Europe's new atom-smasher chief signals caution after breakdown

"But when you have been working on something for so long, with time you can become blinded by the system and don't find all the faults,"
This line is just complete bs. With time, you get more proficient, and are less likely to make mistakes. Ever heard the line practice makes perfect.
The guy is trying to keep his business policitcs in line, since he mentioned he doesnt "mistrust" the 10,000 employees, when in fact, thats exactly what it is to be saying a line like he did.

you have to love how the guy also mentions being better than his predecessor 1000 times here...I'm pretty sure they predecessor can't be at fault for a freakin hardware problem.

the problem isnt leadership. its commitment to science. the nations of the world need to dump 1 trillion dollars into science before we will find IT.

and this thing is worth the trillion too id bet

¿ that's reassuring?

Brandon,
I think that by saying he will be more cautious, he means that he will ramp up the power slower.

The idea of bringing in outsiders is for politics; it will help dilute the blame.

One wonders: If they couldn't get the hardware right, how good is their science?

Supposing it eventually works, how much trust might we place in their assurances that it's safe?

One wonders: If they couldn't get the hardware right, how good is their science?

Supposing it eventually works, how much trust might we place in their assurances that it's safe?

I hardly think a faulty electrical connection is grounds to discredit particle physicists.

I agree on having fresh eyes take a look at it. People that are used to being around such an impressive machine may soon lose the respect and care they once had for routine checks and basic maintenance.

total waste of time and money

Some people have quickly forgotten the mistakes that have been made (and, perhaps, are still being made) in America's space program due to "NASA culture." I don't see the international consortium responsible for the LHC as being immune from making similar mistakes. I hope the outside experts inspecting the LHC will do so in an atmosphere of complete independence. Many of NASA's problems have resulted from budget constraints. Failure to factor in the cost of failure has been an ongoing problem. I hope that is not the case at CERN.

I just want them to get the LHC up and running. the longer we go without firing it up, the longer we go with the silly, supersticious fear that hovers around it. Plus, I really want to see what they discover.
My bets are on subatomic ninjas being responsible for all the natural forces.

One wonders: If they couldn't get the hardware right, how good is their science?

Your right, only 'one' would wonder that.

From personal experience, it is much easier for someone familiar with something to overlook something. The more eyes on something, the better, IMHO. Peer reviews are a good thing. However, it only increases the likelihood that a problem will be found; it does not guarantee it. IMHO, what the director is planning on doing is, simply, good process.

I also found this guy's claims of being more cautious as interesting; almost like he's tooting his own horn too much. If there is another major failure, it will be interesting to see who he blames.

total waste of time and money

Not at all, but bellow Earth surface such experiments are too risky. In cosmic space we could save us money for cooling, vacuum, shaking shielding and whole accelerator could be a much larger/linear.

total waste of time and money

Not at all, but bellow Earth surface such experiments are too risky. In cosmic space we could save us money for cooling, vacuum, shaking shielding and whole accelerator could be a much larger/linear.

I don't think that would be much more cost effective. I agree that it would be much more desirable and efficient, but the cost of building a giant atom smasher in space would be astounding. Think of all the money put into the LHC, plus the cost to launch it all up and assemble it with a highly trained space-construction crew.

Hm, he said he won't make so much fuss. I wonder if he also consider the possibility of sabotage. In any case, I agree LHC should be examined as best as possible. After all, if you switch it on and it breaks it would cost much much more to repair it.

Here is risk of avalanche propagation of cooling system defects over whole LHC ring. Monitoring system of whole accelerator ring must be rebuilt.

Massive miscalculation makes LHC safety assurances invalid:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.5515