Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Build Your Own Cyclotron

Posted by michael on from the DIY dept.

kenthorvath writes "This guy and his friend built their own cyclotron, capable of 1 MeV protons using spare parts and surplus science equipment. Anyone else happen to have a 4600 lb. magnet lying around?"

200 comments

  1. So now we know what's at the galactic center... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    An alien experiment that went seriously south and created a massive black hole.

    Remember, kids, don't try this at home!

    1. Re:So now we know what's at the galactic center... by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      An alien experiment that went seriously south and created a massive black hole.

      Not as seriously horrid as the one that introduced politicians to that little blue planet.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:So now we know what's at the galactic center... by Dog+and+Pony · · Score: 2

      Wasn't this a Dilbert episode? :)

  2. If it doesn't work out... by MacOS_Rules · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is what seems to be a very cool application of putting old equipment to good work. And hey, if it turns out that it doesn't work, he has a cheep and effective form of birth control...

    *shudders* Me thinks of the advertisments for DIY permenant birth control... =O

    --
    If a man's character is to be abused there's nobody like a relative to do the business. -Thackeray, William
    1. Re:If it doesn't work out... by LordDartan · · Score: 5, Funny

      So, are you saying being around a 4600lb magnet is birth control, or being a big enough geek to have a 4600lb magnet is the birth control??

    2. Re:If it doesn't work out... by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > So, are you saying being around a 4600lb magnet is birth control, or being a big enough geek to have a 4600lb magnet is the birth control??

      I don't have a 4600 pound magnet, (you insensitive clod), but that doesn't meant I don't want a 4600 pound magnet! (Surely that also qualifies as beeing geeky enough for birth control purposes!)

    3. Re:If it doesn't work out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, I know if the magnet i have that chicks are attracted too was 4600lbs, they'd all trhink I was weird and leave. That would also hurt my back I bet.

      I'd have to buy tarps to use as birth control. What kind of freak show chick could even handle that?

      What? My mind is where?

    4. Re:If it doesn't work out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope.
      If you were geeky enough you would figure out some way to get one.

    5. Re:If it doesn't work out... by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is what seems to be a very cool application of putting old equipment to good work. And hey, if it turns out that it doesn't work, he has a cheep and effective form of birth control...

      Do you mean the magnetism or what happens after your date asks you what it is?

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    6. Re:If it doesn't work out... by packeteer · · Score: 2

      The magnet isn't the problem. Assuming you can find a 4600lb magnet you can probably build a cyclotron. The birth control comes in when you irratiate your entire neighborhood leaving you (and the milk man whos screwing your wife anyway) infertile.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    7. Re:If it doesn't work out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm gonna break into the lab and steal one. It'll be like Oceans Eleven but without the fucking clod who gets shot at.

    8. Re:If it doesn't work out... by doomdog · · Score: 1

      >> I don't have a 4600 pound magnet, (you insensitive clod), but that doesn't meant I don't want a 4600 pound magnet!

      Really? Hmmm... looks like it is time to start sending off those "Need a bigger magnet? Add 3 to 4 tons to your magnet OVERNIGHT" spams.... I'll make a killing!

    9. Re:If it doesn't work out... by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > If you were geeky enough you would figure out some way to get one.

      Not even if my first solution to "getting a 4600 pound magnet" involves a frictionless surface and a 4700 pound magnet?

      Damn, the world's a cruel place. (And horribly undermagnetized, too.)

  3. Wow! by Junky191 · · Score: 0, Funny

    Imagine a beowulf cluster of these!!

    Er, sorry, I'll go sit in the corner now.

    1. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they're so old by now that they're meta-jokes. They're funny because they're not funny.

    2. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was so unfunny I had to laugh. Then I stopped.

    3. Re:Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (+1) Insightful!

  4. Baby CERN by rgbe · · Score: 1

    Kewl, now all I need is a few superconducting electromagnets and a large hold in the ground and I can build myself baby CERN.

  5. This is very interesting indeed. by packeteer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does anyone have links to where you can find materials to work on this if you dont work in a lab. I am in high school and very interested in physics and it would be an awsome project to work on something like this.

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    1. Re:This is very interesting indeed. by Artifex · · Score: 5, Funny

      I am in high school and very interested in physics and it would be an awsome project to work on something like this.

      Where have I heard this type of thing before?

      You may think this is the ultimate chick "magnet," but personally, I think that even if fusion reactors only get a second place in the science fair these days, you should try to build a Tokomak. There's just something sexy about how they look.

      After the fair, no matter how you do, you can take a promising date to see it, dim the lights and crank it up and see if sub-nuclear particles are all that get excited. Who knows, maybe you'll finally discover the joys of practical applications for combinatorial physics, where books have only given you theories to feed your fantasies...

      (moderators: please don't "nuke" me too badly on this one)

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    2. Re:This is very interesting indeed. by NortWind · · Score: 3, Informative

      It might be easier to build a linear accelerator. It is basically a bigger Van deGraf generator, and (I think) much easier to build than a cyclotron to get a 1MV beam.

    3. Re:This is very interesting indeed. by Lazar+Dobrescu · · Score: 2, Informative
      This guy did it about 8 years ago, and he was in high school. You can see his two projects here and here.

      Building a cyclotron is not that difficult technically, but finding all the needed material might be(high voltage for the magnet, and especially the vacuum pump able to get it down to about 10^-5 atmospheres...) In all cases, it certainly is an interesting project to take up if you have interest in physics, as it touches a lot of different fields of physics and teaches you a thing or two about how simple it can be to make such a complicated experiment work in theory, while being such a pain in the friggin a** in practice...

  6. 'Welcome' by T-Kir · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    This site is just as much for the web wandering curious techie as it is for a physics student...

    ..and for the raging hoardes of /. readers who will leave this server with a few 'frustrations and breakthroughs'(or downs) of it's own to contend with.

    --
    Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
    1. Re:'Welcome' by laymil · · Score: 1

      you're quite silly...do you know the kind of stuff we have here at rutgers? especially bandwidth?

  7. Magnet by RobinH · · Score: 5, Funny

    Anyone else happen to have a 4600 lb. magnet lying around?

    Yes, I keep it right here, next to my server backup tapes.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    1. Re:Magnet by peterb · · Score: 2

      9-tracks, right?

    2. Re:Magnet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't know the BOFH posted to /. but I should've figured...

  8. Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by shadowj · · Score: 5, Informative

    Looks like they've managed to duplicate one of the first cyclotrons. Question is, what are they going to do with it?

    --

    --Larry

    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

    1. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by packeteer · · Score: 2, Redundant

      I know what i would do with it. As a high schol student very interested in physics i would like to see what some of the early researchers went through. Do you have any more links to sites about building these and maybe some info about safety?

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    2. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by shadowj · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Do you have any more links to sites about building these and maybe some info about safety?

      Do I look like a search engine?? Go find those links yourself... how do you think I found them?

      --

      --Larry

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

    3. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by Istealmymusic · · Score: 2

      Via a search engine? Tell me if I'm right.

      --
      "The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
    4. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by victim · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Cyclotrons can be used for uranium enrichment. Most of the uranium used in the Hiroshima (40*WTC911) and Nagaski (20*WTC911) bombs was purified in cyclotrons.

      It takes a lot of energy, so you might want to have vast oil reserves that you aren't allowed to export in order to power the cylcotrons.

      note: The Nagasaki bomb was not that much smaller, the weather was bad and we missed the population center and hit an industrial area instead.

    5. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by BoojiBoy0 · · Score: 1

      Pretty cloddish for a guy with the nick victim to be saying we missed Nagasaki and should have killed more...

      --
      I know the secrets of the video game champs
    6. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by victim · · Score: 2

      Sorry about the confusion, I don't mean to say we should have killed more. I mean that we planned to kill more.

