Chinahand Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 But VinnieK areas of botany - ie plant genetics etc probably do have world wide budgets in the order of £3bn - just ask Monsanto, or the International Rice Research Institute. You can pick any individual project and say it should be cancelled and the cash moved to any other wothy project - get rid of the queen and put it into Cancer research, abolish nuclear weapon research and put it into wave energy etc etc. I don't find that a very helpful exercise. I disagree with you that CERN exists due to it being a bang flash project loved by the media. More its down to its fundamental nature which taps into something very deep in the human psychi. Whether its Spitzer space telescopes, LHC, or getting a budget for zeno-transplants the scientists have to make the case to their peers, who make the case to their funding bodies, who make the case to the government and international research bodies etc. The LHC is a part of that process and so is botany, I don't find it obvious that the LHC is inappropriately overfunded. Are you really saying you do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 [Similarly, you can't tell that our entire species doesn't depend on advancements in a particular field of botany or inorganic chemistry. Thus I propose they be bunged £3bn immediately, even though they may not have the "whatta scoop!" factor everyone loves about the LHC Its a lot of money, I agree, and I'd personally have liked similar megabucks to be spent on renewable energy rather than this but when you look at the unexpected benefits this research has thrown up so far it's a fairly safe bet (I hope) that the future spin offs are going to be worth it. It has a good track record basically. But at this stage, we don't know. We'll have to wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinnieK Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 But VinnieK areas of botany - ie plant genetics etc probably do have world wide budgets in the order of £3bn - just ask Monsanto, or the International Rice Research Institute. I'm well aware of this, see the next point. You can pick any individual project and say it should be cancelled and the cash moved to any other wothy project - get rid of the queen and put it into Cancer research, abolish nuclear weapon research and put it into wave energy etc etc. This is silly and disingenuous. We're talking about how a science budget is being carved up in a cash strapped country like the UK where science is already struggling, not how "world wide funds for science are distributed" or "Queen vs. Science". I don't find that a very helpful exercise. I disagree with you that CERN exists due to it being a bang flash project loved by the media. More its down to its fundamental nature which taps into something very deep in the human psychi. In other words, it's a bang flash project loved by the people - which is precisely what I've been getting at. The LHC is a part of that process and so is botany, I don't find it obvious that the LHC is inapprobriately overfunded. Are you really saying you do? Yes, and it's pretty clear that's what I've been saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 You can pick any individual project and say it should be cancelled and the cash moved to any other wothy project - get rid of the queen and put it into Cancer research, abolish nuclear weapon research and put it into wave energy etc etc. This is silly and disingenuous. We're talking about how a science budget is being carved up in a cash strapped country like the UK where science is already struggling, not how "world wide funds for science are distributed" or "Queen vs. Science". Erm what? What are you complaining about - the relatively small contribution made by the UK in particular to CERN and the fact that this has resulted in other UK projects being cancelled, or whether CERN itself should go ahead. These are very different questions and you seem to be merging them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombay Bad Boy Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...-the-world.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...-the-world.html Professor Rössler claims that, in the worst case scenario, the earth could be sucked inside out within four years of a mini black hole forming. That's one way of bringing people closer together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...-the-world.html Professor Rössler claims that, in the worst case scenario, the earth could be sucked inside out within four years of a mini black hole forming. That's one way of bringing people closer together. At least we'd have four years with no cheese eating surrender monkeys, as the French will be the first sucked in. It'll be all worth it just for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaefell050 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 To be honest I think this is a load of rubbish, for example if this has the smallest chances of happening, why the hell are they using the bloody thing. How would everyone here live their last day? I suppose I would race my Ministox to my heart's content (with my girlfriend). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I think I'd get a deckchair, bottle of Krug Clos du Mesnil 1995, plant myself on Douglas Beach and watch the world dissapear. Wonder what camera setting I need for a black hole, though - maybe long exposure just like a night shot - or try to light it up with a flash...hm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
