# Presentation: 551111

## Long Baseline Neutrinos(Proton Driver Physics Studies)

- Steve Geer                                            BNL Visit                         November , 2005

- Proton Driver Physics Study Recap  Organization  Conclusions & Status
- Towards the Next Study  Timescale  Ingredients

## Proton Driver Physics Study(Spring 2004 – Spring 2005)

-                                     _Working Groups and Conveners_
- WG1:  Neutrino Oscillations
- 	D. Harris (FNAL), S. Brice (FNAL), W. Winter (Princeton)
- WG2:  Neutrino Interactions
- 	J. Morfin (FNAL), R. Ransome (Rutgers), R. Tayloe (Indiana)
- WG3:  Muons
- 	R. Ray (FNAL), R. Roberts (BU)
- WG4:  Kaons and Pions
- 	H. Nguyen (FNAL), T. Yamanaka (Osaka U.)
- WG5:  Antiprotons
- 	D. Christian (FNAL), M. Mandelkern (UCI)
- WG6:  Tevatron Collider
- 	H. Cheung (FNAL), Penny Kasper (FNAL), P. Ratoff (Lancaster U.)
- WG7  Neutrons
- 	T. Bowles (LANL), G. Greene (ORNL)

- Web Page:    http://protondriver.fnal.gov/

## Proton Driver Scientific Advisory Committee

- Peter Meyers  (Chair)       	Princeton
- Ed Blucher		Chicago
- Gerhard Buchalla		Munich
- John Dainton		UK
- Yves Declais		LyonLance Dixon		SLAC
- Umberto Dosselli		INFN
- Don Geesaman		ANL
- Geoff Greene		ORNL
- Taka Kondo		KEK
- Marvin Marshak		Minnesota
- Bill Molzon		UCI
- Hitoshi Murayama	UC Berkley
- James Siegrist		LBNL
- Anthony Thomas		JLab
- Taku  Yamanaka		Osaka

- Give emerging physics case a critical review
- Help us to reach out to a broad community as we develop a constituency excited by the Proton Driver Physics Program

## Study Conclusions & Status

- Neutrino Oscillation physics provides the main motivation for considering an upgrade to the present Fermilab proton source.
- Other physics can broaden the Proton Driver program (low energy muon experiments emerged as a particularly interesting example)
- The results from the study were presented at the 2005 AspenFermilab PAC meeting ...  and were well received  (Study Report = hep-ex/0509019).
- The PAC were intrigued by the significant added benefit expected from adding a 2nd detector to the NOvA setup ... and requested further study of options for a 2nd generation Proton Driver neutrino oscillation experiment.

## e Event Rates: 5 Years Running

| Expt | Signal | Backgr | Signal | Backgr |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| MINOS | 49.1 | 108 | 6.7 | 109 |
| ICARUS | 31.8 | 69.1 | 4.5 | 70.3 |
| OPERA | 11.2 | 28.3 | 1.6 | 28.6 |
| T2K | 132 | 22.7 | 16.9 | 23.5 |
| NOvA | 186 | 19.7 | 23.0 | 20.7 |
| NOvA+FPD | 716 | 75.6 | 88.6 | 79.5 |
| NuFact nu | 29752 | 44.9 | 4071 | 44.9 |
| NuFact nubar | 7737 | 82.0 | 1116 | 82.0 |

- sin2213 = 0.1    sin2213 = 0.01

- Calculations of W. Winter

- Normal Hierarchy,  = 0

## Determining the Mass Hierarchy

- FPD = Fermilab Proton Driver
- T2K* = T2K + 4MW beam

## Searching for CP Violation

- FPD+NOvA+2nd NOvA

- FPD+New Long Baseline

- FPD+NOvA+T2HK

-   FPD + NOvA

## Setting up the Next Study – Initial Thoughts

- The 2004-2005 study was (I think) a solid start. To some extent we emphasized the impact of the Proton Driver on NOvA. We need now to focus on the options beyond NOvA.
- This is a very busy time for the US neutrino community and the team involved in the continued Proton Driver studies will necessarily evolve ... but it is important that we continue to broadly involve the neutrino community in our studies.
- Rough timescale for pushing things forward _might be_ to aim at setting the study up (charge etc) by Christmas, and then taking about a year to execute the study. We might also think about a workshopin the middle of the study, and I am hoping we can continue to involve the Proton Driver Scientific Advisory Committee.

## Setting up the Next Study – Ingredients

- BNL broad-band proposal using a Fermilab neutrino beam
-        Optimum proton beam energy       LAr  versus  Water-C       Cost Guesstimate
- Off-Axis 2nd Generation Options
-        Optimum proton beam energy       LAr versus Scintillator-based detector       Geometry  (optimum angles and number/type of detectors)       Cost Guesstimate

- Are these the right ingredients ?           Is the list complete ?

- The experimental setups & the related questions studied should include:

## Setting up the Next Study – Comparisons

- Comparison of physics potentials should include:

- Options with big deep underground detectors couple the oscillation physics with other programs ... need to pay attention to this.

- i)  As a function of 13, the ability to establish a finite 13, determine the mass hierarchy, and search for CP violation and, for each measurement, the limiting systematic uncertainties.
- ii) The precision with which each of the oscillation parameters can be measured and the ability to therefore discriminate between neutrino mass models (this needs some thought but progress on this would help sharpen our comparisons and better articulate the case for the future neutrino program).

## Possible Additional Subtopics

- a)  NuMI beamline & targetry evolution with beam intensity (up to and possibly beyond 2 MW)   - see later talk
- Beam bunching and proton economics for muon physics
- c)  Possible evolution from a convention FPD neutrino beam to a Neutrino Factory
- d)   ?????

## Finally ...

- I think participation of the BNL group is important for thesuccess of the continued Proton Driver studies ... and hope thatyou will be willing/eager to help plan and execute what needs
- to be done.