Should governments spend $20+ billion to build the Future Circular Collider at CERN?
Evaluates whether constructing a 100-kilometer particle super-collider reveals dark matter and cosmic origins or wastes tens of billions of public science funds.
Pick a Side
Choose a position to defend, or let fate assign your stance.
Arguments FOR
1. Essential to penetrate the mysteries beyond the Standard Model
The Standard Model cannot explain dark matter, dark energy, or why the universe contains matter instead of equal antimatter; higher-energy collisions are needed.
2. Spurs massive global spin-off technologies
CERN's past fundamental research produced the World Wide Web, touchscreens, PET medical scanners, and advanced cryogenic magnet technologies.
3. Preserves international scientific collaboration and infrastructure
CERN unites thousands of scientists from dozens of nations in peaceful collaboration; abandoning mega-colliders permanently disbands physics talent.
4. Precise measurements of the Higgs Boson field
A 100 km ring allows precision 'Higgs factory' collisions to determine if the Higgs field is fundamentally stable or hints at new supersymmetric particles.
Arguments AGAINST
1. No theoretical guarantee of discovering new physics
Unlike the LHC, which had a guaranteed target (the Higgs boson), the Future Circular Collider has no guaranteed discovery; it could find only empty physics 'desert'.
2. Colossal opportunity cost for urgent scientific crises
Spending $20+ billion on abstract subatomic collisions diverts funding from climate engineering, pandemic vaccines, quantum computing, and clean fusion.
3. Enormous electrical power and concrete carbon footprint
Operating a 100 km collider consumes gigawatts of electricity annually and requires pouring millions of tons of carbon-heavy concrete underground.
4. Astrophysics and tabletop experiments offer cheaper discoveries
Space telescopes, gravitational wave detectors, and ultra-cold atomic clocks test fundamental physics at a fraction of the cost of underground mega-rings.
Counter Questions
Questions to challenge claims and probe deeper into trade-offs.
- Can governments justify spending $20 billion on a machine that might find absolutely nothing new in physics?
- What would the world look like today if CERN had not received funding and invented the World Wide Web in 1989?
- Why did the United States cancel the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) in Texas after spending billions digging tunnels?
- Could tabletop laser-plasma wakefield accelerators achieve equal collision energies without a 100-kilometer concrete tunnel?
- Should China build its proposed CEPC collider if European nations refuse to fund CERN's project?
Ready to debate this topic?
Prepare your arguments and test your speech against the clock.