Comsol -leaderboard other pages

Topics

Earthquake in Japan

People around the world were deeply saddened to learn of the devastation caused by the major earthquake and the related tsunami on Friday 11 March in northern Japan. The 8.9-magnitude earthquake had its epicentre some 130 km off the eastern coast, and gave rise to unprecedented damage that extended far and wide.

The KEK high-energy physics laboratory and the Japan Proton Accelerator Research Complex (J-PARC) are the two particle accelerator facilities closest to the epicentre. In both case there were fortunately no reported injuries, nor was there any resulting radiation hazard. J-PARC lies on the eastern coast at Tokai and was the most heavily affected of the two facilities. Designed to withstand a tsunami of up to 10 m, on this occasion there was little effect. Although surrounding roads and some buildings were severely damaged, the accelerators at the facility appear to be in relatively good shape. KEK, at Tsukuba some 50 km north-east of Tokyo, suffered significant disruption to services and some damage to buildings and facilities.

The thoughts of the particle-physics community are with friends and colleagues at partner institutes in Japan, as well as those at laboratories and institutes elsewhere who have family and friends in Japan.

The latest information about KEK and J-PARC is available on the websites: http://j-parc.jp/index-e.html.

Rutherford – the road to the nuclear atom

CCrut1_04_11

After three degrees and two years of research at the forefront of the electrical technology of the day, Ernest Rutherford left New Zealand in 1895 on a Exhibition of 1851 Science Scholarship, which he could have taken anywhere in the world. He chose the Cavendish Laboratory at the University of Cambridge because its director, J J Thomson, had written one of the books about advanced electricity that Rutherford had used as a guide in his research. This put the right man in the right place at the right time.

Initially, Rutherford continued his work on the high-frequency magnetization of iron, developing his detector of fast-current pulses to measure the dielectric properties of materials at high frequencies and hold briefly the world record for the distance over which electric “wireless” waves were detected. “JJ” appreciated Rutherford’s experimental and analytical skills, so he invited Rutherford to participate in his own research into the nature of electrical conduction in gases at low pressures.

Within five months of Rutherford’s arrival at the Cavendish Laboratory, the age of new physics had commenced. Wilhelm Röntgen’s discovery of X-rays was swiftly followed by Henri Becquerel’s announcement on radioactivity in January 1896. Rutherford capitalized on the new forms of ionizing radiation in his attempts to learn what it was that was conducting electricity in an ionized gas. He soon changed to trying to understand radioactivity itself and with his research determined that two types of rays were emitted, which he called “alpha” and “beta” rays.

Thomson continued mainly studying the ionization of gases. Less than two years after Rutherford’s arrival he had carried out a definitive experiment demonstrating that cathode rays were objects a thousand times less massive than the lightest atom. The electronic age and the age of subatomic particles had begun, though mostly unheralded. Rutherford was a close observer of all of this and became an immediate convert to – and champion of – subatomic objects. Beta rays were quickly shown to be high-energy cathode rays, i.e. high-speed electrons.

For Rutherford, however, there was no future at Cambridge. After only three years there he – as a non-Cambridge graduate – was not yet eligible to apply for a six-year fellowship, so in 1898 he took the Macdonald Chair of Physics at McGill University in Canada. (Cambridge changed its rules the following year.) From then on, the world centre of radioactivity and particle research was wherever Rutherford was based.

At McGill, he showed that radioactivity was the spontaneous transmutation of certain atoms. For this he received the 1908 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. He also demonstrated that alpha particles were most likely helium atoms minus two electrons, and he dated the age of the Earth using radioactive techniques. In studying the nature of alpha particles and by being the first to deflect them in magnetic and electric fields in beautifully conceived experiments, Rutherford observed that a narrow beam of alphas in a vacuum became fuzzy either when air was introduced into the beam or when it was passed through a thin window of mica.

