Welcome to the annual
A. O. Williams lecture.
We consulted recently.
I think I am lucky to be the
fourth chair to be introducing
A. O. Williams lecturers.
So it's a series
which has gone, I
think we're around 20
different lecturers.
Very distinguished people
throughout the years.
And you'll find out we have a
very distinguished guest today.
What I'm here to
do is to tell you
something about Arthur Williams,
the namesake of this lecture
series.
And I have a history written by
one of our former professors,
Professor Robert Beyer, who was
a bit of a armchair historian.
He enjoyed writing things up.
And he wrote this
up about Arthur.
Arthur Olney-- Olney Street?
Olneyville.
Williams, Jr. was a descendant
of two prominent Rhode Island
families.
The Williams' who includes
the colony's founder,
Roger Williams; and the
Olneys-- Olneyville--
whose forebears
included Stephen Olney,
Secretary of State in the
Cabinet of Grover Cleveland.
Arthur grew up in
East Providence,
graduated from East Providence
High School in 1930,
entered a nationwide
contest to find
the brightest boy in America.
It was a different era.
OK.
There were statewide
examinations.
And the winner in each state
went to Menlo Park, New Jersey,
where Thomas A. Edison lived.
There was a final competition.
The winner of that exam
was to meet with Edison
and to receive a
four-year scholarship,
all expenses paid, to MIT.
Arthur was the winner.
Art graduated MIT in 1934,
became Brown graduate student
working for Bruce
Lindsay-- another big name
in our department-- on atomic
wave function calculations.
And then he moved on to
the University of Maine
where he was a professor
for three years.
Luckily, he returned to
Brown as a faculty member,
where he was a faculty
member for 30 years.
In 1955, Professor
Williams became Chair,
overseeing the expansion
of the department
beyond its strength
in acoustics,
starting solid state
and particle physics
research in our department.
In his own research, Art
worked on underwater sound,
and was awarded the Pioneers
of Underwater Acoustics
Medal of the Acoustical
Society of America in 1982.
Now in the words of one
of our other professors
who remembers Art very
fondly, Professor Williams
took a very generous interest
in the younger faculty
and helped give them a
warm introduction to Brown.
He was a gracious host at
many parties at his house.
And this contributed to the
cohesiveness of the department.
He was one of those faculty
who contributed more
to the University than
grants and papers.
With that, I turn it
over to Ulrich Heinz,
who will introduce our
illustrious speaker today.
[APPLAUSE]
That's the trouble [INAUDIBLE].
So I'll do this introduction.
It's my pleasure to introduce
this year's Arthur Olneyville
Williams speaker.
So we welcome Professor Rolf
Heuer to the department today.
And Professor Heuer began
his studies of physics
at the University of
Stuttgart in Germany,
where he measured a
cross section of neutrons
scattered off atomic nuclei.
And he thought nuclei are a
little bit too big to study.
He wanted to look
at smaller things.
And this was also the time that
the JSI was being discovered.
So it was a time
when things were
happening in particle physics.
And he ended up in
particle physics
doing his Ph.D., my
instructor, in Heidelberg.
And then from Heidelberg
he moved to CERN,
where he worked in
the OPAL experiment.
This is one of the
four experiments
that operated at the
large electron positron
collider, which occupied
the same ring that the LHC
today occupies.
And he realized
that he didn't only
want to look for small
things, but he also
wanted to bring people
together and organize the team
to look for small things.
And so he eventually
became the spokesperson
of the OPAL collaboration.
Now that ended around 2000.
And he moved to
Hamburg as a professor,
and became the research director
for the German particle physics
lab, DES, which is in Hamburg.
And finally, he has been
the Director General of CERN
for the last seven years.
And again, there's lots
happening in particle physics.
This was the important
period of bringing up the LHC
and guiding it through
initial bumps and successes,
eventually to the discovery
of the Higgs Boson and beyond,
we hope.
So again, there's lots going
on in particle physics.
And so we're very
pleased and honored today
that the tables are turned,
instead of us being guests
at CERN, Professor Heuer
is a guest at Brown today.
[APPLAUSE]
Thank you very much
for this introduction.
Let me first say a few words
to Arthur Olney Williams.
I trained him, so I'm going
to get it clearly spelled out.
It was difficult
to find something
on the web about Williams.
And I think you should put
more on the web on him.
OK?
And I will come back
to that a little bit
later for some other effects.
So Breaking the Wall
of the Hidden Universe.
I will talk about the
discovery of the Higgs Boson,
about it's implication
on physics, mankind,
and the early universe.
But I will also tell
you a little bit
about CERN, because not
everybody here knows what
CERN is and what CERN does.
I will give at the
end also a little bit
in Outlook, which is
slightly more for the experts
than for the others.
But then you will have learned
so much about particle physics
that you can also appreciate
the outlook for the experts.
OK.
So, one has to switch
also these things on.
Then it should work.
What is the mission of CERN?
The mission of
CERN if four-fold.
Well, first of all of
course, we want to push back
the frontiers of knowledge.
We want to unravel some of the
secrets of the Big Bang, what
was meta-like at the early
moments of the universe
existence.
One question is what is the
reason that we physically
can exist.
So this is one of the main--
I think everybody should
be interested in that, yeah?
OK.
So if you do that at the
forefront of research,
you have to be at the
forefront of technology.
So we developed new
technologies for accelerators,
for detectors,
information technology.
Here's my usual question.
Who is below 28?
That's good.
You too?
You think you forgot it.
OK.
I think you guys have never
seen a world without the world
wide web.
OK.
We were still working
with punch cards.
You cannot imagine what that
means if you talk to your box
of punch cards.
I was rewriting the
program actually.
The web was born 1989.
Because our experiments were
becoming so international, so
large, that there needed to
be a software package which
allowed to distribute
information quickly
and reliably to all
the places where people
were allowed to have access.
OK.
So that was the birth
of the world wide web.
Today, it's the grid computing,
which is a driver in the cloud
computing.
And of course, we are also
having quite some spinoff
into society by medical
applications, diagnosis,
and therapy.
Now if you look at that
research, innovation,
both at the forefront
of today's knowledge,
it's obvious that it's
a fantastic training
ground for scientists
and engineers of today
and of tomorrow.
And here I have to correct
immediately an image of CERN.
We are not so much a
physics laboratory.
The physicists are coming
in order to do the research.
We are mainly an
engineering laboratory.
We need a lot of engineers in
all kinds of areas in order
to build, maintain, develop, et
cetera, such an infrastructure.
So we have much more staff in
engineering and technologies
than in physics.
