ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Big science's big day

Posted: Saturday, February 16, 2008 8:30 AM by Alan Boyle


Salvatore Di Nolfi / Keystone / AP
An onlooker watches an element of the Compact Muon Solenoid being lowered into
its underground cavern at the Large Hadron Collider on the French-Swiss border.

The most anticipated date in physics is the day the world's biggest particle-smasher, Europe's Large Hadron Collider, goes into operation. That day had been set for last November, but a magnet mishap and other factors forced a delay until this spring. The final piece of one of the collider's mammoth detectors, the Compact Muon Solenoid, was lowered into its underground cavern just last month. And now the big day is likely to come in June or July rather than May.

The fact is that officials at Europe's CERN particle physics lab don't know to the day when the world's biggest physics project will be ready for prime time. However, they do know the day for the big celebration.

CERN's director general, Robert Aymar, is in Boston this week for the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science - and construction progress on the Large Hadron Collider has been one of the big topics on the meeting's agenda.

The multibillion-dollar collider, which was conceived a quarter-century ago and has been in the works for more than a decade, is expected to shed light on mysteries ranging from dark matter and extra cosmic dimensions to the reasons why particles have mass and why matter won out over antimatter.

There's currently no other way to find out the answers to all these deep questions, Aymar said. "Without LHC discovery, we are stuck, and we will not go beyond what we know today," he told reporters. That's why the start-up is so anticipated.

Aymar said commissioning the machine will take months. 

Physics insiders have long known that the first beam of protons wouldn't be zipping through the collider's 17-mile-round ring until June or July - based on the construction time lines from CERN.

June was the time frame Aymar had in mind when he was asked about the start-up schedule during a Friday session on large-scale science project. But during a follow-up chat, he pointed out that you can't just press a big red button one day and expect each of the collider's beams to hit full power of 7 trillion electron volts immediately.

The rule of thumb is that 1 trillion electron volts, or 1 TeV, is equivalent to the energy expended by a mosquito in flight - which would make 7 TeV as energetic as, say, a bumblebee. The buzz of a bee may not sound like a lot. But when you consider how many trillions of protons are in that beam, the energy adds up to a bullet train going 100 mph. So it's prudent to start small and build up power gradually.

Aymar said that buildup could still start around May 21 or 22, with tests continuing for weeks after that. His aim is to have the collider conducting scientific experiments this summer.

Of course, that assumes that everything proceeds according to plan between now and then - which is not always the case (see above, "magnet mishap"). And now that sectors of the ring are being cooled down to cryogenic temperatures, any problem that needed fixing would required going through a whole warm-up/cool-down cycle.

"Quantification of the delay is three months," Aymar said - which is a geeky way of saying that a glitch in the final phase of preparations wouldn't hold up things by just a day, but rather three months at a time.

This may be why the big party - the ceremony marking the inauguration of the Large Hadron Collider - has been set for months after the scheduled start-up, on Oct. 21. French President Nicolas Sarkozy and other VIPs (including Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman) are expected to be in attendance.

No matter what happens, that date won't change, Aymar said.

And then what? Physicists have told me the first scientific experiments would probably need a year or so to come to fruition, and it could take five years to answer some of the deep mysteries mentioned above. If the answers are there to be found, that is. There's always a chance that the collider will draw a blank - that physicists won't see anything of what they're expecting to see.

"For many people, that may seem like a disappointment," said Lawrence Krauss, a theoretical physicist at Case Western Reserve University. "From a theoretical perspective, it means that every basic idea we have about the fundamental structure of matter, in some way, is wrong. And there's nothing more exciting than that."

Update for 1 p.m. ET Feb. 16: So how much does all this cost? As with all big-science projects, it depends. CERN says the cost of the accelerator is 4.7 billion Swiss francs ($4.3 billion), and additional CERN contributions to the experiments and project-related computing amount to 1.35 billion Swiss francs ($1.23 billion). But scores of other countries are contributing to the experiments as well, and that could add $3 billion to $5 billion to the total expense. Thus, if you're talking about CERN alone, the machine would cost $5 billion-plus, but if you're talking about the total project, the estimates are in the range of $8 billion to $10 billion.

