Politics And Science At The LHC

In the days before Madison Avenue, public relations and spin doctors, Science was free to speak for itself. Like any other activity it was criticized and judged on its activites and results by media and the people. If the public had questions, the scientists answered them. Political games were for government and business. Now big science instituitions and labs with their own bewildering bureaucracies, have developed an interface to present an ideal world of science through their press offices and lobbyists. They sell science like GM sells cars. Somehow the media seems not to have noticed the difference, taking spin doctors' science press kits and sound bite analysis at face value.

Camera shy bumbling scientists with thick accents who were honest about what they were doing, if you could follow the science and what they said, have now been pushed behind closed doors while the media gurus have taken over. At CERN they go a step further and stage media science events, like the big ballyhoo September 10th to show off the Large Hadron Collider during a preliminary start-up test. A modest start-up showcase for an extremely powerful atom-smasher that smashes nothing that day is played out as a big success and a victory for LHC safety. No more doomsday. Doomsayers all wrong, CERN always right. Then three big things go wrong which are skillfully downplayed. While the little ball of protons zips around, the CMS computer system is being hacked by the Greek Team and that for 2 days at the home of the World Wide Web? A 30 tonne surface transformer blows 36 hours later during a thunderstorm. Then a massive failure occurs in the cryogenic cooling system which cripples an eighth of the 17 mile collider ring. Very little information released, but a lot of reassurances on "teething troubles" at the giant baby collider.

It can get worse. The latest surprise from CERN is a new paper published which finally comes to grips with part of the problem with the helium used in their massive near absolute zero cooling system. The CERN paper dismisses every safety concern with helium without considering all of them in "There is no explosion risk associated with superfluid Helium in the LHC cooling system", September 23, 2008, by Malcolm Fairbairn and Bob McElrath of the CERN theory group.

Its focus is helium-4 bosenovas at the LHC and cold fusion during these events.

The short answer is, "We conclude that that there is no physics whatsoever which suggests that Helium could undergo any kind of unforseen catastrophic explosion."

Sounds like these guys were in a hurry, but right behind the Eight Ball. "that that" is fast fast, potential there for a new type of doublespeak. Of course there was an explosive release of one to two tonnes of superfluid helium last time, but that was different. Not a real explosion, more like your radiator exploding, not your gas tank. But the paranormal mindbender winner is, as KFC at the physics arXiv blog said of CERN's conclusions, "That's comforting and impressive. Ruling out forseen catastrophies is certainly useful but the ability to rule out unforeseen ones is truly amazing."

It's a welcome response from CERN even if it is only partial. I first raised the issue myself in ScienticBlogging, July 2nd, 2008, in "Superfluids, BECs And Bosenovas: The Ultimate Experiment" reprinted here on The Science of Conundrums. When CERN didn't bother answering, I contacted their LSAG people via email twice, August 25th and 29th, but included other helium risks like the production of helium-3 via LHC energies ionizing helium-4, where helium-3 bosenovas obviously should also be considered. I received no reply and CERN's paper doesn't address helium-3 bosenovas either. I also wrote about nuclear events in helium, certainly a potential danger in helium-3 and even possible plasma and fusion reactions of helium-3 at the LHC. Again no answer from CERN. Only this sweeping rebuttal: "There is no physics whatsoever which suggests that Helium could undergo any kind of unforseen catastrophic explosion" Is this science or speculation and politics? Don't worry from CERN, but this time not from the CERN PR department, but their CERN theory group.

If this sounds a spectacular failure in addressing safety issues honestly, well what other explanation is there? All they had to say was Helium-4 Bosenovas are Bunk, and Cold Fusion of Helium-4 Stinks. Of course we hope other physicists will examine CERN's 6 page paper and let everyone know if CERN's arguments are sound. Even if they are on Helium-4, one mosquito does not a summer make. Though there have been plenty of light speed protons in another CERN public relations context, masquerading as mosquitos.

If the politics of safety can override safety concerns, like chicks sprawled on red sports cars, are there other similar sales jobs on safety approximating the scientific? Where is the CERN Model hiding out? Look no further than the pharmacuetical industry. When people die, safe products are recalled. Tons of safety reports and tankers on a magazine sunset, and then a giant oil tanker spills and kills birds and animals and fish by the thousands. With 6 months of downtime at the LHC thanks to accidents can happen, they've got plenty of time for gearing up for a new sales campaign, CERN TV commmercials. We're still waiting breathlessly for "Spin the Collider and Win" or "My Best Friend is a Collider / When he gets warm I get hot / Gimme gimme gimme more / My collider / Bang, bang, bang / Big Bang. Be there! Beat Doomsday! Make it happen. Geneva is to die for. Hunker in our bunker or dance the night away. Win a trip for two at participating Dunkin Donuts, your Collider Central. Free Collider Keychain in every limited time only Giant Collider Donut. Careful when you munch. Be safe, dunk first."

Nowadays politics is part of big science. Recently a Climate scientist at MIT, Richard S Lindzen wrote a paper, "Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?" Although the author states that the focus of his paper is on climate science, "some of the problems pertain to science more generally."

Lindzen notes "the change in the scientific paradigm from a dialectic opposition between theory and observation to an emphasis on simulation and observational programs." The LHC Machine is certainly part of this change from earlier Einsteinian physics to let's see what happens when we simulate the Big Bang.

". . . an emphasis on large programs that never end." Fifty years of CERN and now on a budget of $1 billion a year with a $10 billion broken collider that might never work right.

". . . the hierarchical nature of formal scientific organizations whereby a small executive council can speak on behalf of thousands of scientists as well as govern the distribution of 'carrots and sticks' where by reputations are made and broken." CERN in a nutshell.

". . . the politically desired position becomes a goal rather than a consequence of scientific research." New Physics sought.

". . . scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions, and how opposition to these positions is disposed of." Safety or the appearance of safety? Critics are doomsayers who just don't understand.

Well this still works for CERN because it is an enormous organization that has a small powerful directorate and a Director General with Presidential Powers, 'carrots and sticks'. So big and influential in physics that those within and those outside are wary of demurring on anything. Even 20 EU governments that support CERN financially applaud rather than criticize, but then they're not scientists, or cost accountants, and just as misinformed as anyone else. If there are any diplomatic groans, it's probably because the big collider party this October 21st has been called off. In the interests of vitual safety, no doubt here a Virual Inauguration would be safer for Heads of State. Cheaper too, a few souvinir hardhats FedEx'd. Click for Bollinger and caviar now.

No doubt CERN will spring for the real thing. These guys pay their bills. It's prestige that still counts. With participation in other nuclear labs in Europe and friendly relations with many others worldwide, CERN amounts to something like the Church of the Middle Ages. Not based in Geneva for nothing. In 1955 the Swiss Government gave CERN carte blanche to operate in Switzerland as part of the deal to locate its operations in Switzerland. The list of concessions and priviledges CERN enjoys gives it the power of a city state (currently 2,600 staff, plus some 7,931 scientists and engineers, in Wikipedia) or in modern terms, that accorded to a foreign government's embassy and its diplomats. When CERN expanded into France in 1973, the French government was more circumspect but awarded CERN similar if more limited powers. Neither country though has jurisdiction over CERN, its property, its personnel or its activities. Though the French have reserved some rights including the right to intervene if there is a threat to France. If CERN blows up Geneva, Switzerland will have to sue Fermilab. An obvious mistake to put an organization above the law, like we didn't know the gun was loaded. Anyone in Switzerland or CERN care to bet that the obvious mistakes are the most statistically significant?

Surely if there were doubts within CERN as to problems or even the advisability of the Large Hadron Collider in the first place, we would hear about it? Not much has slipped through the cracks in the CERN PR department except their tactics. One source is CERN archives. Some CERN people have found themselves embassassed in hindsight when their candid comments were recorded in CERN videos, transcripts and documents.

