Indoor Practice Facility

[upprdeck]

Thats over my head..

So which does Cornell have since they have it posted both ways?

cornell synchrotron

[RichH]

Thats over my head..

So which does Cornell have since they have it posted both ways?

cornell synchrotron

It is a synchrotron. The only place it's referenced as a cyclotron by my googling is in the titles of that virtual tour you linked to. CHESS stands for Cornell High Energy Synchrotron Source.

Cyclotron —> spiral
Synchrotron —> circle

[upprdeck]

I guess.. i leave that to the experts  from this site its neither.

its collider

from what i see we built a cyclotron in 1935

and from here posted in 2020 about cornell research its a cyclotroncyclotron research

I know last time i was in it which was about 2 yrs ago they called it a cyclotron.

maybe we have both  a CSER and a CHESS

its listed as 2 devices.

i think this explains it

the book of answers

[David Harding]

I guess.. i leave that to the experts  from this site its neither.

its collider

from what i see we built a cyclotron in 1935

and from here posted in 2020 about cornell research its a cyclotron cyclotron research

I know last time i was in it which was about 2 yrs ago they called it a cyclotron.

maybe we have both  a CSER and a CHESS

its listed as 2 devices.

i think this explains it

the book of answers

Good sleuthing.

The Berkelman book ("the book of answers" ) does explain the history well.  The tunnel was first excavated in the 1960's to house a synchrotron when the basement of Newman Lab was no longer big enough to hold the next generation synchrotron that Cornell physicists wanted to build.  They had been on the cutting edge of accelerator construction since synchrotrons replaced cyclotrons as the highest energy particle accelerators in the late 1940's.  Both cyclotrons and synchrotrons accelerate particles, usually electrons or protons (or their anti-particles), for use in experiments, but synchrotrons can reach far higher energies, making them more exciting to physicists who study particle collisions.  Cyclotrons are still important, but in other fields.  

In the 1970's it was time for the next step, which was to build a second ring of magnets in the same tunnel to store a beam of electrons that had been accelerated by the synchrotron along with a beam of anti-electrons (AKA positrons), also accelerated by the synchrotron, going in the other direction.  The particles collided head on, providing much more energy to produce new particles.  That was the collider known as CESR. (Cornell Electron Storage Ring.)  With upgrades, CESR ran from 1979-2009.  

A byproduct of bending high energy electrons is high energy x-rays known as synchrotron radiation or synchrotron light. Cornell physicists realized in the 1970's that they could use those x-rays to study material properties and started using some of those otherwise wasted x-rays.  In the 1990's a facility was built to enhance the production of that synchrotron light, making it a "light source", called CHESS (Cornell High Energy Synchrotron Source).  With upgrades, CHESS is still an active enterprise.  (further reading)

The linked article on "cyclotron research" is stored on a web site hosted by Cornell, but is a theoretical paper from the University of Tokyo.  It reports calculations  about a phenomenon that takes its name from one of the key concepts of the operation of a cyclotron (a cyclotron resonance), but does not use the Cornell facilities.

[Swampy]

Very informative discussion.

So 'splan this to me Lucy: what is a "linear accelerator" (as in "Stanford Linear Accelerator Center" - SLAC) and why would anyone use one after synchrotrons were invented? (I should know this.)

[RichH]

Very informative discussion.

So 'splan this to me Lucy: what is a "linear accelerator" (as in "Stanford Linear Accelerator Center" - SLAC) and why would anyone use one after synchrotrons were invented? (I should know this.)

From the link I posted above that's over upperdeck's head:

Linacs can accelerate heavy ions to speeds not possible with ring-type accelerators (cyclotrons and synchrotrons), because they are limited by the strength of the magnetic fields needed to keep the ions on their curved path. Linacs are also better for sending electrons up to relativistic speeds because electrons lose energy (and speed) through radiation when they travel along an arc. But linacs require lots of real estate, making them costly to build.

[David Harding]

It would be fabulous if the indoor facility could hold fans. I said 1,000 but really even 500 would be okay. Not many soccer (M or W), field hockey, even the early-season MLax games draw more than a couple hundred. Just OK is not OK.

Well, suppose the U.S. men's soccer team wins the WC in, say, 2030, and the women's team wins it in 2023, 2027, and 2031. Now all this success makes soccer the national pastime, with kids clamoring to play it everywhere. Suppose also, that Cornell men's and women's soccer become signature sports, achieving hockey-like success and popularity. E.g., both teams are ranked #1 much of the year and win the NC. Make similar assumptions about lacrosse. Might not all this popularity and success increase crowd size beyond 500?

About the same odds as a nuclear strike destroying the indoor practice facility.

Good one, Al.:-D

Is there still a nuclear reactor on campus?

Nope.  Closed in 2002.

I took a reactor design course sophomore year, and it was pretty cool seeing the reactor in operation.  You could actually see it working because of the Cherenkov Radiation.

