Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

Superconducting Super Collider

 
US History Encyclopedia: Superconducting Super Collider

Superconducting Super Collider (SSC), a federally financed project abandoned in 1993 that would have been capable of accelerating subatomic particles to energy levels forty times that previously achieved by researchers. For reasons of national prestige and international economic competitiveness, the Ronald Reagan administration in 1982 encouraged U.S. high-energy scientists to devise a challenging national accelerator project. Physicists responded with plans for the most ambitious particle accelerator ever attempted, a superconducting super collider. It was to be a proton collider far more energetic than existing ones, employing the superconducting magnetic technology recently developed at the Fermi National Laboratory in Illinois. The primary justification for the machine was a search for particles known as Higgs bosons. The machine was to produce forty TeV protons (where one TeV, or tera-electron volt, is 1 trillion electron volts). This determined the size (a fifty-four-mile-long ring) and the projected cost ($4.4 billion). Federal funding for the machine required justification. Support from the Texas congressional delegation and the promise of $1 billion toward the project from the state of Texas led to the decision to build the accelerator in Waxahachie, Texas, rather than near Fermilab. In the autumn of 1993 the House of Representatives, faced with a more than doubled price tag, voted overwhelmingly to kill the project. By then $2 billion had been spent, the superconducting magnets had been tested, one-third of the ring had been excavated, and two teams of a thousand physicists and engineers from around the world were working out detailed designs of the two enormous particle detectors to observe and analyze proton collisions in the TeV energy range.

Bibliography

Kevles, Daniel J. The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America. 2d ed. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1995.

Trefil, James. "Beyond the Quark: The Case for the Super Collider." New York Times Magazine (30 April 1989): 24.

Weinberg, Steven. Dreams of a Final Theory. New York: Pantheon, 1992.

Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
Wikipedia: Superconducting Super Collider
Top
Ssc mdl.JPG
Current state of the SSC site.
Hadron Colliders
Intersecting Storage Rings CERN, 1971–1984
Super Proton Synchrotron CERN, 1981–1984
ISABELLE BNL, cancelled in 1983
Tevatron Fermilab, 1987–present
Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider BNL, operational since 2000
Superconducting Super Collider Cancelled in 1993
Large Hadron Collider CERN, 2009–
Very Large Hadron Collider Theoretical

The Superconducting Super Collider (SSC), planned to be built mostly in Waxahachie, Texas, would have been the world's largest and highest-energy particle accelerator complex. Its planned ring circumference was 87.1 kilometres (54.1 mi) with an energy of 20 TeV per beam of protons, more than enough energy to create a Higgs boson, a particle predicted by the Standard Model but not yet detected. The project's director was Roy Schwitters, a physicist at the University of Texas at Austin and Harvard University. The project was canceled in 1993.

Contents

Development

The system was first envisioned in the December 1983 National Reference Designs Study, which examined the technical and economic feasibility of a machine with the design capacity of 20 TeV per beam. After an extensive Department of Energy review during the mid-1980s, a site selection process began in 1987. The project was awarded to Texas in November 1988 and major construction began in 1991. Seventeen shafts were sunk and 23.5 km (14.6 mi) of tunnel were bored by late 1993.

Cancellation

During the design and the first construction stage, a heated debate ensued about the high cost of the project. In 1987, Congress was told the project could be completed for $4.4 billion, but by 1993 the cost projection exceeded $12 billion. A recurring argument was the contrast with NASA's contribution to the International Space Station (ISS), which was of a similar amount.[citation needed] Critics of the project argued that the US could not afford both of them.

A high-level schematic of the lab landscape during the final planning phases.

