[Supervolant (OP)]

Hello Friends,
Every day at CERN or in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) there are getting countless of Millions Particles smashed against each other with speeds near that of light.

My Two Questions are the following ones:

1:

In Albert Einsteins special relativity it is stated at the section of relativistic mass that mass is dependent on the velocity to the observer. So do these Particles in the Particle Accelerators gain in Mass while getting Accelerated?

If you really got the real clue you could answer me this one: Rest Mass of an Electron is 9.11×10−31 kg, what is the Mass at, or near the speed of light?

I think an Electron has Infinite amount of Mass while traveling at Light Speed because of the Relativistic Mass theory. But I am new at questioning how our world works so this is just a thought of mine or more like a wish of an amateur physicist.

2:

These Particles are being Accelerated on the best shape possible an infinite circular path reaching 27 km's in length and 4k in diameter. No matter if particles (especially electrons) gain mass at higher speeds or not, they still have Mass. A gyroscope or flywheel generates force / momentum into all directions because of the occurring centrifugal force of the circular path around an axis of a mass.

Does this phenomenon apply to electrons in the particle smashers as well? Is there centrifugal force on the outside wall of the accelerators because of the circular path the electrons have to take?


I've already read a lot in this forum and got a lot knowledge out of it. It's simply great to see so much input on questions of strangers answered by strangers. Hope on humanity at it's finest!

Greetings from Germany,

Robert

[yor_on]

Number one is not so tough, just google it. the second one is trickier. how do you think here? " Is there centrifugal force on the outside wall of the accelerators " ?

As measured by?
=

Well it is a 'rotation' and all rotations is a acceleration, no matter if they gain speed, or not, according to Newton and Einstein both.
==

Which actually makes me want to ask a question. Can anyone think up a scenario where a rotation won't 'bleed away' inside our universe? To take just one rotating 'sphere' and then say that it 'rotates' inside some universe makes no sense to me. There is no way to prove it that I see? And with two they will act upon each other.
==

Actually the question you ask is even deeper than what one first might think-
what is a circle?

Is it straight lines, put at an angle to each other?
Or (a) bent line(s)?

[CPT ArkAngel]

The mass increases by the Lorentz factor. There are magnets pushing the particles all along the path. As the velocity increases, the mass increases so the magnets effective push decreases. It would take an infinite amount of energy to increase the particles velocity to light velocity.

The magnets are aligned to counter the centrifugal force. A linear accelerator is more effective and simpler but you can only accelerate a particle in one pass.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_factor

[evan_au]

Electrons gain Mass & generate Centrifugal Force?

Actually, the LHC accelerates protons, not electrons. But the same principle applies.

Before the LHC was built, the same tunnel was occupied by LEP, which collides electrons and positrons.
But proton-proton collisions carry more energy than electron-positron collisions, and this provided the energies necessary to find the Higgs boson.

Is there centrifugal force on the outside wall of the accelerators because of the circular path the electrons have to take?

The magnets bend the path of the protons so that it follows a circle. This bend represents an acceleration of the charged particles.
Wen you accelerate charged particles, they emit radiation (synchrotron radiation), which loses energy from the beam. So you have to keep pumping energy into the particles to overcome the lost energy from synchrotron radiation.

[alancalverd]

Actually the question you ask is even deeper than what one first might think-
what is a circle?

Is it straight lines, put at an angle to each other?
Or (a) bent line(s)?

Strictly speaking a circle is a continuous "bent line", the locus of a point moving at a constant distance from another point (the center). One consequence of introducing computers into primary schools has been the inability of a digital computer to generate a truly smooth curve, so a lot of kids grow up believing that circle is 360 straight lines.

This has caused a practical problem  in modern aeronavigation. One of the simplest instrument approaches is to fly a "DME arc" where you use a radar-like gadget (Distance Measuring Equipment) to fly a smooth circular arc at a safe height and distance around the ground station until the compass shows that the runway is aligned at nearly 90 degrees to your track, then turn and descend as instructed. It takes a bit of skill or a decent autopilot to follow the neat circle the navigator has drawn, but as long as you are reasonably smooth the result is very satisfactory and we keep out of each others' way. Problem with modern GPS navigation is that your heading is changing continuoulsly so although it knows where you and the runway are, it's having to recalculate the required heading faster than it can command the autopilot, because as soon as it has done so, it is wrong, recognised the fact, and switches off with lots of alarm bells ringing!     

[yor_on]

Thanks Alan, this is what I like with TNS, you get to know something you didn't before.
Although :)

What is a circle?

[evan_au]

a lot of kids grow up believing that circle is 360 straight lines.

This also occurs in the LHC.

• The proton beam follows a course which has 1,232 straight sides, with 1,232 dipole bending magnets in between.
• In the straight segments, the beam is accelerated by electric fields and focused by quadrupole magnets.
• In total, there are around 10,000 magnets

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#Design

[alancalverd]

What is a circle?

The locus of a point moving in plane at a constant radius from an origin.