Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Phys Org2)   3 years of work. 170 physicists. 130 institutions. 21 countries. Outlook inconclusive for the moment   (phys.org) divider line
    More: Followup, Electron, Particle physics, Quantum mechanics, Quantum electrodynamics, Standard Model, magnetic fields, Quantum field theory, theoretical value of the muon  
•       •       •

1698 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 12 Jun 2020 at 11:06 PM (19 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



23 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
TWX [TotalFark]
2020-06-12 5:49:50 PM  
Yeah, so?  This is what happens when pushing the boundaries of science.

It was less than 150 years ago that people still believed in Lumininferous Aether as the medium through which light propagated, the medium of space itself.  That failed experiment led to a revolution in physics including Einstein's Special Relativity and later General Relativity, and opened the door for Quantum Dynamics too if my limited understanding is correct.

One of the ironies is that it's generally accepted that there's a phenomenon called Quantum Foam that, at the smallest scale, describes how uncertainty leads to the spontaneous creation and expunge of quantum particles in the universe, constantly, everywhere.  The problems with the Muon are directly related to issues with Quantum Foam and the entourage of these spontaneous particles in the vicinity of stable particles, and the amount of effect of these quasi-virtual particles are what is causing the issue if I understand the experiment correctly.

Lastly there's the possibility that the Quantum Foam is or contributes to the effects of unknown source that are currently named Dark Matter and Dark Energy.  There are numerous avenues of research on those, beyond my own scope of understanding, trying resolve this.
 
2020-06-12 6:04:04 PM  
I flubbed the headline, it was supposed to say "... for the moment".
 
2020-06-12 6:22:11 PM  
"We've now quantified the light-by-light scattering contribution to the extent that it can no longer be used as an explanation to save the Standard Model if the experimental value turns out to differ significantly from the theoretical prediction."

Well, that explains that.
 
2020-06-12 11:32:06 PM  
Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?
 
2020-06-13 12:00:11 AM  

MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?


Human need for knowledge? This is why pure research is so hard to do - it's utterly necessary for advancement, but since it doesn't have an immediately available practical application, people dismiss it.

It's not like that money would have been diverted to social needs anyway.
 
2020-06-13 12:36:41 AM  

MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?


Time and time again we have found that fundamental scientific results that don't have an immediate application end up being incredibly important down the road.  Basically, once we know how nature works, we find ways to exploit that knowledge.

When things like general relativity and quantum mechanics were being developed, we had no direct application for the vast majority of results.  But down the road it turned out to be absolutely critical to a huge number of technologies.

If we had all had the attitude that we shouldn't invest in the scientific future in the 19th and 20th Centuries, you wouldn't be able to even write the comment that you just did.  You wouldn't have a computer. Or the Internet.
 
2020-06-13 1:03:14 AM  
I am *shocked* I get to use this again:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-13 1:18:33 AM  

Krazikarl: MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?

Time and time again we have found that fundamental scientific results that don't have an immediate application end up being incredibly important down the road.  Basically, once we know how nature works, we find ways to exploit that knowledge.

When things like general relativity and quantum mechanics were being developed, we had no direct application for the vast majority of results.  But down the road it turned out to be absolutely critical to a huge number of technologies.

If we had all had the attitude that we shouldn't invest in the scientific future in the 19th and 20th Centuries, you wouldn't be able to even write the comment that you just did.  You wouldn't have a computer. Or the Internet.


I love the discoveries that are being made proving theories about the building blocks of nature. I visited CERN  right after they discovered the Higgs Boson and it was nerd nirvana.

I am curious though about what practical applications, if any, have come from validation of standard particles. Do we have a quark gun or a muon imaging device? Is there something we can point to as something used by the average person?

No snark, just curious.
 
2020-06-13 1:50:17 AM  

Slypork: Krazikarl: MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?

Time and time again we have found that fundamental scientific results that don't have an immediate application end up being incredibly important down the road.  Basically, once we know how nature works, we find ways to exploit that knowledge.

When things like general relativity and quantum mechanics were being developed, we had no direct application for the vast majority of results.  But down the road it turned out to be absolutely critical to a huge number of technologies.