    7. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by bastion_xx · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Cyclotrons can be used for uranium enrichment. Most of the uranium used in the Hiroshima (40*WTC911) and Nagaski (20*WTC911) bombs was purified in cyclotrons.

      Actually, they both weren't U135 based.

      The Hiroshima weapon, Little-Boy, was a uranium enriched "gun" style weapon. Material from Oakville, TN. Fat-man, the weapon used on Nagasaki, was an implosion based Plutonium; material courtesy of Hanford, WA.

      It takes a lot of energy, so you might want to have vast oil reserves that you aren't allowed to export in order to power the cylcotrons.

      Aye, that it does. And the results of the processing facilities are the same too. In Oakville and Savannah, there are buildings no one will enter for a long, long, time. In Hanford, the engineers are finding out very interesting things about the waste storage tanks.

    8. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative


      Actually several points in your note are incorrect. First the name of the place of Oak Ridge TN. Also known as Clinton Engineering Works, part of the Manhattan Project.

      Several methods were used to seperate U-235/238 at teh Oak Ridge facilities, of which one was a cyclotron-based production train.

      As to the long term effects of cyclotrons on the buildings, in the mid '80s my office was to be on the magnet floor of one of the cyclotron buildings. The building had already been reused at least twice before that. (The Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion project was in there during the 1950's, and during the 1960's the clear bay in the middle of the building was used for part of the drop tests of nuclear fual transport vessels.)

      There are buildings in the Oak Ridge DOE reservation that I wouldn't want to spend much time in, but the stories that they were rendered unusable are just that, stories without facts.

      John Farmer (Contractor at all the OR sites from 1979 - present, Mother & father at OR sites from 1943 to 1990)

    9. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by AJWM · · Score: 5, Informative

      This should not have been modded up as insightful, but rather modded down as disinformative.

      Where to begin?

      Yes, the Hiroshima bomb ("Little Boy") was of the enriched-uranium type, but the uranium was enriched in gas centrifuges, not cyclotrons. (As uranium hexafluoride gas, with the U235 hexafluoride being somewhat lighter than U238 hexafluoride).

      The Nagasaki bomb ("Fat Man") was of the plutonium implosion type, no uranium involved. It was originally targeted for the arsenal at Kokura, but the weather forced diversion to the backup target (Nagasaki).

      The actual yield of the Nagasaki bomb was about 33% greater than Hiroshima (21kt vs 15-16kt), not "not that much smaller".

      The only thing a cyclotron has in common with a gas centrifuge is that stuff goes around in circles in both.

      --
      -- Alastair
    10. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by packeteer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      One of the other little known facts of about Nagasaki was that it was essentially an experiment. It was chosen as a secondary site because they wanted to know what kind of damage would be done to a hilly area. As it turns out the hills protected the people on the other side. Im not saying this is some giant conspiracy or thats its even (any more than Hiroshima) evil im just saying they got a lot of data from Nagasaki. Kinda sad to think civilian casualties are reduced to data but it was a war and hopefully we learned from it.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    11. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by SnakeStu · · Score: 2

      ...and hopefully we learned from it.

      Oh, I'm sure we learned from it, and we're so "clever" about applying what we learned, we still have the threat of nuclear war hanging over us today, even if it's not popular to discuss anymore (following the breakup of the Soviet Union) unless it's to get funding for the missile defense farce.

      --
      No Laughing Allowed!
    12. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by packeteer · · Score: 2

      Much of the reason why websites like www.abolishnukes.com exist is because of what happened during WWII. Whether or not everyone headed in what you think is the right direction i would like to think that you and I both learned from it.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    13. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by Alsee · · Score: 1

      hopefully we learned from it

      Primary lesson learned in the wake of WWII: Forcing automobile assemly line workers do jumping jacks every morning is a silly way to try to improve productivity.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    14. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by bastion_xx · · Score: 1

      Dunno what I was thinking (ex is from a small town called Oakville, keep getting those confused). Most of my DoE time back East was spent in Germantown or in Savannah.

    15. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are they going to do with this thing? Good question...Im currently sitting in the Control Room of a 1200 MeV Cyclotron, and hell, I dont even know what we're doing with this thing :) All I know I gotsta wear this here radiation badge, and to leave my PDA outside the vault when the main magnet is on

    16. Re:Yesterday's technology, tomorrow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.

      Actually, the enriched uranium used at Trinity and Hiroshima was indeed enriched using cyclotrons, at the Y-12 plan in Oak Ridge, TN.

      The gaseous diffusion plant (K-25) was under construction at the time and did not come online (IIRC) until after the war had ended. The United States used (and continues to use) gaseous diffusion to produce enriched Uranium. K-25 has been shut down, but a sister plant in Paducah KY continues to operate. (A third plant in Portsmoth OH was placed into standby a couple of years ago.

      A cyclotron method to enrich Uranium was developed in the 80s, but was never put into large scale use. IMHO, this is mostly due to the strength of the local labor unions, who have seen their rolls cut drastically as America's need for Uranium dwindled.

  9. Soooo.... by CodeMunch · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    We're targeting individuals for the /. effect now? What'd this guy ever do to you? Barbarians.

    1. Re:Soooo.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This should be +5 Funny

    2. Re:Soooo.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's a college web server. It can handle it.

  10. Great! by dolo666 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now I can really get Spiderman by trapping him in another dimension! Mwhwhahahahha.

  11. Amazing... by neksys · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It never ceases to amaze me that amateur science enthusiasts are building stuff like that - from the home-made tesla coil of a few weeks ago, to home-built rockets capable of low orbit... it just blows me away. Granted, the devices they build are generally years, if not decades behind the "cutting edge", but the fact that average people can take a sound scientific principle and turn it into something physical for a handful of bills is wonderful. It is people like these that foster innovation and growth in the sciences - not multi-billion dollar research conglomerates. These DIY tinkerers are what science is all about - it is science for the sake of science, and by extension, for the sake of the world! They do it because they are passionate about what they are doing - not for the fame, or the fortune. It was politics and economics that made the decision to put a man on the moon - it is people like this that got us there.

    1. Re:Amazing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Next on slashdot: building xray machines from discarded monitors for fun and profit.

    2. Re:Amazing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they do forget profit. The best of the best do it for fun and because they can't resist. It's sad to see universities and places like JPL focus so hard on patents. Too many times I've seen it stop great idea from getting out.

    3. Re:Amazing... by Fembot · · Score: 5, Funny
      "...but the fact that average people can take a sound scientific principle and turn it into something physical for a handful of bills is wonderful"


      Erm... the average person can't work a VCR let alone build a cyclotron... hell they probalby think a cyclotron is one of those exercise bikes from the shopping channel.

    4. Re:Amazing... by aelvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It never ceases to amaze me that amateur science enthusiasts are building stuff like that ...

      According to Tim's web page: "I am currently a graduate student in the Physics Department at Rutgers University. My primary area of interest is in Particle accelerators. I have worked at Fermilab in the Beams Division." Then it goes on to list accelerator talks he's given, accelerators he's worked at, and publications on accelerators he's written.

      So how exactly does that make him an "amateur science enthusiast?"

    5. Re:Amazing... by Jobe_br · · Score: 3, Interesting

      On this note, I'd like to share a thought I recently had: while driving one evening, it occurred to me that it might be an interesting endeavor to build a truly feature-rich home-theatre appliance, PVR, DVD player, component video outs, digital in/out - bells and whistles galore. Then it occurred to me that there is no (legal) way to DIY build a DVD player. With hardware decoding and all, just as a real player does. What's missing? Well, the keys for the CSS encryption, of course. Even without the DMCA, you can't just put your own hardware DVD player together, to my knowledge. Each manufacturer is assigned a key for CSS, if I recall - and you don't get one!

      Needless to say, I was irritated, angered and more than a bit disappointed at this revelation.

