Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

How much should it cost to weigh a boson? (Scientists think we’re going to need a bigger particle collider)



[i]Photo above - "Hey, Joe . . . is the W boson really twice as heavy as they thought? And what are we gonna do about it?" "Sheesh . . . build a new particle collider! Haven't you been paying attention?"[/i]

The story thus far: The Large Hadron Collider (on the France/Switzerland border) cost $5 billion to build 15 years ago. It’s 17 miles in circumference. And it costs about $5 billion a year just to keep the thing plugged in and warmed up. 6,000 scientists work there. And it’s obsolete.

Today's update: The Swiss are considering a proposal to spend $17 billion (3X as much) on a new particle accelerator. Makes sense, because it will be 56 miles long – 3 times as large. Presumably it will cost 3X as much annually to operate ($17 billion) and employ 18,000 scientists – 3X as many as the current LHC.

If you have some spare change, you might want to invest in adjacent Swiss land. There might be a need for affordable housing, roads, shopping malls, fast food restaurants, schools, hospitals, sports stadiums, . . .

Switzerland seems to be balking at this new particle accelerator. It's a lot of money.

The question on everyone’s mind, now that the Large Hadron Collider FINALLY caught a “live” Higgs boson, and measured it: “what does that darn W boson weigh?” (see link below)

There are two competing measurements, about 100% apart. SOMEONE is going to have to build a new particle accelerator, if we want to find who's right and who's wrong. Will 56 miles long be big enough for the new one? There are 5 types of bosons (that we know of). Someone might raise questions about the other 3. We might need more than 56 miles.

I’ve read – for years – that 90% of the scientists who ever lived on planet earth are alive today. (see 2nd link below). Evidently most are working at one the current or planned/future particle accelerators. It's amazing this many people are falling short of Albert Einstein, Enrico Fermi, Erwin Schoedinger, and Max Planck.

Shouldn't we have more people working on (the so far elusive) safe, long range EV batteries? Or the bird flu vaccine? The US government had 60 labs on this, full time, and got beat to the finish line by some obscure private company called Zoetis. (see yesterday's column).

There are scientists who want to build permanent lunar colonies. Bigger space stations, to replace the leaky, decrepit International Space Station (launched during the iMac era, 30 years ago). Can I sign up to live in one of those new undersea colonies? And we need giant lasers to zap any asteroids that wander too close. There’s a new asteroid that has a 2% chance of hitting the earth – in 45 years. It’s 8 times more massive than the dinosaur killing asteroid. Can someone who's good with numbers please the math and tell us how big a laser we will need? And what will happen to the thousands of pieces asteroid debris that rain down on us after it’s zapped? Will we need more telescopes to keep an eye on them?

If you actually insist, I can keep listing all the bizarre science proposals that keep popping up. Man made mountains to alter rainfall patterns. Wrapping Greenland’s glaciers in tinfoil to slow down the melting. A giant hydroelectric dam at the entrance to the Mediterranean, to generate electricity. Making new glaciers from scratch.

This is the kind of crapola which the US Congress has to mull over, year after year. No wonder so much sneaks through. A couple of years ago some journalist demonstrated that most senators don't even know what atoms are used to make H20. But they do know that federal projects mean federal money in their home districts.

If someone can honestly explain to me WHY the weight of the W boson is a higher priority than schools, student achievement, affordable housing, and better healthcare (including global vaccine availability), I’m listening. My starting point is skepticism that W bosons or glacier blankets are going to make a difference to us in the short term. Or long term.

Musk . . . the ball is still in your court. Congrats on sending termination emails to those 60 labs full of government bird flue scientists, who couldn’t match what Zoetis did. Please don't get conned into building the worlds largest particle collider, even if some Pentagon general shows you a secret report on how it could lead to an amazing military new weapon.

I’m just sayin’ . . .

Weighing in on the W boson measurement conundrum

90% of All the Scientists That Ever Lived Are Alive Today - Future of Life Institute
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Subsumedpat · 36-40, M
It is used to advance our science, the fusion reactor is the holy grail for energy production, everyone is trying for it.
wildbill83 · 41-45, M
@Subsumedpat 'cept government funded science projects are extremely wasteful in terms of time and funding; private companies researching fusion have progressed much further in a shorter amount of time with less cost
Subsumedpat · 36-40, M
@wildbill83 Not really, pretty incredible the things the space program gave us, we got a lot out of going to the moon. Besides India and China are going to pass us in the race to achieve fusion power, it will be a game changer for energy.
wildbill83 · 41-45, M
@Subsumedpat that was then, I'm talking about now. NASA is mostly a joke these days, all the good designers & engineers retired out years ago

India isn't doing it on a scale large enough to be beneficial, and China...gimme a break, everything they build is overstated and poorly built, they're more likely to blow themselves up than invent anything actually beneficial to the world; and even if they did build a functioning fusion reactor, the CCP would step and and seize control, preventing any proliferation of the technology.

It's one thing to actually build a fusion reactor, it's a totally different game to build one that can be marketed/commercialized; and the latter is far more likely with a private or public company in a democratic/capitalist society...
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Subsumedpat do you have a specific link between "weight of the W boson" and "fusion energy?"

i've been hearing about "cold fusion" for 20 years. Did this every pan out, or was it just a big scam to get government grands and sell IPO stocks?

is there any "experimental fusion reactor" in operation today which actually PRODUCES more energy than it consumes?

I'm suspicious that fusion isn't going be nearly as clean and affordable as the scientists getting the grant money claim. remember, they said the same thing about nuclear (fission) power. "So cheap they won't even bother putting electric meters on homes".
Subsumedpat · 36-40, M
@SusanInFlorida It is clean in that it leaves no radioactive waste to deal with. We are not there so we cant begin to think about what it will cost to run one, the British got one to sustain fusion for 6 seconds so we are a long way away.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Subsumedpat from "copilot"

"Fusion requires temperatures of about 100 million Kelvin (approximately six times hotter than the sun's core). At these temperatures, hydrogen is a plasma, not a gas. Ions inside a compact fusion reactor have been heated to 100 million degrees Celsius (180 million degrees Fahrenheit) for the first time, which is a monumental step towards making nuclear fusion energy a practical reality."

explain to me how temperatures 6 times hotter than the suns core won't create an epic "meltdown" if something goes wrong.
Subsumedpat · 36-40, M
@SusanInFlorida Because they did it for 6 seconds and it did not.