Topic: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?  (Read 15642 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« on: July 19, 2005, 11:49:15 am »
1st let me understand antimatter explosions... If you have an equal amount of anti-matter and matter, when they meet, do they blow up, and what kind of yield are we talking... or do they cancel each other out and give out a whimper? How do you get an antimatter explosion and a release of tons of energy?

How much antimatter would one need to make a bigger explosion than the worlds most powerful Hydrogen Bomb, and what is the most antimatter one of our current-tech particle accelerators can hold?

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2005, 11:53:13 am »
I guess it depends on how much anti-matter, but if you look at the TOS episode Obsession from classic trek, that little bit in the magnetic bottle was enough to RIP away Half the planets atmoshphere. So I would think the ani-matter bomb is a bigger bang.
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline KAT J'inn

  • CFO - Kzinti War Machine, Inc.
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2294
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2005, 11:55:06 am »
Okay . . .  from my days in school for Nuclear Engineering (believe it or not LOL) . . . and due to old age I am certain I will get this wrong . . .


Anti-Matter --- Matter Contact should yield pure energy from the matter with no loss.  Therefore, the amount of energy created should be calculated from    E = MC^2

From that formula you can take the known energy yield of a Hydrogen Bomb and calculate backwards to determine how much matter  (and an equal amount of Anti-Matter) you would need to equal or exceed that yield.

So as to your question as to what is bigger . .  well an anti-matter bomb has the potential to be bigger due to 100% conversion of matter to energy.  However, it depends on the amounts of material used.




Offline Bob Graham

  • Dar Uberpimp
  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 37
  • Gender: Male
  • "Take her easy, and if shes easy, take her again"
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2005, 11:58:25 am »
Dont they screen lawyers to keep such knowledge away from them?
Captain FPFBobG
uberpimp_91@hotmail.com

"It's too bad that whole families have to be torn apart by something as simple as wild dogs."


762_XC

  • Guest
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2005, 11:59:54 am »
Nuclear fission converts a small amount of the matter in the nucleus to energy.

A matter-antimatter interaction converts every particle-antiparticle pairing into energy.

So given equal amounts of material, an antimatter explosion would be much greater, probably by several orders of magnitude.

P.S. I'm more scared about Dizzy having this knowledge.

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2005, 12:00:53 pm »
Dont they screen lawyers to keep such knowledge away from them?


If you are going to play with nuclear power, you had better learn to defend your self I guess.  ;D
« Last Edit: July 19, 2005, 01:06:48 pm by FPF-TobinDax »
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #6 on: July 19, 2005, 12:02:46 pm »
Okay . . .  from my days in school for Nuclear Engineering (believe it or not LOL) . . . and due to old age I am certain I will get this wrong . . .


Anti-Matter --- Matter Contact should yield pure energy from the matter with no loss.  Therefore, the amount of energy created should be calculated from    E = MC^2

From that formula you can take the know energy yield of a Hydrogen Bomb and calculate backwards to determine how much matter  (and an equal amount of Anti-Matter) you would need to equal or exceed that yield.

So as your question as to what is bigger . .  well an anti-matter bomb has the potential to be bigger due to 100% conversion of matter to energy.  However, it depends on the amounts of material used.





As the resident Physicist, I can say this is almost correct, a few things left out, but close enough.  The "pure energy" per se, would not be energy, but actually a null area, which would be devistating if it came in contact with either matter or antimatter.  The vacuum of space is far from a place with out energy, infact, if you consider that all space has an infinite ammount of energy passing through it, from every light source in the universe, you would have to figure that into the equation for the "explosion" force.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #7 on: July 19, 2005, 01:05:09 pm »
As others have said given equal -or without having a much larger (like to the xxxxxth power)nuke the winner would be anti matter.
Pretty much 99.9 adinfinitum of what's known about anti matter is (afaik) still theoretical.
The theory works -but it won't really be 100% until it can be tested..and that might take awhile.

EDIT : http://livefromcern.web.cern.ch/livefromcern/antimatter/

Has some answers to questions - please be noting that they claim to have (over 10years) produced
about one billionth of a gram- and the cost for even that has been huge.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2005, 01:29:45 pm by Hexx »
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27844
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #8 on: July 19, 2005, 01:27:46 pm »
All, I can say, Is I hope Anti-Matter wins out, as I'd be afraid of what Dizzy could do with It. I somehow doubt, he'll get his hands on the stuff though.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D

Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #9 on: July 19, 2005, 01:32:02 pm »
Nah AntiMatter would win out, it's a pretty efficient conversion of energy.
Fission is not so efficient, fusion is more but still not that great.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #10 on: July 19, 2005, 01:35:32 pm »
The real question is what is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks?
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #11 on: July 19, 2005, 01:39:40 pm »
The real question is what is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks?

<sigh, Feds>
They actually weigh the same Tobin.
And for the next answer
If you dropped them both from the same height the bricks would hit the ground first
(given a non-vacuum )

-And the REAL question is
Why do you want to know?  ???
« Last Edit: July 19, 2005, 01:50:59 pm by Hexx »
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline KAT J'inn

  • CFO - Kzinti War Machine, Inc.
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2294
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #12 on: July 19, 2005, 01:43:03 pm »
So in order of destructive power.   Top Least  Bottem Most . . .



1)  TnT

2)  Atomic Bomb

3)  Nuclear Bomb

4)  Anti-Matter Bomb

5)  Shop Rex at a Macy's Clearance Sale



Okay, I think I got it.



Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #13 on: July 19, 2005, 01:44:40 pm »
The real question is what is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks?

<sigh, Feds>
They actually weigh the same Tobin.
And for the next answer
If you dropped them both from the same height the bricks would hit the ground first

-And the REAL question is
Why do you want to know?  ???

Spoil sport! I was hoping for some interesting replies before some stick in the mud came along with that response and ruined things. :P
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #14 on: July 19, 2005, 01:48:20 pm »
So in order of destructive power.   Top Least  Bottem Most . . .



1)  TnT

2)  Atomic Bomb

3)  Nuclear Bomb

4)  Anti-Matter Bomb

5)  Shop Rex at a Macy's Clearance Sale



Okay, I think I got it.




how about a bar full of kitties at last call at a bar?
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #15 on: July 19, 2005, 01:49:27 pm »
The real question is what is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks?

<sigh, Feds>
They actually weigh the same Tobin.
And for the next answer
If you dropped them both from the same height the bricks would hit the ground first

-And the REAL question is
Why do you want to know?  ???

Spoil sport! I was hoping for some interesting replies before some stick in the mud came along with that response and ruined things. :P

Well you could argue about the actually dimensions/scale of the "brick" - I suppose  if you increased the surface area and made it (much) smaller in depth you could (eventually) have the brick fall slower- it would have to be a fairly controlled test though
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

el-Karnak

  • Guest
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #16 on: July 19, 2005, 01:56:07 pm »
So in order of destructive power.   Top Least  Bottem Most . . .



1)  TnT

2)  Atomic Bomb

3)  Nuclear Bomb

4)  Anti-Matter Bomb

5)  Shop Rex at a Macy's Clearance Sale



Okay, I think I got it.




