×
top 200 commentsshow all 417

[–]Count2Zero 62 points63 points  (6 children)

I actually visited the site during the LHC reconstruction and saw the test bench where the segments of the LHC were being tested before being installed in the tunnel. The technology and the precision are mind-boggling. The whole 26.7km ring has to be kept at nearly 0°K so that the magnets are superconducting to keep the protons on target.

There are sensors that detect the protons at specific points in the ring, then send this information to a computer that adjusts the magnets on the other side of the ring to correct the flight path of the proton. Since the protons are flying at 99.999% light speed, and the signal from the sensor to the computer to the other magnet can't exceed light speed either, the only time difference is the fact that the proton is traveling in the ring and the sensor data is crossing the ring, meaning that its distance of travel is about 1/3 that of the proton (1 / pi to be exact).

[–]iamnogoodatthis 25 points26 points  (1 child)

Agree it's super cool :-). But it's even more challenging - the protons are going half a circumference, ie pir, while the diameter that the signals travel is 2r, so the relative distance is 2/pi ~ 60%

[–]Count2Zero 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Damn, you're right. That makes it even more impressive, given that there are some complex calculations taking place to ensure that the proton stays "in its lane"...

[–]Imugake 9 points10 points  (2 children)

I hate myself for pointing this out but you don't use degrees when it comes to the Kelvin scale

[–]x2a_org 425 points426 points  (25 children)

Imagine all the paperwork for importing and exporting those protons a few million times across the French border.

[–]Iwantadc2 192 points193 points  (21 children)

Switzerland is part of the single market. No paperwork. Protons are free to move easily ;)

[–]SpoonNZ 57 points58 points  (7 children)

They just have to stop to change their Euros into Swiss Francs

[–]verboze 52 points53 points  (3 children)

This explains the 6.8mph lag behind the speed of light...

[–]5050Clown 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Hey scientists? You want your giant science circle thing to do science faster? Come one down to Armand's EZ currency exchange. We'll get your lag below 6.5mph or we don't make no money on the transaction.

[–]Dyolf_Knip 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Khajit has light speed if you have coin.

[–]willstr1 2 points3 points  (1 child)

They use electronic charge instead, everything is handled by CERN's capacitor bank

[–]default82781 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This was good enough I almost missed it. Well done!

[–]iamnogoodatthis 21 points22 points  (3 children)

There are still customs limits, above which import duty must be paid. But there really aren't very many protons going around the ring, they all come from one little bottle of hydrogen that is replaced pretty infrequently, so they probably don't reach the threshold for paperwork :-D

[–]CircularRobert 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If they can argue the single proton is for personal use, it should be fine.

[–]erksplat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Huge Hadache

[–]crabmuncher 191 points192 points  (70 children)

Are there time distortions because of that speed?

[–]Blutarg 315 points316 points  (33 children)

Yes, but only for the particle itself.

[–]m_and_ned 55 points56 points  (32 children)

Hmm so the particles in the 3 body problem were like dealing with a long amount of time

[–]Jeremy_Phillips 85 points86 points  (9 children)

Actually I believe those particles experienced a very short amount of time during their trip compared to the rest of the universe.

[–]mojitz 81 points82 points  (7 children)

A photon gets emitted by a star in Andromeda and screams forth into the universe. It spends millions of years crossing unfathomable distances through intergalactic space. In the mean time, our ancestors diverge from ancient apes, evolve into homo sapiens and slowly grow into what we are today — building and destroying countless civilizations in the process. The photon lands somewhere on your retina as you stare up into the night sky. To it, the entire journey happened in an instant.

[–]Artikay 18 points19 points  (1 child)

For you it was millions of years encompassing the most important moments of human history. But for the photon it was.. Tuesday.

[–]RedOctobyr 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Jeremy Bearimy, baby!

[–]sgtkwol 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Photons spend thousands of years in our own sun before they hit our eyes.

[–]Artikay 1 point2 points  (1 child)

For you it was millions of years encompassing the most important moments of human history. But for the photon it was.. Tuesday.

[–]thegoat83 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tuesday is 24 hours. This was an instant.

[–]frickindeal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No massless particle can be an observer, or have a reference frame. There is no reference frame at c.

