Print 93 comment(s) - last by Technomage.. on Aug 12 at 12:49 PM

LHC will only operate at half power to try to detect problems earlier

The Large Hadron Collider may usher in a new era of particle physics as the world's most powerful particle accelerator.  However, the LHC has also been the victim of numerous delays, ever since its launch last September failed. 

At launch an electrical fault between two of the magnets reportedly caused an arc of electricity, which in turn triggered a helium leak and explosion.  As a result, the proton tube was contaminated with soot, and the magnets were broken off from their mountings.  Months of repairs revealed more leaks in the vacuum of the insulating layer surrounding the proton tube.

Now the European Center for Nuclear Research, or CERN has declared that the repairs are done.  States CERN in a press release, "[Tests] will initially run at an energy of 3.5 TeV per beam when it starts up in November this year.  This news comes after all tests on the machine's high-current electrical connections were completed last week [the week of July 27], indicating that no further repairs are necessary for safe running."

Still, the restart represents caution on CERN's part -- 3.5 TeV is only half of the beam's full intended operational power.  States CERN Director General Rolf Heuer, "We've selected 3.5 TeV to start because it allows the LHC operators to gain experience [with] running the machine safely while opening up a new discovery region for the experiments."

There remain concerns about whether the device is capable of running at full power.  Describes CERN:

Following the incident of [Sept. 19, 2008] that brought the LHC to a standstill [due to a faulty magnet connection], testing has focused on the 10,000 high-current superconducting electrical connections like the one that led to the fault. These consist of two parts: the superconductor itself, and a copper stabilizer that carries the current in case the superconductor warms up and stops superconducting, a so-called quench. In their normal superconducting state, there is negligible electrical resistance across these connections, but in a small number of cases abnormally high resistances have been found in the superconductor. These have been repaired. However, there remain a number of cases where the resistance in the copper stabilizer connections is higher than it should be for running at full energy.

However, CERN also says that it has tested and repaired a large number of these faulty copper connections.  It says that the final two sectors it tested revealed no abnormalities.  Nonetheless, after all the headaches, it plans to throttle up the 17-mile long accelerator loop slowly, just in case there's still undetected problems.

Comments     Threshold

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

better safe than sorry
By rodrigu3 on 8/10/2009 12:23:43 PM , Rating: 5
If I were them, I'd rather know it's working well at half power, than blowing up at full power because someone wasn't careful.

RE: better safe than sorry
By PrinceGaz on 8/10/09, Rating: -1
RE: better safe than sorry
By quiksilvr on 8/10/2009 12:37:39 PM , Rating: 3
I know that this is an ongoing gag, but in all seriousness, do you have any idea how much energy would be required to create a black hole big enough to take out the planet? TeVs aren't gonna do it!

RE: better safe than sorry
By SPOOFE on 8/10/2009 12:51:03 PM , Rating: 2
Any black hole created would probably go unnoticed. Its event horizon would be so small and gravitationally negligible that it would be nigh miraculous if it ever sucked in just a single atom before the sun burns out of hydrogen.

RE: better safe than sorry
By SublimeSimplicity on 8/10/2009 1:06:17 PM , Rating: 5

I was planning on using this micro black holes to put Dyson out of the vacuum business. Not only would it not lose suction as it filled (as Dyson claims), it would actually have better suction... and be cordless to boot.

RE: better safe than sorry
By Alexstarfire on 8/10/2009 1:17:50 PM , Rating: 2
Can a black hole be moved though?

RE: better safe than sorry
By Spuke on 8/10/2009 2:26:54 PM , Rating: 4
Can a black hole be moved though?
Mine can.

RE: better safe than sorry
By Scabies on 8/10/2009 6:21:56 PM , Rating: 3
it would have mass, right?

RE: better safe than sorry
By Chemical Chris on 8/11/2009 10:46:28 AM , Rating: 2
The angle of the dangle is directly proportional to the mass of the ass if the heat of the meat remains constant.

Physicass 101.


RE: better safe than sorry
By DopeFishhh on 8/11/2009 12:50:08 AM , Rating: 3
I remember reading an article about a scientist who working on the problem of how to deal with a black hole if it was actually created in the LHC.

His suggestion was that firing charged particles (electrons probably) into it would make it negatively charged, then surround it in a similarly negatively charged enclosure to prevent it from touching the sides. Then you fire it off into space.

RE: better safe than sorry
By camylarde on 8/11/2009 4:51:47 AM , Rating: 2
Assuming you know where exactly the black minihole is. Hitting such a small thing with particle beam must be either

A) hard like hell - then its ok, cause the hole is not interacting with the environment (much)
B) easy - then were doomed, cause it surely has started to suck up matter already, is growing and it probably is too late to act.

RE: better safe than sorry
By MrPoletski on 8/12/2009 4:21:28 AM , Rating: 2
Fortunately, the very theory that predicts the possibility (not certainty) of a black hole forming in the LHC also predicts that the black hole would instantly evaporate in a few femtoseconds.

sorry to spoil everyones speculative psuedo science fun;)

(and speculative psuedo science IS fun as well as a nicely overcomplicated term)

RE: better safe than sorry
By HotFoot on 8/11/2009 10:02:54 AM , Rating: 2
If you can possibly interact with a charged particle inside a black hole via electromagnetic force, then you've violated the whole event horizon principle.

Curious, even, that gravity itself escapes the event horizon. I don't know how this could be explained by any gravity-transmitting particle (graviton?) theory.

RE: better safe than sorry
By corduroygt on 8/10/2009 1:19:05 PM , Rating: 5
An even more important advantage would be that you'd never have to empty it out :)
Then of course your twin in a parallel universe would be wondering why his living room is suddenly covered with dust and small bits of trash.

RE: better safe than sorry
By MrBlastman on 8/10/2009 1:57:03 PM , Rating: 2
What would happen if you flushed Alligators and Crocodiles down a black hole... Would that be considered a Cosmic crime? I think this calls for another sequel to the age-old franchise. Alligator III: Get eaten again.

RE: better safe than sorry
By Pan Skrzetuski on 8/10/2009 6:39:44 PM , Rating: 2
As long as we do it before someone in the parallel universe figures out how to send anything nasty our way...

RE: better safe than sorry
By HotFoot on 8/11/2009 10:04:11 AM , Rating: 2
So THAT's what's been happening to my apartment. Damn cosmic twin...

RE: better safe than sorry
By lco45 on 8/10/2009 7:39:44 PM , Rating: 2
Because it sucks using gravity only, so for it to suck the dust hard enough to just make it float off the carpet it would need the mass of the earth.
Could get tricky pushing a vacuum cleaner with the mass of the earth.
Even trickier stopping it once you get it up to speed ;-)


RE: better safe than sorry
By HotFoot on 8/11/2009 10:13:01 AM , Rating: 2
Party pooper.

But it wouldn't need anywhere near the mass of the Earth, considering how much closer the black hole in your vacuum cleaner would be to the object than the centre of the Earth. It's like a small magnet that's really close has a bigger effect than a huge magnet many many miles away.

Anyway, the black hole would be constantly sucking in the atmosphere around it, creating a vaccum, and you'd be cleaning the old-fashioned way, with good ol' static pressure pushing dirt down the tube.

Yes, it's still ridiculous...

RE: better safe than sorry
By MrPoletski on 8/12/2009 4:24:50 AM , Rating: 2
umm, some remedial physics lessons reccomended.

1/r^2 dude.

RE: better safe than sorry
By Nobleman00 on 8/10/2009 2:11:06 PM , Rating: 2

RE: better safe than sorry
By SpaceJumper on 8/10/2009 4:49:58 PM , Rating: 2
The energy is equivalent to 120lb of TNT during an collision. Not all of the energy is inserted into the accelerating particles. What really goes wrong will not be the black hole, because the particles are getting so big during acceleration that the black hole will never be exposed.
The LHC puts in magnetic energy and what it gets out is the magnetic particles. You are what you eat basically.

RE: better safe than sorry
By Technomage on 8/11/2009 2:10:04 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry, but Maxwell's equation clearly show there are no magnetic particles. You could magnetize iron particles, but there are no magnetic charges.

I don't mean to be an ass about it, but let's not make up physics as we go. We'd be no better than the politicians, then.

RE: better safe than sorry
By SpaceJumper on 8/11/2009 6:10:39 PM , Rating: 2
I put it in a simple term so people can understand. The mass is accelerated to near the speed of light, E=mC^2. The energy is converted to mass, it is like an orange with a hyper thick skin. During collision, some of the orange skins will be separated from the orange and landed onto the detectors.
If the particles are not magnetic then the particles should not be responding to the magnetic fields. Are you implying that the Maxwell's equation is wrong.
LHC is still in the religious stage.

RE: better safe than sorry
By MrPoletski on 8/12/2009 4:41:54 AM , Rating: 2
I put it in a simple term so people can understand.

Please don't, because it makes no sense!

The mass is accelerated to near the speed of light, E=mC^2. The energy is converted to mass, it is like an orange with a hyper thick skin.

Now the binding energy inside an atom uses the mass-energy equivelance equation you quoted... but in terms of the objects kinetic energy e=mc^2 has nothing to do with it.

During collision, some of the orange skins will be separated from the orange and landed onto the detectors.
If the particles are not magnetic then the particles should not be responding to the magnetic fields. Are you implying that the Maxwell's equation is wrong.
LHC is still in the religious stage.

About that magnetism thing. A particle can be magnetic only in that it has an electric charge distribution across itself and it is spinning. Iron atoms are all little magnets because the atom spins and the electrons around it do not form an even charge distribution across it. At any given time there may be more charge at one side of the atom than the other. Wan der waals bonds in metals uses this principle IIRC. Anyway, magnetism is created by the motion of an electric charge, nothing more and nothing less. Charged particles experience a force due to a magnetic field - directly proportional to their velocity - because when they move, they actually create their own magnetic field which interacts with the one that is, apparantly, impartng force on the charged particle.

RE: better safe than sorry
By bill3 on 8/11/2009 8:07:30 PM , Rating: 2
Are you the Technomage from MrCranky forums?

If so it's X-Man here.

RE: better safe than sorry
By Technomage on 8/12/2009 12:49:20 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, sorry.

RE: better safe than sorry
By MrPoletski on 8/11/2009 6:02:45 AM , Rating: 3
More to the point is how little an amount of energy there actually is in this beam?

Tera-electron volts sounds huge, but at electron volt is 1.6e-19 joules of energy. A 14TeV (i.e. 14x10^12) collision, the biggest this thing is supposed to be able produce is around 10^-6 joules. So a collision in the LHC can produce enough energy to power a 100w lightbulb for.... one hundred millionth of a second .

Or, more pertinantly, you'd have to 'save up' the energy in these collisions for 11,400 years. Eleven thousand four hundred years to get one hours worth of use out of a 100w light bulb.


RE: better safe than sorry
By mattclary on 8/11/2009 8:07:13 AM , Rating: 2
A 5' woman who knows Judo doesn't expend much energy to take down a 6'6" man.

RE: better safe than sorry
By quiksilvr on 8/11/2009 2:19:23 PM , Rating: 2
Unless she goes for the balls.

RE: better safe than sorry
By MrPoletski on 8/12/2009 4:18:08 AM , Rating: 2
but could she take down a 50,000ft man?

RE: better safe than sorry
By MrPoletski on 8/12/2009 4:43:42 AM , Rating: 2
sorry, a five hundred million foot man..

RE: better safe than sorry
By Hammer1024 on 8/11/2009 4:51:57 PM , Rating: 2
Cosnic Rays in the wild hit up to 10^20th electron Volts; 10 with 20 zeroes behind it.

