posted
I have been told that although starships do indeed keep their matter reserve as deuterium (thus it can double-up as fuel for the impulse fusion generators), the antimatter is plain old anti-hydrogen. I believe the source is Sternbach (about as canon as you can get).
Logically, it makes sense, as antihydrogen has to be easier to acquire/make than anti-deuterium. There is no parity/symmetry issue, its not as if the reactor needs anti-deuterium. The matter/antimatter reactor would gladly accept coffee and anti-earl gray tea as reactants, as long as they were first converted into gasses, and the masses were in correct proportion.
So, what is the mass of 1 cubic meter of liquid slushy hydrogen? (This will allow me to estimate the amount of antimatter in a storage pod for my evil plans).
------------------ Faster than light - no left or right.
------------------ "One's ethics are determined by what we do when no one is looking" Nugget Star Trek: Gamma Quadrant Star Trek: Legacy Read them, rate them, got money, film them
"...and I remain on the far side of crazy, I remain the mortal enemy of man, no hundred dollar cure will save me..." WoV
posted
Yes, it's definitely anti-hydrogen, not anti-deuterium. Although anti-deuterium wouldn't be too hard either, all you need to add is a neutron. (There is no such thing as an "anti-neutron" since neutrons have no charge.)
posted
Well, a Quick Web Search revealed the following link: http://www.magicdragon.com/ComputerFutures/SpacePublications/STAR.html which gives the density of LH2 at 0.078 g/cc, and the density of solid hydrogen at 0.076 g/cc (which rather surprises me). I suppose 0.077 g/cc could do for slush hydrogen.
Personally, however, I always thought that the matter and antimatter would be in solid metallic form, since to get a good clean reaction the two components should be mixed well before the reaction occurs, and the best way to do this could be to have granules that are suspended in space by some kind of field, one could then try to mix them beforehand without having the granules actually touch, until one is ready to detonate the torpedo.
Also, from the TNG TM, since the antimatter tanks on the ship are much smaller than the matter tanks, antimatter would have to be stored at a very high density in order to match the amount of matter, thus requiring it to be stored in metallic form, which is much denser than solid.
Finally, since Starfleet ships are apparently able to refuel thier stocks of deuterium from interstellar gas clouds, I would think they have a proton-proton fusion process better than any conjectured by current science, so they could perhaps have an antimatter one to create anti-deuterium. Personally, I think that having symmetric M/AM reactions is much cleaner.
posted
Of course there's an anti-neutron! It still has a neutral charge, but don't think it's the same thing. Put one together w/ a normal neutron, and you're still going to have a quantity of gamma radiation on your hands (or pass through your hands, as is more likely...).
------------------ Lister: "Cat, what are you doing?" Cat: "I'm courting." Lister: "Courting who?" Cat: "Whoever shows up!" -Red Dwarf, "Me�"
posted
Yeah, an anti-neutron has an opposite spin. But there is a particle that is it's own opposite. I can't remember it's name, but I know there is one.
------------------ It doesn't matter if you don't know what you're doing as long as you look good doing it.
posted
Well, SOMETHING is different. If not spin and charge, what could it be?
As for a particle that's its own anti-particle, photons and pions, to name two.
------------------ "How do you define fool?" "I don't attempt it. I wait for demonstrations. They inevitably surpass my imagination." - CJ Cherryh, Invader
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Y'know...as we find ever smaller & smaller particles, I'm waiting for more of the comedy names to show up..y'know, like gluons. (which as a modeler I find hilarious) My proposed choices are peon, hardons, morons, & condons (say it quick).
------------------ "I said 'You are, you are, The only one who sees.' I said, 'You are, you are' The only strength I need.'" ---Kim Leaman, "Mary"
posted
Quote.... "Also, from the TNG TM, since the antimatter tanks on the ship are much smaller than the matter tanks, antimatter would have to be stored at a very high density in order to match the amount of matter, thus requiring it to be stored in metallic form, which is much denser than solid."
Remeber that the M/ARC only runs at a 1:1 ratio @ warp 8+ so of course you do need alot more matter then anti-matter.
posted
Okay, I did my own number crunching and came up with some figures. How many joules are released by 1 kg of antimatter? This page (http://astp.msfc.nasa.gov/antimatter.html) says that you get 9 x 10^16 J/kg antimatter from mass-energy equation, which agrees with several other pages. (http://www.cm.nu/~shane/lists/rec.arts.startrek.tech/2000-09/0245.html http://www.cm.nu/~shane/lists/rec.arts.startrek.tech/2000-09/0245.html and http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/feb99/goneby214.htmhttp://www.fivedoves.com/letters/feb99/goneby214.htm . Some pages include the matter in the calc, others only the antimatter. So, if 1 ton of TNT gives you 4.18 x 10^9 J (http://www.aeic.alaska.edu/Input/lahr/magnitude/energy_calc.html and http://www.ieer.org/clssroom/unitconv.htmlhttp://www.ieer.org/clssroom/unitconv.html and others), then 1 megaton produces 4.18 x 10^15 J. Therefore, 1 kg of reactant will give you a bang equivalent to 21.53 megatons of TNT and 1.5 kg, supposedly carried by a TNG torpedo, will give you 32.3 megatons. This amount of antimatter will fit into a sphere 34 cm in diameter. In comparison, the Hiroshima bomb was only 15 kilotons.
The page referenced by James Fox (http://www.magicdragon.com/ComputerFutures/SpacePublications/STAR.html) says the density of hydrogen slush is about 70.7 g/l. Since a cubic meter is 1000 l, it would weigh 70.7 kg. If that blows, it would yield a blast equivalent to 1522 megatons of TNT, which is a bad day for anyone. How much antimatter is carried on a Galaxy class starship?
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
[This message has been edited by Masao (edited May 09, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Masao (edited May 09, 2001).]
posted
30 pods holding 100 m3 each... 3,000 m3 total.... 3,000,000 l 4,566,000 megatons.... A planetary system killer, since a 5 megaton warhead is considered a city killer
------------------ "One's ethics are determined by what we do when no one is looking" Nugget Star Trek: Gamma Quadrant Star Trek: Legacy Read them, rate them, got money, film them
"...and I remain on the far side of crazy, I remain the mortal enemy of man, no hundred dollar cure will save me..." WoV
posted
The difference between a neutron and an antineutron is rather subtle. Neutrons, like almost everything else, are made up of quarks. Specifically, I believe the neutron is composed of one up quark and two down quarks. This is significant because quarks have charge, but only a fractional one. An up quark has a charge of +2/3, while a down quark has a charge of -1/3. So two down quarks plus one up quark gives us a total charge of zero. Which is why neutrons are neutral.
However, there are antiquarks too. An antineutron is made up of one anti-up quark and two anti-down quarks, with charges of -2/3 and +1/3, respectively. So the antineutron still has a total charge of zero, even though it is the exact opposite of a neutron.
Beyond that, the antineutron carries the opposite magnetic moment, but frankly, my dime store physics gives out at this point.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
