Home | Forum | Arcade
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Silvia
valued friend
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
22 Gold
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:43 pm Post subject: Science funding crisis |
 |
|
For those who aren't aware, the US federal government recently passed a budget that impacts science very badly:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/319/5859/18
In particular, my research area, High Energy Physics, has been hit very hard. The lab I typically visit for extended working periods, Fermilab, will be forced to lay off 200 of its 2,000 employees, and the remaining employees will be required to take 2 unpaid days of leave every month. SLAC has been similarly hit. Particularly disturbing are the heavy cuts to future science programs. One short term and one long term project have been flat-lined, both projects were meant to be the 'bread and butter' projects of Fermilab, dictating a slow painful death for the lab and a guarantee that the US will not be a world leader in HEP programs for at least half a century (these programs take several decades to get off the ground, they're BIG).
Past research projects from Fermilab have directly impacted technology in this country: cancer radiation treatments and the development of MRI machines, to name just a few. Hopefully the next budget will reverse the damage and there is some possibility of short-term band-aids, though the prospect for these is bleak. If things continue as they are, I may have to leave the US to get a job - I may CHOOSE to, if only to ensure I'm at the cutting edge of science and to have some job security. A shame, seeing as the US has been paying for my education. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lord Clarke
football friend
Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 400
0 Gold
Location: South of the North Pole
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 2:25 pm Post subject: Re: Science funding crisis |
|
|
Scientific research are not the responsibility of the government, but of the corporations that reap the profits from the new discoveries and inventions.
Its called capitalism....welcome to my country.
| Silvia wrote: | For those who aren't aware, the US federal government recently passed a budget that impacts science very badly:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/319/5859/18
In particular, my research area, High Energy Physics, has been hit very hard. The lab I typically visit for extended working periods, Fermilab, will be forced to lay off 200 of its 2,000 employees, and the remaining employees will be required to take 2 unpaid days of leave every month. SLAC has been similarly hit. Particularly disturbing are the heavy cuts to future science programs. One short term and one long term project have been flat-lined, both projects were meant to be the 'bread and butter' projects of Fermilab, dictating a slow painful death for the lab and a guarantee that the US will not be a world leader in HEP programs for at least half a century (these programs take several decades to get off the ground, they're BIG).
Past research projects from Fermilab have directly impacted technology in this country: cancer radiation treatments and the development of MRI machines, to name just a few. Hopefully the next budget will reverse the damage and there is some possibility of short-term band-aids, though the prospect for these is bleak. If things continue as they are, I may have to leave the US to get a job - I may CHOOSE to, if only to ensure I'm at the cutting edge of science and to have some job security. A shame, seeing as the US has been paying for my education. |
_________________
"The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silvia
valued friend
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
22 Gold
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 2:57 pm Post subject: Re: Science funding crisis |
|
|
| Lord Clarke wrote: | Scientific research are not the responsibility of the government, but of the corporations that reap the profits from the new discoveries and inventions.
Its called capitalism....welcome to my country. |
There are two issues with having 100% corporate funded science:
1) Corporate funded research is subject to tremendous ethical dilemmas. Science pursues truth, corporations pursue profit. The two do not always get along. Governments pursue the common good, and if you subscribe to the philosophy that truth is a part of the common good, then the ethical conflicts are far less severe with government funding of science. I make no claims here that scientists, businessmen, and politicians are not corrupt. Merely that the theory behind them is more compatible between science and government than science and business.