Update for 8 p.m. ET Aug. 4: The original item was a little confusing about exactly what would happen on "Red Button Day." I've amended the text to say more clearly we're talking about the first injection of proton beams. Actual collisions would come later, and collisions at full power would come still later. Obviously, the schedule has slipped since this item was written. Here's today's update.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

So why do they have this thing?
Anti-matter can be examined at the edges of our own atmosphere.  Plus no matter how big you make this thing, it's not going to let you examine the dimension theories.  How about we spend our money protecting our planet from gamma ray bursts, or expand our species to the stars instead of crashing particles together.
Eight billion dollars for the whole project?  Bush spends that much every month to kill Afghanis and Iraqis, abusing our troops in the process.  

Goethe predicted the future when he said "Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action."  But even he could not have predicted the cost.
Even if it costs the full $10 billion, and even if the US were footing the bill (we're not, its mostly paid for by other countries) that is a tiny, tiny expenditure in terms of national budgets.  The IRS collects $2.2 trillion every year.  Would we even notice if we're spending 1/2200th less by cancelling a $10 billion expenditure?  Of course not.
concerned: I can't think of a way this could lead to the type of explosion you describe. The energy just isn't contained in a way that could lead to an explosion. Anyway, the best way to prevent accidents is to understand what we are doing. And we understand things by research through theory and controlled expirements.
This is almost as interesting and well anticipated as a space flight or  some robotic mission.  You don't have to be a physics person to appreciate what is being done here. I sure would like to see a pic of what results from the first collison at energies that far surpass other experiments. I have seen one before but that was some time ago and they are quite spectacular. Maybe they don't release this information readily.
For everyone who has concerns about the cost of basic research and why we spend money on things like this rather than food, I will help shed light on the situation.  What we learn on the journey leads to spin-off technologies that fuel all of the economies of the world.  In other words, we do this - we learn - we make new things - we sell new things - we create new jobs - we create new prosperity.  People have the same questions about NASA.  NASA had this problem, they needed to calculate a lot of numbers really quickly and computers used to be the size of a room.  NASA while flying the space shuttle worked to solve this issue.  Astronauts kept asking for more and more computer power, yet the amount of space on the space shuttle remained the same.  So, NASA drove the development of smaller and smaller computers - from handheld calculators, to desktop computers, then to laptops.  Every article of clothing you wear has fibres that were influenced by the space program.  What we learn along the way turns into things that become the engine of future prosperity.  On the food question, in Star Trek, they used replicator machines to generate food from thin air.  Well, if we understand the basic materials that make-up food and understand matter as this machine aims to, we can make machines that create matter - such as food.  Don't be afraid.  Long-term investment is the secret of wealthy people and wealthy nations.  If you are poor, consider how many long-term investments you have made - study and become more financially educated - and whatever income level you are at, you can become more wealthy.  
Its easy. Thr purpose of the LHC is to create an artificial black hole that they think (officially they are 'almost positive') will evaporate, producing a shower of particles unseen untill now. Studying the behavior in turn , enables many scientists to confirm , deny and create new hypothesis about the universe.

The actual purpose of the LHC is unrelized in that the black hole will instead devour the earth. Thus, the end of hunger , poverty and all world strife!

Haha just kidding. We think ;) . Good joke , eh?

Isnt the progress of science wonderful?
The money some people here think should be used to end poverty, feed the hungry or cure the sick would never be diverted by government into those projects from the things government believes are more important, like defense, or border security, or pork-barreling rewards.

Scientific inquiry like the LHC, or NASA, or similar effort occasionally manages to squeeze a pittance out the hands which control funding.  But those funds, if they were re-directed, would not go to the hungry, the poor or the sick.  Either they would be kept by the government to be used as bribes for votes, or spent on other government subsidies for the energy companies, manufacturing bailouts and similar vote producing efforts.

It may seem to be a lot of investment in scientific investigation, and $10Billion would buy a lot of KFC, to be sure, but Man does not live by bread alone, and the acquisition of knowledge will lead us all out of the wilderness eventually.

Finally, remember it is you who put politicians into places of power, and you who can evict them, too.  If you want a government to tackle social problems like poverty, hunger, homelessness and illness, you have the power to make it happen.

You know a lot of people ask why so much money was spent on this thing to begin with. Why don't we feed the hungry, cure cancer/other diseases, et cetera.

