[MUSIC PLAYING]
MODERATOR: Title is New
Horizons in Particle Physics.
Jerry, please.
FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Francis.
Before I began my talk, I want
to say a few personal remarks.
It's a great pleasure to be
here to help celebrate LNS 46.
I entered the lab in 1960 as
a young assistant professor,
and I can say that my work in
my development as a physicist
would not have been
possible without the help
and support that I received
from the laboratory.
The laboratory has
always been a place which
nurtured young
people, and I found
that to be true
when I came here.
And I must say I profited
greatly from that.
I would like to give my
gratitude to many people.
It's impossible to
thank them individually.
So I have to give
a generic thanks
to the many people who worked
in the laboratory over the years
for their help
and their support,
and for making a wonderful
environment in which one
can carry out science
and education.
In terms of what I want
to talk about today,
it's a very difficult
topic, because I'm
talking about the future,
and the future always
has a big question mark to it.
So in a certain sense, I'm
talking about the relatively
coming future--
the near future, I should say.
I want to talk about the
new horizons for progress
in experimental physics.
In general, progress
in experimental physics
comes from two
general directions.
One is the direction of
greater precision experiments,
and the second is the
high energy frontier.
The talk that I
want to give today
will focus primarily on
the high energy frontier.
And to put my talk
in a certain context,
I'd like to go back to 1946, the
year that the laboratory began.
These are the particles, the
so-called elementary particles,
that existed in 1946.
We had the electron
and positron.
The muon-- which was
just a heavy electron--
that was a great mystery.
In fact, Pais, in his
book, Inward Bound,
says it was a case
of divine laughter.
We had the proton, we had
the neutron, the photon.
The neutrino had been predicted,
but wouldn't be discovered
for another 10 years.
The pi meson had not
yet been discovered.
It had been
predicted in the '30s
to explain what we knew
about nuclear forces.
One year after the
laboratory was born,
the pion was discovered.
Here is the effect.
George Clark talked about this.
Here's a photograph of
the nuclear emulsion.
The pion comes in,
decays into a muon.
The upper part is
the muon continuing.
Now when the pion
was discovered,
there was a great
deal of satisfaction.
There was a feeling that
somehow, this met expectations.
Perhaps the picture
was becoming clarified.
But it was a short-lived
point of view,
because shortly after
that, the V particles
were discovered in
the cosmic rays,
and there was the S particles.
And more and more
complexity developed.
And this complexity came from
the discovery of a large number
of new particles.
And it was driven primarily
by new technology--
by the invention
of the synchrotron,
high energy accelerators.
In 1952, the Cosmotron
came into operation.
New types of detectors--
the bubble chamber.
It was invented in 1952.
And these two devices
helped drive the complexity.
And for example, by
1970, there were already
140 baryons listed in the The
Review of Particle Properties,
and 30 mesons.
And this was sort of
monotonically increasing up
to that time.
Now, in the 60s
and 70s, there were
some conceptual
developments-- very
important ones which
shaped our current picture.
There was SU(3), which developed
a periodic table of strongly
interacting particles.
It was predictive.
It predicted particles
which were later discovered.
There was the
quark bottle, which
was the building blocks
of SU(3) That was in 1964.
SU(3) was in '61.
There was the
electroweak unification,
which related the
electromagnetic
and the weak interactions.
Steven Weinberg, who's
here, did this work in 1967,
when he was a member of LNS.
There was quantum
chromodynamics in 1973,
which developed the theory
of the interaction of quarks.
And that, in itself,
provided the rationale
for having quarks inside
hadrons without escaping.
It had the hypothesis
of confinement.
And also, the
asymptotic freedom,
which basically explained the
much weaker interaction that
quarks have at short
distances, which
was the basis of the
impulse approximation
of deep inelastic scattering.
This all led to the standard
model, which we have today.
And that is the following.
We have three generations
of fermions, two of which
we have not found yet.
We have not found the top
quark or the tau neutrino.
I should say that gravity is
not part of the standard model.
I just put it here
just to remind people
that it has to be
accounted for later.
