3 ms·

Suppose you find a way to use some grand-unification energy source thanks to some new high-energy physics discovery. Then that would mean way more energy availa

Suppose you find a way to use some grand-unification energy source thanks to some new high-energy physics discovery. Then that would mean way more energy available to manufacture tests, medical supplies, synthetic coton and masks, electricity to perform new drugs research on computational models, etc. Of course, that's the best-case scenario, but the way progress goes has always been quite impredictable.

uaaiIbab 6y ago
A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Having physicists continue work using the current collider and literally spending the 20b on education, would be a better use of their money than this.
- henearkr 6y ago
  I understand your way of thinking, but if it had been meticulously followed throughout history, don't you think that almost no scientific research would have been made? Why should anyone spend time thinking when we have so much to do with our hands and readily available knowledge?
  - uaaiIbab 6y ago
    The difference is that most scientific breakthroughs didn't cost 20 billion euros. Not trying to be a smartass, i know the value of research without a certain end goal or outcome, i just think this is one exception where money is irresponsibly spent.
- Avamander 6y ago
  Why not abolish church tax exemption and do both?
jmpman 6y ago
Suppose we spend $20B to discover that the standard model remains intact. Then, physicists request $100B for the next supercollider, only to discover that the standard model remains intact. At what point does a society say “no” to future requests without being deemed “anti-science”? Without worthwhile results, economically, adderall enhanced physicists are no different than trailer park meth heads when they’re both eating government cheese.
- henearkr 6y ago
  But the standard model is already broken by known experiment results... Now is a race to affine results (or find more new phenomena) and navigate through the possible new theories.

uaaiIbab 6y ago

A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Having physicists continue work using the current collider and literally spending the 20b on education, would be a better use of their money than this.

henearkr 6y ago
I understand your way of thinking, but if it had been meticulously followed throughout history, don't you think that almost no scientific research would have been made? Why should anyone spend time thinking when we have so much to do with our hands and readily available knowledge?
- uaaiIbab 6y ago
  The difference is that most scientific breakthroughs didn't cost 20 billion euros. Not trying to be a smartass, i know the value of research without a certain end goal or outcome, i just think this is one exception where money is irresponsibly spent.
Avamander 6y ago
Why not abolish church tax exemption and do both?

jmpman 6y ago

Suppose we spend $20B to discover that the standard model remains intact. Then, physicists request $100B for the next supercollider, only to discover that the standard model remains intact. At what point does a society say “no” to future requests without being deemed “anti-science”? Without worthwhile results, economically, adderall enhanced physicists are no different than trailer park meth heads when they’re both eating government cheese.

henearkr 6y ago
But the standard model is already broken by known experiment results... Now is a race to affine results (or find more new phenomena) and navigate through the possible new theories.