On that same line of thought - how do you think nuclear medicine began? If scientists didn't unlock the mysteries of the atom and begin nuclear science we would never have developed x-ray machines, MRIs would never have existed, nuclear energy would be a thing of science fiction, even smoke detectors have small amounts of irradiated material to make them work. But... We did investigate the atom and we did learn how to manipulate it. We did make new discoveries in particle physics.

What was found over time is that we only touched the tip of the iceberg in terms of what atoms are made of and how they work - there are many subparticles that make up protons, neutrons, and electrons of atoms. They are inferred but have not been observed fully or contained. Immagine for a moment what lies ahead as we actually begin to understand how the subparticles work. If for example a new source of energy is discovered (like last time think nuclear power plants) those issues of poverty and starvation etc might be alleviated once and for all.

Give it a chance people.
Now hold on a second.  Let's be scientists here and seek the truth.  Solving hunger throughout the world won't be accomplished by throwing money at it.  We live in a world where you take some money to the store and you buy food.  It doesn't work that way in the third world.  It doesn't work that way in parts of THIS country, amigos.  

The particle accelerator is worth its weight in gold and may hold the key to free, unlimited power for all.  Imagine that.  The ability to make as much power as we need, forever, without consuming vital resources or creating any form of pollution.  That's just one thing that may be discovered using the accelerator.  

R
Could this thing create a black hole and kill us all? A scary quote from a website...

"III. CONCLUSION

The CERN study [Ref. 1] is a remake of a similar study for the earlier Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven (RHIC) [Ref. 6] adapted to the LHC.

It is important to notice that: The study for the RHIC had concluded that no black holes will be created. For the LHC the conclusion is very different: "Black holes could be created!" !

The main danger could be now just behind our door with the possible death in blood of 6.500.000.000 (US notation 6,500,000,000) people and complete destruction of our beautiful planet. Such a danger shows the need of a far larger study before any experiment ! The CERN study presents risk as a choice between a 100% risk or a 0% risk. This is not a good evaluation of a risk percentage!

If we add all the risks for the LHC we could estimate an overall risk between 11% and 25%!.

We are far from the Adrian Kent's admonition that global risks that should not exceed 0.000001% a year to have a chance to be acceptable. [Ref. 3] .Even testing the LHC could be dangerous. Even an increase in the luminosity of the RHIC could be dangerous! It would be wise to consider that the more powerful the accelerator will be, the more unpredicted and dangerous the events that may occur! We cannot build accelerators always more powerful with interactions different from natural interactions, without risk. This is not a scientific problem. This is a wisdom problem!

Our desire of knowledge is important but our desire of wisdom is more important and must take precedence. The precautionary principle indicates not to experiment. The politicians must understand this evidence and stop these experiments before it is too late! "

source: http://www.nowpublic.com/technology/potential-danger-particle-collider-experiments
If you don't understand what this research is for.. just watch some Star Trek...
Hey, why not just use the energizer bunny to power it up?
I would like to note how refreshing it is to have intelligent posts and rebuttals.  I only hope those naysayers who have yet to educate themselves on the bigger picture at least have the sense to read the intelligent explanations and rebuttals to their comments, and not simply post something and walk away from intelligent posts.  that would be the definition of ignorance.
I understand very well the legitimate concerns of those who criticize big-budget scientific experiment.  But without scientific experiment in quantum physics, used to prove scientific theory in quantum physics, we wouldn't have TV, music reproduction, computers, telephone, cell phones, radar, sonar, processes which kill bacteria in our food supply, X-rays, GPS, CAT and PET scans, radiation therapy for cancer patients, lithotripsy for those who suffer kidney stones, nuclear power and weaponry (OK so we goofed there, big time), hybrid cars, the promise of nuclear fusion and countless other inventions which enhance the lives of almost every human on the planet.  Our study of quantum physics and our space travel are a beautiful tribute to our maker and an expression of our gratitude, wonder, and hope.  There IS enough money to go around for all pursuits improving the lives of God's children.  This research is as important as any.
10,20 30 billion for science/space is a drop in the bucket compared to the billions spent by the countries involved to "help" the poor and yet there is still poor.  Every "tech age" has its protesters for the poor I suppose if they were successfull in the 50's & 60's they wouldn't be sitting in front of their computers and the internet complaining.
To those who are complaining about the cost: since it was the Europeans that built this, why are you all complaning? None of your precious tax dollars was "wasted" on this project. Make your once a year donation to United Way and delude yourself into thinking that all is well.
I hate to inject (another) note of political tension into these very interesting comments, but I can't help myself:
How many of the people complaining about the $5 billion cost of the LHC see nothing wrong with spending over 100 times that much on the war in Iraq, the multibillion dollar casinos that Las Vegas is building these days, or tax cuts for the wealthy which have robbed the poor of many basic services?

