Robert Aymar, CERN Director General from January 2004 to December 2008, passed away on 23 September at the age of 88. An inspirational leader in big-science projects for several decades, including the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), his term of office at CERN was marked by the completion of construction and the first commissioning of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). His experience of complex industrial projects proved to be crucial, as the CERN teams had to overcome numerous challenges linked to the LHC’s innovative technologies and their industrial production.
Robert Aymar was educated at Ecole Polytechnique in Paris. He started his career in plasma physics at Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique (CEA), since renamed Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives, at the time when thermonuclear fusion was declassified and research started on its application to energy production. After being involved in several studies at CEA, Aymar contributed to the design of the Joint European Torus, the European tokamak project based on conventional magnet technology, built in Culham, UK in the late 1970s. In the same period, CEA was considering a compact tokamak project based on superconducting magnet technology, for which Aymar decided to use pressurised superfluid helium cooling — a technology then recently developed by Gérard Claudet and his team at CEA Grenoble. Aymar was naturally appointed head of the TORE SUPRA tokamak project, built at CEA Cadarache from 1977 to 1988. The successful project served inter alia as an industrial-size demonstrator of superfluid helium cryogenics, which became a key technology of the LHC.
Robert Aymar set out to bring together the physics of the infinitely large and the infinitely small
As head of the Département des Sciences de la Matière at CEA from 1990 to 1994, Robert Aymar set out to bring together the physics of the infinitely large and the infinitely small, as well as the associated instrumentation, in a department that has now become the Institut de Recherche sur les Lois Fondamentales de l’Univers. In that position, he actively supported CEA-CERN collaboration agreements on R&D for the LHC and served on many national and international committees. In 1993 he chaired the LHC external review committee, whose recommendation proved decisive in the project’s approval. From 1994 to 2003, he led the ITER engineering design activities under the auspices of the International Atomic Energy Agency, establishing the basic design and validity of the project that would be approved for construction in 2006. In 2001, the CERN Council called on his expertise once again by entrusting him to chair the external review committee for CERN’s activities.
When Robert Aymar took over as Director General of CERN in 2004, the construction of the LHC was well under way. But there were many industrial and financial challenges, and a few production crises still to overcome. During his tenure, which saw the ramp-up, series production and installation of major components, the machine was completed and the first beams circulated. That first start-up in 2008 was followed by a major technical problem that led to a shutdown lasting several months. But the LHC had demonstrated that it could run, and in 2009 the machine was successfully restarted. Robert Aymar’s term of office also saw a simplification of CERN’s structure and procedures, aimed at making the laboratory more efficient. He also set about reducing costs and secured additional funding to complete the construction and optimise the operation of the LHC. After retirement, he remained active as scientific advisor to the head of the CEA, occasionally visiting CERN and the ITER construction site in Cadarache.
Robert Aymar was a dedicated and demanding leader, with a strong drive and search for pragmatic solutions in the activities he undertook or supervised. CERN and the LHC project own much to his efforts. He was also a man of culture with a marked interest in history. It was a privilege to serve under his direction.
The third update of the European strategy for particle physics, launched by the CERN Council on 21 March, is getting into its stride. At its June session, the Council elected former ATLAS spokesperson Karl Jakobs (University of Freiburg) as strategy secretary and established a European Strategy Group (ESG), which is responsible for submitting final recommendations to Council for approval in early 2026. The aim of the strategy update, states the ESG remit, is to develop “a visionary and concrete plan that greatly advances human knowledge in fundamental physics through the realisation of the next flagship project at CERN”.
“Given the long timescales involved in building large colliders, it is vital that the community reaches a consensus to enable Council to take a decision on the next collider at CERN in 2027/2028,” Jakobs told the Courier. To reach that consensus it is important that the whole community is involved, he says, emphasising that, compared to previous strategy updates, there will be more opportunities to provide input at different stages. “There is excellent progress with the LHC and no new indication that would change our physics priorities: understanding the Higgs boson much better and exploring further the energy frontier are key to the next project.”
The European strategy for particle physics is the cornerstone of Europe’s decision-making process for the long-term future of the field. It was initiated by the CERN Council in 2005, when completing the LHC was listed as the top scientific priority, and has been updated twice. The first strategy update, adopted in 2013, continued to prioritise the LHC and its high-luminosity upgrade, and stated that Europe needed to be in a position to propose an ambitious post-LHC accelerator project at CERN by the time of the next strategy update. The second strategy update, completed in 2020, recommended an electron–positron Higgs factory as the highest priority, and that a technical and financial feasibility study for a next-generation hadron collider should be pursued in parallel.
Significant progress has been made since then. A feasibility study for the proposed Future Circular Collider (FCC) at CERN presented a mid-term report in March 2024, with a final report expected in spring 2025 (CERN Courier March/April 2024 pp25–38). There is also a clearer view of the international landscape. In December 2023 the US “P5” prioritisation process stated that the US would support a Higgs factory in the form of an FCC-ee at CERN or an International Linear Collider (ILC) in Japan, while also exploring the feasibility of a high-energy muon collider at Fermilab (CERN Courier January/February 2024 p7). Shortly afterwards, a technical design report for the proposed Circular Electron Positron Collider (CEPC) in China was released (CERN Courier March/April 2024 p39). The ILC project has meanwhile established an international technology network in a bid to increase global support.
Alternative scenarios
In addition to identifying the preferred option for the next collider at CERN, the strategy update is expected to prioritise alternative options to be pursued if the chosen preferred plan turns out not to be feasible or competitive. “That we should discuss alternatives to the chosen baseline is important to this strategy update,” says Jakobs. “If the FCC were chosen, for example, a lower-energy hadron collider, a linear collider and a muon collider are among the options that would likely be considered. However, in addition to differences in the physics potential we have to understand the technical feasibility and the timelines. Some of these alternatives may also require an extension of the physics exploitation at the HL-LHC.”
Given the long timescales involved in building large colliders, it is vital that the community reaches a consensus
The third strategy update will also indicate physics areas of priority for exploration complementary to colliders and add other relevant items, including accelerator, detector and computing R&D, theory developments, actions to minimise environmental impact and improve the sustainability of accelerator-based particle physics, initiatives to attract, train and retain early-career researchers, and public engagement.