    6. Re:Amazing... by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      hell they probalby think a cyclotron is one of those exercise bikes from the shopping channel.

      Oh. No wonder the Bosons keep going strait to my thighs.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    7. Re:Amazing... by Associate · · Score: 1

      WRONG!!! The cyclotron is a ride at the fair. (I tried to find a link, but then I ...zzzzzzzzzzzz.)

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    8. Re:Amazing... by jafuser · · Score: 1
      I don't know if it's quite "just science for the sake of science"... Just imagine the geek women flocking to them after they read some of the stuff they've written about their little project:
      The RF matching box houses the lumped inductance which provides the tuning to bring the chamber's capacitance into resonance at the ion revolution frequency.

      Mmmmmmm.. must build tokamak..

      --
      Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
    9. Re:Amazing... by nounderscores · · Score: 1

      I think you're thinking of the gravitron.

      I guess if you opened the loading door while you were up to 4 gs then you could have people flying out with pretty good Ke too.

    10. Re:Amazing... by Associate · · Score: 1

      Sorry about the mixup. It could have been due to too many candy apples, elephant ears, french fries and polish sausages. Mmmmmmm, sausages.

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    11. Re:Amazing... by corey_lawson · · Score: 1

      He's a grad student! If he was a pro, you think he'd at least be a Post-doc... If he was merely an undergrad, that would make him a slashdot poster-equivalent...

  12. Re:Terrorism by Jacer · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    maybe no one should have developed them in the first place, why is it ok for a super power to posess a weapon of mass destruction and no one else? get a clue, if the super powers aren't the only one to have them, they'r eno longer the super powers, and it establishes a level playing field, maybe the third world countries with a few nukes will get a voice in somewhere and moph into a budding young, developing nation, which can attribute to the economic growth of the entire world.... now from there i'd move onto the evils of capitalism, but that's another argument

    --
    --fetch daddy's blue fright wig, i must be handsome when i release my rage
  13. Re:Terrorism by packeteer · · Score: 5, Informative

    Oh god this has been argued before. In the 1970's in the supreme court case The Progressive vs. The United States cencorship of nuclear info was tested. The Progressive wanted to publish a layman's description of an H-Bomb in order to show that it was not some "secret" and that keeping it as a "secret" would not work or help anything. The govt. took them to courst and the supreme court decided to cencor them. Its sad but true that these things happen but the supreme court setup some rules about when its ok to publish info and this is something that clearly is not dangerous.

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  14. Glad you asked. . . by Monkey-Man2000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Question is, what are they going to do with it?
    Same thing any good physicist does -- try to take over the world! :P

    --
    This post was generated by a Cadre of Uber Monkeys for Monkey-Man2000 (603495).
    1. Re:Glad you asked. . . by shadowj · · Score: 5, Funny
      Same thing any good physicist does -- try to take over the world!

      With a 1 MeV accelerator? You'd have better luck with a couple of "D" cells.

      Disclaimer: no, I have not done the math.

      --

      --Larry

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

    2. Re:Glad you asked. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      With a 1 MeV accelerator? You'd have better luck with a couple of "D" cells.

      Disclaimer: no, I have not done the math.

      Well, have you at least taken over the world? I mean do you have *any* qualification to make such a statement?

  15. Obligitory quote by MattTC · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ray: "You know, it just occured to me that we really haven't had a successful test of this equipment."
    Egon: "I blame myself."
    Peter: "So do I."
    Ray: "Well, no sense in worrying about it now."
    Peter: "Why worry? Each one of us is carrying an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back."

    --
    --"You can lead a man to knowledge, but you can't make him think."
    1. Re:Obligitory quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      4600 lbs?

      "That's a big twinkie"

    2. Re:Obligitory quote by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 2, Funny
      Come on, if you're going to call a GB quote "obligatory" here, it's gotta be this one:

      Egon: There's something very important I forgot to tell you.
      Venkman: What?
      Egon: Don't cross the streams.
      Venkman: Why?
      Egon: It would be bad.
      Venkman: I'm fuzzy on the whole good-bad thing. Whattya mean "bad?"
      Egon: Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
      Ray: Total protonic reversal....
      Venkman: Right, that's bad...OK.. important safety tip. Thanks, Egon.

      --
      Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
    3. Re:Obligitory quote by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute... You need a *license* for a backpack nuclear accelerator?

      uh oh.....

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
  16. Re:Terrorism by hobbesmaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    We better not let terrorists get ahold of the protons; after all all nuclear weapons are made of them!

  17. Similar to my research [further explanation below] by PhysicsScholar · · Score: 0, Troll

    The dissipation regime is observed in magnetometer data as a steepening of the magnetic power spectral slope and a mild but sometimes very apparent systematic magnetic helicity in the range above the cyclotron scale.

    Using the cyclotron fluid formalism developed a few years ago, we have been studying the coupling (very different from others' research -- this coupling is paramount for such experiments!) between low-collisional microscales and the fluid scales of the solar wind.

    Our model uses cyclotron equations of state for the pressures as well as transport coefficients representing wave-particle momentum transfers.

    Bottom line -- cyclotrons rock!

    --

    Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S., Canada, B3H 3J5
  18. Fun with anti-matter? by Crasoum · · Score: 5, Funny
    It deffinatly would be interesting.....

    Then again I know I wouldn't want -any- of my friends that are even remotely intelligent (and even less those that are not intelligent) to be messing with particle acceleration...

    "Mom.... You did say you wanted a skylight didn't you?"

    1. Re:Fun with anti-matter? by Sn4xx0r · · Score: 1
      "Mom.... You did say you wanted a skylight didn't you?"

      I just hit reply to see if this was a .sig/tagline, or part of your post. Well, it is a tagline now :)

      --
      Got brain?
    2. Re:Fun with anti-matter? by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2

      Fun with anti-matter? It deffinatly would be interesting.....

      I've wanted to do this for a long time. It turns out that an electron synchrotron capable of producing antiprotons could, *barely*, fit in a back yard...

      You could make positrons fairly efficiently with a slightly-enhanced version of the cyclotron described in this article, or with a few-MeV electrostatic accelerator, but where's the challenge in that? :)

      OTOH, given my budget or lack thereof, it'll probably be a while before I'm in a position to _build_ a synchrotron. Which is likely for the best, given the quantities of X and gamma rays produced by such a beast.

  19. they plan to ... by twitter · · Score: 2
    ... LEARN! Kind of like repeating 2500 year old geometric proofs. There are many practical considerations that can't be learned from plans and logs. Never the less, just looking at the picutes, you and I can learn a little about what it takes to generate RF and spin protons in a circle. Oh yeah, I forgot the other plan, to TEACH. It is a University, you know. Good for them, and us too.

    Safety tip: Ask the Radiation Safety Office for help.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  20. Re:Doh! by John+Miles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course, an "electron cannon" at atmospheric pressure would be about as dangerous as a broken CRT.

    --
    Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
  21. Things that go boom by shadowj · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Keeping a lid on devices that use simple physical principles is a waste of time. If they're that simple, someone will figure it out on their own in due course.

    Take H-bombs, for instance. Yes, it's true that details of their construction are secret... but it's pretty well known that you need a fission explosion to set one off. Fission bombs are impressive devices on their own... if you can build one, you really don't need to go much further for most purposes.

    The construction details for fission bombs are well known... they're really very simple devices. That doesn't mean that they're easy to build, fortunately.

    --

    --Larry

    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

    1. Re:Things that go boom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fission bombs are fairly easy to build. Getting the materials is the only real problem, since Wal Mart doesn't sell weapons-grade plutonium.

    2. Re:Things that go boom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      That doesn't mean that they're easy to build, fortunately.

      Actually, gun-type fission devices are very easy to build, it's getting the materials that is difficult.

    3. Re:Things that go boom by shadowj · · Score: 4, Informative
      Fission bombs are fairly easy to build. Getting the materials is the only real problem, since Wal Mart doesn't sell weapons-grade plutonium.

