Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 20th 2020

    am finally giving this an entry

    v1, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2021

    added pointer to today’s

    • Sven Heinemeyer, Stanislaw Jadach, Jürgen Reuter, Theory requirements for SM Higgs and EW precision physics at the FCC-ee (arXiv:2106.11802)

    diff, v3, current

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2021

    Is that language of the three frontiers (cosmic, energy, intensity) useful do you think?

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2021

    I am not in position to critique the common wisdom of the experiment HEP-community, but it sure sounds plausible

    (just to note that “intensity” \leftrightarrow “precision”, I have now added a remark on that to the entry here).

    Two points are maybe noteworthy:

    • There didn’t used to be much attention at all to the “precision experiments/intensity frontier”. This is gaining traction only now due to the direct detection null results of the LHC together with the increasing hints for precision effects in flavour/muon anomalies.

      At the same time, the general idea of precision experiments – that strictly every particle, up to the Planck scale, is and always has been leaving its loop-effect traces, ever so small, in mundane low-energy experiments – is a charming one of appeal to theoretically minded people, who should recognize a superb chance to bring better HEP theory to directly bear on question of particle phenomenology.

    • While cosmology has famously been said, since the “Λ\Lambda CDM concordance model” established a couple of decades ago, to have entered its “golden age” of “precision cosmology” that makes it a subject on par with particle physics (this didn’t used to be the case not so long ago), more recently the “H 0H_0-tension” in the “dark energy” model (not to mention the issues of “dark matter”) has been shaking up the foundations of the field to the extent that a small but growing number of experts feel compelled to call it all into question (cosmological contrarians). If these sceptics are only partly correct, then the conceptual foundations of cosmology will need some profound re-thinking before one can regard the field again as being on par with particle physics. This will be interesting to watch.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2021

    That “frontier”-language, as one may have guessed, seems to have been invented for grant applications of US particle physicists.

    A popular account back from 2008 is here:

    and a more recent and more professional discussion of the “intensity frontier” is on the first pages here:

    • J. L. Hewett et al. Planning the Future of U.S. Particle Physics (Snowmass 2013): Chapter 2: Intensity Frontier (arXiv:1401.6077)

    Have added these to the entry now.

    diff, v5, current

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2021

    I wonder what kind of language European physicists use. Guilty about our expansionist past, I would imagine it emphasises integration.

    engages in activities to reduce European fragmentation in physics research, funding and education (EPS)

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2021

    While this is off-topic, just to remark that internal integration is not the antonym to external expansion, on the contrary. How much more expansionist Europe would be were it less fragmented. That’s why Verhofstadt dreams of a European empire, in these words. Or imagine Eurasian integration would happen, following up on Temujin’s little integration project 800 years ago. That’s why every empire-that-is has it’s eye on preventing such integration (check out George Friedman at the 2015 Chicago Council on Global Affairs 53:50 and 59:10).

    Back on-topi: It could be that for the synonym pairs we discussed above:

    “precision experiment”/”intensity frontier”


    “direct detection experiment”/”energy frontier”

    the usage is split as EU/US, roughly. But I haven’t really checked this (and I am not planning to :-)

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2021

    added pointer to today’s

    • Thomas Gehrmann, Bogdan Malaescu, Precision QCD Physics at the LHC (arXiv:2111.02319)

    diff, v6, current

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 14th 2022

    added pointer to today’s

    • Snowmass White Paper: Belle II physics reach and plans for the next decade and beyond [arXiv:2207.06307]

    whose abstract starts out with the line:

    Belle II is an experiment operating at the intensity frontier.

    diff, v8, current

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2022

    added pointer to today’s

    diff, v9, current