Congress canceled the project in 1993. Many factors contributed to the cancellation: rising cost estimates; poor management by physicists and Department of Energy officials; the end of the need to prove the supremacy of American science with the collapse of the Soviet Union; belief that many smaller scientific experiments of equal merit could be funded for the same cost; Congress's desire to generally reduce spending; the reluctance of Texas Governor Ann Richards;[1] and President Bill Clinton's initial lack of support for a project begun during the administrations of Richards's predecessor, Bill Clements, and Clinton's predecessors, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. However, in 1993, Clinton tried to prevent the cancellation by asking Congress to continue "to support this important and challenging effort" through completion because "abandoning the SSC at this point would signal that the United States is compromising its position of leadership in basic science".[2]

The closing of the SSC had adverse consequences for the southern part of the Dallas–Fort Worth Metroplex, and resulted in a mild recession, most evident in those parts of Dallas which lay south of the Trinity River.[3] When the project was canceled, 22.5 km (14.0 mi) of tunnel and 17 shafts to the surface were already dug, and nearly two billion dollars had already been spent on the massive facility.[4]

Comparison to the Large Hadron Collider

The SSC's planned collision energy of 40 TeV was almost triple the 14 TeV of its European counterpart, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN in Geneva. The LHC was less expensive to build because, in addition to its smaller size, the LHC took over the existing engineering infrastructure and 27 km long underground cavern of the Large Electron-Positron Collider.

Current status of site

Panoramic view of the SSC site

After the project was canceled, the main site was deeded to Ellis County, Texas, and the county tried numerous times to sell the property. The property was finally sold in August 2006 to an investment group led by the late J.B. Hunt.[5] Collider Data Center has contracted with GVA Cawley to market the site as a tier III or tier IV data center.[6]

See also

References

  1. ^ Alvin W. Trivelpiece (2005). "Some Observations on DOE's Role in Megascience" (PDF). History of Physics Forum, American Physical Society. http://www.aps.org/units/fhp/FHPnews/loader.cfm?url=/commonspot/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=67517.  Trivelpiece recounts hearing "about a conversation between the Governor of Texas, the Honorable Ann Richards, and President Clinton early in his administration. He asked her if she wanted to fight for the SSC. She said no. That meant it would no longer be an administration imperative."
  2. ^ President Bill Clinton (June 16, 1993). "Letter to William H. Natcher, Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations". http://www.hep.net/ssc/new/history/hepssc/clinton.html.  The letter reads in part, "As your Committee considers the Energy and Water Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1994, I want you to know of my continuing support for the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC). ... Abandoning the SSC at this point would signal that the United States is compromising its position of leadership in basic science—a position unquestioned for generations. These are tough economic times, yet our Administration supports this project as a part of its broad investment package in science and technology. ... I ask you to support this important and challenging effort."
  3. ^ Jeffrey Mervis (October 3, 2003). "Scientists are long gone, but bitter memories remain". Science 302 (5642): 40–41. doi:10.1126/science.302.5642.40. PMID 14526052. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/search?volume=302&firstpage=40&search_citation-search.x=0&search_citation-search.y=0&search_citation-search=search. 
  4. ^ Jeffrey Mervis and Charles Seife (October 3, 2003). "Lots of reasons, but few lessons". Science 302 (5642): 38–40. doi:10.1126/science.302.5642.38. PMID 14526051. http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/search?volume=302&firstpage=38&search_citation-search.x=0&search_citation-search.y=0&search_citation-search=search. 
  5. ^ Christine Perez (18 August 2006). GVA Cawley to market former super collider. http://dallas.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2006/08/21/newscolumn6.html.  Collider Data Center, LLC,
  6. ^ "High Profile Superconducting Super Collider Project from Early 90's Sees New Life". Superconductor Week. August 16, 2006. http://www.superconductorweek.com/pr/0806tgj/scsc1.htm. 

External links

Coordinates: 32°21′51″N 96°56′38″W / 32.36417°N 96.94389°W / 32.36417; -96.94389


 
 

 

Copyrights:

US History Encyclopedia. © 2006 through a partnership of Answers Corporation. All rights reserved.  Read more
Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Superconducting Super Collider" Read more