Print 57 comment(s) - last by MrPoletski.. on Feb 9 at 7:18 AM

The LHC conducted its first collisions, pictured here, in 2009. It plans to operate at low power in 2010 and 2011 and then undergo an upgrade before leaping directly to full power.  (Source: CERN)

The LHC cost over $9B USD to complete, but promises to unlock some of the universe's most compelling mysteries.  (Source: CERN)
Full power collisions will begin in 2013 -- after upgrade

September of 2008 was set to be a landmark year for the physics community.  The Large Hadron Collider, a massive 17-mile-long track beneath the Franco-Swiss border was coming online and promised to at last allow physicists to glimpse the long theorized, but never observed Higgs boson, nicknamed the "God particle".

However, a malfunction killed those hopes, pushing the launch back to 2009.  A cold winter slowed repairs and it was August 2009 when the repairs finally wrapped up.  In November the collider was brought back online at last.  Within days it recorded its first collisions and before long set a new world record -- despite operating at a mere fraction of its prospective power.

Amid a winter shutdown, researchers are now planning their next move, even as they sift through a wealth of data collected from the initial collisions.  This week they laid out an ambitious plan for the collider.

In 2010 and 2011 they plan to operate the collider at 3.5 TeV per beam, much more than 1.18 TeV per beam recorded in November, and significantly more than the previous record holder, the U.S.-based Fermilab, which has achieved 1 TeV beams.  To put these numbers in context, a mosquito has about 1 TeV in kinetic energy -- but it has 10
23 to 1024 atoms in them, many with dozens of protons.  The LHC is packing all this energy into a single proton -- a feat akin to packing all the people in the world into a square smaller than the tiniest transistor.

According to the LHC road map, the collider will shut down in 2012, skipping "mid-range" collisions of around 5 TeV per beam.  Instead, it will receive a circuitry upgrade to help it handle its peak designed power -- 7 TeV per beam.  In 2013 it will begin collisions at a record combined energy of about 14 TeV -- about 14 mosquitoes per proton pair, in layman's terms.

Until the LHC achieves peak power in 2013, FermiLab still has a chance to beat it and be the first to observe the Higgs boson.  However, if the particle is less lightweight, it will likely not be observed until the LHC cranks up the juice.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Is there a point
By hadifa on 2/3/2010 9:55:45 PM , Rating: 1
in planning for anything beyond 2012?

RE: Is there a point
By mkruer on 2/3/2010 10:07:10 PM , Rating: 2
Na its the shutdown that will cause the world to end on December 21, 2012. LOL

RE: Is there a point
By AnnihilatorX on 2/4/2010 4:12:30 AM , Rating: 2
Damn not the Mayan prophecy again which came out to be the end of a 'unit' cycle for their calendar, where actually there is another bigger 'unit' division :P

I henceforth predict the world to end on 31st Dec, 9999

RE: Is there a point
By PlasmaBomb on 2/4/2010 6:51:56 AM , Rating: 1
Damn only 7989 years to go?

So little time and so much to do!

RE: Is there a point
By drycrust3 on 2/4/2010 11:00:06 AM , Rating: 2
By then the fact China will have been and gone as the world's most powerful country will be more ancient history than the Biblical Plagues on Egypt are to us now.

RE: Is there a point
By Mitch101 on 2/4/2010 8:24:31 AM , Rating: 2
I henceforth predict the world to end on 31st Dec, 9999

$10.00 says it doesn't.

RE: Is there a point
By Kurz on 2/4/2010 10:55:51 AM , Rating: 3
Not fair... by todays inflation rate it'll be worth .00001 cents by that time.

RE: Is there a point
By Granseth on 2/4/2010 8:44:10 PM , Rating: 2
Make sure to keep the 10$ safe and sound for the next seventhousand and something years, and sell it as the most precious relic from the 21st century.

RE: Is there a point
By bhieb on 2/4/2010 9:47:18 AM , Rating: 2
I know you were being coy, but what Mayan prophecy. The calendar just stops there are no actual Mayan documentation that that means the end of the world or any kind of apocalypse. In fact it is not really celebrated/feared or acknowledged in their culture as a relevant date. And for a culture with the documentation they had you'd think they would write a little about it or something.

IMO Nothing more than the Mayan Y2K, they just never really thought that far ahead.

RE: Is there a point
By ClownPuncher on 2/4/2010 7:13:17 PM , Rating: 2
The long count calendar doesn't just stop, it is the end of the 13th b'ak'tun on Dec. 21 2012. To the Maya, the end of a b'ak'tun, or calendar cycle (144,000 days) was a cause for celebration.

By UncleRufus on 2/4/2010 9:24:56 AM , Rating: 2
"about 14 mosquitoes per proton pair, in layman's terms."

Since when do 'laymen' measure everything in 'mosquitos'?

Something about that just seems...very odd.

RE: Mosquitos...?
By BeauP on 2/4/2010 9:41:07 AM , Rating: 5
I'll see your 14 mosquito's and raise you a moth.

RE: Mosquitos...?
By JonB on 2/4/2010 11:32:10 PM , Rating: 2
African or European?

RE: Mosquitos...?
By MrPoletski on 2/9/2010 7:08:57 AM , Rating: 2
ya man, I weigh everything in squirrels.

It's ALIVE!!!!
By MTS on 2/3/2010 10:06:52 PM , Rating: 5
They're having WAY too much fun. I'm betting they'll find the particle...and the answer will be 42.

RE: It's ALIVE!!!!
By Duwelon on 2/3/2010 10:11:41 PM , Rating: 2
In related and equally riveting tech news, the LHC picked a piece of lint out of left coat pocket.

RE: It's ALIVE!!!!
By nafhan on 2/4/2010 10:44:07 AM , Rating: 3
Then they start work on the real problem: what's the question?

Beam energy vs proton energy
By HercDriver on 2/4/2010 8:18:32 AM , Rating: 2
The LHC is packing all this energy into a single proton

The energy given for each collision is "per beam", not per proton. According to CERN "", Each proton beam at full intensity will consist of 2808 bunches per beam. Each bunch will contain 1.15×1011 protons per bunch. That is a far cry from each individual proton containing more than a TeV of energy. The web site goes on to characterize this energy in terms of British aircraft carriers and Subarus (very interesting). I don't think we'll ever get to the point where we can manage to accelerate a single proton to the TeV range. I just wanted to make sure the DT readers understood what was really happening.

By HercDriver on 2/4/2010 8:20:50 AM , Rating: 2
By the way, the scientific notation didn't correctly transfer into the post. It's 1.15 times ten to the 11th power, not 1.15 times 1011. Just a clarification.

RE: Beam energy vs proton energy
By HercDriver on 2/4/2010 8:32:21 AM , Rating: 4
O.K. I guess I should have read the CERN website more carefully. It actually does say the the energy is 7 TeV "per proton" and goes on to give the following equation: 2808 bunches * 1.15 1011 protons @ 7 TeV each . = 2808*1.15*1011*7*1012*1.602*10-19 Joules = 362 MJ per beam. <assumes voice of Emily Litella (Gilda Radner) from SNL> "NEVERMIND".

By FITCamaro on 2/4/2010 7:14:42 PM , Rating: 2
So if a delorean drives through the beam will it go back in time?

Buckle this!
By thekdub on 2/4/2010 8:44:53 AM , Rating: 5
"Prepare collider for light speed."
"No, no no. Light speed is too slow."
"Light speed, too slow?"
"Yes, we're gonna have to go right to Ludicrous speed!"

RE: Buckle this!
By Micronite on 2/4/2010 2:23:30 PM , Rating: 2
They've gone PLAID!!!

RE: Buckle this!
By SPOOFE on 2/4/2010 4:21:52 PM , Rating: 2
What's the matter, Colonel Sanders? Chicken?!?

RE: Buckle this!
By Kurz on 2/5/2010 12:57:12 AM , Rating: 1
As long there are no one from the Asshole family aiming the Collider I think we'll be all right.

The end
By mcnabney on 2/3/2010 10:39:29 PM , Rating: 5
I am going to be so pissed if they destroy the universe.

RE: The end
By Creig on 2/4/2010 9:37:39 AM , Rating: 2
At least we can all meet at Milliways for one last drink before we go.

RE: The end
By mcnabney on 2/4/2010 4:46:51 PM , Rating: 2
I think the financing for your meal depends on a bit more time than three years to acrue interest. ;-)

By Captain Orgazmo on 2/4/2010 6:59:03 AM , Rating: 3
"Scientists Plan to Skip Mid-Range, Crank LHC up to Full Power"

In other news, Jeremy Clarkson has been appointed as the new head of the LHC project.

RE: Powerrrr
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 11:17:39 AM , Rating: 2
"In other news, Jeremy Clarkson has been appointed as the new head of the LHC project. "

You laugh, but considering the latest pick for NASA administrator, your suggestion isn't all that improbable.

