Smaller and cheaper particle accelerators?

Smaller and cheaper particle accelerators?
The figure shows images generated using data from a particle-in-cell simulation of a two bunch PWFA experiment. The electron bunches are moving from the top left towards the bottom right. The image shows isosurfaces of electron density (in bright green) and the parallel electric fields (in blue and red). The beam electrons are shown as dots and the dot colors represent the energy of the beam electrons. The simulations were done using the UCLA computer code called QuickPIC and the visualization was done using VisIt. Results from the experiment as well as simulation results were published in Nature, (Litos et al, Nature, vol. 515, pp. 512-515). Credit: This image was generated by Weiming An and Frank S. Tsung using VisIt. The simulation was performed on Blue Waters by Weiming An using the UCLA particle-in-cell code QuickPIC

Traditionally, particle accelerators have relied on electric fields generated by radio waves to drive electrons and other particles close to the speed of light. But in radio-frequency machines there is an upper limit on the electric field before the walls of the accelerator "break down," causing it to not perform properly, and leading to equipment damage.

In recent years, however, scientists experimenting with so-called "plasma wakefields" have found that accelerating electrons on waves of plasma, or ionized gas, is not only more efficient, but also allows for the use of an electric field a thousand or more times higher than those of a conventional accelerator.

And most importantly, the technique, where electrons gain energy by "surfing" on a wave of electrons within the ionized gas, raises the potential for a new generation of smaller and less expensive .

"The big picture application is a future physics collider," says Warren Mori, a professor of physics, astronomy and electrical engineering at University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), who has been working on this project. "Typically, these cost tens of billions of dollars to build. The motivation is to try to develop a technology that would reduce the size and the cost of the next collider."

The National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded scientist and his collaborators believe the next generation of smaller and cheaper accelerators could enhance their value, expanding their use in medicine, national security, materials science, industry and high-energy physics research.

"Accelerators are also used for sources of radiation. When a high energy particle wiggles up and down, it generates X-rays, so you could also use smaller accelerators to make smaller radiation sources to probe a container to see whether there is nuclear material inside, or to probe biological samples," Mori says. "Short bursts of X-rays are currently being used to watch chemical bonds form and to study the inner structure of proteins, and viruses."

Just as important, albeit on a more abstract level, "the goal of the future of high-energy physics is to understand the fundamental particles of matter," he says. "To have the field continue, we need these expensive, large, and complex tools for discovery."

NSF has supported basic research in a series of grants in recent years totaling $4 million, including computational resources. The Department of Energy (DOE) has provided the bulk of the funding for experimental facilities and experiments, and has contributed to theory and simulations support.

"Mori's work is the perfect example of an innovative approach to advancing the science and technology frontiers that can come about when the deep understanding of fundamental laws of nature, of the collective behavior of charged particles that we call a plasma, is combined with state-of-the-art numerical modeling algorithms and simulation tools," says Vyacheslav (Slava) Lukin, program director in NSF's physics division.

Using DOE's SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, the scientists from SLAC and UCLA increased clusters of electrons to energies 400 to 500 times higher than what they could reach traveling the same distance in a conventional accelerator. Equally important, the energy transfer was much more efficient than that of earlier experiments, a first to show this combination of energy and efficiency using "plasma wakefields."

In the experiments, the scientists sent pairs of electron bunches containing 5 billion to 6 billion electrons each into a laser-generated column of plasma inside an oven of hot lithium gas. The first bunch in each pair was the "drive" bunch; it blasted all the away from the lithium atoms, leaving the positively charged lithium nuclei behind, a configuration known as the "blowout regime." The blasted electrons then fell back in behind the second bunch of electrons, known as the "trailing" bunch to form a "plasma wake" that thrust the trailer electrons to higher energy.

While earlier experiments had demonstrated high-field acceleration in plasma wakes, the SLAC/UCLA team was the first to demonstrate simultaneously high efficiency and high accelerating fields using a drive and trailer bunch combination in the strong "blowout" regime. Furthermore, the accelerated ended up with a relatively small energy spread.

"Because it's a plasma, there is no breakdown field limit," Mori says. "The medium itself is fully ionized, so you don't have to worry about breakdown. Therefore, the in a plasma device can be pushed to a thousand or more times higher amplitude than that in a conventional accelerator."

Chandrashekhar Joshi, UCLA professor of electrical engineering, led the team that developed the plasma source used in the experiment. Joshi, the director of the Neptune Facility for Advanced Accelerator Research at UCLA is the UCLA principal investigator for this research and is a long-time collaborator with the SLAC group. The team also is made up of SLAC accelerator physicists, including Mike Litos and Mark Hogan; Mori leads the group that developed the computer simulations used in the experiments. Their findings appeared last fall in the journal Nature.

