Slashdot Mirror


LHC Will Be Shut Down In 2011 Because of "Mistake"

astroengine follows up to a story about the LHC shutting down that seems to have hit all the news replicators today. "It's to be expected when pushing the frontiers of physics, but the LHC's epic 'will it or won't it' saga continues. Due to an unforeseen construction mistake, the LHC will cease experiments for a year (starting around late-2011) so repairs and upgrades can be carried out. For now, accelerated particles will have a maximum energy of 7TeV (half the power of the LHC's design maximum), which is ample for at least 18 months of experiments before shutdown."

183 comments

  1. You know things are bad when ... by dtmos · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... the article linked in the story starts off by debunking the submission.

    UPDATE (March 10, 12:45am PST): With thanks to Prof. Jon Butterworth, member of the ATLAS collaboration at the LHC, I've been informed that the plan to shut down the LHC for an extended period of time was actually announced in early February by Dr. Steve Myers after the LHC Performance Workshop, in Chamonix, France. So rather than this being a sudden development, it is part of a planned shutdown.

    Prof. Brian Cox, also an ATLAS physicist, confirmed this fact via Twitter:

    There is nothing wrong with LHC - lazy journalism. Schedule announced in Jan, 18 months physics, 12 month engineering shutdown afterwards.

    Cox pointed out that accelerator shutdowns are more routine than the BBC article (the source of this blog post) suggests:

    ALL particle accelerators have 6 - 12 month regular shutdowns for maintenance and upgrades. That's how complex machines are operated!

    1. Re:You know things are bad when ... by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, but thanks to you, we won't get as many rants about how f-ed up the LHC is.

    2. Re:You know things are bad when ... by Cornwallis · · Score: 1

      Now I wish /. would close the thread to prevent inane follow-up (like mine).

    3. Re:You know things are bad when ... by Pojut · · Score: 1

      Much thanks to you, fellow poster!

    4. Re:You know things are bad when ... by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Like facts would stop anyone from spouting off.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:You know things are bad when ... by tomp1000 · · Score: 1

      well you shouldve got it out of your system when it actually broke. just because some lazy journalist didnt research properlly and most people are stupid enough to believe it. rant about something worthwile why dont you?

    6. Re:You know things are bad when ... by joocemann · · Score: 1

      Like facts would stop anyone from spouting off.

      The hippies are conspiring AGW to get rich!

    7. Re:You know things are bad when ... by RadioElectric · · Score: 5, Funny

      Obviously the effect which is stopping the LHC from operating works by propagating a "ripple" back in time. Hence, the article summary WAS accurate at the time of submission, but then the ripple reached January and made the shutdown part of the original plan. It all makes sense!

    8. Re:You know things are bad when ... by alexborges · · Score: 1

      The higgs bosson has learned to play our media.

      It sure is smarter than some presidents.

      --
      NO SIG
    9. Re:You know things are bad when ... by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

      Me Too.
      You do have to be careful to get all the juice.

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    10. Re:You know things are bad when ... by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Yeah, an Earth collapsed to a black hole of 2 cm radius should stop spouting off!

    11. Re:You know things are bad when ... by davester666 · · Score: 0

      But all the other colliders weren't powerful enough to create a black hole that could suck the Earth into it...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    12. Re:You know things are bad when ... by chord.wav · · Score: 1

      Someone it's playing with Time. That copy of text just wasn't there when the editors saw the article.

    13. Re:You know things are bad when ... by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 0, Troll

      No, they are conspiring to get hippie-rich, which just means they want to make everyone poor. Get your conspiracy facts right.

    14. Re:You know things are bad when ... by sootman · · Score: 1

      Occam's razor time: LHC caused a ripple in spacetime, or Slashdot editors screwed up. Hmm...

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    15. Re:You know things are bad when ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They need that time to sweep out all the micro blackholes. I am such a coward :)

    16. Re:You know things are bad when ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Occam's razor time: LHC caused a ripple in spacetime, or Slashdot editors screwed up. Hmm...

      Why is Occam's razor what you immediately pick? Severals things in nature have bizarre explanations, such as quantum tunneling. An electron can be go through a solid barrier to the other side.

    17. Re:You know things are bad when ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have this feeling, as if I used to live in a dream or an alternate reality, where the plan was to start the LHC at full power immediately, and that everything was going according to schedule. Then I was told that a shutdown had been the plan all along, and it was as if it HAD indeed been the plan all along! Hmm.. Must be some bad coffee.

    18. Re:You know things are bad when ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously the effect which is stopping the LHC from operating works by propagating a "ripple" back in time. Hence, the article summary WAS accurate at the time of submission, but then the ripple reached January and made the shutdown part of the original plan.

      It all makes sense!

      Lost any ships in the triangle recently?

    19. Re:You know things are bad when ... by sgt_doom · · Score: 1

      In future Russia, LHCs will not exist......(sorry, I had to sneak that one in!).

    20. Re:You know things are bad when ... by jeffasselin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Certainly. But Occam's razor doesn't tell you what is right, but gives you a way to decide in front of equally-valued evidence or lack of evidence on either side, that the simpler explanation is the most likely to be correct and the one you should assume to be correct. It doesn't remove the need for experimental verification, or disproves strange and complex behavior such as quantum tunnelling or brownian motion.

      In this case we are offered two possibilities: some complex, almost-absurd time-warping events caused by an unobserved particle, or the fact that slashdot editors screwed up. #2 is much simpler, so I'm going to choose that one as the hypothesis I will assume is correct until such time that I can test and confirm either hypothesis. I can in this case then use the induction principle and point out the numerous other times the slashdot editors or submitters have screwed up to support this hypothesis. I could further ask Cmdrtaco or Astroengine (the submitter) what their source was, what editing was done, and if either screwed up.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    21. Re:You know things are bad when ... by RadioElectric · · Score: 1

      Blimey, that would be a very long "wooshing" noise if I was sure you were taking my comment entirely at face-value.

      (It WOULD present an interesting way to investigate the spatiotemporal properties of the effect though. By observing the speed that the change had an effect through time (i.e. between today and January) and comparing that to when events "changed" in both the US and Switzerland one could figure out the relationship between the two.)

