Finding new physics will require a new particle collider • Hacker News Board

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#31

Post by orbifold » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:13 PM UTC

mnky9800n wrote: post #22

orbifold wrote: post #5

More likely than not the next collider will be build in China, quite a few particle physicist luminaries have already made their case there. I for one am glad that I stayed clear of the siren call to join the 3000+ grad student workforce at CERN. Sifting through the heap of data that was assigned to you is about as fun as it sounds I think. You get to look for the J/Psi, Pomeron, Dark Matter how exciting! In reality…

And when you graduate you get a not in this field job because it's so competitive you probably were already ineligible by the time you started your PhD.

Well three of my friends are still hanging in there with a non-zero chance of success because they did their PhD in the right group. But yeah if you aren’t well connected or your advisor doesn’t like you this is a dead end.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#32

Post by kd5bjo » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:17 PM UTC

guerrilla wrote: post #30

kd5bjo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there a maximum price tag for potentially knowing more about the universe? Yes. On the extreme end, there’s a finite amount of useful work that can be done before the heat death of the universe. An energy budget the size of the combined output of all power stations on the planet is much smaller than that, but also too much. At a more realistic scale, human knowledge is only valuable in so far as it improves the…

> human knowledge is only valuable in so far as it improves the human condition in some way, now or in the future. We have no idea how it will improve the human condition though. You could have said this to many scientists throughout history. Look at what the (much cheaper) fooling around at Bell Labs got us.

You’re absolutely right, and those projects were absolutely worth the cost to society in retrospect. It’s why I’m generally in favor of exploratory research.

I don’t have much of an opinion one way or the other about building another particle accelerator: the costs are significant, but manageable, and I haven’t followed the science enough to get a good idea of the likely benefit.

The question posed, however, was whether the cost could ever be too high. The only answer to that question is “yes,” regardless of the topic.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#33

Post by xondono » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:17 PM UTC

Deukhoofd wrote: post #10

_fizz_buzz_ wrote: post #8

A counter point by Sabine Hossenfelder: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/23/opinion/particle-physics-...

> I still believe that slamming particles into one another is the most promising route to understanding what matter is made of and how it holds together. But $10 billion is a hefty price tag. And I’m not sure it’s worth it. When is it worth it? They tested many theories, and many of them were proven wrong, and some were proven right. What price can you attach to having this knowledge? Is there a maximum price tag for…

Would you sacrifice all humanity for that knowledge? Since I’m guessing your answer is “no”, then there’s obviously a maximum price (even if my bound is ridiculously off)

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#34

Post by roenxi » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:23 PM UTC

kd5bjo wrote: post #17

Deukhoofd wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I still believe that slamming particles into one another is the most promising route to understanding what matter is made of and how it holds together. But $10 billion is a hefty price tag. And I’m not sure it’s worth it. When is it worth it? They tested many theories, and many of them were proven wrong, and some were proven right. What price can you attach to having this knowledge? Is there a maximum price tag for…

> Is there a maximum price tag for potentially knowing more about the universe? Yes. On the extreme end, there’s a finite amount of useful work that can be done before the heat death of the universe. An energy budget the size of the combined output of all power stations on the planet is much smaller than that, but also too much. At a more realistic scale, human knowledge is only valuable in so far as it improves the…

Something that really sunk in for me while arguing with people on HN is that the entire Nuclear power industry is ~60 years old and provides around ~10% of humanity's electricity [0]. Even after the effective moratorium from 1985.

It seems very unlikely that we've really run up against the limits of what physics can do for us. That is an enormous change and it isn't even a lifetime ago. One more development like that would trivially justify investment values in the trillions of dollars range. Let alone all the other stuff that is likely to happen along the way.

Theoretical limits are all very well, but I strongly suspect the rational amount to spend on it is "everything we can". If I really wanted to start a fight I'll argue that diverting all welfare spending to scientific research would probably result in a greater net good over two generations.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nuclear_power_history.svg.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#35

Post by wolfgke » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:25 PM UTC

beojan wrote: post #21

kd5bjo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there a maximum price tag for potentially knowing more about the universe? Yes. On the extreme end, there’s a finite amount of useful work that can be done before the heat death of the universe. An energy budget the size of the combined output of all power stations on the planet is much smaller than that, but also too much. At a more realistic scale, human knowledge is only valuable in so far as it improves the…

> Other research areas could be more important to progress right now and we only have so many scientists available to do the work. Allocating those scientists to research areas is an incredibly hard task, but it’s a necessary one. That's not really how it works. People work on things they're interested in, not what they get assigned to.

