source: Backup NB/Talks/MEMPHYSetal/MEMPHYS EOI/CAMPAGNE_MEMPHYS-EOI/conclusion.tex @ 416

Last change on this file since 416 was 387, checked in by campagne, 16 years ago
File size: 4.7 KB
Line 
1\section{Schedule}
2
3The following table presents an optimal schedule for the
4European project taking into account the key date of the completion
5of the new tunnel excavation around 2010. Soon after, CERN will have to decide
6its post-LHC strategy, while nuclear physicists will hopefully choose CERN as
7the host laboratory for the EURISOL project.
8We would also like to stress that
9the schedule of the neutrino beams from CERN is not constraining the
10start of the other non accelerator items of research.
11\begin{figure}[htb]
12\vspace{4cm}
13\epsfig{figure=./figures/sch_new.eps,width=\textwidth,angle=0}
14%\epsfig{figure=./figures/sch.eps,width=0.6\textwidth,angle=-90}
15\end{figure}
16
17\newpage
18\section{Conclusions}
19In conclusion a megaton scale
20Water \v{C}erenkov detector at the Frejus site will address a series of
21fundamental issues :
22\begin{itemize}
23\item explore the nucleon decay with a sensitivity an order of magnitude
24better than current limits  on different channels
25\item in the case of a galactic or near galactic supernova explosion,
26track the explosion in unprecedented detail providing at the same time
27information on the third oscillation angle beyond what is currently
28achievable in terrestrial experiments
29\item provide a trigger for supernova explosions
30for other astroparticle detectors for supernova exploding in a range of up to
313 Mpc, knowing that 1 supernova explosion per year is expected
32within a distance of
3310 Mpc
34\item provide a 4 sigma detection of diffuse supernova
35neutrinos after 2-3 years of operation
36\item  in association with a superbeam and betabeam from CERN
37obtain a sensitivity to the third oscillation angle down to   
38$\sin^2(2\theta_{13}) \sim 10^{-4}$ and detect maximal CP violation at 3 sigmas 
39for $\sin^2(2\theta_{13})$ larger than $3\cdot 10^{-4}$
40\end{itemize}
41A series of other physics topics, not mentioned here, will also be adressed\,:
42for instance neutrino physics, as well as
43interdisciplinary topics in rock mechanics, geobiology, geochemistry,
44geohydrology, geomechanics and geophysics that could benefit
45from a large scale underground excavation.
46
47We believe that our project compares favorably with other similar
48projects around the world, and should be seriously considered as a
49very attractive major European project after the LHC. The proposed
50strategy is thus the following: a megaton-scale detector could be
51installed at Fr{\'e}jus and start physics in 2018. It would start
52proton decay and supernova searches, which would last several
53decades. As soon as the neutrino beam from SPL is available,
54neutrino oscillation studies can start, and the advent of a beta beam
55would increase significantly the performances of the detector.
56
57The signatories are eager to see the MEMPHYS project
58come to life. They are aware that the actual location of a megaton detector
59will depend on many issues, in particular the share of future big equipments
60(such as linear colliders) worldwide. They are prepared to do the proposed
61physics in any country, and have already set up collaborations with their
62japanese and american colleagues. An inter-regional yearly (US-Europe-Japan)
63workshop series NNN-XX (Next generation of Nucleon decay and Neutrino Physics
64detectors) organizes and structures this convergence of interests.
65The authors of this document hope however that Europe will not
66miss a unique opportunity to keep a leading role in the underground physics,
67complementary to the Gran Sasso.
68
69Furthermore, it is obvious that the current proposal is complementary
70to other proposals for large undergrounds detectors using
71liquid scintillator (LENA) or liquid argon technologies (GLACIER)
72in order to pursue the same physics goals.
73The advantage of the water \v{C}erenkov technique lies on the possibility
74to instrument very large masses, while liquid argon detectors
75can have an excellent resolution and liquid scintillators
76very low detection thresholds for neutrino physics.
77On the technology side the water \v{C}erenkov seems a straightforward
78extension of the existing techniques while for instance the liquid argon 
79option presents daring technological challenges. The realisation of the
80complementarities in physics potential and the common R\&D issues
81(large underground caverns and containers: excavation issues and safety,
82large area low cost photodetection and electronics,
83purification and background issues, interdisciplinary issues, etc.)
84prompted the proponents of the above solutions to start federating
85their efforts in order to  exploit the possible synergies in view of
86common future proposals to the European Union ~\cite{Laguna}
87and elsewhere.   
88
89
90
91\section {Acknowledgements}
92
93The authors would like to thank the engineers of the IN2P3-CNRS laboratories,
94especially Ch. de La Taille (LAL) and J. Pouthas (IPNO),
95for their decisive contributions.
96
97
Note: See TracBrowser for help on using the repository browser.