The physics is usually
done by the researchers
from the outside world.
And that brings me
to the fourth pillar,
and that is to unite people
from different countries
and cultures.
So we are not only breaking the
wall of the hidden universe,
we are also breaking the wall
between cultures and nations.
This is very important,
especially today,
to learn that one can work
together in a peaceful manner.
This is opposite.
If you look around at the world,
what happens at the moment,
you need more such
institutions which
show that it's possible
to work together.
OK.
So CERN was founded in
1954 by 12 European states.
And at that time it
was science for peace.
And you have to imagine the
whole discussion started
'49, 1949, shortly
after the World War.
A handful of
visionary scientists,
a handful of
visionary diplomats,
were coming together.
They resonated.
And the resonance
was called CERN.
And it took just five years from
the idea to the realization.
So 1954, 12 European states.
And that you can call
science for peace.
Today we have 21 member states.
And we have made in 2010 a
very, very important decision.
CERN, the acronym stands
for Conseil European pour la
Recherche Nucleaire.
So the E stands for Europe.
Now in 2010 we have made
a very important decision.
We have changed the
meaning of the E
from Europe to Everywhere.
And as a consequence, today
we have 21 member states.
Because in the
beginning of last year,
Israel is the 21st member state.
And Israel is outside all of
the definitions of Europe.
But if look now, Israel
is a member state.
Now the applications
for membership,
or associate membership, Turkey,
Russia, Ukraine, Pakistan,
Cyprus.
It's still science for peace.
You see, these guys can
work together if they want.
And this is one of
the main things which
is fantastic at CERN,
that you can show
that people can work together.
We have around 3,500
people on our payroll.
As I told you, it's a lot of
engineers and technicians.
and we have between 11,000 and
12,000 scientists registered
who are allowed to come to CERN
to perform their experiment.
So CERN is a European
Intergovernmental Organization
which is globally used.
It is still 20 to 21, maybe
a European infrastructure.
And the main thing is it's an
infrastructure which belongs
to all of its member states.
It's an infrastructure which is
so large that a single country
cannot afford it.
And therefore it is the
infrastructure of that country
also as the stakeholder.
And it's a prime example of
what Europe and its partners
can achieve when
they work together.
1954, it was European
reconstruction.
1980, East meets West.
I mean it was vital to
have an institute which
could make the Iron Curtain
in Europe transparent.
So that was again, very
important in the understanding
of East and West.
Today, the LHC brings together
more than 8,000 scientists.
The key message here is
that from the very beginning
of the existence
of CERN, it showed
it is a model of
peaceful corporation
at the forefront of
science, independent
of cultural and
national differences.
Today, it has gone
beyond Europe.
As I said, a global
collaboration.
And that is shown here.
This is a distribution
of all the CERN
users by the location of the
Institute, not by the passport.
We have roughly 100
nationalities registered.
But by the location
of the Institute.
And that's a spot check
as of January 2015.
We see roughly 70%.
Let's say 2/3 from
the member states,
and one third from
the rest of the world.
And people with
good eyes can see
that we are one of the
largest US laboratories.
Because the US has the
largest amount of users.
1,700.
The next one is, I
think, Italy, if I'm not
mistaken, with-- I don't know.
1,400 something?
Yeah.
1,400 something.
So you profit a
lot from the fact
that research is free at CERN.
Of course, you have to pay
for your own experiment,
but not for the usage
of the infrastructure.
But I think it's vital,
it's really vital
that research is free.
It's open to everybody who
passes the peer review,
of course.
OK.
And that shows you
the age distribution
of visiting scientists.
It peaks at 26, where we
have also some other people.
Now I must say this distribution
was done five years ago.
So I know that everybody
is now five years older.
But why do I say that?
Because five years ago, the
LHC-- or it's now six years,
I think-- the LHC
was not yet running.
That means we did not have so
many Ph.D. students at LHC.
Today we have more than
2,500 Ph.D. students
performing their Ph.D.
with data from the LHC.
That means the peak would
be even higher at 26.
And so we are really not
the staff, as you can see,
but the users, they are really
predominant young people.
And this gives us one of
the vibrant aspects of CERN.
So the question usually
by funding agencies
is, what do you do with
so many Ph.D. students?
Where do they go once they
have finished their Ph.D.?
And that's the answer.
And the top half
shows for those of you
who have good eyes that around
one half of the students when
they've finished their
Ph.D., they go directly
into the private sector.
The other half is
still in academia,
in universities or institutes.
And in the private
sector, around one third
of the private sector goes
to computing, 20%, here
for example, to engineering.
The other 20% stay in physics.
A small amount here,
4%, goes to finance.
That was a few years ago.
It was many more people
going to finance.
Well, you realize the
effect of these people.
So less and less people
went now into finance.
But that shows that-- and
this is very important
that we not only
educate together
with all the universities
for academia,
but also for the private sector.
But of course, these people are
coming to do research at CERN.
And CERN is not only the
large Hadron collider,
but CERN is also
institute with a lot
of science and accelerators.
Mainly you have the SPS,
a Super Proton Synchrotron
where the W and Z bosons
were discovered and resulted
in Nobel Prize.
You have the PS and other
smaller accelerators.
That's better visible here.
We have today around 50
kilometers of accelerators
starting with [INAUDIBLE],
the PS, the booster, ISOLDE,
which is an isotope factory,
Antiproton Decelerator, SPS,
and the LHC.
And the scientists at all
of these accelerators,
so we have a rich program of
accelerator-based particle
physics, which you can
see here on this slide.
We have of course, a
high-energy frontier.
We have Hadronic Matter
[INAUDIBLE] Hadron structure.
A low energy neutrino
oscillations,
anti-matter research.
[INAUDIBLE]
Also some smaller
non-accelerator experiments
on dark matter and
astroparticles.
Climate research and
medical applications.
And multi-disciplinary approach.
So around 1,000 physicists,
10% of our visiting scientists
are working on non-LHC
particle physics.
And the main
message here is this
is scientific diversity
at unique facilities.
This is very important
to show that these
are things which can essentially
only be done at CERN.
And therefore, we
maintain and upgrade
all of these facilities.
So we have a program for
all of these facilities.
But of course, the
flagship-- and this
is all complemented
by theory-- but now
I concentrate on the
high-energy frontier on the LHC.
So the scientific
challenge is to understand
the very first moment of our
universe after the Big Bang.
So when the universe expanded
from a tremendously small,
tremendously hot spot
in today's size of 10
to the 28th centimeters in
the course of roughly 14
billion years.
