JF Mezei wrote:
> Joseph Huber wrote:
>
>> Also have a look into Cern's ask-the-expert pages at:
>>
>> http://askanexpert.web.cern.ch/AskAn...ccel-en.html#7
>
>
> But they don't answer the most important question: where do the protons
> go afterwards ? Is there a tap at the end of the loop where they open it
> at regular interval and fill a bit bucket with protons ?

Those which collide, are no longer protons, the particles go into the
detector mass, and in fact irradiate it.
When the beam has lost too much of it's particles to produce usefull
events, or because of some technical failure (magnet/power loss or
whatever could happen), then the beam is "dumped" into a big mass of
graphite and (or?) iron.

--

Joseph Huber - http://www.huber-joseph.de

In article <1b37f487-8b1b-44eb-b8c4-d6116f0ee9b9@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes:
>
> All you said here was that you used the pdp a couple of years before
> the first 11/780. Then you said the cheapest DEC system, but not when.
> When you said the cheapest system it sounded to me like it could be
> any system, not just the 11/780, even if it was at the time of the
> first 11/780. DEC didn't have anything cheaper than a VAX 11/780? Even
> a non-VAX (or does the LA36 only work on a VAX)?

When I said the cheapest system, I meant the cheapest 11/780 you
could configure. And at that time all VAXen were 11/780.

In article <48d1b9c4$0$12375$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
> Question about accelerators:
>
> So, you have one big 27km loop.
>
> Do they inject particles and accelerate the even particles clockwise,
> and the odd particles counterclockwise, and each side has 13km to
> accelerate until they hit at the other end of the loop ?

For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
build the detectors for the results of collisions.

Most of the particales don't collide and most which do kind of glance
off each other creating uninteresting results. But the few that make
solid hits provide results never before seen.

In article ,
koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
> In article <48d1b9c4$0$12375$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
>> Question about accelerators:
>>
>> So, you have one big 27km loop.
>>
>> Do they inject particles and accelerate the even particles clockwise,
>> and the odd particles counterclockwise, and each side has 13km to
>> accelerate until they hit at the other end of the loop ?
>
> For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
> at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
> build the detectors for the results of collisions.
>
> Most of the particales don't collide and most which do kind of glance
> off each other creating uninteresting results. But the few that make
> solid hits provide results never before seen.

Of what real value and at what cost?

bill


--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

On Sep 18, 2:34*pm, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
> In article ,
> * * * * koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
>
>
>
> > In article <48d1b9c4$0$12375$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
> >> Question about accelerators:
>
> >> So, you have one big 27km loop.
>
> >> Do they inject particles and accelerate the even particles clockwise,
> >> and the odd particles counterclockwise, and each side has 13km to
> >> accelerate until they hit at the other end of the loop ?
>
> > * *For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. *Only
> > * *at selected points to the loops cross. *That way they know where to
> > * *build the detectors for the results of collisions.
>
> > * *Most of the particales don't collide and most which do kind of glance
> > * *off each other creating uninteresting results. *But the few that make
> > * *solid hits provide results never before seen.
>
> Of what real value and at what cost?
>
> bill
>
> --
> Bill Gunshannon * * * * *| *de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. *Three wolves
> billg...@cs.scranton.edu | *and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
> University of Scranton * |
> Scranton, Pennsylvania * | * * * * #include *


the UK spends less per year on the LHC than we do on peanuts. How much
you pay I know not.

In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>In article ,
> koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
>> In article <48d1b9c4$0$12375$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
>>> Question about accelerators:
>>>
>>> So, you have one big 27km loop.
>>>
>>> Do they inject particles and accelerate the even particles clockwise,
>>> and the odd particles counterclockwise, and each side has 13km to
>>> accelerate until they hit at the other end of the loop ?
>>
>> For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
>> at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
>> build the detectors for the results of collisions.
>>
>> Most of the particales don't collide and most which do kind of glance
>> off each other creating uninteresting results. But the few that make
>> solid hits provide results never before seen.
>
>Of what real value and at what cost?
>
Of what real value was the discovery of the electron ?
Though I'll admit the cost of those experiments was rather lower.

