The Future Circular Collider (FCC) study develops options for potential high-energy frontier circular colliders at CERN for the post-LHC era. Among other things, it plans to look for dark matter particles, which account for approximately 25% of the energy in the observable universe. Though no experiment at colliders can probe the full range of dark matter (DM) masses allowed by astrophysical observations, there is a very broad class of models for weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) in the GeV – tens of TeV mass scale, and which could be in the range of the FCC.
Wild guess: they hacked the maths of those models/choose the models in order to fit the energy range of this new collider ? Ask Sabine H., need a BS meter evaluation... :)
This. If you want someone with honest insight into high energy theory, you probably shouldn't listen to a person who still pushes out papers that favour MOND over DM by curve-fitting special galaxies. This topic has been studied to death and it simply doesn't work well enough to warrant such strong opinions against DM. That's why her papers mostly go ignored in the community (many of them aren't even physics anymore and edge more into philosophy-babble or even sociology). All they do is make captivating conspiracy youtube videos for the average layperson.
You seem to have mistaken this fact for an opinion (all too common for her followers unfortunately). Fortunately, you can easily look up everything I said. But sorry, I don't have time to make brainrot youtube videos for people with no relevant education and no attention span. If you didn't know these things before, you also won't learn them on youtube. And I actually still have real work to do.
Of course, this sole HN comment is worth ten times more than a famous person making scientific videos on the internet... BTW, I wonder where is her mondo-meter at (aka "stuff" vs "model fixing").
We all know she has many enemies in the academics since targetting its funding... you are more likely to be one of them than anything else.
One comment. No. Countless scientific papers that have boiled into an accepted picture? Absolutely. But you won't hear about them if you only listen to one source on youtube who makes videos for non-scientists. Instead you'll see conspiracy everywhere. Like here somehow.
You are in luck, this is exactly the sort of questions that accelerator designers like to answer. You can find the answers on the first 70 pages in volume 1 of the FCC feasibility report: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2928193 just the first
I think the money would be better spent on gravitational wave detectors as they might detect data about the true nature of black holes and help us develop a theory of quantum gravity or at least rule some out.
These experiments afaik don't require particle accelerators and are a different field of science, one of the largest of these detectors is the LIGO observatory overseen by Caltech
I know. That is why I think the money that would be spent on a new particle accelerator should be spent on new more sensitive gravitational wave detectors.
just one more accelerator bro. just one slightly larger accelerator than the one we just got online. we can revolutinize physics with just one more accelerator bro. Just give me 20 billion euros bro and we'll solve physics I promise br
What experiments would people like to do, that this new collider would make possible? What theories will be tested?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Circular_Collider#Motiv...
The Future Circular Collider (FCC) study develops options for potential high-energy frontier circular colliders at CERN for the post-LHC era. Among other things, it plans to look for dark matter particles, which account for approximately 25% of the energy in the observable universe. Though no experiment at colliders can probe the full range of dark matter (DM) masses allowed by astrophysical observations, there is a very broad class of models for weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) in the GeV – tens of TeV mass scale, and which could be in the range of the FCC.
Wild guess: they hacked the maths of those models/choose the models in order to fit the energy range of this new collider ? Ask Sabine H., need a BS meter evaluation... :)
Sabine H. isn’t exactly low on the BS scale.
This. If you want someone with honest insight into high energy theory, you probably shouldn't listen to a person who still pushes out papers that favour MOND over DM by curve-fitting special galaxies. This topic has been studied to death and it simply doesn't work well enough to warrant such strong opinions against DM. That's why her papers mostly go ignored in the community (many of them aren't even physics anymore and edge more into philosophy-babble or even sociology). All they do is make captivating conspiracy youtube videos for the average layperson.
Wow, you have to make a detailing youtube video for all that, without this you are a 10...
I hope you understand why...
You seem to have mistaken this fact for an opinion (all too common for her followers unfortunately). Fortunately, you can easily look up everything I said. But sorry, I don't have time to make brainrot youtube videos for people with no relevant education and no attention span. If you didn't know these things before, you also won't learn them on youtube. And I actually still have real work to do.
Now you are a 20... or an AI. Come on...
Thank you for reinforcing my point. Even if you can't see it, anyone who reads this will.
Of course, this sole HN comment is worth ten times more than a famous person making scientific videos on the internet... BTW, I wonder where is her mondo-meter at (aka "stuff" vs "model fixing").
We all know she has many enemies in the academics since targetting its funding... you are more likely to be one of them than anything else.
"Anyone who reads this will see it".
...
AI?
One comment. No. Countless scientific papers that have boiled into an accepted picture? Absolutely. But you won't hear about them if you only listen to one source on youtube who makes videos for non-scientists. Instead you'll see conspiracy everywhere. Like here somehow.
You are in luck, this is exactly the sort of questions that accelerator designers like to answer. You can find the answers on the first 70 pages in volume 1 of the FCC feasibility report: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2928193 just the first
If you would like to know more details about the physics case for FCC, there was an academic training recently at CERN:
https://indico.cern.ch/event/1582427/
I think the money would be better spent on gravitational wave detectors as they might detect data about the true nature of black holes and help us develop a theory of quantum gravity or at least rule some out.
These experiments afaik don't require particle accelerators and are a different field of science, one of the largest of these detectors is the LIGO observatory overseen by Caltech
https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/what-is-ligo
There is a list of similar observatories in this document
https://dcc-llo.ligo.org/public/0125/G1600979/003/G1600979_L...
I know. That is why I think the money that would be spent on a new particle accelerator should be spent on new more sensitive gravitational wave detectors.
Would this be a different loop, but connected to LHC or is this a new standalone loop where they would need to find a locale to build it underground?
Completely new tunnel, but it will be connected to LHC, as they will use LHC to pre accelerate the particles.
Almost all accelerators built at CERN are still active and are a chain of pre-accelerator for LHC now:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#/media/F...
wow. Amazing map. Just imagine Half Life map with it... :)
That seems like insane engineering
This will be a completely new tunnel loop. The LHC tunnel will be used by LHC at the same time the new tunnel loop is being constructed.
Thanks for clarifying, much appreciated.
[dead]
just one more accelerator bro. just one slightly larger accelerator than the one we just got online. we can revolutinize physics with just one more accelerator bro. Just give me 20 billion euros bro and we'll solve physics I promise br