7 ms·
Your analogy is fundamentally flawed. More realistically : we can only build one car in the entire world, where a tiny minority of people can even understand t
by moonchrome 4y ago
Your analogy is fundamentally flawed.
More realistically : we can only build one car in the entire world, where a tiny minority of people can even understand the potential benefit, and anything they see will be completely useless for everyone else in day to day life because we need a civilisation level effort to even detect the implications of their theory. If their theory had some real world implications - you wouldn't need this car.
And this is expected to be funded by everyone. It's the modern equivalent of building pyramids.
- xcambar 4y agoWith this logic, I assume you'd call the ISS a useless project.
- inglor_cz 4y agoNot the OP, but this is a good example. ISS wasn't useless, but its successor should be much cheaper. We absolutely need to find ways how to do space research more efficiently, otherwise it will stay a luxury of the richest nations. Fortunately, at the very least, launch costs to orbit are dropping and we may hope for further drops in the future - if Starship works as intended.
- concordDance 4y agoIn all seriousness, what use is it? How has it improved people's lives?
- ncmncm 4y agoIt is, really. At one time, it was the only place the shuttle could get to; and the shuttle was the only thing that could get people to it. Literally the only thing they can do at ISS, not better done with robots, is study how human bodies are affected by exposure to high radiation and long-term weightlessness. Which we care about only because people would be so exposed in ISS-like cans. Now they are pushing the "lunar gateway", that likewise has exactly one reason to exist: SLS could get there. And, it will be a place for SLS to get to. And, even more useless. A thing in high orbit around the moon is absolutely useless for any other purpose, whether you are heading for the moon or beyond it.
- dehrmann 4y agoWould you rather have 1 ISS or 200 New Horizons?
- l33tman 4y agoAnd yet 15M people yearly are still visiting those "useless" pyramids 4600 years after they were built.
- Aerroon 4y agoSure, but the people 4600 years ago were the ones that paid the price for building the pyramids. How do 15M people visiting it today help them? We're talking about using everybody's money for these science projects. And this is not money that's voluntarily given, it's taken.
- moonchrome 4y agoI don't really want to dispute that, just want to paint a more realistic of what these scientific projects actually are. They are not investments for sure.
- unsupp0rted 4y agoIf the Egyptians had built a literal money pit 4600 years ago, tourists would now be visiting that.
- navane 4y agoIt's the social equivalent of rocket ships. We all payed for their space holidays too.
- musha68k 4y agoEurope is so rich it can easily afford all of the great project ideas outlined in the article in addition to a new LHC (and then some). Let's think big indeed, the author unfortunately has a very reductive vision for the future. Instead how about: A renaissance of funding - BIG SCIENCE - education, jobs. That was basically the promise of the EU - peace through wealth - let's create some more. Let's bring back the excitement and scientific wonder of the 1960s. This could be a unilateral vision across the democratic spectrum (everyone wants wealth). And yes, global warming actually should dictate no less. Let's do it now. Oh and let's just fix poverty while we are at it. Again, Europe has the means and could do all of that by itself.
- xcambar 4y agoI thought I was an optimistic but you dwarfed me on this to the point of skepticism.
- musha68k 4y agoNo worries, check the numbers - this is all in reach - solely up to us :)
- JKCalhoun 4y agoI feel like the last renaissance of funding (BIG SCIENCE) was the space race. Let's do that again. It was at least a lot more multi-disciplinary than an atom-smasher.
- xiphias2 4y agoThe Human Genome Project was a huge success. Being able to read the DNA cheaply got us a revolution in biotech (cancer therapies, gene therapies, mRNA delivery, and my favourite: partial / full cell reprogramming)
- concordDance 4y agoWhat's it currently doing with that money? I guess we could get rid of funding healthcare and trying to help people out of poverty so that a small number of people get to use a very expensive toy... You know what would be an awesome big science project that would immeasurably improve future people's lives? Sequencing all genes and using that data provide free embryo selection services to everyone who wants to be a parent. Would probably cost the same as that giant particle smasher and but unlike the giant ring it would pay for itself in a generation.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago> It's the modern equivalent of building pyramids. I wish it was true, it would be much easier to convince people to have ten of them.