Can Antimatter Particles Be Harnessed as Weapons Without Immediate Detonation?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Xtensity
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Antimatter Particles
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the theoretical implications and feasibility of using antimatter particles as weapons, particularly in the form of beams. Participants explore the behavior of antimatter when created and potentially utilized in weaponry, considering both current technological limitations and hypothetical advancements.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether a beam of antimatter particles would explode instantly upon creation, suggesting that it might not detonate until it encounters normal matter.
  • Another participant argues that a beam of antimatter would not travel far in air and would require a vacuum to be effective.
  • Some participants speculate about future technological advancements that could allow for the propulsion of antimatter beams, questioning their potential destructive capabilities.
  • Concerns are raised about the containment of antimatter, with suggestions that magnetic fields would be necessary to prevent premature annihilation.
  • There is a discussion about existing particle accelerators, such as the Tevatron and LEP, which are mentioned as examples of antimatter generation, though not in a practical weapon form.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the annihilation of antimatter upon contact with air, with some participants noting that this would not occur "instantly upon firing" but rather upon contact with matter.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the behavior of antimatter beams, particularly regarding their range and the conditions under which they would annihilate. There is no consensus on the practical applications of antimatter as a weapon or the feasibility of creating such a device.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in current technology and the need for a vacuum for effective antimatter applications. There are unresolved questions about the specifics of antimatter behavior in various environments and the technological advancements required for practical use.

Xtensity
Messages
103
Reaction score
0
I'm no expert in particle physics, I only know some of the basics, though I do plan on going into this field for a PhD in the future, which will probably take another year before I begin it...

Would a beam of antimatter particles, either made up of only 1 type of particle, or a mix of particles, explode instantly the second they were created?

Like if there was a way to use use antiparticles as weapons, would it even be possible except in like a bomb form? If antiparticles instantly release a ton of energy when coming in contact with the respective normal particle, would a beam, or a gun that shoots such a beam, blow up instantly upon firing?

I can understand about making a bomb if we could somehow utilize them in a large enough amount... but what about beams? I know this is basically Science Fiction at the moment, but theoretically what are the issues with such a device? I'm just posting this because I'm curious on how they would behave in the above described manner.

Post any potential theoretical models you might have in mind also, I am very curious about these things because they are interesting to think about, since sometime in the future it may be possible.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Unlike antiparticles, air is regular matter. A beam would not go very far. Actually, a beam of regular matter doesn't go very far either, whether it is a cathode ray, the helium that would come out of a pierced balloon, or the exhaust gas of a car. If you want the least amount of range, you need vacuum.
 
Well that's with todays technology. Who knows what kind of advances we can make in the future... though aside the fact that the beam wouldn't go far... if we somehow discovered a way to propel a beam of particles with enough force out of say something the size of a Turret gun(irrelevant to this hypothetical situation), could such a beam be used to obliterate objects depending on what kind of antiparticle beam could be fired?

Ignoring the fact that as far as we know today, it wouldn't go far at all, just hypothetical...
 
Xtensity said:
I'm no expert in particle physics, I only know some of the basics, though I do plan on going into this field for a PhD in the future, which will probably take another year before I begin it...

Would a beam of antimatter particles, either made up of only 1 type of particle, or a mix of particles, explode instantly the second they were created?
No, why would you think that would happen? They'd keep going until they ran into normal matter.
Xtensity said:
Like if there was a way to use use antiparticles as weapons, would it even be possible except in like a bomb form? If antiparticles instantly release a ton of energy when coming in contact with the respective normal particle, would a beam, or a gun that shoots such a beam, blow up instantly upon firing?
Not unless you let the antimatter come in contact with the gun. In practice, you'd probably use magnetic fields for containment and isolation.

Ever heard of the Tevatron? Or LEP?* They're basically antimatter guns (although not of the sort you could stick in a holster and carry around :wink:).

*more precisely, the Tevatron's Antiproton Source and LEP's positron converter
 
Diazona, the air is made up of matter. I would assume a particle accelerators smashing sub atomic particles has a pretty good vacuum... though I'm talking about for practical applications.

I'm thinking any kind of anti-particle possible of colliding and exploding organic objects would obliterate the instant it hit simple air(inside/out the the weapon). At least unless there was some way to make them smart :P.
 
Yes, particle accelerators do operate in a high vacuum. And yes, antiparticles fired out of a gun into the atmosphere would annihilate the moment they came into contact with air. But that's not "instantly upon firing".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
37
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K