Slashdot Mirror


Serious Magnet Failure at CERN's New Accelerator

GrepNut writes "CERN is reporting that the giant magnets that steer the particle beam in the new and highly anticipated Large Hadron Collider have just failed catastrophically in a stress test, apparently due to a design oversight. It doesn't help that the magnets were designed and built by CERN's US competitor Fermilab." While safety precautions were followed, and no one was injured nor were any rifts in the space-time continuum opened, it's still a rather large setback for the project.

193 comments

  1. What actually happened by DJCacophony · · Score: 5, Funny

    The part was destroyed and subsequently compressed into a singularity by the black hole that the device created.

    --
    Slow Down, Cowboy! It's been 60 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment.
    1. Re:What actually happened by MindKata · · Score: 1

      Well, it would explain all the dark matter in the universe.

      Technologically advanced planets, who get to the point where they build their own LHC style machine. Then at the point of understanding, all knowledge in the universe, they experience a Douglas Adams style moment, and then get crushed to the size of pea in a Singularity.

      --
      There are 10 kinds of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
    2. Re:What actually happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Uh...it's probably not a problem...probably...but I'm showing a small discrepancy in...well, no, it's well within acceptable bounds again. Sustaining sequence...

    3. Re:What actually happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But could something the size of a pea be called a singularity?
      After all, I can cut a pea in half.

    4. Re:What actually happened by mindwhip · · Score: 1
      --
      [The Universe] has gone offline.
    5. Re:What actually happened by 2sheds · · Score: 1

      There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something more bizarrely inexplicable.

      There is another theory which states that this has already happened.

      --

      Absit Invidia
    6. Re:What actually happened by l0cust · · Score: 1

      Yeah but you two have to stand like next to each other and set the angles correctly before start peeing. Not that easy I tell ya.

      --
      Politicians and Pedophiles: Two groups of exploitive bastards who are most dangerous when they're thinking of children.
    7. Re:What actually happened by tsajeff · · Score: 4, Funny

      Weren't they warned never to cross the streams??

    8. Re:What actually happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing you need to worry about, Gordon. Go ahead.

      Gordon! Get away from the beams!

    9. Re:What actually happened by garlicbready · · Score: 1

      further investigation revealed the legs of a metalic huminoid structure buried in the aftermath
      when freed from the wreckage it seemed to enquire about the wherabouts of Sarah connor

  2. I blame by nearlygod · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's John Tidor's fault!
    nearlygod

    --
    The Tools Of Ignorance wanna be a tool?
  3. There were no injuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But all credit cards within a 10-mile radius were erased.

    1. Re:There were no injuries by JackMeyhoff · · Score: 5, Funny

      Nevermind that, my metal impants caused me to be stuck to the ceiling for hours until it was finally switched off!

      --
      http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
    2. Re:There were no injuries by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wouldn't strong magnetic fields, like one powerful enough to affect objects miles away, have an effect on organisms? In Larry Niven's Known Space universe (I'm thinking especially of "The Ethics of Madness" in Neutron Star ) Bussard ramjets take a long time to get off the ground since the magnetic field involved would kill the pilot. But Niven never points to any real research into this, so I never knew if it was true or just a convenient plot point. Can any particle accelerators on Earth generate a magnetic field high enough to kill people?

    3. Re:There were no injuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, theres iron in your blood. So it could possibly get quite unpleasant.

    4. Re:There were no injuries by WoLpH · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It would just make us start floating I assume, atleast they were able to let a number of things float because of an intense magnetic field over here: http://www.hfml.ru.nl/froglev.html

    5. Re:There were no injuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      MRIs have pretty strong magnetic fields & don't hurt you

    6. Re:There were no injuries by isny · · Score: 1

      My floppy disks!

    7. Re:There were no injuries by KliX · · Score: 1

      No.

    8. Re:There were no injuries by Dunbal · · Score: 2, Funny

      MRIs have pretty strong magnetic fields & don't hurt you

            Provided the EMT doesn't forget to take the oxygen cylinder out of the room....

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    9. Re:There were no injuries by John+Courtland · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or you carry a loaded firearm into the chamber:

      http://www.ajronline.org/cgi/content/full/178/5/10 92

      --
      Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
    10. Re:There were no injuries by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      Or your doctor shoots you in the face.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    11. Re:There were no injuries by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      Well, if they are done using the magnets, maybe they let us use them to hold up our children's home work?

    12. Re:There were no injuries by Detritus · · Score: 1

      Interesting. It seems that no matter how many safety mechanisms are on a weapon, someone will figure out a way to produce an accidental discharge.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    13. Re:There were no injuries by RMB2 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I actually just spilled paint on my jeans this morning. I'd like to replace them with a pair of your "metal impants", they seem to have extraordinary properties

      --
      [/sarcasm]
    14. Re:There were no injuries by RMB2 · · Score: 1

      Yah, I've gotta say, I actually have no idea what you were trying to type:

      Were you suggesting that you have ferromagnets in your trousers?

      Or perhaps you were describing some sort of devilish formicidae pets of yours??

      --
      [/sarcasm]
    15. Re:There were no injuries by afidel · · Score: 1

      Nah, in fact scientists have made a frog levitate with a 16T magnetic field with no ill affects!

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    16. Re:There were no injuries by MrYotsuya · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or your doctor shoots you in the face.

      Dr. Cheney, I presume?

    17. Re:There were no injuries by fatphil · · Score: 1

      "Luria is acting very strangely, laughing while attempting to apprehend "Babyshoes""
      "... large quantities of marijuana."
      "shooting the corpse in the head ... seemingly to Foreman's amusement."

      They've remade Reefer Madness, by the sound of it.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    18. Re:There were no injuries by ETEQ · · Score: 1

      No particle accelerator could generate fields strong enough to kill a person solely due to the magnetism, but certain wild astrophysical objects (for example, magnetars - pulsars with unusually high magnetic fields - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar ) generate fields that, in the near vicinity, could kill a person just by polarizing the diamagnetic materials in the human body. The thing is, magnetic interactions are generally so much weaker than electrical that all phenomenon I've ever heard of that make those kinds of fields would kill you with various kinds of radiation far sooner than the magnetism would. Not to mention, at least in the case of magnetars and black holes, tidal forces would be fatal before magnetic effects could come into play.

    19. Re:There were no injuries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly enough, the pistol model is consistently misrepresented as a Colt 1991 A-1. There is no such pistol. This weapon was a Colt model 1911 A1, so named because the basic design dates from 1911, and has been revised, twice, to the designation A1

      This accidental firing was cause by a flaw in the safety design of the Colt model 1911 pistols. The firing pin floats and is held in place by only spring. If the gun impacts on the tip of the barrel (the business end of the gun) with enough force, the firing pin's inertia will carry it forwad, impacting the primer on a loaded round, and firing the gun. Dropping a Colt 1911 from waist high is enough to make this happen.

