Giant Particle Collider Struggles

NY Times ^ | August 4, 2009 | DENNIS OVERBYE

[Portcall24]

Sean Riley on a show called World’s Toughest Fixes just did an hour on replacing one of the magnets. They call the LHC the world’s largest scientific instrument. The same show is going to be on again Thursday evening on National Geographic Channel (NGC).

[Youaskedforit]

“We got sucked into an alternate Universe where a man with no positive record and history won the Presidential election based on two books he published about himself.”

Wonderful! There’s no other explanation.

[Vaduz]

Somebody needs to turn on the overhead sprinklers on when it powers up Pooooof.

[neverdem]

Cell-sized vesicle assembly line

Low vitamin D levels linked to metabolic syndrome

Findings May Explain Gap in Cancer Survival

FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list. Anyone can post any unposted link as they see fit.

[Condor51]

“The fact is, it’s likely to take a while to get the results we really want,” said Lisa Randall, a Harvard physicist who is an architect of the extra-dimension theory.

Yep I was right I knew it was her. She's kinda hot.

However, she ain't exactly 'an architect of the extra-dimension theory'. Her specialty is Gravity.

Not until the String Theory proponents realize that its 10 Dimensions wasn't exactly kosher (there were 5 different 'answers', and in physics that's 4 too many) and they needed another dimension, the 11th - Gravity - to make it work. And that gave us the M-Theory which solves 'everything', and that's when she gained prominence with other 'Gravity' Physicists (previously they were treated like kooks). [I've dumbed this down for lurkers]

But yeah, she's a babe and smart to boot. (prolly fricken gay) /s

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks neverdem. IMHO, this boondoggle isn't going to destroy the Earth (as some wags have claimed, and the claim has been picked up by the paranoid) but probably will destroy particle physics.

---

· String Theory Ping List ·

---

---

· View or Post in 'blog · Join · Bookmark · Topics · post a topic · FR page layout · Google ·

---

[allmost]

What a waste. I was telling a friend last summer what an expensive piece of junk this thing was. It had potential but the political wrangling and inherent government inefficiencies doomed this thing from the start. It's hard to believe they want to shut down the Tevatron for this thing.

[SuperLuminal]

"...biggest, most expensive... "

And, therein, lies the reason for the multi-decade decline in the quality of basic physics.

Consider the decades between 1850 and 1870..... magnificent minds at minimal costs made giant leaps in the various fields of physics.

Since the 1970's .....very little by comparison.

Why?

IMHO, two things:

1. Sen Mike Mansfield gutted the most important (and most consistent) support for basic physics and, as a result fewer "magnificent" minds were either trained, discovered, or supported; and,
2. Academic & government research goals became a political race to building the most expensive "toys". Naked political ideologies have played a key role in reducing some formerly important laboratories to politicians' playgrounds that dabble in innocuous crap.

[onedoug]

Not Guilty!

[AFPhys]

Several excellent physics machines have been shut down recently. Those who argued that was foolish to shut down good, working machines (your truly included) on the prospects a newer machine would do the same work more rapidly were not yet justified, were shouted down.

I do not think this is a piece of junk (yet) but it surely has not been able to deliver as of now. It may well be a wonderful research machine in time, though it is definitely pushing technology in MANY ways (this will not be the last of their problems.) Ambitious, yes.

Will it destroy particle physics? No. The SSC in Texas was more of a problem than this machine is. That was built VERY prematurely, and supported by people who really should have known better. This machine is reasonable to build- I just wish the US had decided before building that the SSC was premature, and then built this machine ten years later instead.

[allmost]

I was referring to the inherent inefficiencies that go along with multinational projects like this one. From what I've read over the years there has been as much, if not more, bickering over who makes what, where they make it, etc. than there has been time spent designing and refining the construction. It shows in the results.