David Webb
Security team leader
CCSS
Middlesex University

Democracy - A wolf dying of starvation as a hundred sheep outvote him to
choose grass for dinner again.


>bill
>
>
>--
>Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
>billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
>University of Scranton |
>Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

In article ,
david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:
> In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>In article ,
>> koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
>>> In article <48d1b9c4$0$12375$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
>>>> Question about accelerators:
>>>>
>>>> So, you have one big 27km loop.
>>>>
>>>> Do they inject particles and accelerate the even particles clockwise,
>>>> and the odd particles counterclockwise, and each side has 13km to
>>>> accelerate until they hit at the other end of the loop ?
>>>
>>> For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
>>> at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
>>> build the detectors for the results of collisions.
>>>
>>> Most of the particales don't collide and most which do kind of glance
>>> off each other creating uninteresting results. But the few that make
>>> solid hits provide results never before seen.
>>
>>Of what real value and at what cost?
>>
> Of what real value was the discovery of the electron ?
> Though I'll admit the cost of those experiments was rather lower.

The discovery seems to have produced quite a bit of value and, as you
pointed out, at rather little cost. Back to my original question!

> Democracy - A wolf dying of starvation as a hundred sheep outvote him to
> choose grass for dinner again.

Bad analogy. The wolf would not starve to death on a diet of grass (or
at least that is what vegitarians want us carnivores to believe!). He
probably wouldn't like it, but he could live.

bill

--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

Bob Koehler wrote:

> For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
> at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
> build the detectors for the results of collisions.

Are the paths in 2 separate vacuum "tubes" each with their own magnets
etc ? (which means it is really 2 totally separate accelerators that
happen to intersect at a point ?

Or do they have sophisticated magnets that can generate 2 paths inside
the same vacuum tube ?

JF Mezei schrieb:
> Bob Koehler wrote:
>
>> For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
>> at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
>> build the detectors for the results of collisions.
>
> Are the paths in 2 separate vacuum "tubes" each with their own magnets
> etc ? (which means it is really 2 totally separate accelerators that
> happen to intersect at a point ?
>
> Or do they have sophisticated magnets that can generate 2 paths inside
> the same vacuum tube ?

No, there are two vacuum tubes (or is the right word vacuum pipes ?)
inside the one magnet. The magnets are the sophisticated part keeping
the beams in the opposite directions on track.
If You read through the Cern
web pages, I remember some picture where You can see a magnet with two
vacuum pipes in the center. Since in the LHC the beams are of the same
kind of particles, this is possible.
In past years I was involved in a detector at the Hamburg HERA collider:
there protons collided with positrons (anti electrons).
Because of the different behaviour, the two beams were running each in
their own magnets (superconducting for the protons, conventional warm
for positrons/electrons),
effectively 2 accelerators in one tunnel.

--

Joseph Huber - http://www.huber-joseph.de

Joseph Huber schrieb:
> JF Mezei schrieb:
>> Bob Koehler wrote:
>>
>>> For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
>>> at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
>>> build the detectors for the results of collisions.
>>
>> Are the paths in 2 separate vacuum "tubes" each with their own magnets
>> etc ? (which means it is really 2 totally separate accelerators that
>> happen to intersect at a point ?
>>
>> Or do they have sophisticated magnets that can generate 2 paths inside
>> the same vacuum tube ?
>
> No, there are two vacuum tubes (or is the right word vacuum pipes ?)
> inside the one magnet. The magnets are the sophisticated part keeping
> the beams in the opposite directions on track.

I have to correct myself:
LHC has two beam-pipes, each with its own magnet coil, both are inside
one big cryostat, housing the cryogenics, and the iron yoke to
compensate the magnetic fields.
So the two beams have their own magnetic field, but one can't speak of
two independent accelerators.


--

Joseph Huber - http://www.huber-joseph.de

In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>
> Of what real value and at what cost?

Of the same real value of all basic research: you can't predict
ahead of time which will result in practicle results when.

You could have asked the same of any research that led to anything
we have now. Or you could go back to 50% child mortality.

In article <48d2a7dd$0$1563$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
>
> Are the paths in 2 separate vacuum "tubes" each with their own magnets
> etc ? (which means it is really 2 totally separate accelerators that
> happen to intersect at a point ?
>
> Or do they have sophisticated magnets that can generate 2 paths inside
> the same vacuum tube ?

