Slashdot Mirror


Undersea Neutrino Observatory To Be Second-Largest Human Structure

cylonlover writes "An audacious project to construct a vast infrastructure housing a neutrino observatory at the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea is being undertaken by a consortium of 40 institutes and universities from ten European countries. The consortium claims that KM3NeT, as it is known, will 'open a new window on the Universe,' as its 'several' cubic kilometer observatory detects high-energy neutrinos from violent sources in outer space such as gamma-ray bursts, colliding stars and supernovae. On the scale of human constructions, it will be second only to the Great Wall of China."

120 comments

  1. well then by alienzed · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why build one from scratch? Let's just upgrade the Great Wall of China to be a Great Neutrino Wall of China.

    --
    Never say never. Ah!! I did it again!
    1. Re:well then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To protect China from the Kublai "The Neutrino" Khan!

    2. Re:well then by webmistressrachel · · Score: 0

      WTF??? Do you actually sell any DVDs with that crappy domain and trolly links?

      --
      This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
    3. Re:well then by goodEvans · · Score: 1

      Sure hasn't that already been repurposed as a firewall?

    4. Re:well then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why build one from scratch? Let's just upgrade the Great Wall of China to be a Great Neutrino Wall of China.

      With largest they mean tallest. The great wall of china is not tall at all. It is much smaller then most multiple stories apartment buildings let alone even the smallest sky skyscrapers.

  2. a bit disingenuous by empiricistrob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that this is the second-largest human created structure. While this is an impressive experiment which I think is very clever and great for physics, calling this a structure is a bit of a joke. If you were to call an array of phototubes a structure you could easily compare it to, say, the street lights of Los Angeles -- which I'm sure would be counted as a larger "structure".

    1. Re:a bit disingenuous by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to mention, say, "the North American power grid" or "the global fiber optic network".

    2. Re:a bit disingenuous by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

      Surface area defined? The Gemini solar observatory has to be up there, the base stations and two satellites define a pretty big triangle. Come to think of it, the Voyager project, for a while.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    3. Re:a bit disingenuous by wickedskaman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Did someone say... tubes? ;)

      --
      Sand's overrated... it's just tiny little rocks.
    4. Re:a bit disingenuous by bdsesq · · Score: 1

      I thought it was number 2 after the new Apple headquarters building.....Shows what I know......

    5. Re:a bit disingenuous by rhyder128k · · Score: 1

      I must admit that I was disappointed by the pictures. It looks like some sort of large antenna array, and I was hoping that it was some sort of underwater research base. Hopefully there'll be a future announcement declaring that will be a proper underwater base because loads of nerds thought the idea sounded cool. "It'll be a bit like the one in Deus Ex and we plan to have lots of adventures!"

      --
      Michael Reed, freelance tech writer.
    6. Re:a bit disingenuous by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what about the cables which run between continents under the sea? Aren't they structures?

    7. Re:a bit disingenuous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With a few qualifiers, I think you could say this: it would be the largest *contiguous*, *suspended* structure. Other networks (power, road, optic fibre) are contiguous, but they're sitting on or buried under the ground, rather than suspended above it. Many bridges have long, continuous suspended segments, but they're substantially smaller. However, KM3NeT has the advantage of being suspended in water rather than air, which makes things considerably easier.

    8. Re:a bit disingenuous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna which, as a single "structure", has an arm length of 5 million kilometers and covers an area of some 10^12 square kilometers...

    9. Re:a bit disingenuous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna which, as a single "structure",....

      It's not a single structure.

    10. Re:a bit disingenuous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      or Holland...

    11. Re:a bit disingenuous by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Since it's a neutrino detector, and the sea water is part of the detection method, they are probably including the total volume of the photo-multiplier array; of course you have to consider when my First Grade Teacher said "The hour hand is the big one" I asked if she meant the longer skinny one or the short fat one.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  3. Space by Sduic · · Score: 5, Funny

    On the scale of human constructions, it will be second only to the Great Wall of China.

    ...and the largest one not visible from space...except if you're a neutrino, presumably.

    --
    *this space intentionally left blank
    "One of the four pointers saying 'come and see', and I saw, and beheld a white
    1. Re:Space by Avarist · · Score: 2

      Even tho I'd rate your comment 5 for funny, it's only a myth that you can see the Great Wall of China from space.

