Canadian Researchers Create Supernova In-lab 308
Erebus42 writes "Canada has done something neat. Apparently researchers at the University of British Columbia have created supernova in their ISAC (Isotope Seperator and Accelerator), transmuting sodium 21 into magnesium 22. Spiffy."
Could this be used in weapons development? (Score:1, Troll)
The rammifications of a portable supernova are chilling when you put in in Osama or Saddam's hands, no?
Except... (Score:1, Troll)
Re:Except... (Score:1, Offtopic)
Could you please just shut up? (Score:5, Insightful)
It will never cease to amaze me that there is this army of trolls just lying in wait to come up with the stupidest, most knee-jerk, ignorant and uninformed comment on damn near anything withing moments of its appearance. There's almost a sort of genius to it...
Unfortunately it's a really stupid, useless sort of genius.
Re:Could you please just shut up? (Score:1)
and for those of you who think that the US could do better etc, and so what, and other such comments take note: the supercollider project was to be 20,000 GeV of potential... perhaps forever lost to scientists like those canadian reasearchers with innovative ideas. hats off to the canadians.
Re:Could you please just shut up? (Score:2)
Yes...the most prominent ones are called "journalists".
We should ban hands as well (Score:4, Funny)
Where's the guy who makes the joke about other people asking about Beowulf clusters of supernova's?
-
Could this be used in weapons development? Sure (Score:2)
Re:Could this be used in weapons development? Sure (Score:2)
I mean, *honestly*.. (Score:1)
Come on.. a few months ago bin Laden was under the refuge of a backwards government that *prohibited* technology.. and now, if you listen to people like this, bin Laden and al Queda are suddenly on the cutting edge of <a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/12/18
This isn't to say that bin Laden and al Queda aren't dangerous, but let's keep things in perspective, mmkay?
I can see it now! (Score:1)
Re:I can see it now! (Score:4, Funny)
WOW! I want one! (Score:2, Funny)
Now could you make a black-hole for power generation purposes?
Thanks!
Neat? (Score:4, Funny)
Christ, how many dollars is the new coin worth this time?
--saint
Re:Neat? (Score:3, Funny)
Canada's goal......
by 2005 they plan to only be using chickens and goats.
Re:Neat? (Score:1)
Toonie Deals (Score:1)
One Toonie = 2 KFC Pieces + Fries (on Tuesday)
Most certainly a versatile coin!
Ah yes (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Ah yes (Score:2)
Science for Sciences Sake? (Score:1)
Re:Science for Sciences Sake? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Science for Sciences Sake? (Score:2)
Which is about like saying that the universe is like a really large apartment.
Not to give away my age too much... (Score:2, Insightful)
The better we understand how the universe works, the closer we get to that hyperdrive.
Also this shows that the same physics applies here as applies many light years away. That might seem like an obvious assumption to make, but it is good to confirm these things.
Re:Not to give away my age too much... (Score:2)
So... you're saying that cats will love this thing?
Bragging rights. (Score:4, Funny)
"We have bragging rights."
Finally... I was wondering when we would.
Re:Bragging rights. (Score:1)
"Don't get to bragging."
heh
Re:Bragging rights. (Score:1)
Right, not rights (Score:1)
Help... Please? (Score:1)
Re:Help... Please? (Score:2, Interesting)
In this experiment, they apparently used a particle accelerator to add a proton to sodium 21. This made magnesium (?), a new element. But it didn't last long, the proton decayed into a neutron, converting the atom back into sodium, this time with 22 nucleons (one extra neutron than before).
The reason this is news: we have never converted one element into another before (at least not this way).
Heh, UBC is Cool (Score:1)
PK
"Where are we going... and why are we in this handbasket?"
