The Path to an International Linear Collider Barry

The Path to an International Linear Collider Barry Barish TRIUMPF Seminar 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF

Features of e+e- Collisions • elementary particles • well-defined – energy, – angular momentum • uses full COM energy • produces particles democratically • can mostly fully reconstruct events 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 2

A Rich History as a Powerful Probe 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 3

The Energy Frontier 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 4

The Linear Collider 2001: The Snowmass Workshop participants produced the statement recommending construction of a Linear Collider to overlap LHC running. 2001: HEPAP, ECFA, ACFA all issued reports endorsing the LC as the next major world project, to be international from the start 2002: The Consultative Group on High-Energy Physics of the OECD Global Science Forum executive summary stated as the first of its Principal Conclusions: “The Consultative Group concurs with the world-wide consensus of the scientific community that a high-energy electron-positron collider is the next facility on the Road Map. “There should be a significant period of concurrent running of the LHC and the LC, requiring the LC to start operating before 2015. Given the long lead times for decision-making and for construction, consultations among interested countries should begin at a suitably-chosen time in the near 15 -April-05 future. ” TRIUMPF 5

“Consensus Document” April 2003: signed now by ~2700 physicists worldwide. : Understanding Matter, Energy, Space and Time: The Case for the Linear Collider A summary of the scientific case for the e+ e- Linear Collider, representing a broad consensus of the particle physics community. http: //sbhepnt. physics. sunysb. edu/~grannis/ilcsc/lc_consensus. pdf ) (To join this list, go to http: //blueox. uoregon. edu/~lc/wwstudy/ ) 6 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF

Why a Te. V Scale e+e- Accelerator? • Two parallel developments over the past few years (the science & the technology) – The precision information from LEP and other data have pointed to a low mass Higgs; Understanding electroweak symmetry breaking, whether supersymmetry or an alternative, will require precision measurements. – There are strong arguments for the complementarity between a ~0. 5 -1. 0 Te. V LC and the LHC science. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 7

Electroweak Precision Measurements LEP results strongly point to a low mass Higgs and an energy scale for new physics < 1 Te. V 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 8

Why a Te. V Scale e+e- Accelerator? • Two parallel developments over the past few years (the science & the technology) – The precision information from LEP and other data have pointed to a low mass Higgs; Understanding electroweak symmetry breaking, whether supersymmetry or an alternative, will require precision measurements. – There are strong arguments for the complementarity between a ~0. 5 -1. 0 Te. V LC and the LHC science. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 9

LHC/ILC Complementarity The 500 Ge. V Linear Collider Spin Measurement LHC should discover the Higgs The Higgs must have spin zero The linear collider will measure the spin of any Higgs it can produce. The process e+e– HZ can be used to measure the spin of a 120 Ge. V Higgs particle. The error bars are based on 20 fb– 1 of luminosity at each point. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 10

LHC/ILC Complementarity Extra Dimensions Linear collider New space-time dimensions can be mapped by studying the emission of gravitons into the extra dimensions, together with a photon or jets emitted into the normal dimensions. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 11

Parameters for the ILC • Ecm adjustable from 200 – 500 Ge. V • Luminosity ∫Ldt = 500 fb-1 in 4 years • Ability to scan between 200 and 500 Ge. V • Energy stability and precision below 0. 1% • Electron polarization of at least 80% • The machine must be upgradeable to 1 Te. V 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 12

Linear Collider Concept 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 13

Specific Machine Realizations rf bands: 1. 3 S-band (SLAC linac) 2. 856 GHz 1. 7 cm C-band (JLC-C) 5. 7 GHz 0. 95 cm X-band (NLC/GLC) 11. 4 GHz 0. 42 cm 25 -30 GHz 0. 2 cm (CLIC) GHz l = L-band (TESLA) 3. 7 cm Accelerating structure size is dictated by wavelength of the rf accelerating wave. Wakefields related to structure size; thus so is the difficulty in controlling emittance growth and final luminosity. Ø Bunch spacing, train length related to rf frequency Ø Damping ring design depends on bunch length, hence frequency Frequency dictates many of the design issues for LC 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 14

Which Technology to Chose? – Two alternate designs -- “warm” and “cold” had come to the stage where the show stoppers had been eliminated and the concepts were well understood. – A major step toward a new international machine requires uniting behind one technology, and then make a unified global design based on the recommended technology. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 15

