|
 |
"Mueen Nawaz" <m.n### [at] ieee org> wrote in message
news:48dbd314@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:
> > Do you really believe top quark will ever have a practical application
in
> > the next, say, 100 years?
> You keep asking this, so I'll respond with a statement that I think
> most here agree with:
> "I have no reason to believe that finding the top quark will have no
> practical applications, and thus won't take it as an assumption."
Fine. But if you are intellectually honest, you will also be able to say "I
have no reason to believe that finding the top quark will have *any*
practical applications, and thus won't take it as an assumption" (people in
the field will be able to make a more definite statement, but even this is
enough to justify my reasoning below).
Any sensible person, if he has no reason for or against an action that has a
definite cost, will refrain from taking that action. Even a gambler needs to
have some odds. If you disagree, why don't you send me $20?
> Besides, why limit to 100 years? What if it provides benefits 300 years
> from now?
Who (currently alive) need care about 300 years from now? You simply don't
make dubious investments for what might or might not happen in 300 years,
wasting present resources in the process.
There's a sharp diminishing of value towards the end of one's lifespan. Even
100 years is an overly generous period. Would you rather win $1 billion in
the lottery 2 minutes before you die, or $1000 now?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
