From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Still a stub?[edit]

I lately added some material to the page, which I think is all more or less common knowledge among particle physics folks, but with no references beyond a link to the AGS page. Since there is no question in my mind that the material is substantially factually correct and does add content, I wonder if is this useful or proper, vs the alternatives of missing or wrong (eg, it was previously said to be an electron accelerator) information? I am new to editing Wiki, and still a bit vague on such things. Also, practically speaking, tracking down a full set of references is more than I can typically undertake, unfortunately.

Also, with the information added, I wonder if the page qualifies to be a level up from just a stub? I'm not sure just how to do this (I do see what looks like the place, as "particle-stub", in double braces), and if that is something I should do. Thanks Wwheaton 19:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No no, it's definately a start class now (which I've change in the template on this page, |class=Start up there...). As for the particle-stub with curly braces, that means it links to a template, in this case template:particle-stub. Really, article classification is just to help people find articles to expand, and stubs are the only things that have templates. Oh, and nice edits! --Falcorian (talk) 00:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Threshold energy required to create antiprotons[edit]

The kinetic energy needed is considerably larger than the mass of the antiproton, due to the requirement to conserve both momentum and energy, since the products cannot be produced at rest. On the other hand, in collisions with multi-nucleon nuclei, considerable advantage may be taken from the fact that the nucleons bound in nuclei are in motion, with energies up to about 7 MeV. A more accurate threshold, commonly cited, is 6.2 GeV. Wwheaton (talk) 03:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Georgios Giolvas[edit]

A red link has been twice inserted into this article by User:, claiming invention by Georgios Giolvas. Two references are given, but both are in Greek. I am reverting the change again, until (a) references can be given in English (this is the English Wikipedia, after all) and (b) at least a reliably sourced stub article about Georgios Giolvas can be provided. I know nothing about the factual basis of this claim and am not denying its possible accuracy, but we must have better support that that given so far. Thanks Wwheaton (talk) 14:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The Bevatron was a primarily American project, so the fact that I couldn't find a single English source for Giolvas inventing it is telling (Nor could I find a single English source on him)... That's why I originally reverted. While I don't think an article on him is required to put a reference here, a good, reliable source for the fact would be key. --Falcorian (talk) 18:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Here is an article in Italian Wikipedia about Georgios Gkiolvas (Greek physicist, engineer, inventor 1920 - 2003. Correct spelling: "Gkiolvas", could also be found as "Ghiolvas" or "Giolvas") mentioning Bevatron [1]. The act of Gkiolvas used to be underground according to its nature (mainly creating military equipment) so there are not any formal documents available on the internet proving his inventions. However, there are many books (in Greek language) written by modern researchers and scientists (such as George Palmos, Anestis Keramydas, Nicolaos Pappas, Ntorepa Pepa, Kalogeropoulos and more...) mentioning Gkiolvas as the initial designer/inventor of Bevatron among other inventions such as anti-aircraft Artemis 30, Ultralow Frequencies Sound Cannon[2], G-Ghiolvas System II (NicoPal)[3] and more...

Moreover, there are many references in Greek TV Shows "Oi Pyles Toy Anexigitou (29-09-2007)", "Atheatos Cosmos (19-10-2004)" and "Choris Montaz II (2004)" directed by jurnalist Costas Chardavelas in which various researchers/scientists (many of them known Gkiolvas in personal) admited that G. Gkiolvas invented Bevatron. There are two or three videos (also in Greek language, can be found on youtube) showing Gkiolvas talking about Bevatron Project and admiting that he was the initial designer/inventor of Bevatron. Bevatron's invention by Georgios Giolvas is also confirmed by his widow Aikaterini Aksari.

There are also very serious clues of the existence of a proposal document (dated between early to mid 50's) in which Georgios Gkiolvas presents Bevatron design to Greek Department of Defense and after their rejection; Gkiolvas "sells" Bevatron's design to US scientists.

