Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Case For a Muon Collider Succeeding the LHC Just Got Stronger

Posted by timothy on from the other-people's-money dept.

StartsWithABang writes: If you strike the upper atmosphere with a cosmic ray, you produce a whole host of particles, including muons. Despite having a mean lifetime of just 2.2 microseconds, and the speed of light being 300,000 km/s, those muons can reach the ground! That's a distance of 100 kilometers traveled, despite a non-relativistic estimate of just 660 meters. If we apply that same principle to particle accelerators, we discover an amazing possibility: the ability to create a collider with the cleanliness and precision of electron-positron colliders but the high energies of proton colliders. All we need to do is build a muon collider. A pipe dream and the stuff of science fiction just 20 years ago, recent advances have this on the brink of becoming reality, with a legitimate possibility that a muon-antimuon collider will be the LHC's successor.

35 of 53 comments (clear)

  1. Silly Monkeys by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Funny

    10,000 years of civilization and they're still just beating rocks together.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Silly Monkeys by JeremyWH · · Score: 5, Funny

      But, progress nevertheless, as the rocks are now much smaller! Nanorocks

    2. Re:Silly Monkeys by TomGreenhaw · · Score: 1

      And still move their wheels with fire

      --
      Greed is the root of all evil.
    3. Re:Silly Monkeys by kilodelta · · Score: 1

      Well - some move on electrons now.

    4. Re:Silly Monkeys by tigersha · · Score: 1

      More like attorocks but whatever.

      And what much difference is there between a speeding bullet and a rock? The way you throw the rock might differ, but a rock is a rock.

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    5. Re:Silly Monkeys by gigaherz · · Score: 2

      Most? What is the sun but a very very large ball of fire? In the end, everything but hydrogen has been born in a star's blaze, and hydrogen itself was born in the primordial heat of the big bang. Everything in the universe has been ultimately put where it is thanks to heat and very high pressures.

    6. Re:Silly Monkeys by davester666 · · Score: 1

      We need a better way to thin the herd. The existing methods haven't worked at slowing down the increase in humans.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    7. Re: Silly Monkeys by Gizan · · Score: 1

      Energy.

    8. Re:Silly Monkeys by manu0601 · · Score: 2

      Muons are actually much smaller than the nano scale, which is typical for small molecules. The Muon is like a big electron.

    9. Re:Silly Monkeys by lucien86 · · Score: 1

      But not very stable..
      A muon is like an electron but is type II matter so is unstable.. Could work great in an accelerator. :))

      --
      Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
    10. Re: Silly Monkeys by gigaherz · · Score: 1

      I'd say that the fire element represents energy. Heat is the most obvious form of energy so it makes sense to use it as a representation of all energy interactions.

      The other 3 elements represent the primary states of matter. Plasma wasn't discovered until much later, so it wasn't included in the list of elements at the time. Although, it could be said that the aether is dark matter, which would bring the total to 6?

    11. Re:Silly Monkeys by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Electrons propelled, ultimately, by fire (mostly).

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. Submission Summary = Headache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The byline of the article explains it better:

    How one of the first tests of special relativity might lead to the greatest particle accelerator of all-time.

  3. medium.com, again? by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 2

    What is it with the metric ton of medium.com articles appearing recently? Their advertising and media presence team got awake and started mass-submitting stories to slashdot?

    --
    My first program:

    Hell Segmentation fault

    1. Re:medium.com, again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What is it with the metric ton of medium.com articles appearing recently? Their advertising and media presence team got awake and started mass-submitting stories to slashdot?

      StartsWithABang submits them all but never comments. That account has submitted nine articles from medium.com this week alone. Funny that.

    2. Re:medium.com, again? by Megol · · Score: 2

      Well at least the medium articles tend to be readable (ignoring the useless images).

    3. Re:medium.com, again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yet often full of incorrect things based on the articles related to areas I have formal background in, and sometimes even things that should be known from an intro level class. Not every article, but enough that it kills my motivation to read them (even if I have a background in it, it is nice to read pop-sci stories to see if someone comes up with a good way to explain things to non-technical people, or if there is some new bit of news I've missed). What is sad, is at least one of the author of articles there is a professor...

  4. Oh, fuck this asshole and his exclamation points. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seriously, you can't find a physics blog written by an adult?

  5. Good idea because ... by dbIII · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's a good idea to use muons. Especially after that article about a proton failure.




    P.S. Where is the JOKE tag when you need one?

  6. Re:Algorithmic Design... by johnw · · Score: 1

    Weird. I was reading one thread, went to post, realised I wasn't logged in, logged in, and somehow my comment got attached to a completely different article.

    Please ignore.

  7. Re:Algorithmic Design... by Whiteox · · Score: 1

    Ok. I'm interested. Which article was it?

    --
    Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
  8. Very old news by Livius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The supposed 'advance' was someone asking a question on the Internet. The answer was special relativity which we've had for 110 years.

    1. Re:Very old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In other words, clickbait that is mildly interesting but not at all new or useful. Exactly like every other StartsWithABang post.