We do not have a quantum
theory of gravitation.
Here are the gauge bosons,
which carry the forces.
At this particular
particle, the tau neutrino
doesn't seem to disturb
people very much, in the sense
that the decay properties
of the tau electron
are very well understood.
And though one would like
to see it do something
in a laboratory, people are
not pressing to find it.
However, the top quark
is another matter.
It is very integral
to understanding
the standard model, and one
desperately wants to find it.
There is one other aspect
of the standard model which
one has to talk about, and
that is spontaneous symmetry
breaking.
The underlying equations
upon which the standard model
is based have much more symmetry
than is observed in nature.
The masses are zero.
And this all
requires a mechanism
that breaks the symmetries
and creates mass.
The standard model,
fortunately, is not
very specific as to what
this exact mechanism is.
A special mechanism is assumed--
namely, the simplest mechanism,
which is the Higgs field.
What the idea is there
is there's a field which
pervades the entire vacuum.
The interaction of
fermions with this vacuum
creates their masses.
It also creates the masses
of the gauge bosons.
And the quanta of this field
are neutral scalar particles--
the Higgs particles.
And of course, since
this has been proposed,
people look for these particles.
And as have been reported
in terms of the L3 results,
the Higgs mass is greater.
I should have-- it's wrong.
The Higgs mass is greater
than 53 GeV from LEP.
So that's the limit
we have there.
Now what about the top mass?
Well, it turns out,
because this top mass is so
intricately embedded in the
standard model-- for example,
in various reactions, one
calculates the Weinberg angle.
Their rate of corrections,
the electroweak rate
of corrections, which
basically affect it
in various processes--
they get the same answer
in various processes.
You must put in the top
mass in the Higgs mass,
so therefore, to
guess consistency
in this particular theory,
one requires a top mass--
a top.
And one can also determine the
top mass from its constraints.
For example, here is a fit--
essentially, the various
inputs you get from LEP data--
as a function of Higgs mass.
For example, this Higgs
mass here is 1,000 GeV.
This is 300.
This is 50.
And you notice that here,
that the top mass increases
with Higgs mass, and it's
about it's somewhat above 150.
Now, if one uses additional
data beyond LEP--
namely, for example, if
one uses the mass of the W
from CDF in UA2, and also
one uses neutrino scattering
results, one gets a sharper fit.
And you tend to get a
mass around 150 to 155 GeV
for a Higgs mass of 1 TeV.
And of course, what
happens here is
that as the Higgs
mass gets lighter,
the top mass decreases.
If you ask the question, what
is a 95% confidence level
in terms of the upper limit?
It's about 195 GeV.
So the top mass is less than 195
GeV with 95% confidence level.
So the Higgs mass--
the top mass--
is now pretty well limited
by the standard model.
But still, one wants
to find it out,
and one wants to find the top,
and one wants to measure it,
because one has to
find consistency
in the standard model.
Now, there has been a search
at the Fermilab collider, which
is continuing.
And there you have, basically,
proton, anti-proton collisions.
You can make a
top, anti-top pair
with either quark,
anti-quark annihilation,
or so-called gluon-gluon fusion.
The top will decay into
a W and a B. The W then
can decay into either E
nu, mu nu, tau nu, maybe
the lepton modes, or a Q-Q bar.
The cleanest search mode is
the so-called dilepton signal,
where each where the W from the
top and a W from the anti-top
will each decay into a lepton.
It's extremely clean, and
the signal to background
is much greater than 10 for
most of the mass region.
And let me give you
the latest limit.
This is a result of
the CDF measurements.
And this basically has about
five inverse picobarns--
integrated luminosity.
And here's a theoretical
result for the production
of top, anti-top.
This gives you the
range of uncertainty.
It's given primarily by
the structured functions.
This is the upper limit
from using all the dileptons
plus a B tag, and basically,
where it intersects,
the lowest theoretical limit
is the region of the lower
limit for top, which is 91 GeV.