immortalpuppet Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 The vortex will open up a portal that allows the waiting underpants gnomes to come through. I for one will be enjoying my last day on earth going Commando as a form of protest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaefell050 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Interesting ideas. I'd quite like to race a stockcar through the streets of Douglas as my form of protest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VinnieK Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Erm what? What are you complaining about - the relatively small contribution made by the UK in particular to CERN and the fact that this has resulted in other UK projects being cancelled, or whether CERN itself should go ahead. These are very different questions and you seem to be merging them. My primary concern is the UK's contribution - my mention of 3bn was in response to Ai_droid's post, where he raises the figure. And no, my criticism hasn't solely been about UK projects being cancelled, although that certainly is a part of it. You keep trying to emphasise the supposed smallness of the amount: using questionable metrics like how many pints it could buy everyone in the country, or how it's a relatively small contribution. Fair enough, I concede that the LHC is at the very least a better use of peoples' money than getting an almighty round in at the Fox and Crown, but that 'small amount' could do a lot for science in general in the UK. £34 million alone could pay one year's worth of tuition fees for around 10,000 research students (who, in addition to being the future's scientists, often do a fair bit of legwork on their supervisors' projects). Funding is pretty damn tight at the moment: a number of good candidates are getting turned down for no other reason than there's not enough money, and the fact that they're not even eligible for student style loans (at the very best you may be able to fund part of one year via a career development loan, but even they're in short supply) means that a lot of people are either being turned away from science, or aren't even bothering to apply. Or, you could finance the appointment of around 1,300 postdoc researchers (or, more to be more realistic, employ about 400 or so on three year projects), enabling a large number of current projects to go ahead, including some pretty big ones, in addition to getting postdocs on the first rung of the ladder when it comes to a career in science. Alternatively, you could at least partially fund a state of the art chemistry research lab, or help fund existing projects that are struggling: Jodrell Bank, for instance, was until recently considered to be in jeopardy for the sake of an £80 shortfall in the Science budget, whilst, for the same reason, the UK tried to wriggle its way out of the Gemini telescope project, and a fair number of decent labs that are producing science with immediate and potentially profitable applications have had their own budgets cut. Everything may look lovely and rosey, but the last forecast I read saw the physics budget alone being cut by up to 25% with a large number of existing or proposed job cuts (particularly amongst the postdocs demanded by existing or up and coming projects). Combine this with the problems faced in university funding, the inability/reluctance to pay to update aging facilities and equipment, and the potential damage the current economic situation could do, and you have what amounts to an almighty bloody mess, and one exacerbated by the fact that UK science was already notiorious for operating on a shoe string budget. And yet a large amount of money (contrary to your assessment, the annual contribution to CERN plus the LHC funding amounts to just under a sixth of the current annual science budget for physics and astronomy) is being handed over to persue one research project, and one that has little immediate relevance outside of its own field. Why? So a relatively small number of UK scientists can chase some holy grail in what amounts to a very expensive testing ground for the standard model, so Europe can have a shot at giving Fermilab a drubbing and gloat over the US, so politicians can hold it aloft and momentarily pose as competant custodians of science, and so the odd suburban dinner party can be fleetingly enlightened with a well timed strokey chin moment as one party blithely regurgitates the latest pap to appear in the science columns. Just for the record I am by no means against what's being done at CERN, and I fully support the funding of 'big science'. Ideally, research here would be well funded and there'd be enough left over to give the big exciting questions a thorough rogering now and again. But we don't live in such a world. What I question is the wisdom of taking part in such an expensive, and, dare I say it, relatively limited project when funding for scientific research in general in the UK can't even keep up with inflation and operating costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Just heard on the radio that there was a 'small flash' at CERN - is Swizerland still there?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_kitty Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Yes, everything is Ok...................i was watching it live on BBC1, didn't have a clue what they were talking about but there was a lot of clapping and stuff so i guess that it went Ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ai_Droid Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Yes, everything is Ok...................i was watching it live on BBC1, didn't have a clue what they were talking about but there was a lot of clapping and stuff so i guess that it went Ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.