2 ms·
What about high energy physics? You could make an argument that bigger better colliders should wait till engineering makes building and operating them more eff
by dnautics 6y ago
What about high energy physics? You could make an argument that bigger better colliders should wait till engineering makes building and operating them more efficient (like say, wait until space manufacturing).
- majewsky 6y agoTaking the biggest individiual things for both colliders and blockchains, the energy draw of the LHC is absolutely miniscule when compared to Bitcoin (even if we take the most conservative estimates for the latter). I would consider that energy cost justified given the chance of discovering new knowledge about physics that could help in the process of space exploration. The chance that Bitcoin would help with that is really small in comparison, especially when contrasted with its ludicrous energy usage.
- Stevvo 6y agoThe obvious reply to this one is the secondary effects are worth it and not 'sapping intellectual potential'. i.e. CERN led to development of the web.
- dnautics 6y agoIt was the 70s. How many secondary effects have emerged from colliders in the last, say 20 years? I would say the biggest thing is generation of collimated X-rays for structural biology and materials science, but that was kind of late 90s.