      --
      In Capitalist US, the commerce controls the Government.
    2. Re:Space by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      sure you can, with a telescope.

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

      Not if you're too far away for it to be visible through the telescope.

    4. Re:Space by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Funny

      sure you can, with a Great Wall of China picture book

    5. Re:Space by cupantae · · Score: 1

      I remember hearing that the astronauts apparently had no idea where the wall is.
      They should've sent a geographer!

      --
      --
    6. Re:Space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and the largest one not visible from space...except if you're a neutrino, presumably.

      Not for the great majority of hem. Only for the smallest minority and they only get to see the tiniest part unable to appreciate the super structure.

  4. Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by perpenso · · Score: 0

    An audacious project to construct a vast infrastructure housing a neutrino observatory at the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea is being undertaken by a consortium of 40 institutes and universities from ten European countries.

    This sounds like a front for SPECTRE.

    1. Re:Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by peragrin · · Score: 1

      More likely Cobra.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    2. Re:Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      both wrong, this has all the tell-tails of the machinations of KAOS. We'd better shoe-phone 86 and 99 to get on it.

    3. Re:Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      . . . and I thought it was THRUSH, for sure.

      . . . "Open Channel D . . . you there, Ducky, um, I mean, Ilya . . . ?"

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Funny

      We'd better shoe-phone 86 and 99 to get on it.

      I hear Apple has a patent on the shoe phone.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      We'd better shoe-phone 86 and 99 to get on it.

      I hear Apple has a patent on the shoe phone.

      If not, they will after reading your post.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
    6. Re:Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, knowing which would be half the battle...

    7. Re:Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Humanity isn't ready for the responsibilities that come with being a SPECTRE.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    8. Re:Sounds like a front for SPECTRE by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      But Smart didn't have a white iShoe with rounded corners, judging by color that had to be a BlackBerryLoafer. sometimes the thumbwheel would break on those older models

  5. Obligatory soundtrack by lennier · · Score: 2
    --
    You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    1. Re:Obligatory soundtrack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terrible.

  6. But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not call it Atlantis?

    1. Re:But by lexsird · · Score: 1

      Because it's in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea?

      --
      Take the Red Pill.
  7. It's sparse by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, it's not the biggest. The Deep Space Network has satellites (antennae and data storage servers) around Earth and around Mars. And neither it nor the KM3NeT are solid structures.

    The Great Wall is not strictly connected either but at least it consists of large solid fragments that are big on their own. This observatory is merely an array of sensors suspended in the sea. If you want the biggest structure, I'd look at a road system of a country.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    1. Re:It's sparse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is the Great Wall even the biggest structure? Is a solitary wall even considered a structure, or merely a part of a structure?

      What about the Olmec, Mayan, Incan, Aztec, Egyptian, or Chinese pyramids? I'm also fairly certain there is a large submerged pyramid near Japan.

      Ignoring the ancient megalithic buildings, what about the modern ones like the Burj Khalifa or the Shard? Do man made islands count as structures? What about man made canals?

      Meh.

    2. Re:It's sparse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The internet doesn't count as a structure?

    3. Re:It's sparse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the US highway system is a larger structure than the Great Wall. The Chinese highway system is probably larger still.

  8. Bioshock much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll bet this is how Rapture began. Watch out for anyone who proposes breaking off from the outside world.

    1. Re:Bioshock much? by LurkerXXX · · Score: 0

      Sweet. We can get rid of the idiot Libertarians by shipping them all down there.

    2. Re:Bioshock much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet this is how Rapture began. Watch out for anyone who proposes breaking off from the outside world.

      Cool - can't wait to go there to track down and kill little girls and steal their energy! It's even better than my last vacation in Thailand!

    3. Re:Bioshock much? by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      Are we going to chop them up into little bits and stuff them into those little pods? There is no habitable structure down there, just a bunch of floating receiver elements.

  9. Finally by GodGell · · Score: 2

    At last, it was high time we build something interesting under the seas.

    --
    [SHOW SOME LENIENCY TOWARDS ... I mean, FUCK BETA] Eat. Survive. Reproduce. GOTO 10
    1. Re:Finally by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      It isn't impossible to build KM3NeT under the sea. It's impossible to build it anywhere else.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:Finally by TheFakeMcCoy · · Score: 1

      I caught that

    3. Re:Finally by Robert+Zenz · · Score: 1

      Somewhere, beyond the sea...

