CERN to set up 80-km-long collider

21

After its success with the 27 km Large Hadron Colli­der, CERN, the  European organisation for nuclear research, now plans to build an 80 km long collider to hunt for an even smaller particle in the universe than the one it found last year.

Speaking to Deccan Chronicle on the sidelines of Kurukshetra, a four-day technical festival organised by the College of Engineering, Guindy, on Saturday, Prof. Guido Emilio Tonelli, spokesperson of the Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS) project of CERN, recalled that scientists took over 20 years to discover the Higgs-Boson particle, the smallest sub-atomic particle.

“We used the world’s biggest atom smashing machine, the Ł2.6 billion Large Hadron Collider on the Swiss-French border, to track down the missing particle. With this success now, CERN has plans to build an 80-km collider, which may provide us with more answers as to how the universe started thousands of billion years ago,” he said.

Written By: N. Arun Kumar
continue to source article at deccanchronicle.com

21 COMMENTS

  1. In reply to #2 by zengardener:

    What’s the point in making it longer? More magnets?

    Longer means that they can accelerate the particles to higher energies because there is less curvature. An ideal accelerator would be an infinitely long linear accelerator; making circular accelerators larger and larger means that they get closer and closer to an ideal accelerator.

  2. Articles like this are, in writing terms, trainwrecks.

    an even smaller particle in the universe

    What does “in the universe” add? What is their definition of size here? According to the Standard Model, the particles we’re looking for are point particles. To date, the data is consistent with that.

    the Higgs-Boson particle, the smallest sub-atomic particle

    Putting aside the repeat of the above slip-up, why call it the Higgs-Boson particle? It’s the Higgs boson (not hyphenated, boson not capitalised), end of. We know bosons are particles!

    thousands of billion years

    No; 13.7 billion years. He probably couldn’t make up his mind whether or not to use billions, like someone who accidentally says they have 5,000 grand in their bank account.

    which could produce thousands of small sub-atomic particles

    Only thousands? This is getting ridiculous! Also, if particles are subatomic, they’re small; why add that?

  3. Ahh, science in the media.

    But lets face it, they could have written “the universe is millions and bajillions of years old” and that “scientists are hoping to find even teenier, tinier space marbles” and most people wouldn’t blink an eye.

  4. In reply to #8 by This Is Not A Meme:

    What’s with the Divo hat? Channeling Orgone?

    Hi meme. I have a question for you.
    Do you think we’ll ever be capable of harnessing the full potentiel energy radiating from our sun?

  5. In reply to #10 by Jesper Both:

    In reply to #8 by This Is Not A Meme:

    What’s with the Divo hat? Channeling Orgone?

    Hi meme. I have a question for you.
    Do you think we’ll ever be capable of harnessing the full potentiel energy radiating from our sun?

    Hello. I have two reason’s for saying no. Pessimistic: we have not observed it on any stars yet (Dyson Level II Civilization). Optimistic: stars are a crude and inelegant source of power and by the time we can wrap a star in solar collectors we will have more efficient means. Issac Asimov’s intuition has proven fairly accurate and he stages our future as based on “vacuum energy”. Then there are the smart-matter models, which seek to harness the gravitational energy of gas giants, rather than stars. With a computer the size of Jupiter, I don’t think we’ll be needing to block out the sun, nor would we want to.

  6. In reply to #11 by This Is Not A Meme:

    In reply to #10 by Jesper Both:

    In reply to #8 by This Is Not A Meme:

    What’s with the Divo hat? Channeling Orgone?

    Hi meme. I have a question for you.
    Do you think we’ll ever be capable of harnessing the full potentiel energy radiating from our sun?

    Hello. I have two reason’s for saying no. Pessimistic: we have not observed it on any stars yet (Dyson Level II Civilization). Optimistic: stars are a crude and inelegant source of power and by the time we can wrap a star in solar collectors we will have more efficient means. Issac Asimov’s intuition has proven fairly accurate and he stages our future as based on “vacuum energy”. Then there are the smart-matter models, which seek to harness the gravitational energy of gas giants, rather than stars. With a computer the size of Jupiter, I don’t think we’ll be needing to block out the sun, nor would we want to.

