Does the World Need the FCC and Larger Accelerators?

The plan to build the Future Circular Collider (FCC) at CERN makes paramount to examine the potential risks associated with venturing into larger accelerators.

Larger accelerators, such as the FCC (Future Circular Collider), enable scientists to study particles at increasingly higher energies, allowing for deeper investigations into the fundamental building blocks of matter and the fundamental forces that govern the universe.

At higher energies, particles can be accelerated to velocities even closer to the speed of light, bringing them to the brink of their physical limits. By colliding particles at these extreme energies, scientists can probe the frontiers of particle physics. These collisions create conditions that mimic the intense energies and temperatures of the early universe, offering invaluable insights into the fundamental processes that shaped our cosmos.

The immense size of large accelerators is crucial for achieving these high energies. As particles are accelerated, they need larger turns not to fly off course. The larger the accelerator, the easier the turn, and the higher the final energy that can be achieved.

The FCC and The New Possible Physics

The Future Circular Collider (FCC) has its sights set on horizons beyond the reach of its predecessors, surpassing the energy capabilities of renowned circular colliders like the Super Proton Synchrotron (SPS), the Tevatron, and the iconic Large Hadron Collider (LHC).

The FCC plans to enable three types of high-energy collisions: proton-proton, electron-positron, and, uniquely, electron-proton. In its highest energy proton-proton configuration, it would collide particles at 100 trillion electronvolts – nearly 30 times the LHC’s capabilities.

the FCC

The motivations driving the pursuit of the FCC are deeply rooted in the vast realm of unanswered questions that have eluded the Standard Model (SM) and the discoveries made at the LHC.

One compelling motivation lies in the existence of dark matter, a mysterious entity that constitutes approximately 25% of the energy in the observable universe. Although no single experiment can thoroughly probe the entire range of dark matter masses, there is a broad class of models known as weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) that could fall within the energy scale attainable by the FCC.

The FCC also sets its sights on continuing the research program in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions, following in the footsteps of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) and the LHC. With its higher energies and luminosities, the proton-proton configuration enables a deeper exploration of the collective properties of quarks and gluons, opening new avenues for understanding the fundamental nature of matter under extreme conditions.

Furthermore, the FCC study envisions an interaction point for electrons with protons (FCC-eh), offering a unique opportunity for deep inelastic scattering measurements. This aspect of the FCC will provide unparalleled accuracy in resolving the parton structure and enable precise measurements of the strong coupling constant, contributing to a program of precision measurements and enhancing sensitivity in the search for new phenomena, particularly at higher masses.

Are Huge Particle Colliders like FCC Worth the Costs?

Building giant particle accelerators takes tons of resources. But are the benefits worth it? Let’s look at some key points.

  • Funding these huge projects can limit money for other science areas. For example, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) cost about $9 billion. This leaves less support for alternative research.
  • The science payoff is uncertain. The canceled American Superconducting Super Collider wasted over $2 billion without big discoveries. Careful planning is crucial.
  • The tech itself is often not brand new. The LHC built on existing particle physics rather than driving radical engineering innovation. To get the most impact, accelerator projects should collaborate with industries.
  • There are environmental impacts. The LHC uses around 120 MW of power – equal to 50,000 households. Its construction also disrupts habitats and generates waste.

More debate is needed on whether these mega colliders are the best use of tight science budgets. Their benefits must be weighed against alternatives that nurture emerging ideas across scientific frontiers.

Seeking Particle Collider Alternatives

While massive accelerators like the FCC provide valuable insights, other promising approaches exist:

Innovative Acceleration Technologies

Plasma-based accelerators use ionized gas to accelerate particles in more compact setups. Powerful electric fields within the plasma can propel particles to high energies far faster over shorter distances compared to traditional accelerators.

Laser-driven acceleration also allows ultra-fast acceleration in miniature formats. Focusing intense laser beams on a target can accelerate particles through laser-matter interactions. Both techniques offer potential lower-cost, higher-efficiency alternatives.

Studying Astroparticles and Cosmic Messengers

Instead of relying solely on earthbound colliders, we can explore fundamental physics by detecting particles from space. Experiments like IceCube and DUNE examine cosmic particles like neutrinos, complementing accelerator-based research.

Harnessing High-Performance Computing

Supercomputer simulations enable “virtual colliders,” modeling interactions and phenomena with precision rivaling real experiments. As computing advances, simulations can supplement accelerator data.

Building Space-Based Colliders

Colliders in space would have advantages like massive circumferences, longer particle paths, and flexibility in collider geometries. While technically daunting, space-based colliders could probe new energy frontiers.

Our Opinion

The proposal for a massive new collider like the FCC sparks both excitement at new discoveries and valid concerns about costs. While such a facility could push scientific frontiers, its benefits must be carefully weighed against alternatives. Rather than narrow bets on megaprojects, a balanced portfolio combining accelerator R&D, astrophysics studies, and computing may yield the highest returns.

We believe that the name Future Circular Collider speaks for itself. It will always be a futuristic undertaking.

Let us know your opinion in the comment box below.

Quantum Soul
Quantum Soul

Science evangelist, Art lover