    22. Re:You know things are bad when ... by SQLGuru · · Score: 1

      Lost any ships in the triangle recently?

      Well, originally I had lost them last week, but thank to the ripple, I lost them in 1967. Thanks, LHC!

    23. Re:You know things are bad when ... by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Occam's razor time: LHC caused a ripple in spacetime, or Slashdot editors screwed up. Hmm...

      You only say that because Slashdot's inane speculations caused a distortion in spacetime that propagated backwards and caused Occam to develop his razor. :p

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    24. Re:You know things are bad when ... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yeah, an Earth collapsed to a black hole of 2 cm radius should stop spouting off!

      No one knows the radius of a black hole. That may be the radius of the event horizon, but the actual black hole is of unknown radius because everyone that's checked hasn't come back. If you are going to spout off science numbers, at least make sure they pass the 3rd grade test.

    25. Re:You know things are bad when ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6-12 months is usually for an upgrade (a short one, CERN is calling it an engineering shutdown). A typical shutdown is 1-3 months depending on lab. For comparison sake a typical shutdown is 6 weeks every year at FNAL (that's sort of an average over many years, there have been 3 month shutdowns and two years between them in cases). At SPring-8 they run a typical workday (not 24/7) and have some down time each night and tend to have shutdowns last 4 weeks after two years. They don't really do upgrades, FNAL had one in the era of the tevatron. An upgrade tends to have a different new run afterward and tends to be at least 18 months, often 2 years or more. I thought that CERN was going to do another run after the upgrade at higher energy. They were originally planning on a long upgrade beginning at the end of 2012. Last I heard that got moved-up 6 months or so. It's not a big deal, it always happens that shutdowns get moved around. There is a delicate balancing act where you need to give people enough time to prepare but not go so long that things start breaking. Shutdowns and upgrades are VERY busy times.

  2. Go Fermi!!! by BobZee1 · · Score: 1

    This is good news to me because I like job security and the longer Fermi is rocking, the longer I am rocking.

    --
    dumber people are doing harder things everyday
    1. Re:Go Fermi!!! by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

      I'm suspecting that even when the LHC is running at full power, the Femri will continue on. If you've got a perfectly good working particle accelerator, it makes sense to do your lower powered experiments at Fermi and the high powered ones at the LHC.

      Who knows, these are governmental bureaucracies we're dealing with...

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    2. Re:Go Fermi!!! by alexborges · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dont worry. The Fermi works very well and will continue to work

      However, I cant see why would you deem "secure" a work envirnoment that subjects you to gigantic and powerful electromagnetic fields plus you are confined quite in the same location as some really interesting radioactive material.

      For a physic, barring actual spacewalking, its about as hardcore as it gets.

      --
      NO SIG
    3. Re:Go Fermi!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called getting a paycheck...you know...JOB security.

    4. Re:Go Fermi!!! by alexborges · · Score: 1

      For an anonymous coward you have a disturbing abscence of sense of humor.

      --
      NO SIG
  3. Hmmm... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Funny

    That Higgs Boson is finding more and more creative ways... Seems this time it went so far back as to flaw the LHC's design.

    How long do we have before it goes further back and destroys humanity?

    1. Re:Hmmm... by ircmaxell · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, there's an open letter to the Higgs Boson... http://abstrusegoose.com/118

      --
      If a man isn't willing to take some risk for his opinions, either his opinions are no good or he's no good
    2. Re:Hmmm... by istartedi · · Score: 5, Funny

      How long do we have before it goes further back and destroys humanity?

      At least until yesterday.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    3. Re:Hmmm... by sorak · · Score: 2, Funny

      That Higgs Boson is finding more and more creative ways... Seems this time it went so far back as to flaw the LHC's design.

      How long do we have before it goes further back and destroys humanity?

      If some time-traveling something doesn't want to be found, why not just send back a dead nuke with a note attached that reads

      Dear asshole:

              Leave us alone.

      Your truly,
      The Future

    4. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear asshole:

      Leave us alone.

      Your truly,
      The Eschaton

      FTFY

    5. Re:Hmmm... by precariousgray · · Score: 1

      How long do we have before it goes further back and destroys humanity?

      Too long.

      [There is a smirk, after which the petting of the white cat begins.]

      --
      not much, just being forced to manually insert line breaks into my comment
    6. Re:Hmmm... by bluie- · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean, 'prevents' humanity?

      --
      life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think
    7. Re:Hmmm... by c++0xFF · · Score: 1

      Oh, so it's an anomaly in the space-time continuum, getting larger as it goes backwards in time, eventually preventing the existence of life on Earth? Once again, life imitates Star Trek...

    8. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To the mods who modded this "overrated," I actually laughed out loud (for maybe 2 seconds). So if you didn't think it was funny, then perhaps it isn't for you, but it was funny.

    9. Re:Hmmm... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      That Higgs Boson is finding more and more creative ways... Seems this time it went so far back as to flaw the LHC's design. How long do we have before it goes further back and destroys humanity?

      Oh, hell, now I have to write a sequel to this.

  4. How is this news? by bucky0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The plan for a while now was always to have a period of running at lower power/luminosity then a long shutdown to completely fix the error that caused the incident in 2008. Last december the plan was for a 5 month run this year and a year long shutdown, and they changed that in early february to a 18-24 month run and year long shutdown.

    --

    -Bucky
  5. 2012? by jimpop · · Score: 4, Funny

    I, for one, think they are just scared of being blamed for 2012. :-)

    1. Re:2012? by jolyonr · · Score: 2, Funny

      However, if it's shutting down in late 2011 for 12 months, guess what it will back in operation just in time for!

      Jolyon

      --


      Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
    2. Re:2012? by 0racle · · Score: 2, Funny

      Then they're doing it wrong. They're going to shutdown late 2011 for about a year. That means they should be up and running again around ...
      ...
      ...
      December 2012


      Be afraid. Gordon, you're needed in the experiment room.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    3. Re:2012? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's: "They're waiting for you, Gordon. In the Test Chamber."

    4. Re:2012? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prepare for unforeseen consequences.

    5. Re:2012? by oracleofbargth · · Score: 5, Funny

      I know, I wouldn't want to be blamed for that movie either.

    6. Re:2012? by oldhack · · Score: 1

      Uh-huh. "Because of mistake", they say.

      THAT'S NO MISTAKE!!!

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    7. Re:2012? by jolyonr · · Score: 1

      Well, we still don't know exactly why the Higg's Boson went back in time to freak out the Mayans in such a big way...

      --


      Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
    8. Re:2012? by bn-7bc · · Score: 0

      The world wide roll out of ipv6 (if currant predictions of ipv4 address exhaustion are correct) Or is there someting else?

    9. Re:2012? by rossdee · · Score: 1

      There are worse End-of-the-world movies to be blamed for, Like the Day after tomorrow, and Armageddon

    10. Re:2012? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      No, I'm afraid 2012 is my fault. I'm eligible to retire in 2012.

    11. Re:2012? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...forever to be known as "The Big Mistake".

    12. Re:2012? by Golddess · · Score: 1

      I've said it before and I'll say it again. The LHC will continue to be delayed for one reason or another until it finally goes fully operational on December 21, 2012, and destroys the world.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    13. Re:2012? by PalmKiller · · Score: 1

      That and the next presidential election in the USA.

  6. Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...at least according to the article at the end of the supplied link. Quoting a Prof. Brian Cox, "ALL particle accelerators have 6 - 12 month regular shutdowns for maintenance and upgrades. That's how complex machines are operated!"

    Now, I know slashdot readers don't read the articles, and I've become accustomed to the editors not reading the articles, but this situation implies that even the submitter of the article didn't read the article.

    How is that even possible?

    Sounds like one of those recursive quantum anomalies the LHC is designed to unravel...

    1. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Like this:
      Someone sees headline
      They assume they know what is in the article, and in a panic frenzy to get slashdot cock waving rights, they just submit the story...probably by justs clicking on a button on the webpage.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like one of those recursive quantum anomalies the LHC is designed to unravel...

      Actually, we've taken George Lucas' idea of a Death Star and built a giant Laser producing facility on the crust of our planet. Some minor set backs, of course, but we will have the power to destroy an entire planet soon enough. This whole "Quantum Physics" thing was just to get all the physicists on board, since most of them actually favour Star Trek.

    3. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by ianare · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here's how many of my article submissions have gone :

      Reading the article, reading any associated articles and getting a good grasp of the event and technologies involved. Then carefully summarizing the article, linking to the main article and associated article, and providing reference links to Wikipedia. Finally creating an insightful, not overhyped, and clear headline.

      After submitting the story, refresh /. and seeing an abortion of a summary on the same story because the /. editors just picked the first one with an exciting headline.

    4. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by ozbird · · Score: 1

      Like this:
      Someone sees headline
      They assume they know what is in the article, and in a panic frenzy to get slashdot cock waving rights, they just submit the story...probably by justs clicking on a button on the webpage.

      ... and a month later, when it is no longer news (for nerds or otherwise), the story makes the Slashdot headlines.

    5. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Welcome to the new media, even worse than the old media. True, the tabloids have always been typesetting as if WWIII broke out every day, but at least inside the paper not every headline had to be this absurd brainteaser with extreme hyperbole or no relevance to the actual article. Now every article has to gain it's own ad clicks, and it doesn't matter if it's from "omg what a piece of shit, I can't believe I got suckered by it" or "wow, really great article. I got to bookmark this site" clicks.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by Shimbo · · Score: 1

      Quoting a Prof. Brian Cox, "ALL particle accelerators have 6 - 12 month regular shutdowns for maintenance and upgrades. That's how complex machines are operated!"

      That is rather like a Formula One driver saying, "ALL cars need a complete engine overhaul several times a year."

    7. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I haven't submitted a story since they idlized the submissions page (I use to have 1/3 of my submissions accepted when I was still submitting) so maybe things have changed in the last six months, but

      After submitting the story, refresh /. and seeing an abortion of a summary on the same story because the /. editors just picked the first one with an exciting headline

      wasn't true, at least six months ago. In fact, often I'd submit a story, have it rejected, and see the same story posted a week later. There's this thing called the firehose, which usually works pretty well. An editor can post a story immediately, but many are turned down by firehose readers, only to be accepted a few days later (submitted by someone else) by different firehose readers.

      It happens, no point in sweating it. It works pretty well despite its flaws.

    8. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were lucky. My last submission was changed into something more exciting and far more stupid and less clear (enough of my original writing was left for me to be sure it was not a submission by someone else). I was asked by a friend why I wrote it this way and not that way, and why I added that meaningless tidbit and so on. All I could tell him was, all your suggested fixes was in the original article before it was changed.

      Or... maybe you weren't lucky. Maybe your article was so much changed that you couldn't even recognize it...

    9. Re:Apparently, This is Not Unusual At All by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      reference links to Wikipedia

      Referencing Wikipedia for information on particle physics? What could possibly go wrong?

  7. doom by rubycodez · · Score: 2, Funny

    What this really means is that after scheduled maintenance of 2011 (which now includes bolstering against quench damage), the LHC will be slowly brought to full power in 2012. Reaching full power at the end of 2012. December 2012. Need I say more?

    1. Re:doom by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      As silly as that sounds, that was exactly my first thought when reading the article as well.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:doom by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Would this be kind of like NASA with Apollo 13? Screw superstition, we will do everything we can to make it the worst possible time to teach the idiots to not be superstitious. Does Friday the 13th fall in Dec 2012?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    3. Re:doom by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      they should target Dec 21 to get back on-line, end-of-the-world urban legend we've built up has way more scare value than old Friday the 13th which re-occurs quite often.

  8. Not News. by pz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As the linked article points out, this so-called news is just lazy journalism of a long-ago announced planned shutdown for routine maintenance and upgrading.

    This should never have made it to the front page here. Is it too much to ask that the editors at Slashdot at least GLANCE at the linked articles?

