New 31-km-long International Linear Collider ready for construction

Jun 12, 2013
A schematic of the layout of the International Linear Collider - note the soccer pitch for scale. Credit: ILC

Today the Linear Collider Collaboration published its Technical Design Report [PDF] for the International Linear Collider (ILC) - a proposed 31-kilometer electron-positron collider that will both complement and advance beyond the physics of the Large Hadron Collider.

In three consecutive ceremonies in Asia, Europe and the Americas, the authors officially handed the report over to the international oversight board for projects in , the International Committee for Future Accelerators (ICFA). The report presents the latest, most technologically advanced and most thoroughly scrutinized design for the ILC.

The ILC will accelerate and collide electrons and their antiparticles, positrons. Collisions will occur roughly 7000 times per second at the collision energy of 500 GeV. Some 16,000 superconducting cavities will be needed to drive the ILC's particle beams. The report also includes details of two state-of-the-art detectors that will record the collisions, as well as an extensive outline of the geological and civil engineering studies conducted for siting the ILC.

"The Technical Design Report is an impressive piece of work that shows maturity, scrutiny and boldness," says Lyn Evans, director of the Linear Collider Collaboration. "The should be next on the agenda for global particle physics."

Among other particles, the ILC will produce Higgs bosons and study their properties in detail to determine whether they are as predicted by the Standard Model. Will the be just the first of a family? Will nature be more complicated than a single "minimal" ? And how does the Higgs interact with other particles?

Render of ILC. © Rey.Hori/KEK

Japan is considering offering to host the ILC for the , siting it in the mountains of Japan. They propose to begin with a Higgs Factory and extend it to higher energies in the future.

The ILC brings together more than 1000 scientists and engineers from more than 100 universities and laboratories in over two dozen countries.

Explore further: Serial time-encoded amplified microscopy for ultrafast imaging based on multi-wavelength laser

More information: www.linearcollider.org/

Related Stories

Physics group looks ahead past LHC to LEP3

Aug 08, 2012

(Phys.org) -- A group of physicists is looking beyond the usefulness of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) to a new collider that would sit in the tunnel still occupied by the LHC, to an updated version of what ...

Physicist clarifies Higgs boson in human terms

May 31, 2013

Why did the journal Science name the Higgs boson – an elementary particle – last year's most important discovery? And why did it need something as enormous as the Large Hadron Collider, about 27 kilometers in diameter, to fin ...

Recommended for you

Timely arrival of Pharao space clock

6 hours ago

ESA has welcomed the arrival of Pharao, an important part of ESA's atomic clock experiment that will be attached to the International Space Station in 2016.

First in-situ images of void collapse in explosives

Jul 25, 2014

While creating the first-ever images of explosives using an x-ray free electron laser in California, Los Alamos researchers and collaborators demonstrated a crucial diagnostic for studying how voids affect ...

User comments : 29

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

vacuum-mechanics
1.9 / 5 (12) Jun 12, 2013
"The Technical Design Report is an impressive piece of work that shows maturity, scrutiny and boldness," says Lyn Evans, director of the Linear Collider Collaboration. "The International Linear Collider should be next on the agenda for global particle physics."
Among other particles, the ILC will produce Higgs bosons and study their properties in detail to determine whether they are as predicted by the Standard Model. Will the Higgs particle be just the first of a family? Will nature be more complicated than a single "minimal" Higgs boson? And how does the Higgs interact with other particles?

