Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

home.cern

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 310 posts

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#51

Post by John23832 »

MatmaRex wrote: post #30
John23832 wrote: post #27

Random question. Historically, why have Lead and Gold been so closely linked? Why did alchemist focus on turning lead into gold (and not start with iron, or a rock like quartz)? Is it just because they're two heavy soft metals?

This very article states: > This long-standing quest, known as chrysopoeia, may have been motivated by the observation that dull grey, relatively abundant lead is of a similar density to gold, which has long been coveted for its beautiful colour and rarity.

So the answer is, yes, because they're two heavy soft metals.

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#52

Post by cgriswald »

marcodiego wrote: post #31
John23832 wrote: post #27

Random question. Historically, why have Lead and Gold been so closely linked? Why did alchemist focus on turning lead into gold (and not start with iron, or a rock like quartz)? Is it just because they're two heavy soft metals?

A friend of mine who was into alchemy, told me it was because the difference was only three protons. I don't if early alchemists knew that or why not consider metals that are less than three protons different from gold.

Those would iridium, platinum, mercury, and thalium. For varying definitions of "early", these alchemists only knew about mercury and maybe platinum (there was platinum in Egyptian gold, but it isn't clear they knew it was in there or thought of it as anything more than an impurity). Mercury they did try to turn to gold. They thought of it as an ur-metal from which all other metals came.

But as the sibling poster states, no, they didn't know.

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#53

Post by hasmanean »

John23832 wrote: post #27

Random question. Historically, why have Lead and Gold been so closely linked? Why did alchemist focus on turning lead into gold (and not start with iron, or a rock like quartz)? Is it just because they're two heavy soft metals?

Because alchemists were afraid of people stealing their recipes. Jabir bin Hayyan (aka Geber) the father of chemistry wrote in his own shorthand which is named after him—-gibberish or jibberish.

So Lead, gold, and quicksilver were not the substances their names suggest. They were codenames. The real processes have never been revealed.

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#54

Post by sebmellen »

omnee wrote: post #42

The relevant part: "The ALICE analysis shows that, during Run 2 of the LHC (2015–2018), about 86 billion gold nuclei were created at the four major experiments. In terms of mass, this corresponds to just 29 picograms (2.9 ×10-11 g)." Just need to scale it by trillions to make 1 ounce, but transmutation of lead to gold - the dream of many alchemists - is now just a by product of particle accelerators.

The scale here is absolutely nuts to me. 86 billion nuclei represent only 29 picograms. One gram is 10^12 picograms.

1,000 billion billion gold nuclei per gram of gold.

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#55

Post by codr7 »

EA-3167 wrote: post #9
DrScientist wrote: post #5

It does make you wonder whether the physicists obsession [1] of turning base metals into gold - is the real reason for the LHC :-) [1] Newton famously spent around 30 years of his life on alchemy ( the other stuff were really side projects )

The Ars Magna abides I suppose? I really do think that alchemists would find the modern age of chemistry fascinating, if they could get over the horror of realizing that their religious theories of nature would require immense modification.

It's more the other way around, scientists realizing physical reality isn't.

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#56

Post by qbxk »

DrScientist wrote: post #5

It does make you wonder whether the physicists obsession [1] of turning base metals into gold - is the real reason for the LHC :-) [1] Newton famously spent around 30 years of his life on alchemy ( the other stuff were really side projects )

Surely it's the Anunnaki taking a hail mary approach to their colossal atmospheric gold project

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#57

Post by CGMthrowaway »

omnee wrote: post #42

The relevant part: "The ALICE analysis shows that, during Run 2 of the LHC (2015–2018), about 86 billion gold nuclei were created at the four major experiments. In terms of mass, this corresponds to just 29 picograms (2.9 ×10-11 g)." Just need to scale it by trillions to make 1 ounce, but transmutation of lead to gold - the dream of many alchemists - is now just a by product of particle accelerators.

Ran the numbers. The LHC would break even if the price of gold was $48 trillion trillion per ounce.

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#58

Post by cschmid »

_alternator_ wrote: post #45

Sorta buried in there, but they do note that this is not the first time the transmutation of lead to gold has been accomplished, just the first time it’s been accomplished as near misses in a particle accelerator.

Well technically, the starting points were always other elements like bismuth, and not lead. I believe the authors checked, and noted that in the paper: https://journals.aps.org/prc/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevC.111.0... )

Re: ALICE detects the conversion of lead into gold at the LHC

#59

Post by izzydata »

elashri wrote: post #33

I just did a funny exercise (details are not interesting) to estimate how long would LHC and Alice need (assuming perfect conditions and ignoring any limitations) to get enough gold to fund FCC (15B CHF assuming today's gold price in CHF) on their own. And it would take about 185 billion years of continuous run. A reminder that the universe is about 14 billion years (ignoring the hubble tension for our purpose here)

It would probably also cost more to produce gold than you get out of it so it is effectively infinite time.
Post reply on HN