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:Not News. by danny_lehman · · Score: 1

      in all honesty, i cant remember the last time i read a linked article. i rely on /. to do that.. eventually someone will post the gist of it

    2. Re:Not News. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is it too much to ask that the editors at Slashdot at least GLANCE at the linked articles?

      If Congresscritters can't be expected to read bills before they vote on them why would you expect editors at Slashdot to view articles before they make the front page?

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    3. Re:Not News. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Planned a while ago, yes, but routine? No. This is a scheduled shutdown to fix a design error. Design errors shouldn't be considered routine.

    4. Re:Not News. by spicate · · Score: 1

      Is it too much to ask that the editors at Slashdot at least GLANCE at the linked articles?

      If Congresscritters can't be expected to read bills before they vote on them why would you expect editors at Slashdot to view articles before they make the front page?

      The difference is that Congresscritters have lackeys and lobbyists to tell them what to think. Slashdot editors ARE the lackeys.

    5. Re:Not News. by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      No no, WE are the lackeys for the editors. They are basically just like "What's this mean?" and the commenters argue about it for a while and the people who bothered to read, or are very funny, float to the top.

      Very efficient for them, really.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    6. Re:Not News. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it too much to ask that the editors at Slashdot at least GLANCE at the linked articles?

      Asked and answered.

      Many times daily.

  9. nonstory: its obviously nothing but by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Informative

    the usual saboteurs from the future, trying to preserving their pathetic little doomed timeline

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:nonstory: its obviously nothing but by rgviza · · Score: 1

      It can't be. You can't prevent doom, or else the doom would have never necessitated traveling back in time and you would poof. I know it's true, because I read it in wikipedia.

      --
      Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
  10. Agile Construction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now we need someone to pipe up that if they used Agile Methodology when building the LHC, none of the design issues would have happened.

    1. Re:Agile Construction by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 5, Funny

      Given the way Agile is usually implemented, it would have then made a detour under London before making it back to Switzerland. Kind of like the famous cartoon... especially the documentation part. Nice legs...

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  11. It would have been news if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it were a foreseen construction mistake.

  12. so sick of this by tomp1000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    quite frankly i'm so sick of people critisising the LHC, especially the people at fermilab. firstly most people don;t know a damn thing about particle physics (this includes me but I have a relative expert on hand to answer my queries) unless you have some knowledge of beyond degree level particle physics or know someone who does quite well. KEEP YOUR OPINION TO YOURSELF.
    for those people (probablly americans) stop critising the LHC becuase its bigger than the accelerator at fermilab. thats like kids arguing over who has a better skateboard. NOT IMPORTANT

    1. Re:so sick of this by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      Ummm. Calm yourself. At least to the point where you can once again start making sense.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    2. Re:so sick of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow you're an idiot. Am I also not allowed to criticize Iraq war because I don't have a degree in military history, or the Federal budget because I don't have a degree in economics?

      The headline says there was a construction "mistake". Not a design mistake, but a construction mistake; it seems perfectly reasonable to criticize that.

    3. Re:so sick of this by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 0, Troll

      If you are American, then I guess your assumption that Americans fly off the handle for no reason is a pretty good one, considering. If you're not, take a look in the mirror.

      Either way, thanks for the laugh. Sputtering rage is probably the second funniest thing in the world, next to dudes getting punched in the beanbag.

    4. Re:so sick of this by earlymon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      for those people (probablly americans) stop critising the LHC becuase its bigger than the accelerator at fermilab. thats like kids arguing over who has a better skateboard.

      Yes, it's exactly like that.

      You seem to not understand that our TVs, sound systems, sports cars and particle accelerators are simply the adult extensions of our skateboards.

      KEEP YOUR OPINION TO YOURSELF.

      Why? It's called freedom of speech - perhaps you've heard of it.

      You certainly seem to think that you have it, by virtue of the protocols you've issued.

      News flash - since the beginning of time people have freely expressed opinion without regard for fact - and this is never more true than when the speaker is convinced that they are expressing facts. Now, I wasn't around at the beginning of time, so far as I recall, but it's my opinion that that behavior has been occurring for at least that long and is therefore neither limited to Americans nor to Fermilab fans.

      My other opinion is that you're probably upset that Fermilab isn't in Europe and that you're simply jealous that you're missing out on all the fun.

      But you are providing plenty - for me anyway. This snippet is simply priceless:

      quite frankly i'm so sick of people critisising the LHC, especially the people at fermilab. firstly most people don;t know a damn thing about particle physics...

      Uh - ok - would those be the people at Fermilab that don't know a damn thing?

      BTW - my skateboard has something like 300 BHP, a gazillion ft-lbs of torque, and gets 21 miles per gallon when cruising at just over 100 miles per hour, when cruising that way for about 2 to 2.5 hours at a stretch. And as soon as I translate a gazillion ft-lbs into SI, I'll get back to you on what that means - or - I'll just wait for an opinion from Illinois on that.

      Meanwhile, in my opinion, this sounds pretty cool:

      http://www.fnal.gov/pub/today/archive_2010/today10-03-10Column_readmore.html

      And almost finally, in my opinion, I deserve extra crunchy mod points just for avoiding the whole bigger vs. keeping it up line of jokes in response to your post (which given that there is NO NEWS in TFA, makes your complaint even funnier).

      NOT IMPORTANT

      That's the worst sig ever. In my opinion, you should have a higher opinion of yourself, even if that current sig summarizes the opinions in your post perfectly.

      I think you should cheer up now and have a fabulous day, but that's just another one of my opinions.

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    5. Re:so sick of this by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      KEEP YOUR OPINION TO YOURSELF.

      Why?

      If people are exposed to opinions they don't agree with, it disrupts their sense that they are the center of the universe. You can tell how self-centered someone is by how much opposing opinions annoy them.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    6. Re:so sick of this by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      quite frankly i'm so sick of people critisising the LHC, especially the people at fermilab. firstly most people don;t know a damn thing about particle physics

      People at fermilab don't know a damned thing about particle physics? LMAO, Somebody please mod parent funny!

    7. Re:so sick of this by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      A lot of the people at Fermilab are LHC collaborators. They're helping build the LHC, and will use it when it is built. I haven't seen a criticism of the LHC from anyone at Fermilab. If there was, that person would presumably know bit about particle physics, since he or she works at one of the largest particle accelerators in the world.