It is interesting to know that how much it cost? What is its advantage over the existing LHC?
VENDItardE
1 / 5 (14) Jun 12, 2013
clearly the next step in high energy physics but the question needs to be asked "is it big enough, expensive enough or powerful enough" and just as clearly the answer is NO.....get a real job LOSERS
Matthewwa25
5 / 5 (6) Jun 12, 2013
Venditarde,

Science has done more for humanity then your trillion dollar wars. You call yourselve small government? Lol.
Sanescience
2 / 5 (6) Jun 13, 2013
High energy physics is a diminishing returns game. That said the cost of these programs spread over its 20ish member countries is relatively small. What may be of greater concern is the opportunity cost to other programs that could better serve to improve peoples lives.
JRi
5 / 5 (3) Jun 13, 2013
Wonder, if Japan is the best place for this because of frequent earthquakes.
Grallen
3.3 / 5 (3) Jun 13, 2013
Japan would be an odd choice... Only plus I would see is it's proximity to China, which is where many rare earths needed would be coming from... Though shipping in that volume anywhere would be a minimal cost.

A good place to put it would be on the Canadian Shield somewhere. Super stable, near natural disaster free; Colder climate would reduce cooling costs on the super conductors; Surplus of highly educated engineers; 1st class power grid, almost any where you decide to put it; And Canadian are too polite to say no. ;)
antialias_physorg
3.5 / 5 (13) Jun 13, 2013
High energy physics is a diminishing returns game.

If you consider the difference between species survival and extinction a 'diminishing return'...

The thing is: Anything we don't know about the universe can (and eventually will) kill us. This has been true since we started looking around for predators while trying to drink from a lake - till today when we look around for effects in physics than can boil up and bite us on the (species-wide) behind...if not directly then indirectly.

The knowledge of (and eventual control over) the Higgs field may give us faster than light travel (because if you can prevent interaction with the Higgs field you're possibly not subject to relativistic mass increase as you approach c...and you can also accelerate basically 'for free')
The Higgs may be our gate to the stars - and you want to throw that away because you think investment in a new iPad is preferrable?

alfie_null
3 / 5 (3) Jun 13, 2013
High energy physics is a diminishing returns game. That said the cost of these programs spread over its 20ish member countries is relatively small. What may be of greater concern is the opportunity cost to other programs that could better serve to improve peoples lives.

Doesn't cause me much concern. Please provide some concrete examples of how the money can be better spent to improve people's lives. How much, to what purpose. For extra points, what you expect it will accomplish.
nowhere
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 13, 2013
In development of cold fusion, magnetic motors, room temperature superconductors and antigravity drives, for example. All these findings already exist for many years - their research is just boycotted with mainstream physics.

Why doesn't one scientist, break from mainstream practice of boycotting, and sell this already existing tech to companies for billions?
antialias_physorg
4 / 5 (8) Jun 13, 2013
The last significant contribution of high-energy physics for humanity was development of nuclear bomb.

It gave us nuclear energy which did play a role at some point - and still does for some nations. And - if fusion works out - may well play a big role in our future. (On or off this world).
We're certainly not going to go into space (or aquatic) for any significant amount of distance/time using coal/oil or gas.

The beam sources of high energy physics have given us the tools to probe into the atomic structures themselves - which is of inestimable value for the material sciences (from corrosion research to battery design)

Synchrotrons give us the means to attack cancer with radio-isotope therapy.

Yes, as the old adage says "increasing vision is increasingly expensive". But going blind through the world always leads to tragic (or comic) extinction.
Bog_Mire
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 13, 2013


A good place to put it would be on the Canadian Shield somewhere.

....then if anything went wrong we could "Blame Canada"!
brt
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 13, 2013
In development of cold fusion, magnetic motors, room temperature superconductors and antigravity drives, for example. All these findings already exist for many years - their research is just boycotted with mainstream physics.

Why doesn't one scientist, break from mainstream practice of boycotting, and sell this already existing tech to companies for billions?


answer: because he's a f*cking idiot who has no idea what he's talking about.
brt
5 / 5 (3) Jun 13, 2013
In development of cold fusion, magnetic motors, room temperature superconductors and antigravity drives, for example. All these findings already exist for many years - their research is just boycotted with mainstream physics.

Why doesn't one scientist, break from mainstream practice of boycotting, and sell this already existing tech to companies for billions?


answer: because he's a f*cking idiot who has no idea what he's talking about.