The particle-physics community is invited to submit written inputs by 31 March 2025 via an online portal that will appear on the strategy secretariat’s web page. This will be followed by a scientific open symposium from 23 to 27 June 2025, where researchers will be invited to debate the future orientation of European particle physics. A “briefing book” based on the input and discussions will then be prepared by the physics preparatory group, the makeup of which was to be established by the Council in September before the Courier went to press. The briefing book will be submitted to the ESG by the end of September 2025 for consideration during a five-day-long drafting session, which is scheduled to take place from 1 to 5 December 2025. To allow the national communities to react to the submissions collected by March 2025 and to the content of the briefing book, they are offered further opportunities for input both ahead of the open symposium (with a deadline of 26 May 2025) and ahead of the drafting session (with a deadline of 14 November 2025). The ESG is expected to submit the proposed strategy update to the CERN Council by the end of January 2026.
“The timing is well chosen because at the end of 2025 we will have a lot of the relevant information, namely the final outcome of the FCC feasibility study plus, on the international scale, an update about what is going to happen in China,” says Jakobs. “The national inputs, whereby national communities are also invited to discuss their priorities, are considered very important and ECFA has produced guidelines to make the input more coherent. Early-career researchers are encouraged to contribute to all submissions, and we have restructured the physics preparatory group such that each working group has a scientific secretary who is an early-career researcher. We look forward to a very fruitful process over the forthcoming one and a half years.”
In January 1962, CERN was for the first time moving from machine construction to scientific research with the machines. Director-General Victor Weisskopf took up the pen in the first CERN Courier after a brief hiatus. “This institution is remarkable in two ways,” he wrote. “It is a place where the most fantastic experiments are carried out. It is a place where international co-operation actually exists.”
A new generation of early-career researchers (ECRs) shares his convictions. Now, as then, they do much of the heavy lifting that builds the future of the field. Now, as then, they need resilience and vision. As Weisskopf wrote in these pages, the everyday work of high-energy physics (HEP) can hide its real importance – its romantic glory, as the renowned theorist put it. “All our work is for an idealistic aim, for pure science without commercial or any other interests. Our effort is a symbol of what science really means.”
As CERN turns 70, the Courier now hands the pen to the field’s next generation of leaders. All are new post-docs. Each has already made a tangible contribution and earned recognition from their colleagues. All, in short, are among the most recent winners of the four big LHC collaborations’ thesis prizes. Each was offered carte blanche to write about a subject of their choosing, which they believe will be strategically crucial to the future of the field. Almost all responded. These are their viewpoints.
I come from Dallas, Texas, so the Superconducting Super Collider should have been in my backyard as I was growing up. By the late 1990s, its 87 km ring could have delivered 20 TeV per proton beam. The Future Circular Collider could deliver 50 TeV per proton beam in a 91 km ring by the 2070s. I’d be retired before first collisions. Clearly, we need an intermediate-term project to keep expertise in our community. Among the options proposed so far, I’m most excited by linear electron–positron colliders, as they would offer sufficient energy to study the Higgs self-coupling via di-Higgs production. This could be decisive in understanding electroweak symmetry breaking and unveiling possible Higgs portals.
A paradigm shift for accelerators might achieve our physics goals without a collider’s cost scaling with its energy. A strong investment in collider R&D could therefore offer hope for my generation of scientists to push back the energy frontier. Muon colliders avoid synchrotron radiation. Plasma wakefields offer a 100-fold increase in electric field gradient. Though both represent enormous challenges, psychologists have noted an “end of history” phenomenon, whereby as humans we appreciate how much we have changed in the past, but underestimate how much we will change in the future. Reflecting on the past physics breakthroughs galvanises me to optimism: unlocking the next chapter of physics has always been within the reach of technological innovation. CERN has been a mecca for accelerator applications in the last 70 years. I’d argue that a strong increase in support for novel collider R&D is the best way to carry this legacy forwards.
Nicole Hartmanis a post-doc at the Technical University of Munich and Origins Data Science Lab. She was awarded a PhD by Stanford University for her thesis “A search for non-resonant HH → 4b at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector – or – 2b, and then another 2b… now that’s the thesis question”.
This job is a passion and a privilege, and ECRs devote nights and weekends to our research. But this energy should be handled in a more productive way. In particular, technical work on hardware and software is not valued and rewarded as it should be. ECRs who focus on technical aspects are often forced to divide their focus with theoretical work and data analysis, or suffer reduced opportunities to pursue an academic career. Is this correct? Why shouldn’t technical and scientific work be valued in the same way?
I am very hopeful for the future. In recent years, I have seen improvements in this direction, with many supervisors increasingly pushing their students towards technical work. I expect senior leadership to make organisational adjustments to reward and value these two aspects of research in exactly the same way. This cultural shift would greatly benefit our physics community by more efficiently transforming the enthusiasm and hard work of ECRs into skilled contributions to the field that are sustained over the decades.
Alessandro Scarabottois a postdoctoral researcher at Technische Universität Dortmund. He was awarded a PhD by Sorbonne Université, Paris, for his thesis “Search for rare four-body charm decays with electrons in the final state and long track reconstruction for the LHCb trigger”.
Big companies’ energy usage is currently skyrocketing to fuel their artificial intelligence (AI) systems. There is a clear business adaptation of my research on fast, energy-saving AI triggers, but I feel completely unable to make this happen. Why, as a field, are we unable to transfer our research to industry in an effective way?
While there are obvious milestones for taking data to publication, there is no equivalent for starting a business or getting our research into major industry players. Our collaborations are incubators for ideas and people. They should implement dedicated strategies to help ECRs obtain the funding, professional connections and business skills they need to get their ideas into the wider world. We should be presenting at industry conferences – both to offer solutions to industry and to obtain them for our own research – and industry sessions within our own conferences could bring links to every part of our field.
Most importantly, the field should encourage a revolving door between academia and industry to optimise the transfer of knowledge and skills. Unfortunately, when physicists leave for industry, slow, single-track physics career progressions and our focus on publication count rather than skills make a return unrealistic. There also needs to be a way of attracting talent from industry into physics without the requirement of a PhD so that experienced people can start or return to research in high-profile positions suitable for their level of work and life experience.
Christopher Brown is a CERN fellow working on next-generation triggers. He was awarded a PhD by Imperial College London for his thesis “Fast machine learning in the CMS Level-1 trigger for the High-Luminosity LHC”.
