Dear all,
I have prepared a draft submission in a slightly different style to the original one. Please be sure that I have no intention to antagonize the authors of the original (or the time to do so) but I felt that there were two aspects which maybe can be improved:
1. You don't go to the off-licence to buy spare parts for your car. The European strategy group can, within its mandate, recommend highly a neutrino programme in Europe (if we persuade them), but advocating T2HK, LBNE, GLADE, nuStorm
(a) does not gain us much as they have no way to influence the US or Japanese programmes (assuming that the Americans are able themselves to get a programme approved in their own country in the first place)
(b) gives the ideal justification to proponents of other programmes (colliders of every sort) to suppress neutrinos in Europe in order to promote their own plans (they probably know about Unitarity...)
2. I believe that at this level a more "wordy" strong essay might be better than a "review paper" style with concise averages, many significant digits, etc. They probably don't doubt that we (or some of us) are good physicists ;-)
Enjoy reading and consider how we want to proceed.
Regards
Christos
|