Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Please, don't build another Large Hadron Collider

bigthink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 467 posts

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

#211

Post by Georgelemental »

concordDance wrote: post #137
musha68k wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe is so rich it can easily afford all of the great project ideas outlined in the article in addition to a new LHC (and then some). Let's think big indeed, the author unfortunately has a very reductive vision for the future. Instead how about: A renaissance of funding - BIG SCIENCE - education, jobs. That was basically the promise of the EU - peace through wealth - let's create some more. Let's bring back the exc…

What's it currently doing with that money? I guess we could get rid of funding healthcare and trying to help people out of poverty so that a small number of people get to use a very expensive toy... You know what would be an awesome big science project that would immeasurably improve future people's lives? Sequencing all genes and using that data provide free embryo selection services to everyone who wants to be a pa…

"Embryo selection"—is that a euphemism for "murdering any unborn child that doesn't have all the "right" genes? Because if so I think your definition of "people's lives" must be very different from mine.

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

#212

Post by martin_a »

dane-pgp wrote: post #206
martin_a wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What would prevent some similar unintended consequence in Europe? We're not some fucked up dictatorship state?!?

Yeah, we'd only kill the disabled and mediocre children standing in the way of our Utopia, nothing immoral like those awful Chinese people do.

We're talking about embryos here. I think you're well aware about the ongoing discussions on when those are to be considered humans and when not. That's not an easy topic, obviously, but I'm fairly confident that we won't throw babys in the garbage can if we don't like them but try to make those decisions as early as possible.

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

#213

Post by martin_a »

Georgelemental wrote: post #208
martin_a wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What would prevent some similar unintended consequence in Europe? We're not some fucked up dictatorship state?!?

> No, that could never happen here , are you crazy? We're a prosperous and civilized nation! - Every prosperous and civilized nation's last words

I think the EU as a group of states seems to work quite well. Furthermore it seems like anti-democratic behaviour is getting punished now, too, if you look over to Poland. I'm quite optimistic that this will further improve.

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

#214

Post by _heimdall »

nix23 wrote: post #187
dTal wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a scientific sense - no. It was predicted, it was found. No theories needed rewriting. Significant would have been if they'd failed to find it.

So finding Black-holes is not significant because it was already predicted? And btw there is so much money around...we should not fight against different project but the spending that goes into science itself. LHC and NASA is really just a small drop compared to military spending (in the US). https://twitter.com/WillPVGreen/status/1363179862706503681/p...

Why hello again, tragedy of the commons!

Modern monetary theory is its own can of worms, but justifying massive spending in one area because of even more massive spending elsewhere isn't solving anything.

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

#215

Post by postalrat »

redleader55 wrote: post #75
dmpk2k wrote: post #47

I have started calculating things in LHCs. The LHC is a massive machine with advanced technologies, took a decade to design and build, involving 10k scientists and the international community, and cost $9B. - Squadron of F-35 aircraft: ~0.2 LHCs - JWT: 1.1 LHCs - ITER: >2 LHCs - Elon Musk's wealth: 24 LHCs - Microsoft's market cap: 30 LHCs - US annual military budget: 90 LHCs - US national debt: 3389 LHCs Given the b…

As someone born in a country near Russia, 5 squadrons of F-35 change my life in a more significant way that 1 LHC. Nit: MSFT market cap is ~210 LHC.

Not any more than 5 squadrons of MiGs.

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

#216

Post by signaru »

popinman322 wrote: post #24

The LHC's development produced a number of new technologies (e.g. radiation resistant microcontrollers, and gas electron multipliers). Could the next generation produce more, valuable tech? I also don't have the expertise to tell whether the article is being overly reductive with the project's goals: are there other questions (besides new particles) that can only be answered with a larger collider? The summary of the…

Secondary innovations can also come from solving a primary industrial or commercial problem as is often the case.

By their nature, secondary innovations are not promised. Hence, researchers can get away with not "delivering" any, no matter how much they pitch the "possibility" when asking for funding.

The quality of researchers who will be working is another factor. Presumably it would be very competitive with LHC stuff. But I've seen research projects just become money black-holes as they just end up with unremarkable un-creative research staff who are just there for the paycheck and not competitive enough to otherwise get out of the academic comfort zone.

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

#217

Post by spacemanmatt »

dgb23 wrote: post #152
mhh__ wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't Hossenfelder and Smolin basically paying their bills by being contrarians though?

That’s a passive aggressive ad hominem without any substance whatsoever. These people are not some obscenely rich opportunists in power. They are working scientists, who draw public interest because they say interesting things and they are part of a larger discourse. Now Hossenfelder isn’t known for her fingerspitzengefühl when it comes to criticizing others, but I have yet to find an instance where she doesn’t treat…

I will always get onboard to boost Hossenfelder. She respects the subject matter and also the students, and it impresses me a lot to see it in practice.

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

#218

Post by spacemanmatt »

orbifold wrote: post #190
ahoka wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Baby boomers refusing to have children? What?!

Birth rates of children born during the baby boom (the baby boomers) is 2/3 to 1/2 of their parents generation.

So? Infant survival and life expectancy rates are also way up since their parents generation. You can't just throw around generational statistics without any context at all and call it valid.

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

#219

Post by spacemanmatt »

As much as I generally agree with the goal of knowing all the things, that goal exists in service to living a good life. And I definitely have to question the economic sense of spending $100B at the LHC store, compared with many other stores that sell $100B worth of good life for earthlings.

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

#220

Post by unsupp0rted »

spacemanmatt wrote: post #219

As much as I generally agree with the goal of knowing all the things, that goal exists in service to living a good life. And I definitely have to question the economic sense of spending $100B at the LHC store, compared with many other stores that sell $100B worth of good life for earthlings.

$100B into basic cancer research (not even targeting a specific cancer per se) would be money better spent, for example.
Post reply on HN