Martin Cooper, Los Alamos

1
Martin Cooper, Los Alamos Co-spokesperson for the
EDM Project for presentation to EDM
Collaboration Meeting Los Alamos, NM June 2, 2003
2
NSAC

• Review of Fundamental Physics with Neutrons

• The Charge
• Interpret the Neutron Initiative in the Long
  Range Plan
• Evaluate the quality of the physics opportunities
• Implement the initiative with a constant budget

3
The Committee
Rick Casten (Yale-NSAC Chair-Ex Officio) David
Hertzog (Illinois) Roy Holt (Argonne) June
Matthews (MIT) Mike Ramsey-Musolf (Caltech) Mike
Pendlebury (Sussex) Bob Tribble (Texas AM
-Committee Chair) John Wilkerson (Washington)
4
Meetings
Los Alamos 4/17/03 Solid deuterium, UCN for
n-decay parameters npdg, PCN Small university
facilities ORNL 4/23/03 SNS Experiments at the
SNS - EDM, . . . NIST Program Washington, DC
5/9/03 Executive Session
5
LANL Presentations
Steve Lamoreaux (25 minutes) Experiment overview
and systematic errors.Martin Cooper (15
minutes) Sensitivity, experiment plan, cost and
schedule. Paul Huffman (10 minutes) Planned
measurement of the UCN storage time and
particle identification using after
pulses.Brad Filippone (10 minutes)
Superconducting shielding, magnetic field
generation using a cos(theta) magnet
and ferromagnetic materials.Doug Beck (15
minutes) Polarized 3He production and
transport. Spin relaxation of 3He.Dima Budker
(10 minutes) The HV test bed and field
measurements with the optical Kerr effect.
6
RD ISSUES
UCN density and storage time Density is largely
predictable Storage time measurement at
NIST Backgrounds (b and g) Particle
identification study at NIST Careful materials
choice Polarized 3He properties Uniform B field,
wall coatings to control spin relaxation Source
performance and injection into superfluid
4He Sensitivity of SQUID measurement of
magnetization Magnetic fields Use of
superconducting shield for SQUID
isolation Ferromagnetic shield for field
uniformity Electric field Dielectric properties
of superfluid 4He Optical Kerr effect to measure
field strength
7
RD TIMETABLE
2003 2004 2005 2006
UCN storage time
Background suppression level
injection into 4He
3He source performance and
3He relaxation time
SQUID sensitivity
Magnetic shielding configuration
Electric field parameters
8
Sensitivity
LANSCE dn lt 27 x 10-28 (95 CL) to (100
days) dn lt 6 x 10-28 (95 CL) SNS dn lt 12 x
10-29 (95 CL) to (300 days) dn lt 3 x 10-29
(95 CL)
9
SNS Risk Analysis
Quantity Symbol Design Degraded EDM Loss EDM Limit 95 CL

Wall Loss Time tw gt2,000 s 500 s 1.8
Particle ID 301 21 4
Background / Signal 21 51 1.6
3He Relaxation Time t3 30,000 s 3,000 s 1.9
3He Initial Polarization P3 99 90 1.2
SQUID Noise 1 mf0 10 mf0 1.6
Trapped Fields dB/B 10-3 5 x 10-3 3
Electric Field E 50 kV/cm 25 kV/cm 2

Quadrature 6.5 20 x 10-29 ecm
Murphey's Law (4 worst) 46 137 x 10-29 ecm
10
Communications with Roy Holt
TABLE Status of Neutron EDM Experiments, Limits
are given for 95 CL
Status Facility Limit (e-cm) Date Technique
Latest Publication ILL 7.5 ? 10-26 1999 20-? cell Hg magnetometer
Present Status ILL 3.4 ? 10-26 2003 20-? cell Hg magnetometer
Projected Experiments ILL 8-20 ? 10-27 2004-06 20-? cell Hg magnetometer
PSI 2 ? 10-27 2006-09 8-3-? cells Cs magnetometer
ILL 1.3-20 ? 10-28 2006-09 Superfluid He trap, neutron magnetometer
LANSCE 6-27 ? 10-28 2008-10 Superfluid He trap, 3He magnetometer
SNS 3-12 ? 10-29 2010-12 Superfluid He trap, 3He magnetometer
11
Letter to Committee
Thank you for the opportunity to present our
neutron-EDM experiment to your NSAC Committee on
Fundamental Neutron Science. We are enthusiastic
about moving forward, and in response to the
committees request to reduce the risk in the
project, the collaboration is accelerating its
RD program. We see the following issues as the
keys to making a funding proposal 1)
Neutron-wall partial lifetime 2) Suppression of
beta and gamma backgrounds with particle
identification 3) High voltage stability above
30 kV/cm 4) 3He-spin relaxation time The
collaborations efforts will be focused toward
making these measurements over the next 10 months
with the goal of demonstrating the feasibility of
the experiment. Additionally, work will progress
in other areas to further reduce the risk.
International competition in the neutron-EDM area
encourages us to be as timely as possible. As a
result of this RD program, and barring major
surprises, we expect in early 2004 to be in a
position to discuss the project with the funding
agencies in a way that is consistent with a FY06
start in funding. The LANSCE facility will be
the best place to do full system tests of our
apparatus for several years, leading to a new
measurement of the neutron EDM. To achieve the
ultimate sensitivity with this technique, the
ideal facility is the SNS, which has a much
higher flux of cold neutrons and a long term
commitment from the DOE for continued
operations. We look forward to working with your
committee and the funding agencies to place this
experiment in the national program. Should you
have further questions please contact us. Thank
you for your consideration.
12
NSAC Meeting - 5/30/03

• Preliminary committee report by Bob Tribble
• Final report due in September, but a good draft
  by the end of June
• September NSAC could transmit, modify, or reject,
  but the preliminary
• is likely final answer.

13
Outline
Facilities - SNS, Lujan, NIST, HIFR, PSI (not ILL
due to 5M buy in for US) Science - Standard
Model tests and beyond, hadronic weak
interactions Recommendations - Excellent
science Cost effective - accelerators run by
others - Not enough money Budget - . . .
14
Budget

• EDM is the flagship experiment but must be funded
  outside the program
• SNS is the future of the field - 4 low-cost
  parity/spin-rotation
• experiments for the cold line
• Immediate start of the cold beam line
• 2007 start of the 8.9 Å line depending on the
  status of EDM
• Lifetime experiment was not mentioned
• UCN-A should proceed, high priority for upgrades
• NIST should continue
• ORNL - Ramp up for operations mostly by
  redirecting personnel
• npdg may need to be delayed after commissioning
• PCN needs to be evaluated at a later time

15
New Funds

• EDM is separate
• Reduce FY'06 level of research for SNS operations
• (There was a lot of criticism at this point, but
  budgets prevailed)
• SNS priorities are EDM, parity violation/spin
  rotation, PCN

16
DOE/NSF Comments - Public (P) and Off-line (O)

• Kovar (P) - ORNL is voting with its feet, an
  institutional inititive
• Simon-Gillo (O) - "Martin, you should be
  smiling". We have the ammunition to go for funds
  outside the neutron physics envelope
• Keister (P) - The large financial burden is on
  the DOE. It is useful to understand the merits
  of the science
• Simon-Gillo (O) - She will go ahead with the EDM
  RD funds in June if she is not stopped
• Kovar (O) - "Is there a reason to look?"