PreprintCC BY 4.0arXiv
Comment on "Beam blow up due to beamstrahlung in circular e+e- colliders"
Abstract
The authors of the original article, Valdivia Garcia and Zimmermann (2021), state that they "derive analytical formulae for the equilibrium beam parameters, considering the varying electromagnetic field during the collision". However, to calculate the bending radius in the field of the counter-propagating bunch, they employed an approximation that is completely unjustified. Consequently, a significant portion of the formulae derived in the article bears a very tenuous relationship to reality. For practical purposes, we propose a different solution -- one that is far simpler and more accurate.
Related
- Circular-Mode Optics for High-Intensity Beams and High-Luminosity Colliders
- A modern particle-in-cell code for beam-beam simulations of future colliders
- Integrated Circular Polarisation Beam Shaper Based on Tilted Waveguide Bragg Gratings
- Non-circular scan trajectories for reducing cone-beam artifacts in Gamma Knife CBCT images: a simulation study
- Entanglement of momenta at colliders
BibTeX
@misc{shatilov2026comment,
title = {{Comment on "Beam blow up due to beamstrahlung in circular e+e- colliders"}},
author = {Dmitry Shatilov},
howpublished = {arXiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2610.22453},
eprint = {2610.22453},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.22453},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Comment on "Beam blow up due to beamstrahlung in circular e+e- colliders"
AU - Dmitry Shatilov
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/15
PB - arXiv
DO - 10.48550/arxiv.2610.22453
UR - https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.22453
AB - The authors of the original article, Valdivia Garcia and Zimmermann (2021), state that they "derive analytical formulae for the equilibrium beam parameters, considering the varying electromagnetic field during the collision". However, to calculate the bending radius in the field of the counter-propagating bunch, they employed an approximation that is completely unjustified. Consequently, a significant portion of the formulae derived in the article bears a very tenuous relationship to reality. For practical purposes, we propose a different solution -- one that is far simpler and more accurate.
ER -