TESLA Concept • The main linacs based on 1. 3 GHz superconducting technology operating at 2 K. • The cryoplant, is of a size comparable to that of the LHC, consisting of seven subsystems strung along the machines every 5 km. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 16

TESLA Cavity • RF accelerator structures consist of close to 21, 000 9 -cell niobium cavities operating at gradients of 23. 8 MV/m (unloaded as well as beam loaded) for 500 Ge. V c. m. operation. • The rf pulse length is 1370 µs and the repetition rate is 5 Hz. At a later stage, the machine energy may be upgraded to 800 Ge. V c. m. by raising the gradient to 35 MV/m. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 17

TESLA Single Tunnel Layout • The TESLA cavities are supplied with rf power in groups of 36 by 572 10 MW klystrons and modulators. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 18

GLC GLC/NLC Concept • The JLC-X and NLC are essentially a unified single design with common parameters • The main linacs are based on 11. 4 GHz, room temperature copper technology. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 19

GLC GLC/NLC Concept • The main linacs operate at an unloaded gradient of 65 MV/m, beam-loaded to 50 MV/m. • The rf systems for 500 Ge. V c. m. consist of 4064 75 MW Periodic Permanent Magnet (PPM) klystrons arranged in groups of 8, followed by 2032 SLED-II rf pulse compression systems 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 20

GLC / NLC Concept NLC • Two parallel tunnels for each linac. • For 500 Ge. V c. m. energy, rf systems only installed in the first 7 km of each linac. • Upgrade to 1 Te. V by filling the rest of each linac, for a total two-linac length of 28 km. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 21

ICFA/ILCSC Evaluation of the Technologies The Report Validates the Readiness of L-band X-band Concepts 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 22

TRC R 1 Issues L-Band: Feasibility for 500 Ge. V operation had been demonstrated, but 800 Ge. V with gradient of 35 MV/m requires a full cryomodule (9 or 12 cavities) and shown to have acceptable quench and breakdown rates with acceptable dark currents. X-band: Demonstrate low group velocity accelerating structures with acceptable gradient, breakdown and trip rates, tuning manifolds and input couplers. Demonstrate the modulator, klystron, SLED-II pulse compressors at the full power required. R 1 issues pretty much satisfied by mid-2004 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 23

The Charge to the International Technology Recommendation Panel General Considerations The International Technology Recommendation Panel (the Panel) should recommend a Linear Collider (LC) technology to the International Linear Collider Steering Committee (ILCSC). On the assumption that a linear collider construction commences before 2010 and given the assessment by the ITRC that both TESLA and JLC-X/NLC have rather mature conceptual designs, the choice should be between these two designs. If necessary, a solution incorporating C-band technology should be evaluated. Note -- We interpreted our charge as being to recommend a technology, rather than choose a design 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 24

International Technology Review Panel 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 25

ITRP Schedule of Events • Six Meetings Tutorial & Planning – RAL (Jan 27, 28 2004) – DESY (April 5, 6 2004) – SLAC (April 26, 27 2004) Site Visits – KEK (May 25, 26 2004) – Caltech (June 28, 29, 30 2004) – Korea (August 11, 12, 13) Recommendation – ILCSC / ICFA (Aug 19) – ILCSC (Sept 20) 15 -April-05 Deliberations Exec. Summary Final Report TRIUMPF 26

Evaluating the Criteria Matrix • We analyzed the technology choice through studying a matrix having six general categories with specific items under each: – – – the scope and parameters specified by the ILCSC; technical issues; cost issues; schedule issues; physics operation issues; and more general considerations that reflect the impact of the LC on science, technology and society • We evaluated each of these categories with the help of answers to our “questions to the proponents, ” internal assignments and reviews, plus our own discussions 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 27

Our Process • We studied and evaluated a large amount of available materials • We made site visits to DESY, KEK and SLAC to listen to presentations on the competing technologies and to see the test facilities first-hand. • We have also heard presentations on both C-band CLIC technologies • We interacted with the community at LC workshops, individually and through various communications we received • We developed a set of evaluation criteria (a matrix) and had each proponent answer a related set of questions to facilitate our evaluations. • We assigned lots of internal homework to help guide our discussions and evaluations 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 28