      You can make 'em out of U-235, too, which is a little easier to come by. It's still not all that easy to build one. Assuming that you manage to machine and assemble the fissionable mass without killing yourself, there's the little matter of making the conventional explosives that work as a trigger do their thing in the right way, at the right time. If you're building a bomb that uses explosives to crush a hollow sphere of fissionable material, for instance, you have to make sure that all the charges fire at exactly the right time, or it'll fizzle.

      --

      --Larry

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

    4. Re:Things that go boom by CharlesEGrant · · Score: 1

      There's easy and then there's easy. If you have the engineering infrastructure capable of building and maintaining a jet fighter

    5. Re:Things that go boom by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      The trick is spinning down the U-238. Once you have enough U-235. The delivery mechanism is easy. Just click two half critical mass U-235 bricks together. You'll be in Kansas in no time.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    6. Re:Things that go boom by CharlesEGrant · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's easy and then there's easy. Certainly the gun-type bomb is easier to build then an implosion bomb. That doesn't mean that it is a piece of cake. Among other problems uranium is pyrophoric, which means you have to do your machining in an oxygen free environment. I don't think your typical neighborhood machine shop runs sealed lathes pressurised with N2.

    7. Re:Things that go boom by cybermace5 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think the rest of it involves putting a neutron source at the interface of the two pieces. I remember something about a phosphorous isotope, but don't quote me on that.

      Nuclear weapons that operate on this principle usually have a sphere with a large hole bored in one side, and a plug of U-235 with the particle source on the tip. The plug is fired into the hole (adding up to the critical mass), the source emits particles at the center of the sphere, and no one is around to observe what happens next.

      All you need, in addition to the material and firing mechanism, is a concentrating layer around the core. Beryllium is ideal (Hollywood got that one right in The Shadow) but even water will work. If beryllium is used, the end of the plug will have a piece of beryllium on it, so that when the plug is fired, the warhead is completely enclosed in the concentrating layer with the source activated at the center. There has been speculation that a nuclear bomb could be assembled in a filled bathtub or toilet, making the size of the weapon much easier to hide and smuggle.

      The people most worried about the possibility of homebrew nuclear weapons are those closest to the development of these weapons. That is the scary part.

      --
      ...
    8. Re:Things that go boom by AJWM · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ah, but the real trick is in clicking those subcritical masses together quickly enough, and holding them together long enough, for the whole thing to go "KABOOM!" rather than just fizzle into a scattered mess of melted and shattered chunks of fissionable material that has just showered you and some of the neighbors with a very lethal dose of gamma and neutrons.

      Recall that some nuclear workers have seen the pretty blue flash from nuclear material accidentally going critical and lived long enough to tell the cleanup crew about it.

      Same principle as burning gunpowder in a little pile (makes a nice ball of flame) vs confined as in a firecracker (makes a nice if not Earth-shattering kaboom).

      --
      -- Alastair
    9. Re:Things that go boom by packeteer · · Score: 2

      Your very right. It easy for a country to build one but not Joe Average. It requires VERY precisely machined metal and exatly perfect explosives. Its beyond most manufacturing tolerances but spending a few million on a m,achine isn't much for a country.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    10. Re:Things that go boom by packeteer · · Score: 2

      One argument goes like this. Any species thats living on a planet made of star dust forged by nuclear fusion orbiting a star using nuclear fusion to power their very existance will (given enough brain power and life span) be able to figure out the "secrets" of their very existance. You cant keep a fundemental fact of physics and even life a "secret". It only hurts the situation to be led into a false sense of security.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
    11. Re:Things that go boom by hplasm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've noticed that, they only seem to have the low-grade plutonium on the shelves these days.. must be a shortage or something. Bad harvest on Pluto?

      --
      ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
    12. Re:Things that go boom by merlin_jim · · Score: 2

      If you're building a bomb that uses explosives to crush a hollow sphere of fissionable material, for instance, you have to make sure that all the charges fire at exactly the right time, or it'll fizzle.

      Have you ever seen the magic trick where the guy surrounds his chair with dynamite and sets it off? Exact same problem there; one slight imperfection in timing or yield of one stick is enough to kill him, but if they all go off perfectly, the pressure waves cancel out at the center, where he's sitting.

      If he can solve it, I don't imagine this problem to be insoluable.

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
    13. Re:Things that go boom by shadowj · · Score: 2
      Have you ever seen the magic trick where the guy surrounds his chair with dynamite and sets it off? Exact same problem there...

      No, I haven't seen the trick, but I can picture it... must be great at parties!

      Actually, it's not quite the same problem. We're talking about a sphere of explosives, not the circle that your magician is using... a three-dimensional problem, not two-dimensional. I'd expect that to be much more difficult.

      --

      --Larry

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

    14. Re:Things that go boom by merlin_jim · · Score: 2

      We're talking about a sphere of explosives, not the circle that your magician is using... a three-dimensional problem, not two-dimensional. I'd expect that to be much more difficult.

      You do have a point. Plus, the force of the explosives would have to be more. I imagine that the magician uses the lowest-yield stuff he can find. It's probably much harder to synchronize down to the microsecond a high-yield explosive, as opposed to a low-yield.

      My point being that someone somewhere has solved a very similar problem; you have two basic issues, the first being synchronization, and the second being yield. Synchronization, though tricky, does not appear to be as hard a problem as was originally stated.

      --
      I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
  22. He is right, you know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    President W also said that he knows Iraq is building nuclear weapons because "they have bought aluminum tubes from other countries". And some people dare to say there's no hard evidence!

    So I think that, to protect the american way of life (ie, the right to bomb the shit out of anyone who doesn't give us their oil for free), we should ban aluminum.

    1. Re:He is right, you know? by NewtonsLaw · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ban aluminum?

      Curses, "foiled" again!

    2. Re:He is right, you know? by shadowj · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Allow me.

      Here's a link to the full text of the president's address to the UN. He mentions those tubes. Close enough?

      And here's a link to a story from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, who are anything but crackpots, explaining why those tubes are no kind of evidence at all.

      --

      --Larry

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence

    3. Re:He is right, you know? by gjetost · · Score: 0

      http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/media/henderson /henderson092302.htm

      On September 8, the New York Times reported: "In the last 14 months, Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes which American officials believed were intended as components to enrich uranium..."

      You oughta brush up on your googling skills.

    4. Re:He is right, you know? by istartedi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Don't forget to follow the money. This is a "nonprofit" that takes foundation money. Of course foundations never come out and say "we're all a bunch of Leftist Europhiles living off the wealth of our 19th century ancestors who were capitalists so we're full of guilt and think socialism is just grand even though we like fancy things that people living in real socialist countries could never have". Instead they say they promote "social justice" and crap like that.

      So, they may not be crackpots, but they are lapdogs of the Left who know where the money comes from, how to please the money, and how to say the right things so the money won't stop coming. Go ahead and mod me down or mod me "Funny" if you like, but a lot of you out there have experienced it first hand, and know I'm right.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    5. Re:He is right, you know? by AJWM · · Score: 3, Interesting

      explaining why those tubes are no kind of evidence at all.

      Actually that story does nothing of the sort. Oh sure, it ridicules some of the evidence, but it neither denies the existence of the tubes nor provides an alternative, innocent use for them.

      A much more even-handed story is this one, which goes into considerable detail about the Iraqi centrifuge program and also details some other possible (but still weapons-related) uses for the tubing.

      --
      -- Alastair
  23. You Know what this means... by guttentag · · Score: 2, Funny

    A year from now, parents will be lined up at Toys 'R Us locations only to find that Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong Il have pre-ordered 90% of the shipping units.

  24. Coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Funny what the /. sig had to say as I was reading the comments:

    What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.

    Step 3: Profit!