RE: Powerrrr
By Runiteshark on 2/4/2010 8:05:22 PM , Rating: 2
This would be both awesome and scary.

I can hear him yelling now: POWER!!!!!

RE: Powerrrr
By Dribble on 2/5/2010 6:28:04 AM , Rating: 2
Na, Clarkson will build his own collider for top gear, probably designed to see how fast he can accelerate caravans into each other.

Higgs boson
By majBUZZ on 2/3/2010 11:00:27 PM , Rating: 3
Maybe it will be found if people from the future don't come back and prevent it, btw most entertaining conspiracy theory in a long time. lol

The Future
By btc909 on 2/3/2010 11:13:03 PM , Rating: 1
The last part of the video feed shows Mr. Spock pointing what appears to be a phaser at the LHC causing it's destruction.

RE: The Future
By BZDTemp on 2/4/2010 3:58:27 AM , Rating: 2
No need for a phaser a loaf of bread will do it :-)

By PlasmaBomb on 2/4/2010 6:50:17 AM , Rating: 2
Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational Large Hadron Collider!


By jebo on 2/4/2010 10:36:29 AM , Rating: 2
Keep a close eye on the Church. You never know who you can trust.....

CERN Under New Managment!
By Sazabi19 on 2/4/2010 2:20:38 PM , Rating: 2
Soon to become the new home of Black Mesa :P" The first "test" on full power. heheh ^.^ (All in fun people)

Upgrade required?
By brundall on 2/4/2010 10:19:25 PM , Rating: 2
According to the LHC road map, the collider will shut down in 2012, skipping "mid-range" collisions of around 5 TeV per beam. Instead, it will receive a circuitry upgrade to help it handle its peak designed power -- 7 TeV per beam.

Anyone else find it strange that the LHC requires a full shutdown and a circuitry upgrade to run at its 'peak designed power'. Couldn't they have installed these circuits on day one?

Just hope it dosent go BOOOM
By Toolius on 2/5/2010 10:38:47 AM , Rating: 2
This is all well and good.. but i just hope this thing doesn't go boom again !
WE have a Lot riding on this machine !
Turn It Up Baby !!

It's the end of the world....
By jonperez on 2/5/2010 11:01:17 PM , Rating: 2
as we know it... :)

Weak Forces
By blowfish on 2/3/10, Rating: -1
RE: Weak Forces
By Howard on 2/4/2010 12:40:19 AM , Rating: 5
What the hell are you talking about?

RE: Weak Forces
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 1:16:17 AM , Rating: 5
"It's amazing that these physicists manage to get governments to cough up the billions needed to build these accelerators"

Absolutely! Not like modern physics has ever given us anything useful, like nuclear power, lasers or transistors, right? We're just wasting money that would be better spent on aromatherapy research.

RE: Weak Forces
By homebredcorgi on 2/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: Weak Forces
By Aloonatic on 2/4/2010 3:55:29 AM , Rating: 4
I really don't know whether you and the OP are joking or not.

Assuming that you aren't, the problem that you both seem to have is this. The discoveries that science make are largely taken for granted, overlooked or far beyond the comprehension (and therefore interest) of the average man.

Just being able to build the LHC is a massive achievement. Doing it to test and prove theories. Well what a waste of time that is?!?

Science is moving non stop, never resting on it's laurels. It was not so long ago (well, maybe a little longer than I would like to admit) but when I was looking at university physics departments, being able to make stable integrated circuits and chips that were able to run over 1GHz was pretty much theory. Now it's something that you take for granted and you may even have something on you lap doing just that right now, or perhaps even in your pocket.

Sure there are dead ends from time to time. Very bright people waste their lives chasing after a theory and trying to prove something, but breakthroughs are being made all the time, and man is moving on. As ideas get more complex and the equipment more expensive then it may appear to be a waste of time (and money) but I'm willing to go along with it, and am quite able to ignore the junk sconce and "god particle" tabloid nonsense too.

I hope you join me, else go back to using technology that was made 50 years ago, and maybe I'll give you a phone call and we can carry on the debate that way.

RE: Weak Forces
By AnnihilatorX on 2/4/2010 4:09:10 AM , Rating: 2
I agree, even if it fails to find anything, that's a discovery on itself.

The engineering work that went into the LHC is nothing short of a marvel. I can say that no place in the earth at the moment has so much technology packed into the same place as LHC. Even if the experiment fail, I am sure a lot had been learnt about international collaboration, control theory, superconductors, detection of particles.

