Breadth and Ownership of the HEP Program
Is it important to maintain breadth in the HEP program?
Everyone in a physics department understands why it is desirable to have a strong group working at the LHC, but it is also true that smaller scale efforts in areas outside the energy frontier can have a footprint at a University proportionately larger than the investment. Smaller scale endeavors can bear a stamp of University "ownership" and even hold a presence in a department in different way than large-scale efforts at remote facilities.
Comments
The focus of the HEP program should be on doing the best possible science. Many of the most important particle physics questions (neutrino oscillations, double beta decay, dark matter, dark energy, etc.) are best addressed at facilities other than LHC. A program that includes only an LHC effort is too narrow, and is likely to miss out on many of the most important discoveries of the next decade or two.
Posted by: Jon Thaler | October 31, 2006 05:34 PM
I agree with Jon's statements, and would add that in recent years univeristy groups have been strongly encouraged by funding agencies to pool their resources into one LHC and/or ILC effort. It is clear that this makes sense in terms of getting the most for an investment. However, this amalgamation can squeeze out initiatives away from the HE frontier and make the particle physics program at a university too narrow and monolithic. The only real solution, however, is better funding for HEP and a balanced view by advisory bodies.
Posted by: Michael Schmitt | November 12, 2006 08:39 PM