I love the LHC & CAN'T WAIT for it to start taking data. I'll gladly chip in a hundred bucks to offeset the construction cost if it'll help. Maybe I could take some cash out of what I'm forced to pay my government to fight a war I don't support.
THIS IS A VERY BAD IDEA!  LOOKING INTO THESE AREAS OF SCIENCE ON OUR ONLY HOME, ONLY PLANET IS A MISTAKE.  THEY ARE PLAYING WITH FIRE AND ARE ABOUT TO LET AN BEAST OUT IN WHICH THEY CANNOT CONTROL!
I wonder how many carbon credits they have to buy to run this thing. Not that I buy global warming, which I don't, but how many houses could be run with the energy this thing will use? Counting construction and application I would be a few pounds of carbon will be emitted. I guess that is OK, huh??
For the cost of 18 - 37 days for the US military to be in Iraq (@ ~$270 million per day for the US), I think this thing is pretty cheap (esp. considering it's not just the US footing the bill).

Of course, good science never gets the funding it needs unless it helps us fight better wars (e.g. the A-Bomb). If there were really a possibility of weaponizing this thing, the US would have paid double for it and made it top secret as well.

I think it's worth the relatively small outlay of cash (and huge economic impact to the Swiss) to find out more about the nature of the universe. Some things can't be done without some sacrifice in terms of time and money.

As far as the black hole thing goes, I don't believe we have enough energy on all of the earth, let alone just in Switzerland, to create a black hole that will suck the earth and all of her inhabitants into it. If we had this amount of energy on earth, there wouldn't be an energy crisis!

Besides, I thought black holes like this were formed after stars went supernova or something. If there is one created in the LHC, it will likely be infinitessimally small and evaporate almost immediately after it's formed.
I am surprised at the number of people that think an investment of less than $10 billion for this project is a waste of money.  The US spends that much on our military in just a few days.

This project is supports very basic research into what makes everything in the universe work.  If we don't invest in the search for such understanding, our progress in science and technology will slowly grind to a halt.  Imagine if the scientists who studied electricity decades ago had not bothered because nobody could imagine a use for it?

The bottom line is with basic research we really don't know what we will find.  But our future will be based on the new understand of our world.
"CERN, men to Mars, Deep Space Exploration, all wonderfully interesting and exciting things. All terribly expensive as well. Yet we cant afford to address the pressing issues here on earth ? STOP all of this and redirect the talent and money to combating pollution, warming, health and the other serious issues that affect us all here on good old Earth !!!!!!!!!!!"

  First...you propose taking physicists ant turning them into something else. Take away LHC, and they'll pursue their passion somewhere else, in some other way.

  Second, you write as if billions of dollars *aren't already* being spent on all those things you deem more inportant. Have you really stopped to find out? I submit that you'd be very suprised. LHC is chump change compared to many other programs and projects...

  And there's always the chance that what we learn with LHC might (or might not...basic science is like that, you can't really know what will be useful, and knowledge *is* worth pursuing for its own sake) have some bearing on one of those issues (cleaner energy through a currently unknown physical process, perhaps?) you list.

Or not. If you don't look, you won't know.

