Even larger hadron collider proposed

[MartG]

CERN are already looking at a sucessor to the LHC, with 3x the length

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-220...

Somewhere for my son to work once he's got his degree I guess

[Ray Luxury-Yacht]

This is awesome. In a blind, ignorant statement of utopia - more money should be spent on stuff like this, and less on fighting other human beings on the planet we all share!!

But, unlikely I know

[Simpo Two]

Ray Luxury-Yacht said:

This is awesome. In a blind, ignorant statement of utopia - more money should be spent on stuff like this, and less on fighting other human beings on the planet we all share!!

Do both. Lure your opponent into the machine using whatever bait is most effective, then switch it on...

[jet_noise]

Dear MG,

do you think it might be called the Hadron Pileup?

regards,
Jet

[Caruso]

No doubt if they get the 50mile one they'll want a 100mile one a few months after.

[anonymous-user]

Can't we just build one around the hard shoulder of the M25? ;-)

[cahami]

Has something good come of the first one then? Do we need a bigger one to improve our lives? or is someone just securing future funding? Sorry if im sounding obtuse.

[MartG]

cahami said:

Has something good come of the first one then? Do we need a bigger one to improve our lives? or is someone just securing future funding? Sorry if im sounding obtuse.

So far most seemingly 'useless' research has led to advances in our understanding that benefit everyone on a daily basis

[callyman]

MartG said:

So far most seemingly 'useless' research has led to advances in our understanding that benefit everyone on a daily basis

This ^^. If it wasn't for our understanding of quantum mechanics, we wouldn't have transistors

[PlankWithANailIn]

cahami said:

Has something good come of the first one then? Do we need a bigger one to improve our lives? or is someone just securing future funding? Sorry if im sounding obtuse.

The problem in physics at the moment is that these massive collider's and massive space telescopes are the only way we can test existing theories and discover new ones. If we cant build them then it means an end to humans attempts to understand the universe.

The reality is that CERN are just proposing the next achievable step up from what we have got, i.e. they probably want more but are trying to be realistic. I suspect that ever larger colliders will be built every 10 to 20 years, perhaps we should build the best possible collider that we can on Earth, say 1000 times as big as the LHC, it would save money in the long run. I predict also that the entire dark side of the moon will be turned into a telescope/telescopes in the not so far future.

Think of it this way

1) First modern scientific test equipment = Small telescope/microscope (1600)
.
.
.
.
.
.
infinity) Latest scientific test equipment = Unbelievably huge telescope/microscope, slightly bigger than the previous one.

[MartG]

PlankWithANailIn said:

perhaps we should build the best possible collider that we can on Earth, say 1000 times as big as the LHC, it would save money in the long run.

Build one around the Moon's equator

[MiniMan64]

[Shaolin]

Max_Torque said:

Can't we just build one around the hard shoulder of the M25? ;-)

They could ask for people to donate old magnets they have in the house and use the circle line, I reckon this would work at a fraction of the cost.

[Regiment]

I would have thought the follow up to the Large Hadron would be a space based linear accelerator rather than a land based one.

[SMGB]

To look back closer to the big bang needs more and more energy as times arrow takes particles in the other direction. When you accelerate particles and constrain them in a circle they radiate energy and the larger the ring the lower this is. Hence the linear accelerator comment above. A ring does allow more collisions as you send particles off in both directions at once though. The LHC is instrumented pretty much all round its circumferance to generate lots of data and this would be hard work in space. Arguably this produces too much data although the must be using some algorithm to sift through it.
I dont resent a penny of my tax that goes on this, or on the teeth of the armed services (/f35 above), but oh the superanuated brass hats and the vast legion of deadwood in the MoD.

[paolow]

MartG said:

CERN are already looking at a sucessor to the LHC, with 3x the length

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-220...

Somewhere for my son to work once he's got his degree I guess

Why not just send the particles round the LHC three times?

And then just send me the cheque for my 'consultants fees'

[RobDickinson]

Rather this got funding than about a billion other things much less deserving.

[RobM77]

cahami said:

Has something good come of the first one then? Do we need a bigger one to improve our lives? or is someone just securing future funding? Sorry if im sounding obtuse.

Obviously there's some good info above. The finance, for instance, is relatively small compared with other things we do (LHC is equivalent to a medium sized University to build and run); there are also benefits that come out of science.

However, what it all boils down to is our quest for the advancement of knowledge, which, like exploring, is a key human desire that's never doing to go away. Apply the same logic to your own life - would you be willing to stop reading books and watching television in return for spending the time doing charity work instead, or helping your neighbour put up a new fence? Most people wouldn't, they'd share their time between all three. There is a list of things that human beings like to do, 5 to start with are: learn, explore, have fun, pro-create, help others. It is distinctly unhuman to stop one or more of these things completely to focus on another, especially when you look at society as a whole. People's opinions may vary on the proportion of money spent on each thing, but before we criticise the millions spent on science we should look at the billions we spend on war, or giving chavs somewhere to live and a way to scive off work. Particle accelerators are built with small change in comparison.

[Newromancer]

Just wondering, have I've been the only one who read Forever Peace by Joe Haldeman?

[tank slapper]

cahami said:

Has something good come of the first one then? Do we need a bigger one to improve our lives? or is someone just securing future funding? Sorry if im sounding obtuse.

A lot of cutting edge science seems irrelevant to daily life, but really it is all ground work for daily life in 50 or so years time. It is only once we understand something that we can make use of it, so while it may not have any immediate apparent benefit other than being able to confirm theoretical knowledge, that knowledge is then available to be used in conjunction with other discoveries or existing technology to produce new ideas and technology.

A good example of this is what is happening with nano-technology. Previously it was entirely in the realm of science fiction and some obscure experiments in university labs, but there are some extremely promising ideas that are under development that could have very wide ranging impacts on health care, for both diagnosis and treatment, as well as other areas. Had those experiments stopped at "Oh, that's cool" and then been put on the shelf to gather dust, an entire field of scientific development would have been closed off.