2) Fundamental science cannot reliably predict the benefits prior to starting research, the benefits are only known once the research is complete. This makes a poor incentive for companies to fund a particular science project because they have no idea if the result of the research will be beneficial for their particular corporate goals. Corporations know this and are one of the strongest political supporters of government funded fundamental science research because they simply cannot do it themselves. Corporations know the results are good for industry as a whole and politically support the scientific studies they feel are more likely to benefit them individually. It's called capitalism....welcome to my country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lord Clarke
football friend
Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 400
0 Gold
Location: South of the North Pole
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 3:04 pm Post subject: Re: Science funding crisis |
|
|
Government is in the business of running a country, or a city or a state, not inventing the car. Now if it works to the benefit of the country, like a military use, or a way to feed a family of 4 with 1 carrot, fine. But the truth is the government spends too much on science. And too much junk science. If you want to find the truth, find the money to do so, and stop wasting tax dollars. We have too many studies on things like the effect of loud music on lab rats.....okay, that may sound idiotic, but you and I have both heard of extremely dumb federally funded science.
| Silvia wrote: | | Lord Clarke wrote: | Scientific research are not the responsibility of the government, but of the corporations that reap the profits from the new discoveries and inventions.
Its called capitalism....welcome to my country. |
There are two issues with having 100% corporate funded science:
1) Corporate funded research is subject to tremendous ethical dilemmas. Science pursues truth, corporations pursue profit. The two do not always get along. Governments pursue the common good, and if you subscribe to the philosophy that truth is a part of the common good, then the ethical conflicts are far less severe with government funding of science. I make no claims here that scientists, businessmen, and politicians are not corrupt. Merely that the theory behind them is more compatible between science and government than science and business.
2) Fundamental science cannot reliably predict the benefits prior to starting research, the benefits are only known once the research is complete. This makes a poor incentive for companies to fund a particular science project because they have no idea if the result of the research will be beneficial for their particular corporate goals. Corporations know this and are one of the strongest political supporters of government funded fundamental science research because they simply cannot do it themselves. Corporations know the results are good for industry as a whole and politically support the scientific studies they feel are more likely to benefit them individually. It's called capitalism....welcome to my country. |
_________________
"The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silvia
valued friend
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
22 Gold
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 3:19 pm Post subject: Re: Science funding crisis |
|
|
| Lord Clarke wrote: | | Government is in the business of running a country, or a city or a state, not inventing the car. Now if it works to the benefit of the country, like a military use, or a way to feed a family of 4 with 1 carrot, fine. |
It frequently does benefit the country. It's exceptionally hard to predict in advance whether it will or not and what that benefit will be. The benefits to our country from science are innumerable and include some of the examples I listed earlier.
| Lord Clarke wrote: | | But the truth is the government spends too much on science. And too much junk science. If you want to find the truth, find the money to do so, and stop wasting tax dollars. |
Where would you suggest I find the money? And how did you draw the conclusion that science is a waste of tax dollars? Most cancer patients, computer users, soldiers, and tech companies would disagree.
| Lord Clarke wrote: | | We have too many studies on things like the effect of loud music on lab rats.....okay, that may sound idiotic, but you and I have both heard of extremely dumb federally funded science. |
I reiterate that scientists and politicians can be corrupt. Some pretty stupid crud out there, mostly just to make some senator look good to a voting district. In fact, there were some pretty dumb earmarks for Illinois instead of funding their existing scientific labs. But a new fangled toy that a senator can espouse is oh-so-much-more exciting than a stable research lab that's been around for decades. Scientists, particularly the quacks, are all too happy to play along, 'cause it's money! And on the defense.... sometimes you've got to take risks to get rewards. Some risks are smarter than others.
The point of my post is that science is a long term investment. It's not something that you can abandon in light of short term trials, because there will always be short term trials. Perhaps you're right, that the sheer quantity of science funding is too large, but if America wishes to remain technically competitive in the future, it's an investment we must make - other countries are and will outpace us. One of America's largest sources of income is through selling weapons. Those weapons started out as research projects decades ago. History has demonstrated consistently that science investment pays off, big time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lord Clarke
football friend
Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 400
0 Gold
Location: South of the North Pole
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 3:30 pm Post subject: Re: Science funding crisis |
|
|
I actually agree with much that you say regarding the benefits of science, however, the government cannot fund everything that is out there. Maybe, if they are cutting costs, they can look at everything that they are paying for and throw out the junk that is not necessary. I mean, you can't tell me that every research project out there is really worth the investment, can you? I am sure there are projects that can just go away?
