Plasma wakefield acceleration. Why is plasma the perfect transformer?

AI Thread Summary
Plasma wakefield acceleration is considered the most efficient transformer due to its high density of free charges, enabling the generation of intense electric fields. While superconducting cavities have better efficiency, their field strength is limited to around 35 MeV/m, whereas plasma acceleration can reach GeV/cm levels. The acceleration can be achieved through two methods: laser excitation and electron beam excitation, with ongoing research addressing energy spread issues. Current applications are promising for medical and industrial uses, but challenges remain for particle colliders due to beam width. Understanding the continuous acceleration process and the overall mechanism of plasma wakefield acceleration remains a topic of interest and inquiry.
Superposed_Cat
Messages
388
Reaction score
5
Hi all, I recently read the wiki article on Plasma wakefield acceleration and it states that plasma is "The most efficient transformer known" but does no explain how (or maybe it does electrodynamics and induction are not my strong suit) and when I google it the only things that come up are cartoon referances. could someone please explain? Thanks in advance:)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Plasma has a high density of free charges. This allows to get very intense electric fields.
I guess in terms of efficiency, superconducting cavities are better, but their field strength is more limited (currently ~35 MeV/m, while plasma acceleration is of the order of GeV/cm).
 
Superposed_Cat said:
Hi all, I recently read the wiki article on Plasma wakefield acceleration and it states that plasma is "The most efficient transformer known" but does no explain how (or maybe it does electrodynamics and induction are not my strong suit) and when I google it the only things that come up are cartoon referances. could someone please explain? Thanks in advance:)

Plasma Wakefield comes in two different favors: excitation by lasers and by electron beam.

Here are links on laser plasma wakefields:

http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2006/December/06120602.asp

http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/29728

Info on electron plasma Wakefield:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1145

Zz.
 
ZapperZ said:
Plasma Wakefield comes in two different favors: excitation by lasers and by electron beam.
Proton beams are tested, too.

Here is some recent progress on the energy spread issue: Quasi-monoenergetic laser-plasma acceleration of electrons to 2 GeV

They are probably nice for medical and industrial applications, for particle colliders the beam is not narrow enough. (at least at the moment).
 
Thanks guys. Does anyone have a link to a diagram or schematic of a hypothetical plasma w/f accelerator for me? I am having trouble understanding the whole thing works.
Every page I look at is either too complex or so simple it omits vital info. Thanks if it's not too much
 
How does it CONTINUALLY accelerate the particles. I get how it gives them an initial massive kick.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Back
Top