Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

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

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it dept.

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."

9 of 183 comments (clear)

  1. 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 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.

  2. 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 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: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
  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.