"The near term goal of this research is to produce compact accelerators for use in universities and industry, while a longer term goal remains developing a high energy collider operating at the energy frontier of ," Mori says.


Explore further

Physicists hit milestone in accelerating particles with plasma

Citation: Smaller and cheaper particle accelerators? (2015, April 22) retrieved 23 May 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2015-04-smaller-cheaper-particle.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
83 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments


Apr 22, 2015
Nope. It is incredibly clumsy. Even commercial electron beams are clumsy, since they need great acceleration potentials. My first job out of the service was with Raychem as an Industrial Electrician and Beam Tech. We made our own process equipment, and used electron beams for radiation chemistry. Our 500 kV beams were made by HVE, the one million and two-million Volt machines were GE, and the Three-million Volt unit was Radiation Dynamics, Inc.

When I would do Beam Check in the morning, going around to the different buildings in different towns, for each of the ten beams, It would be a kick. If you put your safety glasses in even the one million-Volt beams, they would glow, then be darkened, "smoked", so we could use them as shades outside. Annealing them at a few hundred degrees would clear them up again.

If otto wants to know anything about linear accelerators, and how they are used in industry, let me know.

Apr 22, 2015
Our High Voltage Engineering beams, at 500,000 Volts could fit on a factory floor. But the others took three stories of concrete beam cell. The air glowed blue when they were used, and because of the secondary X-rays, operations were viewed through a water-filled View Tube about six feet long and 30 inches or more in diameter.

Apr 22, 2015
The accelerator tube itself was ten feet long on the one and two-million -Volt beams, and was a glass fixture featuring a series of coaxial tubes acting as accelerating grids. The tube fit within the high-voltage transformer which was a series of electronic voltage doublers stacked upon each other, each with a tap to an accelerating electrode. With multiple taps along the length of the beam tube within the transformer, the difference between the cathode and the work was two million volts.

Just before exiting the Beam Tube through a "window" of titanium foil, it was "swept and scanned" into a coverage area.

Electrons do not travel far in air, nor do they cohere, but spread, since they repel each other. Not a good weapon.

Apr 23, 2015
LOL, gkam worked on accelerators, too. Gee, how many degrees do you claim to have? Any more in "research engineering?" Snicker.

Apr 23, 2015
Sorry, Da S, but it is true. What did you folk do with your lives? Only two degrees, as you would recognize them, a BS in Industrial Technology, and an MS in Environmental Management, but I already told you folk that. Meanwhile, the rest of you hide behind pseudonyms.

Want to know what we did with all that stuff? I also took care of our industrial laser, a 250-Watt continuous beam in the infrared.

I love it. Challenge me. Let me educate you.

Where's otto hiding?

Apr 23, 2015
Nope. It is incredibly clumsy... My first job out of the service was with Raychem as an Industrial Electrician and Beam Tech. We made our own process equipment...
Huh. So I guess you never learned that electron beams need a cathode and an anode, which is why they are not suitable as weapons.

Please keep your worthless 'experience' and your empty lying bullshit to yourself ok?
gkam worked on accelerators too
Its becoming clear that gkam has created an entire life in his head.

There was a story on 60 Minutes last week about a guy who has created a whole college football team entirely in his head. He has maintained this elaborate construct for decades, complete with games, individual players with histories and personalities, staff, championships, etcetc.

Difference between gkam and this guy is that he knows his team is a fake. And he certainly wouldn't claim it on an application for a coaching position.

Uh gkam, ever been a coach? Of course you have.

Apr 23, 2015
"There was a story on 60 Minutes last week, . . "

Hilarious. Let's talk specifics, shall we? Did you look up the GE 2000 KVP Electron Beam? Did you know the electrons screaming through the window are bigger than the ones which left the cathode?

And look into the differences between work accelerated and self-accelerated beams, to clear up your confusion about cathode and anode.

To quote your hero, . . "Bring 'em on!", otto. I have you again, don't I?

Apr 23, 2015
One thing that's obvious is that, if all these jobs are real, gkam was never able to keep most of them longer than 6 months, or about long enough for his employers to realize that he was mostly bullshit. And he ended up as a 'consultant', the refuge of a washout.

And now he's posting on a science website as an 'expert' and lying to himself that people here would actually take his claims of 'experience' as sufficient reason to accept his bullshit without question.

He IS 70 years old you know.

Apr 23, 2015
What about the HVE beam? Have any genuine questions about what we did with them? I am just starting, otto, I did more than this. And it is real.

You did not ask why we had to invent our own process equipment. Aren't you curious? Any real techie would be very interested in it.

Yup, I am 70, and did this starting in 1969, after I came home from the War of My Generation, the one many hid from.

Apr 23, 2015
Unable to debate electron beams/linear accelerators or what we did with them, otto will just abandon this thread, and attack me somewhere else, . . until I straighten him out again.