      Is your post a bad "leave Britney alone" parody?

    8. Re:so sick of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      for those people (probablly americans) stop critising the LHC becuase its bigger than the accelerator at fermilab. thats like kids arguing over who has a better skateboard.

      Fuck you and your eurotrash idea that you're qualified to speak for 350+ million Americans.

      You pompous, arrogant lout.

    9. Re:so sick of this by tomp1000 · · Score: 1

      mate you just cross analysed my rant in great detail. I may not be mensa material but at least i have a life outside my mothers basement

    10. Re:so sick of this by tomp1000 · · Score: 1

      your reply proves the point you quoted. im not speaking for 350million + americans im having a fucking rant about stupid people, you cannot deny there are plenty of idiots in america, as there are in any country. you just see americans being moronic far more. if this mature argument doesnt apease you let me try the immature approach. fuck off and go back to impregnating your sister trailer-twat. noone cares about your opinion

    11. Re:so sick of this by earlymon · · Score: 1

      Given that I type very quickly, and think even faster - I formulated the post before I even typed it, and I typed it under two minutes.

      I'm glad you have a life outside of your mother's basement.

      Your lame excuse at an attack on me for being a dolt doesn't really wash. I'd forgotten that post after I'd responded. You're still stewing - which of us needs a life?

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    12. Re:so sick of this by AmeliaMurderBot · · Score: 1

      You just insulted a whole country. I hope you realize that you should correct your own failings before stereotyping people born in America, and trust me, in those three lines I see at least three failings. You're lazy, ignorant, angry and hypocritical. "keep your opinion to yourself"? What makes you think anyone cares about your ill informed and prejudiced opinion? And I see that everyone else has a similar view of you to me. You're a moron.

    13. Re:so sick of this by AmeliaMurderBot · · Score: 1

      Y'know what's funny about all this? You owned Tom. This is funny cause it's Tom, and although he tells you that you're living in your mothers basement, he know's that's where he'll live for the rest of his life. Wait, you made him look stupid more than once (not that he didn't do a sufficient job of that himself) ?? Marry me?

    14. Re:so sick of this by earlymon · · Score: 1

      you just see americans being moronic far more. if this mature argument doesnt apease you ...

      Huh.

      1. Americans being moronic far more that what? Or who? Have you ever been to more than one continent in your life? I mean - seriously?

      2. Is English your third or fourth language? As appeasing isn't at all what you're doing, one simply must point out that that word does not mean what you think it does.

      3. The same applies to the expression "mature argument."

      It's high time someone told you at least two facts of life, in the form of two things that you, personally, should never attempt:

      First, never use a glowing charcoal briquette to judge the temperature of snow - they're two different things.

      Second, never use yourself as a reference for judging the intelligence of others - by definition, you are completely unequipped to ever know why not to do that, so you'll simply have to take my word for it.

      Remember - no matter when you may think this, or why - no one ever has been or ever will be laughing with you.

      By the way - are you popular in Japan? I think they were thinking of you....

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu8rpP29bIk

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    15. Re:so sick of this by earlymon · · Score: 1

      Marry me?

      With a name like AmeliaMurderBot, how could I resist and why would I want to?

      Here's an engagement present that I made just for you:

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1577926&cid=31445592

      --
      Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
    16. Re:so sick of this by Script+Cat · · Score: 1

      My skateboard has eight wheels.

  13. LHC is the new Tower of Babel by buruonbrails · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's one of the world's most ambitious projects. Not surprisingly, its construction and operation can be problematic from time to time.

    1. Re:LHC is the new Tower of Babel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Comparing it to the Tower of Babel is a bit much. Honestly, are we expecting to be smitten by a higher-being during the construction? Otherwise, I agree it is very complex and it will take time. How long did getting to the moon take? In any case, I don't really think the comparison between the LHC and the Tower of Babel is very apt for discussion. However, if you think that it will fail horrifically and be an everlasting tale of human hubris, then that's all well and good. I'd then simply say, I disagree.

      Posting AC due to the fact that I don't have time to write a complete response.

    2. Re:LHC is the new Tower of Babel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I highly doubt that our work on the LHC is likely to have us all struck so that we speak different languages and can no longer communicate with each other. I mean asdne aeacen adseset scnetst sdsdnegls?

      sdentif sheypicalita klenucvilitus!

  14. LHC Forever by flagg9483 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hear that a level in the next Duke Nukem will take place in LHC facility. A PS3/360 trophy/achievement will be rewarded for finding the secret door to the main ring, repairing damage caused by mutated aliens, and escaping through a black hole created by incompetent CERN scientists.

    1. Re:LHC Forever by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Personally, I expect it to show up in the next Half-Life episode, after all, Gordon was spotted there.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  15. You mean the time paradoxes.... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    prevented this thing from blowing up the universe again? Man, this is worse than last night's "Lost" episode.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  16. Two words by binarylarry · · Score: 1

    Resonance Cascade.

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    1. Re:Two words by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Only if you push the machine to 105% for extra resolution.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
  17. Some phrases you do not want to hear at same time by Bearhouse · · Score: 1

    ""The standard phrase is that the LHC is its own prototype," Dr. Steve Myers, director of the particle smasher, told the BBC today.

    "Due to an unforeseen construction mistake"...

    Wind it up to 11, guys! What could possibly go wrong?

  18. No... by Petersko · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Now we need someone to pipe up that if they used Agile Methodology when building the LHC, none of the design issues would have happened."

    If they'd have used the Agile Methodology it'd be working, but the particles would travel at 60 miles per hour, and the collisions would be recorded by a police sketch artist. Improvements would be scheduled for a future sprint.

    1. Re:No... by IronChef · · Score: 1

      I have to go to scrum in a few minutes and your post made my day.

    2. Re:No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And the scrum...

      Yesterday:
      I tried to detect Higgs-Boson

      Today:
      I will try to detect Higgs-Boson

      Whats holding me up:
      Higgs-Boson

  19. The mayans were right! by WiglyWorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It will be late 2012 before the LHC gets to full power? Hmmmmmmmm.... Awfully forboding to me.