Now Fermilab is now in the midst
of an upgrade, which is being--
it hasn't started in
terms of construction,
but the plans are going on, and
that is a new main injector.
And that will increase the
amount of integrated luminosity
enormously.
And around the year
2000, there should
be at least 1,000
inverse picobarns
with one additional detector.
So it will be a factor of 400
more data available to find top
at Fermilab.
And this will
permit the top quark
to be seen, if its mass
is 250 GeV or less,
which goes on the limit
of the standard model.
In addition, if the one will
be able to measure the top mass
with reasonable precision--
namely, less than 10
GeV, if the mass is
less than 180 GeV.
So I can make a reasonably good
measurement of the top mass.
In addition, I won't talk
about the B pairs that
can be produced,
but in addition, one
can make a measurement
of the W mass
to a precision of
50 MeV or less.
And that's comparable to
the limits for L2, L200.
Now, with this
alone, there will be
an enormously
powerful constraint
in the standard model.
Here I've plotted
the mass of the W
versus the mass of the top
for various Higgs masses.
1,500, 125 GeV.
Now, let's just assume
that it turns out
that the top mass
is, let's say, 130.
This is the limit that one has
in terms of the top mass going
horizontally.
The W mass would be
given in this region.
This is the region
that will be allowed
in terms of the standard model.
At that level, one will even
be able to get some information
about the scale
of the Higgs mass.
And we'll put
enormous constraints
on the standard model in terms
of whether there is physics
outside which can be seen
in this particular set
of measurements.
So by the year 2000,
one hopes that there
will be enormously
powerful constraints
on the standard model.
But even if the
standard model is
found to be correct
with no problems,
there are lots of questions.
The standard model has been
experimentally confirmed
so far, but is incomplete.
It has roughly 23 parameters.
There are different
ways of counting.
That's why I say
about 23 parameters.
The question of symmetry
breaking is still a question.
What is the mechanism?
There's a question
of CP violation.
We know there's CP violation.
The standard model
can account for it,
because we know that
with three generations,
there is a phase in
the theory, which
can account for CP violation.
But we don't know whether the
CP violation that we observe
comes from within
the standard model
or outside the standard model.
So it is quite clear that
higher energy experiments
are needed to clarify
many of these issues.
Well, there's a new generation
of proton-proton colliders
on the horizon,
which will be very
important for searching
for the physics
beyond the standard model.
Let me talk about two of them--
these two, the LHC and the SSC.
The energy of the LHC will be
between about 15 and 16 TeV.
The SSC, basically, is
20 on 20, so it will be
a center of mass energy of 40.
The initial design luminously
for the LHC is about 3 times 10
to the 34.
For the SSC, it's 10 to the
33, although it is clear
that with minor upgrades,
this luminosity can be
raised to above 10 to the 34.
The circumference of
the LHC is 16 miles.
SSC is 54 miles.
The dipole fields that are
being contemplated for the LHC
is about 10 tesla.
For the SSC, it's
about 6 and 1/2 tesla.
Now, in terms of
where they are, I
should say that this
machine is being planned,
but it has not
been approved yet.
This machine is
under construction
at the present time.
This shows you the SSC.
This is Dallas.
This is a Forth Worth.
It's really something of
geographic significance.
There's no question about it.
I'll show you, again,
a picture of LEP,
where the LHC will be located.
Another magnet ring
will be put inside LEP,
another significantly
large accelerator.
Now let me just
show a few things.
Here's a few things
I can say about it.
This is the SSC.
Here are comparable
sizes of other machines.
Here's LEP.
Here's SLAC.
Here's the Fermilab Tevatron.
It turns out that to
get this kind of energy,
one needs five stages
of acceleration.
One starts out with--
actually, there's
even another one.
There's a very low ion
source, but there's
a Linac, a low energy booster,
a medium energy booster,
a high energy booster.
This is 2TV device.
It feeds into this machine.
Here's where the
experimental halls would be
on both sides of the machine.
And here is a view of the
cross-section of the tunnel.
Now, this machine is
a formidable machine,
from an experimental
point of view.