The Tevatron, outside of Chicago at Fermi Labs, hits around 10x12th eV (1 TeV) while the LHC, maxed out in it's launch configuration, is 7 TeV or 7x10^12 eV...

Last time I looked out the window, the earth hasn't been swallowed...

So if the LHC can generate black holes, they've been being generated over your head for the past few billion years or so.

I've got better things to worry about.

RE: better safe than sorry
By Spivonious on 8/10/2009 12:51:01 PM , Rating: 5
I never thought I'd see a resonance cascade, let alone create one.

RE: better safe than sorry
By PhoenixKnight on 8/10/2009 12:57:16 PM , Rating: 2
Prepare for unforeseen consequences.

RE: better safe than sorry
By clovell on 8/10/2009 1:35:17 PM , Rating: 3
I've got my crossbow in my desk.

RE: better safe than sorry
By tviceman on 8/10/2009 3:00:56 PM , Rating: 2
Wake up Mr Freeman, wake up and smell the ashes.

RE: better safe than sorry
By invidious on 8/10/2009 5:54:16 PM , Rating: 2
When the singularity collapses, I will be far away from here. In another universe, as a matter of fact. You, on the other hand, will be destroyed in every way it is possible to be destroyed-and even in some which are essentially impossible.

RE: better safe than sorry
By bill3 on 8/11/2009 8:09:56 PM , Rating: 2

Too bad all those things are fake.

RE: better safe than sorry
By MrPoletski on 8/11/2009 6:05:32 AM , Rating: 3
They are waiting for you, Gordon..

In the.... TEST... CHAMBER....

RE: better safe than sorry
By XZerg on 8/10/2009 3:04:01 PM , Rating: 2
it is not December 2012 yet... don't blast it full power.... yet... :)

RE: better safe than sorry
By Omega215D on 8/10/2009 3:41:54 PM , Rating: 5
All Gordon Freeman has to do is push a stupid cart into the beam. How hard can that be?

RE: better safe than sorry
By DEVGRU on 8/10/2009 5:00:06 PM , Rating: 3
Apparently, harder than you can imagine. He went to MIT to learn how, nevermind the grueling Black Mesa job interview.

RE: better safe than sorry
By PhoenixKnight on 8/10/2009 7:33:11 PM , Rating: 2
Good job, pulling that lever and all. I can see your MIT education really pays for itself.

RE: better safe than sorry
By monomer on 8/10/2009 7:33:56 PM , Rating: 3
Thi made me think of the ecellent machinima series, Freeman's Mind:

By MrBlastman on 8/10/2009 12:17:19 PM , Rating: 2
If the repairs are complete, why wait until November. Lets fire this thing up now so they have even more time to test it before their "European" Winter vacation. :-|

Scientists around the world are waiting for the data, and willing to accept a headcrab or two in the name of science. After all, only one or two are acceptable anomalies in the name of Science. ;)

Seriously though, if it really is complete, what is the point in waiting any further. They only have a limited amount of time before winter comes and the inevitable shutdown. I think a whole year of setbacks is enough - that is, if it really has been completely repaired.

RE: Excellent.
By Adul on 8/10/2009 12:22:25 PM , Rating: 3
because it takes a long time to properly cool the tube down with liquid helium. A couple months from what I remember.

RE: Excellent.
By MrBlastman on 8/10/2009 12:28:15 PM , Rating: 2
True. The article didn't mention whether it was cooled yet or not. Still though... August, September, October.. There's some extra time in there that it won't be cooling.

RE: Excellent.
By invidious on 8/10/2009 12:45:21 PM , Rating: 5
Today is 8-10-09, 3 months from now would be 11-10-09, well into november. Where are you seeing extra time?

RE: Excellent.
By MrBlastman on 8/10/2009 1:34:20 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, it takes far less time than two months to cool it.

In the above link, they mention it will take two full months to initiate repairs, which, during that time, they would warm the collider and then cool it back down again.

So, the two months is bunk. I would wager it takes 3-4 weeks to cool the thing. That is 1 1/2 months of it doing nothing.

