this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
1690 points (95.2% liked)

Science Memes

10752 readers
1490 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 5ibelius9insterberg@feddit.de 24 points 11 months ago (10 children)

But how will it be called? "Even larger Hadron Collider"?

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] barrbaric@hexbear.net 16 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I agree, this is a shame.

We should build an even bigger one.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago

Maybe they should do a Kickstarter.

[–] bloubz@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 11 months ago

The transmutation circle is massive this time. We can't fail the French-Swiss genocide.

(Btw I've worked on the Atlas project on the LHC, projects are always delayed)

[–] nicetriangle@kbin.social 11 points 11 months ago (17 children)

I'm pretty bullish on science investments, but I've heard multiple arguments that this thing is probably not worth the money. The most prevalent argument I've heard to the contrary is basically "we could discover something that might be interesting." But like very little in terms of concrete measurable returns on investment for it.

This article does a good job of arguing against it I think. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-world-doesnt-need-a-new-gigantic-particle-collider/

My mind isn't made up on the topic, so like can anybody explain to me why this thing is actually worth 30+ billion dollars?

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 13 points 11 months ago

If they already knew the intended results it wouldn't make sense to do it. Science of this kind is like "here's something we haven't tried yet", which itself is pretty difficult to even come up with.

Also, money spend on something like this doesn't just disappear. It goes around the suppliers doing it and returns to the state eventually. Of course someone will pocket some money but when talking billions it's more of an investment in the area than a cost or even an investment in the actual collider. A used collider isn't worth that amount of money , so where'd it go? It didn't disappear. Money goes round.

It creates a lot of jobs and when looking at the entire supply chain, it feeds a hell of a lot of people, even if the scientific result is "oh well it didn't do anything at all." That way, it might be cheaper than supplying social security/basic income for that amount of people.

At the end of the day, in the grand economic scale, we're all riding on the shoulders of whoever digs out the the resources from the Earth, so we need to make these kind of very important projects to make it appear as if everyone else is actually producing anything at all. The science is just a nice side effect.

Will this do?

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›