I feel a strong sense of agency regarding the future of our field. The upcoming High-Luminosity LHC (HL-LHC) will provide a wealth of data beyond what the LHC has offered, and we should be extremely excited about the increased discovery potential. Looking further ahead, I share the vision of a future Higgs factory as the next logical step for the field. The proposed Future Circular Collider is currently the most feasible option. However, the high cost and evolving geopolitical landscape are causes for concern. One of the greatest challenges we face is retaining talent and expertise. In the US, it has become increasingly difficult for researchers to find permanent positions after completing postdocs, leading to a loss of valuable technical and operational expertise. On a positive note, our field has made significant strides in providing opportunities for students from underrepresented nationalities and socioeconomic backgrounds – I am a beneficiary of these efforts. Still, I believe we should intensify our focus on supporting individuals as they transition through different career stages to ensure a vibrant and diverse future workforce.
Prajita Bhattarai is a research associate at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory in the US. She was awarded her PhD by Brandeis University in the US for her thesis “Standard Model electroweak precision measurements with two Z bosons and two jets in ATLAS”.
Particle physics and cosmology capture the attention of nearly every inquisitive child. Though large collaborations and expensive machines have produced some of humankind’s most spectacular achievements, they have also made the field inaccessible to many young students. Making a meaningful contribution is contingent upon being associated with an institution or university that is a member of an experimental collaboration. One typically also has to study in a country that has a cooperation agreement with an international organisation like CERN.
If future experiments want to attract diverse talent, they should consider new collaborative models that allow participation irrespective of a person’s institution or country of origin. Scientific and financial responsibilities could be defined based on expertise and the research grants of individual research groups. Remote operations centres across the globe, such as those trialled by CERN experiments, could enable participants to fulfil their responsibilities without being constrained by international borders and travel budgets; the worldwide revolution in connectivity infrastructure could provide an opportunity to make this the norm rather than the exception. These measures could provide equitable opportunities to everyone while simultaneously maximising the scientific output of our field.
Spandan Mondal is a postdoctoral fellow at Brown University in the US. He was awarded a PhD by RWTH Aachen in Germany for his thesis on the CMS experiment “Charming decays of the Higgs, Z, and W bosons: development and deployment of a new calibration method for charm jet identification”.
Young scientists often navigate complex career paths, where the pressure to produce consistent publishable results can stifle creativity and discourage risk taking. Traditionally, young researchers are evaluated almost solely on achieved results, often leading to a culture of risk aversion. To foster a culture of innovation we must shift our approach to research and evaluation. To encourage bold and innovative thinking among ECRs, the fuel of scientific progress, we need to broaden our definition of success. European funding and grants have made strides in recognising innovative ideas, but more is needed. Mentorship and peer-review systems must also evolve, creating an environment open to innovative thinking, with a calculated approach to risk, guided by experienced scientists. Concrete actions include establishing mentorship programmes during scientific events, such as workshops and conferences. To maximise the impact, these programmes should prioritise diversity among mentors and mentees, ensuring that a wide range of perspectives and experiences are shared. Equally important is recognising and rewarding innovation. This can be achieved by dedicated awards that value originality and potential impact over guaranteed success. Celebrating attempts, even failed ones, can shift the focus from the outcome to the process of discovery, inspiring a new generation of scientists to push the boundaries of knowledge.
Francesca Ercolessi is a post-doc at the University of Bologna. She was awarded a PhD by the University of Bologna for her thesis “The interplay of multiplicity and effective energy for (multi) strange hadron production in pp collisions at the LHC”.
ECR colleagues are deeply passionate about the science they do and wish to pursue a career in our field – “if possible”. Is there anything one can do to better support this new generation of physicists? In my opinion, we have to address the scarcity of permanent positions in our field. Short-term contracts lead to risk aversion, and short-term projects with a high chance of publication increase your employment prospects. This is in direct contrast to what is needed to successfully complete ambitious future projects this century – projects that require innovation and out-of-the-box thinking by bright young minds.
In addition, employment in fundamental science is more than ever in direct competition with permanent jobs in industry. For example, machine learning and computing experts innovate our field with novel analysis techniques, but end up ultimately leaving our field to apply their skills in permanent employment elsewhere. If we want to keep talent in our field we must create a funding structure that allows realistic prospects for long-term employment and commitment to future projects.
Florian Jonas is a postdoctoral scholar at UC Berkeley and LBNL. He was awarded a PhD by the University of Münster for his thesis on the ALICE experiment “Probing the initial state of heavy-ion collisions with isolated prompt photons”.
The two great challenges of our time are data taking and data analysis. Rare processes like the production of Higgs-boson pairs have cross sections 10 orders of magnitude smaller than their backgrounds – and during HL-LHC operation the CMS trigger will have to analyse about 50 TB/s and take decisions with a latency of 12.5 μs. In recent years, we have made big steps forward with machine learning, but our techniques are not always up to speed with the current state-of-the-art in the private sector.
To sustain and accelerate our progress, the HEP community must be more open to new sources of funding, particularly from private investments. Collaborations with tech companies and private investors can provide not only financial support but also access to advanced technologies and expertise. Encouraging CERN–private partnerships can lead to the development of innovative tools and infrastructure, driving the field forward.
The recent establishment of the Next Generation Trigger Project, funded by the Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fund for Strategic Innovation, represents the first step toward this kind of collaboration. Thanks to overlapping R&D interests, this could be scaled up to direct partnerships with companies to introduce large and sustained streams of funds. This would not only push the boundaries of our knowledge but also inspire and support the next generation of physicists, opening new tenured positions thanks to private funding.
Jona Motta is a post-doc at Universität Zürich. He was awarded a PhD by Institut Polytechnique de Paris for his thesis “Development of machine learning based τ trigger algorithms and search for Higgs boson pair production in the bbττ decay channel with the CMS detector at the LHC”.
The proposed Future Circular Collider presents a formidable challenge. Every aspect of its design, construction, commissioning and operations would require extensive R&D to achieve the needed performance and stability, and fully exploit the machine’s potential. The vast experience acquired at the LHC will play a significant role. Knowledge must be preserved and transmitted between generations. But the loss of expertise is already a significant problem at the LHC.
The main reason for young scientists to leave the field is the lack of institutional support: it’s hard to count on a stable working environment, regardless of our expertise and performance. The difficulty in finding permanent academic or research positions and the lack of recognition and advancement are all viewed as serious obstacles to pursuing a career in HEP. In these conditions, a young physicist might find competitive sectors such as industry or finance more appealing given the highly stable future they offer.
It is crucial to address this problem now for the HL-LHC. Large HEP collaborations should be more supportive to ensure better recognition and career advancement towards permanent positions. This kind of policy could help to retain young physicists and ensure they continue to be involved in the current HEP projects that would then define the success of the FCC.