6)  Karnak posts.  I use nothing but the finest temporal rift bombs and genesis torpedoes. ;D

Offline CaptJosh

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #17 on: July 19, 2005, 02:10:02 pm »
You don't get it Karnak. Nothing is more destructive than a Shopasaurus Rex at a sale. NOTHING. Just ask Jinn. He has one, or rather one has him.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27844
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #18 on: July 19, 2005, 02:13:56 pm »
The real question is what is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks?

Actually, Bricks...

Take a gold Brick for example...

 A pound of feathers. Some would say a pound is a pound, but the fact is: Gold is a precious metal and is therefore weighed in the Troy system of measurement. This means that a pound of gold weighs only 12 oz and a pound of feathers weighs 16 oz.

Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

Offline CaptJosh

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #19 on: July 19, 2005, 02:32:38 pm »
Ah, but you neglect to mention that a troy ounce is a larger measurement than a standard ounce.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

Offline Mr.Bad151

  • Lt. Junior Grade
  • *
  • Posts: 57
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #20 on: July 19, 2005, 02:34:06 pm »
The real question is what is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks?

Actually, Bricks...

Take a gold Brick for example...

 A pound of feathers. Some would say a pound is a pound, but the fact is: Gold is a precious metal and is therefore weighed in the Troy system of measurement. This means that a pound of gold weighs only 12 oz and a pound of feathers weighs 16 oz.

Stephen

Umm.. given your example.. wouldn't the feathers be heaver?  Pound of gold 12 oz.. Pound of  feathers 16 oz..??
"As the radius of my knowledge increases, so does the circumference of my ignorance"

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #21 on: July 19, 2005, 02:34:39 pm »
The real question is what is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks?

Actually, Bricks...

Take a gold Brick for example...

 A pound of feathers. Some would say a pound is a pound, but the fact is: Gold is a precious metal and is therefore weighed in the Troy system of measurement. This means that a pound of gold weighs only 12 oz and a pound of feathers weighs 16 oz.

Stephen

Given the info we were given (one pound bricks, one pound feathers) you're wrong.
You can't introduce elemental composition just like it was nothing..
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27844
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #22 on: July 19, 2005, 02:36:27 pm »
Ok, OK, Consider Me spanked.  ;D ;D ;D :whip: :whip: :whip:

Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #23 on: July 19, 2005, 02:38:24 pm »
Ok, so if you want to play the density game, here is one for you:



Imagine a cube with sides as long as this line:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is made of gold, and, here's the kicker, it has the same weight as you do   :police:
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #24 on: July 19, 2005, 02:43:29 pm »
Which Line?

(Feds are soooo bad at this..)
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #25 on: July 19, 2005, 02:45:58 pm »
Ehh, only see one on my screen.  About 17.5 cm (7 in) long.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #26 on: July 19, 2005, 02:50:16 pm »
Solid cube?
if not- *how* thick are the sides -what's the volume of the inside of the cube?

Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27844
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #27 on: July 19, 2005, 02:51:55 pm »
Ya know what Braxton, Screw them guys. This has made this Player come out of retirement, in order to show them exactly what one can do with magic photons, IE, Magic Physics.  ;) I think I'm going to have to jump in on this one.  ;D ;D ;D ;D

Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #28 on: July 19, 2005, 02:57:59 pm »
Solid cube.

And if your coming out of Retirement, lets hope I see that name either Blue Brown or Purple ;)
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27844
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #29 on: July 19, 2005, 03:02:43 pm »
Solid cube.

And if your coming out of Retirement, lets hope I see that name either Blue Brown or Purple ;)

Sounds good, 762, has been hounding me via Frey anyways.  ;D so what do I need to download and install to get this game up and running beyond singleplayer.


Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #30 on: July 19, 2005, 03:04:38 pm »
Jump on the 9th Forums, I'll bump the post I made with EVERYTHING lol.  You will know so much about it that you'll go nuts.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27844
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2005, 03:14:06 pm »
Roger that, Oh man, why do I feel a headache coming on?  ;D ;D ;D

Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2005, 03:18:33 pm »
In a matter antimatter explosion an equal amount of matter and antimatter will convert to energy. in an atomic explosion a miniscule percentage of matter will convert to energy. so say you have 45KG of fissionable material; a gram or a few grams atthe very most will convert. usingthe equation E=MC^2. the released energy (E) is equal to (=) the mass converted (M) multiplied by (X) the speed of light multiplied by itself (^2.) the speed of lightis about 182,000 KM per second.

so since a AM explosion converts the total mass to energy assuming equal amounts of matter and antimatter; 100 grams of antimatter and 100 grams of matter (as an example) would be 200 times more powerful than the typical fission based atomic bomb.

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #33 on: July 19, 2005, 04:20:18 pm »
And what's the the air speed of a swallow?  (and would you prefer to have a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks dropped on your head?  ;) )
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline Kroma BaSyl

  • Romulan Tart
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2276
  • Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #34 on: July 19, 2005, 04:22:33 pm »
And what's the the air speed of a swallow? 

African or European?
♥ ♥ ♥  GDA Kroma BaSyl  ♥ ♥ ♥
GCS Prima Ballerina
GCS PHAT Gorn
GCS Queen Kroma


Because this game makes me feel like  a thirteen year old girl trapped in a lizards body.

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #35 on: July 19, 2005, 04:37:36 pm »
And what's the the air speed of a swallow? 

African or European?

Doh!  ;)

Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #36 on: July 19, 2005, 04:39:47 pm »
And what's the the air speed of a swallow? 

African or European?

Doh!  ;)



*Watches as Tobin gets thrown into the canyon*
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #37 on: July 19, 2005, 04:42:26 pm »
Don't watch Braxton, you don't want to see a nutter on your side drop to his death.
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #38 on: July 19, 2005, 04:42:59 pm »
Don't watch Braxton, you don't want to see a nutter on your side drop to his death.

Oh and   AAAAAAAAAaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh...............
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #39 on: July 19, 2005, 04:46:52 pm »
Was just sticking true to the Monty Python, worry not ;)
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #40 on: July 19, 2005, 04:48:41 pm »
I won't. after all, I'm not dead yet!  ;D
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #41 on: July 19, 2005, 04:51:25 pm »
I've often wondered about how many discussions concerning anti-matter have eventually
turned to Monty-Python..
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #42 on: July 19, 2005, 04:53:19 pm »
I could actually be considered an expert about it too, that is the sad part  :police:, the matter/antimatter that is.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline SSCF-LeRoy

  • Kim's Clubhouse Painter
  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 923
  • Gender: Male
  • Captain
    • SSCF.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #43 on: July 19, 2005, 04:54:40 pm »
You don't get it Karnak. Nothing is more destructive than a Shopasaurus Rex at a sale. NOTHING. Just ask Jinn. He has one, or rather one has him.

Insignificant next to the power of the Force... ;D Wait, SR IS the Force :o

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #44 on: July 19, 2005, 04:57:01 pm »
I could actually be considered an expert about it too, that is the sad part  :police:, the matter/antimatter that is.
Hmmm
Rereading all your posts on this topic maybe you should stop at Blockbuster on your way home tonight..  :P
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #45 on: July 19, 2005, 04:59:06 pm »
I could actually be considered an expert about it too, that is the sad part  :police:, the matter/antimatter that is.
Hmmm
Rereading all your posts on this topic maybe you should stop at Blockbuster on your way home tonight..  :P

Might as well let it spill, since a few people already know: I'm a PhD in physics, so, yes, I know what I am talking about when it comes to stuff like this.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #46 on: July 19, 2005, 05:00:35 pm »
I could actually be considered an expert about it too, that is the sad part  :police:, the matter/antimatter that is.
Hmmm
Rereading all your posts on this topic maybe you should stop at Blockbuster on your way home tonight..  :P

Might as well let it spill, since a few people already know: I'm a PhD in physics, so, yes, I know what I am talking about when it comes to stuff like this.

