Comment

Comment on bro pls

Has the LHC resulted in any kind of tangible returns on investment so far? I know they proved the existence of the Higgs Boson, but all that did as I understand it was verify what we were already pretty sure of.

I'm just having a hard time understanding why we can't blow 30 or 100 billion or whatever on something else like fusion research. Or just something with a more concrete "if we pull this off it solves <gigantic international problem>.

I understand science can walk and chew gum at the same time, but this in particular seems like a shitload to spend and a lot of land to disturb so that particle physicists can nerd out in an underground torus proving theories but maybe not moving the needle much for mankind.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Sodis@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
The thing is, that you can’t predict, what fundamental science will lead to. In the case of the LHC the tangible returns are technologies, that can be adapted to other fields, like detectors. There are enough other arguments, why a bigger accelerator is a bad idea, where you do not need to trash fundamental research as a whole.

source
- nicetriangle@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  You have any links to info on these technologies? I've done some googling today and in the past and come up with little specifics on the LHC gave us X or helped lead to the development of X that is now being used for Y.
  
  And I'm not saying we need to trash research. Just that research could be done on things that more directly answer some of the very real problems we have right now before this planet goes up in flames.
  
  source
  - Sodis@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    These things are really special interest. They developed small scale particle detectors, that are nowadays used in medical physics for example (PET scanners and so on). Then their electronics need to be very insensitive to radiation damage, that is also important for everything space related. There is probably some R&D on superconducting magnets as well, that can be adapted to other purposes, but I am not too up to date in this field and I am not sure, if Cern is a major player there.
    
    source
    nicetriangle@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Thanks I appreciate some specifics. It's pretty cloudy when I've looked into this myself.
    
    source
  - slackassassin@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    The world wide web, for one.
    
    source
    nicetriangle@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    The LHC – specifically – and not CERN generally developed the world wide web?
    
    source
  - Gabu@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Imagine thinking that the literal, fundamental fabric of reality isn’t important research…
    
    source
jadero@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I also think there are better places to put this kind of money, including on projects that we are certain have obvious potential to change the world for the better.

What I was getting at was the very idea that we absolutely have to know what the return is before we start. Just because we know the potential return doesn’t mean that it’s not research (as in your fusion example), but just because we can’t identify a return ahead of time doesn’t mean there won’t be one.

Also, I don’t know if there have been any tangible benefits from the LHC. Precision manufacturing? Improvements in large-scale, multi-jurisdiction project management? Data analytics techniques? More efficient superconducting magnets? I don’t know if those are actual side effects of the project and, if they are, I don’t know that the LHC was the only way to get them.

source