 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Relativity / January 2005Accellerated learning
I was on the CERN site, but I still would like to know: About how many cycles per second (around the ring) does a particle go? Can they acccellerate neutrons or other chargeless particles? How? And what good do magnets do in that case, anyway? How come a new beam in the same tunnel isn't limited by synchrotron radiation exactly like the last one? If they only use chargeless particles, what becomes the limit on energy? Centrifugal force causing the beam to scrape against the tube? How much faster is that than the synchrotron-limited case? What was the max energy of the old accellerator and the new one? And after we explore this level, how far away is the next "interesting" energy? What would have been the energy of the SSC? What phenomena will we now be able to explore? Thanx! =[ d > I was on the CERN site, but I still would like to know: > > About how many cycles per second (around the ring) does a particle go? The ring has a circumference of 26 km, and the particles are going essentially 300,000 km/s. The frequency is thus (300,000 km/s)/(26 km), or about 11,000 Hz. > Can they acccellerate neutrons or other chargeless particles? No. > How? And > what good do magnets do in that case, anyway? Absorbers for the neutral particles, I suppose. > How come a new beam in the same tunnel isn't limited by synchrotron > radiation exactly like the last one? The synchrotron radiation depends inversely on the mass of the particle. Muons radiate much less than electrons, protons much, much less. > If they only use chargeless > particles, what becomes the limit on energy? Centrifugal force causing > the beam to scrape against the tube? How much faster is that than the > synchrotron-limited case? The only way to collide neutral particles is to accelerate counter-rotating charged particles, run them into dumps, sweep the charged smithereens away and let the neutral smithereens collide. But this would be an unfocused beam spot and a lousy way to make a living as an experimental physicist. > What was the max energy of the old accellerator and the new one? The old one was 100 GeV each beam, or a collision energy of 200 GeV. The beam energy of LHC is 7 TeV, or a collision energy of 14 GeV, an increase in beam energy by a factor of 70. This is not an apples-to-apples comparison, because a lepton-lepton collider puts all of its energy in the collision, whereas hadron-hadron colliders only put a fraction (not a fixed fraction either), as it's the quarks and gluons in the hadrons that do the colliding and they individually carry a fraction of the hadron momentum. > And > after we explore this level, how far away is the next "interesting" > energy? That depends *entirely* on what we see at LHC. But Google "muon collider". > What would have been the energy of the SSC? Collision energy of 40 TeV, a factor of about 3 higher than LHC. Would have been bigger, too. > What phenomena will we now be able to explore? > > Thanx! You're welcome! PD > =[ d In sci.physics.relativity, DavidBowman <dt041054@yahoo.com> wrote on 29 Jan 2005 02:17:51 -0800 <1106993871.909701.281340@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>: > I was on the CERN site, but I still would like to know: > > About how many cycles per second (around the ring) does a particle go? I'm not sure. The LHC specification LHC-BPM-ES-0004 (rev 2) for the LHC (which AFAIK is still under construction) refers to a parameter called "bunch spacing", which can range from 24.95 to 88925 nanoseconds. Since 88925 / 2808 is approximately 31.6, as opposed to the specified 24.95, I can only be approximate, but it appears that the particles race around the ring completing a lap every 88925 nanoseconds, or 88.925 microseconds. http://edms.cern.ch/document/327557 I'd have to look for the size of the ring to actually answer your question using these specifications. Another document specifies a GeV of 36900 for lead ions, with a relativistic gamma factor of 190.5, yielding a computed speed of 0.99998622209975 c. And that's at injection; at collision the beam is 574000 GeV for a gamma factor of 2963.5 or a speed of 0.99999994306751 c. http://ab-div.web.cern.ch/ab-div/conferences/Chamonix/chamx2004/PAPERS/1_05_JMJ.pdf > Can they acccellerate neutrons or other chargeless particles? How? And > what good do magnets do in that case, anyway? No, because the beam is electrostatically accelerated. The magnets steering it would be equally useless. > How come a new beam in the same tunnel isn't limited by synchrotron > radiation exactly like the last one? If they only use chargeless > particles, what becomes the limit on energy? Centrifugal force causing > the beam to scrape against the tube? How much faster is that than the > synchrotron-limited case? Erm, that question didn't make a lot of sense; please rephrase. > What was the max energy of the old accellerator and the new one? And > after we explore this level, how far away is the next "interesting" > energy? What would have been the energy of the SSC? > What phenomena will we now be able to explore? The document http://epaper.kek.jp/p93/PDF/PAC1993_3717.PDF suggests a 2 TeV MEB-Collider transfer line. Since a proton's energy is about 938 MeV this suggests a gamma factor of about 2132. Looks like LHC is bigger. :-) I have no idea as to the actual phenomena; I know SR but am ill-versed in particle physics beyond the elementary idea that one cam smash them together. > Thanx! > >=[ d  Signature#191, ewill3@earthlink.net It's still legal to go .sigless. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.