    Not meaning to intefere with your discussion here, but what on earth are you on about Meme?
    Just because you harness the full energy from the sun, it doesn’t mean that it will be “shut off”.
    It simply means that we should be able to harness the energy released by the sun. It is the nearest source of energy availble to us. A sun cannot be “sucked” dry.
    Maybe we should think about harnessing that energy in a more effective way. A particle vacuum machine that could absorb and store the energy. Sort of like a solar battery with unlimited storage room so to speak.

  7. A exciting as this is if I’d just finished building the biggest and most expensive thing ever I’m not sure I could in good conscience turn round and ask for a bigger one. There’s no fair way to divide science funding but this is a big hole to fill let alone to start digging another.

    Sorry for being a downer, I look forward to some informed and optimistic responses.

  8. In reply to #11 by This Is Not A Meme:

    In reply to #10 by Jesper Both:

    In reply to #8 by This Is Not A Meme:

    What’s with the Divo hat? Channeling Orgone?

    Hi meme. I have a question for you.
    Do you think we’ll ever be capable of harnessing the full potentiel energy radiating from our sun?

    Hello. I have two reason’s for saying no. Pessimistic: we have not observed it on any stars yet (Dyson Level II Civilization). Optimistic: stars are a crude and inelegant source of power and by the time we can wrap a star in solar collectors we will have more efficient means. Issac Asimov’s intuition has proven fairly accurate and he stages our future as based on “vacuum energy”. Then there are the smart-matter models, which seek to harness the gravitational energy of gas giants, rather than stars. With a computer the size of Jupiter, I don’t think we’ll be needing to block out the sun, nor would we want to.

    The really cool civilisations are using no energy at all, of course, these days. Contrived to run as a matrix-like “simulation” on a series of super computing entities configured as a space-time crystal they can survive the heat death of the Universe

  9. In reply to #12 by Cowboy1977:

    Not meaning to intefere with your discussion here, but what on earth are you on about Meme?
    Just because you harness the full energy from the sun, it doesn’t mean that it will be “shut off”.
    It simply means that we should be able to harness the energy released by the sun. It is the nearest source of energy availble to us. A sun cannot be “sucked” dry.
    Maybe we should think about harnessing that energy in a more effective way. A particle vacuum machine that could absorb and store the energy. Sort of like a solar battery with unlimited storage room so to speak.

    I was thinking an unbroken layer of statellites or a solid sheet of material totally enveloping the sun, not losing any heat, nothing left over. I may have taken the “full potentiel energy radiating from our sun” question a bit too literally. In terms of basing our energy economy off the sun, that seems inevitable. Kurzeil’s predictions for solar panel efficiency held true recently, surpassing a particularly tricky phase in development. I believe soon we will build solar plants to power solar panel factories. I’m also pretty excited about Stanford’s new peel ‘n’ stick solar panels.

  10. In reply to #15 by This Is Not A Meme:

    In reply to #12 by Cowboy1977:

    Not meaning to intefere with your discussion here, but what on earth are you on about Meme?
    Just because you harness the full energy from the sun, it doesn’t mean that it will be “shut off”.
    It simply means that we should be able to harness the energy released by the sun. It is the nearest source of energy availble to us. A sun cannot be “sucked” dry.
    Maybe we should think about harnessing that energy in a more effective way. A particle vacuum machine that could absorb and store the energy. Sort of like a solar battery with unlimited storage room so to speak.

    I was thinking an unbroken layer of statellites or a solid sheet of material totally enveloping the sun, not losing any heat, nothing left over. I may have taken the “full potentiel energy radiating from our sun” question a bit too literally. In terms of basing our energy economy off the sun, that seems inevitable. Kurzeil’s predictions for solar panel efficiency held true recently, surpassing a particularly tricky phase in development. I believe soon we will build solar plants to power solar panel factories. I’m also pretty excited about Stanford’s new peel ‘n’ stick solar panels.