Apr 23, 2015
What about the HVE beam? Have any genuine questions about what we did with them? I am just starting, otto, I did more than this. And it is real
What you did with them during the 6 months you were there? Not much I would assume. Not much time at all to ask the real engineers how they worked or how they were designed.

But you would need a solid background as an engineer to understand these things...
My first job out of the service was with Raychem as an Industrial Electrician and Beam Tech
... which you obviously did not have.

So stop pretending you know anything about them. Tech. You weren't qualified then and you're certainly not qualified now.

Apr 23, 2015
Only two degrees, as you would recognize them, a BS in Industrial Technology, and an MS in Environmental Management
-neither of which has anything whatsoever to do with particle beams you fucking moron. Why do you think people here would fall for such crap? Are you really THAT stupid?

Apr 23, 2015
otto thinks you need an Electron Beam Degree from an accredited university to work on Industrial beams? Ha, ha, ha, ha!

Really, otto, have you done ANYTHING in the real world?

Let's talk about the beams, shall we?

Or will you try to change the topic again, or just go hide?

Apr 23, 2015
"-neither of which has anything whatsoever to do with particle beams you fucking moron. "
-----------------------------------------------------
Yes, it does, silly. My Research project and report for the Industrial Tech degree was on Electron Beam Generators for Industrial Uses, since I was already a tech.

I want to teach otto about radiation chemistry, and what we did at Raychem, but he ran away.

Apr 23, 2015
"-neither of which has anything whatsoever to do with particle beams you fucking moron. "
-----------------------------------------------------
Yes, it does, silly. My Research project and report for the Industrial Tech degree was on Electron Beam Generators for Industrial Uses, since I was already a tech.

I want to teach otto about radiation chemistry, and what we did at Raychem, but he ran away.
Yeah liars give me heartburn. Which is what you most obviously are.
otto thinks you need an Electron Beam Degree from an accredited university to work on Industrial beams? Ha, ha, ha, ha!
Gkam thinks that auto mechanics know how to design cars. Ha, ha, ha! Gkam thinks that filling out validation forms is how to learn nuclear physics. Ha,ha,ha! Gkam thinks that standing in a nuclear reactor facility is also a way to do this. Ha, ha, ha!

Apr 23, 2015
I want to teach otto about radiation chemistry
No wait, I know this one... This is where you will insist that HIGH ENERGY alpha cant penetrate skin, and that fallout is the MAIN cause of lung cancer.

And how H2 explosions in the ruins of a reactor can cause prompt criticalities in molten Pu even though it is full of all sorts of crud, and throw vessel parts 130km... without making a crater.

And how his quorum of (imaginary?) learned nuclear experts told him this is obviously the case, even though ALL of them missed the fact that the article they all misread was talking about windborne DUST and not projectiles.

And how you know these things because you earned an MS in Industrial Hygiene or something similar.

WHAT an ASSHOLE you are.

Apr 23, 2015
"WHAT an ASSHOLE you are."
--------------------------------
Of course that's all you see, look where your nose is.

Hey, let's stop the adolescent screaming across the playground, and I'll tell you how we made the wire for American spacecraft, heat-shrinkable metals and plastics.

Do you know about cross-polymerization?

It is hilarious to have you challenge me on things many of us really did, otto. And the fact you could not tell a kilowatt from a krytron is also hilarious. And the Specific Heat of Water, (with caps)???

Ask me what production equipment we made ourselves. Ask me about the Banbury, twin-screw extruders, and large expanders. Don't just keep up the same tired and discredited babble, . . wake up!

I am really glad you came around, Toots, . . . since I don't have Nixon to kick around any more, I was getting lonely.

Don't'cha want to ask what was under the operating beams, as the air glowed blue?

Apr 23, 2015
otto ran away, but radiation is used to crosslink the polymers in plastics, making then elastic at melting temperatures. We extruded the tubing, sent it under the beams to crosslink it, then ran it through an expander which doubled the diameter, and was immediately cooled (frozen), in that shape.

When you buy it and re-heat it, it returns to its original size. See, otto, stick with me, and learn how the world works.

Apr 24, 2015
otto ran away, but radiation is used to crosslink the polymers in plastics, making then elastic at melting temperatures. We extruded the tubing, sent it under the beams to crosslink it, then ran it through an expander which doubled the diameter, and was immediately cooled (frozen), in that shape.

When you buy it and re-heat it, it returns to its original size. See, otto, stick with me, and learn how the world works.
But you're a mechanic who could never hold a job because of his insanely inflated opinion of himself. What could I possibly learn from you?

What I've already learned is that sickos like you too often bullshit themselves into positions of influence and make it worse for the people in this world who truly care about facts. And so exposing you is a way of helping others to recognize bullshit when they see it.

