antimatter energy

Status
Not open for further replies.

Apokalipse

Golden Master
Messages
14,559
Location
Melbourne, Australia
molsen said:
how can we ever control global warming when your graphics cards consume so much fossil fuels!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!??!
nuclear energy, or even antimatter if they manage to make enough of it.
Australia has lots of uranium to mine.
but still, antimatter is 100 times as powerful, and doesn't leave radiation.
 
apokalipse said:
antimatter is 100 times as powerful, and doesn't leave radiation.\
Yeah, but there is just the small problem that it could cause a quantum vacuum collapse or an Ice-9 Type Transition.
 
003 said:
Yeah, but there is just the small problem that it could cause a quantum vacuum collapse or an Ice-9 Type Transition.
people have witnessed antimatter anhilation before. the only thing that happened was a release of energy.
 
The problem with antimatter is making enough of it. If you take all the antimatter ever produced by a specific team, it would only be enough to power a small lightbulb for a few minutes. And these guys are putting out billions of anti-atoms a second.

Take a tad bit more than that to power a warp drive, no?
 
just calculating the mass:
1 billion antihydrogen atoms = 0.000000000000000166 grams

at the rate of one billion antihydrogen atoms per second:

in 24 hours, they can make 0.0000000000143424 grams of antihydrogen atoms

or in one year, they can make 0.000000005234976 grams of antihydrogen atoms

not a whole lot.

*edit*
split off the antimatter discussion into a new thread....

*edit*
what's the best way to make antimatter? particle accelerators? (assuming you can contain the antimatter afterwards)
 
apokalipse said:
what's the best way to make antimatter? particle accelerators? (assuming you can contain the antimatter afterwards)

Yeah, you slam protons going at 99.9999% of the speed of light [which you have already acclerated] into a liquid target material, and subatomic debris is produced, including some antimatter. It's not very efficient though; for every million protons smashed, only 20ish antiprotons are produced. Protons are preferred against something like electrons, becuase, obviously, they weigh more than electrons and produce more debris.
 
Lots of ways to make electrical power bar fossil fuels, don't have to resort to sci-fi solutions. Sure if there was ever a cheap way to produce lots of antimatter quickly then that might be an option.. but I hope not, we've already got enough stuff that we can make bombs out of.
I understand Nuclear fission and possibly fusion will probably play a big part in future energy produciton.
 
MrCoffee said:
Lots of ways to make electrical power bar fossil fuels, don't have to resort to sci-fi solutions. Sure if there was ever a cheap way to produce lots of antimatter quickly then that might be an option.. but I hope not, we've already got enough stuff that we can make bombs out of.
I understand Nuclear fission and possibly fusion will probably play a big part in future energy produciton.

I think it's important to research new energy sources such as anti-matter, etc. If nobody bothered to look into new sources of energy, all of our vehicles would run on coal, as well as power plants.

The only way that you can find a cheap way of producing anything is to research it.

Nuclear fission is already a large source of energy for our cities. However, this also produces radioactive waste, which is difficult to dispose of.

Fusion is extremely clean. It is somewhat self-contained, and would only really produce Helium as a bi-product. The only problem is creating a reaction that is large enough to be useful, but still being able to contain it.
 
Still, an anti matter warhead the size of a golfball being able to blow the **** out of a small country is'nt something i'm particularly looking forward to seeing..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom