Re:Is particle physics dead, dying, or just hard?
by varjag on Tuesday February 10, 2026 @06:41AM
(#46958396)
EUV lith would have absolutely been achieved if LHC wasn't ever built.
Re:Is particle physics dead, dying, or just hard?
by skeptic_ai on Tuesday February 10, 2026 @08:59AM
(#46959792)
Lhc mastered high vacuum, high precision lens from zeiss, precision lasers, specialized magnets which are needed by euv lith.
So would have been delayed.
Re:Is particle physics dead, dying, or just hard?
by varjag on Tuesday February 10, 2026 @10:44AM
(#46961337)
High vacuum in enormous volumes maybe. Otherwise it was certainly a problem solved decades ago.
Not sure what role of EUV optics was in LHC. But Zeiss would develop you anything on the frontier of optics if you have deep enough pockets.
The rest I don't know enough to comment on, but as far as technology goes both LHC and EUV lithography are bespoke systems. Seriously doubt there is any path dependency. Huge part of LHC cost were earthworks and precision construction of complex machinery at enormous scale.
Re:Is particle physics dead, dying, or just hard?
by chuckadams on Tuesday February 10, 2026 @01:27PM
(#46964479)
EUV uses mirrors rather than lenses, and the precision surfaces on those are something that more likely came out of space programs. But honestly, I have no problem with throwing a few billion at basic science that might go nowhere. It's a drop in the ocean compared to war and corporate welfare.
You should look up how modern EUV lithography was commercialised. This was essentially a big plasma physics puzzle. If ASML hadn't taken on a ridiculous gamble (financially on the same order of magnitude as a new collider, esp. for a single colpany) with the research, Moore's law would have died long ago and the entire tech industry would be affected. And there was zero proof that this was going to work beforehand.