How Does the Star Trek Warp Core Utilize Matter-Antimatter Collisions?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahmes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Core Warp
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the theoretical and practical implications of using matter-antimatter collisions, particularly in the context of the "Star Trek" warp core concept. Participants explore the feasibility of utilizing gamma rays from electron-positron collisions, the potential of antihydrogen as a fuel source for space propulsion, and the challenges associated with containment and energy production.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that while matter-antimatter collisions produce energy, the practical use of gamma rays generated from electron-positron collisions is limited due to the energy required to produce and focus the particles.
  • Another participant mentions that antihydrogen has been suggested as a potential fuel for space propulsion, but highlights the high cost and containment challenges associated with it.
  • Concerns are raised about the feasibility of using antimatter for propulsion, with one participant suggesting that the energy required to produce antimatter would outweigh the energy gained from its reactions.
  • A participant argues that the containment of antihydrogen is not as difficult as suggested, referencing a paper on inertial confinement fusion propulsion systems.
  • There is a discussion about the production of antiprotons through inertial confinement, which could be controlled using electric or magnetic fields, unlike antihydrogen.
  • One participant questions the practicality of using positrons from sodium isotopes for antimatter reactors, suggesting that antimatter reactions could be used for energy generation rather than direct propulsion.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the overall efficiency of antimatter as an energy source, pointing out potential energy losses in the process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the feasibility and practicality of using matter-antimatter collisions for energy and propulsion. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of various proposed methods or the challenges involved, indicating ongoing debate and uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the high cost of producing antimatter, the challenges of containment, and the energy efficiency of antimatter production versus its potential energy output. The discussion reflects various assumptions and conditions that are not universally accepted.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in theoretical physics, space propulsion technologies, and the practical applications of antimatter in energy generation may find this discussion relevant.

Ahmes
Messages
75
Reaction score
1
"Startrek" warp core

Hello,
The "Startrek" warp core works on the real physical phenomenon of matter collides with antimatter and energy is created.
But as I was taught, a collision between an electron and a positron will produce two, very energetic, gamma-photons. how can anyone use (nowadays) these gamma rays? If this energy was usable, wouldn't they make some use of that in nuclear reactors instead of blocking it behind thick lead walls?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The problem is the energy required to produce the positron and focus it to collide with the similarly focussed electron. They do this in accelerators, for example the Large Electron-Positron accelerateor (LEP) used this approach, and was the source of many discoveries. But as a source of useful energy it doesn't work.
 
http://www.space.com/images/h_laser_levan_02.jpg

Riding on a beam of light, future passenger-carrying spacecraft will look far different than clunky vehicles used today. Test shots of a sub-scale version of this single-seater laser-boosted lightcraft have already been carried out at White Sands, New Mexico test range. CREDIT: Ron Levan/RPI

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3607020/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Antihydrogen Can Be Used

Antihydrogen has certainly be suggested (and experimented with) as a future source of space-propulsion.
The ONLY constraints on using such a fuel, at present, is the very high cost in producing the fuel.
 
Nommos Prime (Dogon) said:
Antihydrogen has certainly be suggested (and experimented with) as a future source of space-propulsion.
The ONLY constraints on using such a fuel, at present, is the very high cost in producing the fuel.


..and containing it. Can't encounter ordinary matter or you lose all that energy, suddenly! And since antihydrogen is electrically neutral, you can't use EM to confine it either.

Also this would be a source of energy, but probably not reaction mass. The reaction mass limitations for going anywhere outside the solar system in a human lifetime are so great that the rocket principle just doesn't look feasible. Thus you are forced to look for workable metric engineering solutions.
 
Containment Not That Difficult...

I consider the "Containment" problem to be a minor one.
Read this and tell me what you think?

From;
"HIGH PERFORMANCE INERTIAL CONFINEMENT FUSION (ICF) PROPULSION SYSTEMS FOR INTERSTELLAR MISSIONS."
http://www.interstellarsociety.org/PROP4.HTM

No worries...

If you don't consider this approach feasible, there's a few other ones I reckon "are close to the money".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Inertial confinement isn't a way to confine antihydrogen, it's a way to PRODUCE antiprotons. Closely related to inertial confinement fusion, which is an ongoing research enterprise, you see from the paper that it compresses a pellet of fissile material with EM beams to produce a flood of antiprotons. Now anitprotons don't have the problems I mentioned with antihydrogen. Since they are charged, they can be controlled with electric or magnetic fields.

You still have the basic rocket problem though. Even if you have total conversion of matter into energy and your reaction is photons - this is the theoretical maximum of the rocket principle - you still can't get up to a healthy enough fraction of c to make an interstellar trip in a human lifetime. To get to Alpha Centauri at .1c would take 43 years, without braking, but to get to .1c would require a Moon-sized chunk of matter to convert.
 
quick question... NA22 sodium isotope produces positrons by simply sitting... and they have an electric charge... why not positrons for some type of antimatter reactor? besides, you shouldn't use the antimatter reaction for propulsion purposes, just use it for an energy to create a means of propulsion... eh?
 


but woudnt you lose energy in the long run, the amount of energy needed to make even nearly enough anti- particles to use as a 100% efficient energy source would be greater then the energy got out, as energy is wasted in heat and light
 
  • #10


7 year old thread.
 

Similar threads

High School What does QFT really predict about matter/anti-matter interactions?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Graduate How different would matter-antimatter explosion be compared to nuclear
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
High School Few questions about radioactivity/radiation
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
High School How Does an IEC Fusion Reactor Work?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K