Topic: Antimatter Cruiser in old JPL Study (Read 20564 times)

Stormbringer · « **on:** November 20, 2003, 12:37:21 am »

A while ago, I posted for info on how to find out more about this ship. The Future almanac claimed this was gene's inspiration for the warp engines of the enterprise. I am posting it to fulfill my promise to do so and to see if someone like MR Hypergol would know how to find out the name of the design study and get more info on it. You might notice that if you replace the boron crystals with dilithium you have the exact scheme for powering the warp engines of the star trek series.

EDIT: Graphic link removed to preserve hosting space.

762 · « **Reply #1 on:** November 20, 2003, 08:53:16 am »

Actually Storm the dilithium is not used as a reactant. The dilithium crystal (being transparent to antimatter) is used to focus the M/A reaction into a coherent plasma stream.

The matter reactant is slush deuterium.

Stormbringer · « **Reply #2 on:** November 20, 2003, 09:23:11 am »

Noted. But in the real world the boron is used due to it's ability to sponge up high energy particles. It is used as one of several control rod substances in nuclear reactors because it "gobbles" up neutrons, etc. So in a way the boron focuses or tunes the energy of the reaction to desireable energy outputs even if it is used as a reactant; similar to dilithium's (Albeit nominally non-destructive) energy lensing role. And (IIRC) the Klingon's engine does use dilithium in a direct conversion role which would be destructive to the dilithium crystals. The Fed's version is non-destructive.

762 · « **Reply #3 on:** November 20, 2003, 09:28:32 am »

I'm wondering why they wouldn't just use a straight hydrogen/anti-proton mix a la Star Trek. That way you wouldn't have to worry about neutron flux or radioactive by-products.

Corbomite · « **Reply #4 on:** November 20, 2003, 09:34:45 am »

Quote:

I'm wondering why they wouldn't just use a straight hydrogen/anti-proton mix a la Star Trek. That way you wouldn't have to worry about neutron flux or radioactive by-products.

Do you realize how expensive it is to "create" antimatter?

762 · « **Reply #5 on:** November 20, 2003, 09:43:37 am »

I know it is, that's why they're saying this thing will be a while off. We were discussing the matter reactant.

Stormbringer · « **Reply #7 on:** November 20, 2003, 12:22:50 pm »

Regarding contempt of gravity. It is not easy to get out ove even the earth's paltry gravity well. Consider than we originally had to use three stage rockets like the saturn to get even a tiny capsule above it. 90 or more percent of the ships mass was fuel and motors, etc. Thr remaining miniscule amount was for the LEM and command module. IOW cargo space. So rockets are mostly fuel, tanks motors etc and can barely manage to get into orbit. This thing has a much better ratio of fuel to cargo. It is vastly faster more powerful and versatile than any conventional rocket can hope to achieve.

I'll post suggested reading later / more time.

Stormbringer · « **Reply #8 on:** November 20, 2003, 12:31:04 pm »

I don't think that is true. The anihilation produces energy across the entire spectrum. There would be induced radiation in the reaction and exhaust channel. Just as in fission. Even most types of fusion eventually induces radioactivity and degradation of the shielding in the reactor chamber. AM reactions would be even more enegetic.

762 · « **Reply #9 on:** November 20, 2003, 01:14:04 pm »

Well the process would definitely yield radioactive by-products. If an antiproton reacts with a Boron-10 nucleus, it will mutually annihilate with one proton, resulting in a Beryllium-9 nucleus. Be-9 is stable but another reaction would yield Li-8, which is radioactive (.84 second half-life, both alpha- and beta-decay). The alpha decay yields a free neutron, which could could potentially lead to more radioactive isotopes (but would probably be sucked up by the Boron). There are other possibilites I'm sure.

P.S. If any real physicists are reading this, please tell me if I am talking out of my arse!

762 · « **Reply #11 on:** November 20, 2003, 02:17:46 pm »

Well I had chili for lunch, so it might just be.

Talk about nuclear reactions...

Stormbringer · « **Reply #12 on:** November 20, 2003, 04:03:50 pm »

Ain't that a cool looking bugger?

JMM · « **Reply #13 on:** November 20, 2003, 06:31:55 pm »

I hope it comes with toilets? Or is that optional?

KOTH-Steel Claw · « **Reply #14 on:** November 21, 2003, 06:52:07 am »

Storm,

I spoke with my father in law last night (just retired from JPL). He wasn't able to verify anytihng for me. He did mention that their website is pretty good for finding information. Sorry, but I couldn't get any other info.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/

Stormbringer · « **Reply #15 on:** November 21, 2003, 10:45:21 am »

thats OK. I was hoping some one would recognize it and be able to name it. If I had the name I coulddo a proper search. Descriptive searches got me no where. Search engines are not smart enough yet. I think I've already tried searches for AM propulsion design studies on JPL site. It confused the engine. Perhaps if I got the book it would have a bibliography or endnotes that name the study. I can get it used for about eight bucks.

Stormbringer · « **Reply #17 on:** November 22, 2003, 05:00:45 pm »

Toasty0; thanks for hosting this graphic for me.

Since space is valuable I don't mind if you remove the file when it is no longer convenient to host it. Just remind me so that I can delete the references to it in a timely manner. I think everyone who might have had suggestions or info has had a chance to see it by now. I've had two offers of help and search suggestions. No luck on the follow ups thus far. I guess I'll buy the book to see about bibliography or endnotes. It will also give me a chance to scan in the part about Gene using this idea for his propulsion system for the curious.

Stormbringer · « **Reply #18 on:** November 22, 2003, 05:06:38 pm »

.84 seconds? Sounds rather clean compared to elements with half lifes of 50K years or more. Perhaps not so big a problem as I initially thought. Of course, there are; in addition to induced radiation, direct particle creation in the resultant plasma which could casue tertiary radioactive elements. This is after all second only to the big bang in terms of creative and destructive potential. It is a "Little bang."

News:

Topic: Antimatter Cruiser in old JPL Study (Read 20564 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Stormbringer

762

Stormbringer

762

Corbomite

762

Sirgod

Stormbringer

Stormbringer

762

Corbomite

762

Stormbringer

JMM

KOTH-Steel Claw

Stormbringer

Stormbringer

Stormbringer

Stormbringer

Sirgod

Topic: Antimatter Cruiser in old JPL Study (Read 20564 times)