B-L-O-C-K-B-U-S-T-E-R Hard to miss
Big shiny yellow letters, blue background
Your coworkers can thank me later.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #47 on: July 19, 2005, 05:03:26 pm »
I could actually be considered an expert about it too, that is the sad part  :police:, the matter/antimatter that is.

Hmmm
Rereading all your posts on this topic maybe you should stop at Blockbuster on your way home tonight..  :P


Might as well let it spill, since a few people already know: I'm a PhD in physics, so, yes, I know what I am talking about when it comes to stuff like this.


B-L-O-C-K-B-U-S-T-E-R Hard to miss
Big shiny yellow letters, blue background
Your coworkers can thank me later.




Might help you loosen up a little bit.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #48 on: July 19, 2005, 05:06:23 pm »
I'd say that it doesn't.. but that's a revelation I'm saving for another time..
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #49 on: July 19, 2005, 05:51:22 pm »
Just wait until I break out the physics behind flammable Pop Tarts!

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #50 on: July 19, 2005, 05:57:40 pm »
Ok, so if you want to play the density game, here is one for you:



Imagine a cube with sides as long as this line:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is made of gold, and, here's the kicker, it has the same weight as you do   :police:

This will be true under all circumstances in the absence of gravity
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #51 on: July 19, 2005, 05:59:14 pm »
Ok, so Storrmbringer gave the best description I can make sense of. Lotsa good stuff, but how do you capture antimatter, hold it w/o it coming into contact with matter... and how would it go off? Pop the top and let it come into contact with the can? Also... if it needs matter to go off (why dont they just cancel out instead of exploding) poping the can in a vacuum like outer space, would the antimatter dissipate in the absence of matter... or someone said light from the stars would do something... or would the antimatter kinda sit there... ooze from the can so to speak and lurk waiting for something to stroll by?

And we got a measurement figure... but how many grams would it take to yield in excess of the worlds largest hydrogen bomb?

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #52 on: July 19, 2005, 06:00:23 pm »
Ok, so if you want to play the density game, here is one for you:



Imagine a cube with sides as long as this line:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is made of gold, and, here's the kicker, it has the same weight as you do   :police:

This will be true under all circumstances in the absence of gravity

Can you ever truly remove *all* gravitational influences though?
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #53 on: July 19, 2005, 06:02:12 pm »
Yes, matter/antimatter reactions convert 100% of the mass of the reactants into energy, however energy comes in a huge number of forms and it really depends upon what type of energy is produced. For an antimatter 'explosion' to occur, some of this energy must be converted into kinetic energy. Consider a nuetron bomb, while it releases a lot of energy, there is no explosive force.
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline CaptJosh

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #54 on: July 19, 2005, 06:04:43 pm »
Make that almost no explosive force. A little bird told me that there is still a small blast radius. Somewhere around the size of a car, IIRC what said bird said.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #55 on: July 19, 2005, 06:05:58 pm »
Ok, so if you want to play the density game, here is one for you:



Imagine a cube with sides as long as this line:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is made of gold, and, here's the kicker, it has the same weight as you do   :police:

This will be true under all circumstances in the absence of gravity

Can you ever truly remove *all* gravitational influences though?

Gravity in Newtonian terms is no different tyo any other force. When a force is applied to a mass it accelerates (newton's 2nd law F=Ma). The "weight" of a mass then is nothing else other than a measure of the force acting on it. In the absence of any force, an object has no weight, but it still has mass (unless of course the object is moving at the speed of light)

So, while there exists no place in the universe that does not have some gravitational influence (since all points in the universe are affected by the gravity of every mass or object in the universe), the sum vector total of all forces acting an object can be zero (in which case it has no weight).
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #56 on: July 19, 2005, 06:13:17 pm »
Ughh OK IIRC the "largest" "Nuke" (there's what-about 15 different kinda?) was claimed as
@ 100 mt and (I think?) detonated at about half that yield by the Soviets in the early 60's

So basically (looking at TJ's )it would release .. god actually I'll let one of the brains do the math,
The (predicted) energy from an antimatter/matter reaction is ar less.
You'd probably come close to the 100mt's with a few  grams?
(Or I could be way off)

I think you'd be best looking at the TJ's released during the explosion.
But I just don't feel like working out the math, not that I couldn't of course..
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #57 on: July 19, 2005, 06:13:38 pm »
Ok, so Storrmbringer gave the best description I can make sense of. Lotsa good stuff, but how do you capture antimatter, hold it w/o it coming into contact with matter... and how would it go off? Pop the top and let it come into contact with the can? Also... if it needs matter to go off (why dont they just cancel out instead of exploding) poping the can in a vacuum like outer space, would the antimatter dissipate in the absence of matter... or someone said light from the stars would do something... or would the antimatter kinda sit there... ooze from the can so to speak and lurk waiting for something to stroll by?

And we got a measurement figure... but how many grams would it take to yield in excess of the worlds largest hydrogen bomb?

Well the largest yield fusion bombs ever tested were 2oo or so megatons and there were 500 megaton designs. the hiroshima and nagasaki bombs were measured in kilotons. and those were the equivelent of one tenth of what i was talking about above. so my guess would be half a kilogram of antimatter.

it could be stored in small amounts using simple static charges in a matrix where the sides of a pit were equal in charge to the amount of antimatter. a nano technology array of such pits on an IC like platform where the number of pits are huge and where the polarity of the walls of the pit could be switched might safely do it without large magnetic bottles.

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #58 on: July 19, 2005, 06:15:53 pm »
Ok, so if you want to play the density game, here is one for you:



Imagine a cube with sides as long as this line:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is made of gold, and, here's the kicker, it has the same weight as you do   :police:

This will be true under all circumstances in the absence of gravity

Can you ever truly remove *all* gravitational influences though?

Gravity in Newtonian terms is no different tyo any other force. When a force is applied to a mass it accelerates (newton's 2nd law F=Ma). The "weight" of a mass then is nothing else other than a measure of the force acting on it. In the absence of any force, an object has no weight, but it still has mass (unless of course the object is moving at the speed of light)

So, while there exists no place in the universe that does not have some gravitational influence (since all points in the universe are affected by the gravity of every mass or object in the universe), the sum vector total of all forces acting an object can be zero (in which case it has no weight).


Have I ever mentioned how much I HATE physics?
Dated a girl a few years back who did this stuff, I had to learn it just to try and keep up
Now I remember how much my brain hurt...
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #59 on: July 19, 2005, 06:23:56 pm »
Here's an idea. pi mesons do not react with matter or energy fields. but they rapidly decay to gamma ray photons and other particles that do. so if pi mesons are aimed at a ship (even) with shields and the relativistic velocity is such that the decay time coincides with when the pi mesons are traversing through the ship what happens is the decay to other relativisitic particles within the hull amounts to a nuke going off (inside the ship.) shields are useless, the hull is worthless.

pi mesons are made in quantity when positrons and electrons meet and anihilate. one game; traveller used this principle in a weapon known as the T factor meson cannon.