Hassnae El Jarrari is a CERN research fellow in experimental physics. She was awarded a PhD by Université Mohammed-V De Rabat for her thesis “Dark photon searches from Higgs boson and heavy boson decays using pp collisions recorded at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC and performance evaluation of the low gain avalanche detectors for the HL-LHC ATLAS high-granularity timing detector”.
The main challenge for the future of large-scale HEP experiments is reducing our environmental impact, and raising awareness is key to this. For example, before running a job, the ALICE computing grid provides an estimate of its CO2-equivalent carbon footprint, to encourage code optimisation and save power.
I believe that if we want to thrive in the future, we should adopt a new way of doing physics where we think critically about the environment. We should participate in more collaboration meetings and conferences remotely, and promote local conferences that are reachable by train.
I’m not saying that we should ban air travel tout court. It’s especially important for early-career scientists to get their name out there and to establish connections. But by attending just one major international conference in person every two years, and publicising alternative means of communication, we can save resources and travel time, which can be invested in our home institutions. This would also enable scientists from smaller groups with reduced travel budgets to attend more conferences and disseminate their findings.
Luca Quaglia is a postdoctoral fellow at the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Torino. He was awarded his PhD by the University of Torino for his thesis “Development of eco-friendly gas mixtures for resistive plate chambers”.
With both computing and human resources in short supply, funds must be invested wisely. While scaling up infrastructure is critical and often seems like the simplest remedy, the human factor is often overlooked. Innovative ideas and efficient software solutions require investment in training and the recruitment of skilled researchers.
This investment must start with a stronger integration of software education into physics degrees. As the boundaries between physics and computer science blur, universities must provide a solid foundation, raise awareness of the importance of software in HEP and physics in general, and promote best practices to equip the next generation for the challenges of the future. Continuous learning must be actively supported, and young researchers must be provided with sufficient resources and appropriate mentoring from experienced colleagues.
Software skills remain in high demand in industry, where financial incentives and better prospects often attract skilled people from academia. It is in the interest of the community to retain top talent by creating more attractive and secure career paths. After all, a continuous drain of talent and knowledge is detrimental to the field, hinders the development of efficient software and computing solutions, and is likely to prove more costly in the long run.
Joshua Beirer is a CERN research fellow in the offline software group of the ATLAS experiment and part of the lab’s strategic R&D programme on technologies for future experiments. He was awarded his PhD by the University of Göttingen for his thesis “Novel approaches to the fast simulation of the ATLAS calorimeter and performance studies of track-assisted reclustered jets for searches for resonant X → SH → bbWW* production with the ATLAS detector”.
HEP is at an exciting yet critical inflection point. The coming years hold both unparalleled opportunities and growing challenges, including an expanding arena of international competition and the persistent issue of funding and resource allocation. In a swiftly evolving digital age, scientists must rededicate themselves to public service, engagement and education, informing diverse communities about the possible technological advancements of HEP research, and sharing with the world the excitement of discovering fundamental knowledge of the universe. Collaborations must be strengthened across international borders and political lines, pooling resources from multiple countries to traverse cultural gaps and open the doors of scientific diplomacy. With ever-increasing expenses and an uncertain political future, scientists must insist upon the importance of public research irrespective of any national agenda, and reinforce scientific veracity in a rapidly evolving world that is challenged by growing misinformation. Most importantly, the community must establish global priorities in a maturing age of precision, elevating not only new discoveries but the necessary scientific repetition to better understand what we discover.
The most difficult issues facing HEP research today are addressable and furthermore offer excellent opportunities to develop the scientific approach for the next several decades. By tackling these issues now, scientists can continue to focus on the mysteries of the universe, driving scientific and technological advancements for the betterment of all.
Ezra D. Lesser is a CERN research fellow working with the LHCb collaboration. He was awarded his PhD in physics by the University of California, Berkeley for his thesis: Measurements of jet substructure in pp and Pb–Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV with ALICE”.
ECRs must drive the field’s direction by engaging in prospect studies for future experiments, but dedicating time to this essential work comes at the expense of analysing existing data – a trade-off that can jeopardise our careers. With most ECRs employed on precarious two-to-four year contracts, time spent on these studies can result in fewer high-profile publications, making it harder to secure our next academic position. Another important factor is the unprecedented timescales associated with many prospective futures. Those working on R&D today may never see the fruits of their labour.
Anxieties surrounding these issues are often misinterpreted as disengagement, but nothing could be further from the truth. In my experience, ECRs are passionate about research, bringing fresh perspectives and ideas that are crucial for advancing the field. However, we often struggle with institutional structures that fail to recognise the breadth of our contributions. By addressing longstanding issues surrounding attitudes toward work–life balance and long-term job stability – through measures such as establishing enforced minimum contract durations, as well as providing more transparent and diverse sets of criteria for transitioning to permanent positions – we can create a more supportive environment where HEP thrives, driven by the creativity and innovation of its next generation of leaders.
Savannah Clawson is a postdoctoral fellow at DESY Hamburg. She was awarded her PhD by the University of Manchester for her thesis “The light at the end of the tunnel gets weaker: observation and measurement of photon-induced W+W– production at the ATLAS experiment”.
CERN turns 70 at the end of September. How would you sum up the contribution the laboratory has made to human culture over the past seven decades?
CERN’s experimental and theoretical research laid many of the building blocks of one of the most successful and impactful scientific theories in human history: the Standard Model of particle physics. Its contributions go beyond the best-known discoveries, such as of neutral currents and the seemingly fundamental W, Z and Higgs bosons, which have such far-reaching significance for our universe. I also wish to draw attention to the many dozens of new composite particles at the LHC andthe incredibly high-precision agreement between theoretical calculation performed in quantum chromodynamics and the experimental results obtained at the LHC. These amazing discovering were made possible thanks to the many technological innovations made at CERN.
But knowledge creation and accumulation are only half the story. CERN’s human ecosystem is an oasis in which the words “collaboration among peoples for the good of humanity” can be uttered without grandstanding or hypocrisy.
What role does the CERN Council play?
CERN’s member states are each represented by two delegates to the CERN Council. Decisions are made democratically, with equal voting power for each national delegation. According to the convention approved in 1954, and last revised in 1971, Council determines scientific, technical and administrative policy, approves CERN’s programmes of activities, reviews its expenditures and approves the laboratory’s budget. The Director-General and her management team work closely with Council to develop the Organization’s policies, scientific activities and budget. Director-General Fabiola Gianotti and her management team are now collaborating with Council to forge CERN’s future scientific vision.
What’s your vision for CERN’s future?