  9. Re:Boondoggle by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

    Oh don't worry your point little head Mr. Teabagger. This will be happening in some Commie country like Sweden or France, not in God fearing Jorb Creator Worshipping Jeebusland! Booyah!

  10. Re:Boondoggle by gtall · · Score: 1

    Really? Soooo.... after you get sick, you will happily reject the results of all that money spent on health research over the years? It was someone else's money, you have no right to it given the pittance you paid in taxes.

    Come to think of it, all that money pissed off on quantum physics over the years that allowed you to type your silly thought was useless as well, take it back.

    And all that money the Swiss patent office pissed off on Einstein when he was supposed to be working instead of working out a theory of gravity, money down the drain that...or at least down a drain we can locate via GPS.

    Science is a tax. It is a tax on current generations so that future generations can live better. This used to be considered a human virtue, now the dumbinati consider it money wasted because they didn't immediately see their cut of progress.

  11. Estimate of 660 meters by Translation+Error · · Score: 3, Informative
    In case anyone else was completely confused about the ''estimate of just 660 meters" in the summary:

    But let's do the math: even if these particles are moving at almost the speed of light--300,000 km/s--and they live for 2.2 microseconds, they should only be able to travel about 660 meters before decaying away.

    Yet I told you these particles are created at the top of the atmosphere, which is some 100 kilometers, or 100,000 meters up! From our perspective, that muon should never make it to the ground. And yet, it's Einstein to the rescue, thank to the fact that when objects move close to the speed of light, their clocks run slow.

    --
    When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
  12. metric ton by rossdee · · Score: 1

    "What is it with the metric ton of medium.com articles"

    IMO the "metric ton" should be called a MegaGram (it is after all one thousand KiloGrams)

    and of course the article should be on light.com rather than medium.com

  13. Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    IAAAP (I am an accelerator physicist), and this is pretty old news. The US muon collider program is actually on its way out. Last year's Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel (P5) advised the DOE to defund the muon collider project, redirecting funds toward the International Linear Collider (ILC)-- a 250GeV e+/e- precision Higgs factory-- and other projects:

    http://science.energy.gov/~/media/hep/hepap/pdf/May%202014/FINAL_P5_Report_Interactive_060214.pdf

    The DOE has followed P5's review, and Fermilab's muon collider project is winding down.

    1. Re:Old news by goarilla · · Score: 2

      IAAAP (I am an accelerator physicist), and this is pretty old news. The US muon collider program is actually on its way out. Last year's Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel (P5) advised the DOE to defund the muon collider project, redirecting funds toward the International Linear Collider (ILC)-- a 250GeV e+/e- precision Higgs factory-- and other projects:

      According to this article it's easier to put energy in particles with substantial mass. They don't seem to leak as much.
      So how are they gonna accomplish these 2-3 x higher energies in the ILC over the LEP ? More massive electric fields ?

    2. Re:Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      IAAAP (I am an accelerator physicist), and this is pretty old news. The US muon collider program is actually on its way out. Last year's Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel (P5) advised the DOE to defund the muon collider project, redirecting funds toward the International Linear Collider (ILC)-- a 250GeV e+/e- precision Higgs factory-- and other projects:

      According to this article it's easier to put energy in particles with substantial mass. They don't seem to leak as much.
      So how are they gonna accomplish these 2-3 x higher energies in the ILC over the LEP ? More massive electric fields ?

      It's all in the name. ILC = "International Linear Collider", i.e., two linacs pointed at each other. Synchrotron radiation only bites you if you're accelerating tangentially to the direction of motion. There's very little synchrotron radiation in a linear accelerator. LEP was a circular collider (proceeding the LHC, and occupying the same tunnel the LHC now uses), hence the synchrotron radiation problem.

      The trouble with linacs is they're somewhat wasteful. Each bunch only gets one crossing with the opposing beam, so you're constantly accelerating new bunches. At LEP you got something around 100 million chances for a bunch to interact with the opposing beam (assuming ~1hr fills)-- and that's assuming only one collision point.

      So, it's six to one, half-dozen to the other. Either you expend all your energy accelerating new bunches constantly, or you expend all your energy replacing what's lost to synchrotron radiation.

      --IAAAP

    3. Re:Old news by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      The problem with high-mass particles is they lose energy when accelerating - and in the physics sense, which includes changing direction, as when traveling around a circular path. Linear accelerators, I assume, do not have such a problem: They don't spin their particles in circular paths. That's my guess anyway, I'm not a physicist.

  14. what price science? by markhahn · · Score: 1

    we need to find a way to talk about the price of science projects. there are many examples: the top of top500, LHC, Iter, etc. we don't seem to discuss them rationally: to estimate the practical payoff in order to evaluate the cost of building them.

  15. Re:Waxahachie, TX by eriqk · · Score: 1

    Not if it's supposed to be linear it isn't.

  16. Moon Collider??! by BadPirate · · Score: 1

    Oh.. moun collider. This article just got BOOOORRRING.

    --
    - Holy crap, I've got MOD points! Who thought that was a good idea.
  17. Depends on where you live... by DrYak · · Score: 1

    Oh, is it so ? *My* electrons are pushed around by water falling down and funny glow-in-the-dark rocks.
    Yep, it's all about rocks again...

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]