OK.
I think it's extremely
difficult to imagine 10
to the 28th centimeters.
It's a huge number.
But to imagine it
is very difficult.
It's equally difficult to
imagine the very small numbers.
What is the difference
between the imagination
between 10 to the minus
12, 10 to the minus 13, 14.
It goes to zero.
I don't know if I can make
that joke here in the US,
but I try it.
On the 10 to the
28th centimeters,
I could help you a little bit.
Because if you replace the
centimeters by dollars,
you have roughly the square
of the American deficit.
It didn't help you very much
to understand 10 to the 28th.
I can just say it's
a large number.
So what we can imagine is of
course, the human dimension
that meets a center of
the ruler that now, I
put into the center of the ruler
the only photo which I received
from you on Williams.
And this is my next complaint--
find a better photo for him.
OK?
It seems to be very
difficult, because I
couldn't find anything.
I did some research, but OK.
Fine.
But I think it's worthwhile,
since you have this lectures
here, I think would be.
It was not a serious
complaint, but I
think it might be quite good.
OK.
So, now getting serious again.
How can we now look into
the history of the universe?
Well, first of all, you can
go to the large dimension.
On the large dimension
you take telescopes.
You taking either
ground-based telescopes,
you take space-based telescopes.
And it's obvious that the
better the resolution,
the more powerful the
telescope, the further back
you can look into history-- into
the history of the universe.
Now if you do that with photons,
you'll run into a problem.
You'll run up to the
wall around 380,000 years
after the Big Bang.
And the first 380,000
years, the universe
was still so hot
that no stable matter
could form-- no stable atoms.
So photons-- that means
energy and matter there--
was always fighting
essentially against each other.
So no stable metal could form.
No photons, no information,
could escape, at least
in the form of photons.
380,000 years roughly
after the Big Bang,
the universe was cool enough so
that stable atoms could form.
The moment stable atoms could
form, the photons could escape.
And therefore the
information you
have is from the point of
380,000 years after the Big
Bank.
OK.
So this is what I call
the hidden universe.
So what to do then?
Well, you go to the small scale.
And at the small scale, you
need a super microscope.
The more powerful
your microscope,
the smaller the scales you
can resolve, the more powerful
your microscope,
the more energy you
need in order to produce
a small wavelength.
The more powerful
your microscope,
the more energy you need.
The more energy you
have on a small spot,
the higher the energy density.
And with this higher
energy density,
you get closer to the Big Bang.
Now how close do we get?
But before I come
to that, I want
to stress again the difference.
The difference is
here, with LHC,
we are reproducing
the conditions
at the moment of
the early universe.
With the telescopes
we are looking back.
That's a big difference.
With the telescopes we are
looking to the history.
With the super microscope we
are reproducing the conditions.
That's the big difference
between the two approaches.
And if you recalculate
the resolution power of 10
to the minus 16, 10 to the
minus 17 centimeters into time,
then you find that we get up
to 10 to the minus 12 seconds
roughly, to the Big Bang.
So this is what I would
call breaking the wall
of the hidden universe.
And I think nobody
else gets closer
than we get with this machine.
OK.
I hope there's some people who
are not from particle physics.
Oh yeah.
Sure.
Yeah, yeah.
I forgot.
OK.
So what have we
learned over that time?
Well, of course, more
than 100 years ago,
Rutherford experiment
showed that the atom
can be divided into the
nuclei and the electron.
The nuclei in turn
in protons neutrons,
protons neutrons existing
out of the [INAUDIBLE].
The force carries the gluons.
And that is our standard
model of particle physics,
of the microcosm.
You have here the
metaparticles--
the quarks and electrons.
And on the right-hand side
you have the force particles.
So we have three
families off two quarks
and two electrons each.
And I don't know if everybody--
or if you appreciates
very much that to we all
consist of the other three
metaparticles.
The up quark, the down
quark, two up and one down
makes a proton.
Two down, one up makes
a neutron, in turn
makes a nuclei.
The proton and the neutron
in turn makes a nuclei.
And then you have the electron
to neutralize it to the atom.
These are the three
metaparticles out
of which we are consisting.
Now nature has
three more families.
Each counterpart of the up/down
electron and the neutrino
are heavier than in
the lowest family.
Still, we do not really know
why we have three and only
three families.
Now, this is, of course,
the metaparticle part.
Now these metaparticles
have to understand
how they should communicate,
how they should be interact,
and for this we have
the force particles.
The photon is a carrier of
the electromagnetic force.
The gluons are the carriers
of the strong force,
which binds the quarks
together, and also the nuclei.
The nucleons and the nuclei.
And the Z and W bosons
are the carriers
of the big force,
which is responsible,
for example, for some of
the processes in the sun.
So these are the three main
forces in the microcosm.
We can neglect the gravitation,
because it's much too
small in the microcosm.
Fortunately, we can
neglect it because we
don't know how to calculate
it together with the others.
So.
This is a fantastic model.
It's just this 12
metaparticles and four types
of force carriers.
So very, very nice.
But it has one problem.
It was tested over decades
with high precision.
However, there was one crucial
question left out-- namely,
how two elementary
particles acquire mass.
Now some of you might think
why does this interest me?
Well it should interest you
because if the particles would
only be massless, we
could just not exist.
Because massless
particles is essentially
excluded to form
composite matter.
You need massive
fundamental particles.
And we need to understand how
these guys got their mass.
There's one possible solution.
Mainly to define the mass
as a property of particles
with the energy E to
move with a velocity
normalized to the
velocity of light.
And this is this formula that
means the higher the mass,
the lower the velocity
at the same energy.
So mass equals zero, you
have the velocity of light.
We discussed this morning with
some of the undergraduates
that there was once the
idea of the measurement
unexplained that there might
be some particles faster
than light.
It was some time
ago that was wrong.
So velocity of light
is really the limit.
And the higher the mass
now, at the same energy,
the lower the velocity.
So what can you do?
You introduce a scalar field.
And these were the
six theorists who
introduced such an idea of a
scalar field, Brout, Englert,
and Higgs.
And then Kibble,
Guralnik, and Hagen.
And Guralnik was
working here at Brown.
And the particles
acquire the mass
for the interaction
with this field.
OK.
The more they interact
with this field,
the heavier the particle.
The less they interact
with the field,
the lower the mass
of the particle.
That's the trick.
We would not know
anything about this field
if that field would not
have to self-interaction.
So the self-interaction
of the filed
would be then the
so-called Higgs Particle.
It's a fluctuation in the
field which from time to time
appears and disappears again.
