15 billion dollars waisted in building and maintaining large hadron collider. So what we discovered?

[Papay]

http://www.ibtimes.com/pulse/large-h...rticle-1819412

LHC cost is close to 15 billion dollars. Now scientists want to "upgrade" LHC and conduct new experiments over the next decade with a cost that could ultimately reach 30 billion dollars. The question is:Have we learned anything useful? Or the experiment is nothing more than an endless vortex that sucks billions of dollars without a purpose?

Just to clarify this is i am not against scientific experiments. But i am wondering if these 30 billions dollars were spent to other scientific fields wouldnt we have better results?

[Gaidin]

Really dude? Really?! Go away.

[Roma_Victrix]

I'm with Gaidin on this one.

[Gaidin]

[Papay]

Oh really? So this man would say that the universe is static 100 years ago because "science says" it. Bty the topic is not about science is general. Its about one of the most expensive experiments ever made and whether it worth it

[Iskar]

Gaidin's motion carried

The LHC is probably our so far best chance at getting any glimpse of understanding how quantum particles act on relativistic energy scales. If anything is going to give us experimental data to build on for quantum gravity, then it's this project.

Oh really? So this man would say that the universe is static 100 years ago because "science says" it. Bty the topic is not about science is general. Its about one of the most expensive experiments ever made and whether it worth it

Science is mainly about the method, not the temporary results, and even those do not just become outrightly "false", but only restricted in the domain they're applicable to and their accuracy relative to the latest findings.

[Gaidin]

Oh really? So this man would say that the universe is static 100 years ago because "science says" it. Bty the topic is not about science is general. Its about one of the most expensive experiments ever made and whether it worth it

You're saying "it's too expensive, let's hide from it". Also he doesn't say science says the universe is static. He says science says our data currently says X. We want to know what new data will give us. We will then reassess our theories after facepalming if we have to.

Because, sir, you don't know jack about science.

[Papay]

You're saying "it's too expensive, let's hide from it". Also he doesn't say science says the universe is static. He says science says our data currently says X. We want to know what new data will give us. We will then reassess our theories after facepalming if we have to.

Because, sir, you don't know jack about science.

The data are altered depedning on our knowledge. Many scientific theories were altered or even abandoned. Regarding the 15 billions dollars i believe that it would be better invested somewhere else

[Gaidin]

Regarding the 15 billions dollars i believe that it would be better invested somewhere else

How much do you know about quantum gravity?

[Iskar]

Let's get this straight, Papay:

Data are not altered, what changes are our interpretations of them and the scientific method ensures that these interpretations become more and more accurate. Also theories are not just abandoned. Newton's theory for instance has been proven false in a completely general setting by measurements that instead support the theory of general relativity. However, Newton's theory is still an excellent approximation for low masses and velocities and ordinary length-scales.
Any new theory has to yield older, partly applicable theories in the limit of the respective parameter domains. E.g. when you calculate the equations of motion of an apply in the vicinity of the earth's surface in general relativity and drop the terms that amount to unmeasurably small deviations you get exactly Newton's equations back.

[Sphere]

The LHC program started in 2001. It's total costs for construction, operations and research between 2001 and 2015 were about $15 billion.

In that time period the US spend $8,173 Billion on defense. If it were up to me, I'd have rounded that down to $8,158 Billion, and have used the extra funds to finish construction on the Superconducting Super Collider in Texas so that the today the US would be leading the world in fundamental particle research.



We must do things which make the nation worth defending. Advancing human knowledge is one of the those things.

[Gaidin]

The LHC program started in 2001. It's total costs for construction, operations and research between 2001 and 2015 were about $15 billion.

In that time period the US spend $8,173 Billion on defense. If it were up to me, I'd have rounded that down to $8,158 Billion, and have used the extra funds to finish construction on the Superconducting Super Collider in Texas so that the today the US would be leading the world in fundamental particle research.

<snip picture>

We must do things which make the nation worth defending. Advancing human knowledge is one of the those things.

We have afeared representatives who thought gravity would destroy the earth on our scientific committees in congress...

[Visna]

We have afeared representatives who thought gravity would destroy the earth on our scientific committees in congress...

That's just the tip of the iceberg.

[Gaidin]

That's just the tip of the iceberg.

Well yes, I can go on. But that's mostly a red herring for this thread insofar as the scientific theories they like to butcher assuming they know anything at all.

[Caelifer_1991]

Gaidin seems to have amassed a list of supporters in this case, and I shall throw my hat in the ring as well to say that I am one of them. If money is not worth spending on scientific endeavours then what is it good for? Supporting the listless on benefits? Pouring it even more than is the case already into the military? The work done at CERN serves to improve the collective understanding of the entire human race about the Universe, its components, and the way they work. This is infinitely more useful than anything else the money may be used for.

[Emperor PooMan]

Really dude? Really?! Go away.

I agree with this guy.

[Himster]

The question is:Have we learned anything useful?

Yup.

i am wondering if these 30 billions dollars were spent to other scientific fields wouldnt we have better results?

Probably not. Understanding fundamental particles of reality offers beneficial knowledge to all fields of knowledge, be it philosophy, mathematics, art, neurology, medicine, engineering and transport etc. etc.
Considering how much of the world's resources are wasted on pointless wars and arms races, ego driven monuments and corporate buildings, corrupt political systems, broken social welfare systems, advertising etc. etc. 30 billion dollars is a drop in an ocean and that ocean is a drop in a mega ocean.

[Gaidin]

Pouring it even more than is the case already into the military?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say this is a deceptive statement to make. There is mass production the military makes where that 30 bill would be useless. And there is research the military does where that 30 bill would be awesome. So, you know....be careful with general statements. That isn't to say I wouldn't have preferred our own CERN to confirm these experiments as such, but that's not my point here.

[Papay]

Gaidin seems to have amassed a list of supporters in this case, and I shall throw my hat in the ring as well to say that I am one of them. If money is not worth spending on scientific endeavours then what is it good for? Supporting the listless on benefits? Pouring it even more than is the case already into the military? The work done at CERN serves to improve the collective understanding of the entire human race about the Universe, its components, and the way they work. This is infinitely more useful than anything else the money may be used for.

I still dont understand what the purpose is except from "they are scientists, let them spend as money as they want"

[Gaidin]