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

Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 254 posts

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#41

Post by buzzkillington »

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…

You are talking about engineering there, not science.

Science is using duct tape to explore the properties of graphene. Engineering is building a plant that can produce 500km2 of graphene a day.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#42

Post by tsimionescu »

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 a fight I'll argue that diverting all welfare spending to scientific research would probably result in a greater net good over two generations.

Why welfare spending? Why not corporate subsidies? Or just forcefully seize the entire assets of some number of non-scientists, chosen at random? Cutting out welfare as a whole seems to be the single spending cut most likely to kill the largest number of people.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#44

Post by paulpauper »

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…

That is only 1/300 the cost of the covid stimulus. it is only extensive because it has been deemed by the media and pundits as so.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#45

Post by dang »

axla wrote: post #19
dang wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't post flamebait here. It never leads anyplace new. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

One cannot leave smooth articles or headlines un-contradicted, for the unfortunate reason that if humans read something often enough, it tends to become the truth.

Here we trust readers to make up their own minds.

Of course it is good to supply relevant information, but then the emphasis should be on supplying information, not taking a swipe.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#46

Post by kd5bjo »

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…

> I strongly suspect the rational amount to spend on it is "everything we can".

By saying “everything,” you’re dodging the question of what sacrifices we should make to speed up basic science research. How do you draw the line between what we can and can’t afford?

Should we require everyone to pursue a Master’s degree? A PhD? Do we shut down university humanities departments? Do we halt all production that doesn’t directly support the basic sciences? Do we reduce food production to only that which is needed to support the scientific staff?

Some or all of these suggestions are probably beyond your idea of what’s acceptable. If so, you agree that there is some price that is too great to pay. The interesting question isn’t whether there’s a limit, it’s what it is.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#47

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#48

Post by EastLondonCoder »

_fizz_buzz_ wrote: post #8

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

In the late 19th century people that went into science where actively discourage to study physics since many believed there was nothing left to find out. Without quantum mechanics we would not have the transistor, there would be no computers. The immense economic value delivered by fundamental research makes a 10 billion usd investment look like a microscopic peanut crumb compared to the potential value it can give. For comparison the combined world defense budget in 2018 was around 1.8 trillion usd.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#49

Post by Gatsky »

_fizz_buzz_ wrote: post #8

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

It will be impossible to get an extra 10 billion dollars invested into science without a project like this. In other words probably 10% or less of that money would end up going into other fields of research. Considering all the other things governments spend money on, that is a good enough reason to do it in my book.

Re: Finding new physics will require a new particle collider

#50

Post by Random_ernest »

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…

I think people severely underestimate the scale, complexity, and time it takes to build large scale accelerators. There wont be some magical new accelerator popping up. Building them takes years, sometimes decades. Additionally you need a lot of experience in building, operating and designing those. Having worked in accelerator physics for quite some time my opinion is that China does not have the skills to do this. Research labs that built such machines had decades of prior experience and the community support. China has neither of those.

Imho the next big accelerator will be either some LHC upgrade, clic (very very unlikely) or the ILC.

Post reply on HN