What's new

Chen-Ning Yang Oppose China's Super Particle Collider.

Welcome to our Japan community!

A discussion forum for all Things Japanese. Join Today! It is fast, simple, and FREE!

Chan Rasjid

23 Jun 2016
Reaction score

[Full article]
Chen-Ning Yang Correct, China Should Not Build Super Particle Collider. - The blog of ChanRasjid - Chinadaily Forum

Nobel laureate Chen-Ning Yang was openly opposed to the idea of China building the next generation super particle collider. On 7 September, he released an article on WeChat expressing his views that China should not build the world's largest particle collider. His main reason, other than being very costly, is that such a machine would not gain us much scientific knowledge or benefit to society. We may even read into his reason as a hint that particle physics - strictly the Standard Model of particle physics - may lead us to nowhere. We will examine if particle physics is indeed useful.

International Press of Boston,
Why China Should Build The Great Collider: A Response to C.N. Yang | 博客
David Gross, a foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Science, responded to Dr.Yang's comment on:
High-energy physics produced any "tangible benefits" to society?

Yes! Even taking an extremely narrow view of this question, the technologies directly springing from particle physics have spawned huge industries that generate revenues far exceeding the magnitude of the investment in basic science. The multi-billion dollar accelerator industry, operating thousands of small-scale particle accelerators around the world ranging from light sources, to medical accelerators for cancer-fighting radiation therapies, owes its existence to particle physics. And the need for powerful magnets at proton colliders necessitated the development of superconducting magnet technology, itself a billion dollar industry, which are the critical component for MRI machines, a five billion dollar industry.

David Gross, being a physicists, seems to not know much about economics. You can hypothetically create a "billion dollar industries" from a huge unused mountain and you spend billions moving it back and forth between two locations - repeatedly ad infinitum. Surely, billion dollar secondary industries may arise around new technologies for moving mountains around "better and faster" giving larger revenues - they somehow would still end up to be of some use somewhere.

It is a myth that particle physics from CERN (operator of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) which discovered the Higgs Boson) has given society any new physics that resulted in any new technology - not one item, directly. The Standard Model involves so far only in fanciful concepts like quark, color charge, etc and none has anything to do with what engineers could use in their work. The very great technological advances of the past decades have nothing at all to do with the experiments carried out at CERN; they were nothing other than the result of empirical experimentation based on physics that have been around for decades since the breakthrough in quantum mechanics of the 1930's.

Should anyone build super particle collider machines where the supposed 6.5 x 10¹² eV protons have only real energy of 470 x 10⁶ eV - out by a factor of 15,000!

Best regards,
Chan Rasjid Kah Chew,
E=mc2 Relativistic Mechanics Invalid
Top Bottom