You don't know what the practical aspects of this research are. It might not have anything to do with the heavy element produced. Maybe its a new alloy created for the experiment, a new type of capacitor, etc.
When we spent a lot more in real dollars on fundamental research, we were the world leader not only in that research but in technology generally. I'd much rather we return there rather than concede first place to the Chinese.
I've been listening to that rationale for fifty years. Find it for me in Article I Section 8.
You don't know what the practical aspects of this research are.
Neither do you. I DO know what research into the soil microbiome or hydrology could yield, for example, at a pittance compared to this work involving high-dollar equipment.
There is a lot of research to do. It all costs money. We're broke. I want what is spent to foreseeably yield a profit with which to fund more research. It is knowable what the likelihood a particular project might yield within an acceptable time frame. When the elements under consideration are so ephemeral it is knowable how little.
Because we're broke.