      I fear I'll associate that song for the rest of my life with Rapture...

  10. Re:Impact on wildlife? by mark_elf · · Score: 3, Informative

    "In addition to the neutrino observatory, KM3NeT will house equipment for monitoring the deep-sea environment, including (according to Popsci) the recording of whale song and the observation of bioluminescent organisms."

    I guess they thought of that.

  11. odds are by pinfall · · Score: 1

    It will never get fully funded.

    1. Re:odds are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Probably true. I've seen people trying to drum up support for KM3NeT at various conferences, for a while, and they don't seem to be making much progress. I guess the trouble is that KM3NeT would be only a mild improvement on the existing IceCube detector, which cost the best part of a billion bucks.

      Incidentally, I'm a grad student working on another neutrino detection project. We're funded, but our costs are a lot lower than the above projects (in exchange for having a smaller chance of actually detecting a neutrino).

    2. Re:odds are by lexsird · · Score: 1

      Frankly, I think it's kind of a mistimed project. We should be in space, it's a much easier environment to work with. And we should be working like ants out there on projects. Of course I am an undergrad engineering student, not a scientist, what do I know? But I would imagine that working outside the atmosphere in a relative vacuum with little gravitational influences, one could put up some amazing arrays of sensors. Unless vast amounts of sea water crushing down upon you is their idea of the pristine environment to detect neutrinos, it seems like quite the handicap to give oneself for a working environment. Not to mention, why the Mediterranean? It's like a cesspool so to speak, with all of Europe washing into it. Is that what they want to filter through?

      Anyway, the whole thing seems like something that wastes resources that should be going for space. Once we are in space we will have crazy amounts of resources to work with, we can come back and build our underwater labs with gleeful abandon due to the fact we can drop all the materials we mined and refined right on the construction site. Personally, I want a giant submarine that all my friends can live in, we will paint it yellow. No reason....lol.

      Good luck with that project of yours, I like science...seriously I do.

      --
      Take the Red Pill.
    3. Re:odds are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I work in ANTARES, the KM3NET v0.1 . Most people working here work on KM3NET as well. For now there is 50 Million euros available for us to build this ( we need around 200 Million Euros). There is going to be three detectors, each couple of times bigger than ICECUBE. And the improvement will be huge, combined detectors will give results 10 times better than ICECUBE.

    4. Re:odds are by AlecC · · Score: 2

      The vast amounts of water are what you need, and what you don't get in space. You only detect a neutrino when it, just very occasionally, interacts with matter, which generates a flash which their suspended detectors report. You need cubic kilometres of something of reasonably known chemical composition, preferably with a lot of light nuclei, not vacuum. Another project is using cubic kilometres of Antarctic ice for the same purpose. You could hang your detectors in space, but there would be nothing there to detect unless you hauled cubic kilometres of water or, say, highly compressed hydrogen, there. Not to mention that they would be in different orbits, so that you would need a significant structure to hold them in constant physical relationships.

      As to the choice of ocean: the Mediterranean is actually quite clear because of its relatively low oxygen content. While they may be cleaner, the Atlantic etc. are, at least in their shallower areas, pretty opaque because they are full of plankton. And you need a shallow area, of which the Mediterranean has plenty, because you are fastened to the bottom. This is not about the abyssal depths, this is just about instrumenting a very large volume of clear-ish water.

      This is a detector that, basically, could not be built in space because of the gigatons of matter needed.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    5. Re:odds are by lexsird · · Score: 1

      I see, we couldn't just dangle the sensors in a gas giant? Just kidding. I was wondering what the relationship was. Thanks.

      --
      Take the Red Pill.
  12. military target by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will this observatory become a military eavesdropping device? Could this device be sensitive enough to detect and pinpoint the nuclear reactions of hidden nuclear ballistic missile submarines? Could it also pinpoint/detect nuclear tests by rogue states?

    Alone perhaps it may not be sensitive enough but what if it was coupled with existing neutrino detectors to increase its detection method like how very large baseline arrays work in the radio telescope field.