A typical event, there
will be a hundred million
of these per second at
10 to the 33 luminosity.
A hundred million.
And one has to detect, sort, and
store all the relevant events.
When one goes to 10 to the 34,
one is talking about a billion
per second.
So one requires the most
sophisticated and complex
instrumentation, the highest
levels of fast electronics,
and enormous
computational facilities
to make a project
like this work.
And this is the great
technological challenge
of such a project.
Let me show you-- there
are two detectors which
are now being planned.
One is called the SDC.
And I don't have time to
discuss them in detail,
because I want to talk
about the physics.
This is the SDC, and here is the
so-called scale factor measure.
This is an individual
person here,
and this is the SDC with
the various subsystems.
And the second
detector is called GEM.
And let me show you
a schematic of that.
And here is another
person here, so you
get some idea of the
magnitude of the detector.
Just absolutely enormous.
They're incredibly
complicated things to build,
and they take many years.
Now, I also want to show you
that civil construction has
begun there.
It's a project which
is going to be on--
a paper project.
I don't know whether you
can see this so well.
This is the magnet
laboratory here,
which has been constructed now.
It has all kinds of magnets
being tested in here.
Here are buildings associated
with the compressors
and the refrigeration, and
the magnetic power supplies.
Here is a long
structure here, which
will be used for a string
test of magnets, which will
be carried out this summer.
The magnets are performing
well in terms of their meeting
specifications.
And here is a
photograph of the string
of magnets being put there.
It'll be five dipoles and
one quadrupole along here.
Each dipole is 50 feet long.
And here is a shaft, which
is being dug near this area
that I just showed you.
And this shaft will
be used to deliver
the magnets to the tunnel.
This shaft will be 60 feet.
It'll be an oblong
cross-section, 60-feet long
and 30 feet wide, and it
will be 265 feet deep.
And this is the beginning of
the digging, at this point.
Now, let's go and
talk a little bit
about what the physics will be.
Well, one of the major things
that one has to, of course,
look for is the Higgs,
because the assumption is
that the top will be
discovered at Fermilab.
And now the core
question is the Higgs.
The question-- what is its mass?
Is it elementary or composite?
If it's composite,
there will be new kinds
of forces and constituents.
For example, there was
a Technicolor model,
which basically has
a composite Higgs,
but if you have a
composite Higgs,
you have to have new kinds of
gluons and new kinds of quarks,
and these give rise to a whole
new family of particles which
are called techniparticles--
they would be technipions,
technirows, et cetera.
And these are expected to
be at the TeV mass range.
So these particles
are really things that
can be searched for at the SSC.
So the thing is one has
to both look for the Higgs
and also look for new
families and particles.
Now, you've heard from
Gregor Herten about how
the Higgs is looked for.
There are various modes.
Let me just repeat them.
Mainly, the two gamma
for when the Higgs
is less than the
mass of the Z. When
it's between the
Z and the two Zs,
you can get a Z
Plus two leptons.
Which would go to four leptons.
If the Higgs is greater
than two Z masses,
then you get two Zs
and four leptons.
Of course, the cleanest signals
are various combinations
of electrons and muons.
And of course, you
measure the kinematics
to essentially establish the
invariant mass of the Higgs.
Now, let me just show you some
simulations here, but more
to show you about what's
happening with the signal,
because there's a very
interesting thing that
goes on here.
This is for 200 GeV.
This is for 400 GeV.
These are simulations
made by the SDC group.
And this is for 800 GeV.
You can still get
measured it at 800 GeV.
Now, what's going on
here is the following.
It turns out that the Higgs
mass, basically, its width
is growing with the
value of its mass.
The width of the Higgs
goes as the mass cubed.
So when the Higgs gets
to a mass of 1.4 TeV,
it disappears as a
particle, because its width
is equal to its mass.
So in a certain sense,
you are seeing here
the width of a Higgs
getting broader,
and if you go much
higher, it gets
more and more difficult to see.
And the question is,
are there other ways
of approaching this problem?
For example, what happens if
the Higgs gets to a mass of 1.5?
You cannot find that
there's a particle.
Can you find out
anything about it?
And this is a very
important question.
Well, it turns out that you can.
And this is one of
the things which
is really most interesting.
Let me first say--
before I get to
that question here,
let me show you the limits
of, basically, of discovery,
in terms of the SSC.
This is for an 800 GeV Higgs.
Now, 10 to the 33 is
the standard luminosity
for the SSC.
Here is the ultimate luminosity.
That is the theoretical upper
limit that one can get to.
And if once it sticks to
the standard luminosity,
one can just about get to
about a TeV with the SSC.
Then, of course, is
when you go beyond,
that the mass gets so
broad that you start
getting into great difficulty.
But you see, what happens
here is the following.
If the Higgs mass becomes
greater than 1 TeV,
it turns out that WW and ZZ and
WZ production will be enhanced.
And this can be
observed at the SSC.
It's a very clear signal
of something very strange
going on.
And because what's
happening here,
is that the symmetry-breaking
force becomes strong.
It becomes a strong force.
And not only will you
see enhanced production
of these things, you'll
also probably see
new particle resonances
between the 1 and 3 TeV level.
Let me just point out
how this comes about.
There have been a number
of papers written on it,
and I'm certainly not
an expert, but I'll just
report what has been
put in the literature.
We looked that the Higgs mass.
It's related to a unknown
parameter called lambda and v
squared, where v is the
expectation of the Higgs
fields, related to
the Fermi constant.
Now, turns out lambda
represents a self-interaction
of the Higgs field.
So when lambda gets big, the
self-interaction of the Higgs
field becomes very large.
So what happens for
the Higgs mass greater
than the square
root of 2v, are you
get lambda greater than one,
and you get a strong interaction
between these things.
Actually, it's between
the larger two components
of these gauge bosons, and this
leads to enhanced production
of pairs of gauge bosons.
And the process looks
very much like this.
What happens is a
quirk comes here.
You get a virtual W
admitted on both sides.
You have a strong
interaction here,
which basically represents--
this black ball here represents
the non-linear interactions
of the Higgs fields.
And then you get, basically,
these things scatter and become
real particles.
And you get a lot of them.
Well, not a lot, but you
get enough to measure.
It's going to be
hard to measure.
For example, here,
just for the ZZ.
This has calculated.
It turns out the calculations
are quite model independent,
because they basically make
associations with low energies
pion scattering theorems, and
these are well understood.
For example, here is a ZZ
signal for a 1 TeV Higgs.
Now, here is the very
broad mass that you
would observe, in terms of
just the decay of the Higgs
the two Zs.
Here is the background.
Here is the enhanced
ZZ signal coming
from the strong,
symmetry-breaking interaction.
So you see right here, you're
seeing this effect right here.
Now, most of the people
who've been looking who've
been looking at this
feel that this background
could be estimated to 30%.
And therefore, one can really
see the effect of this enhanced
Z gauge boson pair production.
So the point here is that
even if the Higgs mass is
large enough so you can't
see it as a particle,
you will see its effects.
And I think that's
extremely interesting.
Now what about supersymmetry?
Supersymmetry is
also something which
would be very appropriate
to search for at the SSC.
Now, supersymmetry is a very
attractive point of view,
theoretically.
It allows one to have a
quantum theory of gravity.
It allows gravity to be put
into some sort of unification,
grand unification.
The idea here is that particles
have supersymmetric partners.
For example, the quark,
which basically-- fermions
have bosons and
bosons have fermions,
and for example, the
quark, spin one half,
has a squark,
which is spin zero.
Lepton is slepton.
W is-- I always want
to say "whine-o,"
but it's really wino.
And the reason that it's
such an attractive theory
is because when you put
in the super partner,
you get cancellation
of infinities.
And so, actually, many
things are calculable.
And for example,
it's an integral part
of superstring theory
for that reason.
And so it's very attractive
to look for these things.
Now, from experimentalist
point of view,
there's not a shred of
evidence that they exist.
I mean, it's a very
perplexing situation.
