bro pls

Guys, the trick is to get it partially built and then cancel funding. Then scientists will never trust you to fund anything ever again, and you get to act like science is a waste of money while you're spending ridiculous sums on fighter jets.

Yes, I am still bitter about Waxahatchie.

Budget: Military Complex > CERN

Long term value to citizens: CERN > Miltary Complex

All historical CERN expenses combined are a tiny fraction of the yearly expenses of the combined EU miltary

This is cheaper than two super carriers.

Remember when people were worried about these killing us all by creating a black hole that swallows the Earth?

Can this one just hurry up and do that please?

I'd rather spend 22 billion on this than in Israel or more weapons of war

i hope someday we construct a collider that spans the entire circumference of the earth. But we'd probably have to build one that spans the circumference of the moon first, and then maybe mars, since the oceans are going to be a bit of a doozie to work around that we don't have the technology for, whereas the interior of a collider is supposed to be evacuated, so, the moon almost kinda already handles that for us. heat might be an issue of course, but if we can figure out thermal radiator panels that can dump the heat straight into space, maybe we could pull it off...

mars would address the heat issues, but those dust storms are no joke and the dust itself is microscopic toxic/caustic razors and it'll try to get in everywhere and ruin fine instruments it touches. Moon dust is also really bad but there's no wind to kick it up on the moon obviously...

but damn. DAMN. imagine the fucking science we could get done with a LUNAR-SCALE PARTICLE COLLIDER!!!

Fun fact, they were going to build one in the US crossing the borders of LA, TX, AR. They even dug out the damn hole, but they shit canned the whole project so now we're just left with a random giant circular hole underground.

Edited AK to AR. That would have been a bit excessive.

I'd rather spend money on science than killing innocent people.

Imagine if only 1/10 of all countries ~~GDP~~ gouvernement spending went to scientists and the patent bullshit didn't exist ? We'd be mining asteroids and sipping coffee on Mars.

When I look at the inability to fund big science projects like this, I'm reminded of the most fictional thing to ever happen in a science fiction movie.

The film? Contact.

They build a giant portal machine thing.

Gets blowed up by terrorists.

But that's okay, because they've got another one!

What?

Yep!

"Why build one when you can build two for twice the price?"

FALSE. SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF FAILURE. ABORT.

We need this one to undo the timeline shift the last one caused

But how will it be called? "Even larger Hadron Collider"?

Maybe they should do a Kickstarter.

NA copium. Where's your $21B collider ?

The fact they are suggesting 100km in circumference tells me that the size of this thing was not planned based on scientific research, but they wanted an easy, big number. That being said, go science! I'm all for additional research, provided they don't explode our planet, as I would be mildly upset if they did that.

I'm pretty bullish on science investments, but I've heard multiple arguments that this thing is probably not worth the money. The most prevalent argument I've heard to the contrary is basically "we could discover something that might be interesting." But like very little in terms of concrete measurable returns on investment for it.

This article does a good job of arguing against it I think. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-world-doesnt-need-a-new-gigantic-particle-collider/

My mind isn't made up on the topic, so like can anybody explain to me why this thing is actually worth 30+ billion dollars?