4 ms·

I would argue Marconi and Maxwell share equal credit. They both stood on the shoulders of giants to accomplish something they could never have done alone, and i

I would argue Marconi and Maxwell share equal credit. They both stood on the shoulders of giants to accomplish something they could never have done alone, and it is likely that if either hadn't done what they did, somebody else would have done so fairly soon. But critical to the argument, Marconi stood on Maxwell's shoulders. The wireless would not have existed without the fundamental, "pointless" work of Maxwell and others. I would imagine cell phones were far from Maxwell's mind when he did his work, yet those, too, are a legacy of his discoveries. I look at things like the LHC and really question whether anything practical will come of it. In the end, I don't care, because we are learning, and our species seems to do better when exploring new frontiers, no matter where they are. (I do question whether we could learn more by funding a lot more smaller experiments, but that's a different issue.)

archgoon 14y ago
Particle physics needed the LHC. In particle physics, the fastest way to answer the question "are there new particles at higher energies?" is to collide particles at those higher energies. Also, $4.4 billion dollars isn't that much. For the price of Zynga and Instagram, you get to push out the limits of our understanding of the interactions of fundamental particles.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
  I'm still hoping know the Higgs mass will lead to hover boards. I don't really believe it will, but I'm sure Maxwell never thought his work would lead to something like always-connected pocket computers. I don't begrudge spending the money at all, as there is little question that particle physics has massively impacted everybody's lives. That said, we have limited amounts to spend on tese things (more limited than it should be!), so we should be asking, "What experiments help us learn the most?" when we spend it. We should not be asking, "What experiment will yield something I can sell?"
  - archgoon 14y ago
    > so we should be asking, "What experiments help us learn the most?" when we spend it. Understood, but isn't the point of not saying "What experiment will yield something I can sell?"", is that we don't know the answer to the question "What experiments help us learn the most?" Again, the LHC isn't that expensive. Mark Zuckerberg lost more money over the last two days to pay for both the LHC and the Hubble.

archgoon 14y ago

Particle physics needed the LHC. In particle physics, the fastest way to answer the question "are there new particles at higher energies?" is to collide particles at those higher energies. Also, $4.4 billion dollars isn't that much. For the price of Zynga and Instagram, you get to push out the limits of our understanding of the interactions of fundamental particles.

SoftwareMaven 14y ago
I'm still hoping know the Higgs mass will lead to hover boards. I don't really believe it will, but I'm sure Maxwell never thought his work would lead to something like always-connected pocket computers. I don't begrudge spending the money at all, as there is little question that particle physics has massively impacted everybody's lives. That said, we have limited amounts to spend on tese things (more limited than it should be!), so we should be asking, "What experiments help us learn the most?" when we spend it. We should not be asking, "What experiment will yield something I can sell?"
- archgoon 14y ago
  > so we should be asking, "What experiments help us learn the most?" when we spend it. Understood, but isn't the point of not saying "What experiment will yield something I can sell?"", is that we don't know the answer to the question "What experiments help us learn the most?" Again, the LHC isn't that expensive. Mark Zuckerberg lost more money over the last two days to pay for both the LHC and the Hubble.