A posthumous memo by Stephen Hawking: towards a super collider in China (or at CERN?)
Among all current activities in particle physics today, a significant fraction of them focuses on investigating what could be the next collider experiment, i.e. the accelerator machine to be switched on in 15-20 years from now (if ever built).
I am personally quite involved in this task, and I have already written about it in the past (both through regular scientific publications and on Steem). I am indeed trying to show that there exists a way to probe one of the properties of the Higgs boson that no one really thinks we will ever manage to get. I like challenges (and abusing coffee)… For more information, I recommend reading this old post about my own research.
[image credits: CERN]
Although I was not expecting to write on future colliders at the moment, I was a bit surprized to read, earlier in April, a memo whose one of the authors was Stephen Hawking.
Not only was Stephen Hawking already deceased at that time (see by the way this beautiful obituary by Penrose), but this was also the first time that I read that he was giving some interest in the experimental collider future of particle physics.
In fact, this posthume article was distributed in China before the death of Hawking, but only appear on the arxiv a few weeks after his death. The title was very direct, Should China build the Great Collider?. He tends to say yes. I tend to say that one should build it, but not necessarily in China.
A 50-YEARS TIMELINE
But before moving forward, it is interesting to explain why we should bother today about what should be built in 15-20 year from now. The reason is simple: the future is today. In order to be ready in 2035-2040 and switch on a super collider at that moment, one needs many studies, on top of the construction of the machine.
To understand this better, we can take the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, more commonly known as the LHC, as a historical example. If we look into the past, the first LHC research is dated from roughly 1985, whilst the machine started to operate more or less 20 years later. It will furthermore run until 2035.
[image credits: CERN]
This is a spread of 50 years. 20 years were needed to understand the physics that could be done at the LHC, to freeze the technology to be used and to build the machine. 30 years will then be used to exploit its potential in the best possible way.
So, if we want a kind of continuity after the LHC, i.e. some collider experiments to be started in 2035-2040, we are actually already slightly late for thinking about the future!
This is why physicists are now actively investigating the options.. Not only at CERN where a post-LHC apparatus could be built (see the map on the right for instance), but also in China.
A FUTURE CIRCULAR COLLIDER? WHY?
The first question to ask concern the physics opportunities of a potential new machine. Equivalently, why do we need another collider after the LHC? This obviously depends on the findings (or non-findings) of the LHC.
[image credits: marsspF2 (CC-SA 3.0)]
Case 1: The LHC will find, in the next few years, something like a new particle or dark matter.
After this discovery, the main issue will be to characterize the new beast and measure its properties.
However, in most well motivated theories extending the Standard Model of particle physics, there is never one single new particle, but instead a plethora of them.
It is therefore very likely that the LHC will only allow to get crude hints on physics beyond the Standard Model. Another more powerful collider will be necessary both for cornering better the particles found at the LHC and discovering the expected more massive guys.
Case 2: Nature is trickier and the LHC will only get glimpses about new phenomena through deviations from the Standard Model. In this case, our theoretical understanding allows us to get an idea about where new particles are hiding (in terms of the right energy scale to probe).
Once again, a new more powerful machine exploring the right scale is the way to go to open the door to new phenomena!
[image credits: Pixabay (CC0)]
Case 3: Nature could in principle screws us even harder, and all observations after 30 years of LHC operation will be the Standard Model of particle physics and nothing else!
In this case, one will have to verify that every single parameter of the Standard Model matches the expectation.
And we know that the LHC is not sufficient for this task, as discussed in this post where I present my own research about the self-interactions of the Higgs boson
We thus needs again to think bigger with a greater machine!
HAWKING’S STAKE… AND MINE
There are many options for this new machine. One of them focuses on a 100km long collider with a collision energy reaching 7 times the LHC one. A huge LHC somehow, that consists in a perfect plan for any of the three cases above.
[image credits: Fermilab (public domain)]
The vision of Hawking (and his co-author Kane) is to build this machine in China.
In this memo, they address the question both from the scientific, cultural and economical standpoints.
I however think that most of what the authors say also applies to a second option for this machine, located at CERN.
I have already given my opinion about the scientific opportunities. This is mostly shared by the two authors, although I disagree with them about putting once again supersymmetry in the spotlight.
