by acceleration, I meant centripetal acceleration to bend the particles in a circle. You're right, the acceleration to boost the energies is linear RF cavities
To accelerate particles in opposite directions using the same magnetic field, you'd need to accelerate both positive and negative charged particles (positives go one way, negatives go the other), The Tevatron does this (protons one way, antiprotons the other). You only have to build one ring to contain the particles, but it's a tradeoff because you have to generate the anti-particles, which is an expensive process (basically, take regular particles, slam them into a fixed target and you get some % out the other side as antiparticles.).
This is factually incorrect. At peak (experiment running, all detectors running, all computers processing), the LHC will consume 180 MW of energy. This includes all the energy used to heat offices, etc... The actual experiment uses ~22MW of power. It's not "sneeze-at" power consumption, but considering an average household uses ~1kW of power, and the fact the LHC is planned on being shutdown a significant fraction of the year, the assertion that you could power "millions of homes and businesses for a significantly longer period of time" is bogus.
No, it's not. There is a ton of things out there, even in the furthest, most desolate parts of space. The cosmic microwave background is about 2.75K and is pervasive throughout the universe, for instance.
By displacing the oxygen (since it's heavier than O2), you can get varying amounts of hypoxia (depending on how much Xe you breathe). It's a physical, not a chemical reaction.
Because we can control protons (and other charged particles) with electric/magnetic fields. We don't have a way to steer (and accelerate) neutrons (well, there are neat little tricks, but none of them are as powerful).
No, "high temperature" superconductors cannot be used in magnets. That's why they're using liquid helium (or was it liquid hydrogen?) instead of the much cheaper liquid nitrogen -- all the superconductors that work at the warmer liquid nitrogen temperatures will stop working in a moderately strong magnetic field.
It's liquid helium. There's a ton of problems with LH2 that nobody wants to mess with.
Respectfully, I disagree with you. A mac fits it well.
I use a MBP for pretty much what he's talking about, and it works great. No, there's no docking port, but when I get to work, I plug in 3 cables (video, USB, power) and I'm ready to rock. I spent a lot of time dicking around with various laptops trying to get Linux to give me decent battery life, but OSX just does the right thing (tm) consistently, and I'm able to get a mountain of battery time out of my laptop.
A machine that has a 500gig harddrive, ~6-7 hours battery, simple docking (OSX detects when you plug in an external moniror real well) is a great dev machine and would do him good.
A bad choice would be to radically change our power grid on the issue that coal contains naturally radioactive isotopes.
But there are *no* good parts to coal outside of the fact that it's cheap. It belching out tons (literally) of radioactive materials every year is just a neat little bonus.
The dissonance of people complaining about nuclear power because of the fear of radioactivity makes my head hurt considering that the normal working operation of coal power is to launch that shit into the upper atmosphere.
The *real* bad choice would be for us to continue what we're doing because people don't want to take the two seconds to actually look at the facts.
There are all kinds of nasty things in coal. You're neglecting all the other (fun!) isotopes that are stored in coal (decay products from heavier materials that are nasty) as well as things that are chemically nasty (arsenic and mercury for one).
I'm not a member of the far left. I'm a physicist. I've worked at some labs with a significant amount of historical radioactive contamination and have had to read up a lot on the subject. It *is* bad. Really really bad. There are isotopes that are (chemically) remarkably similar to calcium. What happens if those chemicals get put into your bones?
Don't extrapolate information like that from wikipedia. Read one of the many articles on the subject. Anyone who has any bit of intelligence will agree.
Interesting. I'm doing HPC work at a US accelerator lab too. Looking from your commments, are you one of the guys that's using HDFS at a pretty large Tier-2?
I'm embarassed to say this, but I'm really out of this game. I want to upgrade my machine, and have no idea of what I should get. I want to get a new mobo/cpu/ram combo to put in my machine. Should I wait till more AM3 motherboards come out, driving the price down a bit? I could spend about $400. I do a lot of development (multiple VMs) and play games like TF2 on occasion. Is going to a Core 2 Quad/i7/Phenom II a better choice?
As another person on the LHC/CMS team, let me say: "at least this gives us more time to break and refix things before first beam".."Oh, you mean we need to change this code again? great."
yeah, you're right, and I've managed to fail at an order of magnitude calculation. 10^12hz (visible) waves have a wavelength of 10^-7m (hundreds of nanometers) 10^9hz waves should have a wavelength of 10^-4m (tenths of a millimeter)
As a physics PhD candidate, I'm going to have to put my skepticals on.
The wavelength of the high frequency waves you're generating in the cable is going to be on the order of... 10^-12m (I don't have a calculator in front of me, I might be off by some orders of magnitude). So, you would want to have cables that were some integer (or half-integer?) multiple of your wavelength to take care of harmonics, right? How the hell can you do that on a 20m cable?
Please correct me if I'm real offbase, but I think that while there's a lot of problems with making effective cabling, the actual length isn't one of them.
I'd like to install this on a machine that neither has a CD drive nor can boot from USB devices through the bios. Is there a way to make grub boot from an ISO file?
Slashdot Mirror
by acceleration, I meant centripetal acceleration to bend the particles in a circle. You're right, the acceleration to boost the energies is linear RF cavities
To accelerate particles in opposite directions using the same magnetic field, you'd need to accelerate both positive and negative charged particles (positives go one way, negatives go the other), The Tevatron does this (protons one way, antiprotons the other). You only have to build one ring to contain the particles, but it's a tradeoff because you have to generate the anti-particles, which is an expensive process (basically, take regular particles, slam them into a fixed target and you get some % out the other side as antiparticles.).