The lifetime of the Higgs, I
think, is 10 to the minus 20,
or something like this.
Seconds.
So the particles acquire
mass with the interaction
with this field, and the
self-interaction of the field
is the Higgs Particle.
So the question is
now, has the LHC
answered the crucial
question which was left open,
namely how do elementary
particles acquire mass.
Or in other words, do
we have the last missing
cornerstone of the front
of the standard model.
Did we find it?
Well, there was an
announcement as you well know.
On the 4th of July, 2012.
And I will come back to that.
But there are many more key
questions in particle physics
open.
The standard model,
the first one
is the origin of mass, which
we have hopefully solved now.
But the standard model leaves
many other questions open.
Is there possible unification
of forces at the highest energy?
That means at the
[INAUDIBLE] scale,
close to the Big Bang energy.
Is there a fundamental
symmetry of forces and matter?
Because force particles
and metaparticles
have different spin
symmetry, and we
have to see can we combine
that to a fundamental symmetry
of both?
What happened to antimatter?
After all, we are living in
a matter-dominated universe.
Where's the antimatter?
And why is a little
bit off matter
left over after the Big Bang?
In how many number of space or
time dimensions are we living?
And then finally,
the tiny question.
What is dark matter?
And what is dark energy?
After all, the standard model
just describes roughly 5%
of the universe, the
visible universe.
95% of the universe is dark.
The dark matter.
One quarter roughly
is dark matter.
3/4 is dark energy.
Dark matter clumps
like normal matter.
And dark energy
drives the universe
apart in an accelerated fashion.
And it drives it apart in all
directions in the same way.
That means that there's no
preferred directional evidence
in the dark energy.
That means it's a scalar.
That means it behaves all
the same in all directions.
That's important.
OK.
The hope now it that with
a large Hadron collider,
we are entering
the dark universe.
And I've put an exclamation
mark and a question mark
in, in order to be
on the safe side.
The first one
expresses the hope,
and the second one the doubt.
Because you don't know.
But this is something which
drives us on, of course.
OK.
So that brings me to the
large Hadron collider.
The LHC.
27 kilometer circumference.
One of the largest scientific
instruments ever built.
Many more than
10,000 people ware
involved, and still are
involved in design construction
exploitation now.
It collides protons to
reproduce the moments
of the early universe, 14
billion times a second.
That shows you some of the
hardware of the large Hadron
collider.
This is one of the magnets.
I always forget the dimensions.
I think it's around
50 meters long.
And we have roughly
1,400 of these.
We have only one position
that we can lower it down.
And then it is transported
to the position
where it will be installed.
You see, I have the impression
this guy looks pretty tired,
which means it's one of the last
magnets which was installed.
Well actually this guy's
only there for safety,
because this wide line
guides the whole track.
So it's an automatic car.
And then once you
have it installed,
you have to connect the magnets.
And these are
high-power connections.
And they are more than
10,000 amps [INAUDIBLE]
flowing through
these connections.
And this was one of
the 10,000 connections
which blew up in 2008.
And where we had to
repair then in 2009.
And to improve everything in
order to make a machine now
fit for higher energy
and for a long lifetime.
And this is, of course, the way
I as a DG wants to see the LHC.
Nobody is in there.
Everything is installed.
We can start working.
Now to study, how do we do it?
Well, in these two magnets
we have two vacuum tubes.
In one vacuum two of the
protons are running clockwise,
and the other one
anti-clockwise.
And at four position where
we have the big experiment,
we bring these
protons to collision.
We don't have single protons.
We have around 2,800
packets of protons.
Now for those who work in CMS,
I know that in the past three
years, we had 1,400 packets.
But it's designed for 2,800.
And we will soon
have 2,800 this year.
So 2,800 packets running
clockwise and anti-clockwise.
More than 100 billion protons
per packet, per bunch.
Now colliding these bunches,
if you don't do anything,
it results in nothing.
The protons will
not hit each other.
So what you have to do
is you have to squeeze.
Your have of focus
these bunches before you
want to collide them.
Then you collide them.
And once you squeeze
it well enough,
then several tens of the protons
will collide, and therefore
break in these collisions into
their fundamental constituents,
like the quarks or the muons.
And these constituents
then interact
at a very high-energy density.
Much, much higher than
the energy in the sun.
But as I said, in a very
small confined space,
maybe on the size of the proton.
And this is a very
high-energy density.
And out of this high-energy
density, lot of particles
come out.
You transform this
energy into particles.
And the production and the
decay of these new particles
which are coming out
there are registered
in this high-tech
powerful detectors, which
act like digital
cameras which are
built around these
interaction points.
And I have a short movie
which indicates that
to the ones who have not
seen a collision yet.
That is the LHC.
At least the magnets.
So then you see here a proton.
And in the proton you see
the three quarks up and down.
Quark and then you
collide the protons which
come from the right-hand
side, and the protons which
come from the left-hand side.
In these high-tech
powerful instruments.
And then a lot of
particles come out.
And you register
these particles.
You interpret these images.
And out of the interpretation
of these images
you can draw conclusions
on the underlying
process at the collision.
What you see here
is these detectors
are built like onions.
And each layer of the
onion has a different task,
it has a different
job to perform.
For example, the inner
layers are registering
the white [INAUDIBLE].
The white [INAUDIBLE]
are charged particles.
They all essentially
stop at a certain moment
that they lose their energy.
They are getting absorbed.
Except for the muons.
And you see here there are
two muons going to the left,
and two muons
going to the right.
And you should remember,
these four blue [INAUDIBLE]
now for later.
And you see that you
can identify them
as muons because first of all,
they are charged [INAUDIBLE],
and secondly, they traverse
the whole detector.
So when we started with the
LHC, we started a new era
in fundamental science.
And you see the four big
experiments which are built up
here, and three
which are shown here,
and three small experiments.
Atlas is the biggest experiment.
The second biggest is CMS.
The stands for compact.
These are the two
omni-purpose experiments.
That means they should register
all interesting processes
in these collisions.
LHC B is an experiment
which in particular looks
for heavy quark
physics, which could
give some indication on the
difference in properties
of matter and antimatter.
And the Ellis experiment is
dedicated for the heavy iron
collision, when we from
time to time collide lead
ions with lead ions.
To give you an idea about the
size of these experiments,
this is Atlas at the
moment of construction.
Now it's filled with around 100
million to 150 million sensors.
And you see this is the size
of an average physicist.
You can well imagine that
it's around 25 meters
times 25 meters times 45 meters
in longitude and direction.
You need to have such
large detectors in order
to resolve the smallest
possible dimensions.
