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

Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

news.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 63 posts

Re: Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

#31

Post by coward83847 »

hardtke wrote: post #9
solotronics wrote: post #3

why not finish the one in Texas? yes the facility probably needs repairs but a lot of initial work is done I would think?

This will be hosted at either Brookhaven National Lab (NY) or Jefferson Lab (Virginia). Unfortunately, National Labs need to find new large construction projects to justify their continued existence, and there aren't enough big science projects to go around. The European model of sharing a single facility (CERN) is much more sensible in that it decouples scientific prioritization and the issue of local jobs.

It's worth mentioning that the national labs are also considered a wartime resource. Having geographic separation is an asset in that sense.

Re: Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

#33

Post by lovich »

sovande wrote: post #19

I thought particle physics were coming to an end? After CERN found the Higgs boson then nothing. The ROI of a more powerful accelerator is abysmal. It is impossible to know how large a new collider needs to be and if anything interesting will be found. Use the money on a moon-base instead and then mars.

If all the experimentation at the LHC brought up nothing that physicists expect, that would imply that our model of physics is wrong. Now the model can be updated with new theories and tested with new experiments

I wouldn't imagine that particle physics would be coming to an end until we had an experimentally proven model that explained all phenomena we can observe

Re: Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

#35

Post by nikofeyn »

sovande wrote: post #19

I thought particle physics were coming to an end? After CERN found the Higgs boson then nothing. The ROI of a more powerful accelerator is abysmal. It is impossible to know how large a new collider needs to be and if anything interesting will be found. Use the money on a moon-base instead and then mars.

there are other accelerator architectures and approaches that are not just scaled versions of the LHC.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_acceleration

Re: Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

#36

Post by wyattpeak »

_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #34

Required reading "Lost in Math" about the possibility that those scientists search for something that doesn't exist.

While Hossenfelder is well within her wheelhouse criticising the search as wrongheaded, members of the public reading and forming an opinion on the proper course of physical research is less than useless.

It's exactly the same thinking that leads people to conclude that global warming isn't a problem, because they found a climate scientist who also disagrees.

Unless we all, en masse, want to go get physics degrees to properly critique the arguments, the only responsible thing for a member of the public to do is trust majority opinion. It can be wrong, certainly, but it's vastly less likely to be than any of the dozens or hundreds of minority opinions which oppose it.

Re: Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

#37

Post by _Codemonkeyism »

wyattpeak wrote: post #36
_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #34

Required reading "Lost in Math" about the possibility that those scientists search for something that doesn't exist.

While Hossenfelder is well within her wheelhouse criticising the search as wrongheaded, members of the public reading and forming an opinion on the proper course of physical research is less than useless. It's exactly the same thinking that leads people to conclude that global warming isn't a problem, because they found a climate scientist who also disagrees. Unless we all, en masse, want to go get physics degrees to…

If the public pays billions and billions of EUR, it should form an opinion.

"trust majority opinion"

Trust those who get those billions of EUR, you mean.

Re: Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

#38

Post by rurban »

sovande wrote: post #19

I thought particle physics were coming to an end? After CERN found the Higgs boson then nothing. The ROI of a more powerful accelerator is abysmal. It is impossible to know how large a new collider needs to be and if anything interesting will be found. Use the money on a moon-base instead and then mars.

They still cannot explained gravity, and the standard model is unsatisfactory.

They know exactly what they are searching for, read the paper. Esp. in QCD there's a lot still missing. Sea quarks, gluons.

Re: Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

#39

Post by krastanov »

_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #37
wyattpeak wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While Hossenfelder is well within her wheelhouse criticising the search as wrongheaded, members of the public reading and forming an opinion on the proper course of physical research is less than useless. It's exactly the same thinking that leads people to conclude that global warming isn't a problem, because they found a climate scientist who also disagrees. Unless we all, en masse, want to go get physics degrees to…

If the public pays billions and billions of EUR, it should form an opinion. "trust majority opinion" Trust those who get those billions of EUR, you mean.

Given that science has a pretty good (but not perfect) track record of improving the human condition, yes, trust them or spend the effort to become a recognized expert.

Re: Richard Milner on a new U.S. particle accelerator

#40

Post by davrosthedalek »

solotronics wrote: post #3

why not finish the one in Texas? yes the facility probably needs repairs but a lot of initial work is done I would think?

It's a collider of electron on proton/ion beams. There are two candidate sites: Jefferson Lab (Newport News, Virginia), which already has a electron beam (CEBAF). And Brookhaven National Lab (Brookhaven, Long Island, New York), which already has an ion beam.
Post reply on HN