I mean natello of course.
Egleton
1 / 5 (2) Jun 13, 2013
We need both big science and we need little science. As much money should be diverted from wars as possible.
Three urban myths:
1 Wars stimulate the economy. If that were the case we would burn our houses every year to get richer.
2 Some science is "Pathological". No science is "pathological". There are interesting experiments or boring experiments. Dropping a food on the floor to duplicate the experiment that you did in your high chair as a two year old is still valid science.
So why then do some insist on being arbiters of good taste in science?
3 Extarordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan regreted having said that in his later years, as it is patently false, as a moments reflection will reveal.
maxb500_live_nl
1 / 5 (2) Jun 13, 2013
What about the Compact Linear Collider, CLIC. Seems to be a far better choice then this. Since this ILC has only 0.5 Tev while the CLIC is to operate at 3Tev it should achieve far greater results. And likely at lower cost because of it`s unique design.

And since CERN has by far the largest physics research budget and most involvement from across Europe and across the whole world it seems they will decide what to build next. I would also assume sometimes it`s better to wait for new technologies or advance those technologies to achieve much higher energies. We are talking about spending up to tens of billions for the next generation linear collider and taking 2 decades or more to finish it. This is no easy or simple decision to be taken.
LarryD
5 / 5 (1) Jun 13, 2013
antialias_physorg, 'The knowledge of (and eventual control over) the Higgs field may give us faster than light travel (because if you can prevent interaction with the Higgs field you're possibly not subject to relativistic mass increase as you approach c...and you can also accelerate basically 'for free')'
This sounds like saying AT is a Higgs field? (not a criticism, a qusetion)

I think ILC is a bit too soon after LHC. With all the info these machines create which takes a long time to evaluate properly, I would have thought something like a ten year gap between building would be wise.

Urgelt
5 / 5 (3) Jun 14, 2013
Antialias wrote, "...the Higgs field may give us faster than light travel..."

That's a severe case of wishful thinking.

Possibly, just possibly, we might learn how to manipulate the Higgs Field for individual particles. What that would gain us isn't clear, but I don't think it's clear that a particle whose Higgs Field has been disrupted is necessarily a stable particle. We might get an energy yield.

Even if you could build inertialess spaceships - which isn't at all a conclusion we can reach from what we think we know about the Higgs Field - it's not clear they could exceed C.

FTL is, for now, given what we know, in the province of fiction, not physics.

Basic research, though, is good. The more we know about the nature of the physical world, the more we can learn to do with it. *Something* useful will probably emerge. That something may even be useful in liberating us from our birth planet - if we can get there before our population growth results in a crash.

Time is short.
antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (6) Jun 14, 2013
That's a severe case of wishful thinking...it's not clear they could exceed C.

I inserted the 'may' in 'may give us faster than light travel' on purpose. Obviosuly no one knows if this is possible or not, as the discovery of the Higgs isn't that long ago.

Currently it looks like the relativistic mass increase prohibits you from adding enough impulse to a craft in order for it to exceed c. If we could decouple from the Higgs field (and I aggree that is a VERY big "if") then
a) that mass increase may not apply - acceleration could again be linear with expended reaction mass.
b) reaction mass needed may be greatly reduced if we figure out how to decouple the craft even partially - but not the reaction mass at the point of useage.

It would be like 'superconductivity for the Higgs field'.