Now Brown is very
strongly involved in CMS.
And CMS, which is
slightly smaller.
Again, you can see it here
in relation to the humans.
CMS, as well as Atlas,
has around 3,000 members
from roughly 40 countries.
Now you have to imagine 3,000
members means, I don't know,
one full professor
has roughly 10 people
in his or her
group, which means,
let's say, 300 professors,
which means 300 egos.
Yeah.
Yeah.
He agrees, yes.
Yes.
I think it's a
job-- of their egos.
But it works.
It really works.
I mean, everybody knows
that alone you cannot do it.
You need the others.
So this is a fantastic
sociological experiment also.
So large international
collaborations
are a place where people
learn to work together.
It is collaboration competition.
One should not think that
it's only collaboration.
It is also competition.
And I must say, science without
competition doesn't work.
You need competition.
But you can compete and
collaborate at the same time.
You learn that diversity
is a good opportunity
to recognize differences,
to accept them,
to learn to use them.
It influences your
way of thinking.
You have to share information.
You have to give,
and you have to take.
I mean, if you don't give,
you cannot receive anything.
You have to work together.
And I must say, how
is the management?
The management is
really for common goals,
or by convincing partners.
That's the only management
which works here.
But it works very well.
And if it works very
well, then of course,
we can address some of the key
questions of particle physics.
Maybe understand, for example,
this primordial state of matter
before nucleons could form.
That means roughly a
microsecond after the Big Bang.
Have we now found
the Higgs particle?
Will we find the reason why
antimatter and matter have not
completely destroyed each other?
And the tiny question, what
is the mysterious dark matter
and what is dark energy?
These are questions
which we can address.
And if you look closely, I
think also which we can solve,
that we are able to address.
Now the problem now is
this is the cross section
of production rate of
various processes at the LHC.
That's the total cross
section, everything together.
Most of it here is standard
model, which we know already.
And below, down here,
at the low energy,
this is the energy
of the collider.
For example, this is 7 TeV.
The new physics
is very much lower
than all of the processes.
You see there is
more than 10 orders
of magnitude difference
between the total reaction rate
and the rate of
new physics, which
means you need a tremendous
amount of statistics
in order to produce new physics.
But if you produce new
physics, that doesn't help you.
You have to identify
the new physics.
That means you need
even more statistics.
Or in total, you need
very high statistics.
You need a high
correlation rate.
And you need many years
of data collection.
That's a key message.
If you produce such
a lot of statistics,
you need a fifth experiment.
And the fifth big
experiment at LHC
is the worldwide
LHC computing grid,
which connects nearly
160 sites in 35 countries
with a sort of
gridlike computing
where you have a tier 0.
At CERN and in Hungary,
for business continuity,
we have two tier 0's.
Then we are connected
to 13 tier 1's, it's
more than on the slide here.
And then we have the tier 2,
which is a simulation and end
user analysis.
It's an international
collaboration
to distribute and
analyze LHC data.
And without the grid computing,
without the fantastic work
of the experiment as a
result of great performance
of the machine,
we could not have
made the discovery in 2012.
Now let's concentrate
now on the question,
have you found this
Higgs particle?
This is again the graph.
The production rate
of the Higgs boson
is rather low compared to
the total production rate.
But now comes the
problem that you have
to identify the Higgs boson.
This piece, of
course, is special
because it interacts with
all fundamental particles.
That means it can
decay in different ways
in all fundamental particles.
That means you have a
lot or different decay
possibilities of the Higgs,
a lot of different signatures
in the detector.
So you have a low
production rate,
and you have a low rate
in each of these channels.
And then you have to select
for the detection, the most
promising, the
cleanest, channels.
And one of the clean channels
is the decay into two sets.
And the two sets in turn, decay,
for example, into two muons.
So you have two, you'll remember
the two blue [INAUDIBLE]
to the left, and the two blue
[INAUDIBLE] to the right.
These were the four leptons,
the for muons coming
from a [INAUDIBLE] decay.
Another very clean
signature is the decay
of [INAUDIBLE] into two photons.
And that could look like
this in the CMS experiment,
for example, you
have quite a few
of charged [INAUDIBLE]
here, but then you
have an accumulation
of energy here.
And this dashed line is
only to guide the eyes.
So there's no charged
particle [INAUDIBLE].
So this is a photon here
with very high energy.
Another photon with
very high energy.
And both together, you
form the invariant mass
of these two photons.
Despite the fact that it's a
clean signature, [INAUDIBLE]
count from standard
model processes.
Now if you have [INAUDIBLE]
from standard model processes,
your distribution of
the invariant mass
must be a continuous line.
If you have a bump on
this continuous line,
a resonance, then you
have found something new.
And that was the
announcement in July 4, 2012.
You see, that's the
background from standard model
as a function of the environ
mass of the two photons.
And then on top of this
you have here the bump,
which is the possible
signal of the Higgs boson.
And both experiments
have shown that they
had signals in the
two photon channel
in the four lepton channel.
And that is now a
very educational slide
about the evolution
of that signal.
And for those of you realize
that might express if wrongly,
I usually get it wrong
when I explain this graph.
OK.
So this was the
status on July 2011,
at the European Physical
Society meeting.
What is shown here
is the probability
that it is not a signal.
I think I got it
right this time.
It's a probability
that it's not a signal.
No.
The probability that
it's not a fluctuation.
That's been [INAUDIBLE].
OK.
But if there's a
fluctuation, then you
should see a lot
of the thickness,
but a low amount of probability.
The lower the probability
here, the stronger the signal,
the stronger the indication
that there is a signal.
Now I got it right.
OK.
So if you have
indefinite statistics,
everything should be at one.
And there should
be no fluctuation
if there's no signal.
If there's a signal
somewhere, you
should see it as a
negative resonance here.
That is now the signal as we
have it a few months later,
in December 2011.
And you see now all these
fluctuations are gone.
It's essentially everything
is flat around one,
except for this one tick mark.
But then here we had
already a 3 and 1/2 sigma,
or a probability of 10
to the minus 4 nearly,
that it is not a fluctuation.
That it is a fluctuation.
Now.
It is difficult to
do that each time,
especially once it is
now 11:00 in the evening.
So then in spring 2012, the
first publication appeared.
And then the signal
went a little bit back.
But again, this is really also
a message to the young people.
If everything always goes
in the same direction,
something must be wrong.
There must be some fluctuation
also in the evidence.
So that didn't concern us.
And then came the July 2012.
And you see we had
a five sigma effect
that there is something new.