On the other hand, I disagree with the fed government not allowing federal funds for stem cell research....IF there is anything that should be funded, that is probably one of them.
So I am not advocating completely abolishing federal funding, but how about we have a little fiscal responsibility?
| Silvia wrote: | | Lord Clarke wrote: | | Government is in the business of running a country, or a city or a state, not inventing the car. Now if it works to the benefit of the country, like a military use, or a way to feed a family of 4 with 1 carrot, fine. |
It frequently does benefit the country. It's exceptionally hard to predict in advance whether it will or not and what that benefit will be. The benefits to our country from science are innumerable and include some of the examples I listed earlier.
| Lord Clarke wrote: | | But the truth is the government spends too much on science. And too much junk science. If you want to find the truth, find the money to do so, and stop wasting tax dollars. |
Where would you suggest I find the money? And how did you draw the conclusion that science is a waste of tax dollars? Most cancer patients, computer users, soldiers, and tech companies would disagree.
| Lord Clarke wrote: | | We have too many studies on things like the effect of loud music on lab rats.....okay, that may sound idiotic, but you and I have both heard of extremely dumb federally funded science. |
I reiterate that scientists and politicians can be corrupt. Some pretty stupid crud out there, mostly just to make some senator look good to a voting district. In fact, there were some pretty dumb earmarks for Illinois instead of funding their existing scientific labs. But a new fangled toy that a senator can espouse is oh-so-much-more exciting than a stable research lab that's been around for decades. Scientists, particularly the quacks, are all too happy to play along, 'cause it's money! And on the defense.... sometimes you've got to take risks to get rewards. Some risks are smarter than others.
The point of my post is that science is a long term investment. It's not something that you can abandon in light of short term trials, because there will always be short term trials. Perhaps you're right, that the sheer quantity of science funding is too large, but if America wishes to remain technically competitive in the future, it's an investment we must make - other countries are and will outpace us. One of America's largest sources of income is through selling weapons. Those weapons started out as research projects decades ago. History has demonstrated consistently that science investment pays off, big time. |
_________________
"The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silvia
valued friend
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
22 Gold
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 4:03 pm Post subject: Re: Science funding crisis |
|
|
| Lord Clarke wrote: | | I actually agree with much that you say regarding the benefits of science, however, the government cannot fund everything that is out there. Maybe, if they are cutting costs, they can look at everything that they are paying for and throw out the junk that is not necessary. I mean, you can't tell me that every research project out there is really worth the investment, can you? I am sure there are projects that can just go away? |
Certainly! But I think if you evaluate the details of this most recent funding omnibus that you'll find the opposite occured. Lots of earmarks for projects that will die on their own, or, worse, drain money for the next decade. The projects which I mentioned that were chopped are HUGE, mainstream, critical path projects - definitely not junk science, with historically proven benefits. I'm sure you've heard of the LHC.... the ILC, one of the projects chopped, is the next generation LHC. If Congress doesn't do something in the next funding resolution (hopefully sooner!) the ILC will not be in the US, guaranteeing a lack of US superiority in particle physics for the next half century. The repercussions to our future economy scare the crud out of me! Where the heck will we make our money? Serving Whoppers? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lord Clarke
football friend
Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 400
0 Gold
Location: South of the North Pole
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 5:28 pm Post subject: Re: Science funding crisis |
|
|
| Silvia wrote: | | The repercussions to our future economy scare the crud out of me! Where the heck will we make our money? Serving Whoppers? |
This I actually agree with you....that is why I oppose NAFTA and any government program which allows big corporations to move abroad, with government funds no less, to manufacture for less.....
