>What did the previous collider discover?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
>why do we think that building a bigger microscope will be any different?
Why do we think building a bigger telescope then Hubble will be any different:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
>why do we think that building a bigger microscope will be any different?
Why do we think building a bigger telescope then Hubble will be any different:
The JWST is also hugely behind schedule, to the point that XKCD mocks it [2]. Originally scheduled for 2007, the launch date repeatedly slipped. The latest date, 2021, is now in doubt.
I think there's a big risk that this CERN supercollider would have the same cost and schedule risks.
[1] https://www.nature.com/news/2010/101027/full/4671028a.html [2] https://xkcd.com/2014/
The Large Hadron Collider went over budget by about double, which is bad but frankly for these sorts of cutting edge systems hardly unprecedented. Some of that was ironically due to budget cuts causing delays which in the long term increased costs.
If you want a prime reason things go over budget this is the prime one, not fully funding a project in order to save money. If you look at well executed projects they spend years setting up and then execute as fast as possible.
(2) Hubble is dieing. It will not last forever but still makes new discoveries, new science, regularly. A replacement is needed. And the JWST is a totally different device, not just bigger. We probably need both the JWST and a new Hubble.
The problem with colliders is that the next energy thresholds where we expect to observe unexplained phenomena are a couple orders of magnitude greater than the proposed collider. So we could really only confirm existing theories unless something major is hiding in the energy gap. This seems unlikely.
Critics want to put the money towards avenues where we're likely to observe new things instead of confirming validated theories.
And no, the higgs was a theory, now proven right (maybe you mean that by 'new physics'?)
Sorry but your view on the world is just depressing, its like we need 'new science' 'new physics' whatever that means, but building the experiment to proof a theory is right, is too expensive?
And no the JWST is a space telescope NOT something completely different from hubble, it's a telescope.