Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
The mid 1990s-to-present day 'economic systems' initiated and have sustained the LHC project to the present day.
The many different minds who consider research investments, have obviously found it to be justified and it represents the preferred option, over the myriad of considered alternatives.
The scientists and engineers who have developed it, are more than likely to embrace the data it produces, given that there is nothing else which can produce the same data.
This is reality and the real world .. like it or not.
Cheers
|
Only because to have pulled out of the project back then (mid 90's) would've been financial suicide...all those contracts that would've had to have been paid out wouldn't have gone down too well. Try and do the same thing now....fund a LHC. You wouldn't get the money for it. In any case, the LHC has been on the cards since the early 80's. The US cancelled its own SSC back in the early 90's because it was going to cost them too much. These projects aren't on the solid ground you might believe they are. The LHC itself was touch and go for a time.
Of course the scientists and engineers who built it have a stake in what data it produces....that's a given. However, I'm not talking about the data it puts out. I'm talking about how it's interpreted and what the general theoretical physics community thinks of it. Whilst most would be happy to see what comes out of it, not everyone is going to agree with all the results that come from the experiments. Nothing is cut and dried.
Reality....rather subjective word, don't you think.