"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:48db0b08$1@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:

> > But 10 years is a perfectly valid timeframe for many a medical research
to
> > give fruits.

> Only after the fundamental work has been done by scientists.

I don't know what that means. Of course work has been done, we are not
starting from the stone age each time but build on top of existing
knowledge. 10 years is a perfectly fine timeframe to expect results from
applied sciences for most any project starting today.

> And you don't think there's any existing problem in fundamental physics
> the LHC is trying to gather evidence to solve? Like, where does mass
> come from? Why does inertia match gravity?

If it comes from Higgs, we won't be in better shape than we are now. We
already assume that. If it doesn't, we will be in worse shape. In any case,
beyond the discovery of Higgs, there's very little that LHC can give us that
Fermilab did not. But besides that, the real issue is, it's all academic. No
application, no benefit.

> > Not all science is wasteful, I make no such claim. Just the opposite, I
> > claim that the worthiness of scientific research needs to be examined on
a
> > case by case basis. High energy physics research, amongst all branches
of
> > science, is the least useful of sciences.

> Because, you know, all those nuclear energy plants that France is
> building aren't at all useful.

HEP at TeV scales has *nothing* to do with nuclear fission (nor fusion).
That's a gross but common misconception. Physics today is highly
specialized, which laymen do not appreciate the different domains. I suggest
reading the "purpose" section of the Wiki page on LHC.

>  > In fact, it has zero application, past, present or foreseeble future.

> Do you have a citation for this? Or is this argument from ignorance?
> Because, like, you keep saying this, and it seems to be the center of
> your argument, but I've seen nothing except your statements that the
> research is and must be useless.

Please provide an application, if you can. I cannot cite for something that
doesn't exist.

Post a reply to this message