LHC beta* 3.5 meters
- CharmQuark
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
- Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)
Re: LHC Beta* 2 meters
Nice post Orion
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.
Re: LHC Beta* 2 meters
A picture is worth a 1000 words....well done
- CharmQuark
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
- Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)
Re: LHC beta* 3.5 metres
You are more than welcome
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.
- chriwi
- LHCPortal Guru
- Posts: 403
- Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 1:19 pm
- Location: Stuttgart Germany
- Contact:
Re: LHC beta* 3.5 metres
But it also shows that the beta doesn't necessarily say anything about the real concentration of protons at the colissionpoint rather about the angle they collide in.
But I still belive that there is some relationship which makes beta something like a good guess for the proton-densety at the collisionpoint, but it also depends on the overall aperture of the rest of the beam. (I hope I used the right words)
But I still belive that there is some relationship which makes beta something like a good guess for the proton-densety at the collisionpoint, but it also depends on the overall aperture of the rest of the beam. (I hope I used the right words)
bye
chriwi
chriwi
Re: LHC beta* 3.5 metres
This is only true if you apply some more constraints, such as that the cross-section of the beam stays the same at both ends of the cavity in the middle of which is the focus point.Tau wrote:Yes, if you halve beta*, you double the luminance.
Otherwise I can imagine scenarios involving changes to beta* without any effect on luminance.
Re: LHC beta* 3.5 metres
Indeed, I assume emittance stays the same, and the beams stay nicely focused exactly on each other. It is all in "accelerators for pedestrians", but I admit I have a hard time reading it.
The basic idea is that the particles in the beam do not all have the same sideways (transverse, they say) speed. When steering the beam, you have the choice between steering them very accurately to a point (so that the speeds differ by a lot), or a more "relaxed" steering where the speeds are more equal, but the beam is wider.
A wide beam with almost equal speeds has high beta*, where a narrow beam with lots of speeds difference (variance, they say) has a low beta*.
The basic idea is that the particles in the beam do not all have the same sideways (transverse, they say) speed. When steering the beam, you have the choice between steering them very accurately to a point (so that the speeds differ by a lot), or a more "relaxed" steering where the speeds are more equal, but the beam is wider.
A wide beam with almost equal speeds has high beta*, where a narrow beam with lots of speeds difference (variance, they say) has a low beta*.
- Tau