Annihilation results in an extreme burst of energy

Syed Ammar
Messages
25
Reaction score
1
Annihilation results in an extreme burst of energy... If enough antimatter is isolated, it can be utilized for annihilation which can converted into useful energy...This can make us approximately
half as fast as light... Just wanted to have ur comments ..?? Is it possible...?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Syed Ammar said:
Annihilation results in an extreme burst of energy... If enough antimatter is isolated, it can be utilized for annihilation which can converted into useful energy...
Correct

...This can make us approximately half as fast as light..
Not sure about this.

..Is it possible...?
Yes it is, theoretically. No such vehicle has yet been constructed. Antimatter is just not gasoline you can store in your tank. Antimatter annihilates with all types of 'matter'. So you need special 'magnetic confinement containers' to store them. You can't leave the antimatter to touch any type of 'matter' be it the walls of an 'antimatter engine' or the say on the whole 'the vehicle'. So it is not as simple as that for practical reasons.
 
What do you mean by "This can make us approximately half as fast as light" ? There seems to be some context missing from your question.
 
I think it's a misconception, and he wanted to say that it allows us (theoretically) to create really effective in speeding up machines - eg spaceships. Of course as already pointed out, this is just a theoretical result, and practically by today's technology, we can't isolate enough antimatter ...
If I recall well, a CERN scientist had said in public (due to the "Illuminati" book), that taking all the accelerators on earth, and the rate they produce antimatter which we can isolate, we need some thousands to millions of years to isolate enough antimatter to give the same power as one nuclear bomb.
 
While antimatter would have enough energy density to let a spacecraft reach half the speed of light with a reasonable amount of fuel, it is unclear how to use this energy in an efficient way. The easiest design (use it as in a chemical rocket) will waste a large fraction of the energy and heat the spacecraft - and that really limits the thrust you can get. More realistic designs are much more inefficient.

If I recall well, a CERN scientist had said in public (due to the "Illuminati" book), that taking all the accelerators on earth, and the rate they produce antimatter which we can isolate, we need some thousands to millions of years to isolate enough antimatter to give the same power as one nuclear bomb.
In the same way: all the antimatter created in the last decades, assuming we would have it all available at the same time, could be used to boil a cup of water. Unfortunately, we don't have long-term storages for them. And we have cheaper ways to boil water.
 
Thanks everyone... and by the way, I did commit a mistake in the question.
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top