🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.physics
Article #1265

Re: SLC (was Re: terminal particle energy ...)

#1265
From: DURRETT
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 19:49
32 lines
2630 bytes
Actually, a large part of the design of the looped portion of the SLC
was concern for the combination of aesthetics and environment. If the
collider had been built in a plane, the north loop would have been
above ground. This was considered a problem for a lot of reasons. First,
cooling would have been a problem(it always has been along the linac,
which, because of complaints from the locals is painted gov't green
rather than the more logical white. SLAC has always been cheap in their
approach to such things. They long intended to cool the linac housing
by spraying water on the building which holds the klystrons, only to
have a five-year drought get in the way). Second, the exposed hillside
which would have been torn up for this purpose, faces the city of Menlo
Park, whose residents are only too happy to take the money of poor
graduate students and transplanted post-docs, but don't want to have to
actually see any evidence of what goes on up the hill. Thirdly, there
is, oddly enough, some wildlife on the site, and some of it(some foxes
and deer) lives in this portion of the site. Had Menlo Park objected
insisted on an EIS, SLAC probably would have lost. But Jim is right,
Burt and others apparently discounted too much reports that non-linear
effects would cause major problems with the beams once they were
steered away from the linac. Hopefully, physicists will learn a lesson
from all this, but I'm not holding my breath. People like Burt Richter
will always be around to say, "No, it's OK. We'll do it really cheaply."
And as long as a few people continue to have success with this technique
the people who don't have to do the science, but do provide the funds,
will think under-funding works.

Roo-Dog Rip
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Roo-Dog Rip is:                  <>SLAC, Stanford, the DOE and the
Derrell Durrett                  <>University of Colorado neither claim
D_DURRETT@COLOPHYS.BITNET        <>responsibility nor accept liability
D_DURRETT%KAOS@VAXF.COLORADO.EDU <>for my opinions. Gee- what a surprise.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <92108.114952DURRETT@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!unixhub!slacvm!durrett
References: <8244@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> <yrzjp!-.rcain@netcom.com> <16APR199209312039@sscvx1.ssc.gov> <8286@sun13.scri.fsu.edu>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!unixhub!slacvm!durrett
From: DURRETT@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: SLC (was Re: terminal particle energy ...)
Message-ID: <92108.114952DURRETT@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: 17 Apr 92 19:49:52 GMT
References: <8244@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> <yrzjp!-.rcain@netcom.com>
 <16APR199209312039@sscvx1.ssc.gov> <8286@sun13.scri.fsu.edu>
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Lines: 32