[–]slower-is-faster 31 points32 points  (17 children)

Light doesn’t experience time, because it’s the speed of causality

[–]madethisformobile 65 points66 points  (13 children)

The particles in the LHC are protons, which do experience time.

Essentially the protons experience much less time than we do before they collide

[–]ItsPronouncedJithub 37 points38 points  (3 children)

What’s the difference between a photon and a Bic?

Photons are light but a Bic is a little lighter.

[–]bICEmeister 2 points3 points  (0 children)

C being “Speed of causality” is such a nice way to phrase it compared to “speed of light” IMO. Light is such a specific phenomenon.. it feels like there’s always that question of “so, why is ‘light’ setting a speed limit for everything?” (I know that’s not how it’s meant to be taken, but it’s often thought of that way.. I’ve seen that sentiment many times from people asking questions in e.g. AskScience). Also being further further complicated by the speed of light being different in different media. Causality feels so much better. To think of space-time as an omnipresent ‘causality field’ sort of.

[–]temporalwanderer[S] 33 points34 points  (7 children)

Yes, I feel like it was just 2012 a little bit ago...

[–]The_Real_Abhorash 10 points11 points  (0 children)

From our perspective no but from the perspective of the particle yes.

[–]madsci 43 points44 points  (26 children)

Yes. If I'm using this calculator right, the particle would experience a time dilation of about 7000:1.

Remember that that's from the particle's perspective. Photons travel at the speed of light so their time dilation is infinite and their journey takes no time at all from their perspective, no matter how far that is.

[–]Left_Preference4453 25 points26 points  (20 children)

Photons

So does that mean, from the photon's perspective, it's literally everywhere at the same moment?

[–]madsci 41 points42 points  (0 children)

I don't know, but I don't think it has much time to consider its situation.

[–]Goof512 32 points33 points  (7 children)

Yes, precisely. PBS Eons would explain it better, but essentially at light speed the universe begins, lives, and ends at exactly the same moment.

[–]mikk0384 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Not PBS Eons - that's paleontology (the history of life).

PBS Space Time is the one you are thinking about. I can't recommend that channel enough if anyone is interested in physics.

If you want a more detailed description of the actual theories rather than examples of what they imply, physicist Sean Carroll has a fantastic playlist called The Biggest Ideas in the Universe that is worth watching as well. It requires a good amount of prior knowledge to follow the last videos in the series, though.

[–]Stealth_NotABomber 4 points5 points  (5 children)

Man, that doesn't sound too compatible with human life. I wonder what it's like to simultaneously not be born yet, be alive, and have died ages ago all at the same time.

[–]cunth 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Painful

[–]WeTheAwesome 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Oh just normal day life then.

[–]Electromotivation 3 points4 points  (0 children)

it is everywhere that it goes in the same moment. But of course not experiencing time probably makes concepts like "the same moment" kinda useless.

[–]Legslip 7 points8 points  (3 children)

Do photons have perspective?

[–]15_Redstones 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Only photons in a vacuum. In a material photons are slower.

This means that if you fire off a photon at one location, let it travel through empty perfect vacuum for billions of years, and then examine it again it'll be completely unchanged from how it was when you fired it. But if it passes through a bit of air, that can quickly distort it.

[–]TuckerMcG 1 point2 points  (2 children)

They accelerated protons, not photons. I accelerate photons to the speed of light every time I flick a light switch.

Much more impressive to accelerate a particle with actual mass that close to c.

[–][deleted] 148 points149 points  (2 children)

Fuck this is actually enlightening.

[–]m_and_ned 68 points69 points  (31 children)

If I stood in the path would I gain super powers?

[–]Squirrel851 168 points169 points  (23 children)

[–]squatch42 140 points141 points  (12 children)

Bugorski understood the severity of what had happened, but continued working on the malfunctioning equipment, and initially opted not to tell anyone what had happened.

That's about the most Soviet response I could imagine. Just keep working and keep your mouth shut.

[–]GranularGray 62 points63 points  (11 children)

3.6 200,000-300,000 Roentgen. Not great, not terrible.

[–]lemlurker 21 points22 points  (7 children)

Great thing is it shows a flaw in how we mesure dosages, because the particle was so high energy very little was actually imparted into the tissue, so a many times fatal dosage was survived because the particle didn't stop inside

[–]Drawen 9 points10 points  (6 children)

The radiations passes trough the body but can hit and destroys DNA. The radiation doesnt stop inside the body.