      More modern firearms still tend to use a floating firing pin, but with an internal cross block that prevents the firing pin from moving if the trigger has not been pulled.

    20. Re:There were no injuries by LordByronStyrofoam · · Score: 1

      I worked for General Atomics in '79-'80, on the Doublet-III tokamak (an experimental fusion reactor). The 'B' coils on the machine put out 240 KGauss during a 5-second 'shot' That was enough to cause all the images on the CRTs in the control room to collapse, and enough to deflect magnetic north on compasses within a mile or so of the device.

      No one in the lab felt anything physically, although you could sometimes feel keys on steel keyrings rearrange themselves in your pocket if you were working just the other side of the radiation-blocking concrete wall.

      Remember, also, that magnetism decreases by the cube of the distance from the source.

      --
      Slashdot's name? When my compiler sees /. it generates a warning about a badly formed comment.
    21. Re:There were no injuries by bugnuts · · Score: 1

      Magnets. Always with the magnets.

      Principal Skinner is impressed!

  4. Back at Fermilab by dduardo · · Score: 0, Troll

    Scientists: Muhahahaha, that will teach those Europeans.

    1. Re:Back at Fermilab by Kensai7 · · Score: 0, Troll

      From 1998 to 2002, Fermilab conducted four engineering reviews of the magnets by experts from Fermilab, other US national laboratories and CERN. The reviews do not appear to have addressed these asymmetric loads. Tests at Fermilab were done on single magnets where such loads do not develop.


      I get it, I get it! I presume these magnets are "export" versions as those faulty F16s Americans sell us Europeans now and then. :)
      --
      "Sum Ergo Cogito"
    2. Re:Back at Fermilab by dunezone · · Score: 1

      Actually, I live in Batavia Illinois the town that Fermilab is located in. Its a neat place to go to but if you don't have the time or live to far just play Half-Life its like the same place.

  5. Just reverse the polarity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...and make sure there aren't any redshirts around the next time you install it.

  6. moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I sure am glad you signed your post, because after reading such an unintelligent, innate statement, I lost so many IQ points that I forgot who made it.

    1. Re:moron by nearlygod · · Score: 0, Troll

      What the hell is your problem? I didn't realize that jokes had been banned from slashdot... or did you just not get it?

      nearlygod

      --
      The Tools Of Ignorance wanna be a tool?
  7. Important safety tip by rheman1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    How many time do I have to tell you: Don't cross the streams!

    1. Re:Important safety tip by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Funny

      Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light. Total protonic reversal.

      Right. That's bad. Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks.

    2. Re:Important safety tip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'd like to get a sample of your brain tissue. ...Okay.

    3. Re:Important safety tip by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      "Back off, man! I'm a scientist."

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  8. Oddone will speak again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Where would someone called Oddone work if not at a place that creates black holes.

  9. worst case scenario by Rhoads47 · · Score: 0

    Precautions must be taken to prevent an event that would tear apart the fabric of the space-time continuum and destroy the ENTIRE universe. Granted, that's a worst case scenario. The destruction may be limited to merely our own galaxy.

    1. Re:worst case scenario by iknowcss · · Score: 1

      Is destroying the fabric of space and time actually a legitimate fear? I mean Jesus, there are forces thousands of orders of magnitude greater than what our measly Particle Accelerators can produce. Shouldn't we be worrying about stuff that's in the center of our galaxy more than what a few sentient beings on a little blue marble can do with their sciency toys?

      --
      Life is rarely fair. Cherish the moments when there is a right answer.
    2. Re:worst case scenario by l0cust · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I was agreeing with you before your post went crazy like Tarantino midway through 'From Dusk till Dawn'.

      Human's in their everlasting quest for knowledge and other 'enrichment' seems to be consistent in messing things up that work perfectly and make it a dangerous object. It happens at home when the man of the house thinks he can fix his own brakes and then seems to be messing around with it for several hours to the collection of us sentient beings messing up all types of natural systems including our own food and other supply chains (water, air, ...)
      Do you mean to say everything was perfect before humans started tinkering with things trying to understand how they work? As much as I am a pro-nature guy, I hate when people try to paint humans as the root of each and every problem and something which was thrown right in the center of this nature circus from some Alien world. We are a product and one of many parts of this very natural system, and through us its the system which is trying to understand itself.

      Its ironic how you gave that example of a man trying to fix the brakes on his own, if it was not for people like him we would still be swinging from tree to tree. Not a bad life except that you wouldn't have the option of complaining about it on some internet forum.
      --
      Politicians and Pedophiles: Two groups of exploitive bastards who are most dangerous when they're thinking of children.
    3. Re:worst case scenario by scheme · · Score: 4, Informative

      The difference is that the closest black hole in the universe is lightyears away (at least that is the current conception) and the universe seems to be balanced out perfectly so all the dangerous stuff that is floating around doesn't consume the whole universe. It's a careful setup of universal laws that keep it together, just like the ecosystem on earth did for thousands of years.

      There are cosmic particles hitting the atmosphere with more energy than the LHC will produce. If the LHC were going to cause a rift in the space time continuum, these particles would have done the same in the last 6 billion years that they've been hitting the atmosphere.

      --
      "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
    4. Re:worst case scenario by qeveren · · Score: 1

      Particle events far more energetic than anything our best accelerators can even approach occur daily in our upper atmosphere, and have for the entire 4.5 billion years of the Earth's existence. Earth is still here.

      --
      Don't just stand there, get that other dog!
    5. Re:worst case scenario by tomz16 · · Score: 1

      yawn... call it hunch, but based on your post, I'd wager that you don't have any background whatsoever in a real scientific discipline.

      Slashdot is funny that way... There are people here that could melt you with their brain just by thinking about it, and then there are the people that read an article in a tabloid at the supermarket checkout and believe that this experience qualifies them to have an informed opinion on matters of nuclear physics. Which are you?

    6. Re:worst case scenario by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tom, how was the article on Britney Spears? ;-)

    7. Re:worst case scenario by Mr2cents · · Score: 1

      There are cosmic particles hitting the atmosphere with more energy than the LHC will produce. If the LHC were going to cause a rift in the space time continuum, these particles would have done the same in the last 6 billion years that they've been hitting the atmosphere. But there's a small difference: These cosmic high-energy particles enter the atmosphere at near lightspeed. So if it forms a black hole when it collides with the atmosphere, it would leave the other side of the earth a bit later, still at near light speed. In the LHC, two protons collide head-on, coming to a dead stop (what they're looking for are collissions where not only the atoms collide, but the quarks inside the nucleus collide. When I visited CERN - an amazing experience - they told us that they're looking for maybe 4 such collissions per year!!). So if it were to form a black hole, it would be pulled to the center of the earth and then oscilate up and down. Only when two cosmic rays with the same energy collide head-on near the earth you would get the same effect. That's a totally different statistic.

