• mr_robot
    link
    English
    218 months ago

    Remember how nut-jobs were convinced that using the LHC would create an earth-eating black hole? I miss the simpler times.

    Uneducated conspiracy theorists seemed laughably quaint back in 2012.

    • deweydecibel
      link
      English
      5
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      2012? The LHC black hole shit was the mid 2000s, around 2008 is when it peaked.

      Which itself was a repeat of the same concerns that were thrown around in 2003, when CERN thoroughly debunked them the first time.

      And I have full confidence we’ll see a return of them once this project gets closer to fruition.

    • @just_another_person
      link
      68 months ago

      Right? That’s an unimaginable amount of work. Imagine trying to debug that thing if there are issues. Walking miles a day just checking on stuff lol

      • @Algaroth
        link
        5
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        deleted by creator

  • @ClockworkOtter
    link
    78 months ago

    Imagine designing this thing that probably won’t be completed until you’re dust!

  • @owenfromcanada
    link
    English
    6
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Instead of building it this big, they should build it as big as the following one will be.

    • @Chocrates
      link
      68 months ago

      Instead of building it that big, they should build it as big as the following one after the following one will be.

  • @TheBiscuitLout
    link
    English
    68 months ago

    Is it by smashing stuff together until they break something fundamental, and the universe goes dark?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      58 months ago

      Whoops, blew the galactic breaker. Somebody has to go down to the supermassive black hole and flip it back on.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    58 months ago

    Are the two intersecting to give scientists the option of transferring from one collider to the other? If so, why intersect at two points (they overlap a little) instead of just one (at a single tangent point)?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      7
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      https://www.cern/science/accelerators/accelerator-complex

      Yes, the maximum energy that a syncrotron can accelerate a beam to is determined by its size and field strength. There are multiple rings that are used to bring beams up in energy levels before feeding to the next. Each ring has many bunches of particles circulating. So each bunch has to be going close to the same speed. You wouldn’t want to do all the accelerating in one ring because it wouldn’t allow nearly continuous operation.

      As for two intersecting points, the collisions involve colliding two beams. So there’s two different kicking/injecting points one for each direction.

      https://cds.cern.ch/record/2002005/files/CERN-ACC-2015-030.pdf