This new "accelerator on a chip" is really amazing, it can accelerate electrons at least 30 times faster than the SLAC linear particle accelerator (1 billion electron volts per meter is their goal)
formatting link
The video on that page is neat, it shows how the electric field of light is used to increase the energy/accelerate the electrons, which have to already be going near light speed when they enter the device as for it to work it has to be synchronous I think.
Would this device work for relativistic ion beams too?
Also it looks like something like that (just one tooth section) could be used as a plasmonic relay or diode.
On a sunny day (Sun, 29 Sep 2013 13:12:07 -0700) it happened Jamie M wrote in :
Will ions move in a ?glass? medium?
I dunno, I am really impressed and happy with this result, and it supports my often made statement that these big monsters like CERN should be table top experiments. Because after all, we are playing with very very small particles (not so for ions though).
Yeah, well, we shall see. It's one thing to give a few electrons a 150keV kick in half a millimetre, but it's quite another to reach a few hundred GeV. This is not the first time someone announces huge gradients. They usually soon hit some show stopper.
Not to worry: CERN's machines aren't huge just for the fun of it. If this can be made to work, CERN will use it, and probably think of some affordable practically useful gadgets in the process.
On a sunny day (Mon, 30 Sep 2013 15:08:54 +0200) it happened Jeroen Belleman wrote in :
Yes, please do not see this as personal attack, but IMNSHO CERN is a social project to keep industry going and some PhD students of the street.
We need: better weapon (that is why all them PhDees where brainwashed in the schools anyways), after the WW2 atom bomb. Clean fusion energy (really understanding how stuff works, not build yet an other one that will not work (ITER), not ever again asking for larger stuff to test the obviously wrong theories by some last century scientific fraud, (LIGO, graffiti waves comes to mind). travel to other planets, good space ship that can carrier the masses.
But OK, as bomb shelter, after you get rid of all that helium (kids balloons? it could prove useful some day, or not ,or soon.
CERN uses more energy than all the combined wind power in that area of Europe put together. A bit modesty for those scientific frauds when asking for more money for yet a larger (now linear?) collider would in this time be good thing. I'd vote it down.
Also the tooth spacing has to be synchronized to the electrons speed too:
"The non-relativistic section consists of grating structures with a tapered grating period to assure synchronicity with the accelerating electrons using the third (B1), second (B2) and first (B3) spatial harmonic."
(link is from the
formatting link
you linked to)
In the diagram I'm not sure if the grating teeth period changes or if the gap between the teeth is changing, I thought it would be the grating period, but the diagram makes it look like the gap is increasing to match the faster electrons.
I think a fairly obvious improvement to this grating type accelerator is to trigger a plasmonic resonance in the grating and totally eliminate the external laser!
I thought of a potential use for this technology for desalinating sea water into drinking water, using millions of these etched gratings in parallel as microfluidic channels, and then using focused sunlight as the light source to pump the sodium or chlorine ions down a different route to make fresh water. Also probably could do a similar thing with a flow battery for charging it.
That's certainly a side benefit of the project, but most rational observers see the obswervations that it can make as the major part of its justificat ion.
ools anyways), after the WW2 atom bomb.
The atom bomb is quite powerful enough to render the earth uninhabitable. W hy would we need anything bigger? Something that could be tightly focussed on a remote location could be useful, but that doesn't seem to be on offer.
t an other one that will not work (ITER),
JET worked. It only generated about 65% of the power needed to maintain the plasma, but ITER should be big enough to get past break-even, if too small to be a cost-effective energy source. Building stuff that works - proof-of
-principle prototypes - is a well known route to getting to something pract ical.
formatting link
ries by some last century scientific fraud,
Obviously wrong from Jan's point of view - as in not predicting the result he wants. This makes him a Dutch krw.
loons? it could prove useful some day, or not ,or soon.
Europe put together. A bit modesty for those scientific frauds when asking for more money for yet a larger (now linear?) collider would in this time b e good thing. I'd vote it down.
Jan has less. He wants to throw away the scientific theories we've got with out offering anything remotely comparable to put in their place.
Interesting. Gratings work with single wavelengths of light, and sunlight s pans a factor of two in wavelength (380nm to 780nm). You'd have to disperse the sunlight by wavelength to give each pumping gating it's preferred wave length.
The ions in the water won't be travelling at anyhting like the speed of lig ht - or even the speed of light in water, so the "surfing" component - whic h is what this thread started off with - isn't going to be significant.
Still, Jamie has conformed to the first rule of brain-storming which is to announce every idea that you've got, no matter how absurd.
Or, to really get funding form everywhere, how about separating gold from sea water? Just set it in and let it run, come back and pick up the 'tailings'
Better to collect the catalytic platinum from the side of highways. At least that's enough to make a living.
--
There is a consensus that A => B and B is true does not imply anything on A.
-- Paul Aubrin , 08 Jul 2012 12:46:34 GMT
You have been stupid enough to write: "If a theory A predicts B and we
observe B then we have evidence the theory is true" and you are telling
me that pointing your error is some sophistry?
-- Paul Aubrin , 08 Jul 2012 18:36:01 GMT
You said also that you agreed with the following proposition "If a theory
A predicts B and we observe B then we have evidence the theory is true".
Do you agree it is a remarkable delusion ? Do you agree that denying it
is a logical fallacy is not creeping denialism, but a full deception.
-- Paul Aubrin , 08 Jul 2012 19:17:54 GMT
I learned physics and chemistry from quite [ba-KARK!] good masters.
-- Paul Aubrin, 14 Oct 2013
Fritz Haber tried to do this just after WW1. He'd been mislead by published analyses that suggest a gold content between 4 and 64 parts per billion. H is work demonstrated that the true gold content was about a thousand time l ower, at about 4 parts per trillion.
formatting link
You'd have to move a lot of sea-water past your collector before you could collect a significant amount of gold.
The obvious place to do it it would be in the Straits of Gibraltar, where c old, less salty Atlantic sea water flows into the Mediterranean at the surf ace, and warmer, saltier Mediterranean water flows out below it.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.