    1. Re:The mayans were right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Professor Brian Cox (an LHC physicist) on the world ending in 2012.

    2. Re:The mayans were right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      There is no such Mayan prophecy: 2012 only coincides with the beginning of a new 144,000 year period (a b'ak'tun). Just like westerners have periods of a thousand years (millennium) or a hundred years (century), the Mayans have periods of 144,000 years. The Mayan calendar refers to events well after the beginning of the new b'ak'tun so this whole doomsday prophecy is basically on the same level of New Age bs as y2k.

      See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_calendar

    3. Re:The mayans were right! by the_hellspawn · · Score: 0

      I am still taking a vacation to Bora Bora for December 21, 2012. Even if a hoax, I will be on the beach drinkin beer on a paradise island in the Pacific. What other reason does someone need to celebrate. If the prophecy is correct, I will die in paradise with a beer in hand. Can't beat that!

      --
      "The laws of science be a harsh mistress." --Bender
    4. Re:The mayans were right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      QUICK, everybody out of the Universe!

      *FLWOOP*

    5. Re:The mayans were right! by aBaldrich · · Score: 1

      Nah, it's the real life version of Duke Nukem.

      --
      In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
    6. Re:The mayans were right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If everyone has the same idea as you, on that day there won't be any free beach spot nor any beer left on that island.

  20. Misleading words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It may be due to semantics, but the headline is still inappropriate. I interpreted "shut down" as "dismantling," as if it were used in "shut down the NASA space program." The summary clarifies the issue without sadisticly making you RTFA for it, but the heart attack has already happened.

    Well, news sources normally do this. It's just important to remember to never take anything as real unless you've read it AND cross referenced it thoroughly. Coming to slashdot does not count as a control-making space: cross-references usually mean talking with people who have the same belief, unless you're browsing at low thresholds or some dissenter post is modded insightful by luck.

    1. Re:Misleading words by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 1

      When I worked in automation, "shutdown" was the standard terminology used to describe a period when production was run down; it's usually when I was working - it's the only time you can get in to make major changes that would be otherwise disruptive or impossible. You usually got one shutdown period in summer and another over the Christmas period.

      If you wanted to say something was being dismantled, you'd probably say "decommissioned", since that's the opposite of what we did when we put things in (i.e. commissioned).

      --

      Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

    2. Re:Misleading words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shutdown -r +777600

    3. Re:Misleading words by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Wrong. Shut down is what people call it when something goes down for maintenance.

    4. Re:Misleading words by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Dude you have it backwards - a "shutdown" is when you shut-down the plant. It may not actually be 100% shut down, but it will not be producing anything. Now, WHY you do a shutdown could be scheduled maintenance, upgrade projects, or someone may have screwed up the logic in a PLC forcing the shutdown.

      If you didn't notice, the name "shutdown" is incredibly descriptive about what exactly is happening. In the oil industry they call them "shut-ins" because that's exactly what they do. In either case, it doesn't describe in any way why you've shut down the plant.

      Apparently scheduled shut downs for particle accelerators tend to be a year or more.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    5. Re:Misleading words by omnichad · · Score: 1

      You read my post backwards. Probably because it was written passively. Let me write it non-passively. When something goes down for maintenance, you call it a shut down. I didn't say that it was the only thing called a shut down.

  21. The timestream protects itself by hoggoth · · Score: 1

    Once again, the timestream moves to protect itself. If they continue attempting to create Higgs-Boson particles at the LHC, we will find ourselves inhabiting an increasingly unlikely reality. Construction accidents, birds dropping baguettes into the particle beam, anything can happen to prevent this.

    Mark my word, something improbable will happen to the LHC near the end of this repair work.

    We should harness this power to direct the future time stream and create a drive that uses these disturbed probabilities. We can call it the 'improbability drive'.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    1. Re:The timestream protects itself by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

      Should be easy enough, just build a universe destroying device that sets itself off unless what you want to happen happens. The hard part is making the probability of the device failing be less than the probability of whatever you want to happen randomly happening. Unfortunatly, considering that you teleporting to Mars is unlikely to happen over the course of several million universe lifetimes, that would have to be a pretty foolproof device.

    2. Re:The timestream protects itself by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

      Does this mean we're gradually increasing improbability in the universe? This would *so* explain Microsoft Windows.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    3. Re:The timestream protects itself by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Are you saying Windows is very probable? Or are you confusing improbability with entropy?

    4. Re:The timestream protects itself by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

      No. No! Windows is so improbable that its difficult to fathom how it came about in a rule based universe.

      Admittedly Windows is a major factor in increasing the rate of entropy, but the relationship details are still unclear.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    5. Re:The timestream protects itself by O-Deka-K · · Score: 1

      If they continue attempting to create Higgs-Boson particles at the LHC, we will find ourselves inhabiting an increasingly unlikely reality.

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

    6. Re:The timestream protects itself by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Increasing improbability makes Windows less likely.

    7. Re:The timestream protects itself by IICV · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's not how it works at all - we only experience the realities in which the LHC hasn't destroyed reality. All other realities have been destroyed, so we're not around to experience them. No timestream editing required.

      That's also why you aren't dead - you are not around to experience all of the realities in which you are dead, so you never will.

      On a more rational note: in order for unlikely events to happen, you need time and space. The more space you have, the less time it takes for something unlikely to happen in that space. The LHC is an incredibly delicate, incredibly closely monitored, extremely large thing (there's 17 miles of some of the highest tech stuff ever in there). Of course weird stuff is going to happen to it.

    8. Re:The timestream protects itself by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      I think you're looking at his "increasing" differently than he is. As Universal Improbability increases, the probability of the probable decreases. Given the action/reaction principle, this means that the probability of the improbable increases.

      In other words, increasing improbability means a greater chance that the improbable will come to pass.

      Otherwise it would be impossible for anything unlikely to ever happen at all.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    9. Re:The timestream protects itself by omnichad · · Score: 1

      If you're increasing improbability, it makes it less likely for anything to ever happen at all. Universal or not, if you increase probability, everything is less likely.
       