This is factually incorrect. At peak (experiment running, all detectors running, all computers processing), the LHC will consume 180 MW of energy. This includes all the energy used to heat offices, etc... The actual experiment uses ~22MW of power. It's not "sneeze-at" power consumption, but considering an average household uses ~1kW of power, and the fact the LHC is planned on being shutdown a significant fraction of the year, the assertion that you could power "millions of homes and businesses for a significantly longer period of time" is bogus.
No, it's not. There is a ton of things out there, even in the furthest, most desolate parts of space. The cosmic microwave background is about 2.75K and is pervasive throughout the universe, for instance.
bremsstrahlung is the word you want :) /physics!
By displacing the oxygen (since it's heavier than O2), you can get varying amounts of hypoxia (depending on how much Xe you breathe). It's a physical, not a chemical reaction.
Because we can control protons (and other charged particles) with electric/magnetic fields. We don't have a way to steer (and accelerate) neutrons (well, there are neat little tricks, but none of them are as powerful).
L4D isn't peer to peer. There are dedicated servers, it just automatically chooses them.
No, "high temperature" superconductors cannot be used in magnets. That's why they're using liquid helium (or was it liquid hydrogen?) instead of the much cheaper liquid nitrogen -- all the superconductors that work at the warmer liquid nitrogen temperatures will stop working in a moderately strong magnetic field.
It's liquid helium. There's a ton of problems with LH2 that nobody wants to mess with.
Regards,
shit, a 1.03million # UID is low now? I thought I was bad being in the 200k....
Respectfully, I disagree with you. A mac fits it well.
I use a MBP for pretty much what he's talking about, and it works great. No, there's no docking port, but when I get to work, I plug in 3 cables (video, USB, power) and I'm ready to rock. I spent a lot of time dicking around with various laptops trying to get Linux to give me decent battery life, but OSX just does the right thing (tm) consistently, and I'm able to get a mountain of battery time out of my laptop.
A machine that has a 500gig harddrive, ~6-7 hours battery, simple docking (OSX detects when you plug in an external moniror real well) is a great dev machine and would do him good.
A bad choice would be to radically change our power grid on the issue that coal contains naturally radioactive isotopes.
But there are *no* good parts to coal outside of the fact that it's cheap. It belching out tons (literally) of radioactive materials every year is just a neat little bonus.
The dissonance of people complaining about nuclear power because of the fear of radioactivity makes my head hurt considering that the normal working operation of coal power is to launch that shit into the upper atmosphere.
The *real* bad choice would be for us to continue what we're doing because people don't want to take the two seconds to actually look at the facts.
There are all kinds of nasty things in coal. You're neglecting all the other (fun!) isotopes that are stored in coal (decay products from heavier materials that are nasty) as well as things that are chemically nasty (arsenic and mercury for one).
I'm not a member of the far left. I'm a physicist. I've worked at some labs with a significant amount of historical radioactive contamination and have had to read up a lot on the subject. It *is* bad. Really really bad. There are isotopes that are (chemically) remarkably similar to calcium. What happens if those chemicals get put into your bones?
Don't extrapolate information like that from wikipedia. Read one of the many articles on the subject. Anyone who has any bit of intelligence will agree.
Interesting. I'm doing HPC work at a US accelerator lab too. Looking from your commments, are you one of the guys that's using HDFS at a pretty large Tier-2?
I'm embarassed to say this, but I'm really out of this game. I want to upgrade my machine, and have no idea of what I should get. I want to get a new mobo/cpu/ram combo to put in my machine. Should I wait till more AM3 motherboards come out, driving the price down a bit? I could spend about $400. I do a lot of development (multiple VMs) and play games like TF2 on occasion. Is going to a Core 2 Quad/i7/Phenom II a better choice?
Thanks!
Bucky
I'll bite. that's an interesting story. where's it from?
As another person on the LHC/CMS team, let me say: "at least this gives us more time to break and refix things before first beam" .."Oh, you mean we need to change this code again? great."
Or you could use SWIG it's already got C#/java, etc.. bindings.
That's what you get for living in cookeville ;)
That case would be Sega v Accolade
Can you do two things for me?
1) Define fascism
2) Tell me what obama's doing that meets the definition.
Thanks.
yeah, you're right, and I've managed to fail at an order of magnitude calculation. 10^12hz (visible) waves have a wavelength of 10^-7m (hundreds of nanometers) 10^9hz waves should have a wavelength of 10^-4m (tenths of a millimeter)
As a physics PhD candidate, I'm going to have to put my skepticals on.
The wavelength of the high frequency waves you're generating in the cable is going to be on the order of ... 10^-12m (I don't have a calculator in front of me, I might be off by some orders of magnitude). So, you would want to have cables that were some integer (or half-integer?) multiple of your wavelength to take care of harmonics, right? How the hell can you do that on a 20m cable?
Please correct me if I'm real offbase, but I think that while there's a lot of problems with making effective cabling, the actual length isn't one of them.
I'd like to install this on a machine that neither has a CD drive nor can boot from USB devices through the bios. Is there a way to make grub boot from an ISO file?
you can get PCI cards that do that.