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #60 on: July 19, 2005, 06:29:59 pm »
Well the largest yield fusion bombs ever tested were 2oo or so megatons and there were 500 megaton designs... my guess would be half a kilogram of antimatter.

it could be stored in small amounts using simple static charges in a matrix where the sides of a pit were equal in charge to the amount of antimatter. a nano technology array of such pits on an IC like platform where the number of pits are huge and where the polarity of the walls of the pit could be switched might safely do it without large magnetic bottles.

Ok, so half a kilogram of antimatter would yield a 200-500 megaton explosion? (and if we are talking 2000 times the power of the hiroshima bomb, that would be big enough to wipe out the state of New York)? Tracey mentioned different kinds of non/kinetic explosions. How do we insure we get a destructive release of energy?

Now, static charges to hold antimatter in place... Sounds pure science fiction. But what do I know? If possible tho, wouldnt the forces exerted by the static field be matter and screw things up? I thought you had to freeze antimatter in a magnatized vacuum?

And for Tracey since you seem to know something about gravity... how else do you keep those G racks looking so perky? What is the speed of gravity? Speed of light, less than that or instantaneous? And what effect would Capn Josh's 'Gravity Wells' have on an antimatter explosion if gravity were turned on and off?

Also

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #61 on: July 19, 2005, 06:36:32 pm »
Well the largest yield fusion bombs ever tested were 2oo or so megatons and there were 500 megaton designs... my guess would be half a kilogram of antimatter.

it could be stored in small amounts using simple static charges in a matrix where the sides of a pit were equal in charge to the amount of antimatter. a nano technology array of such pits on an IC like platform where the number of pits are huge and where the polarity of the walls of the pit could be switched might safely do it without large magnetic bottles.

Ok, so half a kilogram of antimatter would yield a 200-500 megaton explosion? (and if we are talking 2000 times the power of the hiroshima bomb, that would be big enough to wipe out the state of New York)? Tracey mentioned different kinds of non/kinetic explosions. How do we insure we get a destructive release of energy?

Now, static charges to hold antimatter in place... Sounds pure science fiction. But what do I know? If possible tho, wouldnt the forces exerted by the static field be matter and screw things up? I thought you had to freeze antimatter in a magnatized vacuum?

And for Tracey since you seem to know something about gravity... how else do you keep those G racks looking so perky? What is the speed of gravity? Speed of light, less than that or instantaneous? And what effect would Capn Josh's 'Gravity Wells' have on an antimatter explosion if gravity were turned on and off?

Also

well what she said was true however in the same way the nuclear explosion yields particles that cause a devastating explosion an antimatter explosion would to. after all a tiny amount of matter converting to energy caused the whole nuclear explosion force.

the mechanism in an atimatter explosion is the same conversion process writ large. it is not a whole different physical principle. both explosions use the same principle. now it is true in a fusion explosion the principle is a little differnt and has more to do with proton radius energy; but essentially the fission bomb and antimatter bomb work on the same principle.

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #62 on: July 19, 2005, 06:38:51 pm »
What are Hexx's 15 different types? Atomic, Nuclear, Fission, Fusion, Hydrogen, what else?

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #63 on: July 19, 2005, 06:39:24 pm »
Well for the energy I dunno

For the area of effect- I belive the 100MT (biggest ever produced) was estimatd to
be able to wipe out everything in a 50km radius, cause dmg up to 100km radius and 3rd degree burns to 150kms
( all kms are very @ )

You could hold it in a magnetic field- but it would have to be in a vacuum (IIRC)

And gravity would have no more or less effect on an Antimatter explosion than on any other tyoe of energy release.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #64 on: July 19, 2005, 06:43:55 pm »
And gravity would have no more or less effect on an Antimatter explosion than on any other tyoe of energy release.

More info please...

If we are releasing more energy in an antimatter/matter explosion, what speed would space and time distort? Or am I mistaking that the energy released weighs the same amount as the mass it started with? I thought an explosion of that m,agnitude would release more mass and thus exert its own gravity influence...

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #65 on: July 19, 2005, 06:48:37 pm »
No. force exchange particles are shared. for example there is no anti-photon. an antiproton has a charge of -1 unit. so it is repelled from negative charges. if the atoms around the antiproton are also negatively charged the antiproton will never get near enough to contact the ordinary wall and anihilate. when the antiprotons is needed the charge in the wall can be reversed. or in three dimensions a magnetic field can be turned on simultaneously to directthe antiproton out of the matrix without contacting the walls.

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #66 on: July 19, 2005, 06:50:54 pm »
But didnt Wesley say in TNG that Matter, Energy, Space and Time are all the same thing?? Or is that something L. Ron Hubbard said  :-\
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #67 on: July 19, 2005, 06:54:34 pm »
No. force exchange particles are shared. for example there is no anti-photon. an antiproton has a charge of -1 unit. so it is repelled from negative charges. if the atoms around the antiproton are also negatively charged the antiproton will never get near enough to contact the ordinary wall and anihilate. when the antiprotons is needed the charge in the wall can be reversed. or in three dimensions a magnetic field can be turned on simultaneously to directthe antiproton out of the matrix without contacting the walls.

Unless the strong electrodynamic forces are overcome by kinetic energy and the subatomic particles pushed together close enough so that the weak nuclear forces or "hooks" can grab on to them. Consider the stellar core of a neutron star that has a mass 1.44 times Chandrassaker's limit.
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #68 on: July 19, 2005, 06:57:09 pm »
The idea of confining antimater with a scheme similar in principle to what i discussed  has been done in the lab. and on a much larger scale posititve particles in the form of hydrogen nuclei have been suspended in a matrix of doped ceramic for use in a prototype hydrogen car. the containment scheme worked with enough hydrogen so trapped to drive the car nearly 300 miles. That is a lot of protons. asntiprotons would just require the opposite polarity of the scheme for the hydrogen car already produced as a prototype.

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #69 on: July 19, 2005, 06:57:45 pm »
No. force exchange particles are shared. for example there is no anti-photon. an antiproton has a charge of -1 unit. so it is repelled from negative charges. if the atoms around the antiproton are also negatively charged the antiproton will never get near enough to contact the ordinary wall and anihilate. when the antiprotons is needed the charge in the wall can be reversed. or in three dimensions a magnetic field can be turned on simultaneously to directthe antiproton out of the matrix without contacting the walls.

Yeah That's what I was going to say..

I don't think any *measurable* effect on gravity (or the infamous space/teime continuim) would result from even a very large Antimatter explosion
Light(energy) does have (I think?) some gravitational influence.. but hell if I can do the math to figure out what you want

So -aside from making me feel stupid- where exactly did this line of questions come from?  
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #70 on: July 19, 2005, 06:59:02 pm »
No. force exchange particles are shared. for example there is no anti-photon. an antiproton has a charge of -1 unit. so it is repelled from negative charges. if the atoms around the antiproton are also negatively charged the antiproton will never get near enough to contact the ordinary wall and anihilate. when the antiprotons is needed the charge in the wall can be reversed. or in three dimensions a magnetic field can be turned on simultaneously to directthe antiproton out of the matrix without contacting the walls.