If we had all had the attitude that we shouldn't invest in the scientific future in the 19th and 20th Centuries, you wouldn't be able to even write the comment that you just did.  You wouldn't have a computer. Or the Internet.

I love the discoveries that are being made proving theories about the building blocks of nature. I visited CERN  right after they discovered the Higgs Boson and it was nerd nirvana.

I am curious though about what practical applications, if any, have come from validation of standard particles. Do we have a quark gun or a muon imaging device? Is there something we can point to as something used by the average person?

No snark, just curious.


I think it's worth remembering that some of the inventions that most dramatically changed the world were invented due to some sort of accident or random chance, sometimes years, centuries, or even millennia after the underlying scientific principles were first discovered.  A few examples:

* All of the basic principles of the steam engine were known during the Roman Empire, but nobody put all the pieces together until the 19th century AD.

* Early research into microwave radiation was focused entirely on military applications; nobody thought about using microwaves to cook food until a researcher accidentally melted a chocolate bar during an experiment that went wrong.

* The team that developed the first laser had a few ideas for how it could be used, but they never could have imagined its role in modern high-speed fiber-optic networks.

While a better understanding of muons will likely change the world, it's probably way to soon to guess how exactly it will change.
 
2020-06-13 2:05:59 AM  

Slypork: Krazikarl: MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?

Time and time again we have found that fundamental scientific results that don't have an immediate application end up being incredibly important down the road.  Basically, once we know how nature works, we find ways to exploit that knowledge.

When things like general relativity and quantum mechanics were being developed, we had no direct application for the vast majority of results.  But down the road it turned out to be absolutely critical to a huge number of technologies.

If we had all had the attitude that we shouldn't invest in the scientific future in the 19th and 20th Centuries, you wouldn't be able to even write the comment that you just did.  You wouldn't have a computer. Or the Internet.

I love the discoveries that are being made proving theories about the building blocks of nature. I visited CERN  right after they discovered the Higgs Boson and it was nerd nirvana.

I am curious though about what practical applications, if any, have come from validation of standard particles. Do we have a quark gun or a muon imaging device? Is there something we can point to as something used by the average person?

No snark, just curious.


PET scanning uses positrons. MRI machines at least use a similar concept to what's being discussed in the article
 
2020-06-13 3:22:58 AM  
Get a brain, muons.
 
2020-06-13 5:21:16 AM  

MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?


A simple, mundane, currently almost-omnipresent example: GPS: http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~​p​ogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html
Which relies on relativity.
Which was mostly "rounding error" until our technology precise enough that the shape of space over non-trivial distances became an issue.

Quite a few more are listed here: https://math.stackexchange.com/​questio​ns/486855/what-are-some-examples-of-ma​thematics-that-had-unintended-useful-a​pplications-mu
* Conic sections: mathematical trivia, or guideposts to understanding how gravity works (at the macro level)?
* Radon transform: ever had an MRI / PET etc?
* Number theory: originally a bit of "filling in the blanks" / purely theoretical math, now it's the core of online encryption (and hence ~all internet commerce).
* A shamefully under-voted answer: "Imaginary numbers came out long before their use in electrical engineering became apparent."

And if you want to talk about expenditure:
1 year of graduate student: maybe 50k USD if they're lucky.
1 year of tenured professor: maybe 200k USD if they're very lucky.
1 F-35A: 72M USD per unit. 44k USD/hour to fly: https://www.popularmechanics.com/mili​t​ary/aviation/a29626363/f-35-cheap -- So every hour that we fly an F-35A, we could be funding a year of postgraduate education/research.
1 Gerald R Ford-class aircraft carrier: 13G USD/unit to purchase, 6.5M USD/day to operatehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wi​ki/Gerald_R​._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier
1 year of running CERN's LHC: 260M CHF: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La​rge_Ha​dron_Collider#Cost , also https://home.cern/resources/faqs​/facts​-and-figures-about-lhc ("How much does the LHC cost?" 1.1G CHF for 36mo 2009-2012, +150M CHF for 22-month-long shutdow)
1 year for climate change graduate student: 25k USD: https://www.yaleclimateconnectio​ns.org​/2018/09/climate-change-science-comeba​ck-strategies-in-it-for-the-money-part​2/
1 year revenue for ExxonMobile: 200G-500G USD: https://www.statista.com/statist​ics/26​4119/revenue-of-exxon-mobil-since-2002​/; 14.3G USD profit in 2019: https://www.businesswire.com/ne​ws/home​/20200131005260/en/ExxonMobil-Earns-14​.3-Billion-2019-5.7-Billion ... which works out to 286k graduate students or 71.5k tenured professors.

