1 / 27

Physics : ILC vs LHC

Roma, 12 ottobre 2005. Physics : ILC vs LHC. ….after Snowmass 2005. Barbara Mele Sezione di Roma. Advances in Physics at Snowmass. Higgs Supersymmetry Beyond the Standard Model Top / Quantum Chromodynamics. LHC/ILC Connections Cosmological Connections

clarke-chan
Download Presentation

Physics : ILC vs LHC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Roma, 12 ottobre 2005 Physics : ILC vs LHC ….after Snowmass 2005 Barbara Mele Sezione di Roma

  2. Advances in Physics at Snowmass Higgs Supersymmetry Beyond the Standard Model Top / Quantum Chromodynamics LHC/ILC Connections Cosmological Connections Radiative Corrections (Loopfest)

  3. The Charge for the Physics Working Groups 1. What are the most important measurements that the ILC should perform in the subject area of your working group? 2. What are the key measurementsby which the ILC will add to what is already known from the LHC? 3. What are the processes andmeasurements new to the community in the past few years that further motivate the case for the ILC? 4. For each of these measurements, what criteria for the detectors are necessary to allow measurements to the appropriate precision? 5. Are there detector capabilities that are not strongly challenged by the list of processes in #1 and #2? Is this acceptable, or are there additional measurements that should be added to the list against which detectors will be evaluated?

  4. 485 pages ! started in Spring 2002 ~ 120 authors . . .

  5. Precision Higgs physics at the ILC • model-independent observation • mass • absolute branching ratios • total width (mod.indep.) • spin, CP • top Yukawa coupling • self coupling most measurements at the percent level! Garcia-Abia et al

  6. Supersymmetry Two methods to obtain absolute sparticle masses: in the continuum: at the kinematic threshold: (polarized beams) Freitas Martyn mass precision 0/00 – 0/0 • many more observables than just masses: • angular distributions, FB-asymmetries- cross sections- LR-asymmetries- ratios of branching ratios • possibility to determine SUSY parameters without many model assumptions

  7. LHC: Mass determination for 300fb-1 (thus 2014) LHC: Toy MC from edges, thresholds to masses Polesello et al: use of χ1 from ILC (high precision) in LHC analyses improves the mass determination D. Zerwas, Snowmass talk Allanach et al

  8. MSSM parameter determination

  9. SUSY W-group conclusions

  10. DM/DM main sensitivity bulk 3.5% focus 1.9% co-ann. 6.5% funnel 3.1% The Cosmic Connection SUSY provides excellent candidate for dark matter (LSP) Other models also provide TeV-scale WIMPs How well can the properties of the DM-candidates (to be found ataccelerators) be compared to the properties of the real DM (inferred from astrophysical measurements) ? ALCPG study/prel. matches precision of future CMB exp.

  11. Dark Matter : is it the Susy LSP ?

  12. Difficult at LHC

  13. No elementary Higgs? Cross section for vector boson scattering violates unitarity at ~1.2 TeV, if forces remain weak and no new resonances appear ILC sensitivity deep into multi-TeV region from VB final states eff. Lagrangian parametersof strong EWSB: Higgsless model: new resonancein WZWZ Coupling structure from ILC if resonance seen by LHC Birkedal et al. Krstonosic et al.

  14. Effective 4-fermion contact interactions

  15. What if “unexpected” New Physics ?

  16. it’s there for sure!Threshold scan provides excellentmass measurementTheory (NNLL) controls mt(MS) to 100 MeV Top • precise mtop vital for • improved SM fits- MSSM (mh prediction)- DM-density in mSugra- . . . . Heinemeyer et al Hoang et al

  17. EW precision measurements :

  18. Phisics Benchmarks for the ILC detectors

More Related