Space-based particle accelerator

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the feasibility and implications of constructing a space-based particle accelerator, exploring theoretical, engineering, and economic considerations. Participants examine the potential advantages of a larger radius in space, the challenges of vacuum quality, and the technological requirements for such a project.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that a space-based accelerator could utilize a larger radius to reduce the strength of magnetic fields required, leveraging the natural vacuum of space.
  • Others question whether current space-faring technology is sufficient for such a project, considering costs, resources, and the challenges of launching necessary components.
  • A participant suggests that launching a smaller number of magnets might suffice for deflection, challenging the need for a continuous line of magnets.
  • Concerns are raised about the economic and engineering constraints that would make a space-based accelerator impractical at present.
  • Some participants argue that the empty space between magnets would not contribute to the accelerator's effectiveness, limiting the size of the accelerator to the number of magnets deployed.
  • There is a mention of existing plans for space-based detectors, but skepticism about concrete plans for a space-based accelerator is expressed, particularly regarding the feasibility and costs involved.
  • Participants discuss the implications of detecting the Higgs boson at the LHC and how it might influence future accelerator projects, including potential plans for a space-based accelerator.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on the feasibility or practicality of a space-based particle accelerator. Some believe it is theoretically possible, while others emphasize significant economic and engineering challenges that remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include uncertainties about the required technology, the economic implications of launching and maintaining such an accelerator, and the adequacy of vacuum conditions in space compared to terrestrial accelerators.

kaveh32
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone, I am wondering why large particle accelerators are not arranged in space around a planet or a moon via multiple satellites? The radius is much larger, hence weaker magnetic fields required. Also there is natural vacuum up there. Any ideas why this hasn't been done?

Isn't the space vacuum good enough? Will solar winds be a trouble? Are the energy requirements too high?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you think our current space-faring technology is up to this? How far beyond the ISS in terms of cost, resources, manpower and climbing-out-of-Earth's-well would you say this accelerator is?
 
Yeah, launching a bunch of magnets is trivial. I see this as a hubble-size project, sending a package of 6 to 12 magnets (or electric plates) and a detector into orbit around a planet or a moon. Launch and costs are out of question (an order of magnitude cheaper than LHC). Any limitation with the basic physics? I am not sure about the size/weight of the detector, and the machine's energy requirements in orbit. Also, is the vacuum of space vacuum enough for this purpose?
 
You're kidding, right? A space based particle accelerator around the moon would require enough magnets to completely encircle it. About a million of them.

Admittedly space would be a great place to build a particle accelerator, but it's effectively impossible right now because of economic and engineering constraints.
 
Why do you need a continuous line of magnets? Wouldn't a smaller number of deflection points suffice for a much larger radius?

Can't deflection be achieved by simple electric dipoles and without the need for magnets?

What are the economic and engineering constraints?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Please read a similar topic on this in this thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=250114

For those of us who work in accelerator physics, we always shake our heads whenever we hear suggestions like this. If they think the ILC, at $20 billion proposed price tag, is expensive, space-based accelerators will go through the roof, both figuratively and literally. Also note that getting good vacuum is the LEAST of the problem with accelerators here on earth. It's not even a major cost factor!

Zz.
 
In a space based accelerator, I don't think the empty space between the magnets would contribute anything. So an accelerator made of six satellites would only effectively be as large as the six magnets.
 
kaveh32 said:
Why do you need a continuous line of magnets? Wouldn't a smaller number of deflection points suffice for a much larger radius? Can't deflection be achieved by simple electric dipoles and without the need for magnets?
To achieve the high interaction rates in synchrotron colliders like the Tevatron and LHC, the beams have to be tightly focused. This also reduces the required magnet aperture. To achieve strong focusing, F (focusing) and D (defocusing) quadrupoles have to be placed at regular intervals, say every kilometer. So there would have to be tens of thousands of magnets (there are ~8000(?) magnets in CERN LHC), which is only ~26 Km around).
Particle physics quit using weak-focusing synchrotrons when the ZGS (at Argonne National Lab) and the Bevatron (Lawrence Berkeley Lab) synchrotrons were shut down many years ago.
Bob S
 
Algr said:
In a space based accelerator, I don't think the empty space between the magnets would contribute anything. So an accelerator made of six satellites would only effectively be as large as the six magnets.
You make a good point. Unless I misunderstand how accelerators work (which is quite possible), the purpose of a larger accelerator is to add magnets, which means each can deflect the beam by a smaller amount, which means the beam's energy can be higher.
 
  • #10
there are already plans to build a large accelerator in space. To move forward is dependent on the outcome of the LHC at CERN. If they detect the HICKS Boson, the next step is space. this was the main goal of the LHC. To proceed any further, they need a larger area to collide the particles. If my memories are correct, the plan includes 6 magnets.

LHC creates conditions about 600,000,000 year after the BigBang

The space based collider will create conditions about the time of the BigBang.
 
  • #11
rjzm said:
there are already plans to build a large accelerator in space.

What plan? I haven't heard of any plan!

Now, there are plans to build DETECTORS in space. That definitely is true, and in fact, we already have several not only currently waiting for launch or being built, but also already orbiting the earth. But accelerators? So what rumor did you get this from?

To move forward is dependent on the outcome of the LHC at CERN. If they detect the HICKS Boson, the next step is space.

It's the HIGGS. If the LHC detects the Higgs, my guess would be that the cleanest way to pin down its properties would be via a lepton collider as proposed for the ILC.

Zz.
 
  • #12
Hello ZapperZ,

I do appologize for naming of the HIGGS BOSON as HICKS, I was exhausted.

I am familiar with the detectors you write of, but I am certain I heard correctly in an interview approx six months ago, plans were being discussed for a space based accelerator. Unfortunately I do not recall at this moment who the interview was with. The focus of the interview was the LHC. I also recall the individual expressing how expensive the space based accelerator would be if the project were to proceed. The proposed size was also discussed.
 
  • #13
Thank you for the correction.
 
  • #14
rjzm said:
I do appologize for naming of the HIGGS BOSON as HICKS, I was exhausted.
Zz, c'mon - a veritable cornucopia of redneck jokes abound. Your self-control is astonishing.
 
  • #15
rjzm said:
Hello ZapperZ,

I do appologize for naming of the HIGGS BOSON as HICKS, I was exhausted.

I am familiar with the detectors you write of, but I am certain I heard correctly in an interview approx six months ago, plans were being discussed for a space based accelerator. Unfortunately I do not recall at this moment who the interview was with. The focus of the interview was the LHC. I also recall the individual expressing how expensive the space based accelerator would be if the project were to proceed. The proposed size was also discussed.

I work in accelerator physics. If there have been ANY concrete plans on building such a device in space, I would know. There are pies-in-the-sky dream of building one, but if various nations can't get their act together to even AGREE on the ILC, you'll understand my skepticism if such an accelerator is already in the "planning" stages of being built. Just thinking of bringing up all the needed RF power up there gives me the jeebees!

DaveC426913 said:
Zz, c'mon - a veritable cornucopia of redneck jokes abound. Your self-control is astonishing.

I had to slap myself silly.

Zz.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
12K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K