On the other hand, building such a machine involves the accelerator and imaging industries, magnet technologies,… This project will hence definitely generate revenues exceeding by far the investments. But this has always be the case: new technologies and techniques emerge from particle physics because it lies at the frontier of knowledge.
And we have yet not talked about all people getting a PhD on this topic and enriching the industrial workforce at the end of their thesis. Not everyone indeed stays in physics!
CERN OR CHINA?
Whilst a super collider may allow China to take a leading role in particle physics, being at the roots of the development of a new world center for high-energy physics, the entire accelerator complex will have to be designed from scratch.
At CERN, the LHC will be taken as a pre-accelerator and that many things are thus already in place. On the other hand, the LHC will be exploited as much as possible before being shut down, which may delay the full thing.
Therefore, both options need to be considered for now. Who knows what our future will be?
Once again, some stupid stuff is hidden in this post… Can you find it?
STEEMSTEM
SteemSTEM is a community-driven project that now runs on Steem for more than 1.5 year. We seek to build a community of science lovers and to make the Steem blockchain a better place for Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM).
More information can be found on the @steemstem blog, on our discord server and in our last project report. Please also have a look on this post for what concerns the building of our community.
SOmeone said you have been kidnapped by the french community and I was preparing to put forward a rescue army. You rightly belong to steemstem and yea, glad to have you back.
Hawking is a visionaire which is one of the attributes of great men. About the location of the new collider, can you briefly summarise the pros and cons of China/CERN? (sorry, I'm probably too lazy to read one of the links which could have it).
Ahaha, you may want to ask @howo. He is dreaming about cornering me to get some drinks! More seriously, I was traveling back to Europe on Thursday-Friday, and I was then quite busy with work, having 3 visitors to take care of. But don't worry, I am never away for more than 2-3 days.
For the moment, particle physicists are assessing the potential of a collider to be placed in a 100km-long tunnel. Whilst this was initially a post-LHC project for CERN, the Chinese community has proposed to build it there. The main difference between both is that at CERN, a facility already exists and will be used in the project. In China, everything will have to be built form scratch. In terms of funding, the situation is not clear for any of the two options, at the moment. Whilst the CERN option will be cheaper, China has recently demonstrated its capacity in handling big scientific project. So...
We will probably know more by the end of this year.
My optimal vision would be to have a electron-positron collider in China (for which the technology exists) and keep the proton-proton option for CERN (for which the technology does not exist yet but whose existing installation may be used). The electron-positron machine is sometimes seen as an intermediate step to the big proton-proton machine, but I think these must now be seen more decoupled.
However, note that the chances to see both colliders are tiny (but non zero), as Politics also enters. I don't personally care as long as we have a new collider somewhere.
This being said, I didn't answer your question. But there is no well defined answer, as you can guess :D
"Ahaha, you may want to ask @howo. He is dreaming about cornering me to get some drinks! " And I half succeed once !
Why "half" though?
Met him but we did not have drinks :p we just ate.
I cannot drink during working hours :)
Your post is always different i follow your blog everytime,your post is so helpful.I always inspire of your post on my steem work.Thank you for sharing @lemouth
Believe me, the pleasure is for me. Thanks for passing by and for your nice comment!
Well, I think it is rather obvious why many would agree for while a collider of this magnitude could be built in China.
1.- It would decentralize the technology CERN already controls. Making a super power such as China's to also develop this structures, will provide different angles as for how the discoveries can be implemented on. So in my opinion, where it should be built the answer is: in both places.
2.-The fact CERN has better resources and advancements to carry out such a project are a matter of no discussion. However, that's not necesarily a bad thing. Such a huge monster like China is will definately end up encouraging scientists to work for them as they have the money for it.
Hopefully the project ends up bringing humanity interesting advancements (I can't wait to see what the whole black matter issue will end up like).
Thanks for the comment. I kind of disagree with both your points and I will try to clarify why.
1- Such a project is not the product of anyone or any institute, but the results of the joint action of particle physicists from all around the world. The LHC collider experiments involve research from everywhere, including China, for instance. Moreover, the technology developed to build the machine has no patent and therefore belongs to the public domain. In addition, (yes they are more)m the experiments are self-managed by people elected by the experimental community itself. The fraction of CERN people in there is non zero, but very small compared to other countries,
For this reason, CERN does not really 'control' anything. What is right is that CERN runs the accelerator. But we cannot talk about control, again.
