Hadron Collider ?

[fbg40]

Can someone explain the purpose of the Hadron Collider and how much it costs the taxpayer ?
FBG40

[joggerjayne]

Unless you pay Swiss taxes, like my other half, I'm not sure it costs us anything, does it?

[RATTER15]

It makes a particle of something travel travel really really fast, then it collides with something, that proves the Higgs Bosun theory, which helps scientists prove where the earth came from, as for the cost, you wont be wanting to buy one without getting a substantial rise! :-)

[Svejk]

It'll be a joint EU project, jj. Your boyfriend would have to sell a lot of cuckoo clocks to pay for it.

[Khandro]

jake the peg (where has he gone?) once calculated that it costs us each - everyone in Europe - the price of a pint of beer per annum.
I may lack public spirit but I'd rather have the pint.

[RATTER15]

In all seriousness, the Hadron Collider fascinates me to a degree and would love to know what it does in depth. I, however will never understand it!

[joggerjayne]

Can we swap our pint of beer for a vodka and tonic?

[Old_Geezer]

The purpose is one, perhaps the reason for us to exist: to learn the nature of reality and add to the bank of knowledge. It's cost per individual on this planet is vanishingly small.

[Baldric]

It was built by The European Organization for Nuclear Research of which the UK is a Member.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CERN

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

[fbg40]

Thanks for all the very prompt answers.
FBG40

[Khandro]

'The Large Hadron Collider is nearly 30 years in the making - and costs the member countries of CERN and other participating countries an estimated €4.6 billion (about US$ 6.4 billion) but that's not all! Extra things like detectors, computing capacity, cost an extra €1.43 billion.

The United Kingdom, contributes £34 million per year, less than the cost of a pint of beer per adult in the country per year.

The United States contributed approximately $531 million to the development and construction of components for the LHC (with the US Department of Energy shelling out $450 million and the National Science Foundation the remaining $81 million).'

[jim360]

"I, however will never understand it!"

You aren't alone. Essentially the reason that so many thousands of people work there is that no-one else understands it (completely) either.

[Khandro]

^^ but I gather those guys are leading a life of Riley, huge salaries + wine women and song. I think you should apply Jim :0)

[jim360]

Funniest thing I've read so far today!

[Old_Geezer]

Yeah: there's minimal singing.

[atalanta]

It is there in order to satisfy ( some of ) the curiosity of ( some ) physicists.
In my opinion this money could have been far better spent on cancer research, for instance. I am fed up with extravagant "curiosity" projects which will never be of the slightest use to humanity, such as sending assorted machinery to Mars and other bits of the solar system.
And no, we shall never be able to colonise Mars or any other non-Earth body. Too far, too dangerous, too expensive.

[jim360]

I don't suppose there's any point in noting for the umpteenth time that the world wide web has its origins in CERN? With particle physicists wishing to find a more efficient way to share data across the world, and realising that everyone else could use it as well? To moan about physicists never doing anything useful, to pick a random example.

It's probably true that little of benefit is going to come directly from a better understanding of very high energy particle interactions. Of necessity the only way to exploit these is to build massive particle accelerators and it's almost certain that there's no way to downscale that, and even if you could then a particle lasting 10^-18 seconds isn't going to be much use allowing you to watch football better. But there are all the indirect benefits that come with it. Including the microwave, as an example, which have its origins in an accidental discovery at a particle accelerator experiment. Or the aforementioned worldwide Web. Or the development of highly efficient superconductors/ magnets/ refrigeration technology, all of which is essential to the inner working of the LHC but will undoubtedly have impact elsewhere. Or the massive amounts of computing power required, forcing us to develop better computers and more sophisticated alogrithmms for dealing with data. Or the mathematical techniques being developed to explain what's going on but turn out to have applications in other fields. Recently String Theory, a much-derided attempt to describe everything in the Universe, is being used to investigate properties of metals and other materials. Again, that is almost certain to have real-world consequences. The list of knock-on benefits is extensive.

[Khandro]

jim; You sound a bit like those working there making rather specious arguments for its justification. Some of them it has been their entire career and they don't want it to end that is why every time governments were questioning continuing financing it they were blinded by science and there was always a press release showing just how they were on the very brink of making a breakthrough. When you think of the significant scientific discoveries which have really benefitted humanity and have been achieved by individuals or very small groups at quite minimal expense you can see that this is a monstrously expensive, colossal white elephant.

[jim360]

Well you can make an argument that I have a vested interest since my work directly depends on the LHC (and other detectors), but the fact is that this does have benefits, and major ones at that, both direct and indirect. Nothing specious about it at all.

[jim360]

Oh, and it's also a bit of a specious argument to go on about the "minimal expense" benefits. There have been many of them. But the more advanced breakthroughs tend to need a lot of time, manpower and, well, money. Someone messing around in their shed with £500 to spend is going to have minimal impact on medical research these days.

[Old_Geezer]

I do not understand the point of view where someone has a favourite aim and wants all finance put there, and none anywhere else. As if throwing excess money at a problem made much difference to progress. As long as sufficient funding is available we need not be a one horse backer. Things can be prioritised but the spread should be to cover many fronts of progress.

Anyway, humans will always suffer from some ailment or another. There is a greater aim than simply satisfying our self interest. Accumulation of knowledge is it's own reward. and no none knows what that will lead to. Things need to be investigated before practical uses of what has been learnt become clear.