physics.org's muon g-2 articles

[notFritzArgelander]

OTOneH Here is a theoretical article that claims to have shrunk the disagreement!

https://phys.org/news/2021-04-strength- ... ligns.html

OTOtherH. The stress of the disagreement.

https://phys.org/news/2021-04-tantalizi ... ebook.html

[notFritzArgelander]

https://phys.org/news/2021-04-field-arg ... dence.html

[AntennaGuy]

Re:

https://phys.org/news/2021-04-field-arg ... dence.html

With: "What do touch screens, radiation therapy and shrink wrap have in common? They were all made possible by particle physics research." That's comforting. But I wonder how big and how expensive a particle physics R&D program would have to be for it to become no longer cost effective, from the perspective of generating/spurring technology spin-offs?
:shrug:
From Dr. H (as linked from a comment at Instapundit):

[notFritzArgelander]

Re:

https://phys.org/news/2021-04-field-arg ... dence.html

With: "What do touch screens, radiation therapy and shrink wrap have in common? They were all made possible by particle physics research." That's comforting. But I wonder how big and how expensive a particle physics R&D program would have to be for it to become no longer cost effective, from the perspective of generating/spurring technology spin-offs?
:shrug:
From Dr. H (as linked from a comment at Instapundit):

I think that Dr H is overly pessimistic about "no new big colliders". The muon g-2 is not an expensive experiment, certainly not on the scale of the LHC or the cancelled SSC (in favor of the ISS which overran initial estimates by 10,000% :yikes: ). One reason that I've been a fan of experiments like muon g-2 is relative low cost. I think that there are avenues of research that are fruitful that need and deserve funding and that Dr H's attitude would suppress.

I think that hadron colliders have low benefit to cost ratio relatively speaking. Since protons are used and are themselves complex, the experimental signatures are always frightfully messy and difficult to interpret. While I'm skeptical about a next generation proton collider I would be enthusiastic about a lepton or lepton-anti-lepton collider just because the experiments are intrinsically cleaner, easier to interpret.

The alternative to doing no experiments is "we are satisfied with what we know and don't want to know any more". That would be much more significant a harbinger of cultural decline and decay than failure to colonize Mars, say, which is MUCH more expensive.

I don't care what technological benefits come from particle physics research, though. Knowledge should be pursued for its own sake. The pursuit is becoming expensive, though.