True, but if we graft this argument onto Sabine's argument, it doesn't seem very fair. Those astronomical observations and the development of General Relativi

True, but if we graft this argument onto Sabine's argument, it doesn't seem very fair. Those astronomical observations and the development of General Relativity were done a century ago and have relevance today. But if particle physics is being judged against astronomy, then shouldn't the modern societal benefits of century old of particle physics count as well, contradicting the claim that particle physics lacks societal benefits?