I still see LHC recruiting summer internship for students. Tell me this has no benefits to anyone whatsoever.

RE: Weak Forces
By theArchMichael on 2/4/2010 11:13:41 AM , Rating: 2
Not to mention that in the bigger scheme of things, $9 billion USD is a drop in the bucket in comparison to other budgetary investments into "more practical" engineering projects and ventures. Consider this, the new JSF fighters total development cost was somewhere in the region of $40 billion USD (when a dollar was worth more too). That is $40 billion dollars for analysis, design and development resources followed by an estimated $200 billion dollars of purchasing costs for what would be (for all intents and purposes) an incremental upgrade for many of the member nations' air forces (United States, Great Britain, etc.). Also, considering that the LHC is probably the most significant human scientific endeavor since the space program (emblematically or financially at the very least). $9 billion is really just a trifle.
Science gets little to no respect nowadays, but then you get cursed out by the masses when you mention lowering the military's $0.5 trillion a year budget or if dont have a yellow ribbon bumper sticker.

RE: Weak Forces
By mcnabney on 2/4/2010 4:57:53 PM , Rating: 1
Besides making/finding some radioactive isotopes there is almost no practical benefit to any atom smasher - regardless of size. It is true Blue Sky research and experimentation. Any benefits in ironing out unification theories won't be capitalized on for a century at best.

You want to spend billions on a practical science project? Find a way to get 'stuff' in orbit cheaply.

I imagine a huge ass EM accelerator could be built up the side of one of the world's tallest mountains for less than the LHC. At least that device would serve to place materials and supplies into orbit for a tiny fraction of the current cost of $10-15k per pound.

RE: Weak Forces
By Aloonatic on 2/4/2010 6:42:28 PM , Rating: 3
I imagine a huge ass EM accelerator...
Ah yes, who needs science and research when you can just imagine...

RE: Weak Forces
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 11:16:35 AM , Rating: 2
First of all, let me apologize for whoever rated you down. I don't agree with your post, but you expressed yourself eloquently..and one of your points is certainly accurate. Certainly the standard model has problems, which is why we're looking at things beyond it. I recognize the fact that modern theory has given us essentially nothing in the past 50 years (we're still cannabilizing the great achievements of the 1920s-1950s), but remember that classical mechanics lasted us several centuries, and included several periods of many decades where little to no progress was made.

In short -- be patient, young grasshopper!

I believe we have overlooked that last important part - experimentation
What do you think we build a massive supercollider for? To do nothing but collect experimental data.

If the LHC fails to turn up the Higgs Boson, then it will automatically give much more credence to other models, such as my own personal favorite:

Anyway, it'll be a net win...though its doubtful we see any practical applications from this experiment for 50 years or so.

RE: Weak Forces
By MrPoletski on 2/9/2010 7:15:30 AM , Rating: 2
Something developed over the last 50 years?

Try the MOSFET.

Try the modern silicon chip.

Try the LASER.

~~shakes head~~

RE: Weak Forces
By neilrieck on 2/4/2010 10:51:28 AM , Rating: 3
Don't forget the the HTML and "the web" were developed by CERN in 1989-90 to allow physicists to get "read access" to other research computer without the need for an account. This one invention (which was originally attached to collider experiments) changed the world. With the LHC comes an upgrade to "the web" with technology called "the grid".

RE: Weak Forces
By Jaazu on 2/4/2010 2:54:40 AM , Rating: 5
Wow, I finally found one of the people who I'm guessing think that space exploration is a waste of money, and who feel that any pure science is a waste. Get a grip, see that the universe is bigger than your neighborhood, and understand that there are uses for science other than building bigger guns and faster cars.

RE: Weak Forces
By MrBlastman on 2/4/2010 12:24:19 PM , Rating: 2
His neighborhood is scheduled for galactic demolition though shortly. Let him vent his wind, if anything it will promote some CO2 into the atmosphere to the let the plants be a little greener, a little longer so we can enjoy our remaining time here just a bit more. ;)

RE: Weak Forces
By wiz220 on 2/5/2010 5:09:35 PM , Rating: 1
Quantum theory, which is the best that modern physics can come up with, over-estimates the weak forces binding matter together by about 100,000 times.

As my 7'th grade algebra teacher always said, "PLEASE SHOW YOUR WORK!"

RE: Weak Forces
By MrPoletski on 2/9/2010 7:18:49 AM , Rating: 2
So said the LED to the electrons...

"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer

Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki