of muons in bunches with small emittance. Addressing these challenges requires the development of innovative concepts and demanding technologies. In view of the potential importance of muon colliders for the future of high-energy physics it is timely to start an R&D programme now. European Physical Society Conference on High Energy Physics - EPS-HEP2019 - 10-17 July, 2019 Ghent, Belgium ∗Speaker. c Copyright owned by the author(s) under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). https://pos.sissa.it/ Muon Collider Daniel Schulte 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 12.2 Muon Colliders [Ref
    12-16 12.2 Muon Colliders [Ref. p. 12-20 12.2 Muon Collider S.D. Holmes, V.D. Shiltsev Both e+e− and µ+µ− colliders have been proposed as possible candidates for a lepton collider to complement and extend the reach of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. The physics program that could be pursued by a new lepton collider (e+e− or μ+μ−) with sufficient luminosity would include understanding the mechanism behind mass generation and electroweak symmetry breaking; searching for, and possibly discovering, supersymmetric particles; and hunting for signs of extra spacetime dimensions and quantum gravity. However, the appropriate energy reach for such a collider is currently unknown, and will only be determined following initial physics results at the LHC. It is entirely possible that such results will indicate that a lepton collider with a collision energy well in excess of 1 TeV will be required to illuminate the physics uncovered at LHC. Such a requirement would require consideration of muons as the lepton of choice for such a collider. The lifetime of the muon, 2 μs in the muon rest frame, is just long enough to allow acceleration to high energy before the muon decays into an electron, a muon-type neutrino and an electron-type antineutrino ( ). However, constructing and operating a muon based collider with useable luminosity requires− surmounting− significant technical challenges associated with the production, capture, cooling, acceleration, → and ̅storage of muons in the required quantities and with appropriate phase space densitites. Over the last decade there has been significant progress in developing the concepts and technologies needed to produce, capture, cool, and accelerate muon beams with high intensities of the order of O (1021) muons/year.
    [Show full text]
  • Positron Driven Muon Source for a Muon Collider: Recent Developments ∗ M.E
    10th Int. Particle Accelerator Conf. IPAC2019, Melbourne, Australia JACoW Publishing ISBN: 978-3-95450-208-0 doi:10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2019-MOZZPLS2 POSITRON DRIVEN MUON SOURCE FOR A MUON COLLIDER: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS ∗ M.E. Biaginiy, M. Antonelli, M. Boscolo, O. R. Blanco-Garcia, A. Ciarma, A. Giribono, S. Guiducci, C. Vaccarezza, A. Variola, INFN-LNF, 00044 Frascati, Italy M. Bauce, F. Collamati, G. Cesarini, R. Li Voti, INFN-Roma1, 00185 Roma, Italy A. Bacci, INFN-MI, 20133 Milano, Italy P. Raimondi, S. Liuzzo, ESRF, 38043 Grenoble, France I. Chaikovska, R. Chehab, IN2P3-LAL, 91440 Orsay, France N. Pastrone, INFN-TO, 10125 Torino, Italy D. Lucchesi, Padova University, 35121 Padova, Italy Abstract and reduce losses. Moreover, one complete cycle must ac- + The design of a future multi-TeV µ collider needs new commodate enough time for the e production and damping, ideas to overcome the technological challenges related to µ in the main Positron Ring (PR) or in a dedicated Damping production, cooling, accumulation and acceleration. In this Ring (DR). Damping time must be compatible with a rea- paper an upgraded layout of a e+ driven µ source, known as sonable amount of synchrotron power emitted, ranging from 10 msec in a 5 GeV DR to 80 msec in a 45 GeV PR. This the Low EMittance Muon Accelerator (LEMMA) concept + developed at INFN-LNF, is presented. In this new scheme time is needed even in case it is possible to recuperate the e the e+ beam, stored in a ring with high energy acceptance bunches “spent” in the µ production which, after interacting and low emittance, is extracted and driven to a multi-target with the targets, are strongly affected and have a degraded system, to produce µ pairs at threshold.
