How does the particle accelerator working ? how fast can it accelerate the particles ?
553244
hi,\n\ni worked at a particle accelerator for 4 years.  i know their ins and outs pretty well.\n\nthe basic idea is that you use an electric field to apply a force to a *charged* particle.  note that it has to be charged, like a proton or electron - if you put an uncharged particle (like a neutron) into an electric field, nothing will happen.  for this reason all particle accelerators only use charged particles.  proton accelerators and electron accelerators are the most common types.\n\nanyway, there is usually some sort of "source" that provides  some low-energy particles of the desired type.  for an electron accelerator, this is just called an "electron gun" and is similar to the thing that fires electrons at the screen of your computer monitor.  for a proton accelerator, you start with hydrogen gas, and subject it to a very large electric field.  the proton and electron are ripped apart, and head off opposite directions (because they have opposite charge). \n\nthere are two rough geometries - circular and linear.  there are several types of circular accelerators, but by far the most common is the synchrotron.  in a synchrotron, the particle is made to follow a circular path, by using magnets  that bend the particles.  every time they go around the circle, they are subjected to an electric field, which gives them a strong acceleration.  after going around and around and being accelerated at every turn, their energy gets high enough to be used for some very interesting physics.\n\nthere is, of course, a LOT more to the story than this.  particle accelerators are very very complicated, and each one works differently because it has different science goals.  if you are interested in more technical details i would point you to either SLAC or fermilab, which have excellent online resources:\n\nhttp://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/\nhttp://www-ed.fnal.gov/students.html\n\nas for how fast:  the highest-energy electrons are produced at SLAC, 50 GeV, which is about 99.999999% of the speed of light in a vacuum.  the highest-energy protons are produced at the tevatron at fermilab, which are ~1 TeV (i don't know the exact number) but again, this is essentially the speed of light.  at such high energies, accelerating doesn't really cause an increase in speed, as th eparticles are at the high-energy relativistic limit.  you can think of it like they just get heavier as you accelerate them more, but they are still traveling (almost) at the speed of light.\n\ncheers !
840202
If you increase the energy density (temperature) of a volume of space, particles therein collide with each other at higher speed. If things get hot enough, the collisions result in particle-antiparticle pair creation and annihilation. The hotter it gets, the fast and more numerous the particles become. The BB was a hot soup of such particles early on and, as it cooled, particles stable at low temperature were all that were left (by definition, duh). That includes the fermions we all know and love. The details of why there were apparently a net number of matter vs. antimatter particles left over is still being worked out.
1167454
Usually, you shoot a high energy neutron at it.  It's like in pool, when you break in billiards.  You shoot one ball very fast at the pile of balls, and then they break apart.
523357
*\nThe time-honored phrase "faster than the speed of light" might have to be reworked, thanks to the work of a Danish physicist.\n\nBy shooting a laser beam of light through a super-cooled glob of a kind of optical molasses, Lene Vestergaard Hau and her team at the Rowland Institute for Science in Cambridge, Massachusetts, were able to slow the speed of light down to just 38 miles per hour -- not even fast enough for the slow lane of a freeway.\n\nBy contrast, the normal speed of light in a vacuum is about 186,000 miles per second -- 20 million times as fast.\n\n"I would probably not call it God-like, but I would probably say ... we are tampering with nature in a very peculiar, very bizarre way," Hau says.\nlight maze\nHau points to an intricate maze of mirrors, part of the slowing process  \n\nThe research, conducted at the Rowland Institute and Harvard University, was reported in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.\n\nThe substance that slows the light, called Bose-Einstein condensate, is a microscopic glob of atoms slowed to almost absolute zero -- 459.67 degrees below zero Fahrenheit, the lowest temperature theoretically possible.\n\nResearchers believe that it may be possible to slow the speed of light even further, by a factor of 1,000.\n\n"A human could move faster than that" says Stanford University's Steve Harris, who participated in the project. "But a human couldn't move through a Bose-Einstein condensate, I'll tell you that."\n\nResearchers believe learning how to slow light could eventually have a number of practical applications -- improving computers and communications devices, making television displays and laser light shows more vivid and creating better night-vision goggles.