Breakfast and Lunch for a K-12 students over a year: https://schoolnutrition.org/abo​utschoo​lmeals/schoolmealtrendsstats/
* 14G USD / 5G lunches = 2.80 USD/lunch
* 4.4G USD / 2.4G breakfasts = 1.83 USD/breakfast

NB 1: Some of those USD values are 10-20 years out of date. As of today (2020-06-13), a 2010 USD is worth about117.6% of a 2020 USD, so please scale appropriately: https://www.in2013doll​ars.com/us/infla​tion/2010

NB 2: The "cost per time" values are often funds that go back into local circulation by paying salaries which are spent locally. But so are "massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results": regardless of whether you give 10k USD to a postdoc, or give 10k USD to an enlisted soldier, odds are pretty good that money will get circulated locally. Giving an extra 1G USD to Northrop-Grumman, well, that's a different story.

So, if you don't like the above outcomes: where do you propose that money get spent?
 
2020-06-13 7:31:56 AM  

MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?


Personally, I choose the most theoretical, abstract research I can get funding for.  That is in part because I like such problems but also to annoy the friends, relatives, and liberal arts faculty who think I could have been curing cancer or fixing deep seeded social problems with the same time and money expenditure.
 
2020-06-13 10:35:49 AM  

trialpha: MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?

Human need for knowledge? This is why pure research is so hard to do - it's utterly necessary for advancement, but since it doesn't have an immediately available practical application, people dismiss it.

It's not like that money would have been diverted to social needs anyway.


We went to the moon to beat the russians.

Socialist tax money is ok to spend farting around in space but not on public schools etc
 
2020-06-13 10:37:25 AM  

puffy999: Get a brain, muons.


And get some more free public money.
 
2020-06-13 10:38:51 AM  

tkil: MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?

A simple, mundane, currently almost-omnipresent example: GPS: http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~p​ogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html
Which relies on relativity.
Which was mostly "rounding error" until our technology precise enough that the shape of space over non-trivial distances became an issue.

Quite a few more are listed here: https://math.stackexchange.com/q​uestions/486855/what-are-some-examples​-of-mathematics-that-had-unintended-us​eful-applications-mu
* Conic sections: mathematical trivia, or guideposts to understanding how gravity works (at the macro level)?
* Radon transform: ever had an MRI / PET etc?
* Number theory: originally a bit of "filling in the blanks" / purely theoretical math, now it's the core of online encryption (and hence ~all internet commerce).
* A shamefully under-voted answer: "Imaginary numbers came out long before their use in electrical engineering became apparent."

And if you want to talk about expenditure:
1 year of graduate student: maybe 50k USD if they're lucky.
1 year of tenured professor: maybe 200k USD if they're very lucky.
1 F-35A: 72M USD per unit. 44k USD/hour to fly: https://www.popularmechanics.com/milit​ary/aviation/a29626363/f-35-cheap -- So every hour that we fly an F-35A, we could be funding a year of postgraduate education/research.
1 Gerald R Ford-class aircraft carrier: 13G USD/unit to purchase, 6.5M USD/day to operate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki​/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier
1 year of running CERN's LHC: 260M CHF: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lar​ge_Hadron_Collider#Cost , also https://home.cern/resources/faqs/​facts-and-figures-about-lhc ("How much does the LHC cost?" 1.1G CHF for 36mo 2009-2012, +150M CHF for 22-month-long shutdow)
1 year for climate change graduate student: 25k USD: https://www.yaleclimateconnection​s.org/2018/09/climate-change-science-c​omeback-strategies-in-it-for-the-money​-part2/
1 year revenue for ExxonMobile: 200G-500G USD: https://www.statista.com/statisti​cs/264119/revenue-of-exxon-mobil-since​-2002/; 14.3G USD profit in 2019: https://www.businesswire.com/new​s/home/20200131005260/en/ExxonMobil-Ea​rns-14.3-Billion-2019-5.7-Billion ... which works out to 286k graduate students or 71.5k tenured professors.