  25. Looks like we'll finally be able to build... by Istealmymusic · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..the elusive "five dollar plasma weapon!".

    --
    "The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
    1. Re:Looks like we'll finally be able to build... by GigsVT · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's called a stun gun.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  26. Re:Terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe the third world countries with a few nukes will get a voice in somewhere and moph into a budding young, developing nation, which can attribute to the economic growth of the entire world

    Yeah, and maybe pigs will grow wings and soar with the eagles.

    It's pretty amazing to see someone still spouting cultural relativism. I guess the foolish are with us always.

  27. Hemispheric safety. by Trusty+Penfold · · Score: 5, Funny

    These amateur experiments are very impressive but I'm always worried that the lack of safety guidance will lead imitators into trouble. For example, with this equipment there are potential safety issues if the experiment is replicated in the southern hemisphere.

    In the southern hemisphere or, more specifically, south of the topic of Capricorn, the particles will need to spin the other way.
    This can be achieved in many ways; none of which were mentioned in the original article.
    For example;
    1) Turn the equipment upside down.
    2) Use magnets of opposite polarity.
    3) Use anti-protons instead of protons,

    Just one of these needs to be done to transofrm a southern cyclotron from a deathtrap into a fun and safe piece of equipment.

    1. Re:Hemispheric safety. by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 0

      Lol!! I forgot about that particle space duality rule.

      --

      ----
      Go canucks, habs, and sens!
    2. Re:Hemispheric safety. by laymil · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      lets think about this for a second. where was this done? in a rutgers university physics lab, by a graduate student at the university. i wouldn't exactly call him an amateur...most likely he's at least as qualified as YOU.
      so please, don't dis my school like that.

    3. Re:Hemispheric safety. by DiscoOnTheSide · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Now if he was a RU philosphy or art major, THEN I'd be worried. Go RU! Our football team sucks, but our comp sci, elec. engineering and physics depts 0wnz j00.

      --
      Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
    4. Re:Hemispheric safety. by laymil · · Score: 2

      (also, amateurs don't have access to modern physics labs like this anyway, nor is it that simple to obtain the required materials. so i wouldn't worry about it.)

    5. Re:Hemispheric safety. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, okay Sean, calm down.

    6. Re:Hemispheric safety. by geordie · · Score: 1

      Never mind amateurs not having access to modern physics labs, it would appear that RU students don't have access to a sense of humour! :o)

    7. Re:Hemispheric safety. by DiscoOnTheSide · · Score: 1

      only because we're too busy dodging STDs like a game of space invaders! :-P (This is a joke. NOT flamebait, NOT a troll. I go to the damned school. Its a joke us RU ppl have.)

      --
      Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
    8. Re:Hemispheric safety. by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Funny

      In the southern hemisphere or, more specifically, south of the topic of Capricorn, the particles will need to spin the other way.

      Solution: purchase a toilet from Australia, and stand in it while flushing it. The water will spiral down in a reverse direction from what it does in the northern hemisphere, protecting you from hemispheric polarity issues while operating your experiments.

      Make sure all your neighbors see you stand in the Australian toilet to set a good safety example. Remember, not standing in the toilet is like riding a motorcycle without your foil helmet (which we discussed last time).

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  28. Cylon? by Ribo99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For a couple of seconds I thought this story read "Science: Build Your Own Cyclon" and I got really excited...

    --
    I wear pants.
    1. Re:Cylon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's cylon not cyclon, dumbass

  29. Re:Terrorism by altoidsman · · Score: 0

    "maybe the third world countries with a few nukes will get a voice in somewhere and moph into a budding young, developing nation, which can attribute to the economic growth of the entire world..."
    Give me a break. If they want to become a "budding young, developing nation", perhaps they should stop pointing their nukes at the world they seek to improve.

  30. Since nobody else is on the ball... by Guppy06 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Question is, what are they going to do with it?"

    PROFIT!

  31. Re:Terrorism by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Funny
    > We better not let terrorists get ahold of the protons; after all all nuclear weapons are made of them!

    But they don't work without neutrons. It's the goddamn neutral particles' fault. (And besides, like, what have the Swiss done for us lately anyways?)

  32. Re:Terrorism by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

    "The Progressive wanted to publish a layman's description of an H-Bomb in order to show that it was not some "secret" and that keeping it as a "secret" would not work or help anything."

    Yeah, armed with this information, anybody can go to the local Lowe's, pick up some enriched uranium...

    Of course, if you can figure out how to build an H-bomb with out fissionable matierial... you just have to go down to the local gas station and pick up some deuterium and tritium...

  33. Mine done. by Stalyn · · Score: 1

    right next to the Yugi-Oh cards.

    --
    The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
  34. Re:Nicely written... by Trusty+Penfold · · Score: 1

    You can sell it NASA

  35. Radium Story by 0111+1110 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Did you read his Radium story? Interesting stuff. Makes me want to go out and buy (or build) a geiger counter and start rock hunting. Trouble is how do you tell the difference between Radium and Uranium, let alone between the different isotopes? Also, anyone know where I can get a lead suit, hood, face mask, gloves, and boots? I'd like to experiment with building nuclear batteries (inspired by the recent slashdot story), but you need a license to legally buy those "safe" beta sources, so I'm going to have to play with some nice gamma ray emitters like uranium. Also, did you notice how ugly is wife was at their wedding? No wonder he's got such an impressive resume. He's always at work so he doesn't have to go home. Or was that his mother?

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    1. Re:Radium Story by Chiggy_Von_Richtoffe · · Score: 1

      >Did you read his Radium story? Interesting stuff. Good morning Mdme. Currie, would you like to play a game? >Makes me want to go out and buy (or build) a geiger counter and start rock hunting. Trouble is how do you tell the difference between Radium and Uranium, let alone between the different isotopes? okay, not so bad,before you start though go here: http://216.239.53.100/searchq=cache:SkUOEI1CjMcC:w ww.hr.columbia.edu/ehrs/html/body_rstm.html+gieger +counter+lead+surplus&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 For the gieger counter.... http://www.google.com/urlq=http://surplusrecord.co m&sa=A&ai=hxsdjzj:a:coczb:bdolu:kzp:fyi:exfgy:dx:d jdjbkb:ktdu:vhacby:bnuq:ohlmq or http://www.google.com/urlq=http://www.plccenter.co m&sa=l&ai=AFqathwAt98doMApjkofzBkZuIUMhXcJ2lXQABAp TAA-6lEQACA .... now to tell the difference between radium#88 and uranium#92, a great way is after you've cleaned your hand of all those tens of tons of pitchblend you've been working with (should only take a few years to process) you can use specific gravity to determine which is which http://www.webelements.com/ ... that and a good centrifuge. >Also, anyone know where I can get a lead suit, hood, face mask, gloves, and boots? I'd like to experiment with building nuclear batteries (inspired by the recent slashdot story), but you need a license to legally buy those "safe" beta sources, so I'm going to have to play with some nice gamma ray emitters like uranium. damn! I checked www.villainsupply.com/ and they don't seem to carry them, *shrug* i guess to them underlings really are that *disposable*, btw man don't forget a lead smock or at the very least a lead cod-piece. ;-). oh BTW, "safe gamma rays" whatsa matta boy bruce banner not a hero of yours? >Also, did you notice how ugly is wife was at their wedding? No wonder he's got such an impressive resume. He's always at work so he doesn't have to go home. Or was that his mother? DingDingDing!!!, we have a wiener. alrighty boy now you'se got yourself you're very own underling! (okay that was a bit cruel, but you started it.) but consider the lot of the average slashdotter(sic?) (with appologies to tux, as they had no linux pics) and see how picky you can be. ~What me worry?

  36. imagine the electric bill if you had one of these by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 1

    "honey why do the lights keep dimming?" "Its just Joe across the street playing with that damned betatron again!"