It's not an atom smasher (Score:1)
Slippery Slope (Score:4, Funny)
But it does kindof worry me that Canadians ccan now create there own elements at will. What is to prevent them from creating tons and tons of gold and flooding the gold market? Or How about creating their own Plutonium. Uh oh, I think Canada just got the bomb...Or Carbon. If canada can create it's own Carbon, what can keep them from creating diamonds and flooding the diamond market. And Carbopn is the basis for life. they can create their own stem cells. George Bush ain't going to be happy about that one...Wait, I just relized this means they can create their Hydrogen. My god, they cancreate their own sun. My god, Canada must be stopped.
Congrats goes out to these guys.
Re:Slippery Slope (Score:1)
Well one thing to prevent making tonnes and tonnes of gold would be, well, the cost? To make it would cost tonnes more than the gold is worth.
Oh, and sure Canada hasn't been making any nukes, but we've had the materials for a long time. Ever heard of the Can-Du reactor? (safest reactor in the world I believe) It outputs perfect nuclear waste for a nuke (hence all the fuss by the US when a few were sold to China)
It's kinda cool for nifty sake as well. Hmm, maybe we can create more elements with stupid names!
(do I hear that song blame canada on the horizon?)
Also burns plutonium... (Score:2)
(former IT guy from AECL [www.aecl.ca] makers of the CANDU)
Re:Slippery Slope (Score:1)
Re:Slippery Slope (Score:2)
TRIUMF is a couple of km from the UBC hospital, and for years they've been creating elements for medical imaging and treatment. The material is produced in the TRIUMF beamline, extracted and processed through some rather nasty chemistry, then shot down a pneumatic tube to the hospital to be injected into the patient. These isotopes have short half-lives (minutes) so they have to be produced close to where they are used.
Re:Slippery Slope (Score:2)
Considering how much the present B.C. government is trying to cut back anything with a budget, it's likely the hype is an attempt to hold on to any funding that TRIUMF has whatsoever.
When the provincial government starts considering cutting whole universities [techbc.ca] you've got to scream to stay alive...
It's a Canadian Plot to Accelerate Global Warning (Score:2, Funny)
*I mean, how often have you seen a weather map on TV that has temperatures in Canada that are even 32 degrees? It'll be 72 in Seattle and just across the border in Vancouver it's 20 degrees. And when it's 35 degrees in Buffalo, it's usually like ZERO in Toronto.
Re:Slippery Slope (Score:2)
Canadian Researchers Create Supernova In-lab (Score:4, Informative)
We get it, Canada (Score:1, Troll)
Cheers,
levine
Re:We get it, Canada (Score:1)
Re:We get it, Canada (Score:2)
Listen. Everybody - we're really, really sorry about Brian Adams. Nobody actually listens to him up here, but the gov't sponsors the production of tonnes of his albums, which we decided to dispose of south of the border.
We're really quite mortified at the whole thing. Please accept my apologies.
Re:We get it, Canada (Score:1, Offtopic)
Ya, being Canadian means we might be better than our American neighbours when it comes to nuclear astrophysics, but when it comes to satellite TV, you guys kick ASS! (GO DTV!!!)
Re:We get it, Canada (Score:2)
Cheers,
levine
Re:We get it, Canada (Score:2)
You want to try reading slashdot sometime.
Supernova? (Score:4, Funny)
I mean, yes, this is a nuclear reaction that occurs in supernovas, but it's only one of many. If you come to my house and I sell you a book, I have not recreated Barnes and Noble in my study.
Still, it's a cool trick.
I'm usually proppin' canucks.... (Score:4, Funny)
Next for the lab is what Shotter describes as one of the thorniest problems for nuclear astrophysicists, duplicating the reaction of the isotope oxygen 15, which is believed to be the spark that ignites nova explosions and x-ray bursts.
What can I say, America better not try and invade...
Ummmm.... (Score:1)
First-hand account (Score:1, Funny)
Skinner: Aurora Borealis?
Chalmers: Aurora Borealis? At this time of year? At this time of day? In this part of the country? Localized entirely within your kitchen?
Skinner: Yes.
Chalmers: May I see it?
Skinner: Oh, erm... No.
