This 'God Particle'

The reason I think its hard for the public to see the need for it is mainly because they theory behind is extremely difficult and its hard to get to grips of what it is essentially is

Not gonna type a long explanation there is a very good article here for those that are interested.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... -care.html

All of the major discoveries of our time have come through research so how can research into something as potentially important as this be a waste of money?

Angry Man used the phrase 'waste of money', but that could also be translated into 'used better else where' and that would be a valid point.

I'm not really against your opinion either, I believe in mankind extending his knowledge but there also needs to be a practical benefit from any reseach.

None of the scientists have actually explained why these experiments are so important to you or me or why they are worth the massive expense. Yes they have explained about the 'big bang'/'creation of the universe' etc. but in practical terms that doesn't really mean any kind of benefit to the wider population.

Therefore it would be valid to claim that the money could be used better on something else.

The reason I think its hard for the public to see the need for it is mainly because they theory behind is extremely difficult and its hard to get to grips of what it is essentially is

Absolutely correct and that's why some might think it is a waste of money.

The reason I think its hard for the public to see the need for it is mainly because they theory behind is extremely difficult and its hard to get to grips of what it is essentially is

Absolutely correct and that's why some might think it is a waste of money.

But the problem is that they can only simpify it so much. The good thing is though its not any one country contributing money towards it its a whole host of nations

The reason I think its hard for the public to see the need for it is mainly because they theory behind is extremely difficult and its hard to get to grips of what it is essentially is

Absolutely correct and that's why some might think it is a waste of money.

But the problem is that they can only simpify it so much. The good thing is though its not any one country contributing money towards it its a whole host of nations

It was $10 billion when they built it and considering the number of countries contributing to it then it hasn't really cost a lot of money in real terms.

The theory is complicated I will agree but take for example the quote is posted at the bottom of page 1 of this thread that is a concept that most people could understand.

The reason I think its hard for the public to see the need for it is mainly because they theory behind is extremely difficult and its hard to get to grips of what it is essentially is

Absolutely correct and that's why some might think it is a waste of money.

But the problem is that they can only simpify it so much. The good thing is though its not any one country contributing money towards it its a whole host of nations

It was $10 billion when they built it and considering the number of countries contributing to it then it hasn't really cost a lot of money in real terms.

The theory is complicated I will agree but take for example the quote is posted at the bottom of page 1 of this thread that is a concept that most people could understand.

Unfortunatly it also costs alot to run the LHC. Yes the article perfectly outlines what it could be useful for but those articles rarely get seen by the general public. The one point from the article about using imaging for mass using the boson could be possible but itll be a very long time before it is in use. And the other problem is that the Higgs Boson only lasts few an incredably small time