• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

1.18 teraelectronvolts? Great Scott!

1.18 x 10^12 volts.

1 180 000 000 000 (spaces instead of dots or commas for the international crowd) volts.


This is energy potential, but not alot of current stored. It's like a cup of water pressurized to a bizzlion PSI. It'll push really hard, but you'll run out quick.
 
I hope they installed the flux capacitor in that thing correctly.
 
Is it more than 1.21 gigawatts?

That's like asking if a liter is more than a meter. They measure two different things. Watts are a unit of power, the amount of energy applied or delivered per unit time. An electron volt is a unit of energy. And no, sorry, Alpha Geek, but it's not the same thing as a volt, which is a unit of potential, the difference of energy between two things. An electron volt is the amount of energy gained by an electron as it's accelerated through a potential difference of one volt. So 1.18 TeV is what you'd get if one electron were accelerated with 1.18 trillion volts, or if a trillion electrons were accelerated with 1.18 volts, or whatever.

An electron volt is 1.6 x 10^-19 joules, so 1.18 x 10^12 eV is only 0.00000019 joules. To borrow CERN's own analogy, it's about the kinetic energy of a flying mosquito. We're not talking about enormous amounts of energy here (which is one of the many reasons why the whole "destroy the world" panic is such complete and utter nonsense). What's significant about the LHC is the energy density it can achieve. The total amount of energy in the collisions it creates is small in absolute terms -- we are, after all, talking about streams of tiny subatomic particles being collided, not trucks -- but it's packed into a very small volume over a very brief time, and that allows for the creation of unusual high-energy particles that generally aren't found in nature, and that can teach us a lot about the physics of the universe, particularly what it was like close to the Big Bang, when energy density like that was commonplace.
 
Have we been hit with cosmic-rays of equal or higher energy levels than that?

The highest energy cosmic rays at 10^20 eV (100 exaelectonvolts, or 100 EeV) have about 100 million times as much energy. That's about the same kinetic energy as a well-hit tennis ball.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_cosmic_ray

ETA: KE of a tennis ball weighing 60g travelling at 25m/s = 0.5 * 0.06 * 25 * 25 J = 18.75 J
Divide by 1.6 x 10^-19 to convert to eV = 1.17 x 10^20 eV or 117 EeV
 
Last edited:
The LHC has now broken the worlds record for a proton beam.

We're still here!

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/...tters-Energy-Record-68767.html?wlc=1259615693

for those of use who don't speak particle physics, just how much energy is that? Normally the media gives a comparison but I think this time they were stumped (well the article I read didn't didn't)

Roughly 1000 times the rest mass of a proton, twelvish times greater than the rest mass of a W or Z boson, about six times greater than that of a top quark, and maybe six times greater than the estimates I'm aware of for the Higgs boson. My Internet is being silly with regards to the link--I have no idea what they were looking for here. But generally the reason they want to blast crap at such high energies (or, as Chris said, create such high energy densities) is to create Big Bang-like conditions and get those particles out of the release of energy and then study them in laboratory conditions, instead of waiting for random cosmic ray impacts to study in less-than-ideal conditions.
 
The LHC has now broken the worlds record for a proton beam.

We're still here!

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/...tters-Energy-Record-68767.html?wlc=1259615693

for those of use who don't speak particle physics, just how much energy is that? Normally the media gives a comparison but I think this time they were stumped (well the article I read didn't didn't)

Roughly 1000 times the rest mass of a proton, twelvish times greater than the rest mass of a W or Z boson, about six times greater than that of a top quark, and maybe six times greater than the estimates I'm aware of for the Higgs boson. My Internet is being silly with regards to the link--I have no idea what they were looking for here. But generally the reason they want to blast crap at such high energies (or, as Chris said, create such high energy densities) is to create Big Bang-like conditions and get those particles out of the release of energy and then study them in laboratory conditions, instead of waiting for random cosmic ray impacts to study in less-than-ideal conditions.

They're also expecting that they will be able to detect the production of supersymmetric particles such as the neutralino.
 
Yes, but can it make toast with a Cylon on it? :)

Cristopher, thanks for the correction on eV vs V. My skills are much more finely honed towards electrical stuff than it is to particle physics. :)

I don't know how many watts it takes to produce that much energy in a particle collision, but I'm willing to bet that the Electric company's meter reader will be wringing his hands and grinning broadly next visit. :)
 
So the highest cosmic ray to hit us was 100 quintillion eV, and the expected output of the Tevatron was supposed to be 1.18 trillion eV, and actually produced 970 billion eV?
 
No, 1.18 TeV was the energy level achieved on Monday by CERN's new Large Hadron Collider, breaking the former 0.98 TeV maximum achieved by Fermilab's Tevatron collider.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top