Return to England

With blossoming international scientific fame, Rutherford was regularly offered posts in America and elsewhere. He accepted none because McGill had superb laboratories and support for research, but he was wise enough to let the McGill authorities know of each approach; they increased his salary each time. However, Rutherford also wished to be nearer the centre of science, which was England, where he would have access to excellent research students and closer contact with notable scientists. His desire was noted. Arthur Schuster, being from a wealthy family, said he would step down from his chair at Manchester University provided that it was offered to Rutherford, and in 1907 Rutherford moved to Manchester

At Manchester University Rutherford first needed a method of recording individual alpha particles. He was an expert in ionized gases and had been told by John Townsend, an old friend from Cambridge, that one alpha particle ionized tens of thousands of atoms in a gas. So, with the assistant he had inherited, Hans Geiger, the Rutherford-Geiger tube was developed.

Many labs at the time were studying the scattering of beta particles from atoms. People at the Cavendish Laboratory claimed that the large scattering angles were the result of many consecutive, small-angle scatterings inside Thomson’s “plum pudding” model of the atom – the electrons being the fruit scattered throughout the solid sphere of positive electrification. Rutherford did not believe that the scattering was multiple, so once again he had to quantify science to undo the mistaken interpretations of others.

Geiger was given the task of measuring the relative numbers of alpha particles scattered as a function of angle over the few degrees that Rutherford had measured photographically at McGill. However, photography could not register single particles. Nor was the Rutherford-Geiger detector suitable for “quickly” measuring particles scattered over small angles; it was not sensitive to the direction of entry of the alpha particle and all that they observed was the “kick” of a spot of light from a galvanometer. Yet one of the reasons for developing the Rutherford-Geiger tube had been to determine whether or not the spinthariscope invented by William Crookes did, indeed, register one flash of light for every alpha particle that struck a fluorescing screen.

So, Geiger allowed monochromatic alpha particles in a vacuum tube to pass through a metal foil and onto a fluorescing plate that formed the end of the tube. A low-power microscope, looking at about a square millimetre of the plate, allowed the alphas to be counted. It was tiring work, waiting half an hour for the eye to dark adapt, then staring at the screen unblinking for a minute before resting the eye. It is said that Rutherford often cursed and left the counting to the younger Geiger.

Another of Geiger’s duties was to train students in radioactivity techniques and it was Rutherford’s policy to involve undergraduates in simple research. So, when Geiger reported to Rutherford that a young Mancunian undergraduate was ready to undertake an investigation, Rutherford set Ernest Marsden the task of seeing if he could observe alpha particles reflected from metal surfaces. This seemed unlikely, but, on the other hand, beta rays did reflect.

CCrut2_04_11

Marsden used the same counting system as Geiger, but had the alpha source on the same side of the metal as the fluorescing screen, with a lead shield to prevent alphas from going directly to the screen (figure 1). When he reported that he did see about 1 in 10,000 alphas scattered at large angles, Rutherford was astonished. As he later famously recalled: “It was as if a 15-inch naval shell had been fired at a piece of tissue paper and it bounced back.”

Geiger and Marsden published their measurements in the May 1909 issue of the Proceedings of the Royal Society, but the study laid fallow for more than a year, while Geiger continued obtaining more accurate results for his small-angle scattering from different materials and various thicknesses of foils. It is said that one day Rutherford went in to Geiger’s room to announce that he knew what the atom looked like. In January 1911 Rutherford was able to write to Arthur Eve in Canada: “Among other things, I have been interesting myself in devising a new atom to explain some of the scattering results. It looks promising and we are now comparing the theory with experiments.”

