The US$5 billion facility would be cheaper, bigger and faster to build than a similar one proposed by European scientists.
    • vinyl@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      5 months ago

      Indeed and with what I’ve seen with tofu-dreg projects in china I doubt that it would last.

    • terminhell@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      0·
      5 months ago

      I think (and I’m by far no particle physicists) that generally the larger the collider, the better the results can be. Also allows for more energetic collisions with potential discovery of new particles.

      • Parculis Marcilus@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        01·
        5 months ago

        Particle physicists had their chance on trying prove the existence of any new particles with CERN and their newest project but ultimately they failed to discover any. First, it’s too costly. Second, their theory on bridging the major two theories (relativity and quantum physics) with the assumably new particles is simply too complicated that involves a lot of constants compared to other theory models. There are better way to advance the progress of academic physics, but building a new collider would not help.