I’ve come to learn through extensive research on the Large Hadron Collider that there are viewpoints, which seem to be set to a stalemate. First the pro benefits to the LHC include ideas such as the possibility to increase the energy efficiency of viewing particle reactions by a factor of four. We may also look at how it examines such issues as: the flow of "interlaced" knowledge between specialist teams; the intra- and inter-organizational dynamics of "big science". “Big science” being what they refer to the new capabilities they plan on discovering using this technology. Although this positive outlook looks very convincing there are cons. Firstly there is the undeniable fact that this experiment is very expensive and has hit a heavy toll on the funding toward the LHC. Also there is another downside, which pertain to the LHC being that it is potential that a “Runaway Fusion Reaction” may occur in the LHC Carbon Bean Dump, which could be very hazardous and are highly against safety regulation. Large Hadron Collider: Risks Vs. Benefits
Question 1: What are the anticipated benefits to the experiments with the LHC?
Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2710348/Stephen-Hawking-Large-Hadron-Collider-vital-for-humanity.html, Stephen Hawking: Large Hadron Collider vital for humanity. Prof Hawking, the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, said: "The LHC will increase the energy at which we can study particle interactions by a factor of four." Source: http://www.us.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Business/Management/OrganizationalBehavior/~~/dmlldz11c2EmY2k9OTc4MDE5OTU2NzkyOA==, Collisions and Collaboration; The Organization of Learning in the ATLAS Experiment at the LHC The kind of "big science" being pursued at CERN, however, is becoming ever more uncertain and costly. Do the anticipated benefits justify the efforts and the costs? This book...