Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Columbia Holds Wake For Historic Cyclotron

Posted by kdawson on from the nothing-lasts-forever-mister-bond dept.

Pickens writes "They called it leviathan, behemoth, Big Bertha. At 12 feet wide, rising 7 feet above the cement floor and weighing an estimated 65 tons, the Columbia cyclotron, the particle accelerator built in the late 1930s by Columbia physicist John Dunning, played a crucial role in the dawn of the nuclear era. Dunning's experiments verified fission, established many of its properties, and, most significantly, demonstrated that the rare isotope Uranium 235, and not the more common U-238, was the more fissionable form of the element. 'In a week or two, they will dismantle it, and they will sell it for scrap,' says George Hamawy, Columbia University's director of radiation safety. 'This is the last chance to see it,' Hamawy added as students held a wake and contractors arrived to remove the cyclotron. 'We're going to make two-thousand-pound sections,' said one contractor before taking the cyclotron's measurements. 'We'll start slicing on Monday.'"

11 of 72 comments (clear)

  1. Can it not be preserved? by LLKrisJ · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Givin it's importance in the development of nuclear science, it might be nice to preserve it somehow I would think...

    1. Re:Can it not be preserved? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Givin it's importance in the development of nuclear science, it might be nice to preserve it somehow I would think... Look, we can't be expected to save every damn thing that ever played an important role in history. Things have a limited useful life. Who's ever going to go see the remains of a 70+ year old cyclotron. Were you p[lanning on seeing it, only to be disappointed to hear it was being scrapped? I doubt it. It's not like they're filling in the grand canyon. It's a giant lump of scrap metal. Let it go.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  2. It was always disposable by jotok · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No matter how large, complex, or beautiful anything we make is, it is all essentially disposable. We inevitably attach sentiment to things like cars or houses or boats or gigantic cyclotrons but they are just...things.

    Look, the Navy has all this romantic imagery associated with plying the seas in deadly warships (read "Choosers of the Slain" by Kipling) but almost all ships end up as razor blades or sunk for target practice. Likewise a lot of us have fun tinkering with computers...but over the past 5 years haven't we all broken down and rebuilt assorted Frankenboxes for this project or that project a hundred times over?

    It's the adventure of DOING stuff with the things that is important, not the things themselves. As impressive as the cyclotron is, it's the science and discovery that are really meaningful.

    1. Re:It was always disposable by blincoln · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's the adventure of DOING stuff with the things that is important, not the things themselves.

      The things are important because they provide a tangible link between the events they represent and people who weren't present for them. I wasn't even born when the XB-70 program was underway, but when I visited the Air Force Museum and saw the one remaining prototype, it made all of the things I'd read about it more real to me. None of us (other than the vampires) were alive when the ancient trading routes in the Black Sea were in use, but the artifacts discovered there by Robert Ballard help us understand more about them.
      Obviously some things aren't practical to keep around - fleets of obsolete aircraft carriers, for example. But a single cyclotron? What's so important that they need to put in its place?

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    2. Re:It was always disposable by hcdejong · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Yes and no. It's disposable in the sense that the science done on this cyclotron won't be lost when the hardware is scrapped. But I find it does help to be able to see and experience the hardware even if it's not useful anymore. I've visited a number of science and technology museums over the years, and even if I'm familiar with the ideas behind the artefacts shown, they never fail to shed new light on the knowledge I already have.

      We inevitably attach sentiment to things like cars or houses or boats or gigantic cyclotrons but they are just...things. There's a large gap between preserving nothing and preserving everything. The Navy ends up preserving only the most notable and interesting ships, the same thing applies to scientific equipment.
    3. Re:It was always disposable by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wouldn't junk the most notable stuff. What would we know about the ancient Egyptians if they dismantled everything? Most ships are scrapped, but enough are saved so we have a vivid reminder of what things were like in the day.

  3. They could make more money... by effigiate · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I bet they could bring in more money if they didn't scrap the whole thing, but instead sold small slices of it. No way they could sell ~65 tons worth of slices, but they could get a lot more if they sold off some of the historic piece of equipment. I'd buy a slice.

    1. Re:They could make more money... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I bet they could bring in more money if they didn't scrap the whole thing, but instead sold small slices of it. And after they sold 12 slices to all the cyclotron groupies, they'd have to scrap the remaining 99.5% of it. It's not the Berlin Wall, it's a lump of copper and iron. Given the scrap prices for both, the sale of souvenir pieces would be chump change in comparison.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  4. Auction? by scubamage · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Think they'd let us purchase a small chunk for esoteric value? The machine itself isn't leaking radiation and I know there's a ton of nuclear physicists out there that would love a small chunk. Plus it'd prolly be worth more than selling it for scrap if they opened it to the scientific community.

  5. Re:Get The Lead Out by swschrad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    the ROOM may be, but the CYCLOTRON wouldn't be.

    assuming you get the beam focussed after filament replacement, etc, the only danger to anything except credit cards, people standing between loose steel and the moosey magnet, etc. is behind the target window in the chamber casting.

    and they probably had an old cardboard sign, faded, near that point.

    this is why stuff like this is built underground with no easy access. Mother Earth is your shield, suffering those protons and (later) neutrons for you.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  6. Re:Deeznutz! by Ambitwistor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, with a little elbow grease and a 4600 pound, 4 kilowatt magnet. Which most of us have lying around at home.