In most, and I think the LHC is included, there are two tubes. But
you need the sophisticated magnets anyhow because the tubes tend to
both be at the core of the magnets.

Bob Koehler wrote:
> In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>> Of what real value and at what cost?
>
> Of the same real value of all basic research: you can't predict
> ahead of time which will result in practicle results when.
>
> You could have asked the same of any research that led to anything
> we have now. Or you could go back to 50% child mortality.
>

Face it. You'll never know what a piece of research may be worth until
it has been completed. A lot of it has no practical use. The little
bits that are worthwhile have changed the world many times.

A LASER can blind you but, if you happen to have age related macular
degeneration, it might just keep you from going blind.

Where would we be today without Solid State Physics? Building computers
with vacuum tubes?

Would you like to consider what your life span might have been if you
had been born a hundred and fifty years ago? No penicilin! No sulfa
drugs. No X-Ray, no MRI, no CAT Scan. Your doctor could very well have
known less about the art and science of medicine than you do.

Sometimes research just suggests a better place to look or a better
thing to look for. It's still worth doing!

In article ,
koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:

> In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
> >
> > Of what real value and at what cost?
>
> Of the same real value of all basic research: you can't predict
> ahead of time which will result in practicle results when.
>
> You could have asked the same of any research that led to anything
> we have now. Or you could go back to 50% child mortality.

In a speech entitled I, Thou and the Computer (back in 1973 or something
like that), Isaac Asimov commented on an anti-science article by a
certain Mr. Laurie in the magazine NEW SCIENTIST, in which Laurie stated
"Sure, science has turned a few tricks like tinned food, but what has
science done to add to the happiness of man's three score years and
ten?" Asimov replied in a letter: man's three score years and ten.
Before science, the average lifespan was more like one score year and
ten. If you don't want it, Mr. Laurie, don't take it.

Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> In article ,
> david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:
>> In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>> In article ,
>>> koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
>>>> In article <48d1b9c4$0$12375$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
>>>>> Question about accelerators:
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you have one big 27km loop.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do they inject particles and accelerate the even particles clockwise,
>>>>> and the odd particles counterclockwise, and each side has 13km to
>>>>> accelerate until they hit at the other end of the loop ?
>>>> For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
>>>> at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
>>>> build the detectors for the results of collisions.
>>>>
>>>> Most of the particales don't collide and most which do kind of glance
>>>> off each other creating uninteresting results. But the few that make
>>>> solid hits provide results never before seen.
>>> Of what real value and at what cost?
>>>
>> Of what real value was the discovery of the electron ?
>> Though I'll admit the cost of those experiments was rather lower.
>
> The discovery seems to have produced quite a bit of value and, as you
> pointed out, at rather little cost. Back to my original question!
>
>> Democracy - A wolf dying of starvation as a hundred sheep outvote him to
>> choose grass for dinner again.
>
> Bad analogy. The wolf would not starve to death on a diet of grass (or
> at least that is what vegitarians want us carnivores to believe!). He
> probably wouldn't like it, but he could live.
>
> bill
>

Wolf - "Grass is what food eats!"


----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> Bob Koehler wrote:
>> In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu
>> (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>> Of what real value and at what cost?
>>
>> Of the same real value of all basic research: you can't predict
>> ahead of time which will result in practicle results when.
>>
>> You could have asked the same of any research that led to anything
>> we have now. Or you could go back to 50% child mortality.
>>
>
> Face it. You'll never know what a piece of research may be worth until
> it has been completed. A lot of it has no practical use. The little
> bits that are worthwhile have changed the world many times.
>
> A LASER can blind you but, if you happen to have age related macular
> degeneration, it might just keep you from going blind.
>
> Where would we be today without Solid State Physics? Building computers
> with vacuum tubes?

Quiz: How many 6AU6s does it take to implement an iPOD?

Extra credit: how much filament power is required?