What that Entailed – We each traveled at least 75, 000 miles – We read approximately 3000 pages – We had constant interactions with the community and with each other – We gave up a good part of our “normal day jobs” for six months – We had almost 100% attendance by all members at all meetings – We worked incredibly hard to “turn over every rock” we could find. from Norbert Holtkamp 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 29

The Recommendation • We recommend that the linear collider be based on superconducting rf technology – This recommendation is made with the understanding that we are recommending a technology, not a design. We expect the final design to be developed by a team drawn from the combined warm and cold linear collider communities, taking full advantage of the experience and expertise of both (from the Executive Summary). – The superconducting technology has several very nice features for application to a linear collider. They follow in part from the 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 30 low rf frequency.

Some Features of SC Technology • The large cavity aperture and long bunch interval reduce the complexity of operations, reduce the sensitivity to ground motion, permit inter-bunch feedback and may enable increased beam current. • The main linac rf systems, the single largest technical cost elements, are of comparatively lower risk. • The construction of the superconducting XFEL free electron laser will provide prototypes and test many aspects of the linac. • The industrialization of most major components of the linac is underway. • The use of superconducting cavities significantly reduces power consumption. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 31

Technology Recommendation • The recommendation was presented to ILCSC & ICFA on August 19 in a joint meeting in Beijing. • ICFA unanimously endorsed the ITRP’s recommendation on August 20 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 32

What’s Next • Organize the ILC effort globally – Coordinate worldwide R & D efforts, in order to demonstrate and improve the performance, reduce the costs, attain the required reliability, etc. – Undertake making a “global design” over the next few years for a machine that can be jointly implemented internationally. – These goals are within reach and we fully expect to have an optimized design within a few years, so that we can undertake building the next great particle accelerator. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 33

Fall 2002: ICFA created the International Linear Collider Steering Committee (ILCSC) to guide the process for building a Linear Collider. Asia, Europe and North America each formed their own regional Steering Groups (Jonathan Dorfan chairs the North America steering group). International Linear Collider Steering Committee Maury Tigner, chair Physics and Detectors Subcommittee (AKA WWS) Jim Brau, David Miller, Hitoshi Yamamoto, co-chairs (est. 1998 by ICFA as free standing group) Global Design Initiative organization Accelerator Subcommittee Greg Loew, chair GDI central team site evaluation Ralph Eichler, chair Satoshi Ozaki, chair (finished) 15 -April-05 Parameters Subcommittee Rolf Heuer, chair (finished) GDI central team director search committee Technology Recommendation Panel Barry Barish, chair (finished) Comunications and Outreach Neil Calder et al Paul Grannis, chair TRIUMPF 34

Starting Points for the ILC Design TESLA TDR 500 Ge. V (800 Ge. V) 33 km 47 km US Options Study 500 Ge. V (1 Te. V) 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 35

Experimental Test Facility - KEK • Prototype Damping Ring for X-band Linear Collider • Development of Beam Instrumentation and Control 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 36

Evaluation: Technical Issues 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 37

TESLA Test Facility Linac e- beam diagnostics undulator photon beam diagnostics 240 Me. V 15 -April-05 bunch compressor superconducting accelerator modules 120 Me. V TRIUMPF e- beam diagnostics laser driven electron gun preaccelerator 16 Me. V 4 Me. V 38

Statement of Funding Agency (FALC) 17 -Sept-04 @ CERN Attendees: Son (Korea); Yamauchi (Japan); Koepke (Germany); Aymar (CERN); Iarocci (CERN Council); Ogawa (Japan); Kim (Korea); Turner (NSF - US); Trischuk (Canada); Halliday (PPARC); Staffin (Do. E – US); Gurtu (India) Guests: Barish (ITRP); Witherell (Fermilab Director, ) “The Funding Agencies praise the clear choice by ICFA. This recommendation will lead to focusing of the global R&D effort for the linear collider and the Funding Agencies look forward to assisting in this process. The Funding Agencies see this recommendation to use superconducting rf technology as a critical step in moving forward to the design of a linear collider. ” FALC is setting up a working group to keep a close liaison with the Global Design Initiative with regard to funding resources. The cooperative engagement of the Funding Agencies on organization, technology choice, timetable is a very strong signal and encouragement. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 39

The Birth of the Global Design Effort Linear Collider Workshop Stanford, CA March-05 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF

ILC Design Issues First Consideration : Physics Reach Energy Reach ILC Parameters Luminosity 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 41

Parameter Space 1010 N nb nom low N lrg Y low P 2 1 2 2 2820 5640 2820 1330 ex, y mm, nm 9. 6, 40 10, 30 12, 80 10, 35 bx, y cm, mm 2, 0. 4 1. 2, 0. 2 1, 0. 4 1, 0. 2 sx, y nm 543, 5. 7 495, 3. 5 495, 8 452, 3. 8 18. 5 10 28. 6 27 % 2. 2 1. 8 2. 4 5. 7 sz mm 300 150 500 200 Pbeam MW 11 11 11 5. 3 1034 2 2 Dy d. BS L 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF Range of parameters design to achieve 2 1034 42

Achieving Maximum Luminosity N 1010 nb nom low N lrg Y low P High L 2 1 2 2820 5640 2820 1330 2820 ex, y mm, nm 9. 6, 40 10, 30 12, 80 10, 35 10, 30 bx, y cm, mm 2, 0. 4 1. 2, 0. 2 1, 0. 4 1, 0. 2 sx, y nm 543, 5. 7 495, 3. 5 495, 8 452, 3. 5 18. 5 10 28. 6 27 22 % 2. 2 1. 8 2. 4 5. 7 7 mm 300 150 500 200 150 Pbeam MW 11 11 11 5. 3 11 L 1034 2 2 4. 9! Dy d. BS sz 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 43

Towards the ILC Baseline Design 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 44

TESLA Cost Estimate 3, 136 M€ 15 -April-05 (no contingency, year 2000) TRIUMPF + ~7000 person years 45

Gradient 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 46

Electro-polishing (Improve surface quality -- pioneering work done at KEK) BCP EP • Several single cell cavities at g > 40 MV/m • 4 nine-cell cavities at ~35 MV/m, one at 40 MV/m • Theoretical Limit 50 MV/m 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 47

single-cell measurements (in nine-cell cavities) Gradient Results from KEK-DESY collaboration must reduce spread (need more statistics) 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 48

New Cavity Shape for Higher Gradient? TESLA Cavity Alternate Shapes • A new cavity shape with a small Hp/Eacc ratio around 35 Oe/(MV/m) must be designed. - Hp is a surface peak magnetic field and Eacc is the electric field gradient on the beam axis. - For such a low field ratio, the volume occupied by magnetic field in the cell must be increased and the magnetic density must be reduced. - This generally means a smaller bore radius. - There are trade-offs (eg. Electropolishing, weak cell-to-cell coupling, etc) 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 49

Gradient vs Length • Higher gradient gives shorter linac – cheaper tunnel / civil engineering – less cavities – (but still need same # klystrons) • Higher gradient needs more refrigeration – ‘cryo-power’ per unit length scales as G 2/Q 0 – cost of cryoplants goes up! 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 50

Klystron Development THALUS CPI TOSHIBA 10 MW 1. 4 ms Multibeam Klystrons ~650 for 500 Ge. V +650 for 1 Te. V upgrade 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 51

Towards the ILC Baseline Design Not cost drivers But can be L performance bottlenecks Many challenges! 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 52

Damping Rings higher Iav smaller circumference (faster kicker) bunch train compression 300 km 20 km 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 53

15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 54

15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 55

15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 56

Beam Delivery System 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 57

Strawman Final Focus 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 58

Parameters of Positron Sources rep rate TESLA TDR # of bunches per pulse # of positrons per bunch # of positrons per pulse 5 Hz 2820 2 · 1010 5. 6 · 1013 NLC 120 Hz 192 0. 75 · 1010 1. 4 · 1012 SLC 120 Hz 1 5 · 1010 DESY positron source 50 Hz 1 1. 5 · 109 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 59

Positron Source • Large amount of charge to produce • Three concepts: – undulator-based (TESLA TDR baseline) – ‘conventional’ – laser Compton based 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 60

Conclusions Remarkable progress in the past two years toward realizing an international linear collider: important R&D on accelerator systems definition of parameters for physics choice of technology start the global design effort funding agencies are engaged v Many major hurdles remain before the ILC becomes a reality (funding, site, international organization, detailed design, …), but there is increasing momentum toward the ultimate goal --- An International Linear Collider. 15 -April-05 TRIUMPF 61