h a l f b a k e r yProfessional croissant on closed course. Do not attempt.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Are you bored of the same old thing? Has
Mariokart lost its charm? Are you tired of
Tetris? Does Space Invaders not really do it
for you any more? If the answer to any of
these questions is 'yes', then the Small
Hadron Collider could be for you! You can
conduct your own experiments, on a
much
smaller scale, but working on the same
principle as CERN's Large Hadron Collider.
Its a great way to understand the physics
involved, and unlike most games, there is
always more to find out. The console
comes with a free book on Quantum
Mechanics, String Theory, black holes, the
Big Bang and the Higgs Boson, which we
suggest you read before firing it up. Not
suitable for children under the age of 8.
Early homemade cyclotrons
http://www.aip.org/.../lawrence/first.htm
This can be done easily [nineteenthly, Sep 11 2008]
Mirrorcle
http://www.photon-p...e/PPL-HomePage.html
An off-the-shelf desktop synchrotron. [wagster, Sep 13 2008]
[link]
|
| |
I think the first cyclotron was only a few decimetres in diameter, if i remember rightly, so it's not completely impossible. |
|
| |
good! this could really take off |
|
| |
This is just a guess, but i think you would need the following: |
|
| |
* A reliable source of baryons, possibly a lump of available radioactive material (unless you just accelerate electrons or rely on cosmic or background radiation. I think probably a smoke alarm would work.
* Four D-shaped electromagnets, maybe scavenged from a microwave oven. I think they'd have to be ferrous rather than rare earth, unfortunately.
* A chamber which could be evacuated.
* Something like a Geiger counter or a cloud chamber.
* Something to generate very rapidly alternating current. I have no idea how to do this.
* A vacuum pump.
* Radiation shielding of some kind, maybe lead? |
|
| |
OK. We will "allow" that all that stuff exists and just have the user interface in place. |
|
| |
I see this as being a desktop, executive-toy,
USB-powered hadron collider. Sure, it wouldn't collide those hadrons together with much energy, but at least you'd have your own hadron collider. |
|
| |
According to the Wikipedia entry on Ernest Lawrence, his first cyclotron was made of wire, sealing wax and brass and was only ten centimetres in diameter. It cost him, eighty years ago, twenty-five dollars to make, and accelerated protons, i.e. hadrons. This is clearly bakeable and all that's needed is either a kit or a ready-made, like those toy Stirling engines that cost a couple of hundred quid. You could even do alchemy with it, albeit with tiny amounts of metal. |
|
| |
All you need is a business plan. You can do this easily, and given the free publicity from the LHC, you probably should. Watch out for radiation though. |
|
| |
A particle accelerator like that would be a great science kit for children. You'd make a fortune if you could get it out in time for this Christmas, with all the LHC publicity. |
|
| |
Then she said, "I hadron. I lepton him! Then I decided to take baryon. He had a fermion him, though it was no ordinary matter, I can tell you!" |
|
| |
So I, Ja-Ja Binks, said, "Meson a new drug, now I wear a pion my head!" |
|
| |
I am concerned about the radiation. I have
absolutely no idea how much radiation this
would produce and i don't know how to
work it out. |
|
| |
I have discovered the Sketchly Boson. It's a miniscule piece of Brown Matter. With legs. |
|
| |
//I have absolutely no idea how much radiation this would produce and i don't know how to work it out.// |
|
| |
Not enough to get through a lead apron. |
|
| |
If the alternating current was at four
megahertz and the cyclotron was four
decimetres across, like the original one,
that would mean the speed would be
pretty weedy compared to modern large
particle accelerators, i.e. around
four*pi*four million decimetres per
second. I make that a mere five
hundred kps. Could anything
interesting be done with that? I
suppose you could at least do the gold
leaf scattering experiment. Is it
enough, for example, for fission? |
|
| |
//Is it enough, for example, for fission//
probably not, but in 10 years, who knows? |
|
| |
It would be fairly simple to double the
speed by setting two up which accelerate
in opposite directions before colliding in
an intersecting section. |
|
| |
uh huh, that would work, i think |
|
| |
cheers for all the suggestions guys! |
|
| |
Attention UK listeners! (everyone else: This will most likely be available after broadcast on the BBC's website): I just heard a trail for tomorrow (Sunday) morning's "Broadcasting House" programme (9-10am, Radio 4) on which thy said they'll tell us how to make our own LHC using just a digital camera, a TV remote control and a plastic bin bag. I almost can't wait. |
|
| |
//on which thy said they'll tell us how to make our own LHC using just a digital camera, a TV remote control and a plastic bin bag.// |
|
| |
Is Richard Dean Anderson hosting the show? If only they had told the CERN guys. Could've saved a bucket of dosh. |
|
| |
More than one bucket. Just trying to imagine how many Zimbabwean dollars the LHC would have cost... too hard. |
|
| |
Large Ron had her collide (allegedly). |
|
| |