As CERN Council president, I have a responsibility to be neutral and reflect the collective will of the member states. In early 2022, when I took up the presidency, Council delegates unanimously endorsed my evaluation of their vision: that CERN should continue to offer the world’s best experimental high-energy physics programme using the best technology possible. CERN now needs to successfully complete the High-Luminosity LHC (HL-LHC) project and agree on a future flagship project.
I strongly believe the format of the future flagship project needs to crystallise as soon as possible. As put to me recently in a letter from the ECFA early-career researchers panel: “While the HL-LHC constitutes a much-anticipated and necessary advance in the LHC programme, a clear path beyond it for our future in the field must be cemented with as little delay as possible.” It can be daunting for young people to speak out on strategy and the future of the field, given the career insecurities they face. I am very encouraged by their willingness to put out a statement calling for immediate action.
At its March 2024 session, Council agreed to ignite the process of selecting the next flagship project by going ahead with the fourth European Strategy for Particle Physics update. The strategy group are charged, among other things, with recommending what this flagship project should be to Council. As I laid down the gavel concluding the meeting I looked around and sensed genuine excitement in the Chambers – that of a passenger ship leaving port. Each passenger has their own vision for thefuture. Each is looking forward to seeing what the final destination will look like. Several big pieces had started falling into place, allowing us to turn on the engine.
What are these big pieces?
Acting upon the recommendation of the 2020 update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics, CERN in 2021 launched a technical and financial feasibility study for a Future Circular Collider (FCC) operating first as a Higgs, electroweak and top factory, with an eye to succeeding it with a high-energy proton–proton collider. The report will include the physics motivation, technological and geological feasibility, territorial implementation, financial aspects, and the environmental and sustainability challenges that are deeply important to CERN’s member states and the diverse communes of our host countries.
It is also important to add that CERN has also invested, and continues to invest, in R&D for alternatives to FCC such as CLIC and the muon collider. CLIC is a mature design, developed over decades, which has already precipitated numerous impactful societal applications in industry and medicine; and to the best of my knowledge, at present no laboratory has invested as much as CERN in muon-collider R&D.
A mid-term report of FCC’s feasibility study was submitted to subordinate bodies to the CERN management mid-2023, and their resulting reports were presented to CERN’s finance and scientific-policy committees. Council received the outcomes with great appreciation for the work involved during an extraordinary session on 2 February, and looks forward to the completion of the feasibility study in March 2025. Timing the European strategy update to follow hot on its heels and use it as an input was the natural next step.
At the June Council session, we started dealing with the nitty gritty of the process. A secretariat for the European Strategy Group was established under the chairmanship of Karl Jakobs, and committees are being appointed. By January 2026 the Council could have at its disposal a large part of the knowledge needed to chart the future of the CERN vision.
How would you encourage early-career researchers (ECRs) to engage with the strategy process?
ECRs have a central role to play. One of the biggest challenges when attempting to build a major novel research infrastructure such as the proposed FCC – which I sometimes think of as a frontier circular collider – is to maintain high-quality expertise, enthusiasm and optimism for long periods in the face of what seem like insurmountable hurdles. Historically, the physicists who brought a new machine to fruition knew that they would get a chance to work on the data it produced or at least have a claim for credit for their efforts. This is not the case now. Success rests on the enthusiasm of those who are at the beginning of their careers today just as much as senior researchers. I hope ECRs will rise to the challenge and find ways to participate in the coming European Strategy Group-sponsored deliberations and become future leaders of the field. One way to engage is to participate in ECR-only strategy sessions like those held at the yearly FCC weeks. I’d also encourage other countries to join the UK in organising nationwide ECR-only forums for debating the future of the field, such as I initiated in Birmingham in 2022.
What’s the outlook for collaboration and competition between CERN and other regions on the future collider programme?
Over decades, CERN has managed to place itself as the leading example of true international scientific collaboration. For example, by far the largest national contingent of CERN users hails from the US. Estonia has completed the process of joining CERN as a new member state and Brazil has just become the first American associate member state. There is a global agreement among scientists in China, Europe, Japan and the US that the next collider should be an electron–positron Higgs factory, able to study the properties of the Higgs boson with high precision. I hope that – patiently, and step by step – ever more global integration will form.
Do member states receive a strong return on their investment in CERN?
Research suggests that fundamental exploration actively stimulates the economy, and more than pays for itself. Member states and associate member states have steadfastly supported CERN to the tune of CHF 53 billion (unadjusted for inflation) since 1954. They do this because their citizens take pride that their nation stands with fellow member states at the forefront of scientific excellence in the fundamental exploration of our universe. They also do this because they know that scientific excellence stimulates their economies through industrial innovation and the waves of highly skilled engineers, entrepreneurs and scientists who return home trained, inspired and better connected after interacting with CERN.
A bipartisan US report from 2005 called “Rising above the gathering storm” offered particular clarity, in my opinion. It asserted that investments in science and technology benefit the world’s economy, and it noted both the abruptness with which a lead in science and technology can be lost and the difficulty of recovering such a lead. One should not be shy to say that when CERN was established in 1954, it was part of a rather crowded third place in the field of experimental particle physics, with the Soviet Union and the United States at the fore. In 2024, CERN is the leader of the field – and with leadership comes a heavy responsibility to chart a path beneficial to a large community across the whole planet. As CERN Council president, I thank member states for their steadfast support and I applaud them for their economic and scientific foresight over the past seven decades. I hope it will persist long into the 21st century.
Is there a role for private funding for fundamental research?
In Europe, substantial private-sector support for knowledge creation and creativity dates back at least to the Medici. Though it is arguably less emphasised in our times, it plays an important role today in the US, the UK and Israel. Academic freedom is a sine qua non for worthwhile research. Within this limit, I don’t believe there is any serious controversy in Council on this matter. My sense is that Council fully supports the clear division between recognising generosity and keeping full academic and governance freedom.
What challenges has Council faced during your tenure as president?
In February 2022, the Russian Federation, an observer state, invaded Ukraine, which has been an associate member state since 2016. This was a situation with no precedent for Council. The shape of our decisions evolved for well over a year. Council members decided to cover from their own budgets the share of Ukraine’s contribution to CERN. Council also tried to address as much as possible the human issues resulting from the situation. It decided to suspend the observer status in the Council of the Russian Federation and the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research. Council also decided to not extend its International Collaboration Agreements with the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation. CERN departments also undertook initiatives to support the Ukrainian scientific community at CERN and in Ukraine.