The cyclotron footprint is in an interesting location.  If I knew this I was still surprised to see it depicted like this.

I'm nit-picking, but it's was a synchrotron, not a cyclotron.

FYP::burnout::

The synchrotron continues to run, feeding the storage ring, which is used a synchrotron light source.  The present tense is correct.

[David Harding]

Very informative discussion.

So 'splan this to me Lucy: what is a "linear accelerator" (as in "Stanford Linear Accelerator Center" - SLAC) and why would anyone use one after synchrotrons were invented? (I should know this.)

From the link I posted above that's over upperdeck's head:

Linacs can accelerate heavy ions to speeds not possible with ring-type accelerators (cyclotrons and synchrotrons), because they are limited by the strength of the magnetic fields needed to keep the ions on their curved path. Linacs are also better for sending electrons up to relativistic speeds because electrons lose energy (and speed) through radiation when they travel along an arc. But linacs require lots of real estate, making them costly to build.

The linked article is generally a pretty good explanation, with the exception of the first quoted sentence which is just plain wrong.  The highest energy accelerators we have built are all circular machines.  Just look at the tables in the Wikipedia article linked above.  There is a concept that has been floating around for 20+ years for a pair of linear accelerators with their beams aimed at each other to produce high energy collisions.  It's called the International linear Collider (ILC).  It's still in the distant future.  The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a circular accelerator whose particles reach ~25 time the energy of the ILC.  It's been running for over ten years.  Before that, the Fermilab Tevatron, another circular machine, was the highest energy machine in the world for ~25 years at almost 4 times the energy of the ILC.  Even electrons can do very well in high energy circular machines, as demonstrated by the Large Electron-Positron Collider (LEP).  

The gizmos that give the particles you are accelerating a push are called radio frequency accelerating cavities.  One pass through a cavity increases the particle's energy by a certain amount.  If you want to give the particles lots of energy, you have two choices:  make a linear accelerator where the particles go through a long line of accelerating cavities or make a circular accelerator where they go through the same small set of cavities over and over again.  

Trying to answer the question why use a linac:  
1) A linac can produce an essentially continuous beam of particles.  (A cyclotron can, too.)  A synchrotron produces pulses of particles.  
2) A linac can can produce an intense beam of electrons with a narrower spread in particle energies.

::deadhorse::

[Trotsky]

electrons lose energy (and speed) through radiation when they travel along an arc

Huh.  I always thought that from the electron's POV it wasn't an arc, it was a straight line through space that happened to be curved through no fault or concern of the electron.

This whole discussion is fascinating; thank you everyone who is contributing.  I could read about this stuff all day.

Beats workin'.

[David Harding]

electrons lose energy (and speed) through radiation when they travel along an arc

Huh.  I always thought that from the electron's POV it wasn't an arc, it was a straight line through space that happened to be curved through no fault or concern of the electron.

This whole discussion is fascinating; thank you everyone who is contributing.  I could read about this stuff all day.

Beats workin'.

I suppose that from the electron's POV the whole world around it could be turning, but the electron would have to be pushing hard to make it so.  The energy that the electron radiates is the synchrotron light I mentioned above.  It's a curse if you want to push the electrons to higher energy.  If you want high energy x-rays, it's a blessing.  

This is my work.

[marty]

electrons lose energy (and speed) through radiation when they travel along an arc

Huh.  I always thought that from the electron's POV it wasn't an arc, it was a straight line through space that happened to be curved through no fault or concern of the electron.

This whole discussion is fascinating; thank you everyone who is contributing.  I could read about this stuff all day.

Beats workin'.

I suppose that from the electron's POV the whole world around it could be turning, but the electron would have to be pushing hard to make it so.  The energy that the electron radiates is the synchrotron light I mentioned above.  It's a curse if you want to push the electrons to higher energy.  If you want high energy x-rays, it's a blessing.  

This is my work.

Nice drift.  The picture I scouted was due to my curiosity concerning how much space the Wilson buildings and surroundings included.  The slope of the ground makes this an absurd question.  And the cyclo/synchro banker makes me humble squared.

[RichH]

This is my work.

Thanks for discussing! Your insight and clarifications are very much appreciated. I'm just a guy with a couple Physics degrees and a penchant for googling.

[CAS]

Andy said, on a recent football podcast with Dave Archer, that $18.5MM has been raised for the indoor practice facility (about 75% of total cost).  Would be used by football, lacrosse, club teams. & intramurals.  Get out your checkbooks.  Would be a large, free standing building.  And a game changer.

[Al DeFlorio]

Andy said, on a recent football podcast with Dave Archer, that $18.5MM has been raised for the indoor practice facility (about 75% of total cost).  Would be used by football, lacrosse, club teams. & intramurals.  Get out your checkbooks.  Would be a large, free standing building.  And a game changer.

This is known as "putting your money where your mouth is."

[upprdeck]

at this point it might get delayed but a few yrs