Re:First-hand account (Score:1)
Alchemy... (Score:1)
Interesting how "journalists" get it wrong (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Interesting how "journalists" get it wrong (Score:2)
Black Holes? (Score:1)
Re:Black Holes? (Score:5, Informative)
Not necessarily. The immense amount of forces that are involved in a supernova create conditions that allow black holes to form. All you really need for a black hole is enough heavy matter in small enough space.
It's like this... When planets and even small stars form, the electromagnetic force is enough to keep individual atoms from crushing each other. You can't push electrons any closer.
Stars who die without becoming any bigger become white, and eventually black dwarfs.
In larger stars, after they ignite, the nuclear force-- the constant fusion reaction-- is enough to do the same thing. Once that fusion reaction shuts down, however, the atoms begin to collapse, increasing density and pressure until the heavier atoms are able to fuse.
If a star this size goes nova, the electrons and protons collapse, leaving neutrons. The neutron matter will hold up to a certain point under the force of gravity. AP's correct me, but I think it's the electroweak force that is responisble for this resistance.
If a star dies at this stage, you get a neutron star.
If a star is very, very massive... Think blue giants... Even the force that keeps the neutrons from crushing eachother is not enough to overcome the force of gravity. The neutrons collapse under their own weight into an infinitly small point and the space around the singularity warps until the escape velocity is greater than the speed of light.
I'm certain what we all know that singularity + event horizon = black hole.
Despite the fact that the researchers were creating the same kinds of reaction that occurs in the latter period of the death of a star, they simply weren't dealing with the kind of mass necessarly to create a black hole. Even if scientists *did* manage to create enough pressure to force matter to collapse into a singularity, it would evaporate away into Hawking radiation almost instantly. You don't just need the singularity to keep a black hole, you need to have it be massive and keep feeding it to keep it alive.
This is cool, but... (Score:3, Redundant)
When are they going to make a dollar that's actually worth one dollar?
Alchemy is acheived (Score:1)
Oh, wait a minute. The price for Platinum is 1.7 times the price of gold.
nevermind...
Say What? (Score:1)
So let me get this straight. They made a small supernova? They made a supernova the size of a sodium isotope?
Would that be a Supernovetta?
Re:Say What? (Score:3, Funny)
Would that be a Supernovetta?
I think the term is "nanonova".
Oh, please! (Score:1)
What a load of hype!!!
What? (Score:2)
I went outside a little while ago and didn't see any bright flashes. I was looking northward too (from Florida). Are you sure this wasn't made up, like the lunar landings?
Re:What? (Score:2)
Whatever (Score:1)
"Now we can re-create the event itself."
BS. You may be able to emulate the effects or the reactions of supernovae, but studying the facsimile will avail us nothing in the realm of physics.
That would be like me saying that I could create a black hole in my bathtub with a few particle accelerators and a little needle to punch a hole in the STC, and then saying I knew how they formed in space.
The very fact that you could do such a thing is impressive, but the creation is based on your limited, earth-based observations nonetheless.
--
dthor
Canada is doomed! (Score:1)
Article is misleading (Score:5, Informative)
Basically, a SN happens when a massive star has converted all of its core fuel into iron by nuclear fusion. The star's gravity compresses and heats the iron until it can fuse also. However, iron is the most tightly bound element, so fusing iron nuclei doesn't release heat energy, it removes it. The thermal pressure that was holding up the star's core disappears in a fraction of a second, and the whole thing comes crashing down in a huge implosion. The implosion causes the core material to form a neutron star or a black hole, and the rebounding shock wave blows the rest of the star apart.
Doesn't sound much like what they did. I don't mean to downplay their achievement; it's still very impressive. I'm just lamenting the sorry state of most science reporting...
Re:Article is misleading (Score:2)
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/energy/
http://www.phy.uct.ac.za/courses/phy300w/np/ch1
http://blueox.uoregon.edu/~courses/dlivelyb/ph1
Actually, Nickel-56 is slightly more tightly bound (because it's "double magic", has the same number of protons and neutrons), but it decays to Fe-56 on a very short timescale.
