,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Thread. Scientific research has tremendous innate value, and detector development (and training of scientists/engineers) has clear and tangible contributions to the economy. At the same time, resources are not infinite.
There are lots of considerations here, not the least of which is that it's not possible to shelve an entire field for a decade (or longer) & expect it to pop back up when the time is right. People will move onto different careers or different applications; that loss is permanent.
But: it's not good enough to say 'trust us'. Make the case for future facilities, but it's not reasonable to assume that there will always be $ for the next desirable experiment. In the face of the unknown, it makes sense to take a step back and ask about the best approaches.
In this case, the best approach may well be going to a new collider immediately. But let's make the arguments, and let's hear the counter-arguments. Let's disagree, even vigorously, but not vindictively.
Most importantly, let's fully fund whatever I'm working on at the moment.