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Collider Design
    Presented at 3rd Int'l Conference on Physics Potential and Development of mu+ mu- Colliders, SLAC-PUB-9921 12/13/1995-12/16/1995, San Francisco, CA, USA acc-phys/9604001 MUON COLLIDER DESIGN R. Palmer1,2, A. Sessler3, A. Skrinsky4, A. Tollestrup5, A. Baltz1, S. Caspi3, P. Chen2, W-H. Cheng3, Y. Cho6, D. Cline7, E. Courant1, R. Fernow1, J. Gallardo1, A. Garren3,7, H. Gordon1, M. Green3, R. Gupta1, A. Hershcovitch1, C. Johnstone5, S. Kahn1, H. Kirk1, T. Kycia1, Y. Lee1, D. Lissauer1, A. Luccio1, A. McInturff3, F. Mills5, N. Mokhov5, G. Morgan1, D. Neuffer5, K-Y. Ng5, R. Noble5, J. Norem6, B. Norum8, K. Oide 9, Z. Parsa1, V. Polychronakos1, M. Popovic5, P. Rehak1, T. Roser1, R. Rossmanith10, R. Scanlan3, L. Schachinger3, G. Silvestrov4, I. Stumer1, D. Summers11, M. Syphers1, H. Takahashi1, Y. Torun1,12, D. Trbojevic1, W. Turner3, A. Van Ginneken5, T. Vsevolozhskaya4, R. Weggel13, E. Willen1, W. Willis1,14, D. Winn15, J. Wurtele16, Y. Zhao1 1) Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973-5000, USA 2) Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford, CA 94309, USA 3) Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA 4) BINP, RU-630090 Novosibirsk, Russia 5) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL 60510, USA 6) Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439-4815, USA 7) Center for Advanced Accelerators, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1547,USA 8) University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22901, USA 9) KEK, Tsukuba-shi, Ibaraki-Ken 305, Japan 10) DESY, Hamburg, Germany 11) University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS 38677, USA 12) SUNY, Stony Brook, NY 11974, USA 13) Francis Bitter National Magnet Laboratory, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA 14) Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA 15) Fairfield University, Fairfield, CT 06430-5195, USA 16) UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-7300, USA Work supported in part by Department of Energy Contract DE-AC03-76SF00515 Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94309, USA 2 Abstract.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 ABSTRACT PHYSICS VALIDATION STUDIES for MUON COLLIDER DETECTOR BACKGROUND SIMULATIONS Aaron Owen Morris, M.S. Department of Ph
    1 ABSTRACT PHYSICS VALIDATION STUDIES FOR MUON COLLIDER DETECTOR BACKGROUND SIMULATIONS Aaron Owen Morris, M.S. Department of Physics Northern Illinois University, 2011 David Hedin, Director Muon colliders are under consideration as a possible important future energy- frontier accelerator. A muon collider could be built as a circular accelerator into the TeV energy range as a result of the reduced synchrotron radiation expected from the larger rest mass of muons. Unlike existing lepton (electron/positron) colliders, muons decay with a 2.2 µs lifetime. These decays will produce very energetic electrons off of the beam reference orbit which can generate detector backgrounds that can affect the physics. The main backgrounds include electrons from muon decays, synchrotron radiation from the decay electrons, hadrons produced by photonuclear interactions, coherent and incoherent beam-beam pair-production, and Bethe-Heitler muon production. We will discuss simulation results in terms of observed physics processes in G4beamline. i NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNVIERSITY DE KALB, ILLINOIS 2011 PHYSICS VALIDATION STUDIES FOR MUON COLLIDER DETECTOR BACKGROUND SIMULATIONS BY AARON OWEN MORRIS © 2011 Aaron Owen Morris A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS Thesis Director: David Hedin, Ph.D. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank the many people who made this research possible. I would especially like to thank my advisor, David Hedin, for getting me on this project. Likewise, I would like to thank my collaborators Steve Kahn, Mary Anne Cummings, and Tom Roberts at Muons, Inc. and Joseph Kozminski at Lewis University and Chason Zacher at NIU.
    [Show full text]
  • Backgrounds and Detector Issues at a Muon Collider 
    Backgrounds and Detector Issues at a Muon Collider S. Geer Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, P.O. Box 500, Batavia, Il 60510 ABSTRACT environment (maybe it can't !). This second problem was con- sidered in Refs. [3, 4], was subsequently the subject of a working Backgrounds arising from muon decay at a 4 TeV muon col- sub-group [5] at Snowmass, and is the subject of this paper. lider are summarized, and some implicationsfor a muon collider In the following we consider a 2+2 TeV muon collider with detector are discussed. Ideas on how to cope with the signi®cant 12 10 two bunches of 2 muons per bunch, a luminosity of background levels are also described. 