News1 min ago
Hadron Collider ?
Can someone explain the purpose of the Hadron Collider and how much it costs the taxpayer ?
FBG40
FBG40
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by fbg40. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
without research hypocrites like you would not even be asking questions like this:http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Science/Question1423050.html
as for: "I'd rather have the pint" - Never heard such monumentally moronic statement" - oh and we are all anonymous but the difference is I'd say it all to your face. Not that anyone would doubt it but th last 2 posts are for Khandro.
as for: "I'd rather have the pint" - Never heard such monumentally moronic statement" - oh and we are all anonymous but the difference is I'd say it all to your face. Not that anyone would doubt it but th last 2 posts are for Khandro.
I'm very sure of what the benefits are. Both directly (not necessarily a lot, apart from knowledge, which is worth it in itself) and indirectly (a huge amount)
As to all that "seems to have been invented by one person" stuff... hmm... I think you are understating the amount of collaborative work that went into these things since. The TV may have been invented by one person but no-one uses his original model any more as it is, by today's standards, utterly crap. Hundreds of people have worked to make it much better. Ditto mobile phones, radios, microwaves, etc etc etc. Technology moves much faster when many people work on it. Even the world wide web was hardly finished when Tim Berners-Lee had done his stuff, and since then it has been changed, improved, adapted, and used by many thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people.
Individual contributions can make a huge difference. Individuals working together make an even bigger one. Don't underestimate the advantage of a collaborative effort. And, for that matter, don't underestimate the benefits that may yet surprise us when they come out of CERN, and other physics experiments.
I think it was GH Hardy who said something along the lines of how little actual use any of his work in pure mathematics actually was. A few years later, it and related work in number theory was used to crack the Enigma code. Since then, some of his work is also behind secure credit-card transactions. Even the apparently useless work at the time can have hidden benefits. Sometimes it will not. But you never know until you find out. Let us hope that scientists continue to waste taxpayers' money for many years to come, then: it will be returned with plenty of interest later down the line.
As to all that "seems to have been invented by one person" stuff... hmm... I think you are understating the amount of collaborative work that went into these things since. The TV may have been invented by one person but no-one uses his original model any more as it is, by today's standards, utterly crap. Hundreds of people have worked to make it much better. Ditto mobile phones, radios, microwaves, etc etc etc. Technology moves much faster when many people work on it. Even the world wide web was hardly finished when Tim Berners-Lee had done his stuff, and since then it has been changed, improved, adapted, and used by many thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people.
Individual contributions can make a huge difference. Individuals working together make an even bigger one. Don't underestimate the advantage of a collaborative effort. And, for that matter, don't underestimate the benefits that may yet surprise us when they come out of CERN, and other physics experiments.
I think it was GH Hardy who said something along the lines of how little actual use any of his work in pure mathematics actually was. A few years later, it and related work in number theory was used to crack the Enigma code. Since then, some of his work is also behind secure credit-card transactions. Even the apparently useless work at the time can have hidden benefits. Sometimes it will not. But you never know until you find out. Let us hope that scientists continue to waste taxpayers' money for many years to come, then: it will be returned with plenty of interest later down the line.
You misunderstand my post which seems to be quite clear; of course thousands of people are required to make and improve millions of motor cars, but the original invention was by one person, similarly TVs, penicillin, electricity and on and on, the greatest inventions and discoveries have been conceived by an individual or very small group -such as DNA
The CERN project is an open-ended research plan costing huge amounts of money to no particular known end, in other words; research for research's sake, which is what it makes it unique.
The CERN project is an open-ended research plan costing huge amounts of money to no particular known end, in other words; research for research's sake, which is what it makes it unique.
"...but the original invention was by one person, similarly TVs, penicillin, electricity and on and on, the greatest inventions and discoveries have been conceived by an individual or very small group -such as DNA "
Again, I don't think that's really true -- or, at least, it hides the behind-the-scenes work of many other people who get overlooked because it makes for a marginally less thrilling story. People were working on the structure of DNA before Watson and Crick (and Franklin and Wilkins) came to their breakthrough. Logie Baird wasn't the first person to think of a television. Edison's accredited invention of the lightbulb overlooks not only Joseph Swan but also maybe as many as twenty other names over a period of 70 years -- and their assistants -- whose work went into developing the idea. And so on and so forth.
