|
Science Forum Index » Physics - Research Forum » Why do circular accelerators use protons?
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Guest |
 Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 5:11 am |
|
|
|
|
Hi. I was reading a bit about ring accelerators and it seems that they
generally use protons more often than nuclei. Sure, theres RHIC but
why not use deuterium or tritium to lower synchrotron radiation
losses? I'm guessing its just because it doesnt work this way. Why
doesnt it? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Uncle Al |
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 12:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
dezakin@usa.net wrote:
Quote:
Hi. I was reading a bit about ring accelerators and it seems that they
generally use protons more often than nuclei. Sure, theres RHIC but
why not use deuterium or tritium to lower synchrotron radiation
losses? I'm guessing its just because it doesnt work this way. Why
doesnt it?
It works fine. Gold nuclei fly deeply relativistic in Long Island's
RHIC. The more particles you have within the impactors the sloppier
the collision results and the lower the point-to-point collision
energy. Overall collision energy is distributed amongst all the
incoming substructures. Each gets only a small portion.
Protons containing three quarks are being abandoned for structureless
point lepton electrons in the someday to be built linear collider.
Synchrotron radiation losses from low mass charged particles are
obviated by flying straight.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Greg McLac |
| Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 7:40 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
dezakin@usa.net:
Quote: Hi. I was reading a bit about ring accelerators and it seems that they
generally use protons more often than nuclei. Sure, theres RHIC but
why not use deuterium or tritium to lower synchrotron radiation
losses? I'm guessing its just because it doesnt work this way. Why
doesnt it?
It may seems that with deuterium for example, there is as much energy. But
that's false at very high energy, because the binding energy is very small
with respect to the kinetic energy. The nucleus then behaves as if the
nucleons weren't bound, that is, as if they were two independent particles.
The available energy is then cut by half.
GML |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Grouchy |
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:28 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Mar 21, 11:11 am, deza...@usa.net wrote:
Quote: Hi. I was reading a bit about ring accelerators and it seems that they
generally use protons more often than nuclei. Sure, theres RHIC but
why not use deuterium or tritium to lower synchrotron radiation
losses? I'm guessing its just because it doesnt work this way. Why
doesnt it?
Without going into the gritty particulars... it might help if you
think of the apparatus as a whole, rather than as a means to explain
this or that event resulting from the operation of the apparatus. The
physicists are going to moan, but... try thinking of a ring
accelerator like an engineer who has to calibrate all of its many,
many components. If your question is applied as if it were an
algorithm, the apparatus has to work in a particular order of events
that are dependent on secondary systems functioning consistently prior
to any possible collection of collision data able to fall within an
acceptable margin or structural and systemic error.
Here's a link to NIST's "Atomic Weights and isotope comparisons" site.
http://www.physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/Compositions/index.html
Here's a link to the Berkeley Lab Isotope Project (a really cool
site).
http://ie.lbl.gov/education/isotopes.htm
Aside from the experimental/technical (and very long) answer to your
question, the above links should provide your with as much of an
answer as you're looking for...
Good luck,
Grouchy |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