RE: Excellent.
By ClownPuncher on 8/10/2009 3:07:24 PM , Rating: 2
Where did you get your info that they will just be doing nothing for that time? Are you thinking they started a volleyball team or something? Or was it just an opportunity to rag on some of the best scientists the world currently has to offer?

RE: Excellent.
By MrBlastman on 8/10/2009 3:20:35 PM , Rating: 2
It was not at all intended to rag on the scientists per say, but more to nail down the point that they are delaying progress by taking the Winter off. Power bills be darned at this point. Soo, lets get to atom smashing asap. :)

Starting up in November is - well, starting up in November. That means we can safely say they won't be starting it up in October, September or August, right? They might start cooling it, but they won't be smashing atoms.

RE: Excellent.
By MrBlastman on 8/10/2009 3:21:17 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, and correction to my verbage - they are going to be smashing particles, not atoms.

RE: Excellent.
By MrPoletski on 8/11/2009 5:27:42 AM , Rating: 2
They almost certainly, and rightly, want to perform additional tests on the equipment after it's cooled and before firing it up, this will take time.

RE: Excellent.
By Snow01 on 8/10/2009 12:51:01 PM , Rating: 2
I seem to remember reading somewhere that it will typically run during the winter months as it will be easier to keep at its low operating temperature, and will be cheaper to do so as well.

RE: Excellent.
By Hare on 8/10/2009 1:40:04 PM , Rating: 4
I seem to remember reading somewhere that it will typically run during the winter months as it will be easier to keep at its low operating temperature, and will be cheaper to do so as well.

When you are dealing with extreme temperatures it doesn't make much difference if it's winter or summer on the surface (they operate below ground). Actually I've read that they do not operate during winter mainly due to electricity being a lot more expensive (>double).

RE: Excellent.
By Zingam on 8/10/09, Rating: -1
RE: Excellent.
By MrBlastman on 8/10/2009 1:07:04 PM , Rating: 5
Cthulhu wants to have a chat with your virgin body... ;)

RE: Excellent.
By Danish1 on 8/10/2009 1:45:24 PM , Rating: 2
I think creating a Mayan God of War to wreck havoc on earth is beyond even a large haldron collider.

but I could be wrong I guess.

RE: Excellent.
By Iaiken on 8/10/2009 2:16:30 PM , Rating: 4
In the off chance that you are not just being daffy:

The Mayan's base-20 math system was capable of calculating out well beyond December, 2012. There were numerous times where dates were found far beyond the scope of the supposed doomsday. These included a date roughly 41,341,050x10^21 in the future.

In reality, it is almost certainly a case of parsimony where the Mayan mathematicians simply didn't see a reason to include the leading zero on their date. Think about it this way, the time span from to would have taken them from August 3114 BC to December 2012 AD. It is only logical to think that, had their society managed to survive to 2012, they would simply roll over to the next significant digit(or

The dissemination of the 2012 doomsday message has been a matter of commercial success for many people looking to cash in on this clever bit of fiction (I'm looking at you New Age!). More likely than not, we'll see nothing but a rise in 2012 stupidity as the day grows near and passes just as Y2K did and numerous other predicted end days.

It will come, and it will pass and those who capitalized on fear will count their royalty cheques and move on.

RE: Excellent.
By Ammohunt on 8/10/2009 2:36:57 PM , Rating: 4
My understanding is that the 2012 date on the mayan calendar was to signal an end to an age not the world but i may be wrong. Don't get your hopes up for a quick end to the world if it does happen it will be gradual over a period of years(like 8;starting january 20th 2009)

RE: Excellent.
By lco45 on 8/10/2009 7:45:00 PM , Rating: 4
What everyone seems to forget is that the Mayans were primitive screwheads, to use Ash's immortal phrase.


RE: Excellent.
By FaaR on 8/11/2009 6:16:57 PM , Rating: 2
They were certainly less primitive in many ways than the screwhead conquistador robbers and thieves that landed on their shores and brought about the end of their civilization.