    Really exciting are nantenna. I have a couple of papers for deep infra red designs that even I could make. The rectifiers are coming along (to convert the terahertz AC into DC) based on metal insulator insulator metal structures that look good. These can gobble up the whole black body spectrum.

  11. In reply to #14 by phil rimmer:

    In reply to #11 by This Is Not A Meme:

    In reply to #10 by Jesper Both:

    In reply to #8 by This Is Not A Meme:

    What’s with the Divo hat? Channeling Orgone?

    Hi meme. I have a question for you.
    Do you think we’ll ever be capable of harnessing the full potentiel energy radiating from our sun?

    Hello. I have two reason’s for saying no. Pessimistic: we have not observed it on any stars yet (Dyson Level II Civilization). Optimistic: stars are a crude and inelegant source of power and by the time we can wrap a star in solar collectors we will have more efficient means. Issac Asimov’s intuition has proven fairly accurate and he stages our future as based on “vacuum energy”. Then there are the smart-matter models, which seek to harness the gravitational energy of gas giants, rather than stars. With a computer the size of Jupiter, I don’t think we’ll be needing to block out the sun, nor would we want to.

    The really cool civilisations are using no energy at all, of course, these days. Contrived to run as a matrix-like “simulation” on a series of super computing entities configured as a space-time crystal they can survive the heat death of the Universe

    Hmm. The sun is halfway “home” as one might put it. Before we start dreaming about civilization 2.0, we should stick to the sun. Instead of thinking of it as a general humanity problem( energy ), we should start by building houses with solar panels as roofs. This will take some time of course, but we have the technology already. One house, one mini power plant.

  12. In reply to #19 by Cowboy1977:

    Hmm. The sun is halfway “home” as one might put it. Before we start dreaming about civilization 2.0, we should stick to the sun. Instead of thinking of it as a general humanity problem( energy ), we should start by building houses with solar panels as roofs. This will take some time of course, but we have the technology already. One house, one mini power plant.

    I think we need to look at the big picture:-

    Photovoltaics are OK in some circumstances, but solar thermal -parabolic collectors, and large high temperature 24 hour power-tower thermal turbine generators, are good in sunny climates.

    Gemasolar Thermosolar Plant – The plant is a 140 m high solar power tower and uses concepts pioneered in the Solar One and Solar Two demonstration projects, using molten salt as its heat transfer fluid and energy storage medium.

    Gemasolar is the first commercial solar plant with central tower receiver and molten salt heat storage technology. It consists of a 185 ha solar field that has a 140-m high tower receiver, a power island and 2650 heliostats, each 120 m2 and distributed in concentric rings around the tower. [4]

    The most innovative aspects of the plant, which belongs to the company Torresol Energy, are its molten salt receiver, its heliostats aiming system and its control system. In addition, its storage system allows it to produce electricity for 15 hours without sunlight (at night or on cloudy days). This storage capacity makes its solar power manageable so that it can be supplied based on demand. The plant has already been able to supply a full day[5] of uninterrupted power supply to the grid, using thermal transfer technology developed by SENER.

    Gemasolar, with its 19.9 MW of power, can supply 110 GWh per year — enough to supply power to 27,500 homes. The plant has been operational since May 2011. Its official launch was held in October of 2011.

    Alt Text

    Ground heat storage systems, balance out seasonal and daily variations. Climate regulated insulated buildings also help.

    Direct reflection of light from orbit could be developed (as with the historic Russian space mirror) and tidal turbines and tidal barrages, also look like a long-term sustainable power-source.

    There was an earlier discussion on other options here: Water-cooled-nuclear-powerplants-arn-t-the-only-option

  13. In reply to #20 by Alan4discussion:

    In reply to #19 by Cowboy1977:

    Hmm. The sun is halfway “home” as one might put it. Before we start dreaming about civilization 2.0, we should stick to the sun. Instead of thinking of it as a general humanity problem( energy ), we should start by building houses with solar panels as roofs. This will take some time of course, but we have the technology already. One house, one mini power plant.

    I think we need to look at the big picture:-

    Photovoltaics are OK in some circumstances, but solar thermal -parabolic collectors, and large high temperature 24 hour power-tower thermal turbine generators, are good in sunny climates.