And everything else at all
other places, it's flat at one.
So it's clear that
a clear evolution
over one year from let's say,
a 2 sigma to a 2 and 1/2 sigma
effect to a five sigma
effect in one place.
And when it was
published finally
with an analysis of more data,
it went to nearly six sigma.
And today we are much
beyond the six sigma,
in each of the experiments.
But I think this is a
textbook example of how things
are going within a short time.
One year is a short time
in particle physics.
But it shows the way how
such thickness evolves.
And that it takes time to
really announce a discovery.
And I can tell you
here, at the time
of CEPS where we
had 2 and 1/2 sigma,
we had a press conference.
And one of the journalists was
asking me, what is going on?
Why can't you announce
already now a discovery?
So I looked at him and told him,
look, we need more statistics.
We have to be more sure.
So we need patience.
And then he answered, but we
journalists are not patient.
Then I looked at him.
And I smiled at him.
And I said to him, but
maybe you can learn it.
Afterwards he made a very
nice article out of this.
And then in December, when
we were at 3 and 1/2 sigma,
a journalist came to me and
said, do you remember me?
I remembered him.
I just got the newspaper
wrong, but it doesn't matter.
He said, I'm the journalist
whom you asked to be patient.
And he said look,
I have learned it.
Isn't that great?
You can educate
journalists with that.
I'm not sure if I
made a mistake now,
because I think there's an
AP journalist in here today.
You are there?
You ignore that.
No.
OK.
No.
It's very nice.
It was a very nice
discussion with him.
OK.
So, the question is now,
is this new particle really
a Higgs boson?
And for that, you
have to verify the two
most important fingerprints.
One fingerprint
is does it couple
to the fundamental
particles according
to the mass of the
fundamental particle?
And that is shown here.
That's the coupling
strength of this particle.
Two other particles
as a function
of the mass of these particles.
You have here the top
quark, W and Z boson,
and the light particles
like the tau, electron,
and the bottom quark.
And it's a clear line
dependence between the coupling
and the mass of these
particles, as predicted here
by the standard model.
Of course, it still was
a large [INAUDIBLE].
And I know I don't have the
most up-to-date plot here.
But it shows
clearly the coupling
is as predicted by
the standard model.
Secondly, the experiments
have measured the spin
of the particle at zero.
It represents a
scalar field, which is
very important for this theory.
So both fingerprints
have been verified.
So the answer is yes,
it is a Higgs boson.
It completes the standard model.
In that way describing
around 5% of the universe.
Oh yes.
It took us 15 years for 5%.
But I still say it
is a Higgs boson,
I'm not talking about
the Higgs boson.
So the Nobel Prize in
physics was given in 2013
to Francois Englert
and Peter Higgs.
Robert Brout, the co-author
with Francois Englert,
had unfortunately passed
away a few years earlier.
For the theoretical
discovery of a mechanism
that contributes to
our understanding
of the origin of mass of
the subatomic particles.
And then confirm
through the discovery
of the particle by
Atlas and CMS at CERN's
large Hadron collider.
That is a fantastic one
sentence acknowledgement
to the theory and
experimental efforts.
Now you have to
remember, they both are
completely independent from
each other, the theory 1964.
So it took 48 years
to find the beast.
To find the particle.
And it took also 48 years
because they have never
met before, they met
the first time in 2012
at the announcement
of the discovery.
But the discovery of the Higgs
boson is only the beginning.
So what's next?
The question, is it the
Higgs boson, or one of many?
The Higgs boson would mean it is
the one of the standard model,
and nothing else.
But the standard model now
predicts all the properties
of this Higgs boson.
If one of the
properties deviates
from the prediction
of the standard model,
then you find new physics.
And when you find new physics,
if you measure the disposition
of the properties,
then the properties
could give information
on dark matter,
because dark matter
particles would
influence these properties.
And if you are very
lucky, the properties
could give first
indications of dark energy.
And I remind you that
95% of the universe
are consisting out of dark
matter and dark energy.
So at least my understanding
of the universe
is going to change.
And I think we are,
if we are lucky,
we are really at the
threshold to open the door
into the dark universe.
This is why we now
have a physics program
at the large Hadron
collider far beyond 2030
for the next 20 years.
And soon the LHC will
run at a high energy,
opening a new window, hopefully,
into this dark universe.
We will produce many
more Higgs boson
to investigate the properties.
And if you look
at the past H(126)
discovery, what is going on?
We've really just
begun the search
beyond the standard model.
Much is still to be accessed.
There will be new
physics models produced.
There will be precision
and rare physics
beyond the direct
production reach.
The LHC is not only a superb
energy frontier machine,
it's also a superb
intensity frontier machine.
With all this intensity, you can
measure very, very precisely.
And I would never have
dreamt 5, 10 years ago
that the LHC could be
such a precision machine.
It's fantastic what you can do.
That's a message to
the funding agencies.
It's clear that
investment is critical.
We have this fantastic machine.
We have to keep it going
with powerful detectors,
triggers, computing.
And we should always remember
that LHC is the only Higgs
top, Z, W factory on the
planet for many years to come.
We just have to exploit that.
And one of the candidates
for dark matter
could be beyond the Higgs
indirect measurements could
be supersymmetry, which
demands for each standard model
particle this
supersymmetric partner.
And the lowest
supersymmetric part
that could be a candidate
particle for dark matter,
and that would be
the only machine
where we could produce
dark matter in the lab
and then investigate it.
That's an example of how
supersymmetric particles could
be produced at the LHC.
You would have heard it if it
would have found something.
So no supersymmetric
particle discovered yet.
However, the potential
for discovery of SUSY
is sizable in the coming
years, first with the energy
increase which we have,
and secondly, then
light with the intensity.
So there are many years to go.
And nobody should dream
that if SUSY is there
that we find it like this,
in the very first days.
It might take many years.
And this is why the European
strategy for particle physics
has identified four activities
that have to be carried out
with the highest priority.
And Europe's top priority
should be the exploitation
of the full
potential of the LHC,
including the high
luminosity upgrade
of the machine and detectors.
So that was the European
strategy in 2013.
Now last year the P5
report has been published.
P5 is the Particle Physics
Project Prioritization Panel.
But P5 is much easier.
The LHC upgrades constitute
our highest priority
real time large project.
So there's a correspondence
to the two strategies.
Therefore the key
message here is
there's a program at the
energy frontier with the LHC
beyond 2013.
7 and 8 TeV have been done.
14 TeV design
luminosity is coming.
And then 14 TeV luminosity--
the high lumi LHC is coming
in roughly 10 years from now.