RE: Excellent.
By lco45 on 8/11/2009 9:42:19 PM , Rating: 2
The Mayans were orders of magnitude more primitive than the Spaniards.

Their mathematics was almost childishly trivial compared to the greeks of thousands of years earlier. The Spaniards had universities, embassies, factories, metallurgy, pack animals, chemists, global trade routes, small arms and artillery, the list goes on.

The Mayans were just as intelligent as anyone else, but were handicapped by being out in the middle of nowhere, away from the exchange of ideas in Europe, North Africa and Asia.

It was a shame they were run over by the Spaniards, although their civilization had been in decline for hundreds of years before the Spanish arrived.


RE: Excellent.
By MrPoletski on 8/11/2009 5:32:00 AM , Rating: 2
well we are approaching the end of the industrial age...

not sure what you'd call the age we are entering now, but we are moving away from oil (albeit slowly) and towards more sustainable sources.

The fact that mankind has said 'we need a sustainable source of fuel/energy/food' is great, I think it's the first time in our history we have ever said it - or at least ever said it and actually started doing something about it.

RE: Excellent.
By Ammohunt on 8/11/2009 10:57:36 PM , Rating: 2
The industrial age ending along time ago we have been in the information age for quite some time.

RE: Excellent.
By invidious on 8/10/2009 5:49:24 PM , Rating: 2
A convinient position to defend, if you are wrong no one will be around to say they told you so.

RE: Excellent.
By Iaiken on 8/11/2009 10:41:20 AM , Rating: 2
You can argue for arguments sake.

I was simply pointing out the most logical conclusion to the question. I could also offer up millions of increasingly absurd conclusions; but based on our knowledge of their number system and the math behind it, it be a waste of time.

To go back to the rule of parsimony, the simplest answer is most likely the correct one... The notion that the Mayans could forecast the end of the world is incredibly complicated and introduces unanswerable questions...

If you really do buy into it, I would suggest that you live according to Carpe Diem so that if the world ends tomorrow, you won't miss it. :P

RE: Excellent.
By otispunkmeyer on 8/10/2009 5:33:02 PM , Rating: 2
because the experiment has cost at least $6bn ... you dont wanna have it blow up in your face when you turn it on. you want it to work...that takes massive amounts of prep work.

im suprised they got this far to be honest... that thing is insanely complex

RE: Excellent.
By MrPoletski on 8/11/2009 5:33:32 AM , Rating: 2
im suprised they got this far to be honest... that thing is insanely complex

That's what they said about the moon landings, about the computer... hell probably about the wheel thousands of years ago..

That's funny...
By Indigo64 on 8/10/2009 12:15:14 PM , Rating: 2
I just got done watching the episode of "World's Toughest Fixes" on my DVR where they were inserting the last section of the collider & connected it, then started surfin the web moments after and I find this story.

RE: That's funny...
By Nobleman00 on 8/10/2009 2:13:54 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I saw that, they fixed the leak with some bubble gum and Gorilla Tape.

RE: That's funny...
By Omega215D on 8/10/2009 3:44:03 PM , Rating: 2
What am I, MacGuyver? Fix it with what??

RE: That's funny...
By camylarde on 8/11/2009 5:53:16 AM , Rating: 2
A staple gun and a cotton sheet should be just enough McGyver!

OH NO! Its not Dec 21 2012 yet!
By nangryo on 8/10/09, Rating: 0
RE: OH NO! Its not Dec 21 2012 yet!
By axeman1957 on 8/10/2009 1:08:04 PM , Rating: 2
thats the day they put it up to full power

RE: OH NO! Its not Dec 21 2012 yet!
By SublimeSimplicity on 8/10/2009 1:13:51 PM , Rating: 2
But the real question... does the dial only go to 10 or does it go to 11?

By Alexstarfire on 8/10/2009 1:20:21 PM , Rating: 3
Nope, it goes up to 12 just for the irony.

All I want to know is...
By Nobleman00 on 8/10/2009 2:19:44 PM , Rating: 3
When will this thing open the gateway to Azeroth?