> That's not really how it works. People work on things they're interested in, not what they get assigned to.

You have no idea how management and funding of large-scale research projects works.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#36

Post by culturestate » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:28 PM UTC

rubidium wrote: post #23

willis936 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s just the nature of the machines. You spend so much effort to get to the nuggets, but you still get the nuggets. Does China have experience making particle colliders? I’ve seen their magnetic confinement fusion research devices. Even in the design stage, there are lessons yet to be learned that are well documented in other machines. That doesn’t mean the people working on them are dumb, or that all fields of la…

These don’t get built by countries. They get built in countries. The home country matters and they’ll need to put up funding, but it’s an international workforce.

> The home country matters...but it’s an international workforce.

Given the current state of the world and the trajectory of the West's relationship with the Chinese government, it may have to be built by China if it's going to be built in China.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#37

Post by vixen99 » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:37 PM UTC

rubidium wrote: post #23

willis936 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s just the nature of the machines. You spend so much effort to get to the nuggets, but you still get the nuggets. Does China have experience making particle colliders? I’ve seen their magnetic confinement fusion research devices. Even in the design stage, there are lessons yet to be learned that are well documented in other machines. That doesn’t mean the people working on them are dumb, or that all fields of la…

These don’t get built by countries. They get built in countries. The home country matters and they’ll need to put up funding, but it’s an international workforce.

Is it supposed there are enterprises located in China exempt from oversight or control by the CCP? To what extent would decisions made within the enterprise be subject to President Xi's vision of complete control?

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#38

Post by buzzkillington » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:38 PM UTC

kd5bjo wrote: post #17

Deukhoofd wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I still believe that slamming particles into one another is the most promising route to understanding what matter is made of and how it holds together. But $10 billion is a hefty price tag. And I’m not sure it’s worth it. When is it worth it? They tested many theories, and many of them were proven wrong, and some were proven right. What price can you attach to having this knowledge? Is there a maximum price tag for…

> Is there a maximum price tag for potentially knowing more about the universe? Yes. On the extreme end, there’s a finite amount of useful work that can be done before the heat death of the universe. An energy budget the size of the combined output of all power stations on the planet is much smaller than that, but also too much. At a more realistic scale, human knowledge is only valuable in so far as it improves the…

>Or maybe we need to raise the global literacy rate so that we have more scientists available.

Or maybe we start paying scientists living wages so anyone who can wipe their ass doesn't end up as a quant. Speaking as a quant with a physics phd working with another 400 phds in an hft firm.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#39

Post by why_this12 » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:38 PM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #34

kd5bjo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there a maximum price tag for potentially knowing more about the universe? Yes. On the extreme end, there’s a finite amount of useful work that can be done before the heat death of the universe. An energy budget the size of the combined output of all power stations on the planet is much smaller than that, but also too much. At a more realistic scale, human knowledge is only valuable in so far as it improves the…

Something that really sunk in for me while arguing with people on HN is that the entire Nuclear power industry is ~60 years old and provides around ~10% of humanity's electricity [0]. Even after the effective moratorium from 1985. It seems very unlikely that we've really run up against the limits of what physics can do for us. That is an enormous change and it isn't even a lifetime ago. One more development like that…

"If I really wanted to start I [sic] fight I'll argue that diverting all welfare spending to scientific research would probably result in a greater net good over two generations."

Bizarre comment is in the plus, critical comments are downvoted. Never criticize CERN or Microsoft on HN.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#40

Post by roenxi » Sun, May 10, 2020, 12:40 PM UTC

why_this12 wrote: post #39

roenxi wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something that really sunk in for me while arguing with people on HN is that the entire Nuclear power industry is ~60 years old and provides around ~10% of humanity's electricity [0]. Even after the effective moratorium from 1985. It seems very unlikely that we've really run up against the limits of what physics can do for us. That is an enormous change and it isn't even a lifetime ago. One more development like that…

"If I really wanted to start I [sic] fight I'll argue that diverting all welfare spending to scientific research would probably result in a greater net good over two generations." Bizarre comment is in the plus, critical comments are downvoted. Never criticize CERN or Microsoft on HN.

Thanks, I fixed that typo.