[Editor's note: The recent vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on whether to spend $110 million to start building the superconducting supercollider turned out to be a breeze for proponents of the Texas project (see story on page 2). But even with the outcome of the House vote known, the debate offers a fascinating look at the arguments both sides are expected to use throughout the coming decade as Congress wrestles with funding for the $6 billion accelerator.

Supporters, in an effort to blunt criticism that the project is merely an expensive toy for a handful of high-Energy physicists, make broad claims for its practical uses, particularly in medicine. They also argue that it is essential to the preservation of U.S. superiority in science. Opponents stress that the project is prone to mismanagement, that it would drain funds from other research fields, and that the government's limited resources...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?