Notices

Go Back   FileFront Forums > Main Forums > The Pub

Remember Me?

The Pub
Intelligent discussion and debate on real-life issues. | This is not a game support forum.
You can also visit the History and Warfare forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
3526878
Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
Chris
February 8th, 2007 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wired
Physicists have unveiled designs for an ambitious $6.65 billion particle-smasher that would let scientists peer into the moments following the big bang -- and maybe restore flagging U.S. scientific prestige.
A report released in Beijing early on Thursday morning provides the first detailed design and cost estimates for the proposed International Linear Collider, which is viewed by physicists as a critical next step in their field.
But its high price and complicated design means that so far, everyone's rigorously avoiding discussion of where the project would actually be located. The U.S. government has contributed tens of millions of dollars to the ILC's research efforts, but has stopped short of saying it would seek to host the project.
Source.

Yes, it's a technological advance to just be so much as thinking of doing a project like this, but considering just how much the US is spending on this when it could be spending it on transport or education or - dare I say it with Bush as president - the environment.
3526905
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
deathwarder
February 8th, 2007 03:01 PM
I dont think you realize our war costs, less than a week in the war is enough to pay for that(see national debt clock)
3526915
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
MrFancypants
February 8th, 2007 03:03 PM
Spending on science is one of the best things your country can do, it will keep western societies as wealthy as they are now until others, like Chinese, catch up.
Spending on environment sounds noble, but that money often ends up in non-sense projects (just look at the latest plans against CO2-emissions in Europe). Subventions for science, on the other hand, are likely to create more efficient technologies which are better for environment.

I wonder what the chances of this collider creating a black hole are like.
3527096
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
Delta Force
February 8th, 2007 04:38 PM
Almost 100%, less powerfull particle accelerators have already done that. Good thing they last for a microsecond so nothing that bad happens.

Would be an intresting and unexpected way to die. One second you are sitting their minding your own business, the next you are crushed into a singularity. Or you might even go to another dimision. Either way would be cool.
3527411
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
Relander
February 9th, 2007 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFancypants
Spending on environment sounds noble, but that money often ends up in non-sense projects (just look at the latest plans against CO2-emissions in Europe)
Could you provide some examples? If you mean nuclear power: it's not the best choice to cut down CO2-emissions but definately better than continuing with coal or oil power.

"International Linear Collider" sounds very good and 6,6 billion dollars compared to its positive potential. Besides, the expenses can be shared.
3527441
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
y0umebednow
February 9th, 2007 12:26 PM
i agree with you on one side but then i also disagree.

yes we need money for education and public use. of course, this is what we pay taxes for.

but i think exploring the universe is also a necessity, what if we uncover a wonder that could better our life?
3527481
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
MrFancypants
February 9th, 2007 12:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relander View Post
Could you provide some examples? If you mean nuclear power: it's not the best choice to cut down CO2-emissions but definately better than continuing with coal or oil power.

"International Linear Collider" sounds very good and 6,6 billion dollars compared to its positive potential. Besides, the expenses can be shared.
I meant the latest attempts to force the car-industry in Germany to reduce C02 emissions by law or things like subsidies for solar technology.
Cars produce only only a very small percentage of the overall production of CO2 (less than half a percent), especially if you take only those that drive in Germany. Besides, you can't just turn a car into a zero-emission vehicle in a day, right now the technology which reduces emissions is an a stage where it costs so much that people would just buy cars from a foreign company.

It is similar with solar technology-subsidies: it may look good at first glance, but if you consider the energy that you have to invest to create solar panels right now you will soon find out that there are other projects which would be more effective and should therefore receive subsidies instead (for example geothermal-energy).

Instead of creating laws which dish out penalties for those companies that refuse to do what some politicians think is good it would be better to create incentives based on scientific evaluation of technologies.
3527558
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
MrFancypants
February 9th, 2007 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Afterburner View Post
I once read something that thousands of black holes are created in the atmosphere every day but they are so tiny they blink out of existence almost immediately.
Small black holes disappear because they radiate according to Hawking, but there are some people who think that maybe Hawking was wrong and they don't just disappear in every case. Let's hope he is right
3527581
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
deathwarder
February 9th, 2007 01:17 PM
nope, the colliders are able to produce electron sized holes, but they are the smallest possible. There are equations that prove it.
3527540
Re: Next-Gen Smasher To Cost 6.6 Billion Dollars
Afterburner
February 9th, 2007 01:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFancypants View Post
I wonder what the chances of this collider creating a black hole are like.
I once read something that thousands of black holes are created in the atmosphere every day but they are so tiny they blink out of existence almost immediately.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bush sells 20 billion dollars worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia Jeffro The Pub 63 January 14th, 2008 01:08 PM
One Billion Songs LS?Master Tech Discussion 13 February 26th, 2006 06:26 PM


All times are GMT -7.







   
 





This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network

The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!

FileFront Forums - Terms of Service - Top
Copyright © 2002-2016 Game Front. All rights reserved. Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Forum Theme by Danny King (FileTrekker), Sheepeep & Graeme(rs)
RSS Feed Widget by FeedWind