But even if decoupling from the field is impossible, further research on the Higgs will give us a deeper understanding of the structure of the universe - which is never to be sneerd at.
brt
4 / 5 (3) Jun 14, 2013
The former U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu estimated the total cost of International Linear Collider to be US$25 billion (just this single one collider). It's more expensive device than ITER (which pretends at least some usefulness) and way way more expensive than the cold fusion research. In addition, from perspective of AWT the ILC is predestined to find anything interesting anyway - the amount of new findings goes with increasing energy down, as LHC already demonstrated. It's because the vacuum is behaving like the water splash: the more energy we put into it, the more noise we will get. It's just salary generator for physicists and companies involved and a waste of precious helium, which will be consumed in cooling of supermagnets.


perfect example of what I was talking about in my previous comment.
brt
3.4 / 5 (5) Jun 14, 2013
Many theoretical particle physicists do not see the need for the ILC anyway. The intensity of the LHC will most likely give us the data to narrow the constants down enough. The ILC would be better built after the LHC closes down and much of the data has been analyzed. Money's better spent on neutrino experiments to determine the mass hierarchy and the CP violating phase.


This isn't true. So much so that it could accurately be called a lie.
brt
5 / 5 (2) Jun 14, 2013
Why doesn't one scientist, break from mainstream practice of boycotting, and sell this already existing tech to companies for billions?
Because the governments http://www.newsci...be.html, so it cannot be marketed. But the scientists are here not for selling of patents, but for doing and publishing of research. After all, they shouldn't patent any technology privately, which they developed for governmental money.


So it's a good idea that everyone knows how to enrich uranium or plutonium? after all, how would we have deep space satellites without plutonium fuel?

It's a very bad idea to share advanced knowledge with immature governments/people. As technology and science advances, the need to restrict who understands and can use that technology and power will also increase.
Tachyon8491
1 / 5 (3) Jun 14, 2013
The liting of suppression on free energy devices that are intrinsically capable of overunity power production will not only cause a revolutionary paradigm shift in publically available technology, but will cause an unprecedented social revolution - it will finally, and for the first time, free us from energy enslavement. Energy enslavement has been with us from the days of physical slavery and just evolved and escalated to a form of social control where an elite (government and multinational corporations) controls social tendencies and behavioural patterns garnering public energies in an ever-upward mode. The fossil-fuel corporations are not willing to sacrifice their quintillions of infrastructure just as governments are not willing to give up social control - continued energy-control is the mechanism. It's time this suppression and old form of energy-control dissolved and resolved. That release promises an unprecedented, new freedom for everyone
ValeriaT
1 / 5 (5) Jun 14, 2013
This isn't true. So much so that it could accurately be called a lie
Actually the physicists did lost and wasted much of data from LEP, a well before the LHC was finished. The substantial portion of experiments will get wasted in this way. I'd recommend to read it, it's interesting example of how the contemporary science actually works.
rah
1 / 5 (4) Jun 15, 2013
HEY! When did the US lose the option to build this at Fermilab or elsewhere in the US? I know the US is declining rapidly and that the politicians aren't smart enough to approve this thing, but can't we continue to pretend?
Greenwood
not rated yet Jun 15, 2013
When did the US lose the option to build this at Fermilab or elsewhere in the US?


The US government killed the last major collider effort in the US, SSC. This time not only US money would be risked but large sums of money from international partners.
ValeriaT
1 / 5 (6) Jun 16, 2013
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (4) Jun 17, 2013
Because the governments hide every such a technology

Everey government? All over the world? In concerted, totally undetectable fashion?
You mean there is a contract with the likes of North Korea, Somalia, Iran or Cuba that they will also not allow anyone to build this stuff there?

That seems far fetched. These countries can't even agree on seating arrangements with their neighbors when it comes to having talks.

...on a totally unrelated note: Gotta buy more tinfoil stocks.
sirchick
not rated yet Jun 18, 2013
@natello do you ever talk about anything except cold fusion, this thread has nothing to do with cold fusion but you still find a way to mention it a few times.

Stop making comments go to university and go work on cold fusion rather than sitting on your arse commenting if you love cold fusion that much! Stop pestering and derailing the subject.
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Jun 19, 2013
this thread has nothing to do with cold fusion but you still find a way to mention it a few times.

I think he's employed by some crackpot organisation and gets payed 50cents every time he mentions it or aether.

That's really the only thing that makes sense at this point why he brings up cold fusion on articles that pertain to toilet paper.