<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Decision for the LHC: 1 Inverse fb at 7 TeV or Bust!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:44:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kunterbunter Kosmos kompakt &#171; Skyweek Zwei Punkt Null</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59665</link>
		<dc:creator>Kunterbunter Kosmos kompakt &#171; Skyweek Zwei Punkt Null</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 02:52:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59665</guid>
		<description>[...] ist auch das erste Paper des CMS-Detektors über die Kollisionen von Ende 2009 eingereicht worden. (Cosmic Variance 29.1., Nature Blog, Science Blogs 1., ScienceInsider, New Scientist Blog 2., Collider Blog, Physics [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] ist auch das erste Paper des CMS-Detektors über die Kollisionen von Ende 2009 eingereicht worden. (Cosmic Variance 29.1., Nature Blog, Science Blogs 1., ScienceInsider, New Scientist Blog 2., Collider Blog, Physics [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marco</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59664</link>
		<dc:creator>Marco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 11:48:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59664</guid>
		<description>Actually Steve Myers said something even scarier in his summary of summaries.
LHC will run until 1fb-1 of integrated luminosity or until end of 2011, whichever comes first. Then a long shutdown of 18-24 months to fix all the splices (the number of 18-24 months is mentioned around minute 61:46 of the second part
of the video tape). So no 14 TeV running until late 2013 or 2014.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually Steve Myers said something even scarier in his summary of summaries.<br />
LHC will run until 1fb-1 of integrated luminosity or until end of 2011, whichever comes first. Then a long shutdown of 18-24 months to fix all the splices (the number of 18-24 months is mentioned around minute 61:46 of the second part<br />
of the video tape). So no 14 TeV running until late 2013 or 2014.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59663</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:24:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59663</guid>
		<description>Thank you John for posting this, and sorry for being a brick on your back. For interested readers, the news made Yahoo&#039;s front page today:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100203/sc_nm/us_science_cern</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you John for posting this, and sorry for being a brick on your back. For interested readers, the news made Yahoo&#8217;s front page today:</p>
<p><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100203/sc_nm/us_science_cern" rel="nofollow">http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100203/sc_nm/us_science_cern</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59662</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59662</guid>
		<description>Here s the official announcement from Steve Myers at CERN.   The key here is &quot;18-24 months&quot;.  what is the stopping criterion?  I am sure someone will ask...


Better in the long run

Last week, the Chamonix workshop once again proved its worth as a place where all the stakeholders in the LHC can come together, take difficult decisions and reach a consensus on important issues for the future of particle physics. The most important decision we reached last week is to run the LHC for 18 to 24 months at a collision energy of 7 TeV (3.5 TeV per beam). After that, we’ll go into a long shutdown in which we’ll do all the necessary work to allow us to reach the LHC’s design collision energy of 14 TeV for the next run. This means that when beams go back into the LHC later this month, we’ll be entering the longest phase of accelerator operation in CERN’s history, scheduled to take us into summer or autumn 2011.

What led us to this conclusion? Firstly, the LHC is unlike any previous CERN machine. Because it is a cryogenic facility, each run is accompanied by lengthy cool-down and warm-up phases. For that reason, CERN’s traditional ‘run through summer and shutdown for winter’ operational model had already been brought into question. Furthermore, we’ve known for some time that work is needed to prepare the LHC for running at energies significantly higher than the 7 TeV collision energy we’ve chosen for the first physics run. The latest data show that while we can run the LHC at 7 TeV without risk to the machine, running it at higher energy would require more work in the tunnel. These facts led us to a simple choice: run for a few months now and programme successive short shutdowns to step up in energy, or run for a long time now and schedule a single long shutdown before allowing 14 TeV (7 TeV per beam).

A long run now is the right decision for the LHC and for the experiments. It gives the machine people the time necessary to prepare carefully for the work that’s needed before allowing 14 TeV. And for the experiments, 18 to 24 months will bring enough data across all the potential discovery areas to firmly establish the LHC as the world’s foremost facility for high-energy particle physics.

I’d like to invite you all to the summary of the Chamonix workshop on Friday 5 February at 14:00 in the Main auditorium. See: http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=83135

Steve Myers</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here s the official announcement from Steve Myers at CERN.   The key here is &#8220;18-24 months&#8221;.  what is the stopping criterion?  I am sure someone will ask&#8230;</p>
<p>Better in the long run</p>
<p>Last week, the Chamonix workshop once again proved its worth as a place where all the stakeholders in the LHC can come together, take difficult decisions and reach a consensus on important issues for the future of particle physics. The most important decision we reached last week is to run the LHC for 18 to 24 months at a collision energy of 7 TeV (3.5 TeV per beam). After that, we’ll go into a long shutdown in which we’ll do all the necessary work to allow us to reach the LHC’s design collision energy of 14 TeV for the next run. This means that when beams go back into the LHC later this month, we’ll be entering the longest phase of accelerator operation in CERN’s history, scheduled to take us into summer or autumn 2011.</p>
<p>What led us to this conclusion? Firstly, the LHC is unlike any previous CERN machine. Because it is a cryogenic facility, each run is accompanied by lengthy cool-down and warm-up phases. For that reason, CERN’s traditional ‘run through summer and shutdown for winter’ operational model had already been brought into question. Furthermore, we’ve known for some time that work is needed to prepare the LHC for running at energies significantly higher than the 7 TeV collision energy we’ve chosen for the first physics run. The latest data show that while we can run the LHC at 7 TeV without risk to the machine, running it at higher energy would require more work in the tunnel. These facts led us to a simple choice: run for a few months now and programme successive short shutdowns to step up in energy, or run for a long time now and schedule a single long shutdown before allowing 14 TeV (7 TeV per beam).</p>
<p>A long run now is the right decision for the LHC and for the experiments. It gives the machine people the time necessary to prepare carefully for the work that’s needed before allowing 14 TeV. And for the experiments, 18 to 24 months will bring enough data across all the potential discovery areas to firmly establish the LHC as the world’s foremost facility for high-energy particle physics.</p>
<p>I’d like to invite you all to the summary of the Chamonix workshop on Friday 5 February at 14:00 in the Main auditorium. See: <a href="http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=83135" rel="nofollow">http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=83135</a></p>
<p>Steve Myers</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59661</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 10:06:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59661</guid>
		<description>The official announcement was just released minutes ago. While the plans are to run at 7 TeV, the duration to run at this collision energy from this post is misinformed. This is why I feared reporting these plans before they became official.

