• @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1213 days ago

        Can we get a collider between moon an earth? I know, a lot of particles out there, but if we isolate it?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          We currently can’t block enough radiation to make space travel safe for humans in long term situations unless we are blessed with the calmest of space weather based on some recent news about the long term effects on the kidneys in the conditions of space travel (source, I believe the research still needs to be corroborated https://phys.org/news/2024-06-astronauts-kidneys-survive-roundtrip-mars.pdf )

          We’re still not at the Star Trek radiation screen level, unfortunately. So I’m not confident we can isolate this well enough. Earths magnetic field and atmosphere do a lot of work for us, and we still cannot replicate their function well enough to make it safe for humans long term. And this is a project that was put underground because it was more sensitive than humans.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            112 days ago

            I think we could easily shield this, it would just be stupendously expensive to bring all that lead up there

    • @Socsa
      link
      English
      813 days ago

      Orbital particle collider or bust

      • pelya
        link
        fedilink
        English
        613 days ago

        That’s what the asteroid belt is for!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      413 days ago

      Honest question could this be feasible with a few dozen satellites positioned above the Van Allen Belts to accelerate particles, and just letting the particles raw dog the solar wind and ride around Earth’s gravity well between each acceleration satellite? Cause that would be badass

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        212 days ago

        No, to orbit the earth at an height of let’s say 1000 km you would need a speed of around 7km/s. If you go faster, you don’t follow an circular orbit. Wirh around 11km/s you would be so fast to leave the gravity well of earth. The particles in those colliders are almost moving at the speed of light. To be exact, they move only 3.1m/s slower than the speed of light, so almost 300000km/s. They would fly almost straight and would be barely influenced by the gravity well.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      212 days ago

      Skip that. Put it in orbit and make it double as a solar collector array and beam the extra energy back down.

      • Tar_Alcaran
        link
        English
        413 days ago

        But other than the intended results, it’s been basically useless!

        Tbf, there are quite a few big experiments that have been done and will be done with the LHC, not just the Higgs boson search.

    • Adkml [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      613 days ago

      Confirmation of the principles they built the thing to demonstrate.

      Every time so far.

      This isn’t far off from some dipshit saying the place program was a waste of resources.

        • Adkml [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          513 days ago

          I need to remind myself people here aren’t as dumb (or dumber depending on how much you like the hardon joke) as you average internet user and maybe lower my defense a couple notches.

  • @mindbleach
    link
    English
    1413 days ago

    It’ll still be called the Future Circular Collider when it’s shut down after forty years of service. You gotta commit to a scale in the proposal, like the Overwhelmingly Large Telescope.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1012 days ago

    Just one more collider bro I swear just this one and we’ll fix the standard model bro just one more I swear

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1013 days ago

    The last time? aaaahahahaa… no. There are several phenomenon that require energy levels that only stellar objects can throw off. They’ll be asking for bigger colliders even when they’re dedicated space stations firing what would be equivalent to weapons of mass destruction at each other.

    Unless scientists can figure everything out just by observing space, there will always be a demand for a bigger collider. Since scientists like to control variables and don’t like waiting for random events that they then almost have to reverse-engineer to explain (without most all of the sensitive detectors built in to these colliders), there will always be a demand.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1213 days ago

      More size = more speed and more particles colliding = more bang = more data = for example possibility for dark matter and/or heavier particles to be found.

  • BoxedFenders [any, comrade/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    When I see massive and highly technical projects like this I wonder where they find enough skilled labor to build it. Just look at the immense complexity of this and they have to build miles and miles of it underground. I’m imagining that all of the construction workers have PhDs in physics or some shit. Or am I overestimating the demands here?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      213 days ago

      Overestimating it a little, the construction workers just need to be good. But there are indeed literally thousands of PhDs working on it for decades, from all over the world.