As the next collider will be a world project again, that will be driven by the community, there is probably no big difference on the physics side (which is what matters for discoveries, or science).
Having twice the same experiment? This would be a dream, but we are probably not a big enough community for that. Or the funding should increase by a lot.
2- China has the money, this is right. But they can't do it alone. They are missing the resource people who are mostly Europeans and Americans. The cultural shock may be a frontier here. Who knows.
Black matter? Do you mean dark matter, by any chance? :D
Thanks for the answer!
Hahaha Yes, I got lost in translation there, sorry.
It is nice to receive a better explaination on how CERN works from an insider. Forgive me for my assumptions on what CERN would or not control. I just think China has become a country which is decided to lead top projects like this one by themselves (seen from a political view, since of course they'll need as much international scientists as possible).
I think China and their associates want to make a statement to the world, that they are not just an overpopulated rich country with cheap labor and highly industrialized facilities. And if they manage to handle a project such as this one, it will surely be loud.
I am sorry if I dragged the whole matter into such a dark topic like politics (that pun was terrible haha), but that's just why I think there is so much enthusiasm for China nowadays.
I am so thrilled to continue hearing from the turn of events. Please, keep us posted!
This is definitely correct. The question is now whether they will jump on this one or not. Because of all the difficulties attached to it. This is much larger than anything that has been done so far, I think, in terms of numbers of people and countries.
I just hope something will happen, could it be at CERN or in China. I personally don't mind as long as I have money to cover my flights (this is by far not clear for China) to get there :)
We'd better get your steemit posts to produce that much money then haha
Good luck there! If someone like myself can be of any help, just count on it!
I am not sure my steem posts will be of any help here. The necessary amount of money is waaaaay larger (this is why we need many countries together) :)
black matter might end up not being matter. :)
It depends whether it is dark or not ;)
Like someone said, almost everything is made in China. That is easy to see why that could be true. They have cheap labour. They have the one of the world's most technologically advanced workforce. I understand the need for continuity if it was done in CERN rather than China. But the economics of it may leave China the winner in this bid. Hopefully they'd finish it in our lifetime (if they get to build it) and we see the result of the experiment.
For the sake of the scientific opportunities I can only hope it gets done at CERN.
They have the workforce, but the technology people are mostly Europeans and Americans. Therefore, things are not that clear. In terms of funding, a single country cannot cope with such a project. One needs contributions from many countries, which is already in place at CERN.
I personally hope to have it happening. The location does not really matter. And as said in my answer to the comment of @gentleshaid, there are enough project to reasonably have one in China (the electron-positron version of the collider) and one at CERN (the proton-proton version of it). On the other hand, having two big collider projects... I don't know whether this is realistic.
For the moment, the only certainty is that things are unclear.
This answers all my questions.
Cool! :)
what do you mean about 'for the sake of scientific opportunities'? Perhaps I will be less inquisitive if you say for consolidation sake
Consolidation helps the scientific opportunity.
The scientific opportunities are the same. They are connected to the machine that is the same in both cases. It is more a matter of politics, culture and economy, as said elsewhere.
I am not so sure CERN needs to be consolidated. Can you please extent this comment a little bit. I am no really sure to see what you mean.
What I guess he means by that is the seamless running of the project since it'd be close.
By consolidation, I mean building on what is already established
Ah ok, you meant extending the existing facilities. Because in terms of people, I am not sure this will change anything.
Thank you @lemouth. You have really inspired me to learn more about the field of particle physics, but its just such a beast to get your head around.
Definitely not Australian this time (again). If you are looking for learning material, I can recommend you to start here. Be careful, the link is booby-trapped: one link hides many links. ^^
And what will happen to it then? Disassembled and sold as spare parts?
Does the design of the new collider vary according to which particles they'll want to probe, or is it one-size-fits-all?
😑 Does anyone ever find these things?
Well, if a super collider is built, the LHC will be used as a pre-accelerator, as shown on the map presented in the post. The magnets will have to be all replaced, and I have no idea what will happen with the former ones. Maybe will you be able to buy one for your living room ;)
We don't know what we are exactly looking for, so that we must stay open to any option. Some of them will be reachable with the new collider, some of them not. But at some point, a line must be drawn. With the energy requirement of the next machine, we have some certainty to learn a lot about the Higgs. This is already something. For the rest, it really depends how evilistic is nature.
