Slashdot Mirror
The Recycling of the Tevatron
ananyo writes with an excerpt from an article in Nature about the decomissioning of the Tevatron: "It is a 4,000-tonne edifice that stands three stories high, chock full of particle detectors, power supplies, electronics and photomultiplier tubes, all layered like a giant onion around a cylindrical magnet. During 26 years of operation at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, this behemoth, the Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF), helped to find the top quark and chased the Higgs boson. But since the lab's flagship particle collider, the Tevatron, was switched off in September 2011, the detector has been surplus stock — and it is now slowly being cannibalized for parts."
Currently other projects are taking small bits and pieces of the Tevatron, but another Fermilab project, ORKA, wants to gut the collider to study kaon decay.
Put it on eBay: "Create your own black hole!" Starting bid: $1 (no reserve)
Sounds like a great set for filming some sci fi - like they used to make movies when tearing down amusement parks and blowing up the roller coaster.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
The lack of funding for the Tevatron is deeply unfortunate. It almost certainly could still have been used for good research. Between this and the earlier cancellation of the SSC, the US seems to be doing its hardest to make sure that it isn't first in particle physics research. We're still doing a lot of good research at Fermilab. For example, MINOS is working on testing the recent FTL neutrino claim (and in fact, the OPERA group was paying careful attention to arrival times primarily because MINOS had previously discovered an anomaly which tentatively suggested that some neutrinos might be traveling faster than light). And the US is still doing very good physics in other areas, especially in solid state physics and plasma physics. But this a really bad trend. It fits into the same pattern as the recent budget cuts to Mars exploration, while we still have billions of dollars pumping into military boondoggles.
I'm happy that they can at least reuse the Tevatron, and kaon decay which is important for understanding CP violation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation which may have implications for why there's apparently so much more matter than antimatter in the universe. But it really shouldn't be coming to this. Physicists shouldn't be desperately scrambling for parts while the cost of what they need is less than a new fighter squadron.
The US will be down to one active cyclotron-collider by the end of this year and not world class anymore. Some of the older accelerators have been recycled: Stanford Linear Accelerator where two of the quark mesons were discovered is now one of the worlds most powerful xray sources. This can see molecular size objects or time slices faster than a chemical reaction.
the US space program can no longer launch astronauts into orbit. Earliest will be next decade. Space probes have been cut to the two in development with nothing beyond that funded.
I'm confused why this is news. Can I buy the parts or something? What does it matter if they're selling the parts.
Woah! So it's not news or interesting unless you are *directly* affected? Generation Me or what, dude? They're taking apart one of your nation's national treasures. Bits of it are being recommissioned because your physicists are broke. It's OK, you're right. Let's leave this "peer into the fabric of the universe and wonder at its awesomeness" stuff up to the Europeans. They'll have the Higgs by the end of the year anyway.
Neither am I. Still interesting. Point still stands. See comment below by JoshuaZ.
They always say, "Maybe I'll need it someday . . . ", or "I might be able to scavenge some parts . . ."
And the stuff just sits around forever . . . right next to my Token Ring network card, tangled up in cables with wacky connectors . . .
They just can't part with the Tevatron . . . this recycling line is just an excuse to keep it around.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
I would say the two primary criteria for 'what is news' are, "Will it affect me?" or "Is it something I can and should do something about?" Not necessarily directly - e.g. voting isn't generally a direct effect. If the story doesn't include one of these, then it's really not news, it's gossip or titillation.
Unfortunately nearly all 'news' these days is sex, car crashes or celebrity gossip - pandering to the biological drives.
On a related note, I finally understood the attraction of the gossip rags at the grocery checkout stand when I read about a study of monkeys, who had been trained to use a juice-based 'monetary system' - they could buy and sell. The researchers used the system to determine monkey preferences. They found that monkeys would pay 'money' to see pictures of the alpha members of the troop (which explains People Magazine), and pictures of naked monkey butts (which explains Penthouse and Cosmo). AFAIK they did not test pictures of monkeys being injured. That would have tested my hypothesis that the urge to see and look at car crashes is also biologically based.
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
IMHO it is. If I take a used carburetor out of a wrecked car, and put it on my that needs a replacement, isn't that recycling?
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
it's reusing. recycling would be scrapping the part and making it into something else
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
You know the three Rs of waste reduction? "Reduce, Reuse, Recycle", you and the GP are both talking about reusing. It's not the same as recycling, in fact it's better because it's more efficient.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
It decays at the same rate as one hand can clap.
You are playing a semantics game, nothing more. Do you feel better about yourself now? Reuse and Recycle are mostly interchangeable in the context we are discussing.
Good-bye
Well this piece isn't about sex, car crashes or celeb gossip - so I guess it's news. Seriously folks - this is a piece relating to a huge piece of scientific equipment that won scientists a few Nobels.It ties in that to the current financial situation in science. It also reports that the plan to display this to the public may be shelved (if the proposal to gut it entirely is accepted). Important stuff for scientists and those who are interested in the climate for basic science in the US. This isn't news? If it isn't to you, it clearly is to other Slashdotters.
Yea, cause Europe totally doesnt have financial difficulties. Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Italy, all doing wonderful.
Something about "glass houses" and "throwing stones"...?
I used to bike around the grounds of FNAL; I'd love to see them open up the tunnels and see a little of the other side!
Since it's in a rural area, I bet if the word got out, the meth heads would be all over it to steal the copper. It would end up looking like one of those old abandoned military sites in Russia.
"He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
Recycling is breaking something down into component materials and re-fabricating those materials into new things. Unplugging a tube and plugging it in somewhere else isn't recycling. Still, it conserves natural resources, so what the hey.
Parts that are not being used, are being transferred to active research projects saving a lot of money. This is a very good thing. Why are we splitting hairs on this?
Right. The point of "reduce, reuse, recycle" is to help people keep in mind it's better to recycle by using something than it is to recycle by throwing it in the recycle bin.
So in that context it makes sense to distinguish.
But that usage does not define the terms in all cases.
The enemies of Democracy are
I think the Tevatron is the second most powerful accelerator on the planet in terms of collision energies. Cern has way outclassed it in collision energies, but it's still a world class piece of equipment. The Stanford Linear accelerator (SLAC) made a great electron source, for a collaminated X ray source. I think it's by far the brightest in the world, enabling experiments that can be done no where else. What could be done with the Tevatron? It's a shame not to use it somehow.
Looking at the diagram in the article, it looks like the particle source and the initial accelerator/storage ring is still live, they plan to use it for some kind of neutrino experiments. The main ring and detectors are what's being gutted AFAIK (which isn't saying much).
Well that depends using "a new fighter squadron" as a metric of measurement...
Lets see to convert, apparently there are 16 fighters in a US fighter squadron. "New", would have to refer to the new F35 fighter jets being built, the cheapest of which is estimated to cost about 122$ million dollars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II
So some rough calculations mean those poor scientists only need 1952 Million dollars, or in general terms about 2 Billion! :)
No, they're not being pedantic, you're being ignorant. Recycle != reuse. If you're using them as synonyms you're using them wrong. Read what they told you and learn, rather than trying to defend your own ignorance.
Free Martian Whores!
Do you have a cite for that study? It sounds interesting. I could only find a passing reference to the study here. I also learned that Googling Monkey Juice Economics is not particularly safe for work...
Sorry, it was a while back and I don't recall the particulars. But it appears that you're on the right track.
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
yes, but their collective situation and yet their continuing commitment to science makes this even more telling for the Americans, no?
well played, sir.
whoever modded this down is a nincompoop.
Ireland is fine - we have been stockpiling potatoes for years, we plan to not give them to English people when their economy dives....
If Alice says "I reused a carburetor from a wrecked car" it means she took a carburetor from a wrecked car and used it, as a carburetor, in another car.
If Bob says "I recycled a carburetor from a wrecked car" it means he took a carburetor from a wrecked car, destroyed it, and used the raw materials to make something new.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=reuse+vs+recycle
www.care2.com/greenliving/why-reuse-beats-recycling.html