      Sure, as you approach impossibility of anything happening, the probable's probability comes closer to probability of the improbable, but it doesn't increase the probability of anything happening at all. There's no set number of events that must happen. The minimum is zero.
       
      Wouldn't increasing improbability be the same as reducing entropy?

    10. Re:The timestream protects itself by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Oops. Typo. Second sentence should read: "If you increase improbability, everything is less likely."

  22. Put the Toyota engineers in charge by PinchDuck · · Score: 5, Funny

    Then it will never stop.

  23. 18 months of Experiments at 7TeV!!! by Lord+Lode · · Score: 1

    That means 18 months of experiments at the highest particle accelerator power ever! Isn't that exciting?

    Who is most likely to find the Higgs boson then? The LHC, or the Tevatron?

    1. Re:18 months of Experiments at 7TeV!!! by sweetser · · Score: 0

      Neither. The Higgs mechanism is not needed if gravity is correctly unified with the other 3 forces, as the t-shirt I am wearing now asserts. Full disclosure: of course I did all the math, you can check it yourself in this mathematica notebook.

      --
      Working on new views of old physics at http://VisualPhysics.org
  24. Energy by superzerg · · Score: 1

    For now, accelerated particles will have a maximum energy of 7TeV (half the power of the LHC's design maximum)

    The design energy for LHC particles is 7TeV, which means 17TeV energy in center of mass during collision. The planned particles energy is 3.5TeV until 2011 which make 7TeV in center of mass.

  25. I Blame Time Travelers. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Apparently by making the LHC work we will cause some disaster so time travelers from an alternate future make sure it stays broken so the disaster will not happen. That or God just doesn't want to be found.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:I Blame Time Travelers. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      That or God just doesn't want to be found.

      Would you want to be found by people who hate you? He's easy to find, but first you have to accept the possibility that he exists, which is impossible for some people.

    2. Re:I Blame Time Travelers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming God created these people, why would he create them in such a way that it is impossible for them to accept that he exists?

    3. Re:I Blame Time Travelers. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      How would a self portrait know why it was painted, or why a certain color was used? I can't presume to understand the motives of a being powerful enough to create a universe.

  26. MPU by ArundelCastle · · Score: 2, Informative

    My kingdom for a mod point.

    1. Re:MPU by xaxa · · Score: 1

      My kingdom for a mod point.

      I have 12, and pretty good karma. (No adverts either!)

      How much is your kingdom worth? I'm sure we could come to some arrangement.

    2. Re:MPU by ArundelCastle · · Score: 1

      Well, technically, I suppose it's more of a fiefdom.... in that I'll have to refer you to my landlord.
      I should mention that the tracts are not huge, and the vassals are a bit leaky, but there's always hot feoffee.

  27. Learned your lesson? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After submitting the story, refresh /. and seeing an abortion of a summary on the same story because the /. editors just picked the first one with an exciting headline.

    That's media for you. Keep it exciting and facts be damned!

  28. We are saved once more by MrTripps · · Score: 1

    The invasion by giant ants from another dimension opened by a gateway created by a particle accelerator is prevented once again. Such is the plot of Einstein's Bridge by John Cramer. Luckily the SSC was never built. West Texas has enough problems with fire ants without the giant alien kind.

    --
    "I'm not a quack, I'm a mad scientist! There's a difference." - Dr. Cockroach
  29. The author is full of $%!) in at least one way by Icaarus · · Score: 1

    From the Author's Website: (follow the link that is the author's name)

    Slashdot I guess I should just fess up and take the blame- I created Slashdot a long time ago, and now it seems to have grown into something pretty amazing. Come on down and check it out for news about Linux, Open Source Software, Legos, Games, Star Wars, Science, Technology and pretty much anything else that falls into the "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters" umbrella.

    So we already know this lune does not know how to read, and that he just posts to flame-bait. Could it be that he also is a slanderous, wretched, troll who seeks to dishonour the nerds we covet. I would prefer to think that then to think that the creator of this website is in fact an illiterate fabulist.

    If the above quote is false, I say /. should sue the poster. If the above quote is true I say we should all boycott that which has been mutated by its own author beyond recognition.

  30. we were asking for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a physicist, all I can say is we've been asking for this kind of press.

    When you hype the bejeezus out of the shiny new multi-billion dollar tool, it's reasonable for the people who paid for it to expect results. It is jarring when people hear for over a decade about the great results that will come out of an experiment, and then later hear that we have to spend ~50% of the time doing maintenance on the equipment, and the first few years just testing it. I know this is the way things work, this is the way my (much, much smaller) experiments work. This is not a complaint about the science, or being careful. This is a complaint about politics, funding structures and a lack of ability across fields to communicate effectively with the general public. We can't keep doing this to ourselves if we want the public to trust us. We have to manage the media better.

    To begin with, the great achievement of the LHC *is* the LHC, not the search for the Higgs boson. It's enough that this is the most complicated, impressive, advanced piece of technology on the planet, and that it required input at the cutting edge from nearly every major field of physics. Just like the point of going to the moon was to go to the moon, not to bring back moon rocks.

    1. Re:we were asking for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "We have to manage the media better."
      That's the kind of thinking that casuses the problem !

      Just tell people the truth the first time !

      We're not as stupid as you think we are.

    2. Re:we were asking for it by glwtta · · Score: 1

      Just like the point of going to the moon was to go to the moon, not to bring back moon rocks.

      Well, ideally we wanted diamonds, or sherbet.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
  31. Should have have hired the Prius engineers by HermDog · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now there's a crew who know how to make an unstoppable accelerator!

    --
    JADBP
  32. Re:Some phrases you do not want to hear at same ti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    unforseen consequences

  33. Oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is a four letter word around the LHC.

  34. Really, it's hedging 2012 bets by drumcat · · Score: 5, Funny

    I see right through this. They don't want LHC running when the Mayan calendar ends...

    1. Re:Really, it's hedging 2012 bets by ps2os2 · · Score: 0

      Excellent, that never would have crossed my mind. Sell it to Hollywood and make a million.