If the collider results in an extended economic boost for the locals, then it has at least some value.  If it results in useful technology for the average man then, that is even better.  Do the collider engineers and scientists see such results forthcoming?  I am all for expanding the frontiers of pure academic knowledge, but price tags for experiments need to be weighed carefully against real need and practicality.  If these experiments can eventually result in more food on the table for our upcoming population of 7 billion, then more power to them.
Sounds like the Gillette company is going to again enable me to get an even closer shave. Sad to spend that kind of money when shaving isn't even popular!
It is going to reveal secrets that will so alarm the persons that can understand the information, "That their hearts will fail them for fear for the things that are COMING on the earth" If you think our weather is getting crazy, wait, these people will figure out that IT IS ABOUT OVER! The only ones that are going to be happy with what they find, is the Born again, the ones that are just waiting for Christ to come for them.
I found it interesting that Bill Clinton and Al Gore helped shut down the SSC, but then turned around and built the SNS in Al's backyard.  Talk about Pork Barrel politics.  Al's right up there with Senator Byrd.
For those who are concerned about some sort of catastrophe, it might be comforting to know that this "machine" is not the first of its kind.  It is just the latest and largest particle accelerator.  Here's a list of about 50 particle accelerators which have been built over the last 77 years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accelerators_in_particle_physics
You'll notice that the CERN Large Hadron Collider is one of a handful of such hadron colliders.  The main difference is beam energy.  The new collidor has roughly seven times more beam energy than the next "competitor," which is Fermilab's Tevatron near Chicago.
First off, any black holes created by the collider would be too small to present any danger to anyone. Much less the whole planet. They would be too small to absorb anything, and too short lived to grow. If that weren't the case, our planet would have been destroyed billions of years ago by naturally occuring energetic reactions. Secondly, to Steve: we can't say for sure what technological benefits these expirements will provide, since it typical takes many decades for practical applications to develop. But, speaking from our past experiences, we should be able to make the money back many times over.
Ok. The energies achievable by the LHC fall comfortably with the "intermediate energy" region for cosmic ray particles. Tremendous numbers of particles of this energy strike the earth everyday from outter space. The most energetic cosmic rays that have been detected on Earth are billions of times more energetic than anything the LHC is capable for producing. If such energetic impacts were going to destroy us, via the creation of black holes or otherwise, it would have happened on its own long before life on Earth existed.
Human beings are a trepidatious species indeed, always afraid to get our feet wet without testing the water with our big toe first.

When steam engines first pulled passengers from place to place, only the brave and foolhardy took advantage of that rapid transit of the day.  Why?  Because we believed that the terrible speeds of 15 miles per hour  or more would do irreparable damage to the human constitution.  We learned over the years since then that we can move faster than sound itself, faster than a speeding bullet (ask the spacemen upstairs in the ISS) and now we are going to sling 'particles' magnetically even faster than that in the LHC.

We aren't going on the trip ourselves, but observing the 'how' and the 'why' and the 'what' will be like opening windows on the world of the incredibly big and the impossibly small things in the universe.  

Best of all, the exercise will expand our minds far beyond the fear and trepidation that holds us captive, no longer afraid to get our feet wet in new knowledge.
Remember these?


***
"We are living in a world where hunger, poverty, disease"... "STOP all of this and redirect the talent and money to combating pollution, warming"... "and it is a very nice toy."
***


Folks, you just *used the Internet* in order to share your opinions with the rest of us.


The very same Internet which originated from several million dollars allocated to make the "ARPANET," the first "version" of the Internet, in 1968. (1)


I can imagine trying to persuade a flower child in 1968 that this money was better spent on researching computer networking, than feeding people in Biafra (2)


Now: if you don't agree with this idea, does this mean that in solidarity with Suffering Millions, you'll forsake using the Web?


Your answer will be most illuminating. Particularly if you choose to air your opinion on this website.


Sources:

1. http://www.dei.isep.ipp.pt/~acc/docs/arpa--1.html
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biafra
big deal... how many sick people and starving children can be saved with all that money ?

