[BDXlist] BDX presentation to JLab directorate

[Eder Izaguirre]

Hi Marco,

Some quick comments:

slide 5: I wouldn’t label the parameter space beneath the thermal line “excluded”. It’s fair to say that in that region you get more DM in the model than is observed. But there is an argument for designing an experiment that will probe even beneath the thermal region, as it’s possible to have a more intricate model where the annihilation DM DM > SM SM is subdominant to some other annihilation channel (e.g. DM DM > dark sector). 

slide 10: I would make it clearer that the g-2_mu is excluded if you assume that the A’ decays only into SM particles. But there is still open territory when it can decay into invisibles. What you have written there is a bit confusing. In particular, the plot on the left shows the g_2 favoured region already excluded. But that’s dependent on the choice of parameters (e.g. what alphaD is chosen).

Best,

Eder






> On Mar 24, 2016, at 1:30 AM, Marco Battaglieri <battaglieri at ge.infn.it> wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> thanks a lot for your timely and valuable supporting material!
> I assembled the presentation available here
> https://userweb.jlab.org/~battagli/bdx.pdf
> If you have any comments, suggestions, let me have it asap in order to have the final version soon
> Thanks again
> Marco
> 
> 
> Marco Battaglieri wrote:
>> Dear BDXers,
>> as we mentioned in the last two meetings, we asked for an informal meeting with Bob McKewon to show progresses and get a feedback before to present the proposal.
>> The quick chat we imagined transformed in  a 2h meeting (!) with Bob, Rolf and Patrizia with 1h for presenting BDX status and 1h discussion. The meeting is fixed for tomorrow at 3PM EST.
>> I think this is a great opportunity to convince the JLab management about the goodness and the readiness of BDX at JLab and obtain the necessary support for the infrastructural costs (as you know this has little to do with the PAC judgment).
>> To make the story short. we need to prepare a good presentation quickly.
>> Even if there are many things still to work out for the full proposal, I believe we have already all ingredients for a thorough discussion with Bob &Co using as a skeleton the LOI but updating all the new items (and in particular addressing the concerns expressed in the PAC report about technology and infrastructure).
>> I'll assemble a presentation that includes all progresses we did in the different area in these 2 years and for this reason I would like from all of you 4-5 slides on a specific item:
>> 
>> - Eder and Gordan: theory update and reach plot (if any new)
>> - Andrea: rec software
>> - Andrea/Eder: Chi generation
>> - Andrea/Luca: test on crystals
>> - Dan W./Gordan: Chi interaction and nuclear response
>> - Dan S./Dinesh: BDX-DRIFT
>> - Elton/Tim: infrastructures at JLab
>> - Marzio/Mariangela: Cosmic BDX prototype at LNS
>> - Mariangela/Marzio: proton beam test at LNS
>> - Raffaella: simulation of beam-related bg (n and gamma)
>> - Alessandra: simulation of cosmic mu and n
>> I will take care of simulations with GEMC and the detector concept
>> 
>> Please nothing fancy, just few slides that I will cannibalize to assemble in a coherent presentation.
>> 
>> I'll be grateful if you could send  your contribution asap (at most by today at 3PM EST) giving me time to prepare the presentation, circulate a draft by tonight, receive your feedback by tomorrow morning and adjust/correct/complement what missing before the presentation.
>> Sorry for the late notification but I received the message from Bob yesterday night and tomorrow is the convenient slot they found.
>> Thanks in advance
>> Marco
> 
> _______________________________________________
> BDXlist mailing list
> BDXlist at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/bdxlist