    I personally think that putting such instrument in open water is risky. It may invite attacks by non associate nations or by terrorist attack. It may be more practical to drill and burry such a device deep in solid earth or beneath a deep inland lake.

    1. Re:military target by zero.kalvin · · Score: 1

      No, neutrino detection threshold will be around 1 GeV. Nuclear reactions produce neutrinos in the ~MeV scale. But ICECUBE are planning on additions that will be able to detect neutrinos with such low energies. Ps, the detector will be more or less protected by the french navy. As there is a very close naval base in Toulon, France.

    2. Re:military target by budgenator · · Score: 1

      No, doing that would be like trying to see a firefly in the middle of a 4th of July fireworks grand finale while wearing welding goggles.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  13. 1. isn't europe broke? 2. didnt the guy that built by decora · · Score: 1

    the great wall of china commit suicide, because he felt he had offended nature by attempting to impose human folly on it?

  14. Re:Impact on wildlife? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 5, Funny

    "recording of whale song" I hope the RIAA doesn't find out.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  15. Body count... by bosef1 · · Score: 1

    So how many people are going to be buried in it?

    1. Re:Body count... by spyder-implee · · Score: 1

      If you read TFA you'll see it's not actually a manned structure. Confusion understandable given the sloppy title.

      --
      Take what ye can. Give nothing back!
  16. ... that is where you'll find me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SeaLab underneath the water. SeaLab at the bottom of the sea.

    amazing -- Sealab 2012!

  17. Re:1. isn't europe broke? 2. didnt the guy that bu by Avarist · · Score: 2

    1. The European Union (which is smaller than Europe btw) is the largest economy in the world with the highest GDP by lead of 12% so I guess not. 2. I'd be pretty surprised if a single guy built the Great Wall of China.

    --
    In Capitalist US, the commerce controls the Government.
  18. This sorta makes me ill. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time a story like this about a massive particle physics project surfaces, my stomach turns. I am by no means anti-science; I did my undergrad in physics, and am a graduate student in engineering. It all just seems like a massive misappropriation of resources. One can blow the horn of scientific inquiry all day, but there are incredibly daunting and very real challenges facing the world today (e.g., energy, toxicology) that need the attention of intelligent people. We live in such a unique time in human existence, when we have this massive supply of cheap energy with which to make massive strides forward in developing a sustainable future, and yet we place trillions of dollars into understanding physical effects which will bear no consequence on the extreme challenges we will face in the very, very near future.

    1. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by johnwsimpson · · Score: 1

      Yep. Can't argue.

    2. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are 7 billion people on the planet; that's too many to save (millions have tried). The future is sustainable, but it's not going to be the pretty, Star Trek utopia that we'd all like.

    3. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by camperdave · · Score: 1

      What makes you think that a particle physicist would have any aptitude whatsoever in toxicology?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    4. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by glitch0 · · Score: 1

      understanding physical effects which will bear no consequence on the extreme challenges we will face in the very, very near future.

      This is just flat out wrong. You should know from getting an undergraduate physics degree that EVERYTHING we use for technology now was at one time a "physical effect which will bear no consequence on the extreme challenges we will face in the future". Seriously, just look at electricity and magnetism as an example. Those were just "physical effects" at one time but now they're the basis of computing. We're now using computers to model biological systems and cure diseases, which is just one example of thousands where we're taking extreme problems and solving them with something that was once just an odd "physical effect".

      What if they learn something from the neutrino observatory that leads to teleportation technology? Or solves our energy crisis somehow? These are all possibilities and to not investigate the unknown is just a waste of humanity itself. You're a scientist, man. Act like one! Where's your spirit of curiosity and undying passion to know the unknown? I guess you decided to go into engineering instead of research, and maybe that passion isn't something we share. Engineering is an awesome degree and I hope you do great things with it. But don't lose your inquiring spirit :-)

      --
      -Glitch "We all know Linux is great...it does infinite loops in 5 seconds." - Linus Torvalds
    5. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by voidphoenix · · Score: 1

      Every time a story like this about a massive particle physics project surfaces, my stomach turns. I am by no means anti-science; I did my undergrad in physics, and am a graduate student in engineering. It all just seems like a massive misappropriation of resources. One can blow the horn of scientific inquiry all day, but there are incredibly daunting and very real challenges facing the world today (e.g., energy, toxicology) that need the attention of intelligent people. We live in such a unique time in human existence, when we have this massive supply of cheap energy.

