TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

CERN releases report on the feasibility of a possible Future Circular Collider

134 点作者 gmays大约 1 个月前

13 条评论

elashri大约 1 个月前
Before discussions go into some generic direction about the field. This is a huge feasibility study contain different aspects done by hundreds of people. People who are mostly interested about the physics case of FCC should read&#x2F;skim at least through the first volume [1], second chapter (Specificities of the FCC physics case) the first four sections. This is about 35 pages with somehow accessible language to people with some physics knowledge.<p>Personally I&#x27;m interested in their proposal about how they are going to approach software (Section 8). They plan to provide experiment agnostic and unified framework that is actually unified and user accessible. The field really need something like that, it is usually the pain point of most junior graduate student. The field suck at documentation and keep coherent software and write code in a bad way most of the time. I think they can have much better framework than Fermilab&#x27;s art [2].<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cds.cern.ch&#x2F;record&#x2F;2928193" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cds.cern.ch&#x2F;record&#x2F;2928193</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;art.fnal.gov&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;art.fnal.gov&#x2F;</a>
评论 #43672802 未加载
评论 #43673494 未加载
评论 #43668453 未加载
评论 #43676678 未加载
BrandoElFollito大约 1 个月前
This is unreasonable spending. And I am saying this as someone who did his PhD at CERN, so I am shitting my old bed.<p>CERN is wonderful but the physics studied there are eons away from applications. This is not solid state physics where you can suddenly discover a great material. This is physics at such energies that we will not have anyone soon. Kinda like quasar astrophysics, about objects that are really far away.<p>The usual response is that this is core science. Yes it is, but not the core science we need today. We have a limited budget for science and a mammoth like CERN cannot swallow it all.<p>The other argument is that technology will get better. True. It can get better without the accelerator, though, if we really need it.<p>I loved my time there, truly fantastic but the costs are not sustainable with current budgets for science
评论 #43680223 未加载
nntwozz大约 1 个月前
This makes me think of The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO), I remember a scientist working there in an interview right after the first discovery telling the reporter how back in the day he was dissuaded by his teacher to go into the field because &quot;there&#x27;s nothing there, it&#x27;s not a serious field of research&quot; or something along those lines.<p>Maybe a bigger collider is exactly what we need, and if it fails that&#x27;s also useful as a confirmation to go in other directions. To build it right now instead of other things is the difficult question because that&#x27;s politics.
jmyeet大约 1 个月前
So I&#x27;m normally a fan of science but I&#x27;m torn on this one because, as far as I can tell, there&#x27;s no clear objective with this collider. It just seems to be bumping up collision energy (to ~100TeV) and hoping something interesting pops out.<p>The LHC had a clear objective: to experimentally validate the Higgs boson, which it did. There have been a ton of experiments since but AFAIK all those have really done is invalidated various theories. That has value, for sure.<p>But it really seems like we need to play catch up and work out a theoretical model in what we&#x27;d actually search for with a bigger collider, rather than hoping higher energies will break something significant in the Stnardard Model in such a way that it&#x27;ll give us a clue to a theory beyond the Standard Model.<p>Think of it like looking for a treasure ship. As a salvager you may know from historical records that a given Spanish ship, carrying gold and silver from the New World, sunk on its way back to Spain. You may have developed a model to really narrow down where on the ocean floor you want to search. That&#x27;s what the LHC was. But this seems like throwing a dart at a map and searching the ocean floor to see if anything interesting shows up.
评论 #43671836 未加载
teekert大约 1 个月前
Sabine is skeptical [0]. Is it really true that there a no theories that are proven or dicarded with this experiment, and that the Chinese have plans to do it much faster? Her video is pretty damning.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;backreaction.blogspot.com&#x2F;2025&#x2F;04&#x2F;why-cerns-new-collider-plans-are-dead.html?m=1" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;backreaction.blogspot.com&#x2F;2025&#x2F;04&#x2F;why-cerns-new-coll...</a>
评论 #43668642 未加载
评论 #43668102 未加载
评论 #43673840 未加载
评论 #43668314 未加载
评论 #43668130 未加载
评论 #43668955 未加载
mmmBacon大约 1 个月前
I was a physics student back when the SSC was cancelled. At the time it seemed like a terrible decision but years on I’m not sure the expense was worth it. In the end I think it worked out and was a good call to let the Europeans fund CERN and find the Higgs. I’m very pro science but I’ve come to a point where I’m asking is the juice worth the squeeze? I think beyond Higgs the juice is becoming harder to justify.<p>The answer for particle physics can’t be to build larger and larger circular machines. Rather that money would be better spent on accelerator research to enable smaller more practical machines at high energies. Such machines may have some practical spinoff uses such as how FNAL offers neutron therapy.
kristianp大约 1 个月前
It doesn&#x27;t feel ambitious enough to me. Spend 10s of billions to get a less than 10x energy about 40 years after LHC reached its peak. Also planning of the next one should have happened while the last one was being commissioned to avoid the huge gap between them.
评论 #43669994 未加载
评论 #43678361 未加载
评论 #43668875 未加载
评论 #43674148 未加载
neom大约 1 个月前
How much of this kinda stuff is also about lithography etc? re: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@thechinaacademy&#x2F;china-may-be-constructing-euv-lithography-machines-on-a-massive-scale-da796ea1af73" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@thechinaacademy&#x2F;china-may-be-constructin...</a><p>I know FCC is firmly science, but curious: does it help in this area of tech also?
评论 #43672481 未加载
esaiohotpvld大约 1 个月前
What surprises me the most is the cost. This is considered to be one of the most expensive endeavors in science… but the first stage costs just about a billion a year?<p>Jeff Bezos (or any other billionaire) could pay for the whole of it, and it would be like me going for a coffee. The yearly cost is 1% of what DOGE allegedly saved, three Marvel movies, and less than the GDP of San Marino.<p>If one of the costliest ever scientific enterprises is this cheap, how many scientific advances are we leaving on the table? It makes me extremely sad.<p>*Disclaimer: I enjoy Marvel movies and don&#x27;t particularly believe DOGE claims about saved money. But I wanted to give some scale of what a billion francs (now about 1.2 billion USD) are.
derelicta大约 1 个月前
Being a project manager for such an endeavour must be both thrilling and traumatic. I&#x27;ve only worked in small projects with a handful of stakeholders, I just can&#x27;t imagine how all of this works when scaled 1000x.
neals大约 1 个月前
I feel like with all the silly things humans do, every remotely feasible physics experiment should be top priority on getting funding and attention. Isn&#x27;t finding out how the universe works, by far, the only thing that matters?
评论 #43670012 未加载
评论 #43669826 未加载
评论 #43669579 未加载
评论 #43671624 未加载
评论 #43676219 未加载
elric大约 1 个月前
Is there any particular reason why they keep building colliders with ever increasing diamaters, instead of going vertical? If we can create magnetic fields strong &amp; precise enough to force particles into a very large loop, surely we can bend the loop upwards ever so slightly and gain additional distance by coiling the collider like a spring?<p>Seems like an insane amount of tunnels is always needed for these things, which is obviously expensive and labour intensive.
评论 #43673608 未加载
评论 #43673209 未加载
jxjnskkzxxhx大约 1 个月前
It always blows my mind to see the anti-intelectualism of HN.