Collider plan splits scientists
Scientists are divided over an ambitious $40 billion plan to build a new and significantly larger atom-smasher to explore the secrets of the universe.
A decade ago, when physicists first turned on the 27km circumference Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world’s most powerful particle accelerator, they were hoping to prove the existence of the Higgs boson, the elusive particle that was supposed to explain why objects have mass.
In 2012 they achieved that aim. Yesterday, however, leading physicists conceded that a proposal to build a successor to the LHC may amount to an expensive leap of faith.
Jonathan Butterworth of University College London, who has contributed to the plans, said: ‘‘We don’t have a specific thing like the Higgs boson to shoot at. In a way that makes it more exciting. On the other hand, it makes it a little harder to be sure it is the right machine. Those discussions are going on now.’’
Scientists from 150 universities helped draft an initial proposal for the Future Circular Collider. The project, overseen by Cern, the particle physics research centre based in Geneva, would involve a 100kmlong circular tunnel built under France and Switzerland.
The pay-off could be vast. The collider would accelerate particles close to the speed of light, at energy levels not achieved before. As they collide and shatter they could provide insights that shift the so-called Standard Model of particle physics, the current theory covering fundamental forces.
Eckhard Elsen, director for research and computing at Cern, said: ‘‘Proton colliders have been the tool of choice for generations to venture new physics at the smallest scale. A large proton collider would present a leap forward.’’
The Higgs boson was predicted by the Standard Model but the model still falls short of explaining the universe. ‘‘It doesn’t include gravity. It doesn’t explain why the universe is made of matter rather than antimatter,’’ Professor Butterworth said. ‘‘It doesn’t explain dark matter, which ... makes up most of the mass of the universe.’’
There are ways that scientists could try to fill these gaps, he added. ‘‘But the one that’s worked very well in the past, which is, of course, expensive and timeconsuming, is to turn up the power and build a better microscope. That’s what this new collider would be.’’
Opponents of the plan said that the physicists should be reined in. Sir David King, the former chief scientific adviser to the UK government, said: ‘‘We have to draw a line somewhere otherwise we end up with a collider that is so large that it goes around the equator.’’ The money would be better spent combatting climate change, he told the BBC.
‘‘We are rattling towards a high temperature planet in which the current global economy will cease to operate. More than 150 million people will be displaced. So if we had a pot of £20 billion and we were discussing what to do with it, we would be faced with people in the medical sciences community coming up to us with ideas to improve human health and wellbeing.’’
The £3.74 billion to build the LHC came mainly from Cern’s 22 member states, which include Britain. Japan, America and Russia also contributed.
– The Times