Re: Going near the speed of light

From: suzysewnshow (suzysewnshow_at_yahoo.com.au)
Date: 09/06/04 

Date: 6 Sep 2004 00:11:34 -0700

"Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@hia.no> wrote in message news:<chfvv8$2nm$1@dolly.uninett.no>...
> "suzysewnshow" <suzysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> skrev i melding news:e0a23188.0409031230.52472828@posting.google.com...
> > "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@hia.no> wrote in message news:<ch9p5b$cnu$1@dolly.uninett.no>...
> > > "suzysewnshow" <suzysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> skrev i melding news:e0a23188.0409021207.263cbc8@posting.google.com...
> > > > "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@hia.no> wrote in message news:<ch7a77$rp1$1@dolly.uninett.no>...
> > > > > "suzysewnshow" <suzysewnshow@yahoo.com.au> skrev i melding
> news:e0a23188.0409020534.17130f1c@posting.google.com...
>
> > > > > > Unless you can tell us how the particle *GAINS* this energy because
> > > > > > for a calorimeter to see it, it must get hotter heavier or hastier.
> > > > >
> > > > > But I DID tell you how we know that the particle *GAINS* this energy.
> > > > >
> > > > Yes you did. Synchrotron radiation you seemed to be saying. I always
> > > > considered that a loss not a gain.
> > >
> > > Since you still haven't got it, you better read it again:
> > >
> > > > > Since you still haven't got it, you better read it again:
> > > > >
> > > > > The synchrotron radiation comes from where the particle
> > > > > trajectories are bent by a magnetic field.
> > > > > The radiated energy comes from the kinetic energy of
> > > > > the particles, which therefore loose some energy.
> > >
> > > This is how the particles *LOOSE* kinetic energy.
> > > On every cycle, they loose energy in the bends.
> > >
> > > But every time the particles are at the same position in the circuit,
> > > they STILL have the same amount of kinetic energy as the last time.
> > > How can this be?
> > >
> > > So:
> > > > > Isn't this a beautiful proof that the RF-cavities keep
> > > > > putting energy into the particles?
> > > > > If they didn't, where does then the radiated energy come from?
> > >
> > > So this is how the particles *GAIN* energy - in the RF-cavities.
> > > On every cycle, they *GAIN* the same amount of energy in
> > > the RF cavities.
> > >
> > > > > When the speed of the particle increases, the synchrotron
> > > > > radiation increases. When the radiated energy is equal
> > > > > to the energy the RF-cavities put into the particles,
> > > > > the accelerator is in steady state and have reached
> > > > > the limit of its performance.
> > >
> > > The particles *GAIN* energy in the RF-cavities,
> > > they *LOOSE* it in another part of the circuit.
> > >
> > > Is this really so hard to get?
> > >
> > > So:
> > > > > So the RF-cavities never cease to put energy into
> > > > > the particles regardless of their speed. We can measure
> > > > > this energy because it is radiated in another part of the circuit.
>
> > > > But we don't... we read the calorimeter.
> > >
> > > And what is this stupid remark supposed to mean?
> > > That there is no synchrotron radiation?
> > >
> > > This is too bloody stupid, and you know it.
> > > That the particles loose kinetic energy as synchrotron
> > > radiation in every bend, and that the energy in this radiation
> > > can be and is measured is an indisputable fact.
> > >
> > > > > THIS was what you are unable to refute.
>
> > > > I think I just did.
> > >
> > > You know you didn't.
> > >
> > > > > Frustrating, isn't it? :-)
> > > > It would be if this was a debating group.
> > > > 'Fess up. You made an argument misstating the interpretation of
> > > > "relativistic mass" now you are trying to change the subject.
> > >
> > > I never mentioned 'relativistic mass' in this thread, and you know it.
> > >
> > > > As long as you are flailing about, you might try and expound on the
> > > > hocky puck that can't exeed the muzzle velocity but somehow can outrun
> > > > bullets that will always be faster than it is.
> > > >
> > > > Paul: <<The reason why a bullet cannot accelerate a puck beyond
> > > > its own speed is that it cannot transfer kinetic energy to the puck
> > > > if it never hits it. >>
> > > >
> > > > Why do the bullets never hit it? Does it like... put to the shoulder
> > > > of the road and let the bullets zip by or better yet it has a bullet
> > > > proof clock in its hip pocket.
> > >
> > > Stop babbling.
> > > We both understand this analogy.
> > >
> > > > Ah... you do understand that accelerating fields are limited to the
> > > > speed of light? (wrt lab)
> > >
> > > No, I don't understand that, because it is plain wrong.
> > > As proven in a lot of accelerators right now, the RF-cavities
> > > transfer the same amount of energy to the particles every
> > > time they passes through it, regardless of the speed of
> > > the particles.
> > >
> > > > And this little example equates the muzzle
> > > > velocity to SoL?
> > >
> > > You obviously don't know how a charged particle is
> > > accelerated in an accelerator.
> > > It is done in RF-cavities, which is a resonance cavity
> > > into which energy is fed.
> > > The frequency is typically hundreds of MHz.
> > >
> > Say? 110 for BNL's AGS?
> > http://www.nsls.bnl.gov/organization/OpsEng/ElectricalSys/RFSys/125-kWAmplifier/125kw.htm
> >
> > > Through this cavity, there is a tube with a gap in it,
> > > see the figure below.
> > >
> > > --------------
> > > | |
> > > | cavity |
> > > | |
> > > | E field |
> > > | ---> |
> > > -------- ---> ---------
> > > * -> v ---> drift tube
> > > -------- ---> ---------
> > > | ---> |
> > > | |
> > > | |
> > > | |
> > > | |
> > > --------------
> > >
> > > The field in this cavity is oriented such that the E-field
> > > is parallel to the tube. The particles move in the tube.
> > > There is no field within the tube, which is called a drift tube
> > > because the particles move by their inertia.
> > > But in the gap between the two tubes, there is an
> > > alternating electric field. The phase of this alternating
> > > field is adjusted such that it is at its maximum in the same
> > > direction every time a particle passes the gap.
> > > The gap us but few centimetres wide, so the time for
> > > a particle (going close to c) to pass it is in the order
> > > of 0.1 ns. If the frequency of the field in the cavity is 500 MHz
> > > the particle will pass the gap in ca. 1/20 period.
> > > So from the particle's point of view, the field will appear
> > > to be almost static. The gained energy is simply qEd,
> > > where q is the charge, E the field and d the width
> > > of the gap.
> > >
> > > Bottom line:
> > > There is no field running after the particle.
> > > The field is set up in the gap before the particle enters it,
> > > and is close to static while the particle is in it.
> > > The force on the particle is F = qE independent of its speed,
> > > and the gained energy is thus Fd = qEd.
> > > Every time.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > Ya need to show all that to the folks wasting money on collider
> > facilities.
> > Yes. I will "stop babbling" and find someone else to explain this
> > hocky puck magic to me.
> >
> > Paul: <<The reason why a bullet cannot accelerate a puck beyond
> > its own speed is that it cannot transfer kinetic energy to the puck
> > if it never hits it. >>
> >
> > Regards, Sue...
>
> Giving up?
> Does that mean that you have realized that I am right?
>
> The RF-cavities transfer the same amount energy to
> the particles irrespective of the speed of the particles, right?
>
> Paul