      I admit I'm just a particle physics noob, so if you know why I'm wrong please (try to) enlighten me.

      On a sidenote, even if this were to happen, i think it would take a veeeeery long time for this to turn into a real problem. Just imagine how small the event horizon of a black hole with the mass of a few protons would be. I wouldn't be surprised if it could pass right through the nucleus of an atom without even hitting any matter.
      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    8. Re:worst case scenario by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      You could take some solice in the fact that the sun (and other stars) apparently don't have problems with these particles passing through them. While the interaction cross section would likely be far smaller at relativistic velocities, I don't think they would be zero (this is the critical assumption). if you think about the number of these events that happen on a regular basis to stars, including neutron stars, which have an escape velocity of half the speed of light meaning that whats left after a collisions is more likely to stick around. Now, neutrons starts have density similar to nuclei, so it's reasonable to expect that traveling through a few miles of nuclei several times would be similar to spending quite a while vibrating around in Earth.

  10. Yore dead Freemen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I never thought I'd see a resonance cascade, let alone cause one!

  11. Fidgeting magnets... by wakaranai · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hmm.... sounds nasty.

    Each of the ~1200 superconducting magnets is about 50 foot long. There's a photo here showing one being put in place (March 2005):
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7119458/

  12. Re:why is this not surprising? by Pandion · · Score: 1

    And now an AC trolling. Truly all the wonder has gone out of the world!

  13. Not Magnet Failure by AmIAnAi · · Score: 5, Informative
    From TFA:


    "The failure does not concern the magnets or the cold masses themselves, but rather their assembly in the cryostat."

    I know we don't read TFA here, but is it too much for the submitter to get past the first paragraph.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
    1. Re:Not Magnet Failure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have this thing composed of magnets and other stuff which they, as a whole, also call a magnet. The slashdot title is refering to the whole magnet. TFA's 3rd paragraph refers to the part magnets.

    2. Re:Not Magnet Failure by acvh · · Score: 1

      not to mention this line from the same FA:

      "At this point the consequences, if any, for the LHC schedule are not yet known."

  14. Re:Got what they deserved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ya, tell me what nation could have developed "Star Wars" the first time. In fact, you mention Challenger and Hubble. What other nations routinely put people or telescopes into space at all?

  15. Surely you can't be serious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I am serious. And please don't call me Shirley."

  16. Apparently... by DiamondGeezer · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...they're going to boost the mass spectrometer to 105% (for the extra resolution). It should be fine just so long as they follow standard insertion procedure...but you don't need to know that - everything will be fine.

    --
    Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
    1. Re:Apparently... by segedunum · · Score: 1

      Gordon doesn't need to know any of that.

    2. Re:Apparently... by StarfishOne · · Score: 2, Funny

      If only they had rerouted auxiliary power via the main deflector dish this wouldn't have happened.. don't they teach anything in high school anymore? =/

    3. Re:Apparently... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you mean the anti-mass spectrometer.

  17. Re:Got what they deserved by Ruie · · Score: 1
    In all fairness the "Big Dig" was not just the tunnel - but also a reconstruction of the in-city highway system to free up a chunk of land previously obstructed by the highway. Working inside a busy city did not come cheap..

    But yes, lots of things were done inefficiently.

  18. Re:Got what they deserved by mikkelm · · Score: 1

    Globalisation means that anyone with a big enough budget can do pretty much everything mankind is capable of.

  19. Help me Jesus! by 0racle · · Score: 1

    Help me Gordon Freeman!

    --
    "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    1. Re:Help me Jesus! by Keiseth · · Score: 1

      Nine out of ten headcrab victims interviewed at the incident agree; "Blarrghharhaghhhh..."

  20. Oh, crap. by swschrad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fermilab has built electromagnets for many particle accelerators, including SLAC. They are apparently the only source. If you want something else, you have to go to TDK in Japan for fixed-intensity ceramic magnets.

    According to an old neighborhood buddy of mine who is at SLAC, when he was in redesign of the linear accelerator in the 80s, those were the only two bids. For flexibility, they went with Fermi and electromagnets.

    And they haven't failed yet.

    While we're whining about cars, you can't keep headlamps and taillamps in a VW, wiring issues burn 'em out. nobody's perfect. that's why you negotiate warranties in the contracts for stuff.

    no wonder you don't dare sign your name. which, BTW, is quite imperfect in itself. Can't stand on the courage of your convulsions, as a rabid right-wing wacko radio commenter used to say.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  21. It all started when... by kpainter · · Score: 5, Funny

    "...research associate Gordon Freeman pushes a crystalline specimen into the beam of an over-charged anti-mass spectrometer, the experiment triggers a resonance cascade, which causes severe structural damage to the entire facility and severs communications with the outside world, and within much of the facility itself..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mesa_Research_F acility#.22The_Black_Mesa_Incident.22

  22. Intelligent design at work! by master_p · · Score: 4, Funny

    God does not want us to dig a hole into His universe! that's why the new accelerator will never work!

    1. Re:Intelligent design at work! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      More likely it will work just fine. God knows what will pour out of that hole, though.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Intelligent design at work! by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      Actually this incident is an example of unintelligent design. Apparently Fermilab did not test the structural loads experienced when the magnet quenches (goes superconducting to normal conducting) and their cryostat design cannot withstand this load....at least that was my understanding from the email which got sent out last week by the two DGs.

    3. Re:Intelligent design at work! by TopherC · · Score: 1

      Just thought I'd actually take that comment as half-serious and present the usual argument that some rare cosmic rays have been found to have many times the energies than the design energy of the LHC. I think the LHC runs at about 7 GeV, and cosmic rays can go up to at least 100 GeV. So nothing really new is going to happen at the LHC.

      The new part is that these interactions will now be made to take place right inside the two most sophisticated particle detectors on Earth. It's fun stuff, and you should be excited to hear about it! At our present understanding, there are four fundamental forces at work in the world. But it would be nice to understand more completely how these forces came to be (are unified). The LHC at CERN is designed to probe energies at just the point where evidence should be found illuminating the unification of two of these four: the weak and electromagnetic forces. Unification of strong and electroweak, or gravity and everything else, takes place at energies *way* out of reach of modern experiments, so this is our best hope in the forseeable future to help answer dozens of questions that have been burning in the hearts of physicists since the late 1960's! So I hope they get those magnets sorted out soon.

  23. No pictures, no interviews, no names by heroine · · Score: 0, Troll

    At least when NASA has a problem, they photograph it and show it to the readers. The lack of pictures, interviews, and names in the CERN press release is incredible. It is quite a different culture than we're used to.

    1. Re:No pictures, no interviews, no names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, NASA and CERN are quite similar in a lot of ways. They are both very large scientific organizations which have to contract out several large pieces of mission critical equipment and the review processes are similar. I have to note that their attitude towards schedules are quite the same! (Or were, as NASA seems to have learnt something from the Columbia disaster whereas CERN still has to learn their lesson.)

      CERN, unlike NASA however, has more freedom when it comes to sharing information with the public. It does not suffer as much from the export license or patents issues.

      If you want to go and see a shuttle at NASA, you'd better be on a VIP visit or tough luck! At CERN, anyone from the public can visit the experiments or the LHC tunnel. I am sure thousands of people must have taken photos of LHC quadropole magnets on visits.

      As for the lack of interviews and names -- gratefully so! I believe that Fermilab has done and will do everything in their power to provide CERN with functioning magnets. With a ~30km tunnel and complicated experiments, with most of the components pushing current technology to its limits, there is bound to be a few things that will need careful reviewing and improvement. Yes, things will fail. Afterall, it may not be rocket science, but is it really that far off? What CERN needs to do is the same as what NASA has done or is trying to do: be realistic about the technical challenges, accept them, and set realistic schedules to avoid cutting corners.

  24. It was a... by master_p · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...resonance cascade failure! :-)

  25. Anti US Slant by laing · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The article seems to place the full blame on Fermilab's poor design. I will withhold judgement until all the facts are known. Did CERN provide specific requirements for asymetric load bearing capacity? If there were no requirements provided to Fermilab, then it would seem to me to be a problem at the CERN end.

    1. Re:Anti US Slant by srujan1.1beta · · Score: 1

      Er... The title says it is Fermilab statement. Right?

    2. Re:Anti US Slant by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      There's no slant. It failed. You can't really spin failure, even though lord knows managers try.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    3. Re:Anti US Slant by PPH · · Score: 1

      Maybe Fermilab is having problems obtaining H-1B visas to fill critical engineering positions.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:Anti US Slant by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they got too many. Not all H-1B's are geniuses, nor are all Americans engineers are idiots, contrary to popular belief. Who knows. But this is going to be a finger-pointing session of Biblical proportions that will probably take years to shake out, and I expect it will spill over into the international politics / diplomatic scene and cause yet another U.S./European rift no matter who was actually at fault.

      If the magnets were built to spec, and if proper engineering practices (such as design review) were performed, then it means that multiple minds on both continents missed something and both are responsible. Neither side will want to admit that of course.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:Anti US Slant by Asic+Eng · · Score: 3, Insightful
      No, putting the blame for a specific problem on some US organization is not "anti US". Everybody makes mistakes, and it's good engineering practice to accept responsibility for them when that happens. Fermilab thinks that the problem occured on their side, and they are trying to solve it.

      Working in a multi-national company with multi-national customers and designing safety-critical systems, I have some experience with handling mistakes. The best approach solving these technical issues, is to keep political games at bay as much as possible. Investigate thoroughly, take responsibility if you own the problem, then work on solving it. Once you start thinking "it's just that the other guys hate us" you've already lost. Any discussion will turn into a political slugfest, and lots of time will be wasted. The flipside is that you also need to keep good records - if someone tries to blame you for something you didn't do, you should have material to nip that in the bud. That works much better once you've gained a reputation for owning up to your own problems, btw.

    6. Re:Anti US Slant by calidoscope · · Score: 1

      If the magnets were built to spec, and if proper engineering practices (such as design review) were performed, then it means that multiple minds on both continents missed something and both are responsible.


      TFA did state that design reviews were conducted with both Fermilab and CERN folks attending and I agree with you that both organizations are responsible.

      --
      A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
    7. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prior to this press release I have never observed any mention of Fermilab's involvement in the LHC. Some magnet cracks under load and it's all "Fermilab, the US did it"!

      That's neat.

    8. Re:Anti US Slant by sl3xd · · Score: 1

      TFA doesn't seem anti-US; it really was a 'oh crap' moment, where Fermilab, other US labs (probably something like ORNL, LANL, Sandia, or LLNL), as well as CERN, reviewed the design, over a period of four years, and the flaw was overlooked every time. There's plenty of blame to pass around, and Fermi is simply trying to save face by stating that they aren't the only ones who missed it, and they aren't the only ones with egg on their faces. It's a weak argument, but saving face is important to any group dependant on grant money.

      The Slashdot post, however, does have an anti-us slant: It insinuates that Fermilab intentionally sabotaged the LHC; Fermilab is just as interested in the LHC's success as everybody else-- perhaps even more intereste in LHC's success, given that they designed some of its core components. Fermilab isn't getting a new collider anytime soon; at the very least, it's not possible for Fermi to somehow stall the LHC long enough for an even larger collider to be proposed, accepted, funded by Congress, designed, built, and brought into operation -- espescially on where there's so much politics (and money/jobs) in what locale gets to build it.

      LHC already fought those battles, and is the only collider that large on the roadmap for years. When the LHC goes online, and is successful, Fermilab gets to slap a "Fermi Inside" sticker on the LHC, if only figuratively. If LHC doesn't go online, and it's the fault of FermiLab's magnet assemblies, I somehow doubt that Fermilab would ever recover.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    9. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Slashdot post does not have an "anti-US slant"; it has a nationalistic slant, implying that it is impossible for two research organisations based in different countries to work together, and to have positive interest in the work that each other is doing.

    10. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit.

      The point was the slashdot commentary was anti-US.

      "It doesn't help that the magnets were designed and built by CERN's US competitor Fermilab."

      What does he mean "doesn't help"? Doesn't help WHAT? If it weren't anti-US, then the comment would have been:

      "The magnets were designed and built by CERN's US competitor Fermilab."

      But no. It wasn't. FU.

    11. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The press release was done by Fermilab, as has been pointed out before a few times... Fermilab suspecting it was their fault is "anti US"? :-)

    12. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The point was the slashdot commentary was anti-US.

      Whose point? The GP writes: "The article seems to place the full blame on Fermilab's poor design." - he's commenting on the article, not the summary.

      What does he mean "doesn't help"? Doesn't help WHAT?

      Not sure, but maybe he just wanted to say: "doesn't help the political tension"?

      If it weren't anti-US, then the comment would have been: "The magnets were designed and built by CERN's US competitor Fermilab."