_________________
"The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silvia
valued friend
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
22 Gold
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As requested in this thread:
The LHC is the Large Hadron Collider, currently under construction and nearing completion at CERN, Europe's premier particle physics lab. It is the next generation in particle physics experimentation.
http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/LHC-en.html
The ILC is the International Linear Collider, currently in design research stages. As for all colliders, time from inception to completion is on the order of several decades. Fermilab, America's premier particle physics lab (don't tell SLAC I said that!), had hoped to host the ILC. It would be the successor to the LHC, although based on a fundamentally different technology. It will almost certainly be lower energy than the LHC, but, due to it's distinctly different design, will explore the 'next interesting region' of particle physics.
http://www.linearcollider.org/cms/
IMHO, the ILC will be dead in the water if the LHC does not at LEAST detect the Higgs boson, and the ILC will be in trouble if the LHC does not detect some new physics, "Beyond the Standard Model." Most of these terms and phrases are most accurately described here:
http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/WhyLHC-en.html
Research development for the ILC was recently chopped in the US funding omnibus, as was UK financial contributions a couple months? ago.
Edit: If you want to see the coolest construction project EVER: http://cmsinfo.cern.ch/outreach/CMSmedia/Movies/CMS%20Assembly%20final.mpg
That's a walloping 171 MB though, so the download is not for the faint of heart. It shows the assembly of the experiment that I'm working on right now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lord Clarke
football friend
Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 400
0 Gold
Location: South of the North Pole
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
While the LHC is immensely interesting....now that you described it, I have read a little about it....not enough to claim to understand the science of it.....it is not something, in my opinion, that my tax dollars should be spent on. I do not understand what practical thing can come from this knowledge. That is not to say it should not be pursued....like I said before, knowledge is power.....but I don't see the need for my dollars to go to it when stem cell research is not funded, or when we still need a cure for cancer (or cures, since there are many types of cancer).
Perhaps you can explain to me the practical applications that might benefit the masses.
| Silvia wrote: | As requested in this thread:
The LHC is the Large Hadron Collider, currently under construction and nearing completion at CERN, Europe's premier particle physics lab. It is the next generation in particle physics experimentation.
http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/LHC-en.html
The ILC is the International Linear Collider, currently in design research stages. As for all colliders, time from inception to completion is on the order of several decades. Fermilab, America's premier particle physics lab (don't tell SLAC I said that!), had hoped to host the ILC. It would be the successor to the LHC, although based on a fundamentally different technology. It will almost certainly be lower energy than the LHC, but, due to it's distinctly different design, will explore the 'next interesting region' of particle physics.
http://www.linearcollider.org/cms/
IMHO, the ILC will be dead in the water if the LHC does not at LEAST detect the Higgs boson, and the ILC will be in trouble if the LHC does not detect some new physics, "Beyond the Standard Model." Most of these terms and phrases are most accurately described here:
http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/WhyLHC-en.html
Research development for the ILC was recently chopped in the US funding omnibus, as was UK financial contributions a couple months? ago.
Edit: If you want to see the coolest construction project EVER: http://cmsinfo.cern.ch/outreach/CMSmedia/Movies/CMS%20Assembly%20final.mpg
That's a walloping 171 MB though, so the download is not for the faint of heart. It shows the assembly of the experiment that I'm working on right now. |
_________________
"The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lord Clarke
football friend
Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 400
0 Gold
Location: South of the North Pole
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I will admit....that is a cool construction project.....more interesting than any I have EVER participated in.....is this project complete yet (it is still playing, so I have not gotten to the end yet)....what was the cost?
_________________
"The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silvia
valued friend
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
22 Gold
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lord Clarke wrote: | | Perhaps you can explain to me the practical applications that might benefit the masses. |
Well, as I've argued previously, it is extremely difficult to predict the benefits in advance. I could attempt to do so, but it would be empty promises. However, I *can* tell you what research in this field, performed by predecessors to this experiment, has given society:
- The nuclear bomb, fusion bombs
- Nuclear reactors, fusion reactors (maybe)
- Radiation cancer treatments and nuclear medicine as a whole
- Magnetic resonance imaging
- Positron emission tomography
- Increasingly smaller electronics
- Quantum cryptography
- Quantum computing (well this could be a pipe dream...)
