A tunnel that doesn’t connect to anything is a hole. Texas has one. It cost over two billion bucks to dig, and it didn’t come close to reaching its mark. The hole was the American version of CERN’s Large Hadron Collider. It was supposed to be not only a bigger underground tunnel, but also one that generated about three times the energy planned for CERN, where the Higgs boson was discovered.
Like many bureaucratic boondoggles, the Superconducting Super Collider, or Desertron, ran over budget, so Congress made a decision to spend money on the International Space Station instead. Was it a good choice? We’ll probably know eventually. In 1993 a proposed four billion dollar-plus science project that had little personal meaning for the average legislator—unless he or she hailed from Texas, where the money was to be spent.
Imagine the conversations.
“You want to build what?”
Scientist: “An underground experiment.”
“Okay, what kind of experiment?”
Scientist: “We want to find really little, teeny-tiny things that make up everything.”
“All right. That shouldn’t be a problem. Will it get me votes?”
Scientist: “It could if you live in Texas.”
“How much is this thing going to cost?”
Scientist: “We think in the neighborhood of four to five bil.”
“Billion? What’s involved?”
Scientist: “We want to dig a circular tunnel that is over 80 km or about 50 mi long.”
“Wait. You want to build a tunnel that connects to itself? You want to dig in a circle?”
Scientist: “Well, you see, we’re going to put giant magnets that require enormous amounts of energy, about 20 TeV per proton so we can send subatomic particles around in opposite directions to watch what happens when they collide. That’s why it is called a ‘collider.’”
“Hold on. You guys are scientists, right? You know that the people of NASCAR know enough to keep everything going in the same direction—and on a track above ground? Is this some sort of joke? Are you telling me that you are going to sit and watch things too tiny to see bang into each other?”
Scientist: “Yes, and we think that the people of Dallas-Fort Worth will see some economic gains as workers funnel into the area, sort of funnel into the tunnel. Did I mention that particle physicists are in favor of the project?”
“Aren’t they doing this in Europe?”
Scientist: “They are, but ours would be ‘Texas-size.’ You know everything is bigger there. I’ll admit the tunnel is pretty big, but most of the costs lie in the magnets. And then, when the subatomic particles collide we will have pictures of some spiraling lines we can show everyone, kind of like the drawings you can make with Spirograph Deluxe Design Sets kids get for Christmas presents, only better.”
“So, you want to spend billions of dollars on magnets to put into a giant circular hole so that you can show me some spiral lines that I can see when my kid uses a Spirograph Deluxe Design Set that costs about $25? You know, no thanks. I think I want to spend the money to put men in some interconnected tubes that circle Earth. They can take pictures that make sense to me.”
What costly project have you tried to sell recently? And what argument did you use? I hope it wasn’t one that used a toy analogy. Did you say to your spouse, “Hey, you know what we should build? A costly manroom in the basement”? Or, “Hey, why don’t we get a tanning bed for the rec room; that way we won’t have to go outside in the real sunlight”?
There’s always a cost, and there’s always the question about significance. Thinking of “building” a hole? What’s it worth you? What’s it worth to those who have to share the cost? What will be the short- and long-term effects? Don’t end up with an incomplete 14 km-long hole like the SSC that serves no purpose except to have wasted two billion dollars. Before you dig that hole, make sure you have the wherewithal to complete it, to maintain it, and to see results from it that either profit your mind or profit your wallet.
Like many bureaucratic boondoggles, the Superconducting Super Collider, or Desertron, ran over budget, so Congress made a decision to spend money on the International Space Station instead. Was it a good choice? We’ll probably know eventually. In 1993 a proposed four billion dollar-plus science project that had little personal meaning for the average legislator—unless he or she hailed from Texas, where the money was to be spent.
Imagine the conversations.
“You want to build what?”
Scientist: “An underground experiment.”
“Okay, what kind of experiment?”
Scientist: “We want to find really little, teeny-tiny things that make up everything.”
“All right. That shouldn’t be a problem. Will it get me votes?”
Scientist: “It could if you live in Texas.”
“How much is this thing going to cost?”
Scientist: “We think in the neighborhood of four to five bil.”
“Billion? What’s involved?”
Scientist: “We want to dig a circular tunnel that is over 80 km or about 50 mi long.”
“Wait. You want to build a tunnel that connects to itself? You want to dig in a circle?”
Scientist: “Well, you see, we’re going to put giant magnets that require enormous amounts of energy, about 20 TeV per proton so we can send subatomic particles around in opposite directions to watch what happens when they collide. That’s why it is called a ‘collider.’”
“Hold on. You guys are scientists, right? You know that the people of NASCAR know enough to keep everything going in the same direction—and on a track above ground? Is this some sort of joke? Are you telling me that you are going to sit and watch things too tiny to see bang into each other?”
Scientist: “Yes, and we think that the people of Dallas-Fort Worth will see some economic gains as workers funnel into the area, sort of funnel into the tunnel. Did I mention that particle physicists are in favor of the project?”
“Aren’t they doing this in Europe?”
Scientist: “They are, but ours would be ‘Texas-size.’ You know everything is bigger there. I’ll admit the tunnel is pretty big, but most of the costs lie in the magnets. And then, when the subatomic particles collide we will have pictures of some spiraling lines we can show everyone, kind of like the drawings you can make with Spirograph Deluxe Design Sets kids get for Christmas presents, only better.”
“So, you want to spend billions of dollars on magnets to put into a giant circular hole so that you can show me some spiral lines that I can see when my kid uses a Spirograph Deluxe Design Set that costs about $25? You know, no thanks. I think I want to spend the money to put men in some interconnected tubes that circle Earth. They can take pictures that make sense to me.”
What costly project have you tried to sell recently? And what argument did you use? I hope it wasn’t one that used a toy analogy. Did you say to your spouse, “Hey, you know what we should build? A costly manroom in the basement”? Or, “Hey, why don’t we get a tanning bed for the rec room; that way we won’t have to go outside in the real sunlight”?
There’s always a cost, and there’s always the question about significance. Thinking of “building” a hole? What’s it worth you? What’s it worth to those who have to share the cost? What will be the short- and long-term effects? Don’t end up with an incomplete 14 km-long hole like the SSC that serves no purpose except to have wasted two billion dollars. Before you dig that hole, make sure you have the wherewithal to complete it, to maintain it, and to see results from it that either profit your mind or profit your wallet.
RSS Feed