1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Chen-Ning Yang Oppose China's Super Particle Collider.

Discussion in 'China News & Practical' started by Chan Rasjid, Nov 29, 2016.

  1. Chan Rasjid

    Chan Rasjid Registered


    [Full article]
    Chen-Ning Yang Correct, China Should Not Build Super Particle Collider. - The blog of ChanRasjid - Chinadaily Forum

    Nobel laureate Chen-Ning Yang was openly opposed to the idea of China building the next generation super particle collider. On 7 September, he released an article on WeChat expressing his views that China should not build the world's largest particle collider. His main reason, other than being very costly, is that such a machine would not gain us much scientific knowledge or benefit to society. We may even read into his reason as a hint that particle physics - strictly the Standard Model of particle physics - may lead us to nowhere. We will examine if particle physics is indeed useful.

    International Press of Boston,
    Why China Should Build The Great Collider: A Response to C.N. Yang | 博客
    David Gross, a foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Science, responded to Dr.Yang's comment on:
    High-energy physics produced any "tangible benefits" to society?

    David Gross, being a physicists, seems to not know much about economics. You can hypothetically create a "billion dollar industries" from a huge unused mountain and you spend billions moving it back and forth between two locations - repeatedly ad infinitum. Surely, billion dollar secondary industries may arise around new technologies for moving mountains around "better and faster" giving larger revenues - they somehow would still end up to be of some use somewhere.

    It is a myth that particle physics from CERN (operator of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) which discovered the Higgs Boson) has given society any new physics that resulted in any new technology - not one item, directly. The Standard Model involves so far only in fanciful concepts like quark, color charge, etc and none has anything to do with what engineers could use in their work. The very great technological advances of the past decades have nothing at all to do with the experiments carried out at CERN; they were nothing other than the result of empirical experimentation based on physics that have been around for decades since the breakthrough in quantum mechanics of the 1930's.

    Should anyone build super particle collider machines where the supposed 6.5 x 10¹² eV protons have only real energy of 470 x 10⁶ eV - out by a factor of 15,000!

    Best regards,
    Chan Rasjid Kah Chew,
    E=mc2 Relativistic Mechanics Invalid

Share this page