think about it.
For the last time...
The LHC is NOT going to BLOW UP the world, or create a gigantic black hole, or a rip in the space-time continuum. Please go and do half an hour's reading on Wikipedia about the LHC, or cosmic rays, or Hawking radiation, & you'll understand that the type of collisions they'll be creating occur naturally in our upper atmosphere every day and pose no threat to anyone. The reason they're burying the LHC in the ground ISN'T because it's some dangerous thing that's likely to explode. It's because the equipment is huge, heavy, & needs to be aligned with microscopic precision & it's easiest to do that if it's all sitting on bedrock & not subject to a lot of vibration from trucks driving by, etc.
People, PLEASE get over your poorly-informed paranoia. The LCH isn't dangerous. It isn't scary. It's not run by mad scientists or evil geniuses. The ONLY thing the LHC will destroy is the limits of our knowlege.
GREAT!!! this sure sounds a lot like the sci-fi book written by John Ringo (The Vorpal Blade) same kind of experiment done in a university in florida, it goes wrong blows up like a 2 megaton nuclear warhead, opens up dimensional doors and aliens come thru and attack earth...Wohoooo!!!!
Some people here try to make sound like Republicans shot down the Superconducting Supercollidor, but if I remember right it was the Democrats.
I believe it was Michael Faraday who was asked by the Prime Minister of Britain why he was wasting his time researching this electricity stuff, back in about 1815.  Maybe some of the above commenters would have preferred that he feed the hungry, clothe the poor, or tend the sick.  His answer?  He didn't know what good could come of electricity, but he was sure that someday other politicians would find a way to tax the stuff.  Now we know: electricity does get taxed, but does it do a whole lot more than his own resources could possibly have done toward feeding, clothing, and healing?  You bet.  The LHC is in Faraday's shoes today.  Let's get on with it for the future of the poor, sick, and hungry.  It may be a distant future, but it will come.
What if they find particles that may be the culprit to cancer? there have been many exploding stars that would have probably produced the same result except we do not see anything but some gases expanding trillions of miles away from the exploding star.If we can find out other possible particles I think we will be on our way of curing cancer or maybe preventing it.If something is so small that it cannot be recognized, I believe it has the answers to the why Doctors and scientists cannot find cures.I think there is so much space matter flying through our bodies that it can and has caused most of our worst deseases. I'm not a scientist just a curious regular person who thinks small and large. any feed back for my small gray noodle
Interesting idea and project, but I'm glad its across the ocean.  Can't help but imagine this will lead to some huge discovery... like how to blow a 17 mile crater into the earth. Burying all this energy underground is eventually going to affect something we shouldn't be messing with. Maybe.
Some who are questioning the value of scientific experimentation at great cost, would be better off living in the dark ages. Who knows what benefits to the human condition might come from this. Humans inhabit this universe it would serve us well to know more about how it was created and how it works. Many have mentioned that human misery has always existed and probably always will. We must move forward in some areas perhaps others will follow.
The experiment will effectively break a proton into its constituent components allowing scientists to peak into the components that make up matter.  Since the cooling of the universe, this information has been inaccessible to man.  Colliders have been built before, but were not large enough to produce the impact speed to break the constituent components of a proton into all of their individual pieces.  The LHC theoretically has enough power to show us the next layer underneath the matter we all take for granted.

Likely, it will create more questions for physicists to ponder ad infinitum.  The LHC is also by no means the end-game or the largest possible lab for particle physics.  We won't know until the experiments are run and the data is analyzed.

Lamenting that big science comes at the cost of human welfare is nothing more than short-sighted naval-gazing.  Humanity in general has no desire to equalize and it will never happen even in the most idealistic world.  There will always be haves and have nots as there has always been.  Big science pays-off by raising the quality of life for everyone that has access to the applications, hydro-engineering, electrical engineering, computational engineering, biotech engineering, etc, etc.  Physics may appear on its surface to be a superficial endeavor, but it is by far the most fundamental as ALL tools are the product of physics exploration and implementations.  Imagine a world with no measures, no levers, no lenses, no springs, no axels, etc, etc.

The LHC will give us significant insight, the only question remains whether we are wise enough to use the insight for the benefit of our species.
john: sadly, we don't have anything that could be called an expiremental particle physics program.
I am, right down to my core, very excited watching the progress of CERN, .... vicariously taking a journey with the entire CERN team towards scratching the heretofor-unexplored micro-scale of the building blocks of matter ... the building blocks of existence.  Thanks to front-liners, supervisors, and managers at CERN for "boldly going where no person has gone before ...", and thanks to senior directors of the project for sharing information and progress on the project so openly / transparently online.

As well as marvel in the anticipation of the physical-world discoveries which CERN may produce, I am fascinated by the cornucopia of humanity which is brought about in this series of online-messages regarding CERN ... from the logic of the scientist, to interest shown by those wanting to know more but in lay-terms, to fellow onlookers keen to support others in grasping the gist of the project, to assessments of the projects economics, to objections to the project in favour of saving mankind from age-old perils, to the occasional religious slant / rant.

