Before we begin, we think it's useful to generally characterize the modern scientific enterprise:

In the physical sciences discoveries about nature come from two sorts of inquiry:

• Patient, detailed "programmatic" investigation and/or
• Leaps of inspiration toward single high-stakes discovery.

Risky ventures have been undertaken when the consequences of null results are judged to be minimal in cost, time, or reputation (Note, sometimes...finding "nothing" can mean "something"!). Such leaps are probably the stuff of scientific legend (Aha!) and might characterize a popular vision of what a scientist most often does. In point of fact, the most amazing and far-reaching discoveries traditionally have come from inquiries of the first sort.

For the last 20 years or so, many scientific questions have now become Big Questions – the Human Genome Project comes to mind. Attacking these sorts of problems require heroic technical solutions and that inevitably involves hundreds of scientists and expensive resources, This combination, in turn mitigates against taking risks. Therefore, a well-balanced scientific program requires a considerable measure of both the first bullet, and, if possible, the possibility of a Home Run...components of the second bullet as well.

The Fermilab physics program as outlined by many of us in the mid-1990's was patterned around projects of the "first bullet" sort. Our measurements have been planned in order leave nowhere for Nature to hide: either a satisfying confirmation of fundamental theories will result, or glaring anomalies will be uncovered. In the course of developing the plan for this work, we also found the potential for high-stakes discovery. These high-stakes measurements don't stand alone, but they are intimately related to the measurements that are guaranteed. That makes this Fermilab Tevatron program Complete. It utilizes available resources productively and, with luck in pushing our own special technologies, possibly leads to scientific revolution.

Neither of the above methods are ever unmotivated – there is always a theory, a previous result, a hint from instinct that prompts further investigation. It's the nature of the enterprise that positive and negative results beget more results and so on. Also, none of this recipe works without a liberal seasoning of human ingredients, of discussion, argument, competition, inspiration, and luck. As you read, hopefully some of these human aspects of our work will show through and you'll appreciate the dedication, long years already spent, and the eager anticipation that we (from a hundred (?) institutions on 4 continents) all feel as we approach this decade.

Delving deeper into this web site will hopefully reveal our plans in an interesting way.