[ art / civ / cult / cyb / diy / drg / feels / layer / lit / λ / q / r / sci / sec / tech / w / zzz ] archive provided by lainchan.jp

lainchan archive - /sci/ - 251



File: 1477914869649.png (268.32 KB, 300x188, steins_gate__the_committee_of_antimatter_forum_sig_by_damastah101-d7rfuoy.png)

No.251

Hi guys, I was wondering, will we ever be able to use antimatter as an energy source in power plants?

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/136124/is-antimatter-power-theoretically-possible

  No.252

too far away to know

  No.253

>>252
Is it really?
Antimatter is much more researched than dark matter.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/the-practical-uses-of-antimatter/

I am no expert on nuclear power, but hasn't nuclear power developed faster?

  No.255

>>253
nuclear power uses ordinary matter. If you're wearing a lead suit, you can hold a chunk of plutonium in your hand no problem.

Antimatter is a *lot* harder to handle. If it touches any ordinary matter, it annihilates fantastically. You'd have to suspend it with electromagnets, which would require significant energy in itself. It's sort of like why Takomaks aren't an efficient energy source, but moreso because it's also hard to make antimatter.

Any research into antimatter power would be better spent on fusion power, which is more likely to be efficient and yield results.

  No.265

>>255
>it's also hard to make antimatter

That's kind of misleading. It's easy to make (or let nature make), just not store in large quantities. For instance a lot of Beta nuclear decays produce positrons, the rest produce antineutrinos.

  No.266


  No.852

>>251
Very doubtful of that.
The amount of energy expended to create the antimatter, store it, create an environment where you could introduce the antimatter (which in of itself requires energy) to matter in amounts large enough to produce enough photons all while harvesting them, would probably not be worth the process/time spent on it.

  No.853

>>852
You're talking out of your ass. We don't create uranium -- we mine uranium ore. Likewise, we could mine antimatter by a multi-satellite configuration to collect antimatter out in space. Then using solar powered electromagnets, channel it into an ordinary matter reservoir. The reactor will store energy and be programmed to launch the energy pods back to Earth.

Energy in:
Building the reactor
Rocket launching
Repair parts

Energy out:
A lot

  No.854

>>265
Well, we've gotten relatively good at making positrons, even using them in relatively everyday life (PET scans if anyone doesn't know), but positrons are orders of magnitude smaller than anti-neutrons and anti-protons. Making actual anti-atoms isn't something we've done a lot, and it seems to be extremely inefficient at this point.

Fission seems like a significantly better option for energy research.

>>853
> to collect antimatter out in space
Where do you suppose we'd get non-trivial amounts of antimatter in space? I've not seen anything to indicate that could be a valid source of it.

Also, your plan doesn't really seem that efficient, with the creation of rockets to send things in space, which is definitely nowhere near cheap, and probably more than we would get back.

  No.885

>>853
You read too much sci-fi material.