    Gemasolar Thermosolar Plant – The plant is a 140 m high solar power tower and uses concepts pioneered in the Solar One and Solar Two demonstration projects, using molten salt as its heat transfer fluid and energy storage medium.

    Gemasolar is the first commercial solar plant with central tower receiver and molten salt heat storage technology. It consists of a 185 ha solar field that has a 140-m high tower receiver, a power island and 2650 heliostats, each 120 m2 and distributed in concentric rings around the tower. [4]

    The most innovative aspects of the plant, which belongs to the company Torresol Energy, are its molten salt receiver, its heliostats aiming system and its control system. In addition, its storage system allows it to produce electricity for 15 hours without sunlight (at night or on cloudy days). This storage capacity makes its solar power manageable so that it can be supplied based on demand. The plant has already been able to supply a full day[5] of uninterrupted power supply to the grid, using thermal transfer technology developed by SENER.

    Gemasolar, with its 19.9 MW of power, can supply 110 GWh per year — enough to supply power to 27,500 homes. The plant has been operational since May 2011. Its official launch was held in October of 2011.

    Ground heat storage systems, balance out seasonal and daily variations. Climate regulated insulated buildings also help.

    Direct reflection of light from orbit could be developed (as with the historic Russian space mirror) and tidal turbines and tidal barrages, also look like a long-term sustainable power-source.

    There was an earlier discussion on other options here: Water-cooled-nuclear-powerplants-arn-t-the-only-option

    My proposition is very simple though. Remember I’m not talking about power plants as a source of energy for individual homes, but about individual homes as selfsufeccient energy units.
    Power plants ( maybe thorium ) would be fine as energy generators for the big grid installations.

    My philosophy on this subjet is one step at a time.

  14. In reply to #20 by Alan4discussion:

    In reply to #19 by Cowboy1977:

    Hmm. The sun is halfway “home” as one might put it. Before we start dreaming about civilization 2.0, we should stick to the sun. Instead of thinking of it as a general humanity problem( energy ), we should start by building houses with solar panels as roofs. This will take some time of course, but we have the technology already. One house, one mini power plant.

    I think we need to look at the big picture:-

    Photovoltaics are OK in some circumstances, but solar thermal -parabolic collectors, and large high temperature 24 hour power-tower thermal turbine generators, are good in sunny climates.

    Gemasolar Thermosolar Plant – The plant is a 140 m high solar power tower and uses concepts pioneered in the Solar One and Solar Two demonstration projects, using molten salt as its heat transfer fluid and energy storage medium.

    Gemasolar is the first commercial solar plant with central tower receiver and molten salt heat storage technology. It consists of a 185 ha solar field that has a 140-m high tower receiver, a power island and 2650 heliostats, each 120 m2 and distributed in concentric rings around the tower. [4]

    The most innovative aspects of the plant, which belongs to the company Torresol Energy, are its molten salt receiver, its heliostats aiming system and its control system. In addition, its storage system allows it to produce electricity for 15 hours without sunlight (at night or on cloudy days). This storage capacity makes its solar power manageable so that it can be supplied based on demand. The plant has already been able to supply a full day[5] of uninterrupted power supply to the grid, using thermal transfer technology developed by SENER.

    Gemasolar, with its 19.9 MW of power, can supply 110 GWh per year — enough to supply power to 27,500 homes. The plant has been operational since May 2011. Its official launch was held in October of 2011.

    Ground heat storage systems, balance out seasonal and daily variations. Climate regulated insulated buildings also help.

    Direct reflection of light from orbit could be developed (as with the historic Russian space mirror) and tidal turbines and tidal barrages, also look like a long-term sustainable power-source.

    There was an earlier discussion on other options here: Water-cooled-nuclear-powerplants-arn-t-the-only-option

    My proposition is very simple though. Remember I’m not talking about power plants as a source of energy for individual homes, but about individual homes as selfsufeccient energy units.
    Power plants ( maybe thorium ) would be fine as energy generators for the big grid installations.

    My philosophy on this subject is one step at a time.

Leave a Reply