One insider has recently commented, not realizing there was some unwritten code of silence. A CERN physicist, Tommaso Dorigo who works at the LHC CMS experiment, wrote in his blog, A Quantum Diaries Survivor, "In fact CERN appears a bit up-tight about the latest events in sector 34 of the LHC tunnel. He goes on to say ". . . since my blog is targeted as a possible source of leaks. . . And if I play fair, maybe I am allowed to survive here, and maybe one day I will stop being threatened every other day, in the name of protecting internal information of the experiments I am a part of."

Dorigo concludes, "Of course, I still assert my complete disagreement at a way to conduct scientific experiments paid with your tax money which resembles the management of the Pentagon rather than an agorà of education, research and scientific communication."

--Alan Gillis


References

Fairbairn, Malcolm and McElrath, Bob. "There is no explosion risk associated with superfluid Helium in the LHC cooling system", September 23, 2008, arxiv,
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0809/0809.4004v1.pdf

KFC. "Forget black holes, could the LHC trigger a "Bose supernova"?, September 29, 2008, the physics arxiv blog, http://arxivblog.com/?p=645

Gillis, Alan. "Superfluids, BECs And Bosenovas: The Ultimate Experiment At The LHC", July 12, 2008, The Science of Conundrums, http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2008/07/superfluids-becs-and-bosenovas-ultimate.html

Gillis, Alan. "The Almost Thermonuclear LHC", March 17, 2008, The Science of Conundrums, http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2008/03/almost-thermonuclear-lhc.html

Lindzen, Richard S. "Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?", September 27, 2008, arxiv, http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.3762.pdf

Dorigo, Tommaso. "An agorà of education and scientific communication", September 23, 2008, A Quantum Diaries Survivor, http://dorigo.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/an-agora-of-education-and-scientific-communication/

CERN / Switzerland. "Agreement between the Swiss Federal Council and the European Organization for Nuclear Research . . .", June 11, 1955, CERN Legal Services, http://documents.cern.ch/archive/electronic/other/legal/articles/LSL00000012.pdf

CERN / France. "Agreement between the Government of the French Republic and the European Organization for Nuclear Research . . .", August 30, 1973, CERN Legal Services, http://documents.cern.ch/archive/electronic/other/legal/articles/LSL00000010.pdf

Accident Cripples LHC

No collisions, no beams either next week at the LHC. The BBC reports an alarming quench of about 100 superconducting magnets today, that heated up as much as 100 C. A tonne of liquid helium spilled into the tunnel and the CERN fire brigade went in. Cause of the quenching has not been announced, nor have any injuries been reported. Liquid helium leaks vaporize back to a gas almost instantly and would freeze or choke personnel present.

Ordinarily magnet quenches occur when proton beams are lost or scatter into magnets, causing helium coolant and magnets to heat and lose their superconductivity and their power to keep proton beams within the collider. CERN doesn't say whether beams were running today during the accident. They would have been at their lowest power 0.45 TeV per beam, though beams 11 times more powerful at 5 TeV were scheduled before October 12th. Vacuum conditions were also lost said the BBC, which suggests beam damage, though CERN hasn't commented.

This is on top of another major failure to the helium cooling system. Last Friday the 12th's thunderstorm burned out a giant 30 tonne 12 Million Volt Amperes surface transformer that powers some of the helium cryogenics system. Although CERN admitted the problem yesterday, without mentioning the thunderstorm, and said the transformer was replaced last weekend, there was no explanation for the long delay in informing the public. The failure of the transformer caused an initial warming in the helium coolant in 2 of the colliders 8 sectors, some as late as September 17th at near 7 K

Whether an ongoing transformer problem contributed to quenching has not been announced. The TimesOnline initial report on damage said, "One of the beams had been captured by Friday, but work was then interrupted by the loss of electrical transformers that power the cryogenic cooling system . . ." A beam apparently running during the thunderstorm, and more than one transformer lost. CERNS's lastest progress report yesterday was sketchy.

