Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Science

CERN, LHC Sets New Luminosity World Record 71

Posted by Soulskill
from the celebrate-by-destroying-a-universe dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Since last night, the Large Hadron Collider is officially the most powerful accelerator in the world. While a record energy level had been reached last year, the new luminosity level, surpassing Fermilab's capabilities, is a new achievement. 'Higher intensity means more data, and more data means greater discovery potential,' as CERN Director General Rolf Heuer says."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CERN, LHC Sets New Luminosity World Record

Comments Filter:
  • by liquidpele (663430) on Friday April 22, 2011 @09:45AM (#35905970) Journal
    puts on sunglasses

    Seem very bright.
    • by bberens (965711)
      The future is bright, you must wear shades.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      Seem very bright.

      OOI as someone who has no connection with the LHC and doesn't even know much physics beyond a few modules as part of a mathematics degree, are the scientists working with it particularly bright? My understanding has been that, so far, it's a very high maintenance (albeit necessary) way of checking various existing theories in the mound of increasingly untested theoretical physics. IOW, it's more of an engineering feat than a scientific one. Or are unexpected observations being made leading to new physics?

      • by PvtVoid (1252388) on Friday April 22, 2011 @10:10AM (#35906180)

        My understanding has been that, so far, it's a very high maintenance (albeit necessary) way of checking various existing theories in the mound of increasingly untested theoretical physics. IOW, it's more of an engineering feat than a scientific one. Or are unexpected observations being made leading to new physics?

        Um. How are they supposed to be able to tell ahead of time when unexpected things [google.com] will happen?

        • I wondered whether they're being made, not whether they're hoping/expecting to make them. Although certain exercises are more likely to lead to new discoveries than others, and there's a difference between exploring new ideas as you develop theories and merely verifying an existing body of work.

      • by JamesP (688957)

        are the scientists working with it particularly bright?

        I don't think CERN scientists have a higher ratio of photon radiance in the visible spectrum (or even outside it) than scientists in other institutions.

        • by zpiro (525660)

          are the scientists working with it particularly bright?

          I don't think CERN scientists have a higher ratio of photon radiance in the visible spectrum (or even outside it) than scientists in other institutions.

          I can tell from your data that you didn't actually collide that question at CERN.

        • by nelk (923574)

          are the scientists working with it particularly bright?

          I don't think CERN scientists have a higher ratio of photon radiance in the visible spectrum (or even outside it) than scientists in other institutions.

          But we won't know for sure until we load them up, smash them together and see what comes out.

      • by myrikhan (1136505)
        Finding all of the existing physics is important as it helps calibrate the instrument and gives confidence it is working as expected.

        I've been spending some time on arXiv looking at LHC related papers. So far they are saying, "No new physics beyond the standard model has been detected." WRT the Higgs, it hasn't been detected yet either. Tighter constraints have been put on it's mass - Due to the combined efforts of the Tevatron, LHC , LEP2 and DZERO. It's very early though. Experts in the field say w
        • > WRT the Higgs, it hasn't been detected yet either.

          As I understand it, ruling out the Higgs would be new physics.

      • Well, since there is no way to predict if a new mathematics PhD will ever generate any important new mathematics, why are we supporting anyone to get a PhD in mathematics? Most math PhDs just use what has already been proven, so they are only checking existing proofs anyway. What use would new proofs be even if they are created?

        All I'm doing is applying your argument about physics to your domain, mathematics. I'm confident that you will now question math PhD programs, because application of your argument

        • You're reading more into my post than was written.

          Anyway, comparing the investment in mathematics PhDs with one of the most expensive pieces of scientific experimentation kit ever built is just silly. No group of mathematicians(*) in a particular field has ever demanded a budget of $9 billion.

          (*) We do not include economists, even though they have an at least passing notion of numbers and freshman algebra and calculus. If we did, I'd concede the argument immediately, as economology is the biggest exploiter

      • by tyrione (134248)

        Seem very bright.

        OOI as someone who has no connection with the LHC and doesn't even know much physics beyond a few modules as part of a mathematics degree, are the scientists working with it particularly bright? My understanding has been that, so far, it's a very high maintenance (albeit necessary) way of checking various existing theories in the mound of increasingly untested theoretical physics. IOW, it's more of an engineering feat than a scientific one. Or are unexpected observations being made leading to new physics?

        Where would Theoretical Physics and Pure Mathematics be without Engineering? You know, Applied Physics and Mathematics that tests whether theories are all BS.

    • I for one welcome our luminous rotating light-speed overlords.
    • by kimvette (919543)

      What I want to know is this: when will this technology be used to make HID headlamps even brighter? 5,000 lumens from 55W isn't enough! :-)

    • Seem very bright.

      Bright enough to know that the LHC has been the most powerful accelerator for a while. Power is energy per unit time, with a beam energy >3.5 times that of the Tevatron we need less that a third of the luminosity to beat the Tevatron in terms of power. This press release was about breaking the luminosity record i.e. the number of protons per area per second which is not the same as power.

  • Nailed! Higgs, here we come!

  • So where is the most powerful brake when you need it?

  • To be pedantic, the most powerful CW proton accelerator in the world is IIRC at Paul Scherrer Institute. Most powerful pulsed source is SNS at Oak Ridge both produce about a MW I think. LHC is highest luminosity which is different.
  • "Higher intensity means more data, and more data means more science!"

Genius is ten percent inspiration and fifty percent capital gains.

Working...