  37. What to do with the cyclotron? by TDDeYoung · · Score: 2, Funny

    To take an idea from Tom Smith- "307 Ale me lads, 307 ale....the finest drink that any bar has ever had for sale...." Bottoms up! TDD

  38. Friendship by batquux · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now that's a real friend..someone who helps you build your own cyclotron.

    1. Re:Friendship by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Now that's a real friend..someone who helps you build your own cyclotron.

      Normal People: "Oh, the limp? An ol' football injury. Man, those were the good 'ol days."

      Geeks: "Oh, my missing spine? An ol' cyclotron injury. Man, those were the good 'ol time periods."

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:Friendship by MadSciGuy · · Score: 1

      I am still seeing the chiropractor twice a week...

  39. Reminds me of a good story . . . by arnie_apesacrappin · · Score: 5, Funny
    Anyone else happen to have a 4600 lb. magnet lying around?

    When I was in school, one of my professors (the guy who's work is talked about in this /. article) told me this story about a large magnet. Keep in mind, I'm recalling this from memory, and I was in college when it was told to me. Therefore, it is an approximation of the actual events that took place.

    A large cylindrical magnet was being delivered to a second floor lab. By large I mean 5 feet in diameter and 3.5 feet wide. Because of university policy, the university maintence crew was to move the magnet to its final destination. After getting it onto the service elevator, they arrived on the second floor.

    From the service elevator, the magnet had to move almost the length of the building, turn a corner, and go about another twenty feet to the lab. The three men moving the magnet got it out of the elevator, and started down the hall.

    Being a large heavy object, they had to push really hard to get it moving. They kept pushing really hard all the way down the hall. Not being physicists, they assumed that the magnet would stop rolling when they stoped pushing. They were quite wrong. Not only did the magnet not stop when they stopped pushing, but it didn't stop when it hit the wall of the corner room. The exterior wall of the building didn't stop it either. It came to rest embeded deep in the ground outside the lab.

    It was much funnier when he told it.

    --

    Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP

    1. Re:Reminds me of a good story . . . by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      A large cylindrical magnet was being delivered to a second floor lab. By large I mean 5 feet in diameter and 3.5 feet wide.

      I bet it was made by ACME Magnet Corporation. They used to spam cartoons in the 1950's.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:Reminds me of a good story . . . by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      "5 feet in diameter and 3.5 feet wide"

      Maybe I dont understand, but diameter is a measurement of width. Maybe 3.5 feet tall or thick? Or am I missing something?

    3. Re:Reminds me of a good story . . . by arnie_apesacrappin · · Score: 2
      Maybe I dont understand, but diameter is a measurement of width. Maybe 3.5 feet tall or thick? Or am I missing something?

      I was thinking of the magnet standing on its side, so that I could be rolled. If you were rolling the magnet down a hall, the area in front of you would be 3.5 feet wide. If the magnet was sitting with one of the circular ends on the the ground, it would be 3.5 feet tall. Hope that clears up the confusion.

      --

      Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP

    4. Re:Reminds me of a good story . . . by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      Gotcha :) Thinking too two-dimensinally...

      Thanks :)

  40. blah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. 4600lb Magnet
    2. ???
    3. Profit!!

  41. 4600 lb magnet by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 1

    I can find/make you a 4600lb magnet. But I can't promise it having much attractive force.

    1. Re:4600 lb magnet by Myco · · Score: 2

      So, just repulsive force then? Wow, a 4600lb. MONOPOLE magnet! That's *really* something!

      --
      My deviantArt site
    2. Re:4600 lb magnet by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 1

      yeah guess it should have been attractive/repulsive

    3. Re:4600 lb magnet by DasBub · · Score: 1

      Man, if I had a nickel for every time I've heard THAT one. You silver-tongued magnet boys are all the same!

  42. Just a request... by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... not all of us instantly know what a 'cylcotron' is, and the sites that articles link to aren't always avaialable due to /. traffic.

    So, please, when you post an article to /., please consider defining what the device is and why it's interesting. At the very least, link to a glossary term somewhere on the net that explains it. Please don't assume that a.) We all know what everything means or b.) That the people who don't know the term wouldn't be interested anyway.

    *meant as a polite request, not bittery sarcastic or anything*

    --
    "Derp de derp."
    1. Re:Just a request... by Myco · · Score: 2

      While I agree with your sentiment, I question its application in this circumstance. I think that most of us *do* know what a cyclotron is -- not to say there's anything wrong with you if you don't, but you are in fact in the minority here. There are *plenty* of *far* more egregious examples of the problem you describe here on /. -- go pick on them first.

      --
      My deviantArt site
    2. Re:Just a request... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

      "There are *plenty* of *far* more egregious examples of the problem you describe here on /. "

      I would, but the problem is that my experience is broad enough that few poorly described things posted on Slashdot escape my scope, thus it doesn't occur to me to request clarification.

    3. Re:Just a request... by kenthorvath · · Score: 1

      If you had followed the link from the word "cyclotron" in the original story, you would have found out exactly what a cyclotron does.

    4. Re:Just a request... by Myco · · Score: 2

      The ones I notice most often are acronyms. Postings under the Developers category do this a lot -- they'll say "New version of XDTBA 7.0.1 has been released, now with support for GHTA and a PH4S-compliant YRT interface!" To quote Ellen Feiss, "..............huh?"

      --
      My deviantArt site
    5. Re:Just a request... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn, I missed that announcement and I think I need that. Do you remember if the article said it had the bug fixes for the BHTA superpositioning problem?

  43. Lock this nutcase up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Folks, I know this is an unpopular position here but this guy needs to be sent to prison for doing this. There is no reason for an individual to posess a cyclotron except for terroristic purposes. The same holds true for other stuff that individuals shouldn't posess like bombs, guns (sniper incident- BAN THEM NOW!), etc.

  44. I wonder what happens if... by squidinkcalligraphy · · Score: 1

    you throw one of these into a small private lake?

    --
    "I think it would be a good idea" Gandhi, on Western Civilisation
    1. Re:I wonder what happens if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, you're supposed to float it in a kiddy pool in the small private lake.

  45. ah Important how to Refine Uranium by linuxislandsucks · · Score: 0

    Should these guys woryy about the Atomic regualtory Commission and the NSA and CIA?

    Why? How do you think you refine Uranium? Give you ahint it involves using their built cyclotron..

    --
    Don't Tread on OpenSource
  46. funny cyclotron joke by rudiger · · Score: 5, Funny

    stop me if you have heard this one.

    two atoms are flying around in a cyclotron and one says to the other, "i think i lost an electron", to which the other replied, "are you sure?".

    the first atom responded "yes, i'm positve."

    AHAHAHAHA GEEK HUMOUR IS FUNNY :)

  47. I Go Pogo ! by mchummer · · Score: 1

    How Piercefully Grows the Hazy Yon !
    How Myrtle Detailed Tho.
    For Spring Hath Sprung the Cyclotron !
    How High Browse Tho, Brown Cow ?

    Churchy La Femme, 1950

    (Thank you Walt Kelly)

    1. Re:I Go Pogo ! by avm · · Score: 1

      Now I've seen it all... very apropos Pogo quote :-)

  48. My high school had a "cyclotron kit" by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Many years ago, my high school had acquired the beginnings of a cyclotron as military surplus - the magnet frame and some big spools of magnet wire. Nobody ever did anything with it, though. This was part of a large shipment of somewhat random military surplus obtained by the electronics shop instructor under some DoD educational program. Lots of interesting stuff, but very little useful - wierd CRTs from obsolete radars, waveguide, big power tubes, paper tape Morse code training devices, and similar obscure junk.

  49. Baa.. Need more power by Swinekilla · · Score: 2, Informative

    I reciently toured the National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory at Michigan State University. Check out the K1200 Cyclotron under the technology category. They got it coupled to the K500 cyclotron currently. It's pretty sweet to see technology that goes way beyond your head, first hand. http://www.nscl.msu.edu/

  50. Re:Terrorism by DavidBrown · · Score: 2

    You people never get it. Protons don't kill people. People kill people!