8-)

8-)

>
> Would you like to consider what your life span might have been if you
> had been born a hundred and fifty years ago? No penicilin! No sulfa
> drugs. No X-Ray, no MRI, no CAT Scan. Your doctor could very well have
> known less about the art and science of medicine than you do.
>
> Sometimes research just suggests a better place to look or a better
> thing to look for. It's still worth doing!
>


----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Jeff Campbell wrote:
> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> Bob Koehler wrote:
>>> In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu
>>> (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>>> Of what real value and at what cost?
>>>
>>> Of the same real value of all basic research: you can't predict
>>> ahead of time which will result in practicle results when.
>>>
>>> You could have asked the same of any research that led to anything
>>> we have now. Or you could go back to 50% child mortality.
>>>
>>
>> Face it. You'll never know what a piece of research may be worth
>> until it has been completed. A lot of it has no practical use. The
>> little bits that are worthwhile have changed the world many times.
>>
>> A LASER can blind you but, if you happen to have age related macular
>> degeneration, it might just keep you from going blind.
>>
>> Where would we be today without Solid State Physics? Building
>> computers with vacuum tubes?
>
> Quiz: How many 6AU6s does it take to implement an iPOD?
>
The figure would be approximately equal to the number of transistors.
> Extra credit: how much filament power is required?
Several megawatts. I haven't seen a 6AU6 in about 50 years now! I no
longer have the Vacuum Tube Data book and can no longer look up the
power requirements.
>

In article ,
"Richard B. Gilbert" writes:
> Jeff Campbell wrote:
>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>> Bob Koehler wrote:
>>>> In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu
>>>> (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>>>> Of what real value and at what cost?
>>>>
>>>> Of the same real value of all basic research: you can't predict
>>>> ahead of time which will result in practicle results when.
>>>>
>>>> You could have asked the same of any research that led to anything
>>>> we have now. Or you could go back to 50% child mortality.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Face it. You'll never know what a piece of research may be worth
>>> until it has been completed. A lot of it has no practical use. The
>>> little bits that are worthwhile have changed the world many times.
>>>
>>> A LASER can blind you but, if you happen to have age related macular
>>> degeneration, it might just keep you from going blind.
>>>
>>> Where would we be today without Solid State Physics? Building
>>> computers with vacuum tubes?
>>
>> Quiz: How many 6AU6s does it take to implement an iPOD?
>>
> The figure would be approximately equal to the number of transistors.
>> Extra credit: how much filament power is required?
> Several megawatts. I haven't seen a 6AU6 in about 50 years now!

Stop by my house for a beer sometime. I'll show some to you. :-)

> I no
> longer have the Vacuum Tube Data book and can no longer look up the
> power requirements.

Yeah, still got them, too.

bill

--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

In article <1221782202_2361@isp.n>,
Jeff Campbell writes:
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> In article ,
>> david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:
>>> In article <6jf3muF31qiqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>>>> In article ,
>>>> koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
>>>>> In article <48d1b9c4$0$12375$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes:
>>>>>> Question about accelerators:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, you have one big 27km loop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do they inject particles and accelerate the even particles clockwise,
>>>>>> and the odd particles counterclockwise, and each side has 13km to
>>>>>> accelerate until they hit at the other end of the loop ?
>>>>> For most of the distance, the loops are not in the same path. Only
>>>>> at selected points to the loops cross. That way they know where to
>>>>> build the detectors for the results of collisions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most of the particales don't collide and most which do kind of glance
>>>>> off each other creating uninteresting results. But the few that make
>>>>> solid hits provide results never before seen.
>>>> Of what real value and at what cost?
>>>>
>>> Of what real value was the discovery of the electron ?
>>> Though I'll admit the cost of those experiments was rather lower.
>>
>> The discovery seems to have produced quite a bit of value and, as you
>> pointed out, at rather little cost. Back to my original question!
>>
>>> Democracy - A wolf dying of starvation as a hundred sheep outvote him to
>>> choose grass for dinner again.
>>
>> Bad analogy. The wolf would not starve to death on a diet of grass (or
>> at least that is what vegitarians want us carnivores to believe!). He
>> probably wouldn't like it, but he could live.
>>
>> bill
>>
>
> Wolf - "Grass is what food eats!"

That's what I keep telling the local vegaterians when thye say I
should be eating salads. :-)

bill

--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include