The nuclear atom

On 7 March 1911 Rutherford spoke at the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. Two other speakers followed him: one spoke on “Can the parts of a heavy body be supported by elastic reactions only?”, the other showed a cast of the “Gibraltar Skull”. A reporter from The Manchester Guardian was present and in the edition of 9 March (p3) succinctly paraphrased Rutherford: “It involved a penetration of the atomic structure, and might be expected to throw some light thereon.” Rutherford had asked Geiger to test experimentally his theory that the alpha scattering through large angles varied as cosec4(φ/2). He concluded that the central charge for gold was about 100 units, that for different materials the number was proportional to NA2 (where N was the number of atoms per unit volume and A the atomic weight), and that large-angle scattering (hyperbolic paths) was independent of whether the central charge is positive or negative. The reporter concluded: “…we were on the threshold of an enquiry which might lead to a more definite knowledge of atomic structure.”

Rutherford’s talk was published in the Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society (Rutherford 1911a) and more fully in the Philosophical Magazine for May (Rutherford 1911b). In the latter, he acknowledged Hantaro Nagaoka’s mathematical consideration of a “Saturnian” disc model of the atom (Nagoaka 1904), stating that essentially it made no difference to the scattering if the atom was a disc rather than a sphere.

The nuclear atom created no great stir among scientists and the public at the time. Three nights after his announcement, Rutherford addressed the Society of Industrial Chemists on “Radium”. The nuclear atom was not mentioned by Sir William Ramsay in his opening address to that year’s meeting of the British Association, although his reported claims of various discoveries caused Schuster – who had stepped down to attract Rutherford to Manchester – to write a letter to The Manchester Guardian stating which of those were discovered by Rutherford.

CCrut3_04_11

Rutherford’s busy life continued as normal: accepting a Corresponding Membership of the Munich Academy of Sciences; giving talks on all manner of subjects but the nuclear atom; refuting several claims of cold fusion that came from Ramsay’s laboratory; motoring in the car recently purchased with the money that had accompanied his Nobel prize; and being involved with many organizations, including being a vice-president of both the Manchester Society for Women’s Suffrage and the Manchester Branch of the Men’s League for Women’s Suffrage. (At Canterbury College in New Zealand, his landlady and future mother-in-law was one of the stalwarts who in 1893 had obtained the vote for women in New Zealand.)

Rutherford’s Nobel Prize in Chemistry of 1908 was too recent for physicists to nominate him again for a prize. It was to be 1922 before he was next nominated, unsuccessfully. There have been 27 Nobel prizes awarded for the discovery of, or theories linking, subatomic particles but there was never one for the nuclear atom. However there was a related one. At the end of 1911 Rutherford was the guest of honour at the Cavendish Annual Dinner, at which he was, not surprisingly, in fine form. The chairman, in introducing him, stated that Rutherford had another distinction: of all of the young physicists who had worked at the Cavendish, none could match him in swearing at apparatus.

Rutherford’s jovial laugh boomed round the room. A young Dane, visiting the Cavendish for a year to continue his work on electrons in metals, took an immense liking to the hearty New Zealander and resolved to move to Manchester to work with him. And so it was that Niels Bohr received the 1922 Nobel Prize in Physics for “his services in the investigation of the structure of atoms and of the radiation emanating from them”. He had placed the electrons in stable orbits around Rutherford’s nuclear atom.

How to Teach Quantum Physics to Your Dog

By Chad Orzel

Oneworld

Hardback: £7.99

CCboo2_03_11

When I first sat down with How to Teach Quantum Physics to Your Dog I was expecting a little light reading, something to pick up on Sunday after lunch. After all, if a dog could understand it, surely someone who has a PhD in physics wouldn’t find it too challenging? I was wrong.

Initially Chad Orzel’s analogies with squirrels and dog wavefunctions are both amusing and enlightening, but as the book moves on they don’t make his subject any clearer. By the time he has reached incoherence it is hard to see how anyone without a good grounding in physics would cope. But it is worth persevering.

Orzel’s style – especially his references to dog treats, bunnies and squirrels – get irritating at times, but despite this I found myself enjoying the book.

To quote Orzel, “quantum mechanics is often subtle and difficult to understand”. His book reminds us why that is, and overall he succeeds in making it a little clearer.

Field Computation for Accelerator Magnets: Analytical and Numerical Methods for Electromagnetic Design and Optimization

By Stephan Russenschuck

Wiley

Hardback: £165 €204 $275

CCboo3_03_11

The LHC is an amazing engineering achievement supported by a long programme of developments. CERN has been encouraging the development of technologies required to complete the project since the late 1960s (for example, the GESSS collaboration between the Saclay, Karlsruhe and Rutherford Laboratories). The quality of this work has been recognized internationally and it has contributed to spin-off activities, especially in the development of superconductors and in magnetic-field computation. With the completion of the LHC, and recognizing CERN’s desire to maintain the competences required to design accelerators, it is the right time to publish a book on the 
computer methods developed to design the LHC magnets.

In this book, Stephan Russenschuck provides an extremely useful and comprehensive description of magnetic-field computation for particle-accelerator magnets. It gives practical information and describes simple methods of analysis; in addition, it includes the abstract mathematics necessary to understand the finite element methods that were developed specifically for the design of the magnets for the LHC’s main ring. The final chapter examines optimization methods, particularly those implemented in the ROXIE software.

The successful design of the LHC magnets required highly accurate field-computation methods that were capable of modelling effects such as conductor and cable magnetization, which are uniquely important to accelerators. Even the LHC’s superconducting magnets quench, when a small resistive volume diffuses rapidly through the coil structure, driven forward by the heat it generates. This book’s chapters describe methods for modelling these effects, and demonstrate the accuracy of the results by comparison with measurements. The appendices include practical information about cryogenic material properties required for quench analysis.

This is a well presented book that makes excellent use of computer graphics to show results and explain phenomena. The graphics showing interstrand coupling currents in conductors and cables are particularly clear and help to make this chapter easy to understand.

Russenschuck has written a valuable addition to the library of those involved in the design of accelerator magnets.

Neutrino

By Frank Close

Oxford University Press

Hardback: £9.99

“Of all the things that make the universe, the commonest and weirdest are neutrinos.” Thus starts Frank Close’s latest book, Neutrino, a fascinating look into one of the most compelling and surprising scientific advances of the past century.

CCboo1_03_11

With its very basic title, a reader might imagine that this book, written by a leading particle theorist, would be an accurate but dry discourse on the eponymous particle. They would be surprised to find a moving book centred on the lives and work of three individuals: Ray Davis, John Bahcall and Bruno Pontecorvo. Neutrino manages to capture not only their impressive scientific contributions but something of their personalities and the times, through an excellent choice of quotes and stories from friends and colleagues. Consequently it is a book that is brief, scientifically accurate and full of drama.

The neutrino’s origins in the early 20th century studies of radiation, stellar astrophysics and neutrino oscillations are all carefully and clearly explained. This book fills in many of the gaps left by more cursory treatments, in particular the road from Wolfgang Pauli’s proposal of the neutrino to the development of the theory of beta decay by Enrico Fermi. But the pedagogic scope is wisely limited and the author does not shy away from leaving the scientific explanations to a footnote if they are incidental to the main storyline.

Neutrino also manages to capture the full spectrum of ideas, events and relationships that play a part in particle physics. The path between brilliant theoretical insight and triumphant experimental verification can be long and precarious. The prosaic (and often deciding) factors – the casual encounter with a colleague that sparks a new idea, incorrect theoretical assumptions identified and corrected, incremental advances in technology, site selection, the vagaries of funding decisions, politics, the role of industrial partners, and just plain luck – are accurately and entertainingly discussed.

That this book succeeds on a number of levels is a credit to the author’s deep knowledge of the physics and his meticulous research, as well as a concise and imaginative writing style. The omission of the LSND and MiniBooNE experiments is the only notable absence, though hardly surprising since the experimental situation here is far from resolved. If the signatures of antineutrino appearance from these experiments stand up to further investigation, neutrinos will have proved to be even weirder than we thought and will provide the author with rich material for a second edition.

Simon van der Meer 1925–2011

CCnew2_03_11

Many people in the high-energy physics community were deeply saddened to learn that Simon van der Meer passed away on 4 March. A true giant of modern particle physics, his contributions to accelerator science remain vital to the operation of accelerators such as the LHC.

Simon studied electrical engineering at Delft University. After a short time with Philips, he came to CERN in 1956 and remained with the laboratory until his retirement in 1990. He is best known for his invention of stochastic cooling, which made possible the conversion of CERN’s Super Proton Synchrotron to become the world’s first proton–antiproton collider. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics, jointly with Carlo Rubbia, in 1984 for the decisive contributions to this project, which led to the discovery of the W and Z particles.

Simon also developed the magnetic horn, which allows the production of focused beams of neutrinos, as well as the eponymous technique to measure luminosity in particle colliders: “van der Meer scans”.

A full tribute and obituary will appear in a later issue of CERN Courier.

AIDA makes EU-funded access to European facilities available

CCnew4_03_11

Access to six European test facilities is now available as part of a new EU project funded by the FP7 Capacities Programme. The Advanced European Infrastructures for Detectors at Accelerators (AIDA) project was launched in February and will last for four years.

Three of AIDA’s nine work packages are dedicated to transnational access. Under this scheme, researchers from EU member states (including FP7-associated countries) can apply for access to facilities at DESY, CERN, the Jožef Stefan Institute (JSI), the Université catholique de Louvain (UCL) and the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT). Access is offered free to the users. In addition, travel and subsistence costs can be covered by the EU funding. The majority of the user group must not be based in the same country as the facility (CERN, as an international organization, is not subject to this requirement). In addition, the research team should publish the results from the experiments carried out at the AIDA facility.

The primary criterion for selection of a proposal will be scientific merit but factors such as previous use of the facility and availability of similar facilities in the user’s home country will also be taken into account. User groups who have not accessed such facilities before are strongly encouraged to apply to this scheme.

At DESY there will be access to test beams of electrons with energies of up to 6 GeV. One of four different test areas can be used for the work. All areas have magnet control to select momentum and access to beam telescopes can be provided on request.

In the CERN East Area there will be access to several beam lines providing protons, neutrons or mixed particles with energies in the range 1–25 GeV. In the North Area, proton and electron beams of several hundred giga-electron-volts are available.

There is also access to three European irradiation facilities. At JSI in Slovenia, access to the Triga-Mark-III reactor will provide neutron irradiation facilities. At UCL in Belgium access to deuterons and protons will be available. Protons for irradiation will also be available at KIT in Germany.

Rare isotope facility is set for 2020

CCnew11_03_11

The Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) Project, which was awarded two years ago to Michigan State University by the US Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) is making significant progress towards start-up in 2020. An important milestone was passed in September 2010 when DOE-SC approved the preferred alternative design in Critical Decision-1 with an associated cost up to $614.50 million and a schedule range from the autumn of fiscal year 2018 to spring of 2020.

When FRIB becomes operational, it will be a new DOE national user facility for nuclear science, funded by the DOE-SC Office of Nuclear Physics and operated by Michigan State University. FRIB will provide intense beams of rare isotopes – short-lived nuclei not normally found on Earth. The main focus of FRIB will be to produce such isotopes, study their properties and use them in applications to address national needs. FRIB will provide researchers with the technical capabilities not only to investigate rare isotopes, but also to put this knowledge to use in various applications, for example in materials science, nuclear medicine and the fundamental understanding of nuclear material important to stewardship of nuclear-weapons stockpiles.

An optimization from the layout initially proposed for FRIB to the preferred alternative design moves the linac from a straight line extending to the northeast through Michigan State University’s campus to a paperclip-like configuration next to the existing structure at the National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory (NSCL). The linac will have more than 344 superconducting RF cavities in an approximately 170 m-long tunnel about 12 m underground and will accelerate stable nuclei to kinetic energies of a minimum of 200 MeV/nucleon for all ions, with beam power up to 400 kW. (Energies range from 200 MeV/nucleon for uranium to above 600 MeV for protons.)

The Critical Decision (CD)-2 review to approve the performance baseline is planned for spring 2012 and the CD-3 review to approve the start of construction is planned for 2013. The selected architect/engineering firm and FRIB construction manager are exploring options to advance civil construction to the summer of 2012.

Recent meetings between NSCL and FRIB User Groups have put a merger in the works, expected to be initiated this year with the final merger for more than 800 members and functions by the end of the year or early in 2012.

• For more information on the FRIB project, see www.frib.msu.edu. For more about the FRIB User Group, see www.fribusers.org.

Tevatron to shut down after 26 historic years

CCnew2_02_11

The final particles will collide in Fermilab’s Tevatron this September at the end of the machine’s historic 26-year run. The Tevatron, the world’s largest proton–antiproton collider, is best known for its role in the discovery in 1995 of the top quark, the heaviest elementary particle known to exist.

The Tevatron has out-performed expectations, achieving record-breaking levels of luminosity. Fermilab had planned to shut down the collider in the autumn of 2011 but in August 2010 the laboratory’s international Physics Advisory Committee endorsed an alternative idea: extend the run of the Tevatron through into 2014. The US government’s advisory panel on high-energy physics agreed with the committee’s recommendation, provided that US funding agencies could increase annual support for the field by about $35 million for four years. This would have maintained the laboratory’s ability to continue with its variety of other high-energy physics experiments, some of them being in their critical first stages.

However, this was not to be. In January, Bill Brinkman, director of the US Office of Science, announced that the agency had not located the additional funds required to extend the Tevatron’s operations. The decision disappointed Tevatron physicists, but it also made more secure funding for the other experiments that will carry Fermilab into the future.

Following the closure of the Tevatron, Fermilab will continue on course with a world-leading scientific programme, addressing the central questions of 21st century particle-physics on three frontiers: the energy frontier, the intensity frontier and the cosmic frontier. At the energy frontier, the laboratory will continue its close collaboration with CERN and the international LHC community and will also pursue R&D for future accelerators. At the intensity frontier, Fermilab already operates the highest-intensity neutrino beam in the world and researchers there are about to begin taking data with the laboratory’s largest neutrino detector yet. At the cosmic frontier, Fermilab scientists will continue the search for dark matter and dark energy.

CERN launches AIDA project

A new, 4-year project co-funded by the European Union FP7 Research Infrastructures programme and worth €26 million began on 1 February. The AIDA project (Advanced European Infrastructures for Detectors at Accelerators) will develop detector infrastructures for future particle-physics experiments in line with the European Strategy for Particle Physics.

The project, which is co-ordinated by CERN, has more than 80 institutes and laboratories involved either as beneficiaries or as associate partners, thus ensuring that the whole European particle detector community is represented. The project will receive a contribution of €8 million from the European Commission.

The particle detectors developed in the AIDA project will be used in a planned upgrade to the LHC; at the proposed International Linear Collider, which will study the Standard Model of physics and beyond with higher precision; Super-B factories, which aim to understand the matter–antimatter asymmetry in the universe; and neutrino facilities.

The AIDA project is divided into three main activities: networking, joint research and transnational access. The networking activity will study promising new technologies, such as 3D detectors and vital electronics, as well as specifying technological needs for the future. Interactions with appropriate industrial partners will also be planned.

The joint research activity will see many of the beneficiary institutes working together to improve beam lines that already exist to test particle detectors. The equipment and technology needed to produce these detectors will also be upgraded.

The transnational access activity will see access to beam lines for testing particle detectors at CERN, DESY and irradiation facilities across Europe opened up to new users. Experts in this area can contribute to the field through their findings made at these facilities.

• For details about the project and the full list of participants, see http://cern.ch/aida.

bright-rec iop pub iop-science physcis connect