      OK, let's play devils advocate. In your summary, why are you pointing out that Fermilab is a US organization? Nobody pointed out that the magnets were US-made when everything seemed to be going well.

      Are you sure you are not a little bit too defensive?

    13. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP wasn't really defensive, it was that the article submitter was flamebait! Read the sentence:

      "It doesn't help that the magnets were designed and built by CERN's US competitor Fermilab."

      Usual rhetoric from some fringe camp...it shouldn't even be in an article summary, but this is freakin' slashdot like usual...

    14. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's plenty of blame to pass around, and Fermi is simply trying to save face by stating that they aren't the only ones who missed it, and they aren't the only ones with egg on their faces.

      No, it's not a face-saving game. It is a simple statement that all the right procedures were in place (internal and external reviews by knowledgeable people etc.) and, apparently, nobody thought to ask "but what happens when this happens?" It's an oversight. It's a fuckup. It happens sometimes. It will get fixed.

    15. Re:Anti US Slant by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

      Well, it's certainly not going to help when it comes time to sort out how this happened and who is at fault. With two competing organizations involved, or at least two separate organizations which each have a strong desire to save face, there is bound to be a lot of finger pointing and tension which is not helpful.

      At least, that's how I read it. Certainly I would agree it is unreasonable to start blaming one side or the other when noone knows the full story yet.

    16. Re:Anti US Slant by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      No, putting the blame for a specific problem on some US organization is not "anti US". Everybody makes mistakes, and it's good engineering practice to accept responsibility for them when that happens.

      Putting the blame on another organization without having conducted a thorough investigation _is_ "anti US".
       
       

      Fermilab thinks that the problem occured on their side, and they are trying to solve it.

      Actually - Fermilab thinks no such thing. The acknowledge that a failure happened, noted the differences between their test setup and the full installation, and stop well short of anything other claim pending the results on an ongoing investigation.
       
      In short, CERN _is_ making gratuitous :anti US" statements.
       
       

      Working in a multi-national company with multi-national customers and designing safety-critical systems, I have some experience with handling mistakes. The best approach solving these technical issues, is to keep political games at bay as much as possible.

      Yet, here is CERN starting those political games.
       
       

      Investigate thoroughly, take responsibility if you own the problem, then work on solving it. Once you start thinking "it's just that the other guys hate us" you've already lost.

      Yet, without possibly having enough time to thoroughly investigate, CERN is starting just that process (creating the feeling of "its the other guys that hate us). Worse yet, CERN *had* to have reviewed the magnet design long before construction began - in that light, playing political games and creating hard feelings seems to be a method of diverting attention from their role.
       
    17. Re:Anti US Slant by jgrahn · · Score: 1

      Putting the blame on another organization without having conducted a thorough investigation _is_ "anti US".

      You seem to critizise CERN. Thus, by your own logic, you either work at CERN, or you are anti US.

    18. Re:Anti US Slant by octopus72 · · Score: 1

      Well, the Fermilab produced those quadrupole triplet magnets, you should read more carefully. Not that it's purely their fault, though.

    19. Re:Anti US Slant by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Putting the blame on another organization without having conducted a thorough investigation _is_ "anti US".

      At the very most it would be "anti that other organization".

      Actually - Fermilab thinks no such thing.

      Yes, they do. It's their press release, and their current thinking is that it's their fault. They may be mistaken, and probably hope they are, but they think it's their fault.

      CERN _is_ making gratuitous :anti US" statements.

      As pointed out many times in this discussion: the text posted at CERN's website was written by Fermilab. That's indicated by the title "Fermilab Statement on LHC Magnet Test Failure".

      CERN *had* to have reviewed the magnet design

      Well, I'm not familiar with the processes they use, but in my field a review is a way to help the designer, the designer still owns any defects which were not found in the review. In any case, CERN is not playing political games by posting Fermilab's statements.

    20. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please read the very post you are responding too - the accusation for flamebait was made to the article, not to the submitter: "The article seems to place the full blame on Fermilab's poor design."

    21. Re:Anti US Slant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it sounds to me more like the journalist adding an anti-US slant if anything.

      It sounds like CERN is trying to avoid allegations that they broke the a multi-billion dollar international collaboration.

      Scientist 1: "CRAP! Um...did we do that?

      Scientist 2: "No, I think the part must've been faulty."

      Scientist 1: "Yeah that's it. Those crazy guys over at Fermilab sent us bad strongbacks."

      Journalist: "You said it's Fermilab's fault? That's over in America right? Well, gee, this fits right in with the article I wrote last week about how American's don't believe in science."

    22. Re:Anti US Slant by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      Coincidentally, Fermilab stands to gain most from delays at Cern. Its researchers also operate a rival but less powerful particle accelerator, the Tevatron. Cue the conspiracy theories... :)
  26. Re:Got what they deserved by gathas · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think the 2+ miles under the harbor was actually the most trivial part of the project, being completed well ahead of and opened earlier than the rest of the project. The real challenge was building the new underground roads and associated bridges, ramps etc. while keeping the existing transportation infrastructure operational (albeit in a limited form). They had to deal with building close to existing subway tunnels, dealing with soil that was all landfill, and hitting archaeological sites. The project was certainly wrought with corruption, but to imply that it was somehow inefficient by comparing the length of the roads developed makes little sense.

  27. Re:Got what they deserved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Oooo, a troll! Gotta get me bow and arrow and fryin' pan! Now where's the olive oil....

    "What were they thinking contracting one of the most important components to Americans?"

    Fermilab for some time stayed on top of the accelerator game (if they've ever really lost it) because their magnets made up for the radius/distance difference. Fermilab essentially builds the strongest magnets for these sorts of applications. The Europeans going to them was smart; they went to the best.

    "It's just becoming an American tradition post-Challenger/Hubble/Star Wars that you got paid to do it multiple times until you get it right."

    You are equating a construction project with unionized workers with high end particle physics testing and design that pushes the envelope.

    The oversight was just that--an oversight. People do make mistakes, and unexpected things do happen. You are certainly not a scientist, because you'd know that most experiments have mistakes in them that are corrected later; the bigger the project, the more costly and noticeable the error, but they happen in all areas--you just don't hear about some bad gel run because it's not "news."

    Should the oversight have been caught? Probably. But it seems to me that asymmetrical load testing not being performed should have been caught by anyone reviewing the paperwork of tests performed, and I'd be shocked if people on both sides of the Atlantic didn't have access to the tests done, and BOTH missed it.

    One thing physicists certainly do care about besides results is something analogous--reputation. The Fermilab people are probably the most disappointed and shocked of the bunch, and all parties feel this--the Fermilab people because they built and tested the magnets, the CERN folks because they didn't check the paperwork carefully and the setback.