That would be saying an anisotropic field perturbation can propagate
superlumnially from the cavity wall to the particle. So... you tell
me!
Hint: http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/LorentzForce.html

What I have *realized* is that you are one who is incapable of
admitting when you are wrong. Clearly, being right or wrong is more
important to you than accurately characterizing phenomena so the
weight of your argument is adjusted accordingly.
Sue...

Relevant Pages

  • sa(p tu*.ng the^ ro^`i
    ... The collider will send particles crashing into each other at just a ... collider will send particles crashing into each other at just a wink ... Critics think the collider could also spawn a black hole that will ... 20th century physicists came up with an idea ...
    (soc.culture.vietnamese)
  • Re: What is the interest in gender bender research?
    ... the new collider the mad scientists have built that other serious ... and size for black holes and exotic particles. ... it actually having enough time to devour the collider, staff and mountain range before collapsing... ... Since Nature regularly bombards the Earth with higher energy particles than CERN will generate there is no danger. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Large Hadron Collider in cosmic catastrophe lawsuit!
    ... | The Large Hadron Collider, or LHC, is due for startup later this year at ... | universe's existence? ... Why do some particles have mass while others ... What is the nature of dark matter? ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: 9 more days to doomsday
    ... On september 10th switzerland is going to turn on the largest particle accelerator ever built. ... The accelerator is like a circle a mile long. ... of electron volts" The Large Hadron Collider can develop energies of 14 trillion electron volts. ... So here we have particles going so fast time is almost standing still, then to be hit with slow moving particles. ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)