Good show all around.  I've got my popcorn.  Roll 'em.
" For example, without Maxwell's equations (discovered in the 1850s) which describe electricity and magnetism, modern electronic devices could not exist.
Michael-Scott Heberling"

While Maxwell's work certainly was a foundation leading towards modern electronics, the physics behind them is far weirder.

In fact, "modern electronic devices" are based on quantum mechanics rather than on classical physics such as Maxwell's equations.

A semiconductor based transistor or I.C. is a practical device based on obscure & counter-intuitive physics (ie. quantum tunneling) & would not have been conceived or invented without the kind of expensive, elaborate & collaborative projects that have led up to the LHC. The same is true of the laser & of the earliest quantum device, the photovoltaic cell (for the understanding of which Einstein was awarded his Nobel Prize).

Those who think such a physics project is "SCAREY" have little understanding of the universe they live in. More energetic events than the LHC will create occur in our atmosphere constantly due to cosmic ray impacts. The danger of catastrophe is essentially zero as these events have occurred an uncountable number of times in the billions of years the Earth has existed. The Earth, as well as life, is still here.

I'm not sure which horrify me more: the requests to dumb down an already glib story, or the people who think they understand and don't see the point of spending money on basic research.

You do remember that Bush Junior is spending $20 billion just on that leaky border fence? And how much for the "Iraq Experiment" so far?
Just so we don't dumb it down too much, let's look at the points already made about cosmic rays.  The issue is, should we worry that the proton-proton collisions at the LHC might cause half of Europe, half of the world, or half of Geneva, Switzerland to disappear?  The new results from the Auger cosmic-rays observatory in South America show that, over their limited area and observing time, they saw 27 cosmic rays with energies over 57 x 10 to the 18th power electron-volts, which we write 57 x 10^18 eV.  One eV is the kinetic energy picked up by an electron that falls through 1 Volt of electrical potential.  We have to reference this energy to a center-of-mass reference frame to see how much energy is available to do physics.  Otherwise, because the total momentum before an interaction must be same as after, much of the incident energy is just used as the kinetic energy needed to carry away all the incident momentum on final-state particles; that part can't blow anyone away with black holes.  In the c.m. the momentum balances and all the energy is useful for physics.  The c.m. energy at 50 x 10^18 eV incident kinetic energy is about sqrt(2*E*m), where m is the mass of the target, E the beam kinetic energy.  A purist would say that the target is one constituent of the struck atmospheric nucleon, known as a quark or a gluon.  However, a quark or gluon has a certain probability of carrying most of the energy of the nucleon itself, so we get the safest estimate if we just take m to be the mass of a proton or neutron, a little over 900 x 10^6 eV.  Carrying that out, we get about 300 x 10^12 eV in the c.m., or greater, for these 27 events.  For comparison, the LHC has colliding beams whose momenta cancel, so the c.m. energy is just the sum of the two beam energies, 14 x 10^12 eV.  Therefore, cosmic rays are striking the earth all the time with usable energy more than 20 times the LHC energy and Europe hasn't disappeared even once.  Do we need to fear what cosmic explosion will happen at LHC turn-on?  Nope.  The data proves it.

Those of us who were preparing to work at the SSC were perfectly content to be right above beams with three times the LHC energy.
Alan and others have explained very well what the potential benefits are, justifying the spending for the LHC. If spending US$8B (spread among many people in many countries via taxes) bothers people, perhaps things that they spend even more on should be examined even harder. Pornography, cosmetics, pizza, bubble gum, gas guzzling cars, and many other things use up much more than US$8B per year (not spread over many years like LHC). Just cutting back on these things by 10% each, and giving that wasted money to worthy projects would result in many sigificant inventions for the benefit of all.

If NASA were allowed to keep its patents and license them (as a government agency they're not allowed to), the money they made from just four of them developed between 1960 and 1970 for the Mercury through Apollo programs (systems analysis software, medical telemetry, micro-electronics and cryogenics) would have given them a $4.5 to $1 return on investment. (That figure was from 25 years ago; it's undoubtably higher now). That doesn't include all the lives saved through use of those technologies, which is invaluable, or the millions of tons of earth moved and subsequent pollution from mining copper for wires that communications satellites replaced. THIS is what basic research is about. Without it, there is no applied research. You want it justified in terms of what will come out of LHC? We don't know yet. But I'll project that (1) the processes used to develop large numbers of enormous superconducting magnets will mean a lot to the future of efficient energy production of all kinds, affordable maglev trains and rail guns capable of placing things like weather satellites (unquestionably useful and life saving) in orbit without pollution from exhaust gasses and potential crashes, and (2) the enormous computer power in terms of both calculation and storage abilities developed for the two Higgs experiments will be used for many other more socially relevant problems.