Unless the strong electrodynamic forces are overcome by kinetic energy and the subatomic particles pushed together close enough so that the weak nuclear forces or "hooks" can grab on to them. Consider the stellar core of a neutron star that has a mass 1.44 times Chandrassaker's limit.

true but you are talking about enough kinetic energy to produce fusion. it is not the sort of energy that would happen by accident in side what is essentially an IC chip..

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #71 on: July 19, 2005, 06:59:42 pm »
No. force exchange particles are shared. for example there is no anti-photon. an antiproton has a charge of -1 unit. so it is repelled from negative charges. if the atoms around the antiproton are also negatively charged the antiproton will never get near enough to contact the ordinary wall and anihilate. when the antiprotons is needed the charge in the wall can be reversed. or in three dimensions a magnetic field can be turned on simultaneously to directthe antiproton out of the matrix without contacting the walls.

Ok, lets get this straight...

1.) I'm getting you on how to hold and store a half kilogram of antimatter. Recap for me on how you would do it, again, please, and what kind of size device we are talking about. What are the power requirements and how do we get the antimatter in there in the first place?

2.) Also, if we can store a half kilogram of antimatter (equal to the most expolosive bomb made by man) what is the theoretical limit on how much antimatter you can store? In Fasa Trek they had various yields of photon torp warheads. The 1st one blew up a parking lot. In SFB, there are 3x types, er 2. Why cant we generate enough to wipe out say... Planet Earth?

3.) I'm fuzzy on this... the gravitational weight or mass of a half kilogram of antimatter... is a half kilogram of gravity influence? What about when you have your antimatter explosion... Do you have an increase in the gravity influence, does the blast 'weigh' more that a half kilogram?


Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #72 on: July 19, 2005, 07:01:28 pm »
No. force exchange particles are shared. for example there is no anti-photon. an antiproton has a charge of -1 unit. so it is repelled from negative charges. if the atoms around the antiproton are also negatively charged the antiproton will never get near enough to contact the ordinary wall and anihilate. when the antiprotons is needed the charge in the wall can be reversed. or in three dimensions a magnetic field can be turned on simultaneously to directthe antiproton out of the matrix without contacting the walls.

Yeah That's what I was going to say..

I don't think any *measurable* effect on gravity (or the infamous space/teime continuim) would result from even a very large Antimatter explosion
Light(energy) does have (I think?) some gravitational influence.. but hell if I can do the math to figure out what you want

So -aside from making me feel stupid- where exactly did this line of questions come from?  

LOL. it does not it is a separate sub topic. it has nothing to do with your discussion.

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #73 on: July 19, 2005, 07:04:53 pm »
 :lol:

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #74 on: July 19, 2005, 07:10:46 pm »
No. force exchange particles are shared. for example there is no anti-photon. an antiproton has a charge of -1 unit. so it is repelled from negative charges. if the atoms around the antiproton are also negatively charged the antiproton will never get near enough to contact the ordinary wall and anihilate. when the antiprotons is needed the charge in the wall can be reversed. or in three dimensions a magnetic field can be turned on simultaneously to directthe antiproton out of the matrix without contacting the walls.

Ok, lets get this straight...

1.) I'm getting you on how to hold and store a half kilogram of antimatter. Recap for me on how you would do it, again, please, and what kind of size device we are talking about. What are the power requirements and how do we get the antimatter in there in the first place?

2.) Also, if we can store a half kilogram of antimatter (equal to the most expolosive bomb made by man) what is the theoretical limit on how much antimatter you can store? In Fasa Trek they had various yields of photon torp warheads. The 1st one blew up a parking lot. In SFB, there are 3x types, er 2. Why cant we generate enough to wipe out say... Planet Earth?

3.) I'm fuzzy on this... the gravitational weight or mass of a half kilogram of antimatter... is a half kilogram of gravity influence? What about when you have your antimatter explosion... Do you have an increase in the gravity influence, does the blast 'weigh' more that a half kilogram?



well bear in mind the matrix would have to be very precisely machined in the way that IC chips are by lithography or vapor deposition with masks and all that. ifthat is doable the units could be made modular so that many such "IC chips" could be harnessed together in stacks or piles. the limit would be to do with prtability if talking about a weapon  but could be huge if storage for spaceship fuel.

Currently we cannot produce even half an ounce of antimatter a year. but 22 KG of antimatter are floating in space between here and jupiter at any given second. and it is constantly replenished by solar radiation and cosmic radiation. some day we may have either lartge production plants or find away to trick ordinary matter into becoming antimatter. the difference is in quark distribution and quark species in the particles. (IIRC) rearrange those in matter and you might get antimatter.

as to gravity of an explosion remember all that energy is the equivelent of half a KG of mass. ittakes huge amounts of energy to make a small amount of matter. gravity would be unimpressed by even such a gargantuan explosion because cosmically such an explosion is miniscule.

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #75 on: July 19, 2005, 07:13:24 pm »
So -aside from making me feel stupid- where exactly did this line of questions come from?  

I'm going somewhere with this, and it isnt blowing up earth. But there was some discussion among certain manhattan scientists as to wether or not the atomic chain reaction would ever stop, thus blowing up the planet... On a side note, I think it would seem to be a much more precise way of knowing exactly how big an antimatter explosion would be than a nuke. But thats why we have super computers. Hrmmm... another interesting topic... would quantum computers do for antimatter explosion modeling what supercomputers did for nuke explosion modeling?

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #76 on: July 19, 2005, 07:18:18 pm »
-Keep in mind that Star Trek (and most sci fi in general) simply uses antimatter as the
"powerful source of energy"
a kiloton is 4.2 terajoules or 4.2 TJ.

 gram = 0.001 kg. Sppeed of Light 300,000,000 meter/s.  
E=mc2
E= 0.001 x 300000000 x 300000000 kgm2/s2 = 90,000,000,000,000 J = 90 TJ.

90 TJ = 21.4 kiloton (nuke)

And that's 1g, I think it would be doubled (as you'd need a second gram of matter)
so 1g of antimatter + 1g matter = @ 180TJ = @ 43 Kiloton nuke
Assuming this is a straight line and not exponential
500g (1/2 kg) = @ 21500Kt= @  22Mt

Is that right?
The amount seems smaller than I remember

Also wouldn't the anti-protons start to repel each other at a certain point?

Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #77 on: July 19, 2005, 07:20:11 pm »
limit would be to do with prtability if talking about a weapon  but could be huge if storage for spaceship fuel.

Yeah, something like that... a small release of controlled antimatter would propel a spacecraft to unreal velocities if you could keep it from blowing up the ship...

Quote
Currently we cannot produce even half an ounce of antimatter a year. but 22 KG of antimatter are floating in space between here and jupiter at any given second. and it is constantly replenished by solar radiation and cosmic radiation. some day we may have either lartge production plants or find away to trick ordinary matter into becoming antimatter. the difference is in quark distribution and quark species in the particles. (IIRC) rearrange those in matter and you might get antimatter.

So is that how we produced a half ounce of antimatter, using solar and cosmic artificial machines in labs? And why dont we see antimatter explosions in space if this stuff is lurking around out there?