    "Don't these people know the 6+ mile Boston "Big Dig" with only 2+ miles under the harbor has so-far cost almost as much as the 31-mile Chunnel?"

    Yeah, because digging under the city with all the infrastructure above and nearby including property buyouts is similar to digging under the English Channel. Digging 2 tunnels is analogous to building a huge multilane vehicle passthrough. Building with reusable patented protected tunnel diggers essentially large face milling heads with minimum labor labor is akin to digging with conventional digging equipment.

    Damn man, the two digging/tunnel projects aren't even analagous in the construction discipline, and you're bringing it up to a high end physics project MAGNET failure?

    Yum, fried troll.

  28. Not Magnet Failure?? by IvyKing · · Score: 4, Informative
    I've been involved in the design and construction of several magnets for NMR use - and the supporting structure is usually considered to be part pf the magnet - including the cryostat used in supercons.


    The interesting part of the article was that the cryostat design was reviewed by CERN personnel, so the issue of asymmetric loading on the cryostat was overlooked by more than just Fermilab. Sounds like and "Oh shit - nobody thunk of that" moment.

    1. Re:Not Magnet Failure?? by kestasjk · · Score: 5, Funny

      An "Oh shit - nobody thunk of that" moment which building a particle accelerator.. Promising.

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    2. Re:Not Magnet Failure?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thought

    3. Re:Not Magnet Failure?? by calidoscope · · Score: 1

      An "Oh shit - nobody thunk of that" moment which building a particle accelerator.. Promising.


      If you read TFA, the magnet worked fine in normal operation, the problem only occurred when an asymmetric load was put on the cryostat (which might happen when the magnet quenched). The outcome is that you have broken magnets, the major hazard is the helium vented when the magnets quench.


      These 'oh shit' moments are not unique to the US - the Europeans have had a few over the last decade:
      The first Arienne V lost because of an integer overflow
      An Airbus crashing because the flight computer thought overstressing the airframe to be worse than flying into terrain
      The delay in delivery of the A380 due to incompatibilities between different versions of a CAD program.

      --
      A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
    4. Re:Not Magnet Failure?? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Thunk. Thunking is deeper and more meaningful than thoughting.

    5. Re:Not Magnet Failure?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      All science is theoretical until it either explodes or your sandwich goes moldy... ...and explodes.

    6. Re:Not Magnet Failure?? by RMB2 · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess since the fact that this accelerator might create black holes which swallow up the entire Earth and all of humanity instantaneously has already been "thunk of", we should be fine then.... that's re-encouraging

      --
      [/sarcasm]
    7. Re:Not Magnet Failure?? by Joebert · · Score: 1

      *thunk*
      Ow ! my finger.
      Damn, you've got a hard head.

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    8. Re:Not Magnet Failure?? by Vireo · · Score: 1
      From the article:


      (...) one of the three magnets within its enclosing cryostat broke at a pressure of 20 atmospheres, in response to asymmetric forces applied during the test. Such forces are expected on occasion during normal operation of the LHC.


      It seems to me that asymmetric forces was one of the thing being tested, or at least, that asymmetric forces were expected to occur, so at least, some people tought of that at CERN. The question is, were the asymmetric load in the design specs? If yes, then the designers overlooked or underestimated this point; if no, then there was a specs-writing problem, evidently. Then again, I know nothing in the field of large hadron colliders design ...

  29. kinda funny, really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so why wasn't this tagged "ha ha" ?

    1. Re:kinda funny, really... by webmistressrachel · · Score: 1
      Because, frankly, despite all of the posts about black holes above being modded "Funny", you can bet there are a lot of scared people examining the LHC right now, in the full knowledge that they don't yet have all the answers or the correct odds of creating singularities; if they did they wouldn't need the LHC for their research! Which means most of them, at Fermilab and CERN are taking all of our safety VERY seriously.

      That is why there is no "ha ha" tag and I hope there won't be one.

      Another fried troll on this very serious post. I hope somebody follows up with more detail right here on the front page. I hope this does not jeopardize the LHC project in the medium or long term.

      Rachel.

      --
      This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
    2. Re:kinda funny, really... by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Funny

      so why wasn't this tagged "ha ha" ?

            We're saving the ha-ha for when Switzerland disappears and the remaining crater is filled with a large strawberry shortcake with extra anchovies.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:kinda funny, really... by barakn · · Score: 4, Informative
      Such chicken-little-the-sky-is-falling hysteria is unwarranted. The collision energies in the LHC are expected to be 14 TeV when using protons. The flux of cosmic rays of energy greater than 1 TeV is 100 per year per square meter of the Earth's surface. That works out to about 1.6 billion such cosmic rays per second around the globe. The collision energies in the LHC are expected to be 1,150 TeV for lead. The flux of cosmic rays of energy greater than 100,000 TeV is one per century per square kilometer of the Earth's surface. With a surface area of ~500,000,000 km^2, that's 5 million cosmic rays per year with energies at least a hundred times greater than the LHC collision energy.

      Nature has been performing experiments in our atmosphere for 4.55 billion years at energies much higher than we could hope to attain in a collider. If it was possible for a black hole spawned in one of these event to swallow the Earth (or whatever other nightmare scenario you've envisioned), it would have already happened and you wouldn't be around to discuss it.

      Reference 1
      Reference 2

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    4. Re:kinda funny, really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (sorry for the offtopic moderaton, my browser seemed to hang for a moment and before I knew I had moderated you.)

      (this-post is meta-offtopic)

    5. Re:kinda funny, really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do not dispute your figures or your conclusion, but your explanation is wrong.

      This is quantum mecanics. It doesn't matter what the total energy is. What matters (for the problem at hand, namely the possibility of creating a singularity) is the energy of the most enrgetic particle. To borrow the explanation from Robert Park, this is like throwing stones across the atlantic. If you can't throw hard enough (that's energy of one particle), it doesn't matter how many stones you have (that's the total).

      But yeah, there's many particle entering the atmosphere every day that have a much higher energy than they'll ever get from the LHC. Look up "Oh my god particle".
      So there's no problem.

    6. Re:kinda funny, really... by webmistressrachel · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I make a serious a serious, on-topic post about something, and I get modded down for it "by mistake". Just goes to show, it's not my driving I should worry about but other peoples!

      --
      This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
    7. Re:kinda funny, really... by aaronoaxaca · · Score: 1

      first post ever!..yeah shameless but mod it up anyways!