But upgrades to the
accelerator complex, detectors,
and computing grid are vital
to fully exploit the physics
potential of the LHC.
And that is shown by
these two statements
from P5 and the
European strategy.
And that's the
HiLumi LHC project.
There's a major
intervention needed
on more than 1.2
kilometers of the LHC.
New high field magnets,
triplets, inner triplets,
and the focusing
magnets short dipoles,
et cetera, have to be done.
And this is all carried out in
an international collaboration.
And you see here
the new elements
of quadrupoles and dipoles.
And you see there three
times the American flag.
So there's a lot of
international collaboration
between the US, CERN, and some
individual countries in Europe,
and also Japan here.
So national laboratories,
but also industrial firms
are involved in that.
So that is number one.
Then out of the four
activities, the next three
are on equal footing.
But we at CERN should
undertake the science studies
for accelerator project
in a global context
with an emphasis on the
high energy frontier.
Proton, proton,
electron positron.
And that shows you
why we have to do it.
That was a time where I was
still working as a researcher,
but was during LEP time.
And you see the
construction started 1980.
But at the time of the
construction of LEP,
the first ideas on LHC on design
and R&D started around 1984.
So LEP was [INAUDIBLE] with
physics and its upgrades
until the beginning of 2000.
Then the construction
of LHC started.
And the physics started in 2010.
Today we are here.
Well, I have to move
that we are here.
It doesn't change the picture.
The high lumi LHC, the
design started already
at the construction
phase of the LHC.
So if you look at
that, the time frame
is that you need at
least 30 years, 40 years,
for such a project.
That means it's now
high time to start
to discuss the next study.
Not yet a project, but to
discuss a next strategy.
No, no.
It's true.
And this is the future
circular collider study,
which is geared towards
proton-proton collision
towards 100 TeV.
We had a kick off meeting
February last year in Geneva,
and the first collaboration
meeting in March 2015 in the US
in Washington.
And you have to do it
now if you want to have
a project in 10, 15, 20 years.
So what is the idea?
We want to have a conception
design report ready,
and a cost review for the
next European strategy
update in 2018, '19.
It's an international
collaboration.
We have now signed more than
50 MUs with institutions
all over the world to study as a
driver proton-proton collisions
as in potentially
[INAUDIBLE] e plus and minus.
And then as a potential
option, proton-electron.
If you have such an
infrastructure in the Geneva
area, this is LHC.
And this would be a
future circular collider.
It traverses the lake.
The lake is relatively shallow.
If you're lucky and
you get the water out,
you have free cooling.
But OK.
We tried to avoid it.
But if you have such a
large infrastructure,
you have to study all
possibilities, which you can
do with this infrastructure.
But the driver is the
Hadron-Hadron collision.
At the same time, of
course, we are continuing
our linear collider study.
So this is a compact
linear collider
near CERN, which
could reach eventually
3 TeV of electron-positron
collisions.
And there the conceptual design
report is already published.
But R&D continues
still at CERN and
in the verified collaboration
inside the CLIC effort.
But CLIC effort and
linear collider effort
means that LC are
coupled together
in the framework of the
linear collider study at CERN.
Because the third topic
in the European strategy
high priority is the
international linear collider,
where they have finalized
the technical design
report that has been completed.
Construction could,
in principle, start.
But we have to find somebody
who would like to build it.
Now Japan has
expressed interest.
And Europe at
least, looks forward
to a proposal from
Japan to discuss
a possible participation.
So that's number three.
And at CERN there is
the effort on the ILC
is in the framework of
the linear collider effort
together with the CLIC effort.
Now the fourth pillar
of the European strategy
is that CERN should
develop a neutrino program
to pave the way for
substantial European role
in future long
baseline experiments.
We should explore
the possibility
of major participation
in the US and in Japan.
So our idea is with e
plus, e minus from Europe
we look to the east to Japan.
For the neutrinos we look
to the west to the US.
And we have now created
a so-called CERN Neutrino
Platform, which enables
large-scale detector
development and tests
for neutrino detectors.
So the ICARUS detector has now
been moved from the [INAUDIBLE]
to CERN, and will now soon
move refurbished to Fermilab
to build part of the
short baseline project.
And then we have other liquid
argon detector R&D ongoing.
So there's a test
team now dedicated
to neutrino detector R&D,
in particular, liquid argon.
And we have started now
very valuable collaboration
with the US, in particular
of course, Fermilab,
concerning long baseline
neutrino facility,
or the latest name is June.
There's a common effort on
detector and accelerator
topics.
I'm happy to report that
a global collaboration has
been set up now.
That's a major breakthrough
for Fermilab for the future.
It needs now a long-term
sustained effort and support.
But as far as I
understand, DOE is
very much behind that subject.
So it looks very encouraging.
So we have a clear
collaboration now with Fermilab.
Obviously US on the LHC, and
now in the other direction
with the neutrinos.
So particle physics in the next
decade has a fantastic future.
Because with a European
strategy approved by our council
in May 2013, with the
P5 recommendations
which were approved
by HEPAP in the US
last year with the
Japanese roadmap.
We have at least to my
knowledge for the first time
a global vision for our field.
And which goes far beyond
regional boundaries.
So this is really
for the first time
that we have this common vision.
So CERN, of course,
will play a major role
in this global endeavor
in all directions.
That's what we do at CERN.
That we go beyond
our borders, so
that we go out of our dedicated
site in the Geneva region.
So CERN is there to innovate,
to discover, to publish,
and to share.
And I think one
of the main issues
also is that CERN is there
to bring the world together.
Thank you.
[APPLAUSE]
Thank you for this
wonderful talk.
So now we are open
for questions.
[INAUDIBLE]
China's only, or
CERN, or in general?
[INAUDIBLE]
Well, we are collaborating
with China on the experiments.
We have good
relations with China.
Now the question
is, how is China
moving forward, for example,
with the circular collider?
Is it to be seen as competition
to the IFC in Japan,
or whatever?
We are open for intensifying
the collaboration with China.
It depends on their way how
they want to move forward.
Would you mind sharing
the new data from the LHC
could give evidence for
supersymmetry or for more
information about dark
matter and dark energy.
How likely do you
think [INAUDIBLE]?
What he's asking me
how likely I think
the discovery of
supersymmetry or some more
information on dark matter
in general, or dark energy,
would be in the
next years at LHC.
That's his question.
Now my answer is, I don't know.
Well, you put it on
your slides [INAUDIBLE].
Well, I hope.
I had the exclamation mark,
and I had the question mark.