The damaged Sector3-4, an eighth of the 17 mile collider has still not been stabilized since this morning's accident. About half of it or a mile length was well above normal 1.9 K design temperature, about a quarter of the sector and its magnets this afternoon at 15:46 PM were about 82 K to 110 K. Currently all magnets have warmed. The warmest show a slight recovery from 110 K down to 99 K. and Sector 3-4 is still in crisis as of the 20th September 0:418 AM, with no accurate readout for about half the magnets, and the rest showing more warming, with a few outside the spike zone climbing abruptly in temperature since this afternoon.

Given the gravity of the accident, repairs would take a week or longer.


References

BBC. "Hadron Collider forced to halt", Sept 19, 2008, BBC News, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7626256.stm

CERN. "LHC progress report, week 1", Sept 18, 2008, LHC First Beam, http://lhc-first-beam.web.cern.ch/lhc-first-beam/News/lhc_080918.html

Gillis, Alan. "LHC Fails Thunderstorm Test", Sept 17,2008, The Science of Conundrums, http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2008/09/lhc-fails-thunderstorm-test.html

Henderson, Mark. "'Big Bang Machine' back on collision course after its glitches are fixed", Sept 18, 2008, TimesOnline, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article4774817.ece

Daily Battles At The Tevatron

A quiet moment at the Tevatron Main Control Room. Murphy's Law usually runs the Tevatron. Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. Highlights from April 7 to 9, 2008: Booster kicker magnet (MP02) fails. 10E10 of antiprotons lost. Lightening strikes cause store to abort and TeV to quench. Here's the full 5 page report for April 9 to 11, 2008, from the Fermilab Accelerator Update. "The day shift began with the Tevatron (TeV) in quench recovery. . ."

Well, its a big place with most of the aging equipment dating from 1982. "The Tevatron tunnel is slowly sagging." V. Lebedev writes in his paper on Tevetron Operation Status And Possible Lessons For The LHC. As a result, "During 2006 shutdown about 50 quadrupoles we unrolled." And ". . . because of compression of thermo-insulating spacers . . . It took 3 years and 3 major shutdowns to finish shimming for all 772 Tevatron SC dipoles this year. (2006)"

A lot of experiments and projects make for a hectic schedule, over 50, with some 20 centered at the Tevatron. A thousand superconducting magnets, 15 miles of helium pipe, 24 cryogenic refrigerator houses, but utterly dwarfed by the power and size of the monster LHC. A lot of small annoyances, like from the magnets, though supercooled why should they smell? Other strange smells cropping up, odd vapors, but no fires or radiation hot spots detected by biohazard teams. Mysterious and spooky in the old bowels of the accelerators, grimy cement floors and poor light, an aging industrial twilight city, zones contaminated with radiation and off limits to personnel.

The main problem is a plumber's nightmare. Stuck valves, helium leaks that mushroom 700 times in volume from the cryogenic state, nitrogen leaks as the secondary coolant, vacuum leaks from the beam lines, heat leaks usually electrical, and radiation leaks which contaminate the magnets and force nearly all the superconducting magnet quenches. And they quench a lot, an average of 8 quenches per month in 2006, down from 16 per month in 2001.

Even the roof leaks at the Meson Lab. And when there's a prairie thunderstorm it's pandemonium. Power and communications disrupted. Fire alarms triggered all over dozens of buildings. Even without a direct hit the lightening surging through the ground can terminate the Tevatron beam, an emergency situation, an instant beam dump or its 2 beams drilling holes through anything. Wacky? No, it already happened at the Tevatron twice in December, 2003. A catastrophic beam loss. Ron Moore, Tevatron Department Head, Beams Division, referring to one of the beam loss accidents, recently said ". . . the high energy causes damage even within short time periods. Within 16 nanoseconds, one beam burned through about 1.5 meters (about 5 feet) of solid steel."