Quote
as to gravity of an explosion remember all that energy is the equivelent of half a KG of mass. ittakes huge amounts of energy to make a small amount of matter. gravity would be unimpressed by even such a gargantuan explosion because cosmically such an explosion is miniscule.

So we arnt gonna see any time and space fabric bending here, huh?

Offline Dizzy

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6179
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #78 on: July 19, 2005, 07:25:18 pm »
-Keep in mind that Star Trek (and most sci fi in general) simply uses antimatter as the
"powerful source of energy"
a kiloton is 4.2 terajoules or 4.2 TJ.

 gram = 0.001 kg. Sppeed of Light 300,000,000 meter/s.  
E=mc2
E= 0.001 x 300000000 x 300000000 kgm2/s2 = 90,000,000,000,000 J = 90 TJ.

90 TJ = 21.4 kiloton (nuke)

And that's 1g, I think it would be doubled (as you'd need a second gram of matter)
so 1g of antimatter + 1g matter = @ 180TJ = @ 43 Kiloton nuke
Assuming this is a straight line and not exponential
500g (1/2 kg) = @ 21500Kt= @  22Mt

Is that right?
The amount seems smaller than I remember

Also wouldn't the anti-protons start to repel each other at a certain point?



Awesone stuff, Hexx. Good concrete numbers. Anyone confirm this stuff? You do pretty good making up for being short, hexx. Almost.

Offline Hexx

  • Sexy Shoeless Lyran God Of War
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 6058
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #79 on: July 19, 2005, 07:36:00 pm »
The numbers should be good (I stole them) them math... well that might be screwed up royally.
(As I said-it seems small)

Anyways the best way to compare would be to find someone who know how much fissionable material actually is
icorporated into a nuclear weapon.

The one dropped on.. Nagasaki (I think) had about about 6ish (think it was a little less) KG of plutonium

So the same size-bomb with antimatter (call it 3kg of antimatter and 3 kg of matter)
would be equivalant (roughly) of 130MT.

EDIT: And of course I'm not actually sure it's (currently) possible to big a container big enough to hold
3kg of antimatter.
Courageously Protesting "Lyran Pelt Day"

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #80 on: July 19, 2005, 07:38:56 pm »
limit would be to do with prtability if talking about a weapon  but could be huge if storage for spaceship fuel.

Yeah, something like that... a small release of controlled antimatter would propel a spacecraft to unreal velocities if you could keep it from blowing up the ship...

Quote
Currently we cannot produce even half an ounce of antimatter a year. but 22 KG of antimatter are floating in space between here and jupiter at any given second. and it is constantly replenished by solar radiation and cosmic radiation. some day we may have either lartge production plants or find away to trick ordinary matter into becoming antimatter. the difference is in quark distribution and quark species in the particles. (IIRC) rearrange those in matter and you might get antimatter.

So is that how we produced a half ounce of antimatter, using solar and cosmic artificial machines in labs? And why dont we see antimatter explosions in space if this stuff is lurking around out there?

Quote
as to gravity of an explosion remember all that energy is the equivelent of half a KG of mass. ittakes huge amounts of energy to make a small amount of matter. gravity would be unimpressed by even such a gargantuan explosion because cosmically such an explosion is miniscule.

So we arnt gonna see any time and space fabric bending here, huh?

We do see antimatter explosions in space but since the particles are usually separated by meters only a particle on particle explosion occurs. too small to notice without sensitive detectors. the antimatter comes from cosmic rays coliding with ordinary particles. the products are often antimatter particles that float around until they are struck or strike something. since space is so rarified that takes longer than your would think.

bending space takes tremendous mass liek black holes. or an exotoc material with negative energy density. we may be able to simulate the latter in a lab using certain exotic physical principles. if we can then we can make a warp drive. do a web search on the words alcubierre warp drive. you'll find out what i am talking about.

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #81 on: July 19, 2005, 07:52:02 pm »
I need to point out one thing you all have missed.  In all theory, matter and antimatter null each other, this doesn't create energy, but creates an area of nuetrality, which actually would do the damage.  Everything we know suggests that matter and antimatter wouldn't create or release anything, only destroy.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #82 on: July 19, 2005, 07:56:11 pm »
Really? everything i've read says the particles anihilate forming high energy photons. Also nothing not even an antimatter explosion may violate the law of conservation of energy. energy is never created or destroyed only changed.

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #83 on: July 19, 2005, 08:43:38 pm »
I need to point out one thing you all have missed.  In all theory, matter and antimatter null each other, this doesn't create energy, but creates an area of nuetrality, which actually would do the damage.  Everything we know suggests that matter and antimatter wouldn't create or release anything, only destroy.

Can you describe this area of neutrality? Feel free to provide any maths and/or use technical jargon  ;)
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline CaptJosh

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #84 on: July 19, 2005, 08:56:35 pm »
Last I heard. Matter and anti-matter don't nullify eachother as neither matter nor energy can ever be truly destroyed. Matter can be converted to energ and vice-versa. So when matter and anti-matter meet, they convert completely to energy. A total conversion reaction. This would not create a null zone. It would create an explosion because an explosion is nothing more than something getting very big in a very small timeframe. The reaction is taking two things of a lower energy state and moving them to a higher, albeit more chaotic, state. More energy means it takes more space. Hence an explosion, not a dead zone. Even a singularity isn't a dead zone. A zone with zero energy density cannot exist as we undurstand physics.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #85 on: July 19, 2005, 10:20:38 pm »
To be quite honest, this is a subject, with my facination for Star Trek, that I have followed for many years.  It is also a subject, that with the many zelous Sci-Fi lovers, who happen to become scientists, can be tainted with disinformation and fabrication of evidence.

The reports and studies that I have read, and believe to hold some degree of credibility, all indicate the that antimatter is not actaully matter, but more the lack of matter in a place where there should be such.

The most famous, at least to those in the field, experiment done was something like the following (I will water it down a lot, since part of it was a 45 page writeup about a magnet...)

First lets establish the things we know about matter:
1) It cannot be "created" or "destroyed" (Law of Conservation of Mass). I put those in quotes, since they are very relative terms.
2) Matters physical space is mass, and under any gravity, is a constant value.
3) (This one is somewhat hypothetical still, but quantum mechanics is still a relatively new science, so some day it might be a law) Matter seems to be made up of an infinite number of decreasingly small components.

So, knowing that, consider the following.

Basically, the best known way of "generating" antimatter is to apply a beam of high energy photons to an extremely dense magenetic field between a set of plates.  These plates are extremely close together, and interestingly enough, require extreme cooling for the experiment to be done properly.  Now, between the plates is a gas of know type, mass, and isotope, to which the beam is applied.  The distance between the plates is as such that as the gas is energized from the beam of photons, there isn't enough room between the plates for the generation of new photons.

For those who have forgotten, when a photon strikes an atom, it moves or "knocks" the atom's electrons into a higher orbital, or sometimes entirely off of the atom.  During this process the photon is converted to the engery required to move the electron.  When the electron fails to maintain its high energy state, and succumbs to the strong and weak forces in the atom's nucleus, it falls back down to its original or "ground" state.  This process releases a new photon, there by generating electromagnetic radiation, in the various forms of visible light, alpha, beta and gamma radiation, etc.