      --
      Aaron Miller

      Aaron Miller Computers

    8. Re:kinda funny, really... by barakn · · Score: 1

      I was referring to the kinetic energy (Earth frame of reference) of the cosmic ray just before it enters the top of the atmosphere, therefore I was not only referring to the energy of the most energetic particle, I was referring to the energy of the only particle. I'm not sure what point you were trying to make. Perhaps you got confused and thought I was referring to after the cosmic ray hits something and generates an enormous shower of particles. If we were going to count those there would be a lot more but of lower energy.

      Typical anonymous coward, going off half-cocked.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
  30. Give me a break by stox · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The forces induced in these magnets during a quench is obscene. Given the size of the LHC, I would guess that these are the largest such magnets ever fabricated. When pushing the envelope so hard, failures are going to happen. It amazes me that the public's quality expectations are so high for such work. If Windows was built to the same standards, it would have uptimes measured in centuries.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    1. Re:Give me a break by Theaetetus · · Score: 1

      It amazes me that the public's quality expectations are so high for such work. If Windows was built to the same standards, it would have uptimes measured in centuries.

      That's why software programmers are not engineers.

    2. Re:Give me a break by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, it's why software engineers aren't just programmers. The problem is that large mechanical engineering is done to standards that are well-understood and don't change that much. Software is much more of a moving target. Eventually, though, computing will become more mature, more stable ... and the job of engineer will take on more of its traditional meaning when applied to software development.

      Of course, at about that time we'll have invented a true AI and people won't be programming anymore. Hopefully I'll be retired by then and can take up programming as a hobby.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Give me a break by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Windows is far, far more complex than a magnet, or any other physical thing ever built.

    4. Re:Give me a break by birge · · Score: 1

      Whatever. Computers have been around for almost half a century. By the time aviation had been around for half a century, we went from the Wright brothers to jet aircraft. Maybe software engineering isn't really engineering. My feeling is that it's kind of the ironic reverse of what you say: computers are such predicable environments that it's feasible to even try the ad hoc seat of our pants approach that is programming, and thus software engineering has never had to mature. Windows crashing may be a pain, but it doesn't kill people or waste all that much money in the grand scheme. However, there is no reason software design can't be approached like other areas of engineering, just that nobody has the patience to do so and nobody wants to see progress slowed in the short term to pay for better progress in the long term.

    5. Re:Give me a break by Theaetetus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Windows is far, far more complex than a magnet, or any other physical thing ever built.

      I disagree, and offer the ISS, the Internet, the Pentium that Windows is running upon, an Oil drilling platform, CERN, etc.

      The point is, software programming is at the stage where electrical engineering was a century ago: tinkerers, with no real standards, trying new things. Sometimes they work, sometimes they explode. It was an exciting time, but it wasn't engineering. That didn't happen until standards came about, and at that point, we went from lightbulbs to radar installations.

    6. Re:Give me a break by AnonChef · · Score: 1

      Very true.
      Someone mod parent up.

    7. Re:Give me a break by stox · · Score: 1

      I can't argue that Windows is incredibly complex, but what value is added for all of its complexity? As best as I can tell, Microsoft is using the US Government as a template for software design.

      --
      "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    8. Re:Give me a break by Raenex · · Score: 1

      The point is, software programming is at the stage where electrical engineering was a century ago: tinkerers, with no real standards, trying new things. I used to think simarly, that something like a bridge was ho-hum, with no challenges and already thought out. And while I'm sure that many small ones are like that, I was really floored by the ad-hoc engineering that went in to the Clark Bridge. Years ago I saw a documentary on it: Nova: Super Bridge.

      What stuck in my mind about that was the uncertainty if the thing was really going to stand up under operation. The design was somewhat experimental and built to within tight tolerances, instead of massive over-engineering. They had problems like specially manufactured cables that ended up defective. They didn't catch this until they had already had installed some. After watching all the weird shit that went on my faith in engineering structures was somewhat shaken!
  31. Re:Got what they deserved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh hey wow, I didn't realize that somebody could reply to their own post until you did it just now.

  32. However from deep in the mountain... by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

    It's not my goddamn planet monkey boy!
    I'll see you in hell Bucharoo Bonzai!

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  33. Scotty, I Need More Power! by truckaxle · · Score: 1

    I am imagining that just before failure the fellow at the controls was muttering...

    "I'm Giving Her All She's Got, Captain ... She canna take much more of this, Captain"

  34. "Smashing Atoms" department... by dtjohnson · · Score: 1

    ...is wrong. Should be the "Oh Sh*t!" department. Seems like the same kind of situation as when the Hubble Telescope was launched with the bad mirror and it's likely just as bad news for the forward progress of scientific knowledge. Says the article: "failure to account for the asymmetric loads in the engineering design of the magnet appears to be a likely cause..."
     
        Sounds like it is a big problem, not a small one.

  35. april fool start now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    funny story!

  36. Need more coffee by neildiamond · · Score: 2, Funny

    Did anyone else read that as hardon collider?

    1. Re:Need more coffee by Strilanc · · Score: 1

      Is anyone else tired of reading parent's exact comment on every LHC story?

  37. Re:Got what they deserved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Globalisation means that anyone with a big enough budget can do pretty much everything mankind is capable of.

    It also means never having to say you're sorry.

    Mainly because it opens up a whole new class of other people to blame when it goes bad

    But to be serious; in this case it looks like a case of overlooking a possible engineering problem. It's quite understandable, as things of this nature present some unique and new problems and sometimes present gotchas that only sometimes gets caught in time. The Huygens Titan Probe almost wound up being a very expensive paperweight until a single engineer caught on that the doppler shift of the radio signals might need to be compensated for. Hubble's main mirror wound up being ground incorrectly due to some chipped coating on an end cap of the null corrector and lack of testing. Other space probes, and some very specialized machinery in other fields, weren't lucky enough to have an engineer catch the gotcha in time.

    The problems become obvious with hindsight but are understandably hard to forsee, simply because these sorts of things have either never been done before or are at a whole new order of scale and complexity. Some turn out to be simple bone-headed mistakes but most are, "We never even thought of that!" That sort of thing is truly global.

  38. Stanford Linear Accelerator Center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A very close friend of mine worked for 30 years at Stanford Linear Accelerator Center designing their guidance system mangets. I don't think SLAC had any such problems.

  39. is that a Tardis? by Sfing_ter · · Score: 1

    It's the Doctor, paying a visit.

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  40. Out of this World by Fastball · · Score: 1

    Anyone else reminded of the video game Out of this World when they read this?

    *pines for the days of playing video games*

    1. Re:Out of this World by apharmdq · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the exact same thing. Of all the little sci-fi references people have been dropping here, this one is the most pertinent. In any case, you might be interested to see this:
      http://www.anotherworld.fr/anotherworld_uk/

    2. Re:Out of this World by Cheapy · · Score: 1

      *pines for the fjords*

      --
      Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
  41. What realllly happened by bndnchrs · · Score: 0

    Brian Greene and his army of staunch string theorists realized their idea would be disproven and the Higgs would not be found, so they sabotaged the project to save their government funding.