509480
i'm gonna xplain somethin else 1st so don't get bored.\n\nIf u cud ever travel at a speed faster than light then that would be an achievment in itself. scientists have tried to accelerate atoms to the speed of light in particle accelerators but found that they encountered a problem every time. through the recordings, they were able to conclude that as a partcile is accelerated towards the speed of light, its density starts increasing. they couldn't explain why this happens. through this they came to the conclusion that when a particle is accelerated, its mass increases and so it requires more and more energy to accelerate it further with every unit of speed it gains. when the particle is almost at the speed of light, its mass becomes infinite, and it requires infinite energy to accelerate it further which isn't possible.\n\n    but anyway if u traveled above the speed of light then u would start travelling back in time. this wil hapen because when your speed is at that of light, your mass/density is infinite. so space-time curves around you just like in a black hole. his intense gravitational field will take you back through time. and when you'll stop, you'll find yourself in your own past. very confusing but easily understandable. hope i answered your question
1012863
Particle physics is a branch of physics that studies the elementary constituents of matter and radiation, and the interactions between them. It is also called "high energy physics", because many elementary particles do not occur under normal circumstances in nature, but can be created and detected during energetic collisions of other particles, as is done in particle accelerators.\n\nResearch work certainly requires a particle accelerator, which can be found in both university and private environments. (see link for lists).  There is also a huge body of work in public policy, to expand the research arena, and theory, devising potential projects for the researchers.\n\nSo, H.E.P (high energy physics) and particle physics are essentially the same thing.  A physicist specializing in this area can work in areas other than universities and particle accelerators.\n\nGreat Question!  I learned something new!!
970195
This is one of the oldest questions in the world, after Einstein came out with his special relativity.  The answer is that no matter how fast you are going, your headlight beam is STILL shining ahead at the speed of light. This is exactly what the equations say, and it works.  If it wasn't true, then all the giant particle smashers in the world costing billions of dollars wouldn't even work.
644017
How about a Van De Graff Accelerator?
873430
A particle accelerator sends a stream of particles through a very powerful electric field.
292196
Particles travelling at the speed of light cannot be decelerated; any such particle is massless. Since mass is the constant of proportionality between force and acceleration, no force can cause any acceleration of such a particle. \nEinstein's fundamental equation states that the energy E of a particle is the magnitude of its 4-momentum E^2 = (mc^2)^2 - (pc)^2 = (mc^2)^2/[1-(v/c)^2] where p is the magnitude of its spatial momentum vector, m is the particle's inertial mass and c is the speed of light in vacuum. Thus (v/c)^2 = 1 -  (mc^2)^2/[(mc^2)^2 - (pc)^2]. Letting v/c=1, we get mc^2 = 0, which implies m=0.\nNote that this does not contradict general relativity; light particles lose energy in gravitational fields instead of decelerating. Also, light "slowing down" in a medium is due to photons being absorbed and reemitted; the speed of a photon is always c.
651184
Cherenkov radiation results from particles traveling faster than the speed of light _in a medium_. The particles are still not traveling faster than THE speed of light, which is more fully described as the speed of light in a vaccuum. Thus, the only implications of this is that the water tanks around nuclear reactors glow blue (which, if you haven't seen it, is really freaking cool).
391238
Contrary to popular belief, matter can actually travel at or faster than the speed of light, in a way. How?\nThe object must first be travelling close to the speed of light by conventional propulsion. In order for it to at least match light speed, it MUST utilize warp drives. (remember Star Trek?)\nWarp drives work by using gravity to condense the space fabric in front of the object and antigravity from antimatter to expand the space fabric behind the object. In theory, if the object is travelling close to the speed of light through adequately-condensed space, the object should be travelling at more than the speed of light if the space is expanded. Get what I mean?\nTry this representation. Picture a flat napkin. Superimpose the x and y coordinates of the Cartesian planes onto the napkin. Now, fold the napkin along the x-coordinates, starting from the left to the right, folding down the napkin for the first time, folding it up the second, folding it down the third... Now, soak one end of the napkin, I mean the longer ends, along the y-axis. The result is the whole sheet getting soaked, because the water travels through the "condensed" form of the napkin directly. If you soaked one end of an open, flat napkin, the water still travels at the same speed through the napkin, only this time, it doesn't travel as far within the similar periods of time.\nThe speed of the water represents the speed of your object, and the napkin represents the fabric of space. Get the picture? The object doesn't travel faster than light speed by itself. It never broke the laws of physics, but travelling through condensed space produces the intended effect.
22777
to accelerate particles :p\n\nActually, I know one purpose quite well, next year I'm going to be doing research with a particle physicist(im a physics major) and I know that what he's using it for is to accelerate particles so they're moving really really fast and then crashing them into each other and seeing what kind of junk comes flying out.  This is how they discover new particles.  They are currently working on a particle that is undetectable, but they know it's there because there's another particle shooting out in a different direction, and in order for the forces to be balanced the way that they are, there must be something there...\n\nCrashing particles together at these ginormous accelerations is really interesting actually, because when you crash them together so that they combine, you sometimes get a particle that has more mass than the sum of the 2 masses you started with!! So where is that extra mass coming from? Some of the energy is actually being converted into mass through Einstein's famous formula E=mc^2.
1175169
In general, all acceleration you encounter will not be exactly constant-- but will have some "pulsed" component.  That won't help you travel faster than light.  All it'll make you do is accelerate intermittently, instead of smoothly.\n\nAnd, what is this static field (+Q, -Q)?  Is it an electric field?  All the magnetic and electric fields will do is accelerate any charged particles, probably not even enough to be noticible, unless you use a freakin' high field, in which case you  run the risk of electrocuting yourself.  \n\nAlso, in order for this to make sense, what are "parallel worlds?"  What are they parallel to?  What are their properties?  How do you know they even exist?  If you are just thinking about the ideas presented in science fiction,  it's all a good idea for a story, but if you're trying to build a device, you really need a deeper understanding, in order to take advantage of any effects you might produce.
414278
Any charged particle, like a proton or an electron is accelerated in an electrical field. One can make an electrical field by applying a large voltage differential between two electrical plates. Old cathode tubes televisions work like this: electrons are accelerated inside the tube and hit the screen. So chances are you have already an accelerator at home.\n\nAt CERN or Fermilab the particles are accelerated in mile wide rings. Therefore the encounter the same accelerating electrical field over and over. After millions of rounds they build up speeds close to the speed of light.
954004
No, not at all.\n\nProcesses in perfectly stationary nuclei turn mass into energy. For instance, the energy an emitted alpha particle has in alpha decay from a staionary nucleus is reflected by a tiny fall in mass of the nucleus.\n\nConversely, as you accelerate a particle towards the speed of light, more and more of the energy you give to the particle gets converted to mass. In fact, you can never get the particle to the speed of light - its mass will go to infinity first. This is quite measurable in a particle accelerator.
972241
Firstly, please allow me to substitute your term "speed" for the more accurate term "velocity".\n\nAll particles and waves have an intrinsic velocity  in a vacuum.  The subatomic particle which makes up light is the photon.  The photon travels at an average maximum velocity of 3x10^8 m/sec in a vacuum.  For the exact numerical speed, here is a good source\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light\n\nbut for the purposes of almost all calculations, 3x10^8m/sec is used.  There are physical forces which can slow down the speed of light, and the chief force is gravity.\n\nDarkness is the absence of light, and therefore, the absence of any photons. Therefore, the concepts of speed and velocity are not applicable.\n\nP.S.  There is only one particle theorized to be faster than the speed of a photon, or more aptly put, faster than the speed of light.  That subatomic particle is the "tachyon".  It is further theorized that , because it is travelling faster than the speed of light, it is also travelling backward in time.\n\nP.P.S.  Many of the theories in physics are derived from solutions to various "so-called" unsolvable problems derived from math theory.  In this sense , physics and math go hand in hand.  Therefore, many physics theories are simply supported by math equations until a real life proof can be generated, characterized properly, qualified, and quantified.  The problem here is that just because a math equation may have a solution , it alone BY NO MEANS is proof in and of itself of the existence of subatomic particles and physical phenomenae.  It can only be used as a measuring stick,of sorts,  in order to look for the existence, and therefore, FORMAL PROOF of such phenomenae.