Apr 24, 2015
otto, you MUST have had SOME kind of life. What did you do?

We know what you did NOT do, don't we? Almost everything.

Now, don't be to afraid to ask real questions, such as what were the acceleration potentials of the individual rings? What frequency and voltage did the GE 2000 KVP beam run on? How could the electrons get bigger? Lot's of intelligent questions you could ask to trip me up, but you do not even know enough to do that, so you go into that silly and entertaining self-defining rant.

I love it. It gives me an excuse to tell you my life, the one you never had.

Apr 24, 2015
I wonder if otto is interested in how we expanded and controlled the increase in size of the heat-shrink products. Would he understand the terms?

How can beaming the wire help our spacecraft? Did we sell the aircraft wire for the Concorde?

Apr 24, 2015
otto, you MUST have had SOME kind of life. What did you do?
I told you. I learned how to recognize bullshit when I see it, like The notion that auto mechanics know how to design cars. Ha, ha, ha! Or that that filling out validation forms is how to learn nuclear physics. Ha,ha,ha! Or that standing in a nuclear reactor facility is also a way to do this. Ha, ha, ha!
I love it. It gives me an excuse to tell you my life, the one you never had
Hopeless braggarts and rheumy old men don't need an excuse to do this. That's why they won't let you in the VFW any more isn't it? Or why all the old guys get up and leave when you walk into macdonalds in the morning, right?

Your life is over George. No one left to consult. No PowerPoint created by others left to deliver. No more standing in a nuke plant and pretending you know how it works. Soon your bullshit will only be pushing up flowers.

Ha, ha, ha!

Apr 24, 2015
Gosh, otto, let's talk about the topic in this thread. What is your education or experience with electron beam generators or other linear accelerators? Let's talk about the differences.

How about the relativistic nature of the materials screaming out of the "window"?

Apr 24, 2015
"Your life is over George. "
----------------------------------------------------------------

I love it. Some goober on the East coast, who has done nothing tells me it is all over. Not yet, I am teaching electricity, electronics, integration, and robotics to the son of a friend of mine. I may put together another Power Quality seminar for the power companies, . .

What have you done, . . .?

otto, I left another post, at "holistic soils". Let's discuss it.

No character assassination, just the facts of the issue, okay?

Apr 24, 2015
What is your education or experience with electron beam generators or other linear accelerators? Let's talk about the differences
Whats yours?
My first job out of the service was with Raychem as an Industrial Electrician and Beam Tech
oh... right.

Sorry but this is the internet where one can find all sorts of articles and papers by legitimate, verifiable experts.

WHY would anybody want to rely instead on the opinions of a verified bullshit artiste like yourself??
I am teaching electricity, electronics, integration, and robotics to the son of a friend of mine
... and bullshit. Dont forget bullshit george. His father really should spend some money and get him a real education. There oughta be a law-

Apr 24, 2015
No character assassination, just the facts of the issue, okay?
Okay. The FACTS of the issue are, that your 'experience' makes you think you can make up BULLSHIT like HIGH ENERGY alpha cant penetrate skin, or how H2 explosions in the ruins of a reactor can cause prompt criticalities in molten Pu even though it is full of all sorts of crud, and throw vessel parts 130km... without making a crater.

Or how your quorum of (imaginary?) learned nuclear experts told you this is obviously the case, even though ALL of them missed the fact that the article they all misread was talking about windborne DUST and not projectiles.

Or that fallout is the MAIN cause of lung cancer.

And when called on this, your 'experience' makes you think you can bullshit your way out of it. Sadly, youve probably gotten away with this throughout your life which is why youre so oblivious.

ANY TIME you post anything about your backround, I will be reposting this bullshit for all to see.

Apr 24, 2015
"ANY TIME you post anything about your background, I will be reposting this bullshit for all to see." - Otto

That's really too bad Otto, because many people are weary of seeing it and would rather ignore you both and interact with more rational readers.


Apr 24, 2015
Estevan, I think it's important to note when people lie about their backgrounds; it indicates a certain, shall we say, acquaintance with dishonesty, that tends to impeach claims that user makes.

gkam has lied multiple different ways about its background, and seems not to be particularly scrupulous about the truth. This tends to prejudice other users against it. Arguments that go to credibility or honesty are admitted in courts of law; I believe they are cogent in other fora as well, and I apply them. My experience with people who engage in these types of behaviors tends to imply that you should too.

Otto is no associate of mine; in fact I have it on ignore. But when data that tend to compromise a user's credibility are actually sourced from another user, and merely repeated by Otto, applying a credibility criterion to Otto is logically incorrect. It should be applied to the original source.

gkam's behavior after the original accusation was highly revealing. Just sayin'.

