Science fiction spills into reality: chapter XLVII

[Ravenstorm]

Click (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/10/04/MNGM393GPK1.DTL)

Raven

Cool read.

I'm pretty sure anti-hydrogen antimatter has been isolated in miniscule quantities.

[Latrinsorm]

I don't understand how anti-matter can be shielded from collisions with regular matter, allowing for one big collision at a specified time (i.e. a bomb). That positronium stuff is great, but I don't see how it works for more than a single particle, whose explosive effect would be negligible.

Still fun to think about, though. :)

Obviously create a bomb-shell of a different amu than the anti-matter being held in it. A lab technique that might be plausible is isolating said anti-matter in an environment where its counterpart is non-existent (i.e. vacuum, hypoxia chamber) putting it in said bombshell made out of, um, lead that is vacuum sealed with anti-matter inside, and then have the explosive charge detonate the device to an environment that will contain the counterpart for specific anti-matter (nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen.)

[Drew2]

I think it's a great idea, but I very much dislike its application.

I mean, this could produce more and cleaner power than any nuclear power plant in existance, but all we're interested in is blowing shit up.

This could open the door to deep space exploration (No, seriously), but let's just take some chunks off our planet instead!!!

The Air Force (also, all armed forces) is fucking retarded.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Stanley Burrell
Obviously create a bomb-shell of a different amu than the anti-matter being held in it. A lab technique that might be plausible is isolating said anti-matter in an environment where its counterpart is non-existent (i.e. vacuum, hypoxia chamber) putting it in said bombshell made out of, um, lead that is vacuum sealed with anti-matter inside, and then have the explosive charge detonate the device to an environment that will contain the counterpart for specific anti-matter (nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen.) I dunno, Stan. Even if you make a perfectly sterile environment, partically speaking (if that even makes sense), you'd have to have it completely immobile, wouldn't you? In order to keep inertia from cramming the two parts together? That being said, how would inertia even work with anti-matter? Or for that matter, gravity?

My best bet would be that inertia would not have an effect on X anti-matter, due to the fact that as long as it is in an environment where it is not reacting with its counterpart, this will not create a matter where none has previously existed, henceforth, factors such as gravity and inertia will not cause a vacuum sealed Pb bomb-shell to spontaneously start forming hydrogen atoms.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Stanley Burrell
Obviously create a bomb-shell of a different amu than the anti-matter being held in it. A lab technique that might be plausible is isolating said anti-matter in an environment where its counterpart is non-existent (i.e. vacuum, hypoxia chamber) putting it in said bombshell made out of, um, lead that is vacuum sealed with anti-matter inside, and then have the explosive charge detonate the device to an environment that will contain the counterpart for specific anti-matter (nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen.)

Anyone watch the movie "Old School" and just get a flashback to the debate scene?

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Stanley Burrell
My best bet would be that inertia would not have an effect on X anti-matter, due to the fact that as long as it is in an environment where it is not reacting with its counterpart, this will not create a matter where none has previously existed, henceforth, factors such as gravity and inertia will not cause a vacuum sealed Pb bomb-shell to spontaneously start forming hydrogen atoms. Maybe I misunderstand anti-matter, but I was thinking ANY anti-matter coming into contact with ANY matter caused le explosion, i.e. the positrons of the anti-matter with the electrons of the matter around it (lead, hydrgoen, whatever). It wouldn't be catastrophic, but I figured it would eat up all the antimatter with unnoticeable explosions. Did I miss something?

If you are talking in terms of positron anti-matter than yes, it would instantaneously react with its counterpart. However, anti-matter exists in many different negative amu's. This means that, if you have a negative positron anti-matter, that the first sign of hydrogen it comes in contact with will cause combustion. There is however "Larger Chunks" of anti-matter, that correspond with, to my knowledge, elements specifically, as in, an anti-matter for hydrogen, oxygen, argon, krypton, etc. The whole point is that in order for anti-matter combustion to occur, the said isolated anti-matter must react with its counterpart. Aside from small particle anti-matter, there can be, and I am almost certain that larger anti-matter has been synthesized with correspondents to specific atomic weights of individual elements. An anti-oxygen antimatter particle would not react in a solvent nitrogenous environment.

[Drew2]

How can electrons (and therefore, positrons) have different amus? I thought an electron was an electron was an electron. I know that ATOMS, obviously, have different charges and all that, but electrons themselves carry different charges?

UNHEARD OF.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Parkbandit

Originally posted by Stanley Burrell
Obviously create a bomb-shell of a different amu than the anti-matter being held in it. A lab technique that might be plausible is isolating said anti-matter in an environment where its counterpart is non-existent (i.e. vacuum, hypoxia chamber) putting it in said bombshell made out of, um, lead that is vacuum sealed with anti-matter inside, and then have the explosive charge detonate the device to an environment that will contain the counterpart for specific anti-matter (nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen.)

Anyone watch the movie "Old School" and just get a flashback to the debate scene?

Obviously no one saw the movie.. because that was god damn funny.

Bastards.

[Latrinsorm]

<-- saw the movie, and thought that was the lamest scene. :/ Overall, hilarious, but that scene was lacking. Then again, you're the one who loves t3h cow porn, so I guess I'm not surprised by your lack of taste. :saint:

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
<-- saw the movie, and thought that was the lamest scene. :/ Overall, hilarious, but that scene was lacking. Then again, you're the one who loves t3h cow porn, so I guess I'm not surprised by your lack of taste. :saint:

BBW is NOT COW PORN.

Fucker.