Difference between revisions of "Town Meeting at DNP2012"

From CebafUsersGroup
Jump to: navigation, search
(Preparing for the Hadronic Physics Town Meeting at DNP2012)
(Preparing for the Hadronic Physics Town Meeting at DNP2012)
Line 39: Line 39:
 
* Should we follow the format of previous NSAC town meetings (although this is NOT a long-range plan) with both "invited summary presentations" and the opportunity for anyone who so wishes to show one (or at most 2-3) slides?  
 
* Should we follow the format of previous NSAC town meetings (although this is NOT a long-range plan) with both "invited summary presentations" and the opportunity for anyone who so wishes to show one (or at most 2-3) slides?  
 
* What should the "product" of this town meeting be? Realistically, it will be impossible to write (yet another) white paper in time for the Friday plenary town meeting. However, I (or someone else) could give a summary/overview of the points made during "our" town meeting.
 
* What should the "product" of this town meeting be? Realistically, it will be impossible to write (yet another) white paper in time for the Friday plenary town meeting. However, I (or someone else) could give a summary/overview of the points made during "our" town meeting.
 +
* How should people that cannot attend the town meeting be represented? E.g., should I collect slides from them to show?
  
 
Finally, is there anything else we should do BEFORE this town meeting in October? Note that the Heavy Ion, Fundamental Symmetries, and Computational Physics communities are all holding their own, separate town meetings in July/August. Should there be a more Jefferson Lab -- specific meeting in, say, September? What would be the agenda and the format of such a meeting? Since we already have a white paper, what should the outcome be?
 
Finally, is there anything else we should do BEFORE this town meeting in October? Note that the Heavy Ion, Fundamental Symmetries, and Computational Physics communities are all holding their own, separate town meetings in July/August. Should there be a more Jefferson Lab -- specific meeting in, say, September? What would be the agenda and the format of such a meeting? Since we already have a white paper, what should the outcome be?
  
 
For more information, see also our page on [[NSAC subcommittee feedback]].
 
For more information, see also our page on [[NSAC subcommittee feedback]].

Revision as of 19:37, 10 July 2012

BREAKING NEWS ABOUT DNP 2012 (NEWPORT BEACH)

Friday Town Meeting with NSAC Tribble Subcommittee Preceded by Thursday Mini-Town Meetings

Extended Abstract Deadline, 10 July


As part of the DNP fall meeting (24-27 Oct., Newport Beach), there will be an extended Town meeting on Friday evening with discussion of the activities of the NSAC subcommittee chaired by Bob Tribble. In addition, there will be an opportunity for mini-Town meetings for members of nuclear physics subfields to solicit public input, hold discussions, and prepare for the Friday meeting. The mini-Town Meetings will be held Thursday evening, 25 Oct., during the time period 4-10PM. We have identified contact persons for 4 town meetings, corresponding to the 4 major research areas of nuclear physics:

        Nuclear structure/astrophysics - Brad Sherrill
        Hadronic physics - Sebastian Kuhn
        RHIC physics - Paul Sorensen and Xin-Nian Wang
        Fund. Symmetries and Neutrinos - Alan Poon, David Hertzog, and Takeyasu Ito

We will be sending additional information on these mini-Town meetings in the near future as the groups get organized.

To accommodate those who may still wish to submit an abstract for the fall meeting, the deadline for submission of contributed abstracts has been extended to 5PM on Tuesday, 10 July.


Preparing for the Hadronic Physics Town Meeting at DNP2012

As indicated above, there will be a (up to 6 hour) town meeting on "Hadronic Physics" for input to the NSAC subcommittee considering the implementation of the present Nuclear Physics Long Range Plan. It is obvious that a strong showing of support and input from the Hadronic Physics community (and in particular the Jefferson Lab community) will be tremendously important. At this point, UGBoD is collecting your input on how to best organize this town meeting (and what to do to prepare for it). Please send your suggestions and comments to skuhn@odu.edu (UGBoD chair). In particular, please comment on the following ideas and suggestions:

  • Should we merge this town meeting with the Jefferson Lab User Group Satellite meeting that is usually held during DNP? Note that our topic "Hadronic Physics" is of course more general than just Jefferson Lab - RHIC spin, Drell-Yan at Fermilab, and US groups participating at HERMES, COMPASS, LHC, FAIR, J-PARC...) are part of this "theme". (Did I forget anything?)
  • What role should the Topical Group for Hadronic Physics of the APS play?
  • Should there be a presentation and discussion of the 12 GeV White Paper (which until recently was available for your comments)? This may be "too late" to be of much practical use.
  • Should we follow the format of previous NSAC town meetings (although this is NOT a long-range plan) with both "invited summary presentations" and the opportunity for anyone who so wishes to show one (or at most 2-3) slides?
  • What should the "product" of this town meeting be? Realistically, it will be impossible to write (yet another) white paper in time for the Friday plenary town meeting. However, I (or someone else) could give a summary/overview of the points made during "our" town meeting.
  • How should people that cannot attend the town meeting be represented? E.g., should I collect slides from them to show?

Finally, is there anything else we should do BEFORE this town meeting in October? Note that the Heavy Ion, Fundamental Symmetries, and Computational Physics communities are all holding their own, separate town meetings in July/August. Should there be a more Jefferson Lab -- specific meeting in, say, September? What would be the agenda and the format of such a meeting? Since we already have a white paper, what should the outcome be?

For more information, see also our page on NSAC subcommittee feedback.