So just how hard is it to actually make working particle guns?

Ask /sci/

>>32852854
/sci/ is full of liberals who abhor weapon development.

>>32852893
sometimes I feel sad that biggest driver of innovation and invention is war but then I think about how cool it would be to shoot a 50 pound block of aluminum at someone with electricity and it doesn't bother me much after that

>>32852893
Say its for guided and projectile particle acceleration.

For....kinetic transfer of energy.

File: Accelerator.jpg (1MB, 2130x1420px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2130x1420px

>>32852893
No it's not hillbilly.

Former gunsmith soon to be Chemist here.

>>32852719
The issues of power generation that holds back railguns and lasers is even more of an issue when trying to accelerate an atom to the speed of light.

Even small particle accelerators can take up an entire building. Pic related is the one at my university.

>>32853211
What's the scale on that picture?

File: FB_IMG_1455932879208.jpg (11KB, 561x561px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 561x561px

>Particles as projectiles
You mean 9mm?

File: Accelerator (3).jpg (1021KB, 1138x1707px) Image search: [Google]

1021KB, 1138x1707px

>>32853402
See the silver ball thing on the far right?

This is it.

>>32852719
Particle accelerators are fairly well-known physics-wise and from an engineering standpoint. The problem is the massive power-draw that they have. Superconducting magnets can draw tens of thousands of amps in order to generate fields needed to focus/bend TeV proton beams. Not to mention they need a constant source of cryogenics to keep them at the superconducting level. The development of room-temperature superconductors could easily allow for the absence of cryogenics, but power is still an issue. It is possible* to have 'portable' accelerators, but the particle beam quickly loses energy and exhibits poor accuracy from beam divergence due to space-charge effects. The higher the flux, the greater these effects are.

One could argue using radioactive sources that are of critical-mass with a system of neutron absorbers and reflectors to achieve criticality at-will. This apparatus would have a small collimator to direct the neutron 'beam' in the direction you wish it to go. The problem with this is that the user and/or the surrounding area would be exposed to very high radiation levels, likely resulting in lethal-doses to the surrounding operators. Energy loss in the beam would also be a concern, but the good thing is that beam divergence is less than the accelerators due to using neutrons. An interesting property of using neutrons is spallation of nuclei, which would 'defeat' most materials placed in the beam by causing excess radiation on the other side of the material. Additionally, materials can experience embrittlement due to this nuclear spallation; essentially the areas exposed to high-energy neutrons will be subject defects and structural changes, effectively ruining/breaking the material over time.

These are just a couple random thoughts...

>t. high energy physicist

>>32852719
It's literally useless unless you're pelting them with quadrillions of particles at once in a focused manner.

In which case you're better off sending those particles as one cohesive unit.

Air resistance applies

File: 1462845487112.png (142KB, 292x257px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 292x257px

>>32853452

>>32853632
>The problem is the massive power-draw that they have. Superconducting magnets can draw tens of thousands of amps in order to generate fields needed to focus/bend TeV proton beams. Not to mention they need a constant source of cryogenics to keep them at the superconducting level. The development of room-temperature superconductors could easily allow for the absence of cryogenics, but power is still an issue.
>keep it cold
>keep it powered
Put it in space.

>>32853841
>space is cold

>>32853880
>heat doesn't radiate away

File: Megadeth-Super-Collider.jpg (193KB, 598x600px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 598x600px

>>32852719
Can't believe science ripped off Megadeth.

>>32853880
You don't have a goddam clue what space is like, do you? Heat dispersion is a massive problem in space. Without atmosphere and thus convection, objects can only cool via radiation. Radiation is not efficient compared to conduction or convection.

>>32854204
>Heat dispersion is a massive problem in space. Without atmosphere and thus convection, objects can only cool via radiation. Radiation is not efficient compared to conduction or convection

That's what I was >implying