Can particle accelerators be used to create small objects like legos?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lamonster
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Idea
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of using particle accelerators to create small objects, akin to stacking atoms like Legos. Participants explore the theoretical implications, potential methodologies, and existing technologies related to atom manipulation and nanotechnology.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that particle accelerators could be used to "stack" atoms by slowing them down and directing them with precision, drawing an analogy to CRT TVs.
  • Another participant corrects the misconception that CRTs accelerate atoms, clarifying that they propel electrons instead.
  • There is a discussion about the precision of particle accelerators and the types of magnets used, with some participants noting that different magnet geometries exist for focusing particle beams.
  • A participant proposes using a combination of bending magnets and a transmission electron microscope (TEM) to check the placement of atoms, while others express skepticism about the practicality of this approach.
  • Some participants mention scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) as a method for manipulating atoms, questioning the effectiveness of using particle accelerators for this purpose.
  • Another participant highlights the challenges of atom placement due to potential strain from lattice mismatch when using multiple materials.
  • There is a mention of molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) as a standard method for growing nanostructures, suggesting it may be more effective than the proposed particle accelerator approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility and practicality of using particle accelerators for atom manipulation. While some acknowledge the theoretical concept, others argue that existing methods like STM and MBE are more effective for the intended purpose. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to stacking atoms.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in the proposed methods, including the destructive nature of atom collisions and the challenges associated with manipulating atoms on surfaces. There is also mention of the effort-intensive nature of current methods for creating nanostructures.

lamonster
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
for some reason i can't explain i am horrible with words... so if this is the worst composition of the English language devised by man, please forgive me. ps, be glad i have a spell check >_>

late one night i was out on the balcony and something occurred to me. particle accelerators could be used to make small things. now hear me out. your old CRT TV that is sitting in your garage is a prime example.
instead of accelerating atoms, slow them down to hit a target with precision. in effect it is possible to "stack" atoms like legos to make whatever.
now back in high school i only heard of a machine that could layer atoms, but this is one at a time... sort of.
now i have some problems:
how do you confirm an atom has landed where you want it? you could make a sudo-error check, but it would have to be able to scan/see very small. i looked into it and the only thing i can find that is capable of "seeing" that small is a TEM, and from what i read it can only observe columns of atoms.
one at a time? well isolating atoms one at a time is a pain, but pinching them down to a single file line isn't as hard. Penning traps use magnetic fields to encase charged particles, so its plausible to assume that you could squeeze a mass of ions into a 1 dimensional stream. no?
referring back to the TV again: its plausible that you can assemble a decelerator/TEM hybrid that can work at high speeds, your TV does it all the time... kinda. also, 3d printers go one layer at a time, similar to flashing pictures on the screen.

aaaand I am done... thoughts?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your first mistake is thinking that your old CRT tube accelerate atoms. It doesn't. It only accelerates electrons.

A TEM (or even SEM) operates under slightly different premise because it looks at the secondary electron emission from the material that one is examining.

Zz.
 
okay, i am wrong about it accelerating atoms, but it does propel charged objects towards a target at high speeds with precision. yes?
 
lamonster said:
okay, i am wrong about it accelerating atoms, but it does propel charged objects towards a target at high speeds with precision. yes?

It propels ELECTRONS.

Not a lot of precision with the old CRT tube. In most cases, it only cares that the energy is enough for the screen to emit light via florescence. For a particle accelerator, this is rather crude.

Zz.
 
ZapperZ said:
It propels ELECTRONS.

Not a lot of precision with the old CRT tube. In most cases, it only cares that the energy is enough for the screen to emit light via florescence. For a particle accelerator, this is rather crude.

Zz.
you're right about it being not precise, but you get the concept... right?
if not, ill line em up.

a crt has an electron emitter (-), accelerators can use charged ions(-).
crt's use 2 or more bending magnets to direct charged particle streams to a spicific point on the screen at a given time. linear accelerators use multiple bending magnets to guide a particle stream to a stationary target (sometimes).
the accelerator part doesn't matter in the main idea because I am not trying to accelerate anything... you dig?
 
I work at a particle accelerator facility.

Zz.
 
well that's awesome. I am glad you have the ability to access tools i would only dream of.

is the concept correct?
 
lamonster said:
well that's awesome. I am glad you have the ability to access tools i would only dream of.

is the concept correct?

Correct but incomplete.

There are different magnet geometries in a particle accelerators, not just bending magnet. For example, there are quadrupoles or different types of solenoids to "focus" the beam. All particle beams have something called "emittance", and if such focusing magnets are not present, the beam will expand and hit the beam pipe.

I really am not sure what you're getting at here.

Zz.
 
the goal is to design something that would stack atoms in uniform to better ease the advance of nanotechnology. what I am trying to ask is would it be plausible to use bending magnets, like a TV or an accelerator does, and a TEM (as a way to check if you have a hit or miss) to do so. obviously i wouldn't attempt to use a tv and a TEM to conduct experiments of this nature. i was trying to use general working ideas to illustrate more effectively.
accelerating atoms is not where i was going, if anything i want to slow down the particle beam so the individual atoms don't hit the target and bounce away.

savy?
 
  • #10
No, a bit misguided, yes.

The manipulation of atoms on a surface has been done using STM. To use a particle accelerator is rather odd considering that an atom crashing into a surface is a rather destructive event. In other words, we already have better ways of doing that.

Zz.
 
  • #11
well wouldn't a STM be bad seeing as you could potentially "move" the atom you just placed? could you charge the target positivly so as to cause the atoms being projected to "stick"?
 
  • #12
lamonster said:
well wouldn't a STM be bad seeing as you could potentially "move" the atom you just placed? could you charge the target positivly so as to cause the atoms being projected to "stick"?

Even better, you can use chemistry to bond the atoms together in the desired fashion ... this has been done. However, this is a massively effort-intensive way to make molecules or nanostructrures ... it is way cool though! Saw-Wai Hla at Ohio University has some neat examples on his website herehttp://www.phy.ohiou.edu/~hla/movies.html" . The second paper listed from the Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology is actually pretty accessible even for an interested layman (I think). (The pdf is linked from that site for easy access).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #13
sweet, ty for the link. do you know if there is any further advances? from what it appears, they seem to be just playing with atoms o_O not making anything but maybe switches.
 
  • #14
lamonster said:
the goal is to design something that would stack atoms in uniform to better ease the advance of nanotechnology.

Generally speaking any method of depositing atoms somewhere in some ordered manner will run into the problem of producing strain (most probably by lattice mismatch) as soon as you have more than one kind of material present. The standard method to grow nanostructures is molecular beam epitaxy. I doubt that bending magnets have any chance of performing better than MBE (combined with additional postprocessing and etching), especially in terms of positioning neutral atoms.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 108 ·
4
Replies
108
Views
21K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K