Apr 24, 2015
"gkam has lied multiple different ways about its background, "
=========================

Okay, Big Mouth, show me. I get tired of lightweight one-topic "experts" thinking that with wiki they are "smart". Sorry, you do not cut it. I actually did those things, worked in those fields, earned those degrees, taught those classes, solved those problems. You can only deprecate my postings based on personal; pique, typical of one who works by himself.

You prove I lied, or give me an apology. I am George Kamburoff. Look me up, coward, and let's go at it.

I want an APOLOGY.

Apr 24, 2015
Where are you, Schneibbb???

Apr 24, 2015
You posted the same thing on Twitter as you posted here, and the Twitter poster's profile is that of a 15-year-old girl.

There's really no place to hide here.

Apr 24, 2015
@ Da Schneib - We are in agreement then. My particular peeve is the repeated and incessant tin-hat manifesto that Otto uses on his "hated person of the month". He is constantly on someones' case for trivial crap, and treats the site as if he were its personal sheriff.

The unsupported brags and or info from gkam are getting old also.
I know all about Siamese cats for I was King of Siam!
I am not particularly trusting of someone who never uses a source at all.

@ gkam - Wiki is a good enough source for general information. It is not perfect , and it won't support very recent changes in scientific information, but if you want to know a particular fact it is useful. Your tone toward others has changed greatly since you started commenting on this site.
Do you really want to sound like Otto?

It is a science comments section, not a life experience forum. Support your opinions or be ridiculed. Peace.

Apr 24, 2015
+5. I think we agree on all the important points, Estevan.

Apr 24, 2015
Estavan, I told you who I am. Look me up. Not one thing was unsupported. If you want to take sides, You have to go back and read everything. I am who I am, and who are you?

What is it with you who think you own this site? I gave you my opinion based on genuine experience, but it is not in wiki.

Wiki is good, but it does not give you sufficient information or education to understand the great picture, so you get Eikka telling us how pools lose an inch of water. You get otto not understanding a fifteen-degree delta-T is a temperature rise of fifteen degrees!

If you want to challenge me, do it, but stop your pathetic character assassination, where you only demonstrate yours to the rest of us. Call me on my experience,. Ask some questions. You can't.

"Agree on important points", like personal ego?


Apr 24, 2015
"I know all about Siamese cats for I was King of Siam!"
--------------------------------------
There are entire layers of irony in these discussions. Yes, I do know Siamese cats because I Iived in "Siam". The Korat Plateau is home of the Korat Cat, a special breed we had there. They center around Nahkon Ratchasima, where I lived for a year, while we fought the Commies.

What were you doing in 1968?

Apr 24, 2015
@ gkam - Once again, you miss the point. It is a science comments section, not a life experience forum. Support your opinions or be ridiculed.

Your word is not enough. Acting as a know-it-all requires some real factual second source verification of claims . That's Internet rule #42. I invented the internet, so I should know.

It doesn't matter who you are here. Use credible sources to back up claims or suffer ridicule and disbelief of expertise. Real expertise on a subject can be verified by other sources.

My opinion of you is my own and is valid as such. It is neither assassination nor pathetic.
It is also not totally negative.
Giving out personal information on this forum is a really bad idea, I have already had Otto looking for my business...

If you find yourself arguing with everyone, perhaps it it not the fault of everyone.
Have a pleasant day.


Apr 24, 2015
In 1968 I was hoping my dad would live through the Tet offensive.

Apr 24, 2015
" Real expertise on a subject can be verified by other sources. :"
-------------------------------------

What do you want? You have my name, and I identified my groups, sent out pdfs to Stumpy, and directed you to sites with my picture on them. You are just looking for an excuse for boorish behavior.

"Giving out personal information on this forum is a really bad idea, I have already had Otto looking for my business..."

That's what you get with people like otto with some kind of personality problem. I thought this would be a site for professionals, but see it is a site for schoolgirlish cliques and outings of undesirables, or something equally silly.

Let's clean it up, treat each other as real people, and have an intelligent forum.

ps - "Support your opinions or be ridiculed."

I did. Look up the 553d Recon Wing at Korat Royal Thai Air Force Base, from where the CIA ran dope in the Vietnam War.

Apr 24, 2015
gkam - Other sources means other sources besides you.

Example: I said I invented the internet. I give you my name, address ss# cell #, shoe size and date of birth.
Does this support the idea that I invented the internet?


Apr 24, 2015
Go to the group of who actually bugged Vietnam with sensors, and you can find my name and picture. Want to see the front page of Desert Wings, the base newspaper for the Air Force Flight Test Center with my picture on it, too? I can send it. Stop looking for excuses.

Do people you work with lie to you? Where the heck do you work, if you cannot take the word of a professional, . . . one who offers references?

It is a game, and it has to stop here.