The Tevatron's Main Injector ring has had an intermittent beam loss problem with a neutrino beam that's fired underground to a target detector in an abandoned mine in northern Minnesota, the Soudan mine, 735 km away. Not science fiction either, but you need Fermilab authorization before you can access the failure data. There's just a note published in Fermilab Today of December 7, 2006. "NuMI (Neutrino Main Injector) suffers intermittent beam loss when MI stashes" occurring December 4-6. The NuMI-MINOS project on neutrino physics is a big one that will probably go on without the old Tevatron, only the new Main Injector required to produce the beam.

The big worry is radiation contamination, like tritium, usually found in nuclear power plant cooling water and then your local river. Fermilab also relies on water cooling for certain elements of the Tevatron, even collecting rainwater for some of their needs. It's an eco friendly gesture. In November 2005, low levels of tritium were found in the waters around Fermilab, in Indian Creek and ponds on the site. First time in 30 years. But don't forget that 2 years before, the Tevatron had at least two beam accidents in 2003, the December 5 hit that quenched two-thirds of its superconducting magnets, and later that month, the December 20 failure about as serious. But how could radioactive tritium have been produced from protons (even though extracted from hydrogen) and antiprotons (from nickel), unless one or the other acted on something else, producing neutrons then acting on boron or lithium to make tritium. It's up to Fermilab to find out how this happened. All they have been doing is taking water samples. How about some basic research? Well almost. They did locate the tritium leak, a pipe from Fermilab connecting two cooling ponds. Fermilab says the problem is fixed with no further tritium detected. But where is the tritium that was discharging into the ponds? Still in the Tevatron system? And how was tritium produced in the first place? According to Lebedev in the same paper cited above on page 5, there is a lithium lens, apparently in the Debuncher. Lebedev adds that the lithium lens was to be upgraded by 2007. So was it damaged then? Transformed into tritium? No analysis provided by Lebedev.

There are many lessons here for the LHC just in Lebedev's 5 page paper. No doubt CERN is fully aware of them and have revised their engineering and operations with Fermilab's help. The problem is CERN is not building a new and better Tevatron, but a much bigger machine with energies surpassing the Tevatron's beam by an enormous factor of 150.

Two reassuring things though. On the main desk at the Main Control Room, a lowtech box of Puffs and a flashlight. Click to enlarge.

You Appear To Be Running A Large LHC

Windows XP at CERN LHC CMS. It's little things like ...please send an error report, that could get us into a lot of trouble. The Compact Muon Solenoid weighs in at 5 jumbo jets with a magnetic field of 4 Teslas at 21,000 amps, the magnet supercooled to -269 degrees C. It's all boggling, the sheer scale and complexity, with 3 other major experiments, each in its own giant cavern and 2 piggyback ones in a monumental 27 km ring tunnel of cryogenics and superconducting magnets for the beam pipes.1700 major interconnections for 1232 dipoles in 15 meter lengths for curving the beams, 400 5-7 meter focusing quadrupoles, another 5,000 corrector magnets. Hundreds of thousands of bolts, 40,000 or 10 km worth of special welds using tungsten gas, 65,000 electrical splices of superconducting cables and a lot of duct tape. For this main ring alone the nominal current is 11,850 amps. Imagine plugging in the CMS toaster for a total draw of 32,850 amps. CERN should be able to do that without knocking out the European Power Grid. But the energy stored in the ring magnets once powered is 10 GJ with 725 MJ in the beam. A small loss is sufficient to quench a superconducting magnet. If somebody turns on their air conditioner in Geneva, the beam could dump 157 kg of TNT equivalent, the ring another 2 metric tonnes.

After sifting through a mountain of info on CERN's friendly websites I'd say the risk of conventional accidents is the first thing to consider. This one failure in the power supply could bring down the entire LHC. Add the other 4 tonnes of TNT equivalent in the CMS. Explosions, electrical fires, rupture of the superfluid helium coolant under considerable pressure in the cryogenic pipe system running throughout the ring and CMS, pumps and compressors failing. The Large Hadron Collider could be a "ten billion dollars or whatever it is" disaster a nanosecond before someone clicks Send Error Report or Don't Send.