Also, i think if we invested the money for a new collider into an effort to develop what we've learned so far into a useful technology that inspires the general public, the funding for the next collider would take care of itself.
Also, i think if we invested the money for a new collider into an effort to develop what we've learned so far into a useful technology that inspires the general public, the funding for the next collider would take care of itself.
Annihilation is too uncontrolled to help, often in terms of direction.
Accelerators are all about trying to add just a tiny bit more velocity to something already moving at 99.99% of the speed of light, in the exact direction that particle is already going in. So it is both precision and vanishing results.
It's a tricky situation.
This however does not increase the collision energy significantly: a single electron-positron pair has the (rest) energy of ~1MeV -- this is what is released during the annihilation, but the energies we want to go to at the next collider go up to 10TeV, so 10^7 times larger.
So that's still 4 orders of magnitude below the collision energy of the LHC.
[1]: http://pdglive.lbl.gov/DataBlock.action?node=S016M&home=BXXX...
Strange as it might sound, I think technology being developed for the next generation of mobile networks could be what opens up a new regime (with likely candidate theories) of high energy physics. - Terahertz beamforming for wakefield accelerators, to throw some lingo at you.