A second major challenge was to mitigate the financial pressures being experienced around the world, such as inflation and rising costs for energy and materials. A package deal was agreed upon in Council that included significant contributions from the member states, a contribution from the CERN staff, andsubstantial savings from across CERN’s activities. So far, these measures seem to have addressed the issue.
I thank member states for their steadfast support and I applaud them for their economic and scientific foresight over the past seven decades
While these key challenges were tackled, management worked relentlessly on preparing an exhaustive FCC feasibility study, to ensure that CERN stays on course in developing its scientific and technological vision for the field of experimental high-energy physics.
The supportive reaction of Council to these challenges demonstrated its ability to stay on course during rough seas and strong side winds. This cohesion is very encouraging for me. Time and again, Council faced difficult decisions in recent years. Though convergence seemed difficult at first, thanks to a united will and the help of all Council members, a way forward emerged and decisions were taken. It’s important to bear in mind that no matter which flagship project CERN embarks on, it will be a project of another order of magnitude. Some of the methods that made the LHC such a success can continue to accompany us, some will need to evolve significantly, and some new ones will need to be created.
Has the ideal of Science for Peace been damaged?
Over the years CERN has developed the skills needed to construct bridges. CERN does not have much experience in dismantling bridges. This issue was very much on the mind of Council as it took its decisions.
Do you wish to make some unofficial personal remarks?
Thanks. Yes. I would like to mention several things I feel grateful for.
Nobody owes humanity a concise description of the laws of physics and the basic constituents of matter. I am grateful for being in an era where it seems possible, thanks to a large extent to the experiments performed at CERN. Scientists from innumerable countries, who can’t even form a consensus on the best 1970s rock band, have succeeded time and again to assemble the most sophisticated pieces of equipment, with each part built in a different country. And it works. I stand in awe in front of that.
The ecosystem of CERN, the experimental groups working at CERN and the CERN Council are how I dreamt as a child that the United Nations would work. The challenges facing humanity in the coming centuries are formidable. They require international collaboration among the best minds from all over the planet. CERN shows that this is possible. But it requires hard work to maintain this environment. Over the years serious challenges have presented themselves, and one should not take this situation for granted. We need to be vigilant to keep this precious space – the precious gift of CERN.
More than 150 German particle physicists gathered at Bonn University for a community event on a future collider at CERN. More precisely, the focus set for this meeting was to discuss the opportunities that the FCC-ee would offer should this collider be built at CERN. The event was organised by the German committee for particle physics, KET, and took place from 22 to 24 May. Representatives from almost all German institutes and groups active in particle physics were present, an attendance that shows the large interest in the collider to be built at CERN after the successful completion of the HL-LHC programme.
The main workshop was preceded by a dedicated session with more than 80 early-career scientists, organised by the Young High Energy Physicists Association, yHEP, to bring the generation that will benefit most from a future collider at CERN up to speed on the workshop topics. It included a presentation by former ECFA chair Karl Jakobs (Freiburg University) “From Strategy Discussions to Decision-Taking for Large Projects”, explaining the mechanisms and bodies involved in setting a project like the FCC-ee on track.
The opening session of the main workshop featured a fresh view on “The physics case for an e+e– collider at CERN” by Margarete Mühlleitner (KIT Karlsruhe), who spread excitement about the strong and comprehensive physics case from super-precise measurements of the properties of the Z boson, the W boson and the top quark to what most people associate with a future e+e– collider: precision measurements of the Higgs boson and insights about its connection to many of the still open questions of particle physics like dark matter or the matter–antimatter asymmetry. Markus Klute (KIT Karlsruhe) gave an in-depth review of the FCC-ee project. The midterm results of the FCC feasibility study indicate that no showstoppers were found in all the aspects studied so far and that the integrated FCC programme offers unparalleled exploration potential through precision measurements and direct searches. The picture was rounded off by a presentation from Jenny List (DESY, Hamburg) who talked about alternative options to realise an e+e– Higgs factory at CERN, and the perspective of the early-career researchers was highlighted by Michael Lupberger (Bonn University). While all these presentations concentrated on the science and technology of the FCC-ee or alternatives, Eckart Lilienthal, representing the German Ministry of Education and Research, BMBF, reminded the audience that a future collider project at CERN needs an affordable financial plan and that – given the large uncertainties at present – this requires the community to prepare for different scenarios including one without the FCC-ee. Lilienthal confirmed that the future of CERN remains of the highest priority to BMBF.
The event was an important step in building consensus in the German community for a future collider project at CERN
The workshop went on to review many aspects of the FCC-ee and possible alternatives in more detail: accelerator R&D, detector concepts and technologies, computing and software, theory challenges as well as sustainability. The workshop witnessed the first meetings of the newly established German detector R&D consortia on silicon detectors, gaseous detectors and calorimetry. They will receive BMBF funding for the next three years and will allow German groups to strongly participate in the recently formed international DRD consortia in the context of the ECFA detector roadmap.
The path ahead
The workshop concluded with discussion sessions on the future collider scenarios for CERN, the engagement of the German community and a path to prepare the German input to the update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics. A series of three additional community workshops will be held in Germany before this input is due in March 2025.
The Bonn event was an important step in building consensus in the German community for a future collider project at CERN. The FCC-ee project generated a lot of interest and many groups plan to embark more strongly on this project. Contributions concerning the physics case, theory challenges, detector design and development, software, computing, and accelerator development were discussed. Alternative options for a future collider project at CERN need to be kept open to address the unanswered fundamental questions of particle physics in case the FCC-ee is not built at CERN. This event was clear evidence that a bright future for CERN remains of highest priority for the German particle-physics community and funding agency.
Simone Ragoni is passionate about outreach. His Instagram page, quarktastic, has more than 10 thousand followers, and is one of the very few that successfully makes particle physics and academia relatable. He wrote Become a Particle Physicist in Eight Simple Moves while completing his PhD on the ALICE experiment. The first move is to sip his favourite beverage: coffee.
As a social-media manager and communicator, I’ve been following Ragoni for years. His main tool is humour. And I’m proof it works. I will always remember the basic structure of a proton, because life is indeed full of “ups” and “downs”.
Did I say gentle humour? Nah. Ragoni goes all the way. But he confesses that his humour can only be understood by a handful of people. Particle physics is esoteric – and readers will want to join the club. His book invites you into the world of a young particle physicist. Being a nerd is the new cool.