Theoretically, it's
a beautiful idea.
As an experimentalist,
there's nothing
to basically substantiate it.
Now, there's been a little
bit of new information, which
has given any proponents
of this point of view
some encouragement, and
that is the question
of grand unification,
which is a very cherished
idea in particle physics.
What I'm plotting here
are recent results
for the inverse
coupling strengths,
and these are for the
strong and the electroweak.
And the thing which
has occurred recently,
because of the very
beautiful work coming out
of LEP and other
places, it turns out
that where once it was thought
that there was a unification
scale experimentally being
observed, it's no longer true.
If you run these
coupling concepts,
as one wants to do so in
terms of a minimal theory,
they don't meet at one point.
They should meet at
one point and go on.
They should meet at one point,
and then, of course, you
have a unification scale.
But they're not doing that.
And so that has
caused some concern.
Now, it turns out
that if you take
SU(5) and you put in a minimal
supersymmetric addition to it,
you get unification.
So this has made people ask
the question, is this a hint?
Now there are other
features to this
which make it also attractive.
It raises the unification
energy by a factor of 10.
And this has the effect of
increasing the proton lifetime
by a factor of 10
to the fourth, which
makes the SU(5)
supersymmetric model
compatible with the proton
lifetime measurements, which
is something that I think
one finds very attractive.
The other thing about
it is that the mass
of the supersymmetric particle
which goes into it, the fit
indicates that it's
at the 1 TeV scale.
Here are the actual fits.
And here is the fit with a
supersymmetric addition to it.
You can see this is
the crossover, here.
This is the mass of the
supersymmetric particle
scale, which is 1 TeV.
And here is the where the
unification energy occurs.
So the question is, is it
an accident or is it a hint?
At any rate, if
particles are being--
if there's a suggestion that
these particles exist in the 1
TeV scale, it makes
the SSC a perfect place
to look for these things.
Now, what about the
level of exploration?
This is a luminosity
required, for example,
for producing 100,000
gluino events.
Here's the ultimate luminosity.
Here is the standard luminosity.
At the standard luminosity,
you can get to about 1.6
TeV for a gluino.
Now, you see, this
is the luminosity
required for producing
10,000 gluino events.
And the point here is that
the reason you want so many
is because it's a hard signal
to detect, so you want a lot.
And so it's a
conservative number.
Any rate, in terms of
the ultimate luminosity,
one can get probably roughly
to about 2 and 1/2 TeV.
What about the
structure of quarks?
The current
measurements indicate
that they're point-like, and
their size is less than 10
to the minus 17 centimeters.
How small are they?
Are they composite?
The SSC will be able to
probe quark structure down
to distances of the order
of less than 5 times 10
to the minus 19th centimeters.
Now, how is this done?
Well, the whole idea
here is that, of course,
protons consist of
quarks and gluons.
And when you scatter, you
have quark-quark scattering,
quark-gluon scattering,
gluon-gluon, and these things
basically hydronize into jets.
And you measure the
momentum distributions,
that PT distributions,
to provide information
about the structure of quarks.
Now, I'd like to show
you a core quarks gallery
event from the CDF.
It's a very remarkable event.
It's a beautiful event.
Here, we have pseudorapidity.
And here's the azimuthal angle.
And here is basically
the energy from one jet
from the other jet.
They're both about at 90
degrees, back to back.
And the reason I say they're
quarks, rather than gluons,
is because they have
such a high Bjorken X.
The Xs for these two jets--
this is at about 0.45,
and this is about 0.4.
So then, actually, this
is a very good candidate.
This shows you this
sort of information--
this is like
particle-particle scattering.
That's the point
I'd like to make.
This is a quark.
And so now, how do you see the
effect of composite quarks?
Well, if you scatter one
quark against another quark,
while you can have a standard
gluon exchange, if there's
a compositeness or
size, in general,
this term will be
reduced In terms
of scattering
probability, because there
will be a form factor.
However, if there
are constituents,
you have the possibility of
exchanging constituents, which
adds to the cross-section.