Apr 24, 2015
Real expertise on a subject can be verified by other sources.
Other *reliable* sources. You're on the right track, Estevan. I usually double-source everything.

Apr 25, 2015
gkam - Excuses for what? I been reasonable and patient with you.
I have explained that a person needs to have a second source to back up opinions or facts stated on this forum. Trust but verify.

Some people have proven themselves to be reasonable and educated enough to have their word taken on a subject. There are many such people here on Physorg. The catch is: to be taken seriously you need to know what you are talking about, AND ABLE TO PROVE IT.

You must prove your points, not who you are.

I probably have employees that lie, but we are all humans, the totally honest person is rare.
I own a CNC manufacturing company and I trust the people I work with. Their trust is earned and kept by the daily and long term interactions I have with them.

There are many smart people in the comments section, we would both do well to see what they have to say, instead of nattering about ourselves or each other.


Apr 25, 2015
It is a game, and it has to stop here.
Then stop lying, Gracie. Source evidence for your claims, not emotional arguments like "I was in Vietnam, you must be a traitor if you don't believe me" or pretending you were some sort of "research engineer" when you can't even name the degree you supposedly got. And stop lying after you got busted on Twitter. Did you think no one would find out? Really?

I get trusted not because of who I claim to be, but because I can source arguments from reliable well-known sites and because when I argue, my arguments hang together, and agree with the data from those reliable well-known sites. I don't ask anyone to take me on trust. Occasionally I repeat a claim from an old source, and it turns out it's been superseded; when that happens, I admit it, grab a link for the new source, and move on. But I don't accept a source that's not as good as the one(s) I already have. Like you for example.

There just isn't anywhere to hide here, Gracie.

Apr 25, 2015
Weasel words!! From snipers who hide behind pseudonyms.

The snipers change their tune to suit their needs. You are kids, no matter the age, like little girls deciding who is in or out, thinking this is your little playground.

You all like to sound like real pros, but are little girls here, with your wiki, thinking you can know it all. You can't and you don't.

"I probably have employees that lie, but we are all humans, the totally honest person is rare."
---------------------------
Well that says it, doesn't it? You admit you are all liars. I am not and never was. In many fields lying is death. Where do you goobers work, . . McDonalds?

Go hide behind a phony name, you Cowards.


Apr 25, 2015
We have to clean up this forum. Yeah, some of you may have to go back to writing on bathroom walls, but it has to be professionalized. We can't have in a science site cowardly snipers screaming "LIAR!", and "BULLSHIT!" in all caps.

When I tell about the real world, infields you have only read about, you instantly attack, in total ignorance of the field, because you thought wiki said something else. Do you act like that at work?

What happened to you people? You cannot be silly shits like this in person, nobody would stand for it. But the anonymity of the internet brings out real character, or the parts of you hidden in daily dealings where you are held to what you bleat and act on.

It has to change, and to do it means real names. So all of the cowards will leave and we will have a decent forum.

Apr 25, 2015
I just read some of the silly posts above and found this:" And stop lying after you got busted on Twitter. Did you think no one would find out? Really? "
------------------------------------

I am not on twitter. Or Facebook, or other sites for girls. What are you talking about?

And I was a Research Engineer. Do you think that is a field with a special degree, and not a title for a seasoned engineer or technician? My BS is in Industrial Technology, and my Master of Science is in Environmental Management with an emphasis on energy and the environment. What is your MS in?

Be nice, and I'll teach you how to integrate systems for synergy.

Apr 25, 2015
It is time for real names in this forum. Some folk have demonstrated they are not to be trusted with anonymity.

Apr 25, 2015
gkam - Since you already call people names here, (little girls, snipers, cowards, silly shits) how would your behavior change if you knew us personally?

Would you use even more personal attacks? Send mail to our houses? Trash our Facebook pages? Email attack for not agreeing with the magnificence which you hold yourself to be?

There is good and proven reason for pseudonyms, it is a part of modern life.
Congrats for being the only totally honest person in the world. Diogenes would be proud.

If you wish to complain use the contact at the bottom of the page.


Apr 25, 2015
@Estevan57
Congrats for being the only totally honest person in the world. Diogenes would be proud.

And what about Immanuel Kant!

I am sure that Karl Friedrich Hieronymus was a very honest man and we should be proud to have one of his disciple right here on Physorg.

Apr 25, 2015
Mercy estevan is sure peeping a lot lately.

Dont you remember how you get esai? Pretty soon youll be disclosing the names of your clients again, as well as the location of the only cnc shop in oregon that makes lower receivers for AR15s. And quality sex toys for discerning affixionaddos.

You know like you did in this thread?
http://phys.org/n...ers.html

-I swear some people dont give a shit about anyone but themselves. Especially when it comes to love. Right sweety?

But maybe gkam is right. Whats your name?

Apr 25, 2015
And I was a Research Engineer. Do you think that is a field with a special degree, and not a title for a seasoned engineer or technician? My BS is in Industrial Technology, and my Master of Science is in Environmental Management with an emphasis on energy and the environment. What is your MS in?
Well this is different from when you said you were MS in both. Did you say you taught yourself what you needed to know about beams in order to write your thesis? That doesnt sound right.

But it IS obvious you do have some formal training in BS. Where was it that you learned all those cool slogans? Back at the commune? Or were you Senior Attire Engineer at the local headshop?

Apr 25, 2015
Otto - Thank you.
Your vulgar lies, comments, and desire for my name and address should convince anyone of the need to remain anonymous on this forum.

You're sounding pretty stupid lately, must be the end of the month and the meds running' low.
Have a good day my hate-monkey.

Apr 26, 2015
And I was a Research Engineer. Do you think that is a field with a special degree, and not a title for a seasoned engineer or technician? My BS is in Industrial Technology, and my Master of Science is in Environmental Management with an emphasis on energy and the environment.
Neither of which has jack diddly squat to do with nuclear physics or nuclear engineering.

Meanwhile, Environmental Management? So, how long has a degree in that been available? Certainly not as long ago as TMI.

So much for your lie about doing reviews of nuclear engineering while TMI was going on.

Lying again, Gracie. One way or the other. And I really don't care which.

Tip o'th hat to Otto; even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Apr 26, 2015
Did a search. "Environmental management" was not a degree, certainly not a Master's degree, in 1979, the year of the Three Mile Island accident. The oldest program I could find was USF, which *started* the program in 1979, implying the first graduates would have been in 1985. Harvard has only offered it as a Certification, not a Master's degree, and only since 2001.

Just for the record.

Your vulgar lies, comments, and desire for my name and address should convince anyone of the need to remain anonymous on this forum.
No joke at all, Estevan. There are some really vicious trolls among the climate deniers, for starters.

Apr 26, 2015
Da Schneib do you want to see my diploma? Hmmmm? And do you think all degrees are four-year degrees? Hmmmmm?

You failed, just like otto. I told you all about me, while you and the other cowards hide behind pseudonyms.

And, yes it is a valid Master of Science, not some "certificate", like you wish. What do you have? Show me. I'll send you my email address if you send me your diploma copy.

Look kids, I told you I am real, as you hide. When are you going to GROW UP??

And, who are you. Anyway?? SCARED to tell us?

Apr 26, 2015
Not really interested, gkam. You're lying, and that's obvious. And you're not very smart about it.

A Master's degree requires six years of college. At minimum you have to complete two years in a Master's program after a Bachelor's degree, which would make yours 1981 at the earliest, in the oldest such program anyone can find. Which is two years AFTER TMI, making your "anecdote" an obvious lie.

Your taunting attempts to find out peoples' real identities are totally transparent.

Tell you what, post a scan of your degree and link it here.

Apr 26, 2015
Do you have an MS? I got mine from 1979 to 1982.

I think you are like otto, and think there is only one description for all engineers, and all programs are exactly alike.

Let's talk about particle accelerators, the thread topic. What is your experience with them? Orbital or linear? Ever seen one? Shall I send you pictures?

I'm finally tired of your games of little character. If you are really 50 years old, you should be terribly embarrassed at your loss of character.

BTW, I have to go now to play with the grownups. It has been fun babysitting the kids. Do NOT lose Wiki.

Love, George.

Apr 26, 2015
Post your degree and link it here, Gracie. No redactions, no games, no lies-- and it better have some sort of name that relates to gkam on it.

Engineers who are qualified to review nuclear engineering need to have education in nuclear physics and you don't have any. They don't teach nuclear physics in environmental science disciplines, Gracie.

You're lying, Gracie, and it's obvious.

Apr 26, 2015
I suggest you perform The Cheney, a rather violent from of autocoitus.

Apr 26, 2015
Post it and link it, Gracie. Waiting.

Apr 26, 2015
Just a reminder: claiming degrees and experience you cannot prove is a logical fallacy, specifically the appeal to false authority: http://www.nizkor...ity.html

As for me, I claim no degrees in nuclear engineering or physics; I prove my knowledge by linking to articles from reliable sources that support what I claim. So your demand for my credentials is spurious and irrelevant. I claim no false authority. I cite real authorities who support my claims.

Unlike you, Gracie.

Apr 26, 2015
You are nobody. I send nothing to nobodies.

Send me your name. I gave you mine. SCARED I may be like otto, the vandal? I'm not.

Apr 26, 2015
LOL, not a chance. I didn't make a claim and attempt to support it by false authority; you did. Either you have the support for your claim or you do not.

And you obviously do not.