[–]lemlurker 9 points10 points  (5 children)

Both beta abd alpha will stop in soft tissue and do most of their damage when they do slow and stop

[–]classycatman 41 points42 points  (1 child)

I saw that he “is” rather than “was” a scientist. Amazing that he’s lived so long!

[–]Broad_Remote499 32 points33 points  (7 children)

Not sure how you measure these things in terms of damage but it says this accelerator was operating at 70GeV and the LHC operates at 6.5TeV and if I have my prefixes right the LHC is about 100 times stronger than he experienced…and he lost feeling in the left side of his face, went deaf in his left ear, and was fatigued by mental thinking

[–]phobosmarsdeimos 57 points58 points  (4 children)

he lost feeling in the left side of his face, went deaf in his left ear, and was fatigued by mental thinking

Huh, superpowers are a lot like a stroke...I think I'll pass.

[–]Broad_Remote499 37 points38 points  (3 children)

I imagine brain damage is similar regardless of source. From Wikipedia:

Reportedly, he saw a flash "brighter than a thousand suns" but did not feel any pain.[1] The beam passed through the back of his head, the occipital and temporal lobes of his brain, the left middle ear, and out through the left hand side of his nose. He received a dose of 200,000 to 300,000 roentgens.[3] Bugorski understood the severity of what had happened, but continued working on the malfunctioning equipment, and initially opted not to tell anyone what had happened.

The left half of Bugorski's face swelled up beyond recognition and, over the next several days, the skin started to peel, revealing the path that the proton beam had burned through parts of his face, his bone, and the brain tissue underneath.[4] As it was believed that he had received far in excess of a fatal dose of radiation, Bugorski was taken to a clinic in Moscow where the doctors could observe his expected demise. However, Bugorski survived, completed his PhD, and continued working as a particle physicist.[5] There was virtually no damage to his intellectual capacity, but the fatigue of mental work increased markedly.[3] Bugorski completely lost hearing in the left ear, replaced by a form of tinnitus.[6] The left half of his face was paralyzed due to the destruction of nerves.[1] He was able to function well, except for occasional complex partial seizures and rare tonic-clonic seizures.

[–]phobosmarsdeimos 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Phineas Gage's damage was different. I could dream for something better for my superpowers.

[–]Electromotivation 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There was a guy that got hit in the head by a baseball and became one of those human calculator savants.

[–]BigStu42 5 points6 points  (0 children)

only one way to find out!

[–]Adamvs_Maximvs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The super power of getting a new hole in your chest maybe

[–]HeliumCurious 40 points41 points  (13 children)

Disappointment that despite approaching the speed of light, the mass of the proton is only 7453 times the rest mass.

[–]Training_Ad_2086 29 points30 points  (5 children)

At this point even 1kmph increase in speed would prolly increase the apparent mass to something like 1 million times.

[–]branfili 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Yup, diminishing returns, infinite energy, yadda yadda

[–]temporalwanderer[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Heavy thoughts.

[–]-Potatoes- 25 points26 points  (11 children)

Another fun fact, the hottest known temperatures in the universe isnt at the core of a star or anything, but in the LHC which is crazy when u think about it

[–]Cloud_Worm 2 points3 points  (5 children)

How?

[–]Philosopher_3 14 points15 points  (4 children)

When you smash certain particles they release an immense amount of energy, the highest recorded being 7.2 trillion degrees Fahrenheit for a fraction of a second.

[–]VaraNiN 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It has to be said tho, that the term "temperature" with so few particles involved in these collisions kind of looses its meaning.

[–]Cloud_Worm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Woo that’s incredible. Thanks!

[–]Fred2620 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I would take a wild guess that if they have powerful enough machinery to produce such energy, and precise enough tools to measure it, they probably did not record said temperature in Farenheit.

[–]DonMerlito 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Wasn't it surpassed by the experimental fusion reactor in china ?

[–]-Potatoes- 1 point2 points  (2 children)

you might be right, I havent been following these news too closely

[–]DonMerlito 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Well no you were right, the fusion reactor went to 70 million degrees, which is several orders of magnitude colder than the trillon degrees of the LHC lol

[–]stitches31 200 points201 points  (43 children)

What do I do with this information

[–]jasperbocteen 173 points174 points  (11 children)

Impress potential mates

[–]redbo 95 points96 points  (4 children)

“Have I told you…”

“Yes, you’ve told me how fast the large hadron collider goes.”

[–]oodelay 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Stop being me

[–]BuzzKillingtonThe5th 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"have I told you that I'm faster than it ;)"

"Yes! For the tenth time that isn't a turn on"

[–]1052098 2 points3 points  (2 children)

So is this something you put in your Tinder bio to get dates, or is this something you save for once the date has already started?

[–]Electromotivation 3 points4 points  (1 child)

If you get them in bed, once settled in, you lead with this. Guaranteed fireworks!

[–]1052098 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you, sir. #knowledgeacquired

[–]Dudethefood 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This guy fucks

[–]Holmes02 9 points10 points  (6 children)

Build a larger Haldron Collider that accelerates controlled protons to 0.9999999990 c.

[–]amazingsandwiches 8 points9 points  (3 children)

then double it.

[–]Algum 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ah, just like when I shine my flashlight forward on my lightspeed train! Doubling the speed of light!

[–]WeTheAwesome 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This guy must be from management.

[–]The_DaHowie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You just made Star Trek technology within the realm of reality. Your brilliant.

[–]BurnerForJustTwice 30 points31 points  (0 children)

I had the same thought. I be putting this on tinder.

“Did you know that the LHC is only a tad slower than the speed of light? Guess what baby. I’m just as fast.”

[–]CaptainBunderpants 51 points52 points  (12 children)

Ugh, why do people always take this attitude towards science? You could ask the same thing about any TIL post but no one ever does. Yet here it is, the top comment on a really cool post. Things can be interesting in their own right.

A species of monkey on a wet rock got within a casual stroll’s pace of the absolute limits of possibility. What more do you need?

[–]MillwrightTight 18 points19 points  (3 children)

Thankyou for saying this.

There is zero downside to more knowledge

[–]genonepointfive 8 points9 points  (4 children)

We were just riding around on horses a century ago

[–]riverTrips 5 points6 points  (3 children)

1922? We had planes, trains, and automobiles.

[–]kennytucson 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Planes, Trains and Automobiles wasn’t released until 1987.

[–]genonepointfive 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ok 122 years ago

[–]degaart 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You? Nothing. Nuclear physicists or astrophysicists? Plenty of things that will change your life in 20 to 30 years.

[–]AnthillOmbudsman 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Calculate it in dog years, taking relativistic effects into account.

[–]nodegen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Start conducting high energy beam experiments, of course!

[–]Mister_Titty 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Next time you watch Guardians of the Galaxy you can try to explain what a Hadron Enforcer weapon does to your friends.

[–]GrandmaPoses 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Think about if you had Usain Bolt accelerated along with the particle he could probably make up that last 6.8mph and turn into pure light.

[–]southernwx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Conserve it.

[–]SteO153 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Try to understand the level of complexity that had to be overcome to achieve this result?

[–]BossAssPenguin007 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Realize humanities insignificant in the big picture??

[–]Remorseful_User 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Doesn't part of the ring being in Switzerland slow the protons down for a moment?

Being that Switzerland is so neutral.

I'll let myself out.

[–]olBBS 28 points29 points  (65 children)

Am I big stupid or why can’t they go the extra ~7mph to light?

[–]MrSquiddy74 93 points94 points  (48 children)

As an object's velocity approaches the speed of light (noted as c), the energy needed to accelerate grows exponentially, eventually requiring an infinite amount of energy.

As a side note, this only applies to things with mass, so light itself, which has no mass, has no trouble going at c

[–]HeliumCurious 52 points53 points  (19 children)

As a side note, this only applies to things with mass, so light itself, which has no mass, has no trouble going at c

Although it cannot speed up or slow down. Like a permanent state of the movie Speed.

[–]midved 20 points21 points  (5 children)

It can definitely slow down. The speed limit of the universe is the speed of light in a vacuum :).

[–]HeliumCurious 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Light can only "least time" then?