I understand that the article cannot be changed without any English reference or formal evidences/documents, things which unfortunately I cannot provide right now. If someone can post such evidences or at least translate some of them in English language, I would be grateful. Thank you and please accept my apologies for the inconvenience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation. It may well be that someone more familiar with the Greek literature can provide more information on this subject. The thing that troubled me was that I see the Bevatron as having been "designed", but not "invented", since as far as I know all the basic principles were present already in the Cosmotron at Brookhaven several years earlier. The archives of LBL have some material on earlier designs in the late 1940's that were tried out on paper (for the aperture of the vacuum space, etc, and I believe even for the energy -- it was realized at one point that the fact that protons in complex nuclei are moving fast, so that anti-protons can be made in head-on collisions at lower energies than for H at rest, which affected the final design), several years before the thing was final. Perhaps Gkiolvas played a key role in that early design process? Do you know if he was at LBL at the time? It is also possible he invented the synchrotron concept, I don't remember anything about that. Anyhow, with some more definite information about his role, I'd have no objection to his mention, assuming he played a significant part. I think Lawrence, McMillan, and probably Lofgren were involved, I can't say about others.
Actually what we really need is just a "reliable" translation of the Greek documents, no? If someone could do that, and post it side-by-side on the same web site as the Greek version, or perhaps get it posted at any other reliable university or academic site. Maybe that can be done? Wwheaton (talk) 05:00, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I’ll try to gather as many sources and references as I can. As far as I know, Gkiolvas was on LBL that time, if I’m not mistaken there are some photos showing him among other scientists. Please blame my poor English for confusing the terms invented and designed. I’m not quite sure of the dates of the photos or the documents mention earlier. I’ll try to find English references or at least translate some of them in English. I’ll post any future material here. Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Your English is a lot better than my Greek, alas, so no apologies are needed on that score. Let us know what you find. I should think there might be Greek historical organizations that would be able to translate the Greek documents to make Gkiolvas's role more widely available in English. Cheers, Wwheaton (talk) 21:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually... No. Ghiolvas had NOTHING to do with the Bevatron. As for the "researchers" (Keramydas, Pepa, et al), these are all Greek nationalist mysticists, proponents of the non-existent "Epsilon Team" (a mythical team of scientists, military people, diplomats etc secretly protecting Greece, and planning the return of the Olympian Gods - I kid you not - in 2011, then 2012, then 2013 and who knows what other year they'll postulate next). Think Erich von Daeniken wannabes, with a hefty dose of antisemitic conspiracy theories. Thanks to Hardavellas' marketing of their conspiracy theories, they made a pretty penny in the early 2000s. Their theories are popular among Greek far-right conspiracy theorists and nationalist, racist blogs connected to the neo-nazi party Golden Dawn. A Greek skeptic blogger actually contacted the LBL and here is the correspondence:
1. The email sent to the lab
2. Response from the Lab
No records of a Georgios Ghiolvas or Giolvas or Gkiolvas whatsoever. Furthermore, had Ghiolvas ever been involved in its design (wait - Ghiolvas and his supporters claimed he INVENTED the whole thing), he'd have known it could never possibly be used as a weapon. In his interviews, Ghiolvas claimed the (non-existent, but nationalist fraudsters never let facts get in the way of a lucrative story) Epsilon Team had installed it on satellites to use it against the "evil Jews" and all other anti-hellenic forces. Oh yes, that's what he claimed. And he also claimed he INVENTED it while he was supposedly working for NASA (!!!!), which had nothing to do with the Bevatron, but hey - nationalists don't care about facts. Oh, Ghiolvas also claimed that the "high-tech" Artemis 30 (a run-of-the-mill, obsolete AA gun consisting of two Mauser 30mm guns) was a super-duper weapon that used subsonic frequences... As for the Nico-Pal, it's snake oil. He claimed that all you had to do was put cigarettes in a tray, sprinkle a magical mixture of aloe and other herbs, "bake" it for a bit and then you'd have nicotine-free cigarettes. Oh wait. Companies that were manufacturing it were fined hard by the Greek Ministry of Development for misleading and fraudulent advertising (announcement in Greek). I guess this is another... Jewish, zionist conspiracy against the super-scientist Ghiolvas.
By the way, if he really was such a prominent scientist, where ARE his scientific articles? Citeseer, Web of Science, Google Scholar, etc turned up nothing, nada, zilch. Is this yet another Jewish, zionist conspiracy against Ghiolvas? And don't even get me started on his biography that's filled with ridiculous claims. (talk) 18:11, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


I got here through from the Bevalac redirect. First time I hear this name, but if it was in use (or still is), it should probably be mentioned in the article IMO.Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 01:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

They're the same instrument (but different phases) it seems. [4] It should certainly be expanded to include that. --Falcorian (talk) 03:54, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
In fact the article says; "It received a new lease on life in the 1971, when it was joined to the SuperHILAC linear accelerator as an injector for heavy ions. The combination was known as the Bevalac." :-) --Falcorian (talk) 04:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
The Bevalac phase of its life was notable and should certainly be covered to complete our article. I just don't know enough about it to add anything. Wwheaton (talk) 07:53, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Some good pix[edit]

Does anyone have an idea how to get permissions for the pix here, or in here? The former is interesting (& kind of sad, being of the Grand Old Girl at the end of her life), while the pix in the Lofgren pdf are especially useful. I think the one on p.12 should really go as the lead, showing it just completed in all its naked glory, and the one on p.13, nearing completion, is very good too. My guess is that these latter ones in the Lofgren talk are almost certainly out of copyright, or made as US Government work and thus in public domain, but I can't prove it and I am ignorant of these intellectual property issues on Wikipedia (and I also don't know how to extract a good photo from a pdf). Thanks... Wwheaton (talk) 18:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

A recent article from "Wired" here also has good photos, ancient and recent, and some interesting details. It confirms that the older pix are from LBL, so they must be either in the public domain, or else University of California Board of Regents property. I see that the guy who took the big collection of recent pix (among the external links) probably also put the Wired article together. Wwheaton (talk) 20:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Out of Date?[edit]

I don't see any reason for the "out of date" tag. Nothing new has happened with the accelerator in quite some time, after all. Removing. PianoDan (talk) 02:15, 28 January 2015 (UTC)