Breakfast and Lunch for a K-12 students over a year: https://schoolnutrition.org/abou​tschoolmeals/schoolmealtrendsstats/
* 14G USD / 5G lunches = 2.80 USD/lunch
* 4.4G USD / 2.4G breakfasts = 1.83 USD/breakfast

NB 1: Some of those USD values are 10-20 years out of date. As of today (2020-06-13), a 2010 USD is worth about117.6% of a 2020 USD, so please scale appropriately: https://www.in2013dolla​rs.com/us/inflation/2010

NB 2: The "cost per time" values are often funds that go back into local circulation by paying salaries which are spent locally. But so are "massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results": regardless of whether you give 10k USD to a postdoc, or give 10k USD to an enlisted soldier, odds are pretty good that money will get circulated locally. Giving an extra 1G USD to Northrop-Grumman, well, that's a different story.

So, if you don't like the above outcomes: where do you propose that money get spent?


How abt paying down the trillions in debt that we r leaving for our kids???
 
2020-06-13 10:39:46 AM  

Tom Marvolo Bombadil: MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?

Personally, I choose the most theoretical, abstract research I can get funding for.  That is in part because I like such problems but also to annoy the friends, relatives, and liberal arts faculty who think I could have been curing cancer or fixing deep seeded social problems with the same time and money expenditure.


In other words
U r a socialist.
 
2020-06-13 10:41:15 AM  

TWX: Yeah, so?  This is what happens when pushing the boundaries of science.

It was less than 150 years ago that people still believed in Lumininferous Aether as the medium through which light propagated, the medium of space itself.  That failed experiment led to a revolution in physics including Einstein's Special Relativity and later General Relativity, and opened the door for Quantum Dynamics too if my limited understanding is correct.

One of the ironies is that it's generally accepted that there's a phenomenon called Quantum Foam that, at the smallest scale, describes how uncertainty leads to the spontaneous creation and expunge of quantum particles in the universe, constantly, everywhere.  The problems with the Muon are directly related to issues with Quantum Foam and the entourage of these spontaneous particles in the vicinity of stable particles, and the amount of effect of these quasi-virtual particles are what is causing the issue if I understand the experiment correctly.

Lastly there's the possibility that the Quantum Foam is or contributes to the effects of unknown source that are currently named Dark Matter and Dark Energy.  There are numerous avenues of research on those, beyond my own scope of understanding, trying resolve this.


I shave with Quantum Foam

And i buy it with my money not public money.
 
2020-06-13 10:44:06 AM  

MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?


Some meat in that....

But just remember that in murca u socialize the costs/liabilities and privatize the profits for sit at home stock owners.

84% of company stock is owned by the top 10% yet we all pay our taxes.

Have a nice day!
 
2020-06-13 10:45:29 AM  

Slypork: Krazikarl: MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?

Time and time again we have found that fundamental scientific results that don't have an immediate application end up being incredibly important down the road.  Basically, once we know how nature works, we find ways to exploit that knowledge.

When things like general relativity and quantum mechanics were being developed, we had no direct application for the vast majority of results.  But down the road it turned out to be absolutely critical to a huge number of technologies.

If we had all had the attitude that we shouldn't invest in the scientific future in the 19th and 20th Centuries, you wouldn't be able to even write the comment that you just did.  You wouldn't have a computer. Or the Internet.

I love the discoveries that are being made proving theories about the building blocks of nature. I visited CERN  right after they discovered the Higgs Boson and it was nerd nirvana.

I am curious though about what practical applications, if any, have come from validation of standard particles. Do we have a quark gun or a muon imaging device? Is there something we can point to as something used by the average person?