A highlight is when Ragoni describes how to keep those distributions fit. If you know, you know. There is a pun here and the author explains it very well. He next turns to the tedious work that goes into publishing a paper. “Monte Carlo simulations are our real playground,” he writes, “where we unleash all our fantasy, the perfect world where everything is nice.” But particle physicists are cautious. Five sigma is needed to claim a discovery – a one in 3.5 million chance of being wrong. The author concludes with encouragement to make your own measurements using CERN’s open data.
Ragoni’s book is a delightful gift for anyone whom you want to inspire to become a particle physicist of tomorrow or simply to convey the excitement of what you do, with a quirky bonus of being presented bilingually in English and Italian, should you be keen on improving your physics vocab in one of those languages. It is a gateway to the captivating world of particle physics, skilfully blending humour with profound insights, and inspiring readers to explore further and consider joining the ranks of future particle physicists.
Teaching modern physics to high-school students presents many challenges: overpacked curricula focusing on classical physics; the depth of knowledge needed by students (and teachers) to understand these topics; and students being over-focused on grades and university admissions. By exposing my students to the work being done at major research laboratories around the world, I have managed to find a way to overcome many of those obstacles.
Some time ago, British Columbia removed provincial examinations, giving teachers a bit more freedom to make additions to their curricula. I chose to insert small one- or two-day units throughout the year, which give my students multiple exposure to modern physics topics. These short introductions over a two-year period mean that physics students don’t need to know all the fine details, which decreases their stress and concerns.
Knowledge sharing
Physics teachers are lucky to have access to high-quality professional development via workshops run by CERN, LIGO, the Perimeter Institute (which produces excellent resources for use in physics classes) and others. These often-week-long events give teachers an overview of how a given research facility works, in the hope that they will bring that knowledge back to their students. Along the way, the teachers attend lectures from leading researchers and see first-hand careers in the field that they can bring back to share with their class.
I have been fortunate enough to attend workshops at these facilities. I have also taken part in a research experience at SNOLAB, brought students on tours of TRIUMF and mentored my students as they conducted research at the Canadian Light Source. All these experiences have given me the knowledge and confidence to introduce the facilities and the work done at them to my students in a way that hopefully piques their curiosity.
The pieces provide a starting point for conversations around what these decommissioned parts were used for and the kind of science they supported
While at CERN for the 2019 international teacher programme, I had the opportunity to visit both the CMS and ALICE detectors and to attend lectures from renowned particle physicists. We spent time in S’Cool LAB and visited many of the behind-the-scenes parts of CERN. While all of these experiences left an imprint on my teaching, it was during quiet visits to what was then called the Microcosm garden – which hosts decommissioned pieces of accelerators and detectors as a form of art – that helped transform the physical space in my classroom.
In 2022 my school in British Columbia renovated a large, old classroom to become our new physics lab. Knowing that I had more space to work with than before, I was inspired to start building my own version of the Microcosm garden on my classroom walls. I soon connected with the outreach team at TRIUMF who were excited to help get my project started with a photomultiplier tube, a control panel from a xenon-gas handling system, a paddle scintillator and a light guide. Since then, I have added a Lucas cell from SNOLAB, a piece of the electron gun from the Canadian Light Source and, most recently, a small-strip half-gap prototype from the New Small Wheel upgrade of the ATLAS detector. The pieces provide a starting point for conversations with students around what these decommissioned parts were used for, and the kind of science they supported.
Equipped with some knowledge of what modern research in the field looks like, I have successfully built a system where I am able to inspire students to want to study physics. Since attending my first major workshop in 2018, I have seen an increase in the number of students entering physics majors. Some of them have already gone on to internships at CERN and TRIUMF, after getting their first exposure to these organisations in my classes. My hope is that by having pieces of the facilities I talk about displayed on my classroom walls, this will further inspire more of my students to want to learn about them, possibly setting them on paths to careers in physics.
The 2024 Aspen Winter Conference, The Future of High Energy Physics: A New Generation, A New Vision, attracted 50 early-career researchers (ECRs) from across the world to the Aspen Center for Physics, 8000 feet above sea level in the Colorado Rockies, from 24 to 29 March. The conference built on the many new ideas that arose from the recent Snowmass process of the US particle physics community (CERN Courier January/February 2024 p7). The conference sought to highlight the role of ECRs in realising bold long-term visions for the field, covering theoretical questions, the experimental vision for the next 50 years and the technologies required to make it a reality. Students, postdocs and junior faculty are often the drivers of new ideas in science. Helping them transition new ideas to the mainstream requires enthusiasm, community support and time.
Crossing frontiers
85% of the matter in the universe at most minimally interacts with the electromagnetic force but provided the gravitational seed for large-scale structure formation in the early universe. Hugh Lippincott (University of California, Santa Barbara) summarised cross-frontier searches. Pursuing all possible scenarios via direct detection will require scaling up existing technology and developing new technologies such as quantum sensors to probe lighter dark-matter candidates. On the one hand, the 60 to 80 tonne “XLZD” liquid xenon detector will merge the expertise of the XENONnT, LUX-ZEPLIN and DARWIN collaborations; on the low-mass side, Reina Maruyama (Yale) discussed the ALPHA and HAYSTAC haloscopes, which seek to convert axions into photons in highly tuned resonant cavities. Indirect detection and collider experiments will also play an important role in closing in on minimal dark-matter models.
Delegates expressed a sense of urgency to probe higher energies. Cari Cesarotti (MIT) advocated R&D towards a future muon collider, arguing that muons offer a clean and power-efficient route to the 10 TeV scale and above. Recently, experts have estimated that challenges due to the finite muon lifetime could be overcome on a 20-year technically limited timeline. Both CERN and China have proposed building 100 km-circumference tunnels, initially hosting an electron–positron collider followed by a 100 TeV hadron machine, however, the timeline suggests that almost all of the conference attendees would be retired before hadron collisions come online. Elliot Lipeles (Pennsylvania) proposed skipping the electron-positron stage and immediately pursuing an intermediate-energy hadron collider: existing magnets in a 100 km tunnel could produce 37 TeV collisions, advancing measurements of the Higgs self-coupling and electroweak phase transition, dark matter and its mediators, and naturalness.
The energy, intensity and cosmic frontiers of particle physics target deeply connected questions
Neutrinos were discussed at length. Georgia Karagiorgi (Columbia University) argued that three short-baseline anomalies remain, potentially hinting at additional sterile neutrinos or dark-sector portals. Julieta Gruszko (North Carolina at Chapel Hill) presented an exciting future for experiments that seek to discern the fundamental nature of neutrinos. A new tonne-scale generation of detectors comprising LEGEND1000, nEXO and CUPID may succeed in confirming the Majorana nature of the neutrino if they observe neutrinoless double beta decay.