You claim to have revealed your name. You have nothing to lose. That you won't provide the evidence to support your claims renders them unreliable.

Apr 26, 2015
This thread is about linear accelerators. I have professional experience in their maintenance and operation. You have NONE.

Why would you think you had anything to say in this topic? Now, if you want to play with the grownups, you have to discuss the relativistic effects of the beam.

Apr 26, 2015
Gracie, you made a claim and you won't support it.

End of story.

You're no different from Otto, WP, RC, or any of the climate deniers or relativity deniers.

If you claim to be an authority, prove it, or render your claim obviously false.

Apr 26, 2015
You could, you know, support your claims like I do, with links to reliable sources, Gracie. Then you wouldn't be on the hook to prove your own expertise.

Just sayin'.

Apr 26, 2015
Why would you think you had anything to say in this topic?
Because I can prove what I say by linking to reliable sources that say the same thing I do.

You know, that whole "evidence thing."

Your only evidence is claimed authority you have no evidence to support. Nobody who's actually an authority agrees with you. Otherwise you'd link them and quote their support.

In addition, you are obviously biased against real technology that provides solutions to the problems you claim to support solutions to. So not only do you not support your claims, but you also have a clear bias, no different from the bias of religionists against anything that questions their super magic sky daddy, and no different from the bias of climate deniers who make up stories and deny the proof they're false.

Still waiting for the scan of that diploma, Gracie.

Sorry, Gracie, we don't want to return to the stone age. Technology works. Get over it.

Apr 26, 2015
I suppose my pathetic detractors already checked out the other facts I have presented regarding my other experience. They were disappointed to see that indeed, I was in the Air Force and at Edwards, Air Force Flight Test Center Airman of the Month for October, 19766, in fact. Then the Vietnam Vet thing, and if I really helped bug Southeast Asia.

So, did they look up the HVE 500,000 electron beam? The GE 1000 kVp and 2000 kVp Electron Beam Generators? I know you did not look up the 3 MeV Radiation Dynamics Inc beam.

Because these kids with hiding behind pseudonyms are imaginary beings, they think they are gods. Lower case.

Apr 26, 2015
Got a place for both of us to post?

I dare you to do it, post for post. But you will find the coward's way out, won't you? You'll have some kind of lame nonsense, because you are SCARED to face the world in reality.

Put it up, and let's go.

Apr 26, 2015
The kids think the wisdom borne of experience and education is "bias".

But then, none of them ever worked with Industrial Linear Accelerators, have they?

Apr 26, 2015
Post that scan and link to it, gkam.

Or be exposed as a liar.

Simple as that.

I will post nothing. I never claimed expertise I couldn't prove; plenty of people who are reliable sources agree with me. None agree with you.

Apr 26, 2015
I do not have a post place. Get one for us.

I will match you document for document.

Simple as that.

I have them ready.

Go get yours. And post them.

Apr 26, 2015
Your incompetence is not my problem. Nor is my education relevant. You're obfuscating again, Gracie.

Figure it out or you're lying.

Good luck.

Apr 26, 2015
Try googling on "free photo hosting," Gracie. There, I've addressed your incompetence.

Now post it or FAIL.

Apr 26, 2015
I might need more popcorn.

Apr 26, 2015
You might even need some buffalo wings and a brewski.

Apr 27, 2015
Noted Gracie didn't provide a scan of its supposed diploma.

Claims without evidence are lies.

Apr 27, 2015
I will eventually get the pseudonym lurkers and snipers off this forum.

Wait and see, Da otto.

Apr 28, 2015
I have professional experience in their maintenance and operation
Well thats a lie.

"A profession arises when any trade or occupation transforms itself through "the development of formal qualifications based upon education, apprenticeship, and examinations, the emergence of regulatory bodies with powers to admit and discipline members, and some degree of monopoly rights."

"Originally, any regulation of the professions was self-regulation... With the growing role of government, statutory bodies have increasingly taken on this rĂ´le, their members being appointed either by the profession or (increasingly) by government."

"Besides regulating access to a profession, professional bodies may set examinations of competence and enforce adherence to an ethical code."

-By your own admission you arent qualified. And you are certainly beholden to no ethical code because you lie through your teeth about what you know and how you know it.

Apr 28, 2015
I will eventually get the pseudonym lurkers and snipers off this forum
-And youre a pompous asshole which is certainly unprofessional.

Ever end up on this list?
http://www.bpelsg...ed.shtml

Apr 28, 2015
Gracie, you made claims based on your own expertise and then failed to substantiate either them or it.

Nobody is going to kick anybody off here because you made a false claim and refuse to substantiate it.

I suggest you use links and quotes from reliable sites to support your arguments and admit your arguments are BS unless you can do so. That way no one will challenge you to present your credentials.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more