      So do we have an energy problem or not?

      Your inconsistency notwithstanding, you could pick something better to complain about than spending

      trillions of dollars into understanding physical effects which will bear no consequence on the extreme challenges we will face in the very, very near future.

      Try military spending, or even luxuries like cosmetics and perfumes. Besides, I doubt anyone can say with certainty that those poorly-understood physical effects bear no consequence. It's entirely within the realm of possibility that such understanding could provide the keystone to overcoming the challenges you point out.

    6. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by Wandering+Idiot · · Score: 1

      Yeah, man, understanding basic physical processes couldn't possible lead to better technologies/solutions down the road. We know everything we need to now, let's just stop all scientific inquiry, or maybe we should have done that in the 50's, or at the beginning of the industrial revolution, or hell, once we found out how to make fire, did we really need anything else?

      If countries were spending like 50% of their GDP on projects like this, you might have a point, but you and I both know the expenditures are relatively miniscule on the level of nation/international budgets, and if you didn't know that and were actually serious about the "trillions of dollars" nonsense, you're woefully uninformed to be commenting on the issue (You wouldn't be alone, mind you- I remember seeing a US poll indicating a significant portion of the populace thinks NASA's share of the national budget is something like 20%, when it's closer to 0.5%*). The basic research into subatomic physics is what made possible the development of nuclear reactors, which are likely going to be increasingly important to our energy future once the cheap oil runs out. Similar for better solar panels, more efficient engines, etc. Basically, if you want to solve technological problems, you should be arguing for *more* fundamental, not-immediately-profitable/usable scientific research, not less. The amount of physics and math graduates being sucked into jobs in the financial industry because they pay so well in comparison to actual useful work is a far bigger drain on our ability to deal with the future than fundamental scientific research, in my opinion.

      * Similarly, the National Science Foundation is about 0.2%, and the amount of the Dept. of Energy's budget devoted to research, while less trivial to work out, likely comes to a similar percentage of overall expenditures.

    7. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Comments like this sort of make my stomach turn. If we had all thought like this, we would still be living in caves.

    8. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... or hell, once we found out how to make fire, did we really need anything else?

      Well Vesuvius's thearum does say that as the size of an explosion increases the number of situations it's incapable of resolving approaches 0.

    9. Re:This sorta makes me ill. by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Oh get a life, it's not like this would be the only neutrino detector in the world; Italy has one, Japan has one, Antarctica has one, India is building one and I think the US has two or three. Trying to pick out flashes from muons in turbid seawater with luminescent marine life just seems like unduly complicating a fiendishly difficult task anyways and little more than a pork-barrel project for the photomultiplier tube manufacturers. The world's economies are in bad enough shape that being a little more selective about funding research to get more bang for our bucks is just going to conserve good-will.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  19. chronotrigger reference by wierd_w · · Score: 2

    Will this "ocean palace", which is built to "detect" these mysterious "neutrino" emminations inadvertantly rouse the mighty lavos before he's good and ready?

    You know how it is with those quantum mechanical things- all kinds of consequences happen as a result of obervation! /joke

    Ok, jokes aside, this is very awesome. The engineering lessons learned could be applied in a wide range of ocean construction projects.

    1. Re:chronotrigger reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The North Wind howls... at your petty attempt at a CT analogy.

    2. Re:chronotrigger reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The North Wind howls... at your petty attempt at a CT analogy.

      Ugh. The *Black* wind howls

    3. Re:chronotrigger reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For those who are not interested in the fact that you browse with rockmelt and search directly from the URL bar, but prefer shorter URLs which they can easily review in the status bar, here's a better URL for the same search (I also took the liberty to fix your misspelling of "black"):

      http://www.google.com/search?q=the+black+wind+howls

  20. Stupid Title by Demonantis · · Score: 4, Informative

    I know it is not your fault or the fault of /. in general. It should read tallest human structure. And it is probably that way only because it is underwater. The article says second largest considering the scale of construction for a singular project. Nothing about actual size.