You have another channel,
basically, to scatter.
And therefore, this thing will
increase the cross-section.
It turns out that when the
calculation has been made,
this effect is dominant at
high transverse momentum.
And so therefore,
in general, one
gets an increase
in cross-section.
For example, here is the
scattering cross-section.
Here is the transverse momentum
in terms of TeV over C.
Now, what you do here is--
here's the matrix
element squared.
Here's the matrix element
for a point-like structure.
And there is a
correction term, which
has a constant lambda
square, which represents
the increase in cross-section.
It's called a
compositeness parameter.
And you measure this, and this
gives you a sense of the scale.
For example, for a
lambda of 10 TeV,
this is what the
yield should be.
15, 20.
Now, if the cross-section
gets as high as this--
you see-- this would
correspond to saying
that the quark has a size which
is around 10 to the minus 18
centimeter.
In general, this is now the
result for a point-like quark,
and of course, the limit
is if it varies around
this particular prediction
here, that of course,
the size of the error will
give you the limit and lambda.
So the lambda that one
can probably get to
is between 25 and
30 TeV with the SSC.
So one can actually find out
about quark size-- at least,
get some very, very
good limits on it.
Now, of course, we know about
the carriers of the weak force.
We have the gauge bosons, the
W plus, W minus, and Z zero.
The question is, are there
higher mass Z and W particles?
These are very straightforward
to detect at these colliders,
and at the SSC, one will
be sensitive to masses up
to 10 TeV, so one can search
for such heavy gauge bosons
up to 10 TeV.
Now, I'd like to just stress
one point that I think came very
clearly from [? Alan ?]
[? Booth's ?] talk.
It's that these results are
very important to understanding
cosmology.
The SSC energy densities will be
equivalent to those roughly 10
to the minus 14 seconds
after the Big Bang.
So basically, you're looking
at a very recently early time
in the evolution
of the universe,
in terms of a Big Bang model.
A Higgs-type
mechanism is employed
in the inflationary model
of the universe-- namely,
the idea of having
a false vacuum
initially is very important,
because the phase change
of the true vacuum or the lowest
vacuum drives the inflation.
So it's very important that
that mechanism be understood.
Many people have proposed
the lightest supersymmetric
particle as a candidate for the
missing mass of the universe.
That's another conjecture.
But if one found
supersymmetry, this
would be a very, very
important result for cosmology.
And in general, the
detailed scenario
of the development
of the early universe
depends on grand unification
and symmetry breaking.
So basically, all our models
of cosmology, I think,
will be greatly affected
by what we learn
at these very high energies.
So we have very we have a
number of very exciting searches
at both the SSC and the LHC.
LNS groups will be
participating in both.
I think I neglected to mention
that on the GEM detector,
we have two elements groups--
the counter-spark chamber group
and the APC group.
And as you heard a beautiful
talk by Gregor Herten
about how the L3
detector is being
proposed for a LHC detector.
So we have many exciting
searches, basically,
which will be pursued
at these colliders.
Let me just summarize it.
The Higgs, compositeness,
supersymmetric particles,
techniparticles, new
heavy gauge bosons,
and new families of
quarks and leptons.
So you see, even though we have
three families, it's possible,
for example, that there
may be other families
with massive neutrinos.
We don't know, but
it's a possibility.
But I think the thing is if
history is to be a guide,
it also may be that
what is totally
unexpected may be the
most important discoveries
at these machines.
That has generally been the
history of accelerators.
So as I was thinking
about the future,
I was also thinking
about another celebration
for the LNS.
And I thought that this is such
a wonderful occasion that I was
proposing to have an LNS
celebration called LNS 60,
but if I follow [? Roman ?]
[? Jacquith, ?] maybe it should
be LNS 64.
But the point about it,
whenever it will be--
60, 64-- I think there will be
major discoveries from the SSC
and the LHC to present
on such an occasion.
I think there will be new
theoretical developments
beyond the standard model
based upon these discoveries.
And I think that
LNS, as in the past,
will play a major role
in these contributions.
Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