And things that have benefited from but are not due entirely to research in particle physics:
- Proper understanding of electromagnetic fields, leading to all modern electronics.
- A deeper understanding of molecular bonds and decay, impacting Chemistry and all it's products.
- Mathematical and computational techniques that are used everywhere, including market analysis, biology, engineering, weather prediction, computer science, you name it!
Edit: Oh, and the web as you see it today! The first webpage was invented by a particle physics group at CERN. Arpanet, America's pride and joy, was the beginning of the infrastructure - Europeans pish-posh Arpanet and point to CERN's first web page. I'm not sure if CERN is responsible for the HTML language, or just the concept of displaying information in today's web page manner and serving it over networked computers. Prior to CERN's web page, the internet was email and usenets. Not sure where posting boards fit in there...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet#History
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web#History
Last edited by Silvia on Sun Jan 13, 2008 8:28 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silvia
valued friend
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
22 Gold
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lord Clarke wrote: |
I will admit....that is a cool construction project.....more interesting than any I have EVER participated in.....is this project complete yet (it is still playing, so I have not gotten to the end yet)....what was the cost? |
The CMS experiment construction is very nearly done. Everything is down in the cavern except for a piece of the electromagnetic calorimeter. The tracker has been inserted into the detector. I think there's only two pieces left to go, but don't quote me on that. Things are changing on a weekly basis now, we're frantically gearing up to take data.
Total cost? Honestly I couldn't tell you. I think the administrators hide the number intentionally, behind layers and layers of figures. People might get sticker shock. For JUST the CMS experiment: I would hazard around one billion. I guess it depends on whether you want to include the research and development costs. The cost has also been spread out over MANY countries, this is a world project, and it's been spread out over at least a decade, depending on when you start counting. But it ain't cheap.
Edit: A friend of mine was finally able to track a number down. An obscure government document from 1999 reads that the US contribution was predicted to be around $531 million total for both the CMS and ATLAS experiments. I haven't a clue how much of that CMS got, or how off budget it is. I think we're not as alarmingly off budget as most science projects get, although I'm sure we're over. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lord Clarke
football friend
Joined: 16 Jul 2007
Posts: 400
0 Gold
Location: South of the North Pole
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't giving credit for radiation cancer treatments and nuclear medicine as a whole to quantum physics a stretch?
Now, I am not too knowledgeable in physics, that is to say, other than the many applications of physics in designing structures, which is most of everything, but I was always taught that physics was a dead field?
Maybe it has merit, maybe not, but I would like to see, if the U.S. gave $531 million, what other countries gave. We are usually the biggest spenders in any party. I would love to see some other country foot the bill for once. I realize that the reason for this is that we may be among the richest countries in the world, but hey, if we are going to foot the biggest chunk, do we get to keep the new technologies for ourselves? And why isn't it built in this country? Surely what sounds like a multi-billion dollar construction project could have provided a lot of jobs in this country.
These are some of my problems with giving money away freely. When was the last time a multi-national project of this magnitude done in our country for our benefit?
| Silvia wrote: | | Lord Clarke wrote: | | Perhaps you can explain to me the practical applications that might benefit the masses. |
Well, as I've argued previously, it is extremely difficult to predict the benefits in advance. I could attempt to do so, but it would be empty promises. However, I *can* tell you what research in this field, performed by predecessors to this experiment, has given society:
- The nuclear bomb, fusion bombs
- Nuclear reactors, fusion reactors (maybe)
- Radiation cancer treatments and nuclear medicine as a whole
- Magnetic resonance imaging
- Positron emission tomography
- Increasingly smaller electronics
- Quantum cryptography
- Quantum computing (well this could be a pipe dream...)
And things that have benefited from but are not due entirely to research in particle physics:
- Proper understanding of electromagnetic fields, leading to all modern electronics.