RE: All I want to know is...
By spartan014 on 8/11/2009 8:08:01 AM , Rating: 2
I have already got my hands on the Sword of a Thousand Truths you r*tard...

Seems logical
By IcePickFreak on 8/10/2009 2:40:47 PM , Rating: 2
Wouldn't expect them to fire this thing up and mash it to the floor right out of the gate. I hate to fathom how many components it took to make this unit, and it being on the cutting edge of science, some testing before going balls out seems to be a logical approach.

As far as this thing destroying the Earth, I think we'll be destroyed by an Illudium Q-36 explosive space modulator first.

RE: Seems logical
By JediJeb on 8/10/2009 6:05:53 PM , Rating: 2
"Where's the Kaboom? Where's the Earth shattering Kaboom?!"

I'm going to babysit them
By Armageddonite on 8/10/2009 4:52:20 PM , Rating: 2
I'm as impatient as anyone...I'll be checking their cooling status on a daily basis. Here's the page to do this; they have a color diagram so you know approx. how warm/cold each area is:

RE: I'm going to babysit them
By grath on 8/10/2009 7:35:01 PM , Rating: 2
That must be some damn impressive impatience you got there if youre gonna check it every day, considering they havent updated that diagram in 3 weeks...

Let's hope it delivers the goods.
By Meejoe27 on 8/10/2009 10:32:39 PM , Rating: 3
After all this there better be some awesome discoveries.

If this thing doesn't deliver it will be the biggest scientific dissapointment in recent history, or at least the most expensive.

By MrPoletski on 8/11/2009 5:37:21 AM , Rating: 1
I expect this thing to build a gravity drive for my car by the year 2020... DAMMIT! ;)

Not complete
By gmyx on 8/10/2009 2:13:15 PM , Rating: 3
The title to this article is wrong. Repairs are not complete, the press release is about the planned November Start-up at half power. :
[...]during the past week vacuum leaks have been found in two "cold" sectors of the LHC. The leaks were found in Sectors 8-1 and 2-3 while they were being prepared for the electrical tests on the copper stabilizers at around 80 K. In both cases the leak is at one end of the sector, where the electrical feedbox, DFBA, joins Q7, the final magnet in the sector.

Unfortunately, the repair necessitates a partial warm-up of both sectors. This involves the end sub-sector being warmed to room temperature, while the adjacent sub-sector "floats" in temperature and the remainder of the sector is kept at 80 K. As the leak is from the helium circuit to the insulating vacuum, the repair work will have no impact on the vacuum in the beam pipe. However the intervention will have an impact on the schedule for the restart. It is now foreseen that the LHC will be closed and ready for beam injection by mid-November.

Science today is a joke
By bill3 on 8/11/2009 8:06:03 PM , Rating: 1
Forget this expensive piece of shit ever working. Go back to fabricating global warming mythologies and not curing diseases, science.

RE: Science today is a joke
By lco45 on 8/11/2009 10:03:32 PM , Rating: 2
Stupidity and climate change denial so often find a home in the same brain.


I am ready for the future.
By SlipDizzy on 8/10/2009 12:12:36 PM , Rating: 2
Set the dial for 2021, I want to go live in the ocean.

By Mjello on 8/10/2009 4:49:06 PM , Rating: 2
funny how people predict the end of age in almost every new thing, when we are allready in control of the button to do just that.

Its never more than "a push of the big red button away anyways".

black hole for black money...
By amagriva on 8/11/2009 5:04:18 PM , Rating: 2
With the threat of the SEC investigations on covert bank accounts the swiss bankers are looking for a new place where to hide mafia money...
Another way they are attempting is stuffing money on catamarans on Geneva's lake and transporting it out of the borders with helicopters.
These foxy neutral neutrons!

By Nobleman00 on 8/11/2009 7:33:36 PM , Rating: 2
Steve Jobs is behind this somehow.

“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads
Related Articles

Most Popular ArticlesFree Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM
Top 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki