Hi,

Having discussions here  in Štrbské Pleso after  the Krakow meeting,  it
did occur  to me that  while it might  be quite difficult  for something
like the European  Strategy  process  to  lead  to  a  particular set of
projects emerging  with true and unambiguous  community consensus behind
them,  it is a process that might help identify and stop weaker projects
('pet' projects perhaps in extreme  cases) from somehow becoming part of
the programme through a sense of inevitability.

In which  case if there are  projects that  any significant  grouping of
people find uncompelling for good reasons,  it would be worth explaining
this gently, while being reasonably diplomatic about it, of course.

Yoshi

-- 
Yoshi Uchida                           Tel: +44 (0)20 7594 7821 (direct)
Imperial College London High Energy Physics     FAX: +44 (0)20 7823 8830
Blackett Laboratory 524    http://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/Yoshi.Uchida



> 
> Dear Christos and everyone:
> 
> I agree with your comments.  Our overall goal is to raise the profile of neutrino physics relative to collider physics in the medium and long terms, but we must be careful not to allow excursions down useless paths.  The sterile neutrino questions is tricky because it is a hot topic, but it is also quite likely a dead end.  That's why I think any experiments searching for sterile neutrinos must not only have  sensitivity to non-standard oscillations at better than 5-sigma level but must also constitute an important step for the standard three-neutrino paradigm measurements.  That can come in the form of accelerator or detector R&D, or cross-section measurements, or of course sensitivity to delta or the MH.  NuSTORM fits that bill, but I don't think the ICARUS-based program does.
> 
> Cheers,
> Morgan
> 
> M.O. Wascko
> Imperial College London
> http://www.hep.ph.ic.ac.uk/~wascko
> http://www.t2k.org
> 
> On 13 Sep 2012, at 11:12, Touramanis, Christos wrote:
> 
> > Dear all,
> > I am fully supporting the views presented here and I agree that we should submit our input as agreed. For a UK submission I would also be happy to put my name under nuSTORM also. We might want to state (or keep in mind to air in the discussion at Birmingham) that our priority is on long baseline for MH/CP rather than SBL/steriles (unless things have changed in your minds since we last discussed). One particular potential trap in my opinion is the proposed ICARUS-based sterile programme at CERN for which I do worry that it can create a hole were resources go in but world-class physics does not come out.
> > Cheers
> > Christos
> >