It is NOT true that &quot;In the end the decision is to ... accumulate a substantial amount of physics-quality data: 1 inverse femtobarn, or stop by the end f 2011, whichever comes first.&quot;

In fact, the decision is for the LHC to run from 18 months to 24 months at 7 TeV, even through the winter. After that, there will be a long shutdown. There is no mention of a goal for how much integrated luminosity.

The mistake is minor to the outside world, but there can be real high-energy physicists (who care very much about these details) reading these blogs and it&#039;s important to remain accurate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The official announcement was just released minutes ago. While the plans are to run at 7 TeV, the duration to run at this collision energy from this post is misinformed. This is why I feared reporting these plans before they became official.</p>
<p>It is NOT true that &#8220;In the end the decision is to &#8230; accumulate a substantial amount of physics-quality data: 1 inverse femtobarn, or stop by the end f 2011, whichever comes first.&#8221;</p>
<p>In fact, the decision is for the LHC to run from 18 months to 24 months at 7 TeV, even through the winter. After that, there will be a long shutdown. There is no mention of a goal for how much integrated luminosity.</p>
<p>The mistake is minor to the outside world, but there can be real high-energy physicists (who care very much about these details) reading these blogs and it&#8217;s important to remain accurate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul mann</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59660</link>
		<dc:creator>paul mann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 23:18:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59660</guid>
		<description>lhc fan &#039;latter&#039; pb-pb collisions means there is no date schedule yet? ive been reading through those papers but couldnt find the info... Do you have more precise information on this detail? i presume they will have to retrain the macchine as all the parameters for pb-pb, mass, charge etc. are different? thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>lhc fan &#8216;latter&#8217; pb-pb collisions means there is no date schedule yet? ive been reading through those papers but couldnt find the info&#8230; Do you have more precise information on this detail? i presume they will have to retrain the macchine as all the parameters for pb-pb, mass, charge etc. are different? thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ralph</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59659</link>
		<dc:creator>Ralph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 20:41:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59659</guid>
		<description>Re post 22 - the increase in cross section with energy appears to be somewhat negated (at least for the short term at the LHC) by machine protection - in the short term, the beam current will be limited by how much total stored energy they are willing to have in the machine, so lower proton energy means more protons.

Does anyone have figures for production rates v. proton energy at LHC that assumes a fixed total beam energy and takes into account changes in possible optics at different energies?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re post 22 &#8211; the increase in cross section with energy appears to be somewhat negated (at least for the short term at the LHC) by machine protection &#8211; in the short term, the beam current will be limited by how much total stored energy they are willing to have in the machine, so lower proton energy means more protons.</p>
<p>Does anyone have figures for production rates v. proton energy at LHC that assumes a fixed total beam energy and takes into account changes in possible optics at different energies?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lac Léman</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59658</link>
		<dc:creator>Lac Léman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:28:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59658</guid>
		<description>The almost &quot;official release&quot; is  Steve Myers &lt;a href=&quot;http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=61&amp;sessionId=11&amp;resId=1&amp;materialId=slides&amp;confId=67839&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Summary (slide 9,10)&lt;/a&gt; of the&lt;a href=&quot;http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&amp;confId=67839&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;LHC Performance Workshop - Chamonix 2010&lt;/a&gt;.

On Friday 5th :&lt;a href=&quot;http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&amp;confId=83135&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Summary of the LHC Performance Workshop - Chamonix 2010&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The almost &#8220;official release&#8221; is  Steve Myers <a href="http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=61&amp;sessionId=11&amp;resId=1&amp;materialId=slides&amp;confId=67839" rel="nofollow">Summary (slide 9,10)</a> of the<a href="http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&amp;confId=67839" rel="nofollow">LHC Performance Workshop &#8211; Chamonix 2010</a>.</p>
<p>On Friday 5th :<a href="http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&amp;confId=83135" rel="nofollow">Summary of the LHC Performance Workshop &#8211; Chamonix 2010</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cochrane</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59657</link>
		<dc:creator>cochrane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59657</guid>
		<description>Important to say, that the LHC is pp and the Tevatron is ppbar, so. As long as there is no lucky discovery like a Z&#039; or t&#039; (and even then) the cross section for interesting processes at the Tevatron is way higher then at a 7 TeV LHC. W mass, top physics, EW, Higgs searches, all dominated still by the Tevatron....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Important to say, that the LHC is pp and the Tevatron is ppbar, so. As long as there is no lucky discovery like a Z&#8217; or t&#8217; (and even then) the cross section for interesting processes at the Tevatron is way higher then at a 7 TeV LHC. W mass, top physics, EW, Higgs searches, all dominated still by the Tevatron&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian137</title>
		<link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/#comment-59656</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian137</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 02:59:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/?p=3973#comment-59656</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i></i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
