I read the following interesting article about the Great Collider in China. Could the $10 Billion Great Collider become reality as the main adviser Arkani-Hamed main purpose of it is to find Naturalness? It's like him telling China "LHC didn't find naturalness, could you construct the $10 Billion Great Collider so maybe we can find it?" (see the bottom for my comments and some questions) https://www.quantamagazine.org/20150922-nima-arkani-hamed-collider-physics/ "As things stand, the known elementary particles, codified in a 40-year-old set of equations called the “Standard Model,” lack a sensible pattern and seem astonishingly fine-tuned for life. Arkani-Hamed and other particle physicists, guided by their belief in naturalness, have spent decades devising clever ways to fit the Standard Model into a larger, natural pattern. But time and again, ever-more-powerful particle colliders have failed to turn up proof of their proposals in the form of new particles and phenomena, increasingly pointing toward the bleak and radical prospect that naturalness is dead. Still, many physicists, Arkani-Hamed chief among them, seek a more definitive answer. And right now, his quest to answer the naturalness question leads through China. Two years ago, he agreed to become the inaugural director of the new Center for Future High Energy Physics in Beijing. He has since visited China 18 times, campaigning for the construction of a machine of unprecedented scale: a circular particle collider up to 60 miles in circumference, or nearly four times as big around as Europe’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Nicknamed the “Great Collider,” and estimated to cost roughly $10 billion over 30 years, it would succeed the LHC as the new center of the physics universe. According to Arkani-Hamed and those who agree with him, this 100-trillion-electron-volt (TeV) collider would slam subatomic particles together hard enough to either find the particles that the LHC could not muster or rule them out, rescuing or killing the naturalness principle and propelling physicists toward one of two radically different pictures: that of a knowable universe, or an unknowable multiverse." My physicsforums friends. If the following were simply not true: 1. Supersymmetry 2. Extra Dimensions 3. Multiverse 4. Dimensional Transmutation Couldn't we say that in the Big Bang. The very unlikely constants of nature and fine tuning were simply designed that way by who knows what. If this were true. Would it be the end of physics?