As I said though, the possitioning of the plates prevents this last part from happening though, which is a violation of the Law of Conservation of Mass, since we "destroyed" a photon.  The only reasonable and logical conclusion is, that by preventing formation of new photons, an alternate partical, in this case an anti electron.

The problem with antimatter is, to be reasonably contained, at the current time, it must be immediately isolated from matter, or it will immediately react with that mater, and annihilate.

Now, the reason you get a null area during a reaction is because you end up with particals with a spin that doesn't follow standard patterns.  Yes, this could be harnessed for energey, by all means.  It would be a lot like take magnets of the same pole, shoving them together and then holding them there.  If you do that, the magnets in your hands will never come into contact, because the force required to move them closer rises exponentally as they get closer.  The same would apply here, which is why scientists think that massive energy would be released in a matter/antimatter reaction.  The result though, would be nuetrally charged particals, which, according to quantum mechanics, would most likely decay back into standard matter over some period of time.

The questions the next generation has to answer is how to generate antimatter efficently, how to contain it, and at what point is the released energy harnessable.


Boy... my fingers hurt.... LOL
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #86 on: July 19, 2005, 10:25:06 pm »
Sorry, forgot to add why there wasn't enough room to generate new photons.

This part is simple, since electromagnetic energy is described as a partical wave, there has to be room for a full cycle of the wave for it to be generated, thus the area between the plates is smaller than the peaks of the wave.

This is the same reason that your microwave (hopefully) doesn't irradiate your house every time you use it, the holes are smaller than the wave cycle of a microwave.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #87 on: July 19, 2005, 10:30:12 pm »
um that is not the way to create antimatter that i am aware of. your plates seem like casimir plates that by vanderwahl's force creates an area of negative energy density (relative to the area outside the plates) because within certain energy states or certain frequencies cannot materialize from the virtual state. In fact this scheme is the idea behind modifying spatial curvature without large masses using a synthetic negative energy area inside the casimir plates. see Alcubierre's peer reviewed paper on the process.

antimatter is ordinarily a product of high energy particle collisions such as found at places like CERN and FermiLab. the quark make up and spin state of antimatter particles and even their mass has been measured.

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #88 on: July 19, 2005, 10:43:34 pm »
um that is not the way to create antimatter that i am aware of. your plates seem like casimir plates that by vanderwahl's force creates an area of negative energy density (relative to the area outside the plates) because within certain energy states or certain frequencies cannot materialize from the virtual state. In fact this scheme is the idea behind modifying spatial curvature without large masses using a synthetic negative energy area inside the casimir plates. see Alcubierre's peer reviewed paper on the process.

antimatter is ordinarily a product of high energy particle collisions such as found at places like CERN and FermiLab. the quark make up and spin state of antimatter particles and even their mass has been measured.

Obviously someone has been reading Wykopedia.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline CaptJosh

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #89 on: July 19, 2005, 10:48:26 pm »
Here's an idea...

Read this --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-matter

It can explain it better than I can. Possibly better than anyone here.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #90 on: July 19, 2005, 10:51:55 pm »
I guess I will just shut up then.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #91 on: July 19, 2005, 10:53:10 pm »
um that is not the way to create antimatter that i am aware of. your plates seem like casimir plates that by vanderwahl's force creates an area of negative energy density (relative to the area outside the plates) because within certain energy states or certain frequencies cannot materialize from the virtual state. In fact this scheme is the idea behind modifying spatial curvature without large masses using a synthetic negative energy area inside the casimir plates. see Alcubierre's peer reviewed paper on the process.

antimatter is ordinarily a product of high energy particle collisions such as found at places like CERN and FermiLab. the quark make up and spin state of antimatter particles and even their mass has been measured.

Obviously someone has been reading Wykopedia.


Not I. i tend to avoid wikipedia. science particulalry the fronteier where it meets speculation is a passion of mine.

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #92 on: July 19, 2005, 10:56:47 pm »
I guess I will just shut up then.

Please don't you appear to know alot about it. but i am curious why your description does not match textbooks and how a PET scanner can work on a void of matter/energy rather than particles as you put it?

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #93 on: July 19, 2005, 11:18:15 pm »
I'm serious though you appear to know more about casimir plates than I do. you must tell me all you know aboutthe theory involving them, relative negative energy density and even your ideas about particles or voids created in between them. it is an important subject to me. i may not think of what happens in there as antimatter but i do recognize what you are saying about a void at least within the plates. please continue. or show me a source where i can learn more.

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #94 on: July 19, 2005, 11:22:21 pm »
So if I could shrink the neon tube in my ceiling small enough, I could turn it into an antimatter generator  ;D
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #95 on: July 19, 2005, 11:25:42 pm »
I guess I will just shut up then.

Please don't you appear to know alot about it. but i am curious why your description does not match textbooks and how a PET scanner can work on a void of matter/energy rather than particles as you put it?

Well, to put it simply, what I say won't match textbooks, simply because the whole field is still primarily theoretical.

Sure we know all of these particals are real.  I guess the best way to draw a relation is with the Sun.  We all know that the Sun is a huge ball of matter in a constant state of fusion, right?  Now, we have never seen the inside of the Sun, and for a long while, we probably won't, but that doesn't mean we can't infer things about what the center is like from our knowledge of other things.  Science is not fact, it is just the best explanation person X has at the time that other people will understand and can seem to hold true.

Now, with the PET scanner, your just looking at it the wrong way.  By far, the most common antipartical is the positron, just because its counterpart is the most numerous, the electron.  Positron emission is a normal part of nature, infact, each and every person who reads this thread is not only radioactive, but is emmitting all forms of radiation, but it is in such trace amounts that it doesn't matter.  You looked up a PET scan,so you will have seen that the only radioactive materials... I think they call them radiopharmacuticals or something, sick bastards that they are... are of a specific type.  In most cases, if memory serves, Flourine 18 for the common scans.  Flourine 18 during radioactive decay, by its nature, produces a positron, because it is heavy be a proton in the nucleus.  A proton decays into one neutron because of the weak forces in the nucleus, but the charge must go somewhere, and so a positron is formed.  This positron smashes into an electron, a gluon is formed (which is a nuetral partical) and almost instantly decays back into a pair of gamma rays.

The part about the gluon is always left out of the write-ups about PET scans for two reasons:
A) Medical Doctors don't care how it works beyond the absolute bare minimum, as long as it works.
B) The period of time the nuetral partical is there is so fractional to be inconciquintial.

Oh, and just so you know, positron is synonimous with anti electron.
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline likkerpig

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2614
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #96 on: July 19, 2005, 11:38:51 pm »

For the area of effect- I belive the 100MT (biggest ever produced) was estimatd to

92 MT actually.... damn commies!
But all this mumbo jumbo is just (excuse me) farting in the wind.
Likkerpig+Cheap Draft+7-11 Hot Dogs=... well the death threats stopped after a week.
Likkerpig+40 of Rye+Blue rare beef= Hey, they had to remove the asbestos from them buildings anyway, so they deserved to be shut down!
That's destructive power baby!

Now back to your regularly scheduled mental masterbation circle jerk thingy...


(hmmm, Rum+Rare Blade Steak+Whiskey+Smoked Oysters.....)
"Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby."



Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #97 on: July 19, 2005, 11:41:50 pm »

For the area of effect- I belive the 100MT (biggest ever produced) was estimatd to

92 MT actually.... damn commies!
But all this mumbo jumbo is just (excuse me) farting in the wind.
Likkerpig+Cheap Draft+7-11 Hot Dogs=... well the death threats stopped after a week.
Likkerpig+40 of Rye+Blue rare beef= Hey, they had to remove the asbestos from them buildings anyway, so they deserved to be shut down!
That's destructive power baby!

Now back to your regularly scheduled mental masterbation circle jerk thingy...


(hmmm, Rum+Rare Blade Steak+Whiskey+Smoked Oysters.....)

Thank you for that wonderful  :spam:

 :carmen:
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline likkerpig

  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2614
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #98 on: July 20, 2005, 12:05:50 am »

Thank you for that wonderful  :spam:

 :carmen:

Hee hee hee, my pleasure. I'm pretty good at it....
 :P
"Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby."



762_XC

  • Guest
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #99 on: July 20, 2005, 12:41:47 am »
You guys (excpet Hexx, oddly enough) are way off about Tsar Bomba, the Soviet weapon you all keep referring to.

The weapon as tested was a three stage (fission-fusion-fusion) weapon with a nominal yield of 50MT and a maximum yield of 100MT. The extra yield, had it actually been needed for something, would have been achieved via fast fission of a U-238 jacket which would have been added to the design (instead of the lead jacket used as tested). Had it been fired in this configuration it would have increased the world's total fallout from all nuclear tests by 25%.

Of course the thing was so large and heavy it was militarily useless, not to mention that the yield was far more than was needed to destroy any one target in the world.


Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #100 on: July 20, 2005, 12:45:37 am »
not to mention that the yield was far more than was needed to destroy any one target in the world.




Not if the target was human ignorance  ;)

Offline FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC

  • Empress of the Empire
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2543
  • Gender: Female
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #101 on: July 20, 2005, 01:21:48 am »
Imagine if it was filled with antimatter!
Captain FPF-TraceyG, Federation Protection Fleet


SFC2.net Admin member
SFC3.net Admin member
Voting member of the DGA
Member of XenoCorp, Squadron Commodore

Offline KAT Chuut-Ritt

  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 26163
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #102 on: July 20, 2005, 02:40:48 am »
Somehow I think human ignorance would survive the blast even so  ::)

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #103 on: July 20, 2005, 04:14:24 am »
As long as any of the human race survived at all, yes you're quite right.
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline CaptJosh

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #104 on: July 20, 2005, 10:24:18 am »
Funny thing is, it's known that the USA had warheads designed for a max yield of ~200MT. There were even designs for ~500MT thermonuclear warheads, but I guess cooler heads prevailed and those were never developed. I doubt we ever tested the ~200MT warheads though...
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #105 on: July 20, 2005, 10:35:11 am »
Largely true but if i am not mistaken one of the pacific tests went somewhat out of control and the blast was many times larger than expected. it vaporized an island. that is my premis for suggesting that we have tested the 2oo or so range weapons.

but back to antimatter imagine a storage and delivery system as simple as computer memory where the charge states of magnetic domains are flipped by the millions through logic gates. by arranging these around voids for antimatter to rest in suspended by electrical charges we could do something with ease and safety that the fictional startrek scientists of the future did only with trememdous difficulty and expense of power and equipment and at great peril.

Offline CaptJosh

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #106 on: July 20, 2005, 10:53:51 am »
Sounds like a magnetic bottle, to me.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

Offline FPF-Tobin Dax

  • D.Net VIP
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2719
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #107 on: July 20, 2005, 11:05:05 am »
Largely true but if i am not mistaken one of the pacific tests went somewhat out of control and the blast was many times larger than expected. it vaporized an island. that is my premis for suggesting that we have tested the 2oo or so range weapons.

but back to antimatter imagine a storage and delivery system as simple as computer memory where the charge states of magnetic domains are flipped by the millions through logic gates. by arranging these around voids for antimatter to rest in suspended by electrical charges we could do something with ease and safety that the fictional startrek scientists of the future did only with trememdous difficulty and expense of power and equipment and at great peril.

Hopefully this isn't run on windows software... ;)
Suspected leader of Prime Industries, #1 Pirate Cartel

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #108 on: July 20, 2005, 11:20:06 am »
Sounds like a magnetic bottle, to me.

Nah. a magnetic bottle requires huge superconducting magnets usually aranged in a torus. they cost trilions of dollars to approach the level of containment needed for ordinary plasma. antimatter would require even more leakproof bottles because of volume of antimatter that would contactthe walls in the event of a breach ofthe fields. with my scheme if a cell failed only a few particles would be compromised at a time making for a nearly undetectable event rather than a catastrophic explosion. and if a few cells failed or even a lot the remaining intact cells could still be used until the chip could be replaced.

Offline CaptJosh

  • Lt.
  • *
  • Posts: 775
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #109 on: July 20, 2005, 11:35:25 am »
Ok. But it does still seem like there's a magnetic field of some sort involved here.
CaptJosh

There are only 10 kinds of people in the world;
those who understand binary and those who don't.

Offline Stormbringer

  • Global Moderator
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1984
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #110 on: July 20, 2005, 11:44:57 am »
Ok. But it does still seem like there's a magnetic field of some sort involved here.

there would be to transferthe antimatter out of storage and consolidate the tiny bits into an amount needed to generate good thrust. but because the storage  fields are tiny it is not a magnetic bottle in the sense understood in the fusion community or in the tech talk of trek.  you might think of it as more of a magnetic funnel than a bottle.

Offline Braxton_RIP

  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 1073
  • Gender: Male
    • Dynaverse.net
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #111 on: July 20, 2005, 12:05:55 pm »
Funny thing is, it's known that the USA had warheads designed for a max yield of ~200MT. There were even designs for ~500MT thermonuclear warheads, but I guess cooler heads prevailed and those were never developed. I doubt we ever tested the ~200MT warheads though...

If only you knew.....
Braxton,
Old Geezer

Typical Fleet:
F-DNL, F-CB, F-CLC
Braxton's Fleet:
F-CVTCR, F-BTR, F-BTL+

Offline KAT J'inn

  • CFO - Kzinti War Machine, Inc.
  • Lt. Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2294
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #112 on: July 20, 2005, 01:35:41 pm »
<has flash back of a red eye flight from LA>


Me . . .   J'inn the Loving . . .  gets stuck in the friggin middle seat for the whole flight between two Computer Guys.   They start up with a Linux vs. WIndows debate . . . .

Somewhere over Colorado . . .  I started to cry.


Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27844
  • Gender: Male
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #113 on: July 20, 2005, 02:05:10 pm »
Shoot you think that's bad Will, all I've determined is to keep Yellow cake out of Dizzy's hands. The man scares me.  ;)

Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

762_XC

  • Guest
Re: OT ~ What's bigger, a Nuke Bomb or an Anti-matter Bomb?
« Reply #114 on: July 20, 2005, 05:11:55 pm »
Largely true but if i am not mistaken one of the pacific tests went somewhat out of control and the blast was many times larger than expected. it vaporized an island. that is my premis for suggesting that we have tested the 2oo or so range weapons.

It was a 15 MT test. They were expecting 6MT. This was the largest yield ever tested by the US.

That was before they figured out that lithium makes a good fusion fuel.