35 2 1 ? =3 10 cm s , mm, and a beam-beam interaction re- gion 3 mm long and 3 m radial rms. The time between bunch- I. INTRODUCTION bunch crossings is about 10 s. In Section II a summary of our current understanding of the background ¯uxes is presented. In The physics case for a multi-TeV lepton collider has been ex- Section III some general detector considerations are discussed. tensively studied [1]. It is generally believed that new physics Sections IV and V discuss the background implications for ver- associated with electroweak symmetry breaking will manifest it- tex and outer tracking detectors, together with some ideas for self at or below the few TeV scale. If this new physics gives rise trackers that have been discussed at Snowmass and are worthy of to new particles (e.g. SUSY,technicolor, extended gauge groups further consideration.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics Opportunities for the Fermilab Booster Replacement
    FNAL Pub No. goes here Physics Opportunities for the Fermilab Booster Replacement John Arrington,1 Joshua Barrow,2 Brian Batell,3 Robert Bernstein,4 S. J. Brice,4 Ray Culbertson,4 Patrick deNiverville,5 Jeff Eldred,4 Angela Fava,4 Laura Fields,6 Alex 7 4 8 4, 4, 9 Friedland, Andrei Gaponenko, Stefania Gori, Roni Harnik, ∗ Richard J Hill, Daniel M. Kaplan,10 Kevin J. Kelly,4 Tom Kobilarcik,4 Gordan Krnjaic,4 Gabriel Lee,11, 12, 13 B. R. Littlejohn,10 W. C. Louis,5 Pedro Machado,4 William M. Morse,14 David Neuffer,4 Zarko Pavlovic,4 William Pellico,4 Ryan Plestid,4, 9 Maxim Pospelov,15 Eric Prebys,16 Yannis K. Semertzidis,17, 18 M. H. Shaevitz,19 P. Snopok,10 Rex Tayloe,20 R. T. Thornton,5 Oleksandr Tomalak,4, 9 M. Toups,4 Nhan Tran,4 Richard Van de Water,5 Katsuya Yonehara,4 Jacob Zettlemoyer,4 Yi-Ming Zhong,21 Robert Zwaska,4 and Anna Mazzacane4 1Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA 2The University of Tennessee at Knoxville, Department of Physics and Astronomy, 1408 Circle Drive, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA 3University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 4Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL, 60510, USA 5Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545 6Notre Dame 7SLAC 8Department of Physics and Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA 9University of Kentucky, KY, 40506, USA 10Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616, USA 11Department of Physics, LEPP, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA 12Department of Physics, Korea
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Collider Design R
    DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi• bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer• ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom• mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. MUON COLLIDER DESIGN R. Palmer1'2, A. Sessler3, A. Skrinsky4, A. ToUestrup5, A. Baltz1, S. Caspi3, P. Chen2, W-H. Cheng3, Y. Cho6, D. Cline7, E. Courant1, R. Fernow1, J. Gallardo1, A. Garren3'7, H. Gordon1, M. Green3, R. Gupta1, A. Hershcovitch1, C. Johnstone5, S. Kahn1, H. Kirk1, T. Kycia1, Y. Lee1, D. Lissauer1, A. Luccio1, A. Mclnturfl3, F. Mills5, N. Mokhov5, G. Morgan1, D. Neuffer5'8, K-Y. Ng5, R. Noble5, J. Norem6, B. Norum9, K. Oide 10, Z. Parsa1, V. Polychronakos1, M. Popovic5, P. Rehak1, T. Roser1, R. Rossmanith11, R. Scanlan3, L. Schachinger3, G. Silvestrov4,1. Stumer1, D. Summers12, M. Syphers1, H. Takahashi1, Y. Torun1'13, D. Trbojevic1, W. Turner3, A. Van Ginneken5, T. Vsevolozhskaya4, R. Weggel14, E. Willen1, W. Willis1-15, D.
    [Show full text]
  • Muon Collider - Open Questions and New Ideas
    Muon Collider - Open Questions and New Ideas July 20, 2020 Donatella Lucchesi University of Padova And INFN P. Andreetto, N. Bartosik, A. Bertolin, L. Buonincontri, M. Casarsa, F. Collamati, C. Curatolo, A. Ferrari, A. Ferrari, A. Gianelle, A. Mereghetti, N. Mokhov, M.Palmer, N. Pastrone, C. Riccardi, P. Sala, L. Sestini, I. Vai Muon Collider Collaboration q June 19, 2020 the Eu Strategy updated was published, where at page 14en, we read: […] In addition to the high field magnets the accelerator R&D roadmap could contain: an international design study for a muon collider, as it represents a unique opportunity to achieve a multi-TeV energy domain beyond the reach of e+e– colliders, and potentially within a more compact circular tunnel than for a hadron collider. The biggest challenge remains to produce an intense beam of cooled muons, but novel ideas are being explored;[…] q To facilitate the implementation of the EU Strategy the CERN Laboratory Directors Group on July 2nd: § Agreed to start building the collaboration for international muon collider design study. § Daniel Schulte appointed ad interim project leader, Nadia Pastrone, Lenny Rivkin and Daniel Schulte will collect MoUs. q Scope: • develop a baseline concept for a muon collider at centre-of-mass energy ranges: 3-10 TeV or above • identify an R&D path toward a conceptual design; • design a demonstrator. International Muon Collider Collaboration kick-off virtual meeting on July 3rd https://indico.cern.ch/event/930508/ Energy Frontier Workshop - Donatella Lucchesi July 20, 2020
    [Show full text]