    1. Re:Stupid Title by Hadlock · · Score: 5, Funny

      I nominate the US Interstate Highway project as "widest human structure", a close second being your mom.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    2. Re:Stupid Title by Forbman · · Score: 1

      I'll go with the Trans-Siberian Railroad instead.

    3. Re:Stupid Title by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Sure, but it's only 4 ft 11 5â6 in tall; compare that to 2000+ miles for the interstate system.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    4. Re:Stupid Title by Whiteox · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Nothing will beat the dingo fence in Australia in terms of man made structure. It stretches 5,614 km (3,488 miles)

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    5. Re:Stupid Title by edumacator · · Score: 3, Funny

      For God's sake, they built it for the babies.

    6. Re:Stupid Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...compare that to 2000+ miles for the interstate system.

      Your "2000+ miles" must have a really big plus. The current total length of the US interstate system is 75,440 km (46,876 miles). Which is slightly larger than the Great Wall of China at 8,850 km (5,500 miles) long. I would guess that even the Chinese highway system is longer than the Great Wall.

  21. Hold on, hold on.. by new+death+barbie · · Score: 1

    These are the Europeans, right? The same group of countries currently scrambling to tighten their belts and prevent a financial calamity?

    Let's not hold our collective breaths. Funding might be a little scarce, for a while.

    --

    It's supposed to be completely automatic, but actually you have to press this button.

    1. Re:Hold on, hold on.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Ya gotta spend money to make money."

    2. Re:Hold on, hold on.. by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 2

      The research funding in the UK is dwarfed in comparison to military budgets or even annual DVD purchases. It's quite possible that international funding could be found for a project like this. With 40 institutes putting money in it's quite possible this will go ahead, it's a reasonably low-budget project in many ways.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    3. Re:Hold on, hold on.. by Virtucon · · Score: 2

      Yes neutrino farming is the next big thing. I hear Goldman Sachs is selling neutrino futures as well.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    4. Re:Hold on, hold on.. by kwikrick · · Score: 1

      Yes, lets STOP EVERYTHING because some bankers fucked up their bookkeeping.

      Sadly, the parent post is probably right, that is what's going to happen to this project.

      Let's fire all scientists and stop funding whatever makes society worth while, like schools and social security and infrastructure and such nonsense. Instead, let's write big checks to the banks that caused all this mess and lower taxes for high incomes like bank directors.

      rant, rant, rant, sigh....

      --
      assignment != equality != identity
  22. Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a retreat bunker for the rich once they release the super virus that will destroy everyone else.

    j/k ... or am I...

  23. GDP doesnt mean anything if your debt by decora · · Score: 1

    is higher than your GDP.

    2. oh yeah. i know it was easy to mis-understand what i meant. there was actually one guy, who told other people what to do, and thats how the great wall of china got built. but then he committed suicide. because he had disturbed the Chi of the earth.

    1. Re:GDP doesnt mean anything if your debt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      http://www.chinahighlights.com/greatwall/fact/

    2. Re:GDP doesnt mean anything if your debt by polar+red · · Score: 1

      us debt: 100,39% debt to gdp ration http://www.usdebtclock.org/
      "eu debt" : (80% of GDP) (2010) see : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union
      indeed ...

      --
      Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
    3. Re:GDP doesnt mean anything if your debt by emilper · · Score: 1

      ... that is not very uninformative: most EU15 countries finance the budget by getting dividents from state-owned companies or companies partially owned by the state (that is how Germany over 45% of GDP in govt. spending every year). ... The statistics don't include the debt of those companies ...

    4. Re:GDP doesnt mean anything if your debt by Avarist · · Score: 1

      At least they don't print money to pay off their debts...

      --
      In Capitalist US, the commerce controls the Government.
    5. Re:GDP doesnt mean anything if your debt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, won't print money, just print "eurobonds" that will be sold to the banks and the investment funds that need to be saved, and the money will be used to save them :) ...

      80% was in 2010 ...

  24. Re:Impact on wildlife? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No worries, just set Greenpeace onto the RIAA for getting in-between them and their whale song.

    Kill two cuckoos with one stone.

  25. Re:Impact on wildlife? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I would hate to live in your world of us versus them. Does your brain really filter every piece of information into what will those people I disagree with do about that? I mean damn, second post and you're bringing up environmentalist and sabotage.

