Big Bang
A few months ago, I was lucky enough to visit CERN for a tour around the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and its associated experiments. And I do mean lucky. I doubt I’ll see anything more mind-blowing. Nobody with the slightest interest in science or technology could possibly fail to be impressed by the vast scale, complexity and ingenuity on display. Regular readers may remember that on my return, I wrote a feature attempting to describe the engineering involved in the LHC, and to give a flavour of the atmosphere at CERN.
You’d have to have your head in the sand to have missed the fact that the LHC’s big switch-on was today. If our newsletter schedule goes to plan, you should be reading this just as the first bunches of protons make their orbit around the LHC’s 27km circumference. As the main role of the experiment is to ask questions, it’s only fitting that questions be asked about the LHC. We can safely ignore the ones about whether it will end the world. It won’t.
There were certainly questions asked following my feature. We received several letters asking what possible use clashing particles together could serve, and whether the vast sums of money and the stores of scientific expertise could be better used elsewhere. Certainly, the former chief scientific advisor to the
Which is a remarkably unimaginative attitude, to my way of thinking. What possible use could quantum mechanics and particle physics be? What have they given us so far? Nothing much. Quantum mechanics gave us electronics and microprocessors and lasers, not to mention nuclear power, for better or worse. High-energy physics has given us every single medical imaging technique. Think it’s useless? Try telling someone whose life has been saved by magnetic resonance imaging or positron emission tomography.
And that’s completely leaving aside what might be CERN’s greatest contribution to society, the World Wide Web, developed there and given away free, and without which none of you would be reading this.
The LHC is looking into the unknown, and it’s impossible to predict what might come out of it in terms of its physics. But we do know that the experience gained from developing and, from today, operating its huge superconducting magnets will be carried directly into the experimental fusion reactor ITER, soon to take shape not far away from CERN, and which might give the world a new source of low-carbon energy. And the huge network of computing power, the Grid, which will handle LHC’s results, will open up new methods for analysing and manipulating hugely complex amounts of data.
But to be honest, speaking as a CERN visitor, it isn’t the technology that’s the most impressive thing. It isn’t the superlatives. It isn’t the potential. It’s the fact that this project has brought together thousands of scientists from more than a hundred countries, all collaborating towards a single goal. Some of them don’t share a common language and they’ve still found ways to communicate. It’s exhilarating and humbling to be among those people. It makes you think that anything is possible.
Some would say that the urge to explore is one of the defining characteristics of humanity. Others, perhaps more realistic, would say that there always has to be a pay-off in sight for the kind of investment that the LHC represents. But I’d take the idealistic, optimistic view any day. The spirit of that slice of
Stuart Nathan
Special Projects Editor





Readers' comments (7)
Stuart Phythian - Big Bang | 10 Sep 2008 3:01 pm
I believe Davis King's comments are misguided. I agree with his sentiments (such as solving the problems of World hunger) but what might be Blue Skies research today could become Blue Ocean tomorrow! For example, I'm sure the same argument could have been levelled at Lovell & Watson-Watt et al with their initial research into radio telescopy, leading us eventually to RADAR - a leading development which we now believe we cannot do without.
Many contributory businesses of today owe some of their success to the Blue Skies research done by many thousands of research graduates which subsequently prove groundbreaking and of benefit to mankind.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mike Barnes - Big Bang | 10 Sep 2008 3:17 pm
Your comments on the advantages of collaboration on this project hit the nail on the head and I whole heartedly agree. It was the same 'loss leader' sort of project like Concorde or space race that brings hidden advantages to the world whilst exciting the engineers of all types in their generation. We need these loss leaders as the benefits, you rightly point out, are not always obvious but their contribution immeasurable.
The next nearest scenario that would occupy this level and quantity of engineers occurs during world wars and that we really do not need! Collaboration is king!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Andy Jewell - Big Bang | 10 Sep 2008 3:41 pm
Thanks Mr Nathan for a very refreshing and uplifting article.
I 100% agree with your comments and trust that all future successes that come out of the project will be put towards the common good and the benefit of all.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
brian - Big Bang | 10 Sep 2008 4:55 pm
How refreshing to agree 100% with one of your editorials!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Phil Allport - Big Bang | 10 Sep 2008 10:15 pm
This is a hugely helpful contribution to the debate around "blue skies" research.
Many thanks
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Steve Maundrell - Big Bang | 12 Sep 2008 12:45 pm
With regard to the payback on investment, it strikes me as odd that this enormous project which has been 20 years or so in the coming has cost only £5bn, yet the London 2012 Olympic Games is currently budgeted to cost £9.3bn (but will undoubtedly be more) and will achieve......what?
I'm all for activity and inspiring people to do exercise, but think that perspective is lost sometimes when science & engineering funding is concerned.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Paul Richmond - Big Bang | 15 Sep 2008 9:45 am
The LHC has cost about £5bn, which was spent over 20 years. If you go to http://www.pfma.org.uk/2005-pet-food-market-data/inc-dry-pet-food.htm, you will find the following phrase: "In 2007 the value of the UK pet food market was just over £1.7bn." So in three years, UK pets munch through 1 LHC (as an accountant might see it). Makes you proud to be British.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment