Anyone Else Staying Up For The CERN Announcement About The Higgs Boson Tonight?

[Ben Kenobi]

It doesn't count if it comes from a no-name university and you're banished from the country shortly after completion.

Asher, why does it matter what the name is on the degree? Science is science. Science shouldn't care whether your degree is from Yale or Harvard, it should care as to whether your ideas are correct. Saying that Yale and Harvard is what matters, is contrary to empiricism.

The most dangerous economists are the ones who think it is a science.

It makes claims that can be tested in the real world - it makes predictions (if you do x, you'll see y). Sounds like a science to me. You haven't studied it which is why you're supporting the ideas that you do support. If you understood economics, you'd also understand Kuci's and KH's argument. Your lack of understanding of economics is causing you to advocate positions that are harmful to scientific enquiries.

I don't like physics, actually. Hated it.

You support government funded scientific research because that's what you believe your money should be going. All fine and well - but supporting it because it forces other people to pay for it is wrong. You've got money - you want to see research happen - fund someone to do the research.

Yup. For instance, the private sector just found the Higgs Boson.

Have they, now? That's not what they are saying.

I heard Alberta Health is actually distributing condoms FOR FREE during the Stampede this week. THE NERVE, truly.

Thank you. You do support government intervention in the bedroom to support a cause you believe in. Nothing further.

[Ben Kenobi]

I recall arguing distinctly that NASA should NOT keep revisiting the moon. So it is most certainly not my argument.

By your own argument, your opinion is irrelevant. If the people want it then it should be funded. If you're arguing against the utility of returning to the moon - then you'd best start agreeing with Kuci, since that's his argument.

The people elect their representatives.

Where does it say in the constitution that an obligation of the federal government is to fund scientific endeavours?

As a scientist you seem to have difficulty understanding basic concepts.

Heh, I find it amusing that:

1, we the people are bad.
2, representatives are good since they chokehold we the people into doing what they (and I) want, and not what we the people wants.

[Kuciwalker]

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

Ask KH. My understanding is that his thesis topic wouldn't even have existed without the LHC.

I didn't say I disagreed with it entirely, just that it's hard to tell what comes first. I'm willing to bet some prospective scientists go into high-energy physics because it's what post-grads have them do the grunt work on, who in turn will be working in fields that have received funding and support. But which fields receive funding and support is a result of scientists in those fields getting grant proposals approved, and there are going to be a number of scientists who are in fields for the mere fact that those fields interest them. I know of no data clearly demonstrating one way or the other which influence is more dominant.

It doesn't matter. The size and retraining cost of the existing stock just aren't big enough to say "man, we have all of these physicists who'll be useless if we don't build the LHC, so (sigh) I guess we just have to go ahead and do it".

[Kuciwalker]

Many things came out of the race to get to the moon, e.g. better technology to detect breast cancer, just to name one. NASA currently gets 1/2 of each penny of American's tax dollars. A lot more could get done if we just doubled that (my preference is to take it from the bloated military budget which is funding planes and other items we don't need) but I would prefer to make it 2 cents/dollar. Developing new technology leads to many useful things. Check the NASA spinoff sites for these.

**** this argument, it is stupid. We could have developed all of those technologies without SPENDING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS PUTTING A FLAG ON THE GOD DAMN MOON.

[Ben Kenobi]

A lot more could get done if we just doubled that (my preference is to take it from the bloated military budget which is funding planes and other items we don't need)

4 years ago, debt to gdp was 60 percent. Now it's around 110.

Because of people like you, the US is broke. It's going to take 20 years to get that paid off again and we certainly can't afford frivolity like NASA.

[Lorizael]

Can we afford frivolities like Tevatron, BK?

[Lorizael]

Ask KH. My understanding is that his thesis topic wouldn't even have existed without the LHC.

So based on your understanding of what KH's thesis topic was, you generalized to saying our stock of high-energy physicists largely exists because of the LHC?

It doesn't matter. The size and retraining cost of the existing stock just aren't big enough to say "man, we have all of these physicists who'll be useless if we don't build the LHC, so (sigh) I guess we just have to go ahead and do it".

Here, I suspect, we differ philosophically. When it comes to government priorities, I have essentially two preferences and care about little else. One of those preferences is to advance human knowledge at almost any cost. There are a number of ways in which this is a stupid policy, but it is the correct one within the framework of what I believe. I won't really argue any further on that matter, because I don't delve deeply into my philosophy on Apolyton.

[Kuciwalker]

So based on your understanding of what KH's thesis topic was, you generalized to saying our stock of high-energy physicists largely exists because of the LHC?

No, it's based on a lot of personal anecdotes from friends who are physicists.

Here, I suspect, we differ philosophically. When it comes to government priorities, I have essentially two preferences and care about little else. One of those preferences is to advance human knowledge at almost any cost.

That's an obvious lie. Seriously, think about it.

[Lorizael]

That's an obvious lie. Seriously, think about it.

Excuse me? Clearly, I benefit from much that the government does that has nothing at all to do with advancing human knowledge. Regardless, these are not philosophical priorities for me. What I want and what benefits me as a person living in the United States are very different things. Don't presume to know how my ethics function.

[Elok]

**** this argument, it is stupid. We could have developed all of those technologies without SPENDING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS PUTTING A FLAG ON THE GOD DAMN MOON.

I don't know enough about physics to get involved in the rest of the present argument, but +1 for this.

[Hauldren Collider]

I think he meant to take your "at any cost" statement literally, i.e., you might stop short of Nazi style human research.

xpost

[Lorizael]

Fortunately, I said at almost any cost.

[Asher]

4 years ago, debt to gdp was 60 percent. Now it's around 110.

Because of people like you, the US is broke. It's going to take 20 years to get that paid off again and we certainly can't afford frivolity like NASA.

The US Military budget is one reason you're broke - not NASA.

[DinoDoc]

Nvm. misread post at first.

[giblets]

Fortunately, I said at almost any cost.

So why don't your ethics permit experimenting on humans?