No snark, just curious.


U can put ur dick back in ur pants now

Giggle
 
2020-06-13 10:46:39 AM  

anfrind: Slypork: Krazikarl: MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?

Time and time again we have found that fundamental scientific results that don't have an immediate application end up being incredibly important down the road.  Basically, once we know how nature works, we find ways to exploit that knowledge.

When things like general relativity and quantum mechanics were being developed, we had no direct application for the vast majority of results.  But down the road it turned out to be absolutely critical to a huge number of technologies.

If we had all had the attitude that we shouldn't invest in the scientific future in the 19th and 20th Centuries, you wouldn't be able to even write the comment that you just did.  You wouldn't have a computer. Or the Internet.

I love the discoveries that are being made proving theories about the building blocks of nature. I visited CERN  right after they discovered the Higgs Boson and it was nerd nirvana.

I am curious though about what practical applications, if any, have come from validation of standard particles. Do we have a quark gun or a muon imaging device? Is there something we can point to as something used by the average person?

No snark, just curious.

I think it's worth remembering that some of the inventions that most dramatically changed the world were invented due to some sort of accident or random chance, sometimes years, centuries, or even millennia after the underlying scientific principles were first discovered.  A few examples:

* All of the basic principles of the steam engine were known during the Roman Empire, but nobody put all the pieces together until the 19th century AD.

* Early research into microwave radiation was focused entirely on military applications; nobody thought about using microwaves to cook food until a researcher accidentally melted a chocolate bar during an experiment that went wrong.

* The team that developed the first laser had a few ideas for how it could be used, but they never could have imagined its role in modern high-speed fiber-optic networks.

While a better understanding of muons will likely change the world, it's probably way to soon to guess how exactly it will change.


Isnt socialist tax money a wonderful thing!
 
2020-06-13 1:37:43 PM  

MellowMauiMan: Undoubtedly, a massive amount of money has been spent along the way to achieve these results. I have a big SO WHAT! What real world good comes out of this information? None. That money, if diverted to social needs, would have been better spent. I love science and inquiry, but what is the real world application? What human needs are being filled?


First, the money isn't put on a big altar and burned. It goes to all the things that a large human organization requires, from real estate to toilet paper. It pays everybody, allowing them to fill their needs. This isn't just scientists, but lab assistants and janitors, and clerical workers, and all the other people required to keep a big organized effort running. The money is spent on resources like equipment, most specialized and custom built, thus employing skilled crafters and engineers. It goes to building the large scale infrastructure for these kinds of experiments, which involves even more skilled labor: electricians and builders and welders and so forth. Money doesn't sit still. Or at least it's not supposed to.

Second, the knowledge we're getting has many ramifications. Sure, to the average person the magnetic moment of the muon is more of a fun alliteration than an exciting or interesting object of understanding. But that doesn't mean it's useless. The standard model is the most fundamental theory of matter that exists. And if you think particle and quantum physics doesn't have real-world applications, go have a dental x-ray or an MRI. Go turn off your lights if you live near a nuclear power plant. Any satellite communications you indulge in should probably be curtailed, as should anything involving semiconductors. Particularly interesting to me is that this may help make muon-catalyzed LENR more efficient. It's the 'real' kind of cold fusion that right now takes more energy than you get out. But if we know how to manipulate muons more efficiently, then that could change. At the very least it helps us get more information on fusion itself which helps with the promising hot fusion efforts.

And finally, knowledge for its own sake satisfies the natural human curiosity about the world.

Sure, we could have spent that money on homeless people. And it would have done good. We could have poured it into cancer research. And it would have done good. There are many things that the time, and money, and resources, and effort of all of the people down through the causal chain could have gone towards. But all of that went to this. And it will do good.
 
2020-06-13 4:51:48 PM  
New Farkin User Name:

Forgot about PET scanners but we've known about positrons for a long time. I was thinking about anything that came from the discoveries from high energy physics. Although the idea of sticking someone's head in the LHC seems a little ridiculous.
 
Displayed 23 of 23 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.