Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider • Hacker News Board

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#271

Post by BaseballPhysics » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 3:55 PM UTC

> yes it is, but where does this fundamental science helps in everyday problems?

PhD or not, this is an oddly utilitarian view of science.

I suspect there would be countless discoveries that never would have been made had we only ever weighed an experiment based purely on its ability to "help in everyday problems".

I mean, why, say, develop the theory of evolution? At the time that was irrelevant to "everyday problems". Today our understanding of evolution is valuable in countless settings, but at the time? At best it was an interesting exercise in trying to understand the natural world.

And yet by this reckoning we never would've bothered.

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#272

Post by ordu » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 3:56 PM UTC

> We have so many problems where physics is needed (energy production to start with, and then exploring biology)

How can physics help to explore biology? At a first half of 20th century biology experienced a flow of physicist converting to biology and that had led to a transformation of a biology into what it is now and to a bunch of breakthrough discoveries, most notably the double helix (Francis Crick was a physicist). But I wonder what breakthroughs might happen now if physicists tried to boost biology one more time.

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#273

Post by JoeDaDude » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 3:57 PM UTC

Honest question: Did you feel this way when you were working on your PhD at CERN? Were you working toward solving everyday problems, or fundamental science problems? If the latter, what changed your views since then?

I hope I don't come off as confrontational, it is not the least my intention. It just sounds like you have seen both sides of this issue and maybe you have a deeper understanding you could share.

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#274

Post by esrauch » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 3:58 PM UTC

How long was the time gap from quantum machanics work in the 1920s until serious practical applications for that work?

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#275

Post by louissan » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 3:59 PM UTC

what about trying to see such advanced fields of studies as (extremely?) long-term investments (for the species?).

I'm sure that 20,000 years ago some crazy shaman was frowned upon for trying to "melt rocks and see what happened", or "ate some weird/unknown/sacred plants" or "what if I push this seed into this little corner of land and look after it (water, sun, defend if against herbivores)"? etc, etc, etc?

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#276

Post by ryan_j_naughton » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 4:02 PM UTC

> knowledge that brings us nowhere. If someone could answer to this "and so what?" in a meaningful way I would be glad to change my mind.

Devil's Advocate: Could that not also be said for many astrophysics discoveries including: - Edwin Hubble's discovery of the expanding universe and galaxies - Kepler's discovery of 1K plus exoplanets - Hubble telescope's ultra deep field

None of these are practical pursuits that provide us with new, widely used technology (or at least investing in them is not the most efficient path to said practical technology). Instead, they provide us context on where we sit in the universe. Starting from Copernicus, the constant realignment of our perspective that we are not privileged observers in the universe (disproving geocentrism, heliocentrism, and galactocentrism), have been essential to the development of modern secular humanism and providing us context on our purpose (or at least an effective tool to knock down foolish purported purposes espoused by dogmatic leaders).

So I guess I am taking issue with your narrowly defined purpose of science. What is an "everyday problem" worth solving through fundamental research?

If however, you include these philosophical benefits of fundamental science, then I agree with you.

"Have we had a case where the Higgs boson changed anything in our life?" I think nails that the reason why we shouldn't pursue a LHC++. It has neither benefits from providing us practical tools or new technologies to advance society NOR does it aid us in philosophically contextualizing where we sit in the universe.

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#277

Post by FredPret » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 4:05 PM UTC

As an engineer, my sole concern is making things useful in everyday life for real humans.

However, I need the tools science gives me. I need scientists and mathematicians to think about how the universe and logic works, so that I can know how to make it work for people.

Quantum foam will almost certainly feature in some product down the line.

Edit: there have been some instances of engineers working out solutions before the science existed by trial and error (steam locomotives before thermodynamics, airfoils before those were understood), but knowing proper theory upfront makes it much easier.

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#278

Post by hackinthebochs » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 4:05 PM UTC

Solving the photoelectric effect gave birth to the field. He just didn't like the monster he had created.

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#279

Post by cookingmyserver » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 4:06 PM UTC

I think it is important to remember the context of the discussion. I think I it is completely reasonable, and not odd at all, to have a utilitarian view of science, when you are talking about spending $100 Billion.

Re: Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

#280

Post by bobbylarrybobby » Tue, Jun 07, 2022, 4:07 PM UTC

Did the physicists working on early QM know that it would be so useful? Or were they, like the scientists at CERN, just trying to piece together a model of reality?