The World's Next Big Atom Smasher

The scoop: The world has fixed its attention on the 17-mile-around Large Hadron Collider, but the next big atom smasher -- the International Linear Collider -- is already on the drawing board. What gvies?

Dave on Earth (12:58 PM): Hi Barry! Looks like you got logged on just fine.

Next Big Collider (12:59 PM): Thanks for the easy instructions.

Dave on Earth (12:59 PM): No problem. Where are you chatting from?

Next Big Collider (1:01 PM): Caltech today, but a very good question.
Fairbanks Alaska yesterday and going to Korea shortly.

Dave on Earth (1:01 PM): What's with all of the travel?

Next Big Collider (1:01 PM): The "next big collider" is a global enterprise and my job is to bring it together

Dave on Earth (1:02 PM): I see. How many nations are interested in making this happen?

Next Big Collider (1:03 PM): Fewer than for Large Hadron Collider (LHC), because it's still in the design stage and not exploiting the science (yet).
So, only countries having advanced expertise in accelerators -- about 15 or 20 of them.

Dave on Earth (1:05 PM): It might sound silly that scientists are already thinking about the next big atom smasher -- the International Linear Collider (ILC) -- when the current star has barely started up (and is now under repair). How do you respond to those kinds of reactions?

Next Big Collider (1:07 PM): Scientists, agencies and governments that support this research understand how long it takes from idea to design to digging holes.
So we're out in front to convince people that this is a good thing to pursue.

Dave on Earth (1:08 PM): How will the ILC match up to the LHC?

Next Big Collider (1:10 PM): Not knowing the discoveries in advance, we can only project...
But three generations of electron and proton machines provide a good idea, however.

Dave on Earth (1:11 PM): What three generations of electron/proton machines are you referring to?

Next Big Collider (1:14 PM): Right. The electron generations were SPEAR at SLAC, PETRA at DESY, and lastly LEP at CERN. (LEP helped establish the standard model with precision and enabled predictions for LHC.)
The hadron machines accompanying those include AGS at Brookhaven, Fermilab's Tevatron and SPS at CERN.

Dave on Earth (1:14 PM): So, what are the major differences between the LHC and the ILC?

Next Big Collider (1:18 PM): Footnote example:
Suppose that the elusive Higgs particle is discovered at LHC. How do we know that it's really the Higgs, and what do we learn about the origin of mass?
The Higgs' finer properties can only be established at an electron-positron collider.

Dave on Earth (1:20 PM): To make an analogy, the LHC will play the part of bold explorer of our universe's "artifacts."
Which makes the ILC the guy who aims his microscope up to them to reveal every little detail that he can.

Next Big Collider (1:21 PM): Not a bad analogy. Of course, there are overlaps... there could be some brand-new discoveries with electrons at the ILC, and clever people might learn details with protons at the LHC.

Dave on Earth (1:23 PM): I see. How big, how powerful could the ILC be then? I imagine you'd want it to pack a little more "oomph" than older accelrators :)

Next Big Collider (1:26 PM): The energy is actually less -- probably max of 1 TeV compared to 14 TeV at LHC -- but consider this: All of the energy gets used.
When protons collide in accelerators like the LHC, a quark or gluon in each collides with another. Those collisions typically carry just 10 percent of the momentum of the protons.
With electrons, all energy goes to final state.

Dave on Earth (1:26 PM): So we'll get more bang for the buck (I think the technical term is luminosity) with a huge linear collider?

Next Big Collider (1:27 PM):Yep, more bang for the "energy" if not the $.
Electrons lose energy they build up when accelerated in a circle, and that loss grows the faster they go.
So eventually, you can't make a circular accelerator that makes sense to build. Instead, the idea is to make two linear beams (following Earth's curvature) 20 kilometers a piece, then collide electrons and positrons where they meet.

Dave on Earth (1:28 PM): What's the trade-off?

Next Big Collider (1:29 PM): When linear, we get only one pass at collisions -- so we need very, very intense and small beams to make the chance of a collision high enough.

Dave on Earth (1:31 PM): I take it that you haven't really figured out, exactly, how to squeeze the electron/positron beams down to size?

Next Big Collider (1:32 PM): We have figured it out, but we need to make technologies good enough to meet the technical requirements.
The requirements: very uniform fields, stable and non-shaking equipment, etc. Practical yet crucial design issues.

Dave on Earth (1:33 PM): Sounds like there's still a lot of work to be done, then.
Speaking of which, when do you realistically hope to have the machine built?

Next Big Collider (1:34 PM): Interestingly, these are the type of technology developments that push the state-of-the-art, and eventually find practical applications.
As for the present plan: Complete a design in 2012 that has a price tag and is ready to propose to governments.
Time to get all the commitments from countries: Unknown.
Once we do have commitments, though, it should take about 5 to 7 years to build.

Dave on Earth (1:35 PM): What kinds of practical applications -- should I expect the ILC to improve my microwave oven?

Next Big Collider (1:36 PM): Usually more hidden technical developments :)
Example: I mentioned physical stability. Advances there could lead to more stable tables for making microelectronics.
We're also improving the internet by developing "the grid." That will help improve conversations like this by immediately accessing large information easier than WWW even with Google.

Dave on Earth (1:39 PM): I'm sure Internet aficionados would drool at the thought of making "the grid" public, i.e. so they can download the latest Blockbuster movie instantly.

Next Big Collider (1:40 PM): We're doing it so a university researcher across the globe at his desk can access and do some serious data analysis with LHC or ILC.
Of course, some capability will improve possibilities for the "droolers."

Dave on Earth (1:41 PM): Thanks. Now I want to back up a little: You said there'd be two beams, each 20km (~12 miles) long meeting together to create some serious fireworks between electrons and positrons...