The music of the quarks

[Owen O'Neill]

Nice! I should stay more interested in what's going on at the LHC. 9
years ago I worked at a place where they were designing and building
instrumention equipment for the collider, and it was the coolest job I
ever had. I got to use a comparitively "little" accelator, Large for
1940. Very large magnet that would tug at anything ferromagnetic you
were holding from 5m away, even rip it away--- but it got used as a
proton beam source for verifying the "heavy ion" radiation damage
survival of components used in instrumentation that's monitoring the
muon drift tubes. Most of these tests that were a huge part of my job
I knew were completely pointless but that's beurocracy <sp> in a
worldwide colaboration to build a Large Hadron Collider.

Also, some peices of instrumentation equipment have labels on the side
that say "Hawkwind", camoflauged amidst all the other useless labels
saying "power", "standby" "1,2,3,4,5", "data out"...etc.

Working on pointless stuff, also being coerced to work inneficiently
then get called inneficient as a result...... I s--t you not: (I think
I've said it before on this list) there was a component (Texas
Instruments?) called REG104-GA. It's a "Low Drop-out Voltage
Regulator", with lots of bells and whistles, the most at the time,
like some circuit designer's pathetic little wet dream. If not for the
Captain Lockheed I'd never have ordered this embarrassing component
for evaluation. It was a stupid rectangular chip with 8 pins, looking
nothing like a voltage regulator should look like. You could just KNOW
somehow it's going to be the worst candidate for a bad-weather
radiation environment. If radiation criteria was realistic for
electronics in proximity to the LHC...f*cking.;/ --- what I'm getting
at is I could have effectively caused an important circuit to FAIL, I
bet right when some really important "collision infomation" needed to
get analyzed. Because of MY POWER, set back PHYSICS.


By the way, did you know that much of scientific research involves
people successfully getting funding for their shit, skewing everything
they say to make their work sound promising, making results look as
such?

Not as much in Physics I don't think, but that's only because it's
very accountable. What's the most unscrupulous type of science?
Biology? Oh and especially Cancer reseasrch, with the money there.
Who's a Biologist here? You've got something to hide. Everyone who
makes money does. Tell us your stories about phony research you know
of, maybe were involved with as a student.
-- 
.:.;:'¬;˚˚∆:;:,:;';,,';':;.:,:;:;',,':;.';:¬;;';-,,`⁄,