    Present your own viewpoints instead of painting others.

  26. Great Idea by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Turn Great Wall into a neutrino detector

    1. Re:Great Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But we will have to go into space to make observations...

  27. Re:Impact on wildlife? by ThorGod · · Score: 1

    woops...meant "+1 interesting"...

    --
    PS: I don't reply to ACs.
  28. Uh-oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tube KM6NeT is jerks.

  29. So LOC... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, what is that? 1.5, 15 150 Library of Congresses?

  30. how will they detect all the neutrinos? by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    Since the medeterranian is full of turds how will they see a neutrino?

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  31. Relax... It's -really- just an underwater Mall :-) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...waiting for submarine taxis! :-)

    PS Seriously, it could be a nice big place for powerful officials & rich folks to "survive" in, eg, if someone explodes a nuclear bomb up on land. Its availabilitiy could even increase the risk that someone does that awful deed, since some would be saved, ie, if "your" team could be sure of being among the ones to be saved... :-/

  32. Ever heard of biofouling? by Gallamine · · Score: 1

    So, the plan is to immerse a huge number of optical detectors into the deep sea for an extended period of time. Talk to any biologist or oceanographer and they'll tell you what happens to things like that - they become completely encrusted with plant and animal material. It's called "bio-fouling" and it's one of the biggest problems with putting anything in the ocean (aside from extreme pressure). I just don't see how they'd keep a system like that a) operational and b) calibrated.

    --
    RobotBox - Robot projects from around the world
    1. Re:Ever heard of biofouling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly, you do not know what a neutrino is or how it is detected.

      Please read the fucking article. The first paragraph is:
      Neutrinos [are] special little things. They speed through the planet, and through you, and through everything; but, chargeless and puny, they interact with their surroundings so minimally that other particles hardly take notice.

      Here is the link again http://www.popsci.com/node/59071/?cmpid=enews121511:

  33. Re:Impact on wildlife? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

    I think ASCAP or a similar organization would be the one to collect royalties "on behalf of" the whales.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  34. What could possibly go wrong? by MSesow · · Score: 2
  35. Somebody missed a word by Almost-Retired · · Score: 2

    I was doing great reading the article linked to, until I got to the part where the optical goodies are built to withstand 6 atmospheres or 20,000 feet of pressure.

    'Scuse me, but according to my calculator, and knowing that 34 feet of water is one atmosphere, then 6 is a measly 204 feet. 20,000 feet would be, in slightly rounded figures, 600 atmospheres. And since the Med. Sea is salty, its safe to reduce that to 200 feet.

    Its amazing that in all the posts to this story ahead of mine, no one has mentioned the missing word after the 6 "hundred".

    Shame on you all, blathering away on stuff that if this is true, will have zip effect because it will fail spectacularly, both in terms of results per unit of money, and the scientific disappointment.

    In terms of knowledge gained vs money spent, it certainly seems like its worthwhile to do. Doing it in the Med. also spans a much wider bit of the universe due to the planets rotation in comparison to ICECUBE, which is aimed more along the polar axis.

    My unasked till now question though is: Is there enough daytime sunlight penetration at that depth in the Med. to represent a background noise level that will have to be subtracted, and how will this limit its ultimate sensitivity? Secondarily, what is the clarity of the water from the top of those 800 meter towers on down? Given that its sea water, with the detrious of life falling through it from the oxygenated surface layer 1000 feet above, there is zero chance in hell its not somewhat absorbtive of the emitted photons from a neutrino event.

    My $0.02 (in 1934 dollars, adjust for inflation of 77 years)

    Cheers, Gene

  36. Shhhhhh.... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

    I think ASCAP or a similar organization would be the one to collect royalties "on behalf of" the whales.

    Don't give PETA any ideas. That's not actually half as crazy as some of the stuff they do.

    1. Re:Shhhhhh.... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Don't worry it's not crazy enough for PETA. They'd say the whales were being musically enslaved by humans or something.

      Although I really wouldn't be surprised if ASCAP & company tried to collect royalties, the whales have exactly as much relation to them as the indie/garage bands they collect royalties on...

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  37. Reminds me of... by RevSpaminator · · Score: 1

    Anyone else think of Sealab 2021?

  38. Why the crap would you put half your comment in th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    e title and half in the comment.