Slashdot Mirror


China Plans Particle Colliders That Would Dwarf CERN's LHC

ananyo (2519492) writes Scientists at the Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP) in Beijing, working with international collaborators, are planning to build a "Higgs factory" by 2028 — a 52-kilometer underground ring that would smash together electrons and positrons. Collisions of these fundamental particles would allow the Higgs boson to be studied with greater precision than at the much smaller (27 km) Large Hadron Collider at CERN, Europe's particle-physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland. Physicists say that the proposed US$3-billion machine is within technological grasp and is considered conservative in scope and cost. But China hopes that it would also be a stepping stone to a next-generation collider — a super proton-proton collider — in the same tunnel. The machine would be a big leap for China. The country's biggest current collider is just 240 meters in circumference.

9 of 219 comments (clear)

  1. Super-collider by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Funny

    So I said, "Super-collider? I just met her!" [audience laughs] And then they built the super collider. - Humorbot 5.0

  2. How many broken parts trying to spin up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cern had how many set backs while trying to power the thing up in the early stages of testing? With all the corruption China has I wonder how this will compare.

    1. Re:How many broken parts trying to spin up? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Funny

      Either it will never work, or it's going to create a sub-atomic black hole that will eat up half of their installation, or it's going to create a soccer ball-sized black hole that could have destroyed our entire solar system if it weren't for the fact that aliens will stop them 3.14159265359 seconds before the event.

    2. Re:How many broken parts trying to spin up? by budgenator · · Score: 4, Funny

      Base 2 is real cool, you can count up to 1023 on your fingers; sadly I keep getting thrown out of noisy bars every time I try to order 4 beers in binary.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  3. Try the veal by paiute · · Score: 5, Funny

    The problem with Chinese subatomic particles is that one half-life later you are ready for more.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  4. Re:Make-work Project? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Every country has make-work projects, some of them even have additional benefits - the EU is currently reviewing a energy savings plan where one of the main points is "costs will be offset by the jobs created to implement this directive". Make-work.

    In reality, the Chinese project is definitely not make-work if they plan to do actual research. The "ghost cities" you talk about are actually gradually filling up as more population moves from rural settings into the cities - this has been a long term goal of the Chinese government, but their "long terms" are a fair longer than the "around next election time" terms that westerners tend to think in.

    If you want to see some real "ghost cities" there are plenty in Spain, entire towns and cities, with airports, which were built to sustain the Spanish building industry during the 2008-2013 period, and the properties have never been put on the market.

  5. We should act quickly! by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or the markets will soon be invaded by cheap made-in-China Higgs bosons. Although swiss-made Higgs are known to be by far more precise and accurate, the cheap chinese bosons will send CERN factory into bankrupt, unless some kind of duty is introduced to slow down foreign particles.

  6. Suboptimal Design by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In reality, the Chinese project is definitely not make-work if they plan to do actual research.

    True but a circular design for a electron-positron collider is far from the most efficient. At the energies needed to create the Higgs the energy loss caused by bending the electrons around in a ring means that the ring has to be far longer in circumference than a 'one-shot' linear collider would need to be. Worse if we find something even more exciting like Supersymmetry in our next run of the LHC starting this coming March you will never be able to increase the energy of a circular e-p machine to study it whereas with a linear collider you can extend it.

    A circular machine only makes sense with heavier particles like protons but I question whether the cost savings of a single tunnel for both an e-p machine and a future proton machine will outweigh the massive increase in the cost of the magnets and accelerating cavities for the e-p machine.

  7. The flavour of sour grapes by jandersen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cern had how many set backs while trying to power the thing up in the early stages of testing? With all the corruption China has I wonder how this will compare.

    Of course CERN had problems - this is not engineering, but science. The big difference between the two being that you call it engineering, when you know in advance how to do, and science when you don't. No doubt, the first time a simple van-der-Graf accellerator was built, they had to overcome a number of problems; now, it is something you'd let a student do, because all the technical problems have been ironed out. And when/if China builds this new cyclotron, they will run into a large number of technical problems; of course they will. No need to start constructing fables about "all the corruption"; all that says is that you are suffering from petty envy.