  35. They collapsed the false vacuum by argent · · Score: 1, Redundant

    It's pretty obvious that what's happening is that every time they start it up at full power, it collapses the false vacuum and instantly destroys the universe. So the only versions of the state vector we can observe are the ones in which the LHC never ramps up all the way, because we've been destroyed in the rest of them...

    1. Re:They collapsed the false vacuum by Spatial · · Score: 3, Funny

      The LHC hits.
      The LHC hits.
      The LHC hits.
      Universe, your life force is running out.
      The LHC hits.
      The LHC hits.
      You die...
      Do you want your posessions identified?


      Goodbye Universe the universe...

      You died in the Multiverse of Doom after 13700000000000 moves, killed by a grid bug named LHC.

      You were level 300000000000000000000000000 with a maximum of infinity hit points when you died.

  36. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0, Troll

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  37. LHC Construction by Dripdry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm sorry, I don't have references, but someone was explaining to me that the parts and construction for the LHC are excessively shoddy. He mentioned the size of the magnets and, I believe, mentioned that they weren't really tested before being put in place. His beef was that the whole thing is basically just a huge money sinkhole and may not ever produce the kinds of results it promises.

    --
    -
    1. Re:LHC Construction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, there definitely was a failure in Quality Assurance. The main problem, I believe, was that certain copper bus bars were not soldered correctly, making them some tens of nano-ohms over spec. Yes, nano-ohms.

  38. Don't be fooled... by theswimmingbird · · Score: 1

    They must be filming the sequel to Howard the Duck during the year it's shut down. I'm pumped!

  39. they ran out of black holes during construction by swschrad · · Score: 1

    it seems a number of them were hijacked by some pirates who have been distributing them to would-be journalists.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  40. it's "intents and purposes" by anonymousJUGGERNAUT · · Score: 1

    Your sig contains a malapropism - the expression is "for all intents and purposes," not "intensive purposes." Perhaps it's part of the anti-grammar joke? If so, sorry for being humorless.

    1. Re:it's "intents and purposes" by chickenarise · · Score: 1

      He also uses "begs the question" when he should use "raises the question". I know a lot of people who would not find anything wrong with his sig at all, including the anti-grammar sentiment. If it's a joke, I don't find it funny either (and most people wouldn't even get the joke). If it isn't, then he isn't very good at English.

      --
      One convenient locations...in Africa.
  41. Government "science" is so predictable... by AlexLibman · · Score: 0, Insightful

    It does have to cost a lot of money and create a lot of crony jobs.

    It does NOT have to provide a return on investment or tangible benefit of any kind.

    If you don't agree with how the government spends you money, then you're just a flat-earth creationist cannibal child rapist who needs to STFU.

  42. Re:USA #1! (Seems More and More Rare) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's true that investors these days tend to reward short term profits, and that makes corporations tempted to pursue only short term gains at the expense of long term fundamentals. But that is another and bigger subject.

    In the case of the abandoned Superconducting Super Collider, I think it was justifiably argued that you have to look at "bang for the buck." Fundamental physics is important, but so are a lot of other science projects competing for finite resources. Where do you put your money?

  43. 2012 by Master+Moose · · Score: 1

    Maybe this is the doomsday machine! This error could be the only thing stopping our existance from ending. If we shut it down in late 2011, and send a year fixing bugs then re-start it in late 2012 - OMG the Mayans were right!

    --
    . . .gone when the morning comes
  44. Re:USA #1! (Seems More and More Rare) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Urm No. Even at half powed the LHC is more powerful than Fermilab. Sorry, my little jingoist.

  45. Unforeseen Consequences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mr Freeman, prepare for unforeseen consequences.

  46. How about this instead... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Someone sees headline
    They assume they know what is in the article, and in a panic frenzy to get slashdot cock waving rights, they just submit the story...probably by justs clicking on a button on the webpage.

    How about:

    Someone see headline, reads the article, decides this is important "news for nerds", and composes a Slashdot submission.

    The submission works its way through the queue and eventually gets accepted and posted.

    Before (or very shortly after) the Slashdot posting makes it through the queue, the original article draws comments and feedback and the author posts a correction at the top. Though the posting might have been dead-on on the basis of the uncorrected article, the correction aborts the original point of the submission and would make the submitter look foolish, IF he had seen it before submitting.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  47. This IS how you manage the public by snowwrestler · · Score: 1

    The LHC got built, right? It's functioning, right? Mission accomplished, my friend.

    PR is not about being well-understood, it's about getting a desired, concrete result. The public is largely stupid and fickle. If you let little PR blips like this bother you, you'll never accomplish anything great. Ultimately if the LHC delivers new science, that is all anyone in future history will remember it for. It's aggravating to read bad press but most of it just doesn't matter over time.

    The space race and moon landing projects had HUGE problems for years--rockets failing very publicly, shutdowns and delays, even the death of 3 astronauts. What is remembered now? While the deaths are remembered and regretted, the number one thing that people remember is that we walked on the fucking moon. How many people today could tell you how many failed launches the Saturn V had? Who cares?

    --
    Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  48. Re:Agile Construction - SCRUM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yesterday:
        Tried to find the Higgs-Boson particles

    Today:
        Try to find the Higgs-Boson particles

    Whats holding me up:
        Higgs-Boson particles

  49. Ok... by Puppet+Master · · Score: 1

    so the movie 2012 was off by a year.

    --
    The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
  50. Inaccurate summary? Talk about inaccurate headline by Provocateur · · Score: 1

    It's shutdown -rF, fool!

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  51. Quantum News Posts... by EricTheO · · Score: 1

    Once you read an article about the LHC the state of the facts change.

    --
    -Eric
  52. Will it be flooded by global warming? by niftymitch · · Score: 1
    I find it astounding that a project this large is not matched by a global climate and weather project.

    While good physics is important at one level it will not directly feed and heal those that need it.

    It is true that some social issues are in the way but this blue marble is so understudied and so important to all of us.

    --
    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
  53. Wrong Dept Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely this should come from the "end of the end of the world as we know it dept."

  54. The contractor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if Areva is somehow involved with this project...

    http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sc=2052909
    http://www.tvo.fi/www/page/2986/