Now I get it (Score:1)
UBC website (Score:1)
Bad timing (Score:2, Funny)
All this bragging aboot Canada makes me want to go download that Molson beer commercial from AdCritic...
Breakthrough (Score:2, Informative)
the sodium 21 was transmuted into magnesium 22, which decays into the radioactive isotope sodium 22
as opposed to remaining as magnesium 22. That being said this is still a huge breakthough. With the exception of hydrogren and helium all the elements in the universe are believe to have been formed in Novas or Supernovas. These researchers now has the ability to observe this process directly. Up till now all our knowledge on the subject in based on theories based observations of distant (super)Nova. Who knows the possible extensions of this technology? Transmutation of elements? Fission reactors? Not to mention the huge betterment of our understanding of these processes which will undoubtedly lead to new fields of research which may lead to other breakthroughs in themselves.
competition (Score:2)
Canada, soon to be the richest nation in the world (Score:1)
Re:Canada, soon to be the richest nation in the wo (Score:2)
supernova?? (Score:1)
QED
Woot! (Score:1)
When we all die in the explosion... (Score:1)
Not impressed (Score:2)
Re:Not impressed (Score:2)
You'd need to sell it damn quick before it decayed into FeS2
Gold? (Score:1)
Apparently they forgot to mention... (Score:2)
The statement following was left out for some unknown reason. In the interest of preserving the true integrity of journalism, it is included below:
The team, along with the University of B.C., became the first humans and university, respectively, to be instantly vaporized by a supernova. Bystanders were awed at the sight before receiving intensive doses of gamma- and x-rays. Despite their injuries, some requested prior notification of future tests, in hopes of capturing the event on film.
University of B.C. officials were not commenting on the event, but bystanders were eager to recount their version of the story: "It went boom," said one man, who claimed to be in his early forties and said he had been attending the school for over 20 years, "and I think I had a class in that building once! It's things like this which make me try that much harder to graduate."
Why is a proton beam like a nova? (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess I'm not catching the real significance of this "achievement". What was the theory? What was this experiment attempting to prove or disprove? Were they just showing off how fast they could accellerate protons??
Proclaiming that their proton beam somehow creates a miniature nova seems like a ploy to attract attention (and funding, of course).
Re:Why is a proton beam like a nova? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm a little fuzzy on the details, but you can probably find them on the ISAC webpage.
Real information from TRIUMF (Score:2, Informative)
So, to sum up, they've got their isotope accellerator up and working to the point where they can do some very nice experiments on high-energy nuclear processes, including a number that are important in stellar explosions. No supernova though.
-JS
In the words of the Beatles (Score:2)
American Researcher Creates Black Hole In-Cubicle (Score:5, Funny)
Ultraviolet light generated by an ionized gas was then used to excite a flourescent coating on the interior of a nearby cylinder, creating visible light which was reflected by the surface of a technical document placed precisely in its path. The light was then directed through the "lens" to produce the light-bending effect commonly seen only around supermassive objects such as black holes and galactic superclusters.
Tsar's next ambitious project is to create a miniature expanding multiverse by blowing up several balloons for a staff New Year's party, the expense of which will likely be covered by the piles of grant money expected due to the unqualified success of the LENS experiment.
Disclaimer: I'm all all for the advancement of science, but why do we have to use hyperbole to make it seem interesting, or valuable? Maybe if everyone stopped claiming to have created supernovae or black holes or the core of a star or the moment of creation, we could get to a point where dull, devoted, brilliant researchers who didn't minor in drama can still get funding for their worthy efforts. (This is not a plug—I'm not a researcher, and I'm vastly overpaid as it is.)
TRIUMF != UBC (Score:2)
The name "TRIUMF" actually comes from the original name: TRI University Meson Facility. The three founding universities being UBC, Simon Fraser University, and the University of Victoria.
Work at TRIUMF is done by people from the member universities, people from other institutions (although there's more paperwork involved IIRC), and by "facilities scientists" -- people hired by TRIUMF itself. I don't know about the rest of the research group, but Paul Schmor is listed in TRIUMF's databases as having TRIUMF affiliation -- not UBC.