- A deeper understanding of molecular bonds and decay, impacting Chemistry and all it's products.
- Mathematical and computational techniques that are used everywhere, including market analysis, biology, engineering, weather prediction, computer science, you name it!
Edit: Oh, and the web as you see it today! The first webpage was invented by a particle physics group at CERN. Arpanet, America's pride and joy, was the beginning of the infrastructure - Europeans pish-posh Arpanet and point to CERN's first web page. I'm not sure if CERN is responsible for the HTML language, or just the concept of displaying information in today's web page manner and serving it over networked computers. Prior to CERN's web page, the internet was email and usenets. Not sure where posting boards fit in there...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet#History
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web#History |
_________________
"The American Indians found out what happens when you don't control immigration." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silvia
valued friend
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 262
22 Gold
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lord Clarke wrote: | Isn't giving credit for radiation cancer treatments and nuclear medicine as a whole to quantum physics a stretch?
Now, I am not too knowledgeable in physics, that is to say, other than the many applications of physics in designing structures, which is most of everything, but I was always taught that physics was a dead field? |
Whoah, whoever taught you that is just dead wrong. The physics that's taught in high school classrooms and 101 College Physics is dead. That's Classical Mechanics and the only reason it's still taught is because it's used by Civil Engineers and the mathematics introduced there show up later. But there are TONS of modern unsolved questions that fall under the purview of physics. The largest modern research areas are particle physics (aka high energy physics), astrophysics/astronomy/cosmology, and condensed matter (~50% of physicists are condened matter specialists, which is sort of a cross between physics and chemistry). There are quite a number of other fields, but those are the really big ones.
| Lord Clarke wrote: | Maybe it has merit, maybe not, but I would like to see, if the U.S. gave $531 million, what other countries gave. We are usually the biggest spenders in any party. I would love to see some other country foot the bill for once. I realize that the reason for this is that we may be among the richest countries in the world, but hey, if we are going to foot the biggest chunk, do we get to keep the new technologies for ourselves? And why isn't it built in this country? Surely what sounds like a multi-billion dollar construction project could have provided a lot of jobs in this country.
These are some of my problems with giving money away freely. When was the last time a multi-national project of this magnitude done in our country for our benefit? |
Well, I don't know what portion CMS got, but if it got half of that amount, which would be about right, that would mean the US contribution was $267 million out of a roughly billion dollar project. US physicists compose 1/3 of the CMS research collaboration (2,000-3,000 physicists total, depending on who you ask), so in fact the US didn't contribute their 'fair share.' Although fair share is rarely what it's about. Locality is important too, as you point out.
The last time the US hosted a project of this magnitude was... now. The immediate predecessor to the LHC is the Tevatron, hosted at Fermilab. They're still hoping to snag the Higgs discovery before the LHC takes 'clean' data, they've got about one to two years to do it. The Tevatron is also a huge internationally funded accelerator. Anyway, the Tevatron will continue running for at least a couple more years. It's hoped that the ILC will be built utilizing existing Fermilab facilities. These complexes tend to bounce back and forth between European and American hosting. One complex shuts down while the other fires up. Meanwhile, the shutdown facility constructs the next generation to follow the running facility.
An example of an almost entirely US-run-and-funded collider facility is the Super Conducting Supercollider, built, but never completed, in Texas. The SSC is a painful memory for most physicists. It went terribly, horribly overbudget. When it was at least 100% overbudget (dare I say 200%?), Congress shut it down, and rightly so. Anyway, if you want to throw flaming projectiles at the field, that would be where you'd start. And I couldn't do much other than wince and say... yeah, we screwed up. Some people point fingers at the politicians, but most agree that the proposal was way-off-kilter too cheap.
I don't know why I'm giving you fuel.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group - Design: niedermayr.cc
Guild Wars © 2004 ArenaNet, Inc. All rights reserved. ArenaNet, Arena.Net and the ArenaNet logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCsoft Corporation in the U.S. and/or other countries. |
