# Where to Find Energy in Joules of Particle Accelerators

• nst.john
In summary, this person is looking to find the energy of particle accelerator beams in Joules, but only finds information for the LHC and RHIC. They believe that the LHC's energy is greater than any other particle accelerator, and that the earthquakes in Nepal are connected to the LHC. This is nonsense and should not be taken seriously.
nst.john
I am looking to find the energy of particle accelerator beams in Joules, as the energy given in the URL here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accelerators_in_particle_physics

only gives the energy of each proton. I am looking at all the particle accelerators still active today, and I have only found the energy per beam in joules for the LHC and the RHIC. Is there an equation or reasoning I can use to find the answer or a website with a chart or information of all the energies per beam in joules? Thank you! The URL's for the LHC and RHIC energy are listed below:

http://www.whale.to/b/brookhaven_particle_beam_energy.html
http://lhc-machine-outreach.web.cern.ch/lhc-machine-outreach/beam.htm

It's energy per particle time the number of particles per bunch times the number of bunches. You'll probably have to go to the site of each accelerator to get those numbers.

If you are just interested in the record: the LHC has by far the most energy stored in the beams.
And even more stored energy in the magnets.

I know that part but I'm mapping out energy radii of every particle accelerator to see if they can cause earthquakes for an English essay. I read an article about the LHC being connected to earthquakes in Nepal so I made a map of all the particle accelerators active today and the fault lines of the planet and want to draw a radius of how far the beams' energy would go out of the accelerator when gotten rid of.

That topic does not make sense at all.
nst.john said:
and want to draw a radius of how far the beams' energy would go out of the accelerator when gotten rid of.
Not at all, they stop in beam dumps that are a few meters long. Muons can get a bit further, maybe 100 meters - so what. The total energy in the beams is completely negligible in terms of geology as well.
nst.john said:
I read an article about the LHC being connected to earthquakes in Nepal
You can find crackpot stuff for everything, that does not mean it would be relevant in any way.

nst.john said:
I read an article about the LHC being connected to earthquakes in Nepal

Crackpot nonsense.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_earthquakes_in_2015. Do you see a change in the number of earthquakes coincident with LHC running? I sure don't. Furthermore, there are about 30,000 accelerators in operation. Are you going to include them all in your essay?

I included the major ones. And I don't believe it, I just wanted to show how even if what they're saying is happening, the accelerators won't cause earthquakes. I already saw that there are actually less earthquakes in recent years compared to earlier ones

nst.john said:
I included the major ones.

No, you included the famous ones.

nst.john said:
LHC being connected to earthquakes in Nepal

Imagination is good up to a point... After that the mind gets sick and life becomes a fairytale... I can't understand how the minds of the people who wrote it work... Even if there were to be earthquakes, they should have been near the LHC and not to the other side of the Earth (probably they don't know geography, and think Nepal is a region somewhere in Europe or even a city, and confuse Himalayas for the Swiss Alps). Even if that was not the problem, then we get strikes from cosmic rays, how would some extra events with low intensity (have to travel through the whole earth??) cause such an earthquake?

Last edited:
And manage to go backward in time. The 7.8 magnitude earthquake in Nepal was before LHC collisions.

Like I said, it's crackpot nonsense.

This topic is sillier than the lawsuit to stop the LHC due to black holes destroying the earth.

There are thousands of particle accelerators in this world. Your doctor's office may even have one! Unless there is a legitimate physics that links accelerators and earthquakes, this is crackpottery and should be dealt with accordingly by our forum rules.

Zz.

Well it would be "just for fun" to work this out and see what you find, but for sure not taken seriously...

nst.john
There is nothing left to add...

## 1. How do particle accelerators produce energy in joules?

Particle accelerators produce energy in joules by accelerating charged particles, such as protons or electrons, to high speeds using electromagnetic fields. As these particles gain energy, they collide with a target material, releasing energy in the form of heat and radiation.

## 2. Can particle accelerators be used as a source of renewable energy?

No, particle accelerators cannot be used as a source of renewable energy. While they do produce energy in the form of heat and radiation, this energy is not sustainable and requires a constant supply of particles and electricity to operate.

## 3. How much energy in joules can a particle accelerator produce?

The amount of energy a particle accelerator can produce depends on its size and design. Large particle accelerators, such as the Large Hadron Collider, can produce energy in the terajoule range (1 trillion joules), while smaller accelerators may only produce energy in the megajoule range (1 million joules).

## 4. What are the potential applications of particle accelerator energy?

Particle accelerator energy has a wide range of potential applications, including medical treatments such as cancer therapy and sterilization, industrial processes like materials testing and radiation processing, and scientific research in fields such as particle physics and nuclear chemistry.

## 5. Are there any safety concerns when using particle accelerator energy?

Yes, there are safety concerns when using particle accelerator energy. The high energy particles produced by accelerators can be harmful to living organisms, so strict safety protocols must be followed when operating these machines. Additionally, the high levels of radiation produced can also pose a risk to human health if not properly shielded.

Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
57
Views
14K
Replies
28
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
987
Replies
109
Views
17K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K