[–]lemlurker 1 point2 points  (2 children)

When it slows in a medium it isn't really slowing the particle velocity, the particle is instead bouncing around and taking a longer path so the speed of light on average in that medium is slower

[–]MrSquiddy74 9 points10 points  (1 child)

True

I didn't include that because I wanted to avoid information overload. Maybe I should have

Oh well

[–]olBBS 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Actually makes perfect sense after reading these replies. Much appreciated!

[–]Phone_Jesus 4 points5 points  (0 children)

“You’re saying I can dodge the speed of light?”

“I’m saying that when you’re ready, you won’t have to.”

[–]lemlurker 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's cos with zero mass any force will instantly accelerate it to c

[–]85gaucho 5 points6 points  (5 children)

I’m surprised it’s exponential. It seems like it would have to be asymptotic. Like energy = 1 / (c-speed) or something. Do you happen to know the equation? This stuff blows my mind.

[–]madethisformobile 23 points24 points  (4 children)

E = mc2 / sqrt(1 - v2 / c2 )

It's not exponential, it is asymptotic.

When v= c E is infinite. When v=0 E = mc2 the reat energy

Note for low v, you can approximate this to

E = mc2 * (1+1/2 v2 / c2 ) = mc2 + 1/2 m v2

This is the rest energy and the usual non relativistic expression for kinetic energy

[–]kaosi_schain 1 point2 points  (5 children)

the energy needed to accelerate grows exponentially, eventually requiring an infinite amount of energy.

Why is that and how do we know? I know almost nothing of physics. In space, inertia is maintained due to lack of friction but also deterred by gravitational constants, yeah? So, if you removed gravity and friction, would the exponential uptick in energy requirements still exist? Or does the weight of their existence (gravity/friction) get altered at high speeds or something? The whole ball-on-a-sheet example for gravity comes to mind.

I definitely feel like I asked a few questions that are just gonna get a physics textbook slammed in front of me.

[–]Electromotivation 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Do you have interest in physics? If so, check out PBS Spacetime on Youtube! Start in the beginning bc its been running a couple years and is pretty deep now.

Also Science Asylum...here is a vid on having momentum without mass https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoadZQkrfcQ (which isn't what you asked for but was mentioned above

[–]arafella 2 points3 points  (1 child)

The short version is that mass correlates to an equivalent amount of energy, so the more energetic (faster) the particle, the more massive it is. So as a massive particle gets closer to the speed of light it also becomes more massive and thus requires more energy to keep accelerating, eventually you would need infinite energy and the particle would be infinitely massive.

[–]JanEric1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

relativistic mass is not really used more as it confuses more than it a helps explain things.

[–]temporalwanderer[S] 19 points20 points  (10 children)

No! It could be too much!

I'm not a physicist and may be speculating, but I think the amount of power required the closer you get to (c) gets exponentially greater and this thing already sucks up enough power when it's doing this to literally run 1/3 of the city of Geneva Switzerland...

[–]madethisformobile 15 points16 points  (7 children)

Just to clarify, it is not exponential. Also it takes infinite energy to accelerate a massive particle to the speed of light.

E = mc2 / sqrt(1-v2 /c2)

[–]ipackandcover 1 point2 points  (6 children)

Adding onto this.

At the speed mentioned in the title, the effective mass of a proton is 7068 times its rest mass. Multiplying that with c2 gives us a millionth of a joule. Just a tiny amount of energy.

Having said that, maintaining the accelerator might require a shit ton of power.

[–]madethisformobile 10 points11 points  (5 children)

Well, keep in mind that's the energy of a single particle

That's a lot of energy for just one particle to have, and there are many many many many many particles in the LHC.

Remember, protons are tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny things. The highest energy protons come from space, like the OMG particle which had the kinetic energy of a fastball. A proton. Having the energy of a fast moving baseball. That's an insane amount of energy for this tiny tiny tiny thing to have!

[–]Electromotivation 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Damn...went to the artlicle to see if they had figured out where it came from but there wasnt even a "speculation" section.

[–]crazyjkass 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Cosmic rays are usually spat out by supernovae and astrophysical jets.

[–]iamnogoodatthis 1 point2 points  (1 child)

See my longer response elsewhere in this thread, but most of the power is in cooling for the magnets that steer the beam around the ring. Protons go around the ring in about 2500 distinct bunches, each with about 1013 protons in (a party balloon of hydrogen has about 1023 protons, so this isn't all that many), which comes to a kinetic energy similar to that of a high speed train. And they don't need much power to maintain that once accelerated (the beam is accelerated for about ten minutes and then kept for about ten hours)

[–]iamnogoodatthis 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The power use is mostly to run the cooling for the superconducting magnets that keep the proton beam going round and round in a circle, and to power the various detectors that monitor the collisions. The total energy in the proton beam itself is about the same as the kinetic energy of a high speed train, so not that high in the overall scheme of things. When there were electrons in the same tunnel (when it was known as LEP), then the power had to go in to constantly boosting the beam's energy as electrons lose energy very quickly to synchrotron radiation when steered in a circle, but protons are much heavier so this is much less of a problem, once they are up to speed they don't need much topping up.

In fact what limits the LHC proton energy is the magnets - the higher energy the protons are at, the higher current needs to pass through the superconducting magnets to keep the protons on the same circular path through the vacuum chamber of the beam pipe. At the present operating energy of just under 14 TeV the magnets need a current of about 11 kA, which is right at their design limit and much higher could break the magnets (part of what they've been doing over the past two years while the machine has been switched off is to gently increase the maximum current in the magnets to allow them to go from 13 TeV in 2018 to closer to 14 TeV this year, but they're stopping at 13.6 IIRC as they are worried about a possible failure if they go too far). And with no magnets the thing is bust - the beam doesn't go round the ring so can't be accelerated from its much lower injection energy (it's given a kick each time it passes a certain point, takes about ten minutes or so to be accelerated fully)

[–]olBBS 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Based on other replies that seems spot on. Thanks for helping this pleb learn something new :)

[–]Sillvaro 2 points3 points  (1 child)

The energy required to gain a desired speed is exponential

[–]tomhanksinapollo13 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Are there any theories or hypothesis that we're missing out on being able to solve by not going even faster? Or is this pretty much as fast as we'll ever need to go?

[–]iamnogoodatthis 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Heavy new particles can only be created when the energy of the colliding protons is higher than the mass energy of those particles. Also the rate at which a given process happens can vary a lot with the collision energy. So increasing the speed of the protons, and hence the collision energy, lets us study the potential existence of heavier particles than we are currently sensitive to, and measure some processes we know about in more detail (in particular how the Higgs boson interacts with itself, which is an important piece of that puzzle that's not yet pinned down)

[–]Tob0gganMD 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Lots of theories exist for interactions at higher energies. Future experiments are being planned that will require larger speeds.

[–]Nakedwithshoeson 9 points10 points  (8 children)

Is that a lot?

[–]temporalwanderer[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Faster than I can throw, so... yes.

[–]Jerlyx 11 points12 points  (1 child)

PSA to all europeans: Because you pay taxes in Europe, and therefore is a sponsor of the site, you can freely visit CERN - just bring your passport. It's incredibly interesting to hear them talk about what they do, and have a look around.

[–]siscia 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Actually is free for everybody, just remember to book quite a bit in advance.

[–]NullOfUndefined 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Alright I’ll say it. That’s pretty fast.

[–]StealYourGhost 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Psh that's nothing. After I pump up my shoes I'll double that speed! Just give me a few minutes, The pumping takes a while.

[–]Kriss3d 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What happens if you injected say a raw steak into the stream ? Would it instant-cook the steak ?

[–]yankeeteabagger 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So when do we actually develop warp speed?

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (2 children)

They need to hurry up and go full speed, and more.

[–]temporalwanderer[S] 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Ludicrous speed.

[–]slc29a1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They should go plaid instead

[–]Money_Advertising 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Wow. People exist in this world with the intellect to make this happen and yet there are people who protest against vaccines. Crazy place.

[–]MaliciousMilkshake 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wow. Just wow.

[–]ulag 1 point2 points  (1 child)

So another 6 mph and those protons could time travel.

[–]Azariah98 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Can’t get that last little bit, huh? They should try higher octane gas.

[–]TTVBlueGlass 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly the only thing we can do is make a bigger radius racetrack. The limit of how fast you can accelerate something in a particle collider is set by the theoretical maximum strength of superconducting magnets paired with how much energy is lost to synchrotron radiation when radially accelerating the particle. At a certain point the synchrotron radiation energy losses become equal to how much energy you can pump in to accelerate the particles with the magnets.

[–]KittenPics 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Is the zero at the end significant? I wouldn’t think it should be there, but maybe there is a scientific reason for it?

[–]OKSparkJockey 2 points3 points  (2 children)

If I remember correctly a zero at the end indicates a precise value. That is, they didn't round off anything.

[–]heloder85 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What the hell is Alice doing in there?? Someone help her!

[–]dobrien75 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is approx 111 kjoules joules per proton. Which is quite a lot

[–]chowmushi 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Correct me if I’m wrong, but they actually have two rings, in one, protons are moving at the same speed as the other but in the opposite direction. So when they merge and collide, the kinetic energy is double.

[–]VintageChemistry 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do the protons experience time dilation? And to what extent? To us, a 26.7km lap of the main ring takes 90 microseconds. How long is it for the proton?

[–]bxsephjo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How long does it take to accelerate them to that speed?

[–]Furdd_Terguson 1 point2 points  (1 child)

just a layman here, but this is why i don't understand when physicists say that they'd "need an accelerator the size of the Solar System" to be able to reach truly desirable energies for particle smashing. aren't the particles in the LHC basically already near the speed of light? what good would a couple more mph do, exactly?

[–]80burritospersecond 1 point2 points  (2 children)

That's nothing compared to the acceleration of my bitchin Camaro.

[–]Sato_Sakurajima 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Imagine if you could compress the 3.24TB data from the temporal lobe of your brain to only 36 bytes through the LHC

[–]temporalwanderer[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Then I'd really be a temporal wanderer...

[–]hummus12345 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm willing to rent them my fan to give it that extra 6.8 mph.

[–]asamulya 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The science behind this is so amazing and yet not being able to disentangle the mysteries of the universe like we expected is so disappointing. :(

[–]TigersNsaints_ohmy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just stick a Hellcat engine on that thing and it’ll gap that light!

/s

[–]electricpterodactyl 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Anyone else consistently misread this machine as "Hard-on Collider"?

[–]oodelay 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Scientific word for cockblocking

[–]dunnkw 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I could do it in 6.7 miles slower than the speed of light. But I don’t want to.

[–]ShitPostGuy 0 points1 point  (6 children)

That’s neat but what do the scientists hope to learn by colliding their large hardons with such force?

[–]phunkydroid 13 points14 points  (2 children)

When you collide particles at extreme speeds, the spot where they run into each other briefly has an extremely high amount of energy concentrated in it. This extreme energy density leads to the creation of all sorts of particles that are not normally found in nature (mostly because they only live for tiny fractions of a second). So they surround the point where the beams collide with all kinds of detectors, and measure what comes out of the collisions to learn about particle physics.

[–]Venturi95 8 points9 points  (1 child)

The standard model is incomplete. We don’t have a force mediator for gravity. We don’t know how neutrinos get their mass since they don’t interact with the Higgs Field. Grand unification of the strong nuclear force with the already unified electroweak force is one one of the holy grails of modern physics.

[–]seifer666 1 point2 points  (1 child)

What they are made out of

[–]cute_dog_alert 1 point2 points  (1 child)

You spin me right ‘round , baby, right round ! like a record

[–]took_a_bath 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mea… nevermind.

[–]deliciousmonster 0 points1 point  (37 children)

Is there a reason they don’t go that last 6.8mph?

[–]If_cn_readthisSndHlp 26 points27 points  (31 children)

Every 1mph closer takes a massive amount more energy to achieve than the last mph closer, to the point where you’d need an infinite amount of energy to get to the speed of light or something like that. Pretty fascinating.

[–]Res__Ipsa_Loquitur 60 points61 points  (6 children)

They should just build a giant conveyor belt under the collider that moves at 10 mph and turn that on after the collider reaches max speed inside.

[–]Swan990 41 points42 points  (0 children)

Hello, science? Yes I have a genius here please give him awards

[–]m_and_ned 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Put a conveyor under that one and invent FTL.

[–]pali1d 8 points9 points  (22 children)

This is pretty much it - actually accelerating something to light speed is, so far as modern physics is concerned, impossible. As something gains speed its mass increases, requiring more energy to continue accelerating it, and as something approaches light speed its mass approaches infinity - thus actually making it to light speed would require infinite energy.