Q&A - Particle Accelerators Reimagined - with Suzie Sheehy

[@Tjousk]

That final question was of interest, and answered in a way I did not expect. I was, however, more interested in several of the earlier questions, and all of them gave me things to think about.

[@geneticjen9312]

Suzie is probably my fave speaker at RI. The absolute perfect mix of technical details, accessibility, humour, history of the science, future of the science.

[@gabetower]

That was one of the most interesting talks I've watched

[@shawnminnich4492]

I'm with the guy who asked the field containment question around 8:20, I don't understand why a Paul Trap is the preferred method for particle containment, why wouldn't a toroidal field be used instead? Also wish she went into more detail about how the RF cavity and process of how they actually frequency match the particles to achieve the acceleration. Do the particles trigger the field, or is it some mathematically timed system? Great series with her though, would love for RI to continue it and go more in depth.

[@gaikwadshogun1]

That was quite a brave effort to point out the potential long term demerits of Brexit to particle physics. Also a brilliant and enthusiastic talk overall.

[@gh8447]

Yeah... more maybe, could be, and FUD.

[@pdr.]

It was a pity indeed that politics had to be brought up, but they have to look after their funding after all.

[@lineikatabs]

The blip turned out to be a flop. But that's science! A negative results teaches you just as much as a positive one.

[@widg3tswidgets416]

This isn't even remotely true--especially when the blip is a new particle that exists nowhere in our current models.

[@lineikatabs]

Widg3t's Widgets www.theguardian.com/science/2016/aug/05/blip-flop-as-tantalising-bump-in-large-hadron-collider-data-disappears

[@ZeedijkMike]

Good questions and very good answers.

[@toushei]

Jonathan Butterworth! I had recently read his book "Smashing Physics."

[@perennialbeachcomber.7518]

011823: Wireless :: Orion Correlation.

[@alangarland8571]

I agree with the photons,

[@qlddave]

How does one say First on a RI video?

[@TheRoyalInstitution]

For future reference, we would particularly enjoy the most obscure/complex mathematical equation or process that works out to equal the number 1 for people claiming first. You know, just in case.

[@robsim37]

dim Comment as Integer Comment = 1

[@Matty-Z]

In other words, more complex than 0th < ME < 2nd. :-)

[@osenseijedi]

-exp(i*pi) st?

[@JaredJeyaretnam]

I prefer e^(i*2pi) or e^(i*tau)

[@duncanmatthews1977]

Why does she whisper during lectures and then not during normal conversation?

[@Serotonindude]

?

[@NorwayT]

So, there was no Science done in the UK before the EU monstrosity came along? EU punishing UK for leaving is what is catastrophic and precisely the reason why it was time to leave. Hopefully the EU will evaporate and the carrot and stick mentality in science will evaporate with it. If the UK now can manage to steer clear of too much bureaucracy, Science will flourish in new and unexpected ways.

[@pdr.]

This was an awesome science talk, and you come along, three years later, with some political point of view? Seriously? Just because funding was ever so briefly mentioned as a possible risk factor for future research? You be crazy man.

[@Huntracony]

What do you expect the EU to do? Keep funding British research, despite the UK no longer investing in Europe? It's a two way street. That's not punishment, that's the UK's wish. By the way, the UK is still practically in the EU, so you can't use the past tense yet. No deal has been made and hard Brexit also hasn't happened.

[@Serotonindude]

too narrow view of the things going on there man :) i'd wish the uk back in europe as soon as possible... they are and were great people and scientiest... man, they gave us science actually! scientific method und stuff... ah, a wide field... but i love those guys :)