  42. Re:Got what they deserved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't these people know the 6+ mile Boston "Big Dig" with only 2+ miles under the harbor has so-far cost almost as much as the 31-mile Chunnel?

    Hrm, maybe that has something to do with that the Chunnel is 2 miles of interesting parts and 29 miles of a simple tunnel? Not to mention that the Big Dig was a complete renovation of an old infrastructure while keeping the city running at the same time.

  43. Is there any chance by Pyrrhic+Diarrhea · · Score: 0

    that this thing can be refurbished and used as a chick magnet? I'm sure there are not a few /.ers that could use such a service.

    1. Re:Is there any chance by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      that this thing can be refurbished and used as a chick magnet?

            Not many chicks will be interested in sex if they are accelerated to close to the speed of light. At least in your frame of reference.

            Of course we might be able to use it as a very very large MRI machine... perhaps seaworld can use it for its whales...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:Is there any chance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NO, NO, NO!!!!

        That was star trek 4!!!!!

        (speaks into mouse) .....hello, computer.....

    3. Re:Is there any chance by tomhath · · Score: 1
      Not many chicks will be interested in sex if they are accelerated to close to the speed of light. At least in your frame of reference.

      Do you have any idea how much a chick would weigh if she was travelling close to the speed of light? Not even a /.er would want some of that mass.

  44. Right after ATLAS meetings by scheme · · Score: 1

    Interesting how this came out just a day after the ATLAS software and computing meetings in Munich concluded. I bet there are some interesting discussions happening there right now among the attendees that are still in town.

    --
    "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
    1. Re:Right after ATLAS meetings by octopus72 · · Score: 1

      Atlas had a luck. As the triplet is near to the CMS, there is a (small) possibility that gas shockwave damaged some of it's on-detector hardware (people are discussing it here at CERN, but not much is known yet about the schedule impact).

      The news is unfortunate though. It might mean that there could be only a new cosmic run this year run instead of real beam if the repair of this takes time.

    2. Re:Right after ATLAS meetings by scheme · · Score: 1

      Atlas had a luck. As the triplet is near to the CMS, there is a (small) possibility that gas shockwave damaged some of it's on-detector hardware (people are discussing it here at CERN, but not much is known yet about the schedule impact).

      The news is unfortunate though. It might mean that there could be only a new cosmic run this year run instead of real beam if the repair of this takes time.

      That's a bit ironic since fermilab is a CMS site with quite a few CMS people. If the CMS detector got damaged, the situation is reminiscent of the Super-K accident although probably no where near as bad.

      --
      "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
  45. redundant by smoker2 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Who the fuck tagged this "news" and "science" ?

    It's on a news site in the science section !

    WTF ?
    1. Re:redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why tags are nearly useless: complete retards tag things with generic, non-descriptive words like "news", "science", "haha", "microsoft", "linux". If people put more than 2 seconds into tags they might actually be useful. "microsoft" and "linux" might be relevant keywords, but for fuck's sake you've got to include additional, descriptive tags.

    2. Re:redundant by l0cust · · Score: 1

      This is a reply to your post.

      --
      Politicians and Pedophiles: Two groups of exploitive bastards who are most dangerous when they're thinking of children.
    3. Re:redundant by grimJester · · Score: 1

      Neither submitters nor editors RTFA; this is the first science news in this section.

    4. Re:redundant by ggvaidya · · Score: 1

      I think we're all just a little surprised that it didn't get classified into "Your Rights Online".

  46. Re: Big magnet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't find your car keys?

    Try looking in Switzerland!

  47. Re:NoT magnetic but blond moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey this is supposed to work in Europe...how many blonds are working on the site? Better use carbon nanotube superconductors next time! Better yet some nanotubes in the structure. Stonger than steel you know.

  48. That was no failure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The researcher tasked with inputting The Numbers lost his faith and didn't press EXECUTE.

  49. MOD PARENT UP by icedcool · · Score: 1

    This is very funny.

    --
    Most people aren't thought about after they're gone. "I wonder where Rob got the plutonium" is better than most get.
    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP by fatphil · · Score: 1

      I never thought I'd see a half-life reference cascade, let alone create one.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  50. Crossing the streams.... by savage1r · · Score: 1

    There is no CERN only ZULE!

  51. all is well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i finished discomboobalating the energymotron...whatever.

  52. Fermilab Anti-US? by grimJester · · Score: 1

    It's a statement written by Fermilab themselves, yet it's anti-US because it seems to be Fermilab's fault?

    They must be Democrat lefties, the whole bunch of them.

  53. Black Mesa's experiment? by antdude · · Score: 1

    Sounds like Black Mesa's experiment in Half-Life 1's introduction. ;)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  54. April Fools early by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

    Wow! CERN really DID invent a time machine as predicted, because this fake story from tomorrow got posted a day early.

    --
    Sig for hire.
  55. Real Genius by istartedi · · Score: 1

    Hey, didn't anyone ever tell you to keep your optics clean?

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  56. amazing... by jovius · · Score: 1

    "Oddone and Aymar will speak again at the end of the week."

  57. Re:Got what they deserved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CERN also had to take into consideration the tidal forces on lake Geneva. It was a big issue for them and shows the level of precision that went into designing and constructing the project. Quite remarkable.

  58. Next moment of enlightenment by eclectro · · Score: 1

    happens when the unintended event horizon occurs.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  59. Re:Got what they deserved by MobileC · · Score: 1

    Hrm, maybe that has something to do with that the Chunnel is 2 miles of interesting parts and 29 miles of a simple tunnel? Not to mention that the Big Dig was a complete renovation of an old infrastructure while keeping the city running at the same time.

    And England was shut down whilst the Chunnel was being built.

    --

    Fran
    :):):)
    1st 1st Poster of the new Millennium!

  60. 4 8 15... by frieko · · Score: 1

    I thought I saw the sky turn purple yesterday...

  61. the story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is the "Mysterious Stranger" by Mark Twain

  62. Do not blame Fermilab. by Archeopteryx · · Score: 1

    Period.

    Those magnets are the best they could make them.

    --
    Dog is my co-pilot.
    1. Re:Do not blame Fermilab. by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

      If that's the best they can do it is time to shop for magnets somewhere else because they clearly doen't work very well.

      --
      Privacy is terrorism.
  63. RFID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only that, the RFID chip of my passport was erased as well :-)

  64. CERN superconducting magnet suddenly goes normal by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

    Anyone missing PST files from last tuesday can use this.

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org