    --
    144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
  51. Sitcoms did this long ago- YES on topic by BoneFlower · · Score: 2

    It was a Family Matters crossover I believe with Step By Step but I could be wrong. The nerd from the second show mentioned to Steve Urkel that he was building a Cyclotron for an 8th grade science fair. Quote may not be 100% verbatim, I'm mainly unsure on the second word. HAven't seen the episode(or the show at all) in years, but I'd say this is nearly though not quite verbatim

    "Any fool can build a cyclotron, what you've got to build is a linear accelerator!"

    And I can remember bits of sitcoms that aired almost 10 years ago, but I can't remember where I put my wallet(which is in my hand) at times...

  52. A great Scientific American home experiment by Shadok8 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I have an old 1950's Scientific American book of experiments. It features reprints of articles from the magazine.

    They have a lengthy article on how to build a 1 MEV particle accelerator. It generates a "spray" of alpha products if I remember correctly. Since this is from the 1950's I just love how in light of recent discoveries, the author recommends leaving the room if you plan to operate it for more than a couple of hours.

    Similar warnings are given that a home made X-ray machine may have some risks.

    Articles also include:
    Build a steel rocket with launch girder assembly that reaches a 1 mile altitude. They recommend having a desert for launching.
    Build a telescope, hand grinding the mirrors.
    Build the 1MEV Van de Graff generator to power the accelerator.

    1. Re:A great Scientific American home experiment by cr0sh · · Score: 2
      I love these old articles from SciAm - I remember the rocket, it was also published in a book - your made your own propellant, and they published how to build a strobe light, setting up a far away camera and leaving the shutter open to see the arc (parabola) made by the rocket, and also how to measure height (via the apogee and some trig - simple stuff).

      I miss this kind of spirit of experimentation - if I have kids I hope to be able to pass on such experiments, and show my kids that while things may be dangerous, if you aproach the problem and experiment with respect, you generally won't have a problem - but even so, sometimes accidents happen - and that is the price we humans should be prepared to face in the search for knowledge and truth.

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  53. bubble chamber by pyrrho · · Score: 1

    at the exploratorium in San Fran they have a bubble chamber where you can watch nutrino trails... it looks "easy" to build (not that I could pull it off) in that it's just a matter of suspending a vapor of droplets the right size such that there is a condensation around the nutrino... it blew me away and I always had the idea this was something you could build.

    if this is impossible and I must have seen something else, tell me, I could be wrong.

    --

    -pyrrho

    1. Re:bubble chamber by cr0sh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, they do seem "easy" to build - what you saw is what I think is normally called a "cloud particle trail chamber" - I have seen plans for these type chambers in older SciAm issues (Amature Scientist column), as well as in old (ie, pre-1970) "science fair" experiment books aimed at kids. They aren't super difficult to build, I believe they involve using mainly oil droplets (rather than water). It has been a while since I have seen plans for these things - go to the largest, and oldest library (ie, the "central" library) in your nearest city (you want a library with lots of old books, that still keeps them on the shelves), and look in the 620.x-630.x (Dewey Decimal - mainly applied science/technology) area for these books.

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    2. Re:bubble chamber by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Informative

      if this is impossible and I must have seen something else, tell me, I could be wrong.

      It's impossible. You must have seen something else. I tell you, you're wrong.

      It couldn't possibly have been neutrinos - the setups to detect those are huge things, vast underground caverns full of bleach or water. The vapour would detect much heavier particles... Was there a radioactive source nearby?

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    3. Re:bubble chamber by pyrrho · · Score: 1

      yes, I think it was some other elemental particls... since I remember noot--- I'm thinking nuetrONs not nutrino (oops), or maybe an alpha particle...(protons). Maybe poodles... yes, a poodle detector. Actually it was a swimming pool, with poodle trails and people were really just dropping these poodles and it was quite a mess actually.

      --

      -pyrrho

    4. Re:bubble chamber by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2

      No, they do seem "easy" to build - what you saw is what I think is normally called a "cloud particle trail chamber" - I have seen plans for these type chambers in older SciAm issues (Amature Scientist column), as well as in old (ie, pre-1970) "science fair" experiment books aimed at kids. They aren't super difficult to build, I believe they involve using mainly oil droplets (rather than water).

      The one I saw a few years back used alcohol vapour. It sat on a styrofoam carton of dry ice, so it wasn't exactly "high tech" :).

      A quick search found a page with home-building instructions. You get pretty trails from cosmic rays every few seconds.

  54. Re:Baa.. Need more power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a student working there as computer administrator. I was and still am amazed by the technology there. It's nice too that I know the physicists there and can ask questions about the process of any part there. Besides, how many people can say they work at a particle accelerator? God, I wish I would have gone into physics. By the way, were you there as a student or some other purpose?

  55. Science for young adults by Cheese+Cracker · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's nice to see that there are events for teaching science to young adults all around the world...

    North America - Create your own Cyclotron etc.
    Europe - Championships for creating innovations.
    Asia - Creating gadgets events.
    Australia - Solar car championships.
    South America - Innovation centres for young people.
    Africa - Create alternative cooling innovations.
    Middle East - Create innovative ways of killing the infidels.

  56. Atom smashers, the new hobby by atomicdragon · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's great that this guy has built a cyclotron, and a good looking one at that. But I believe others have done something similar. I've seen a TV story about someone who has constructed smaller cyclotron. If you are interested in building a particle accelerator, I would suggest a Betatron. I was able to make a 3 MeV one (large enough to generate positrons, my goal in constructing it) without much trouble in high school. I just followed the instructions for building one giving by the inventor Donald Kerst in his paper (don't remember the exact paper name) and used parts from the local hardware store. It was small, only a few pounds, and only cost around $100. The nice thing about a Betatron, is that it is extremely stable and self-corrects small deviations in magnetic field (in other words, you can do a crappy construction job and still have it work). The hardest part was finding decent vacuum equipment. Now if I just let it run 24/7 for 5,220 trillion years, I will have myself a pound of antimatter.

    1. Re:Atom smashers, the new hobby by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 2

      I was going to say, how is this a big deal. I too remember a friend building a particle accelerator in high school. I didn't understand that much about it, or I guess the difference between a cyclotron and a betatron. I just wanted him to build it into a backpack for me.

      One of my other friends made super conductors that operated only 2 degrees colder than the warmest ones at that time.

  57. BOFH Alert! by cybercomm · · Score: 1

    Whatever happened to the good-ol' bulk eraser?

    --
    Live for the present, learn from the past, and dream of the future!
  58. Next week on /.: build your own nuclear reactor by Kj0n · · Score: 1

    From the website: This site is to promote the science of nuclear physics, both small and large. ... With this machine, the student can encounter many of the same features, frustrations, and breakthroughs of the nuclear physicist.

    1. Re:Next week on /.: build your own nuclear reactor by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
      Old news. Remember the kid who built reactor a few years out of material from smoke detectors and radium paint from old clocks? He managed to irradiate a shed in the backyard pretty badly.

      You know, get these cyclotron people together with that kid, and maybe the guy from a few months ago who wanted to power an accelerator with lots and lots disposable camera batteries, and they'd probably all get along like a house on fire. (Screams, flames, people running for safety...) - pterry

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  59. large magnets, eh? by Jonny+290 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Anyone else happen to have a 4600 lb. magnet lying around?"

    Yup. It's currently keeping my kid's lifesize crayon rendition of the Sistine Chapel stuck to my 46 foot tall, 1400 ton refrigerator.

    --
    Hey Taco! Looks like you're using the "infinite monkeys and typewriters" scheme to generate Ask Slashdots again...
  60. Building your own accelerator by panurge · · Score: 4, Funny
    Years ago Scientific American (dead tree edition ) published a series of articles on how to build a backyard atom smasher of the Cockcroft and Walton variety using a Van der Graaf accelerator. As I remember, it reached about 3 MeV, three times better than this cyclotron, and was a practical home build for someone without the Rutgers back lot to call on. There was a whole lot of stuff in the article about lead lined aprons, though given the usual cliches about backyard inventors and the opposite sex, I'm surprised this was considered necessary.

    There seem to be two schools of backyard engineering thought: High voltage (lots of polished metal spheres and weird looking insulation, with blue sparks) and high current (big evil looking coils with water cooling circuits.) Perhaps the two camps could collaborate to build a really big mass spectrograph, which (given enough cheap electricity) you can use to extract your own enriched uranium. I'm sure Charlton Heston could be persuaded to argue that the right to bear arms extends to home tactical nukes.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  61. Re:Terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We better not let terrorists get ahold of the protons; after all all nuclear weapons are made of them! "

    So is George W Bush. Can you imagine if the terrorists manage to make a GWB of their own?

  62. RF portions by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2

    There's nothing special in the RF portions (except for the signal generator, but you could probably do just fine with a DDS synthesizer sold in many kits for amateur radio use)

    Haven't checked on the "student use" amp, but the high-power amplifier, the Ameritron AH-811A, happens to be a very common (and one of the cheapest) amateur radio tube amplifiers. (Mainly due to the use of three small and cheap 811A type tubes rather than single monster Eimac/Svetlana high-power tubes) - I believe the 3-tube 811A model is around 500-750 watts.

    Legal limit on the ham bands is 1500 watts, so finding HF amplifiers up to this power is easy as pie.

    As to why I don't know too much about the 50W driver amp - Most amateur HF rigs in the HF bands have 50-100W output, so can drive most tube amps (even the legal-limit variety) directly.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  63. *cough* *cough* by Chiggy_Von_Richtoffe · · Score: 1

    ... i think you mean electron gun, like a crt (really bad accuracy and shit-poor range ~= 20ft IIRC). Stun gun on the other hand *does
    have a plasma effect, but on the scale of 2-4 inches,and only in a path from cathode to anode (with crisp flesh inbetween ;-)

    ~there is *no* sig

  64. better formating by Chiggy_Von_Richtoffe · · Score: 1

    >Did you read his Radium story? Interesting stuff.

    Good morning Mdme. Currie, would you like to play a game?
    >Makes me want to go out and buy (or build) a geiger counter and start rock hunting. Trouble is how do you tell the difference between Radium and Uranium, let alone between the different isotopes?

    okay, not so bad,before you start though go here:
    http://216.239.53.100/searchq=cache:SkUOEI1 CjMcC:w ww.hr.columbia.edu/ehrs/html/body_rstm.html+gieger +counter+lead+surplus&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

    For the gieger counter....

    http://www.google.com/urlq=http://surplusrecord. co m&sa=A&ai=hxsdjzj:a:coczb:bdolu:kzp:fyi:exfgy:dx:d jdjbkb:ktdu:vhacby:bnuq:ohlmq

    or

    http://www.google.com/urlq=http://www.plccenter. co m&sa=l&ai=AFqathwAt98doMApjkofzBkZuIUMhXcJ2lXQABAp TAA-6lEQACA .... now to tell the difference between radium#88 and uranium#92, a great way is
    after you've cleaned your hand of all those tens of tons of pitchblend you've been working with (should only take a few years to
    process) you can use specific gravity to determine which is which http://www.webelements.com/ ... that and a good centrifuge.

    >Also, anyone know where I can get a lead suit, hood, face mask, gloves, and boots? I'd like to experiment with building nuclear batteries (inspired by the recent slashdot story), but you need a license to legally buy those "safe" beta sources, so I'm going to have to play with some nice gamma ray emitters like uranium.

    damn! I checked www.villainsupply.com/ and they don't seem to carry them, *shrug* i guess to them underlings really are that *disposable*, btw man don't forget a lead smock or at the very least a lead cod-piece. ;-). oh BTW, "safe gamma rays" whatsa matta boy bruce banner not a hero of yours?

    >Also, did you notice how ugly is wife was at their wedding? No wonder he's got such an impressive resume. He's always at work so he
    doesn't have to go home. Or was that his mother?

    DingDingDing!!!, we have a wiener. alrighty boy now you'se got yourself you're very own underling! (okay that was a bit cruel, but you
    started it.) but consider the lot of the average slashdotter(sic?) (with appologies to tux, as
    they had no linux pics) and see how picky you can be.

    ~What me worry?

  65. Yes cyclotrons, sources... Nagasaki retraction. by victim · · Score: 2

    I should have left the Nagasaki bomb out of the post, but cyclotrons were used for the uranium processing on the Hiroshima bomb. Gaseous diffusion was also used and soon became the preferred method but if you read up on "Calutron"s (modified cyclotrons) you will find their role in the early uranium processing.

    this article has a pretty good description, including reasons why the Calutrons feel from favor.

  66. Re:Yes cyclotrons, sources... Nagasaki retraction. by AJWM · · Score: 2

    I'd call a calutron more of a mass spectrometer than a "modified cyclotron". Sure, Lawrence modified his cyclotron to demonstrate electromagnetic separation, but the beam in a calutron doesn't continuously circle to boost to higher energies as it does in a cyclotron, it just bends a half-turn (with slight variation depending on ion mass).

    Nice link, though.

    --
    -- Alastair
  67. ...build your own Linear Accelerator! by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 2

    This is what seems to be a very cool application of putting old equipment to good work. And hey, if it turns out that it doesn't work, he has a cheep and effective form of birth control...

    Well, hey. Chances are you're staring at a linear particle accelerator right now.

    Disconnect the high voltage regulator in your monitor and you'll throw off enough X-rays to cloud photographic film. The kinetic energy of accelerated electrons flying from the gun is turned into X-ray photons as they collide with the inside of the glass. The electrical energy, of course, lights the phosphors which bring you my many words of wisdom.

    Modern TV sets and monitors, of course, use a variety of methods to prevent the high voltage from the flyback getting to be high enough to cause lots of hard X-rays. The thick (usually leaded) glass in the front and sides of your monitor help to cut the rays down, as well as providing structural integrity to allow it to withstand the thousands of pounds of atmospheric air pressure with are trying very hard to crush it. But this remains a very critical design safety issue, and has gone so far as a Simpsons episode. (Remember Homer's old farmhouse, with the "Radiation King" TV set?)

    If you want to have an effective toy, yank out the electron gun from the back of the CRT, mount it at one end of a long piece of plastic or glass pipe, mount a really thin piece of sheetmetal at the other end, and at 6" intervals band it with smooth rings of metal connected to each other by 10 Mohm resistors.

    Suck a vacuum into it (vacuum pump), apply 500kV (from your homebuilt Van De Graaf generator) to the ring on the far end from the gun, apply 6V or so to heat the filaments and about -100V DC relative to the first grid in the electron gun to the cathode of the gun, and presto! you'll have a stream of electrons travelling at almost light speed out the other end. Essentially, beta particles, produced without a radioactive source.

    To a lesser extent, that's what the inside of your monitor's picture tube is being whacked with.

    Congratulations, Professor Science. You've just built your very own linear accelerator.

    Not extraordinarily high tech, I think Thompson did it, without the benefit of a modern CRT's thoriated cathode or the prior knowledge that it would work, sometime around the turn of the last century.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
  68. Re:Baa.. Need more power by Swinekilla · · Score: 1

    Yeah.. Just a student.. Little "Field Trip" two buildings down. :) Went with ASAE. Walked from Farrall Hall.

  69. Re:Terrorism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least the relativists feel the need to weigh in on every topic they have no actual facts about...it makes it harder to forget that they're there.