The assertion that "the greatest inventions and discoveries have been conceived by an individual or very small group" is, in the end, rather a subjective one. Since the history of human endeavour is still very young, it's not all that surprising perhaps that a lot of great discoveries have flowed from the pen of one person, but just as many other great discoveries are conveniently overlooked in that claim.
It is unfair to collaborations to belittle their contributions. Perhaps the reason they tend to get overlooked is that it just isn't so surprising that large groups of incredibly intelligent people are going to achieve something.
Again, I don't think that's really true -- or, at least, it hides the behind-the-scenes work of many other people who get overlooked because it makes for a marginally less thrilling story. People were working on the structure of DNA before Watson and Crick (and Franklin and Wilkins) came to their breakthrough. Logie Baird wasn't the first person to think of a television. Edison's accredited invention of the lightbulb overlooks not only Joseph Swan but also maybe as many as twenty other names over a period of 70 years -- and their assistants -- whose work went into developing the idea. And so on and so forth.
The assertion that "the greatest inventions and discoveries have been conceived by an individual or very small group" is, in the end, rather a subjective one. Since the history of human endeavour is still very young, it's not all that surprising perhaps that a lot of great discoveries have flowed from the pen of one person, but just as many other great discoveries are conveniently overlooked in that claim.
It is unfair to collaborations to belittle their contributions. Perhaps the reason they tend to get overlooked is that it just isn't so surprising that large groups of incredibly intelligent people are going to achieve something.
mibn. //Behind every great achiever are a hundred ..........// If that was true, which it isn't, all the inventions listed above and many more ; (William Fox Talbot and photography etc.) have been arrived at, usually without financial assistance, and by private individuals or very small groups.
Did you know that CERN employs 2,400 people all on very substantial salaries? - please see my link above.
Did you know that CERN employs 2,400 people all on very substantial salaries? - please see my link above.
It took 200,000 people and hundreds of years to put men on the moon. Galileo was mentioned as being instrumental actually on the surface of the moon:
That was all about gravity, now the LHC has helped verify the exitance of higgs, the mass boson, now do you think that potentially some things will come out of that? Things that at the moment are Science fiction? Khandro think about it.
That was all about gravity, now the LHC has helped verify the exitance of higgs, the mass boson, now do you think that potentially some things will come out of that? Things that at the moment are Science fiction? Khandro think about it.
Khandro
mibn. //Behind every great achiever are a hundred ..........// If that was true, which it isn't, all the inventions listed above and many more ; (William Fox Talbot and photography etc.) have been arrived at, usually without financial assistance, and by private individuals or very small groups.
Did you know that CERN employs 2,400 people all on very substantial salaries? - please see my link above.
20:05 Thu 04th Jun 2015
http://
quod erat demonstrandum
mibn. //Behind every great achiever are a hundred ..........// If that was true, which it isn't, all the inventions listed above and many more ; (William Fox Talbot and photography etc.) have been arrived at, usually without financial assistance, and by private individuals or very small groups.
Did you know that CERN employs 2,400 people all on very substantial salaries? - please see my link above.
20:05 Thu 04th Jun 2015
http://
quod erat demonstrandum
mibn. A quick dip into Wikipedia doesn't q.e.d anything. Photography and it's history happens to be something I know quite a bit about (having taught it as a subject at BA level) All those people, Marey, Daguerre and Fox-Talbot worked alone and were self-financed and the latter was the first to invent proper modern reproducible photographs by the use of a negative.
The camera obscura and its effect was known for centuries, but isn't photography.
Anyone who says I am against 'research' per se is being disingenuous, nowhere have I said that. The OP is specifically about CERN - a particular bête noir of mine - and if you read my posts above you may see why.
The camera obscura and its effect was known for centuries, but isn't photography.
Anyone who says I am against 'research' per se is being disingenuous, nowhere have I said that. The OP is specifically about CERN - a particular bête noir of mine - and if you read my posts above you may see why.
Latest Posts
How Can The Journey Of Learning Karate
Sport5 mins ago
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Christmas Tv - Strike Is Back!
Film, Media & TV13 mins ago
