Hi All,
 Sorry, haven't had time to read this yet.  Will read and comment.  My feeling would be to mention T2HK, as we get it for free so we would be daft not to back it, but I have to read it in context.

Cheers,
 Dave


-----Original Message-----
From: List for the UK neutrino community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Touramanis, Christos
Sent: 20 June 2012 12:47
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Another Draft

Hello, 

Thanks for the input on UK contributions in MINOS. I was looking for details in the original draft but found little so I put in what I knew as a starting point. Reminding people who we are and what we have achieved cannot be a bad thing. 

I also agree to remove the T2HK mention and only have non-EU projects at the conclusions.

As for the technical presentation, of course the one in the original draft is much better, up to date and an expert's delight. However it could be that our non- expert, non-afficionados audience might be put off and just glance over the table not bothering with sin squares of single or double angles etc (being deliberately excessive here to make the point). Dave might know better the specific panel but my feeling is to go for simple and clear. As for the latest MINOS indication for non-maximal theta23, I do not see what that would add to the discussions within the panel. How would that change our plans anyway? Of course I will not insist on this point, I am willing to follow the general feeling. 

Cheers
Christos

-----Original Message-----
From: List for the UK neutrino community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ryan Nichol
Sent: 20 June 2012 12:06
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Another Draft

Hello Christos, Alfons, Gary, Silvia and Ken,

We can agree with the point that if the goal of this submission is to try an extract a substantial amount of money from CERN then we should focus on the future European projects rather than discussing any or all future US or Asian experiments. The whole UK community could get behind a document that is proposing a future European facility (or facilities), but this document is not the place to pick favourites amongst the other future international projects. So in particular, in the Christos draft we would strongly advocate removing the discussion of T2HK and only mention it in the concluding remarks.

Factual Comments
---------------------------
The current state of the mixing angles and mass splittings was better represented in the original draft which showed, amongst other things, that the MINOS, SuperK and T2K data already (slightly) favour a non maximal theta23 mixing.

The UK also provided target hardware for the upgraded NuMI beam for NoVA/MINOS+ (and indeed the last of the old style NuMI-MINOS targets).

The UK provided readout electronics for MINOS Far Detector and the optical readout chain for the MINOS Near Detector.

Cheers,

Ryan & Jenny




On 19 June 2012 22:47, Christos Touramanis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 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
>
>



--
-----------------------------------------------------
Ryan Nichol
Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
University College London
Gower Street
London
WC1E 6BT

Email: [log in to unmask]
Tel: 0207 679 7266
-----------------------------------------------------