4 ms·

> The higher the frequency, the steeper the gradient. Losses also scale with frequency. And while other acceleration principles have higher voltage gradient,

> The higher the frequency, the steeper the gradient. Losses also scale with frequency. And while other acceleration principles have higher voltage gradient, they still can't reach TeV of collision energy, since you either can't concatenate them, or you can't control the beam sufficiently well. As I wrote in another comment, stuff like plasma wakefield accelerators need to get better by a factor of 1000 before they reach the realms of SRF accelerators. This wont magically happen over night. And most of these people have tenure, they hardly care for trends. I have been to all major accelerator physics conferences over nearly the last decade. Despite clic there is no one seriously claiming to go beyond LHC energy without SRF. No one. Not the plasma wakefield guys, not some strange theoretical accelerator principle. No matter what you read on Wikipedia. Your namedropping comments with very little actual content, disregarding the work of thousands of scientists show a certain arrogance that is super annoying.

ganzuul 6y ago
I'll excuse you trying to make this personal and focus on the tangibles... Losses in a waveguide are miniscule because plasma is almost as good a conductor as a superconductor. Most of the energy is carried in the dielectric anyway. Technology is already being developed as ASIC PHYs for commercial applications as THz MIMO radios for the next generation of mobile networks. No doubt the next generation of accelerators will rely heavily on beam-forming, perhaps already in wakefield accelerators. If you are unfamiliar with ASICs, they are what enabled CD-ROM audio to use solomon-reed error correction while it was thought only a supercomputer could do that in realtime. Lasers already constitute an strange accelerator principle, able to seemingly circumvent a naive understanding of thermodynamics by rectifying energy in space. So don't scoff it. Extreme Light Infrastructure currently under construction will be able to perform nuclear transmutation. Far beyond that, and far beyond the capabilities of any theoretical radio-frequency accelerator, lies lasers powered by nuclear isomers.
- Random_ernest 6y ago
  It's a little hard to discuss when you don't actually read my comments and just skim over them. > Technology is already being developed as ASIC PHYs for commercial applications as THz MIMO radios Cool, unfortunately that has nothing to do with the discussed topic: accelerators for high energy physics experiments... > No doubt the next generation of accelerators will rely heavily on beam-forming, perhaps already in wakefield accelerators. I never argued against that (though I don't really believe it). I said that for experiments in high energy physics, there will be only SRF in the next 10 years (my opinion). Simply since there is no option but high collision energies, which no other acceleration technique solves. Also don't forget that the techniques you mention are partly 40+ years old, there are articles from the 90s that this is the new way particle accelerators will be built in a few years, didn't happen as you are well aware. None of the other topics you discuss after that, has anything to do with what we are currently discussing. Just ask yourself this: Can any of these techniques accelerate charged particles (not just electrons, but also heavier particles) to collide with several TeV of energy? Not just in theory, but right now, in practice. The answer is: maybe in a few years (rather decades), but currently no, far from it (several orders of magnitude from it). > I'll excuse you Wow, I guess you're fun a parties... I'll excuse myself from this pointless discussion since you made up your mind before it started.
  - ganzuul 6y ago
    Yes, I will excuse you. You are the one again with the ad-hominems and have no reason to act so arrogant. The ASIC is needed for channel sounding and beamforming in realtime. The power stage can be separate. This is exactly what a wakefield accelerator needs, although the tech is being developed for another purpose. This is why ASICs and beamforming are important; because they have the potential to provide the missing orders of magnitude of gain. You can see how this can make up the technology gap in the case of wakefield. I have no idea why some charged particles could be accelerated with electromagnetic fields but not others. The idea seems preposterous. Gamma-ray lasers is an old idea but it still represents the pinnacle of what we can consider building. That the idea is old doesn't mean it has been tried and and found inadequate. As usual it is a matter of material science. In the past few years materials which can bend gamma-rays have been developed. Progress is slow, but not halted. It does seem I have been mistaken about one thing; apparently once dismissed theories WIMPs and super-partners have been dusted off. I suppose that is what is required to justify building a new accelerator, but I seriously doubt it has any purpose but job security.

ganzuul 6y ago

I'll excuse you trying to make this personal and focus on the tangibles... Losses in a waveguide are miniscule because plasma is almost as good a conductor as a superconductor. Most of the energy is carried in the dielectric anyway. Technology is already being developed as ASIC PHYs for commercial applications as THz MIMO radios for the next generation of mobile networks. No doubt the next generation of accelerators will rely heavily on beam-forming, perhaps already in wakefield accelerators. If you are unfamiliar with ASICs, they are what enabled CD-ROM audio to use solomon-reed error correction while it was thought only a supercomputer could do that in realtime. Lasers already constitute an strange accelerator principle, able to seemingly circumvent a naive understanding of thermodynamics by rectifying energy in space. So don't scoff it. Extreme Light Infrastructure currently under construction will be able to perform nuclear transmutation. Far beyond that, and far beyond the capabilities of any theoretical radio-frequency accelerator, lies lasers powered by nuclear isomers.

Random_ernest 6y ago
It's a little hard to discuss when you don't actually read my comments and just skim over them. > Technology is already being developed as ASIC PHYs for commercial applications as THz MIMO radios Cool, unfortunately that has nothing to do with the discussed topic: accelerators for high energy physics experiments... > No doubt the next generation of accelerators will rely heavily on beam-forming, perhaps already in wakefield accelerators. I never argued against that (though I don't really believe it). I said that for experiments in high energy physics, there will be only SRF in the next 10 years (my opinion). Simply since there is no option but high collision energies, which no other acceleration technique solves. Also don't forget that the techniques you mention are partly 40+ years old, there are articles from the 90s that this is the new way particle accelerators will be built in a few years, didn't happen as you are well aware. None of the other topics you discuss after that, has anything to do with what we are currently discussing. Just ask yourself this: Can any of these techniques accelerate charged particles (not just electrons, but also heavier particles) to collide with several TeV of energy? Not just in theory, but right now, in practice. The answer is: maybe in a few years (rather decades), but currently no, far from it (several orders of magnitude from it). > I'll excuse you Wow, I guess you're fun a parties... I'll excuse myself from this pointless discussion since you made up your mind before it started.
- ganzuul 6y ago
  Yes, I will excuse you. You are the one again with the ad-hominems and have no reason to act so arrogant. The ASIC is needed for channel sounding and beamforming in realtime. The power stage can be separate. This is exactly what a wakefield accelerator needs, although the tech is being developed for another purpose. This is why ASICs and beamforming are important; because they have the potential to provide the missing orders of magnitude of gain. You can see how this can make up the technology gap in the case of wakefield. I have no idea why some charged particles could be accelerated with electromagnetic fields but not others. The idea seems preposterous. Gamma-ray lasers is an old idea but it still represents the pinnacle of what we can consider building. That the idea is old doesn't mean it has been tried and and found inadequate. As usual it is a matter of material science. In the past few years materials which can bend gamma-rays have been developed. Progress is slow, but not halted. It does seem I have been mistaken about one thing; apparently once dismissed theories WIMPs and super-partners have been dusted off. I suppose that is what is required to justify building a new accelerator, but I seriously doubt it has any purpose but job security.