I dont know what all the fuss is about. I built a collider in my wrist watch. It works fine. I also use it to tune my antigrav engines on my UFO. |
|
| |
// tune my antigrav engines on my UFO // |
|
| |
Fine, but do you have to do it SO early on Sunday mornings ? We are fed up with you revving your antigrav drive. |
|
| |
And you haven't returned those hedgecutters you borrowed, either........ |
|
| |
Somehow, I think this accelerator should only be used on a Friday afternoon, when time passes more slowly for the observer. |
|
| |
// time passes more slowly for the observer // |
|
| |
Ah, but does it ? It's all Relative .... |
|
| |
The observer has no "objective" way of determining if time is passing more slowly for them, or faster for the thing "observed", since all observation is subjective. |
|
| |
<Obligatory reference to Copenhagen Interpretation> |
|
| |
"Time is what we read from a clock" |
|
| |
Time is merely the time it takes for light to get from place to place... it simply takes longer than normal on Friday afternoons. |
|
| |
Exactly, and ...Er, where was I? Oh, yeah: if time goes more slowly for the observer on a Friday afternoon, then the bits inside the accelerator would be apparently travelling more slowly, therefore they could be accelerated even more before reaching close to light speed. This is an advantage only if the acceleration started during the previous weekend when time apparently passed much faster. I think this is due to the weak end force. |
|
| |
[UB] No, our perception that light takes time to get from one place to another is caused by the finite speed at which time travels from one place to another. |
|
| |
//[UB] No, our perception that light takes time to get from one place to another is caused by the finite speed at which time travels from one place to another.// |
|
| |
[hippo], no. The definition of "speed of time" is defined as: how much space has to go past in one unit of time. Space is an arbitrary unit chosen by the observer. I often find it easier to imagine long strings of time spaghetti in a kind of basil pesto-y space sauce (with shavings of parmesan). |
|
| |
No, space-time is more like a sucession of coexistent huge endless canelloni, bent by gravitation into a variety of convoluted multidimensional Klein-bottle shapes and toroids, with a meat-and tomato-and onion filling seasoned with oregano, and a thick cheese sauce poured over the top. The cheese sauce represents all the "dark matter" that can't be observed, as it is 'outside' the canneloni. |
|
| |
Surely all this talk of pasta just reinforces the argument for the existence of His Noodliness? |
|
| |
[AWL], it seems you are confusing the notion of an omniscient entity (pasta or not) with the "tortellini" nature of Calabi-Yau time-space manifolds. It is easy to confuse the two, I have done so myself. I suggest a serving of crayfish ravioli served in a piquant aoli, with drizzled pesto. Although this is *not* a representation of the universe as a hole, it is a good starting point. |
|
| |
{edit} My appologies for the continued pesto references, but they are of some importance. |
|
| |
// it is a good starting point // |
|
| |
We beg to differ. Although the crayfish ravioli represent a good model of a mulit-cellular system of self-contained and independant entities, in a tasty sauce, going straight for this dish ignores the well established experimanetally tested phenomenon of anti-pasta. |
|
| |
Further, the independant nature of the ravioli may bring you into dispute with those who don't like their dinner to move around in a bowl, prefering instead large slabs of grilled beef which stay where they're put (the so-called "steady-steak" theory). |
|
| |
[8th..], of course, you are right. Was it not Einstein who said: "God does not play rice (and by extension, rissotto) with the Universe"? |
|
| |
This of course, rather famously, sparked the experiments which proved entanglement. But that is an advanced subject. I was merely stating that one start with the ravioli model, and move slowly into the totellini, canneloni, and vermicilli models over time (or space), provided you have a good "fruits de la mer" and a nice sprinkling of freshly ground black pepper. |
|
| |
spaghetti carbonara entanglement, that is |
|
| |
anyone here heard of bistromathics? |
|
| |
Einstein certainly had. Not only did he say, "God does not play rice with the Universe", but also, "Now, Bohr, you had the lamb stew..... Pauli, the sole bonne femme..... that's eighteen dollars..... who had the schnitzel ? And who ordered all the schnapps ? Yes, Nils, I know you had two .... Fermi what did you ? oh yes, the Chianti, yes, and the duck..... that's .... forty-one ...... no, that can't be right..... lobster ? who ordered lobster ? Where's Heisenberg ? Has anyone seen Heisenberg ? Oh shut up, Nils, I don't care if his wave function does collapse if I observe him, I will do a damn sight more than observe him, the little sod, I will kick him into the middle of next week, he's had lobster and schnapps and the crepe suzette and all I had was the soup of the day and the sausages, I'm not picking up the tab again, Nobel prize or no Nobel prize ......" |
|
| |
No-one ever pays for "sole bonne femme", it is part of the exclusion principle. |
|
| |