Yes! Two found it here :)
If you can use your connections to get me a good price for the magnets, maybe I can make something like this.
If you make one for me.... then we can discuss :D
Hmmm... The reason I mentioned you in a post I mentioned particle physics,lol.. The next collider experiment to be done in China?? Never knew.. I thought I already confessed I find particle physics mysterious but I think I'm begining to find it interesting. Well, maybe that's because this is not too deep. I think I might really develop some big interests if I keep reading posts that are not really to deep like this one.
But if I may ask, why does the collider have to be built in China?? You think Hawking had a reason for choosing China??
We don't know too, at least for now. But this is one of the options.
Lol! If lying a the frontier of knowledge and technology is not too deep, I don't know what you need. But I agree this post is probably lighter than my usual ones :D
The fact that there is an option in China has nothing to do with Hawking. The Chinese community proposed itself and Hawking liked the ideas, like many of us. However, in terms of science, the location does not really matter. The location is instead strongly correlated with politics, economical reasons, cultural reasons, etc.
This is exactly what I mean. It's lighter than the usual.
I will take a revenge with the next one, don't worry ^^
Lol
Particle physics not deep? woli agba, what have you been smoking? I need some of it because I know next to nothing beyond protons, electrons, neutrons and more recently, Higging bossom (hope i got the spellings) and neutrinos.
One says 'Higgs boson' actually. But yes, I don't know what he smoked. This post was maybe not cryptic enough (however, how can we be cryptic on such a topic) :D
Lol.. It was not cryptic as usual. If I start from reading works like this I might eventually have a thing for particle physics..
That is a great news then. Reading that someone finds my blog useful is always making me happy :)
@gentleshaid Lol at higging :)
Lol.. You think I've been smoking? Lol.. Of course not, I've seen @lemouth write topics I couldn't comprehend at all. I was able to completely read this and you think I smoked... 😂😂
bah... ;)
Hey @lemouth, thank you so much for your contributions, I've learned so much from your blogs.
The LHC is a true beast. Can't even imagine what next level machinery would perform like. By the way what does the term 'powerful' refer to in the case of circular colliders? I'm guessing it is somehow connected to the amounts of energy that can be produced.
Would be fun to see what the Chinese can do. One can expect a lot from their Engineers.
Is your beast more powerful? This should be demonstrated somehow... Let's switch on the magnets!
Unfortunately, we definitely need the rest of the world. For instance, the magnet technology is mostly American. Having the workforce is here not sufficient, which is why the scale of such a project would be the world :)
How about reviving the Superconducting Super Collider that was never completed ? Congress cancelled the project saying "Budget overrun" but it was because of the collapse of the soviet union (imo). They even have the tunnels and everything and also the collision energy is like 3 times that of LHC. So it makes sense to revive the SSC.
And as for the CERN or China question, i don't think geographic position matters at all, it's all about money. If China is willing to spend billions of dollars, then fine let it be in China :)
The SSC was less powerful than what we now aim for. We really need a new machine, for the simple reason that the technology (the magnets in particular) is not existing yet :)
Concerning the second point, it is not only about money. Of course, the host will contribute significantly. But other countries must also commit in a non-negligible amount. And then comes politics. Then culture. Then the mess ^^
Let me start by welcoming @lemouth back. Contrary to @gentleshaid opinion, I knew you weren't kidnapped 😁
Back to whether China should build the great Collider or not?. From the links you embedded in the post I discovered that the LHC CERN is not even up to 10years old. (10th Sept 2008). Why the hurry to quickly build another;I guess you physicists knows better , research work evolve daily. To build another one of 100km wide against CERN which is 27km is actually a welcome idea I believe. How ever, the question to be asked is if the Chinese guys are funding it, they will definitely put it on their own soil to prove to the world something I guess. Besides that, I think experience should be put into consideration, which should make CERN as the best location to be .
From another angle, will there be any seismic impact if two collider are placed within same geographical location?
I was not even really away ;)
It depends how you count. If you count from the first mention of it in 1986, it is kind of older ;)
This is at the end of the day politics... The targeted time is in any case in the post-LHC era.
At CERN, the LHC will play the role of a pre-accelerator (you can check this on the map). So, the two colliders will interact with each other, but on a controlled way. But no seismic impact, except maybe real earthquakes that won't probably hurt :)
Okay. Good