Can anti-hydrogen spacecraft explosions be safely contained?

  • Thread starter plum
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Spacecraft
In summary: Controlled Antihydrogen Propulsion using a storage system to hold anti-protons and a system to release the anti-protons. This would be done by creating an explosion outside the spacecraft and using a shield to reflect the energy away from the spacecraft. We estimate that, starting with the present level of knowledge and multi-agency support, the goal of using antihydrogen for propulsion purposes may be accomplished in ~50 years.
  • #1
plum
136
0
How could the explosion (re: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0410511 ) be contained/ funneled out (without blowing up the actual spacecraft )?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Well, I'm not exactly sure what a matter-antimatter explosion looks like - an extremely high energy black-body? Just plain gamma rays?

Basically, you just make the explosion happen outside the ship and use a shield to reflect the energy away from the ship, driving it forward.
 
  • #3
russ_watters said:
Well, I'm not exactly sure what a matter-antimatter explosion looks like - an extremely high energy black-body? Just plain gamma rays?

Basically, you just make the explosion happen outside the ship and use a shield to reflect the energy away from the ship, driving it forward.

I thought that the Antimatter-Matter reaction occurs inside a chamber, and the heat released heat up in some way a gas which is ultimately exhausted by a nozzle. But I am not sure.
 
  • #4
plum said:
How could the explosion (re: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0410511 ) be contained/ funneled out (without blowing up the actual spacecraft )?
The energy release rate (power) depends on the rate of antimatter-matter annihilations. By controlling the release (current or flow rate) of anti-protons from whatever trap (storage system) which contains the Bose-Einstein Condensate (which is discussed in the paper), the reaction rate is controlled. Afterall, the title of the paper is "Controlled Antihydrogen Propulsion . . . ".

One annihilation will transform the rest mass of proton and anti-proton pair (2 * 938.27 MeV = 1.8765 GeV) into other charged particles, namely pions (2 * ~139 or 2 * ~134 MeV), but possibly Kaons(2 * ~494 MeV), and both types of mesons decay. Presumably, the anti-protons will be close to rest, i.e. not accelerated appreciably.

Suppose the annhiliation produces recoverable energy of 1 GeV (1.6022E-10 J) per annihilation. Consider that the annual production rate is on the order of 1014[/url] anti-protons, which means about 16 KJ of stored energy is produced per year, and this excludes losses during the deceleration and storage. One then must ask, what amount of energy is necessary to accelerate a spacecraft to 0.10c, for example.

The reaction chamber will presumably be magnetically confined to direct the annihilation products in the opposite direction of the rocket trajectory. More than likely, the anti-protons will be directed into an excess of protons, e.g. hydrogen. This will dilute the energy production, so the claims of 3 orders of magnitude (per nucleon) greater energy release as compared to fission, while true, are somewhat misleading - there is more to it.

For a reasonably good paper on [itex]p \bar{p}[/itex] interactions, see - http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ex/pdf/9708/9708025.pdf [Broken]

For a reference on Anti-Matter Propulsion, see http://www.transorbital.net/Library/D001_S01.html


We estimate that, starting with the present level of knowledge and multi-agency support, the goal of using antihydrogen for propulsion purposes may be accomplished in ~50 years.
That's what some fusion experts said about fusion. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
now, i am dull but explain this to me. how is this idea feasable, isn't our universe constructed of matter and darkmatter, so how are we possibly ever going to be able to contain anti-matter. the only way would be to somehow create anti-matter right "on the spot".
 
  • #6
antimatter can be created...on the spot...and has been, this has been done using an electron accelerator in a vacuum, smashong electons togther until they split them selves up and start creating little bits of anti matter basically...anyway, these bits are then manipulated with magnets in a vacuum again, into small vaccumed magnitised chambers, where they are removed from all non-anti matter. also there is a theory that the inverse of a swarzchild black hole of which you spoke of earlier could contain some sort of gate through a singularity allowing antimatter to exist in great quantities, without on-the-spot creation...and correct me if I am wrong, but i believe this is a valid explination. ( i think its spelled swarzchild...)
 
  • #7
thanks for that - still think if they do do it it will be catastrophic :biggrin:
 
  • #8
yeah, there is a real possibility for extreme danger, as well as potential energy...definetly
 
  • #9
ohh.. and as far as directing the explosion out of the craft i have heard of cooled niobium being used as a superconductor to direct such things...this (or a similar means) may be used in the outward direction of the annihilation process (the niobium allows a charge to pass through it, shooting the antimatter out of a vacuumed chamber, and into somewhere it can annihilate ( a strong, possibly mirriored chamber before where the muffler might be) in this chamber hopefully, an equal piece of matter could be propelled (on a path of similar in velocity to the antimatter) that would connect to the antimatter and then release the energy as mainly light, or in this case a hydrogen atom or two, and some light).
 
  • #10
Apparently, we may someday be able to send antimatter powered probes costing billions if not trillions of dollars to interstellar destinations, but barring miraculous technological breakthroughs for creating and then storing tons of antimatter, using it for manned interstellar travel will be impractical for the foreseeable future. It's far too expensive to create and far too hazardous to store (if copious amounts can be created) in significant quantities. Also, once the mass of the propellant becomes larger than the mass of the craft, the fact that the propellant has to push it's own mass leads to an asymptotic energy function that no amount of mass in the universe can overcome. This, at least, is according to what I've learned and understood so far. I'd still like to expand this discussion if anyone thinks that it can offer hope for long-term interstellar travel.
 
  • #11
plum said:
barring miraculous technological breakthroughs for creating and then storing tons of antimatter, using it for manned interstellar travel will be impractical for the foreseeable future.
It's pretty much the only practical means of interstellar travel if you want any significant thrust. (Ion propulsion is far more efficient, but gives a very low impetus. It's still a better bet in the long-run, though.)
As for the amount of antimatter needed, do you really have any concept of how powerful this stuff is? Annihilation of matter and antimatter is 100% energy conversion. Hydrogen fusion, in contrast, is somewhat less than 1%. One half gram of antimatter reacting with one half gram of matter releases 25,000,000 kilowatt-hours of energy. For a trip that will primarily be ballistic, you don't need tons of it.
 
  • #12
Danger said:
As for the amount of antimatter needed, do you really have any concept of how powerful this stuff is?

Yes, I do. At a speed of .1c, approximately 250,000 kg of antimatter would be required to get to the nearest star, at a cost of $625 trillion. Total Kinetic energy: 2.26 X 10~22 Joules. Do some more research before you disagree.
 
  • #13
plum said:
Do some more research before you disagree.
Nothing in my arsenal can read the link that you posted, but I would certainly suggest that you study up on 'Ion Compressed Antimatter Nuclear' propulsion as is being developed at the Pennsylvania State University Center for Space Propulsion Engineering in association with the Marshall Space Flight Center. You'll see that the proposed mission requires less than 10mg of antiprotons for a trip to Barnard's Star.
 
  • #14
This is a bit dated but I just found it.

HOW TO BUILD AN ANTIMATTER ROCKET FOR INTERSTELLAR MISSIONS

SYSTEMS LEVEL CONSIDERATIONS IN DESIGNING ADVANCED PROPULSION TECHNOLOGY VEHICLES

http://www.aiaa.org/Participate/Uploads/2003-4676.pdf [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
As far as generation is concerned, it will be a long time before we can produce and store antimatter in appreciable quantities. In the distant, future, we learn harvest it from stars. A couple years ago, I read an article stating that some form of solar disturbance (a flare, I think) had produced more than a pound of antimatter in just a few moments.
 
  • #16
Wow! I never heard of that one before, Lurch. Can you manage to remember where you read it? (That's not an insult, by the way; I can almost never do that.)
 
  • #19
Fascinating. Thanks, Lurch
 

1. What is an anti-hydrogen spacecraft?

An anti-hydrogen spacecraft is a theoretical spacecraft that would use anti-matter, specifically anti-hydrogen, as a fuel source. Anti-hydrogen is the antimatter counterpart to regular hydrogen, and when combined with regular hydrogen, it produces a tremendous amount of energy.

2. How would an anti-hydrogen spacecraft work?

An anti-hydrogen spacecraft would work by using a powerful magnetic field to contain and control the anti-matter fuel. The anti-hydrogen and regular hydrogen would be combined in a matter-antimatter reaction, producing high-energy particles that can be harnessed as thrust for propulsion.

3. What are the potential benefits of an anti-hydrogen spacecraft?

The potential benefits of an anti-hydrogen spacecraft include extremely high speeds and efficiency, as well as the ability to travel long distances without needing to refuel. It could also open up the possibility of interstellar travel and exploration.

4. What are the challenges and risks associated with developing an anti-hydrogen spacecraft?

One of the main challenges is the production and containment of anti-matter, which currently requires large amounts of energy and specialized equipment. There is also a risk of catastrophic explosions if the anti-matter fuel is not properly controlled and contained.

5. Is an anti-hydrogen spacecraft currently being developed?

While there have been some proposals and research on anti-matter propulsion, there are currently no active projects or plans for an anti-hydrogen spacecraft. The technology and resources needed to develop and operate such a spacecraft are still in the early stages of development.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
701
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
22
Views
34K
  • Aerospace Engineering
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Back
Top