Talks on the importance of science communication and education provoked a great deal of discussion. Ethan Siegal, host of popular podcast “Starts with a Bang” spoke on public outreach, Kevin Pedro (Fermilab) on advocacy with policymakers in Washington, DC, and Roger Freedman (University of California Santa Barbara) on educating the next generation of physicists. In public programming, Nausheen Shah (Wayne State) was the guest speaker at a screening of Hidden Figures, the inspiring true story of the black women who helped the US win the space race, and Philip Chang (University of California San Diego) lectured on “An Invitation to Imagine Something from Nothing”.
The energy, intensity and cosmic frontiers of particle physics target deeply connected questions. Dark matter, dark energy, cosmic inflation and baryogenesis have remained unexplained for decades, and the structure of the Standard Model itself provokes questions, not least in relation to the Higgs boson and neutrinos. Innovative and complementary experiments are needed across all areas of particle physics. Judging from the 2024 Aspen Winter Conference, the future of the field is in good hands.
The wonder and awe that we sense when we look at the starry skies is a major motivation to do science. Both Plato (Theaetetus 155d) and Aristotle (Metaphysics 982b12) wrote that philosophy starts in wonder. Plato went even further to declare that the eye’s primary purpose is none other than to see and study the stars (Timaeus 47c). But wonder and awe also play a wider role beyond science, and are fundamental to other endeavours of human civilisation, such as religion. In Wonderstruck: How Wonder and Awe Shape the Way We Think, Helen De Cruz (Saint Louis University) traces the relationship between wonder and awe and philosophy, religion, magic and science, and the development of these concepts throughout history.
Essential emotion
De Cruz’s book is rich in content, drawing from psychology, anthropology and literature. Aptly for particle physicists, she points out that it is not only the very largest scales that fill us with awe, but also the very smallest, as for example in Robert Hooke’s Micrographia, the first book to include illustrations of insects and plants as seen through a microscope. Everyday things may be sources of wonder, according to philosopher and rabbi Abraham J Heschel, who has written on religion as a response to the awe that we feel when we look at the cosmos. Even hard-nosed economists recognise the fundamental role of wonder, she observes: Adam Smith, the famous economist who wrote The Wealth of Nations, believed that wonder is an essential emotion that underlies the pursuit of science, as it prompts people to explore the unknown and seek knowledge about the world. Although particle physics is not mentioned explicitly in the book – the closest instance is a quote from Feynman’s Lectures on Physics – the implications are clear. And while the sources quoted are mostly Western, other traditions are not ignored, with references to Chinese and Japanese culture present, among others.
The book also motivates questions that it does not address, some of which are especially interesting for fundamental physics. For example, modern human beings who live and work in cities spend most of their lives in an environment that alienates them from nature, and nature-induced awe must compete with technology-driven amazement. One can maybe glimpse that in outreach, where curiosity about technology sometimes, though not always, eclipses interest about the fundamental questions of science. While the book discusses this topic in the context of climate change – a reality that reminds us that we cannot ignore nature – there is more one can do with respect to the effects of such an attitude in motivating fundamental science.
At a time when large scientific projects, such as CERN’s proposed Future Circular Collider, are being considered, generating a lot of discussions about cost and benefit, this book reminds us that the major motivation of a new telescope or collider is to push into the frontiers of the unknown – a process that starts and finishes with wonder and awe. As such, the book is very useful reading for scientists doing fundamental research, especially those who engage with the public.
Ilario Boscolo, who was one of the proponents of the AEgIS experiment at CERN, passed away on 16 April 2024 at the age of 84.
Ilario Boscolo was born in Codevigo, Italy in 1940 and graduated from the nearby University of Padua. In 1968 he joined the University of Lecce, where he initiated research in accelerator physics, high-intensity electron beams and free electron lasers (FELs), and far-infrared and CO2 lasers. Among his important scientific contributions at that time were the development of a prototype electrostatic accelerator, investigations on far-infrared lasers optically pumped in a cavity, and a much-cited theoretical proposal for a two-stage FEL for coherent harmonic amplification (an optical klystron). Ilario spent long periods of study in international research institutes, including the ENEA fusion energy centre in Frascati and the University of California Santa Barbara, where he collaborated with world-leading FEL researchers Luis Elias and William Colson.
In 1987 Ilario was called to the University of Milan, where he became full professor, to participate in the INFN project ELFA (electron laser facility for acceleration) and was responsible for the photocathode emission. His interest then turned to other topics, including efficient electron sources based on field emission from carbon nanotubes or ferroelectric ceramics and, within CERN, pulsed laser phase coding systems for new acceleration facilities. Within the INFN SPARC–SPARX initiative, started in 2003 and based in Frascati, he focused on laser applications for the development of pulsed, high-brightness UV and X-ray FEL sources. In particular, he showed that the high beam quality of the electron sources depends on suitable shaping of comb laser pulses, the study of which was realised in a dedicated laser laboratory at Milan founded by Ilario.
In 2007 Ilario was one of the proponents of the AEgIS experiment at the CERN Antiproton Decelerator, which aimed to investigate the properties of antimatter, in particular its gravitational interactions. This required the production of a low-energy beam of antihydrogen atoms, obtained by a charge-exchange process with positronium atoms laser-excited at Rydberg levels. Led by Ilario, the Milan laser laboratory was responsible for the laser system that was required to make this pairing possible. AEgIS demonstrated the first pulsed-production of antihydrogen atoms in 2018, enabling a series of antimatter studies that are ongoing.
In all his activities, Ilario showed great passion and enthusiasm for both science and its applications. This positive attitude was also widely displayed through his didactical activity in various courses at the University of Milan. He was responsible for a new physics laboratory for the biology programme and for the laser laboratory for the physics programme. In addition, his greatest success was the complete reconstruction of the general physics laboratory for first-year students. By encouraging students to practice and elaborate on their own, with only little guidance from the teacher, this laboratory left an indelible mark on their training as physicists.
Another strong passion of Ilario was civil commitment, reflected in his constant engagement with university governance and studies of politics and economics, to which he dedicated himself with his usual inexhaustible enthusiasm, particularly after his retirement.
Ilario is remembered by his collaborators and students as a person of great culture, of brilliant insights, of a willingness to discuss physics and politics with anyone, and as an exquisite friend. He was a true scientist, leaving a deep mark on physics and a bright memory for everyone who had the honour of knowing him.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
