Lisa Randall

That was originally one of the hopes of the Large Hadron Collider. I'd say at this point... it would be very unlikely given what they've already accomplished. But there are these underground detectors, xenon detectors that look for dark matter coming in, and they are going to try to achieve a much stronger bound than exists today.

That was originally one of the hopes of the Large Hadron Collider. I'd say at this point... it would be very unlikely given what they've already accomplished. But there are these underground detectors, xenon detectors that look for dark matter coming in, and they are going to try to achieve a much stronger bound than exists today.

That was originally one of the hopes of the Large Hadron Collider. I'd say at this point... it would be very unlikely given what they've already accomplished. But there are these underground detectors, xenon detectors that look for dark matter coming in, and they are going to try to achieve a much stronger bound than exists today.

It's interesting. It's both a major victory. The Higgs boson was proposed 50 years ago and it was discovered. The Higgs mechanism seemed to be the only way to explain elementary particle masses and it was right. So on the one hand, it was a major victory. On the other hand, I've been in physics long enough to know it was also

It's interesting. It's both a major victory. The Higgs boson was proposed 50 years ago and it was discovered. The Higgs mechanism seemed to be the only way to explain elementary particle masses and it was right. So on the one hand, it was a major victory. On the other hand, I've been in physics long enough to know it was also

It's interesting. It's both a major victory. The Higgs boson was proposed 50 years ago and it was discovered. The Higgs mechanism seemed to be the only way to explain elementary particle masses and it was right. So on the one hand, it was a major victory. On the other hand, I've been in physics long enough to know it was also

a cautionary tale in some sense, because at the time I started out in physics, we had proposed something in the United States called the superconducting supercollider. A lot of physicists, I'll say particularly in Europe, but I'd say a lot of physicists were saying when that the Large Hadron Collider would have the energy reach necessary to discover what underlies the Standard Model.

a cautionary tale in some sense, because at the time I started out in physics, we had proposed something in the United States called the superconducting supercollider. A lot of physicists, I'll say particularly in Europe, but I'd say a lot of physicists were saying when that the Large Hadron Collider would have the energy reach necessary to discover what underlies the Standard Model.

a cautionary tale in some sense, because at the time I started out in physics, we had proposed something in the United States called the superconducting supercollider. A lot of physicists, I'll say particularly in Europe, but I'd say a lot of physicists were saying when that the Large Hadron Collider would have the energy reach necessary to discover what underlies the Standard Model.

We don't want to just discover the Standard Model, we want to know what the next step is. And I think here, people were more cautious about that. They wanted to have a more comprehensive search that could get to higher energies, more events, so that we could really more definitively rule it out. But in that case, many people thought they knew what would be there.

We don't want to just discover the Standard Model, we want to know what the next step is. And I think here, people were more cautious about that. They wanted to have a more comprehensive search that could get to higher energies, more events, so that we could really more definitively rule it out. But in that case, many people thought they knew what would be there.

We don't want to just discover the Standard Model, we want to know what the next step is. And I think here, people were more cautious about that. They wanted to have a more comprehensive search that could get to higher energies, more events, so that we could really more definitively rule it out. But in that case, many people thought they knew what would be there.

It happened to be a theory called supersymmetry. So a lot of physicists thought it would be supersymmetry. I mean, it's one of the many factors, I think, that went into the fact that the Large Hadron Collider became the only machine in town. And the superconducting supercollider, if it really had achieved what it was supposed to, would have been a much more robust test of the space.

It happened to be a theory called supersymmetry. So a lot of physicists thought it would be supersymmetry. I mean, it's one of the many factors, I think, that went into the fact that the Large Hadron Collider became the only machine in town. And the superconducting supercollider, if it really had achieved what it was supposed to, would have been a much more robust test of the space.

It happened to be a theory called supersymmetry. So a lot of physicists thought it would be supersymmetry. I mean, it's one of the many factors, I think, that went into the fact that the Large Hadron Collider became the only machine in town. And the superconducting supercollider, if it really had achieved what it was supposed to, would have been a much more robust test of the space.

So I'd say for humanity, it's both a tribute to the ability of discovery and the ability of really believing in things so they have the confidence to go look for them. But it's also a cautionary tale that you don't want to, you know, assume things before they've been actually found.

So I'd say for humanity, it's both a tribute to the ability of discovery and the ability of really believing in things so they have the confidence to go look for them. But it's also a cautionary tale that you don't want to, you know, assume things before they've been actually found.

So I'd say for humanity, it's both a tribute to the ability of discovery and the ability of really believing in things so they have the confidence to go look for them. But it's also a cautionary tale that you don't want to, you know, assume things before they've been actually found.

So you want to do things in, you know, you want to believe in your theories, but you also want to question them at the same time in ways that you're more likely to discover the truth.

So you want to do things in, you know, you want to believe in your theories, but you also want to question them at the same time in ways that you're more likely to discover the truth.