OK?
The difference to the Higgs
is that the energy range
of the LHC was chosen so
that the electronic symmetry
breaking mechanism would fall
inside this energy window.
So it was sure that we
would find the mechanism
how elementary particles
get their mass.
That was a given from theory
and experimental knowledge.
So it was sure that it
would discover something.
Either the Higgs
or something else.
Now it's the Higgs.
With dark matter
and dark energy,
it's much more difficult because
the predictions are so wide.
Our theory colleagues
are very clever.
They have a plethora of models.
Because super simulator is
not just a single model,
it's many, many
different models.
So that you don't
know where it is.
It could be at a
very high scale.
It could be at a
relatively low scale.
And this is exactly
why I don't know.
But I'm always an optimist.
You cannot be a director
general without optimism.
There's a high chance.
But it's not actually
that it's for sure.
But it's basic physics.
Basic physics has the risk
of not finding something,
despite all your best efforts.
But I'm pretty sure
that we find something.
I don't put any pressure
on my successors, so.
But I'm pretty sure
we find something.
So just a comment on what
some of the other science
goals for the
linear accelerator.
Are those plans a lot
different from those
on circular accelerators?
Well, first of all,
the linear collider
uses electrons and positrons.
The circular collider
at the moment
uses protons and protons.
Ignore for the moment
the heavy ions.
So in the older times, I
would say 10 years ago,
everybody said the
proton-proton collider
is a discovery machine.
And the e plus
and minus collider
is a precision machine
which studies the physics.
I think that's no longer true.
Both are precision machines.
And they can discover things in
the different production modes.
OK.
For example, the carrier of
the strong force, the gluon,
was discovered in an e
plus and minus machine.
You would have
expected to discover it
at a proton-proton machine.
So both have
discovery potential.
And both have potential
for precision measurements.
The key issue here is that you
look at the same questions,
but with a different view angle.
You come to it with a
different production mechanism.
You look with different
types of detector.
You look with different
backgrounds in your processes.
It's very similar to
astrophysics or astroparticle
physics, where only the
results from many telescopes
together give you
the final picture.
The same here.
You look from
different view angles,
and suddenly you'll
see much more.
So it complements
the proton-proton
through the linear
collider e plus and minus.
The question is, which energy?
If you want to study many
of the Higgs couplings,
you can choose an
energy of 250 GV.
But then you'll miss the
ttbar threshold, for which
you need at least 350 GV.
If you want to measure
the Triple Higgs coupling,
which is something
very important.
That's the decay of the
Higgs into two Higgses,
you need at least the
e plus or minus 800 GV.
It's even better
to have one TeV.
This you can only reach
with a linear collider.
So already the
Higgs only gives you
enough justification to study
it within an e plus and minus
machine.
Now here you have to see
which energy you want to use.
The result of the
next one, if you
find something about
some supersymmetry,
if it's low mass or
higher mass, that
will then finally also decide
which type of accelerator
you build.
More questions?
CERN has had a very successful
program with heavy ions.
As the energy and the
luminosity increase though,
what do you see as the
future for [INAUDIBLE]?
Well, at the moment
they have a program
until at least 10 years.
And then we have
this long shot arm
where we increase where we
have the high lumi upgrade.
And even there,
you could imagine
to run from time to time
also for heavy ions,
with a higher luminosity.
They have plans to
collect 10 [INAUDIBLE]
with the heavy ion
collision mode.
Which would go until 2030 or so.
It complicates a little bit
the design of the interaction
region, but it's possible.
We are discussing
discussion of that.
And if they have a clear,
structured, interesting
program, I think one can do it.
So I see it a long future also
for the heavy ions at LHC.
[INAUDIBLE]
At the moment they are
upgrading the detector,
or improving the
detector every shut down.
They also have a very
ambitious program for the next
[INAUDIBLE].
And I think then they should
do one step after the other.
First finish this
present upgrade
before they talk about
the next upgrade.
Otherwise, you lose the focus.
And then they have a problem.
But I think there will
be a long lifetime also
for the heavy ions.
And actually also in the two
experiments, CM and Atlas,
there are two heavy ion
groups, very active.
Now here we have to decide do
we go on with these activities
or not, that again,
complicates interaction region.
OK.
If you are willing to pay
for that, that's no problem.
No.
We have to discuss this.
But it will go on.
All right.
Any other questions?
Maybe I can ask
a quick question.
So suppose the projects in China
and Japan don't go as planned.
What are the plans that CERN
has to go higher energy?
Is the high energy LHC
still in discussion?
Well I didn't have
it on my transparency
that the FCC study
includes a high energy LHC.
High energy LHC
means you throw out
the present magnets in
the LHC and replace them
with new magnets.
Now given all of the efforts
in magnet technology,
you might reach a maximum
of factor 2 high energy
as a high energy LHC.
Question, is that enough or not?
So this is why we concentrate
at the moment concerning
the energy frontier on
this 8,200 kilometer
infrastructure, which
would give a factor 7 or 8
with respect to the LHC,
depending on the magnet
development, which you can do.
The circumference
would be a factor
3 more than the LHC, roughly,
which is not so much,
plus the new technology
in the magnets.
However, we have to see
how much it would cost.
But that is at the moment
one way we are looking at.
But we are looking
at that independent
of the two other countries.
OK.
Any other?
Oh, yeah.
Why do you think it was
particle physics as opposed
to a different area
of physics or science
in general that was
able to bring together
the kind of financing and
international collaboration
to create a project like this?
You mean why it was
us, particle physics?
It's in our genes?
No.
I don't know.
I mean, particle physics
from the very beginning,
on the experimental side, needed
larger and larger corporation,
larger and larger collaboration.
So we have to, as I said,
learn how to deal with this.
Experiments 20 years
ago, 30 years ago,
consisted out of, the big ones
out of 300, maximum 500 people.
We thought that's the maximum.
But we learned how
to cope with that.
Today we have the 3,000.
Somehow we have
learned obviously
a very quickly, and
in a steady manner,
that you need to
collaborate despite the fact
that you compete
at the same time.
I don't know why it's us.
I see big problems in
other areas of science,
where they have problems to
work together in such a way.
But I think it's unavoidable for
most of the scientific fields
to collaborate more.
Take photon science.
If you go to the
free electron lasers,
it's not a group of one
or two or three people,
it's now also other
big experiments.
And I don't know.
For them it seems to
be a learning effect.
I don't know.
It must be in our genes.
I come back to this.
I have no other explanation.
OK.
Then let's thank
Professor Heuer again.
[APPLAUSE]
