Are there currently working colliders with unequal beam sizes?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the existence and characteristics of particle colliders with unequal beam sizes, specifically addressing current and planned colliders, the implications of beam size differences in various particle collisions, and the measurement of beam sizes at collision points.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the existence of colliders with unequal beam sizes and the factors that govern these sizes, particularly in the context of different particle types.
  • Clarifications are sought regarding what is meant by "size," with emphasis on the rms beam size at the collision point, specifically the transverse rms beam size.
  • One participant notes that at the collision point, both beams typically have similar beta functions and emittance, suggesting that their widths are equivalent.
  • Another participant argues that reducing the rms size in one direction does not significantly increase luminosity if the other beam is wider, indicating a potential asymmetry in beam sizes is uncommon.
  • Specific examples are provided, such as the RHIC Run 21, where different emittance values for deuterium and gold ions are mentioned, suggesting a difference in beam sizes.
  • References to specific colliders, such as KEK-B and LHC, are made, with observations that the proton beam may have a smaller transverse size compared to the lead beam.
  • Discussion includes the observation that in electron storage rings, the equilibrium emittance is influenced by radiative effects, leading to differences in emittance based on energy levels.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications and characteristics of beam sizes in colliders, with no consensus reached on the existence of colliders with significantly unequal beam sizes or the conditions under which this occurs.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of measuring beam sizes, noting that definitions and conditions can vary, which may affect the interpretation of results.

Mikheal
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
For coliders of different particles such as RHIC, does the beam sizes of different beams are the same, for example Run-21 where deuterium and Gold ions are colided, what are the the average ratio of beam sizes for such light and heavy particles collision?, if yes, what factors govern this ratio?
I know that for any coliders beams are not exactly the same size but they can be approximated to the same value as the deviation is relatively small, such as LHC. My questions:
1- are there currently working or planned colliders with unequal beam sizes?
2- for coliders of different particles such as RHIC, does the beam sizes of different beams are the same, for example Run-21 where deuterium and Gold ions are colided, what are the the average ratio of beam sizes for such light and heavy particles collision?, if yes, what factors govern this ratio?
3- for e-e+ colliders does vdM scan still used, and does the beams have the same beam sizes?
Please provide me with refreances if it is available.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you mean by "size"? Length? Width? Emittance? Where do you measure? The radius changes throughout the orbit.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
What do you mean by "size"? Length? Width? Emittance? Where do you measure? The radius changes throughout the orbit.
I mean the rms beam size at the collision point where the two beams are colliding.
Yes, I know that size change along the orbit, thank you
 
I ask again - length? Width? Emittance?>
 
Vanadium 50 said:
I ask again - length? Width? Emittance?>
Generally in articles they refer to it by rms beam size. I am concerned about the transverse rms beam size, (vertical and horizontal width)
In fact, at the collision point both beams have approximately the same beta function and hence the Emmittance and the width are equivalent.
Thank you
 
Reducing the rms in horizontal or vertical direction is not increasing the luminosity notably if the other beam is wider, but it makes accelerator operation harder and/or reduces the maximal number of particles in the bunch. I would be surprised to find a strong asymmetry anywhere. I found this paper on p-Pb collisions at the LHC where both beams have the same beta* and similar emittance.

Unrelated: In Figure 1 you can see how slow lead ions and protons can't be synchronized, but as the LHC approaches its peak energy their speed gets close enough to synchronize them. The process is surprisingly slow - of the order of minutes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mikheal
I am just curious about the at the collision point where the reaction rates are recorded.
So this mean that both p and Pb have have the same size right? Is there currently working machines with beams with different sizes?

For example, RHIC run 21 Model 3A where d-Au collision with emittance of 1.0 → 1.2 micro for d and of 1.2 → 2.3 micro for Au.
1656396310935.png
 
The proton beam has a slightly smaller transverse size than the lead beam. CERN-ATS-Note-2012-094 MD

KEK-B is almost certainly asymmetric, but I couldn't rell you in which direction. Ususally the higher energy beam is smaller and the positron beam is smaller, but these are different beams in KEK-B.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
In this 2013 design, LER (low energy ring, positrons) has slightly smaller emittance in x and y and smaller beta_y* but slightly larger beta_x* (table 1).
The size is not identical but it's pretty similar.
 
  • #10
Vanadium 50 said:
Ususally the higher energy beam is smaller and the positron beam is smaller, but these are different beams in KEK-B.
As a small remark: for electron storage rings the equilibrium emittance is determined by the radiative effects and scale as ##\epsilon_0 \propto \gamma^2##. So for two identical lattices the high-energy beam will have larger emittance.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
13K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K