Page 1 of 2

FCC

Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 8:59 pm
by pcatom
Is anyone following us:

http://indico.cern.ch/event/282344/

You thought LHC was good! :clap: This will blow it out of the water.

Re: FCC

Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 10:29 pm
by DCWhitworth
Wow, can something that big realistically be built ?

Re: FCC

Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:17 pm
by pcatom
That is what we plan to find out!

There is nothing fundamental which prevents it.

Re: FCC

Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:18 pm
by pcatom
Having said that ... it won't be a piece of cake either! A lot of technologies will need to be pushed to make it realistic and affordable.

Re: FCC

Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2014 8:53 pm
by DCWhitworth
I don't doubt that it can be, or will be able to be, done technically, my concerns would be getting the funding for it and finding a suitable geographically and geologically suitable place for it.

Re: FCC

Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2014 9:27 pm
by pcatom
Have a look at the presentations ... and follow over the next 5 years as we elaborate the concept.

It is exciting !!!

Re: FCC

Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2014 10:13 pm
by CharmQuark
I'm following! and so are a good few of friends :thumbup:

Re: FCC

Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:57 pm
by chelle
If Ultra-high-energy cosmic rays don't produce anything out of the ordinary, than what kind of particle do they still hope to find with a machine that is maybe just 10 to 100 times as powerful as the LHC?

Re: FCC

Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2014 9:15 pm
by pcatom
Cosmic rays tend to interact with atoms in the upper atmosphere. These primary interactions are not directly seen on the earths surface. Instead it is the secondary showers of particles from the primary collision that eventually appear in the detectors. The advantage of accelerator based collisions is that we can surround them with detectors and see more clearly what went on during the primary collision.

Re: FCC

Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2014 11:47 pm
by chelle
Ok, thanks pcatom that makes sense … but still if some quark-soup would be fabricated that's stable for a fraction it still would have time to reach earth every now and then, ... perhaps, probably not ... makes me wonder about previous balloon research and if it's now possible to identify Higgsbosons in old photographs now we know in what energy region it is situated?

Re: FCC

Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2014 11:16 pm
by andrewp
And the call went out to the particle physicists of the world: TO THE BALLOONS!! :dance:

Re: FCC

Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2019 8:05 pm
by godzila
Well resurrecting this topic as we have all seen the FCC Conceptual Design Report (CDR) release today.

I muss say I am still not convinced (thankfully I have no say in it :).

Sure it would be an interesting toy but, according to current theories, what is there to "find" at those energy level ? Is it really worth spending 10bn€ to confirm that the universally recognised as incomplete Standard Model does still work at 100Tev ?

Sure some new physic might appear at those energy level but do we have, at the very least, some hint of it ?

Re: FCC

Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2019 9:27 am
by chelle
godzila wrote:
Wed Jan 16, 2019 8:05 pm
Well resurrecting this topic as we have all seen the FCC Conceptual Design Report (CDR) release today.



Is it really worth spending 10bn€ to confirm that the universally recognised as incomplete Standard Model does still work at 100Tev ?

Sure some new physic might appear at those energy level but do we have, at the very least, some hint of it ?
The psychology behind it is similar to why organisations build temples/mosques/football stadiums/…/cathedrals. Economic growth. If particle physics doesn’t grow it will stagnate, youngsters will lose interest, pursue other scientific fields.

So as we aren’t finding something new and interesting we must build something new. Companies need to expand and grow.

Scientific discoveries and research are only a small part of science itself, so it doesn’t matter if there’s nothing to find, it’s a place for education.

There’s no harm in that.

The harm is surpassing physical stability when overheating the Higgsfield, as debated between Alan Turing and Wittgenstein:

87ABA66F-CCF2-4042-90BC-8B173C527005.jpeg
87ABA66F-CCF2-4042-90BC-8B173C527005.jpeg (176.45 KiB) Viewed 1761 times

http://www.turing.org.uk/philosophy/ex4.html

BTW anyone see the movie Aquaman where the people of Atlantis blew themselves up :mrgreen:

Re: FCC

Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 6:52 pm
by Tracker303
I'm usually sad to see billions spent on things, be they on defence, sports or stuff like that, when there's so much to fix in our world: pollution, poverty, food quality, and hell, even if you want to stay among "beautiful" things, there are historical places for sale like this castle in Italy which would need to be cared for and turned into museums.

But science isn't the same. Science is always justified, be it physics, biology, space exploration, anything. I'm always glad when I see that my tax money is spent on something constructive like this!

Re: FCC

Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 7:01 pm
by chelle
Tracker303 wrote:
Sun Jan 27, 2019 6:52 pm
But science isn't the same. Science is always justified …
Science isn’t holy and what people do in the name of ‘science’ is surely not ‘always justified’.

Science itself is indifferent, the uses go in all directions from the very good down to absolute horror.