Skip to main content

World's Largest Particle Accelerator Starts off Successfully

This isn't directly related to nuclear power but I'm sure many of the readers here could appreciate the significance and relevance of this event. 

From the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN):
The first beam in the Large Hadron Collider at CERN was successfully steered around the full 27 kilometres [17 miles] of the world’s most powerful particle accelerator at 10h28 this morning. This historic event marks a key moment in the transition from over two decades of preparation to a new era of scientific discovery.

...

Starting up a major new particle accelerator takes much more than flipping a switch. Thousands of individual elements have to work in harmony, timings have to be synchronized to under a billionth of a second, and beams finer than a human hair have to be brought into head-on collision. Today’s success puts a tick next to the first of those steps, and over the next few weeks, as the LHC’s operators gain experience and confidence with the new machine, the machine’s acceleration systems will be brought into play, and the beams will be brought into collision to allow the research programme to begin.
What is the purpose of the LHC?
The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the minuscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe.

Two beams of subatomic particles called 'hadrons' – either protons or lead ions – will travel in opposite directions inside the circular accelerator, gaining energy with every lap. Physicists will use the LHC to recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. Teams of physicists from around the world will analyse the particles created in the collisions using special detectors in a number of experiments dedicated to the LHC.

There are many theories as to what will result from these collisions, but what's for sure is that a brave new world of physics will emerge from the new accelerator, as knowledge in particle physics goes on to describe the workings of the Universe.
Pretty sweet stuff! For more information, check out the page on Wikipedia.

Update:

Comments

Norske-Division said…
"Russian nuclear reactor designs are the safest in the world"

"Oh, the chance of a resonance cascade is exceedingly small" - Half Life Scientist

"We really don't think there is much danger presented by the teleporter" - Doom Scientist

These bad scientists and fictional scientists are always going around saying something isn't actually dangerous. But games like the one I mentioned as well as Chernobyl have made some people think that scientists are a bunch of cow-boys who are willing to bet everything on what they think is a small risk. That scientists are stuck in an out of touch world of odds, not understanding the real consequences of what they're doing.

Now, I don't think this. But I understand how this popular perception came about.
Anonymous said…
To answer the question wether the LHC is dangerous, I found this link:

http://hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com/
Rod Adams said…
My beef with "big science" has nothing to do with the potential for hazard.

It simply baffles me that so much time, money and human ingenuity has been expended for so little gain!

With all of the very real problems in the world needing the efforts of the best solvers we can find, why do physicists think that the equivalent of accurately counting the angels on the head of a pin is worth $10 billion?

Though I work in a field where the word "billion" rolls easily off of the tongue, it is always worth remembering just how big $10 billion is.

Fill the Rose Bowl (100,000) people. Write each of them a check for $100,000. That is $10 billion.
David Bradish said…
Rod,

I'm of the complete opposite opinion on this. $10B invested by 20 countries is nothing. We should always be exploring and inventing and progressing. That's how we've gotten to be where we're at today.

We don't know what we don't know and it will take more and more money to achieve new things.

I found some Einstein quotes that seem to fit this situation::

"The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible."

"Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal."

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed."
Johan said…
Rod there is no way of knowing what gains might come out of big science. Just like no one could even guess fission existed before it was discovered. The day humanity stops doing real, fundamental science is the day all progress grinds to a halt.

Not to forget, the sheer joy of understanding how the universe works is priceless in itself even if it has no application.
Anonymous said…
I Just want to chill in the rose bowl and collect $100,000 now. I am not worried, I just want my money now Rod.

Love Hasersys
Anonymous said…
>Rod< how many weeks of Iraq war expenditures is LHC worth? ~4 weeks without casualties?
Anonymous said…
I just want to know why? With a hefty price tag like that, why is it so important to know how it all started and who cares. It started and we are all here. Everyone from small towns to big cities are losing jobs and kids are going hungry. But this is going to solve the problems? What are the adverse reactions? Does it matter? Even better, why isn't it mentioned? I guess every test is a success and there will be more jobs created from this. So where does the money come from to build this particle accelerator. This type of science belongs in a lab and no further until the people of the world can say if its safe. But that's my opinion, right.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...