Another good link (Score:3, Interesting)
I can't believe that the 3D View of the Experimental Hall [triumf.ca] (which I worked two weeks on as a summer student) is actually posted on Slashdot! Fame and fortune, here I come!
Slashdot is trolling you (Score:2, Troll)
This happens over and over. Do you think that the Slashdot editors are that stupid? No, they are smart, and they make a lot of money. If they keep it too tight and smart, a lot of people (read: lurkers, not the average poster) might get bored or scared away.
Why do you think there is no article moderation or ratings in this supposedly "open" community? All I'm saying is that you shouldn't waste so much energy on getting worked up over Slashdot's editing.
LS
Why magnesium? (Score:2)
So that's it (Score:2)
Idiotic question (Score:2)
I understand these things are small, and are likewise controlled, but if you create something which may accidentally grow exponently bigger (if this is even possible)?...
Re:Idiotic question (Score:2)
Somewhere between "negligible" and "none".
Have a nice day.
(A useful baseline is to consider the cosmic radiation that hits us every day. These particles can have much higher energies than anything TRIUMF is putting out, and the planet's survived ~4 billion years so far. Experiments like RHIC are at high enough energy levels that it's worth asking the question, but the TRIUMF stuff is quite routine and is not going to run away.)
Spiffy! (Score:2)
You grab any old particle accelerator and aim it at element X and get element Y. Spiffy.
Well, I guess Canada needs bragging rights to SOMETHING better than "The only country in the world less likely to get in war with the US than Texas".
-
This is nothing! (Score:5, Funny)
As near as I can tell, the real universe split from its when the war of independence failed to happen, although it could also have something to do with the invention of poutine.
Interestingly, since prime-time television programming has apparently not yet been invented in this timeline, this alternate universe is almost completely dependent upon its mate for non-drama, non-Prince-Edward-Island-themed broadcasts. Thus, while the existence of a 'shadow -universe' may come as a shock to all of you in out there in the real one, citizens of this other realm have known about your universe for quite some time. They've been watching you! They don't wear goatees, but they all seem to wear mustaches! Avoid replacement by your evil twin: Destroy Canada today!
Re:This is nothing! (Score:2)
And wait a minute... you all have beards... so you must be the Evil Mirror Universe!
And now you control the very power of the stars. God help us all.
Re:Alchemy? (Score:1, Informative)
If I read the article right, it decomposed back into sodium(22). We can create lots of elements with super science gadgets, but none that I've heard of are stable.
However, I have to wonder what would happen to radioactive waste that was modified this way. We've got to figure out some way to make that stuff less dangerous, at least until we can create black holes to dump it into.
Re:Alchemy? (Score:2)
Even the sodium(22) is temporary. It decays to neon(22), which is stable.
In general, if it's stable, it's found in nature at high enough concentrations that you don't need to produce it (e.g. gold). The accelerators and reactors are for when you want an unstable element that isn't found in nature, and that does something interesting as it decays toward stability.
However, I have to wonder what would happen to radioactive waste that was modified this way.
It would probably just get more radioactive. If you were able to isolate a particular waste isotope you might be able to transmute it into something more friendly, but it'd probably require more energy than you ever got from the nuclear fuel in the first place.
We've got to figure out some way to make that stuff less dangerous,
Put it back in the mine where you originally got the uranium, enclosed in leak-resistant containers (e.g. a block of glass). That should make it less dangerous than the other background hazards (radon from the natural uranium that we haven't yet mined, radioactive potassium in bananas, carbon-14, pesticides, tobacco smoke and car exhaust, etc).
Or just make bullets out of it and shoot it at your enemies. Worked well for the US in the Gulf war, with the depleted uranium left over after producing enriched power-plant fuel and bombs.
Re:Wait a sec (Score:2, Informative)
The CRC handbook lists the following half-lives:
Na21 22.5s
Mg22 3.86s
Na22 2.605y