If a there's a project that should be looked at for costs and benefits of a questionable nature, it's ITER. The design and location chosen under pressure from the US was due to production of and access to a neutron source. There are some beneficial uses for this, but the major use for high neutron flux is in the production of fissionable materials. Sure, they can say it's for fuel. As the US frequently says about Iran (but never themselves) any source of neutrons capable of making fuel is also capable of making weapons grade material. Other, low-or-no neutron designs were possible. The US forced its hand by threatening to withdraw its funding if they were chosen, and if it weren't placed in France who would allow more access to the device than the Japanese who are much more wary of things that produce fissionables. Figure: if the US wanted nuclear power without the neutron production, they'd have pursued one of the low neutron producing Thorium reactor designs decades ago, or one of the laser based fusion facilities such as the National Ignition Facility at Livermore. They haven't. You want to examine costs and benefits? Look at this on, and keep in mind that we've been 20 years from developing fusion power for 50 years now. We are, however, very close to developing bursts of high energy neutrons which can be easily slowed to thermal neutrons, and smashed into U(238) to make Plutonium. There is very little basic research with potential benefits involved here -- the technology is already developed. They're just trying to tune it up to get it to work.

Stop and think about whether you your collective selves could find US$8B in your pockets and feed the hungry, house the homeless and solve energy problems. You could very easily, a few dollars each, a little at a time. If you're not going to, then don't criticize those spending the same, who are likely to produce things to save you that kind of money anyway.
$8 Billion pales nexts to the $468 Billion total spent on the Iraq war!

I hope the LHC confirms the third arm of the triangle of reality!
The LHC is a very impressive machine and I'm excited to see what it reveals, nobel-prize discoveries like the Higgs boson, supersymmetry, etc.  Theoretical particle physics is dazzling in its mathematical abstractness and profoundness.  But it's the hardware side that really interests me, the giant particle accelerators pouring energy into beams of charged particles - protons in the LHC case - until the beam carries as much energy as a speeding locomotive (but with only a small fraction of the momentum) and can penetrate almost anything.  In fact, there's a concept for fusion energy that uses particle beams instead of laser beams, and some people believe it's the most practical approach, even more practical than ITER.  There's a mind-blowing letter about this that was published in Science by Burton Richter, a particle physicist and Nobel prize winner.  Just go to www.sciencemag.org and search for "Heavy Ion Drivers".  If half the stuff he claims in the letter is true, then the public has every right to  be upset at big science, for not developing a promising "spin-off" of particle physics that has the potential to solve the world's energy crisis - and the climate crisis as well.
Frankly I am disappointed in the conspiracy nut cases for not latching on to this. Clearly they are too simple to recognise this as an opportunity to exercise their psychopathic tendencies.  I would like to give them a nudge in the right direction by posing a few questions. Why does it cost ten billion dollars to create the energy released when smashing a mosquito? Why do all the articles seem desperate to point to this low level of generated energy? How many thousand times a second is this energy going to be released? Is there absolutely no margin of risk? (I have personally watched roulette wheels spin out 18 consecutive black numbers during actual play. This will be tens of thousands of times probability against chance and I have seen it twice). Did the USA not want the thing built in the states? Are we certain that know we what micro black holes will do? What new matter could it potentially create? Why the sudden urgency? Is someone hoping to use it as an escape portal because the planet is about to be destroyed due to...fill in the blank…? Is someone hoping to use it as an entrance portal for future scientists because the planet is about to be destroyed due to...fill in the blank…? Is someone hoping to use it as an entrance portal for aliens because the planet is about to be destroyed due to...fill in the blank…? Is someone hoping to use it as a propulsion device for the entire planet because the planet is about to be destroyed due to...fill in the blank…?

Hopefully these questions will spark the interest of the lunatic fringe and stir them to activity.

Come on you nutters get off your backsides and start freaking out!!


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=671015

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google