posted
OK, so we know that Star Trek ships use fusion reactors and matter/antimatter reactors. I've found from the TNGTM (page 57) that m/a has a 10^6 times greater energy output than that of standard fusion.
My questions are;
1) How much power does a fusion reactor generate?; 2) How much power does a m/a reactor generate (if not 10^6 greater than the answer to 1)?; 3) How powerful are plasma-based reactors - you know the ones that the Cardassians used to defend Chintoka with? 4) How much power do any other sources generate?
Let the debate/discussion begin!
-------------------- If you cant convince them, confuse them.
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I strongly suspect that you won't get anything more than these responses. The output of any reactor depends on how much fuel you're putting into it, how you're gathering up that output to put it to work, and all sorts of other minor but important technical details that no one has ever bothered to make an episode about, and thus are simply unknowns.
Suffice it to say, as Mark said, a fusion reaction gives you lots of energy. An antimatter reaction gives you _lots_ of energy. Presumably the Cardassian reactors give you lots too.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
No, that's not it at all. A ship's mass has nothing to do with it.
But here's one way you can approximate it: the TNG TM should give the total amount (in m^3) of antimatter a Galaxy class ship should carry. The book also says that this amount of fuel is enough to power the ship for five years. Assume that the antimatter is used *only* for warp propulsion, and assume an exact five year period. Look up some physics books and determine how much energy is contained in a single atom of deuterium (and thus, anti-deuterium). Also determine the density of slush deuterium at whatever cryogenic temperature the store it at on the Enterprise.
The rest figures itself out - you should be able to find the total amount of energy that would be released if you reacted ALL the antimatter on a GCS with the corresponding amount of matter. Divide this by all the seconds in five years, and you'll have the approximate amount of energy expended per unit time. In other words, the average power output of a GCS warp core cruising at its sustainable cruise velocity, assuming continuous operation. You could factor in a reasonable amount of time the ship would NOT be at warp for maintenance, etc. (say, 4-6 weeks per annum but this is off the top of my head) to gain a better approximation.
Do the math. There's lots of it.
Mark
[ February 23, 2002, 18:42: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
posted
Now that most of that is solved, what was all that business about a year ago with Frank telling everybody he believed fusion could produce more power per whatever unit of reactive material than a m/a annihilation process with the same amount of reactive material?
-------------------- Move .sig!!
Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Using info from Star Trek: The Magazine, I have calculated that at full capacity, DS9's four operable fusion reactors could produce 526.66664 terawatts (526,666,640,000,000 watts) of power in the form of plasma. I would guess that a starship's M/ARA could produce a few dozen petawatts (XXX,000,000,000,000,000 watts) of power in the form of plasma. And one would suppose that either shuttle craft are equipped with extremely low power M/ARAs or a medium output fusion reactor, and that is why shuttles can barely achieve warp or not maintain it for long (The only exception is the Delta Flyer that is really powerful).
-------------------- Fry- How will we get out of this? George Takei's head- Maybe we can use some kind of auto-destruct code like one-A, two-B, three-C... (Bender's head blows up) Bender- Now everybody knows! -Futurama's obligatory Star Trek episode
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I remember when David Schmidt first showed up here, we started a thread to figure out the energy from a kilogram of antimatter, for use either in warheads or reactors. Don't remember when that was, however. The efficiency of an antimatter reaction should be near 100%, but you can choose anything less than that for fusion.
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Bloody hell. ![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
