>>12052756you probably weren't even born in 2008 when the LHC started operations, but they over-hyped the fuck out of it.
when asking for money to congress, hep-theorists have little to show so they come up with stupid bullshit that is *technically* possible, like miniature black holes. and that's a good strategy in the short run, they get their headlines and their funding, but next time around some congressman will ask, "hey, whatever happened to all that shit you promised last time?"
>Still got return on investment definitely.you and I and anyone who has worked at hep knows we have obtained returns, but taxpayers don't, and that's the people you have to be held accountable to. there's a huge political aspect about being a scientist and asking your country to fund your 100 quintillion dollar machine that only a small percentage of population understands, your word alone that we have obtained returns is simply not enough.
sabine's point is that, there's a very, very real possibility that susy, let alone string theory just isn't true or can't be achievable within the next 1000 years, and just hyping up a new machine just for it to fail (in the eyes of politicians or the general public) could be catastrophic for science, so just mindlessly parroting WE NEED BIGGER MACHINE to get yourself funding and students for the next decade or so is super irresponsible
