Similar kinds of questions were asked when people did "useless" research on trying to make smaller computers...Originally Posted by Pietleeu
One thing this discovery may do is prevent future useless experiments. Some string theories require particle colliders the size of our solar system. This discovery scrapped a few of those speculations as the standard model does not require such exotic interpretations.
You can't trust a meta-ethical moral relativist since such a person can abuse reason to justify any act.
I kind of wouldn't mind seeing one of those.Similar kinds of questions were asked when people did "useless" research on trying to make smaller computers...
One thing this discovery may do is prevent future useless experiments. Some string theories require particle colliders the size of our solar system. This discovery scrapped a few of those speculations as the standard model does not require such exotic interpretations
"Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove..."
You do realise all the things you just listed as "helped" were all discovered from something just like the Higgs Boson?
Yup an entire site dedicated to Nasa spin offs alone ... http://spinoff.nasa.gov/
Last edited by Unhappy438; 22-07-2012 at 02:53 AM.
I already showed that different aspects of the internet was developed on different continents. The old saying that necessity is the mother of invention is still true. Not fringe science is the mother of invention. The internet is commonly seen as a necessity and various institutions including one in SA was working on parts of its functioning at the time when sharing information became a necessity.You do know the internet was developed at CERN, right? The laws of nature and physics? You mean like gravity and electromagnetism? Yeah, how'd understanding those fundamental forces of nature ever help humanity?
Spin-offs unfortunately don't count. All projects produce spin-offs and whose to say other projects' spin-offs won't be better? We might have had IPv6 from the get go if another institution invented the internet and foresaw its global usage.
Invariably we might see benefits in the future in currently exotic areas such as space travel. The criticisms against it are valid however. There are current areas of research where the money can have a much more immediate benefit like cancer, green energy, HIV to name just a few.
Only a religious science nut will not question money spent indiscriminately. Or perhaps it's because you would rather see the money spent on something that you think can confirm your beliefs? You would rather see money spent on proving the fantasy of evolution than on starving people?
I actually do. I question why Vodacom sponsors the Bulls while Simphiwe can't run a business because of high communications costs and has to continue living in a shack because of it. The fact that most people don't actually shows humanity has our priorities screwed up.
forget the higgs, i think we've just discovered something far more incredible.
if we cull the cern project and divert the funds to poor countries(TM) around the world, we can finally end world poverty(TM).
now if we can just divert the funds from space programs into world peace(TM), that will be the end of all our problems.
unfortunately beauty pageants, as we know them, may be a thing of the past. but i'm sure they'll be willing to take one for the team.
Last edited by murraybiscuit; 22-07-2012 at 09:17 AM.
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so
Debating over this is like debating over religion, If you are not a Christian, you will never allow yourself to be convinced otherwise, if you are Muslim you will never see eye to eye with Christians... Etc etc. If you are a scientist, you will never side with humanitarians...You do know the internet was developed at CERN, right? The laws of nature and physics? You mean like gravity and electromagnetism? Yeah, how'd understanding those fundamental forces of nature ever help humanity?
Maybe if we had a time machine we could go back in time and ask Carl Friedrich Gauss how the things he was working on in the 1800's would have helped humanity? He had no idea, but without his work, you wouldn't have had a computer to be working on.
You're taking an incredibly short-sighted view, friend.
Why don't you ask BMW how they can sponsor the Springboks with R40mil while people are starving? Or how a baseball player can get a $275 million (over 10 years) contract while people are suffering?
I thought we were talking about LHC , how did the Boks enter this..... Besides, it proves my point that you too believe certain monies are better spent elsewhere..
I doubt money is being taken away from research into those fields and given to this. There is money, room and necessity for both, I think. Large-scale research projects like this don't get undertaken because scientists are bored and don't have anything better to do. There is a legitimate need and reasoning to fund it. This is how human knowledge progresses.
I have no idea what you're babbling about here. Projecting?
Maybe because Vodacom isn't a charity or a venture capital firm? Although, In a large sense, I agree. There are many groups of people/governments/firms whose priorities are messed up. Legitimate and important scientific inquiry isn't the problem, though, and defunding it won't solve those problems.
As a science-buff and a humanist, I find it insulting that you somehow put them as opposites. And no, this discussion is not at all like religious debates. You claimed research like this is a waste of time. I disagreed, and told you why. You claimed a better understanding of the laws of nature and physics hasn't helped humanity, which is patently false. The machine you're using to post on this forum is proof of that. Without the foundations developed by scientists in centuries past, we wouldn't have any of the useful technologies you mentioned. Those scientists didn't always know that they work they were doing would have this impact, they did it for the sake of exploring, discovering and understanding more than we do now.
Obviously I agree with you that certain monies are better spent elsewhere. I wouldn't mind if less money was spent on developing more sophisticated and effective ways of killing each other, for example. The LHC cost $9 billion. Looking at the budgets of the institutions funding this thing, and the time-period over which it's being used, it's a paltry amount.
"Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove..."
Oh, forget it ObDawn, let them brood about this technological progress as 'wasteful spending', while they remain silent(or secretly support)at certain country's spending ten times more on bombing and shooting up some middle-eastern folks to kingdom come. They've already said they view it like religion so let them be. To them, everything must be Us VS Them.
Last edited by Geriatrix; 23-07-2012 at 04:19 PM.
That which comes into existence will eventually break apart and pass away
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Incorrect_predictions
We can add Pietleeu and Swa to this in a couple of yearsThe ordinary 'horseless carriage' is at present a luxury for the wealthy; and although its price will probably fall in the future, it will never, of course, come into as common use as the bicycle. Literary Digest, 1899.
Sad state of affairs, man.
"Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove..."
“Nothing is so dangerous to the progress of the human mind than to assume that our views of science are ultimate, that there are no mysteries in nature, that our triumphs are complete and that there are no new worlds to conquer.”
― Humphry Davy
Oh and Swa , the LHC is the largest Scientific instrument and largest experiment ever. Please go sprout your ignorance about "fringe science" elsewhere.
Money spent on one thing is always being taken away from something else. There are a lot of important projects to do with disease that are short on funding. I didn't say that research projects should not be undertaken. The problem is that while there are underfunded important projects with the possibility of a much more immediate benefit then it's valid to question its necessity.
What I see is that it's always the same group of people that for the most part don't question when something is done "in the name of science." That in itself only shows a biased attitude but then people like Unhappy here will pounce on anyone that advocates legitimate criticism. That is the hallmark of religious nuts.
Legitimate criticism , you're full of jokes aren't you
So what's your view on the LHC, and CERN in general? Do you think it's a waste of money?
Well, I happen to think scientific endeavours like this are well worth it, and would like more people to get on-board. Same with the SKA Project. I think it's a wonderful and worthwhile avenue of our resources and time for a variety of reasons.
"Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove..."
I think money would be better spent solving real problems rather than satisfy curiosity.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks