5 ms·
Yes far worse, the superconducting supercollider produced science which has debatable value. There’s an argument we lost nothing by canceling the project. Wind
by Retric 9mo ago
Yes far worse, the superconducting supercollider produced science which has debatable value. There’s an argument we lost nothing by canceling the project.
Wind farms produce electricity which pays for the investment when you finish but pays nothing when a stop early. This makes stopping early extremely economically harmful.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- watersb 9mo agoEsoteric programming language developed for the superconducting super collider, Glish, was picked up by the National Radio Astronomy Observatory, which used it well into the 2000s. Glish supported networked remote procedure calls, made then almost transparent to the program. Otherwise, Glish was roughly similar to Tcl or Lua. I don't know what other bits and pieces got salvaged from the SSC project.
- shawn_w 9mo agoDocumentation etc: https://www.cv.nrao.edu/glish/papers/index.html https://www.cv.nrao.edu/glish/papers/index.html
- vel0city 9mo agoI've read a lot of the science funded in the early engineering of the project around the magnets eventually rolled into the LHC, so there's that. Otherwise it seems like we spent a lot of money on a 17-mile hole in the ground in North Texas.
- willis936 9mo agoThe effective electricity rate in MA is already $0.37/kWh. How much further could it go?