65 replies to this topic

[Mathias]

Breeder reactors are the key to renewable nuclear power, atleast in a sense.

[Dauth]

Assuming all the resultant energy, (actually momentum) is in one direction

[Golan]

Azul, on 28 Nov 2006, 12:44, said:

I said it because you counter an opinion without a fact and information . You never knew what can be happen in 100 years later , as how in 1900 peoples can't imagine '' computer '' , we can't know if anti-matter can be used as fuel or not , its same for any other opinions .

The idea of having a computer was completely unknown 100 years before it´s invention. AM is known today and we know enough about it to say it´s fucking unlikely that we can effectively use it in 100 years.

Dauth, on 29 Nov 2006, 18:59, said:

Κασεν, on 29 Nov 2006, 18:49, said:

A single atom of anti-matter is bombarded with a proton, which causes an explosion that releases a huge amount of energy in a controlled area. This energy is used to power the spacecraft. It allows for an unbelievable amount of energy to be stored in a very tiny space.

Assuming all the resultant energy, (actually momentum) is in one direction

And that your spacecraft won´t get shred to tiny peaces, which is rather likely to say the least. Also, building a spacecraft that carries a friggin cyclotron can be a bit difficult.

[Dauth]

Haven't i already gone through the fact that making antimatter uses up more energy than is produced by it? and storage is a bugger because antimatter reacts with matter, you would have to do it in an extremly strong and stable magnetic field which wastes even more energy.

Im doing physics at university and am so close to giving up on this topic.

We have 2 sources of energy that can be used.

The Sun and its effects on the atmosphere/tides
Nuclear Power

No fancy techniques, the second law of thermodynamics is there for a reason!

[Mathias]

I am aware of tons of concepts for antimatter drives, but the basical technological foundations beneath are still not within our grasp.

Edit: Typo.

Edited by Cycerin, 29 November 2006 - 18:10.

[Dauth]

And again i ask, where do you get the antimatter from? i can post the kinematic proof if people want but you need to be first year degree student to understand

Edit : Kacen beat me to it

Edited by Dauth, 29 November 2006 - 18:12.

[Mathias]

I was not really trying to argument FOR antimatter drives, you know.

[Golan]

Κασεν, on 29 Nov 2006, 19:11, said:

If by cyclotron you mean the device scientists use to create anti-matter, then no. The anti-matter is already made and stored on the ship. How it is stored on the ship, and how the beings managed to create so much, is unknown. (This comment aimed at Golan)

Jups, its the multitool for every maniac scientist. And the number one device to both generate and store antimatter.

[Eddy01741]

scratches head for 5 mins straight.... wtf... yeah, maybe i should check out the anti-matter thread somewhere around here since theres so much rave about anti-matter.

[Mathias]

The previous antimatter thread is just retarded. Almost nobody understands what antimatter is.

[Dauth]

ahem, give me 3 weeks and i'll explain why we have more matter than anti-matter (CP violation).

Anti-matter does not need raving about, just a vague understanding of relativistic dynamics

[AllStarZ]

Quote

you never know cycerin, i mean in 1940's atomic energy was introduced and within 60 years we have almost mastered it with the multi-warhead atomic ICBM's and nukelear power plants, i cant even imagine what will happen in the next 60 years at the rate technology is advancing.

We're actually alot slower than you think yet alot faster. Some fields advance spectacularly fast (computer technology) within a short span of time, while others (space exploration) barely advance at all, simply incorporating improvements in other technologies to enhance the said capability.

The advancement of technology is more like a race between different cars, not like a steady advance or anything. One car may take the lead, but then the one lagging behind would take first place suddenly.

Quote

If I am not mistaken, doesn't France reuse their nuclear waste? Because there should still be some leftover energy in that stuff.

Canada does it too, and we're in fact pioneers in that respect. Our CANDU reactors are several times more efficient, and safer than most other designs.

Edited by AllStarZ, 04 December 2006 - 22:59.

[̀̀̀̀█]

Hope this isn't going to make me a necro......

Fusion drives will be the power in 100 year..... All you need is one fusion reaction to get going, and then the energies can be safely siphoned off for different uses/ reactors. All you need is a fuel supply and your little fusion ball will never die. O and dauth, what field are you trying to major in? I'm looking into being a nuclear engineer/ physicist. I already have nuclear physics 101 down. I'm looking to transfer into MIT in 2 years.

One more thing. AM will be possible once we get fusion reactors, but they won't have any use inside the shadow of fusion, AM is too unpredictable for civilian use. Maybe as a massive weapon. Think AM tipped bullets anyone?

[Dauth]

ARAIK its not a necro issue in the main pages if its still on the front page, especially in somewhere as underused as this.

I'm 3rd Year Physics with Theoritical Physics at the University of Manchester.

For fusion to occur we need to have atoms with enough energy to essentially "get over" the coloumb potential. Deuterium is currently thought to be a useful source and has been tried alloyed with Paladium rods.

Muonium has also been mentioned on a less grand scale however getting a sufficient supply of hydrogen with muons together without the muons decaying is difficult.

Fusion may well be cleaner than fission however fission occurs naturally this means that there is a lot less (even tho it requires significant) preparation required to make an efficient fission reactor.

I think AM is a far betched idea for small muntions but plauasble for bombing with/ICBM. For antimatter to not anhilate it needs to be kept in a magnetic field of constant strength.

Pyrobob if you have any questions regarding physics you can ask me. If you want i can post a list of the topics i have studied in detail.

[Cryptkeeper]

a constant magnetic field even a small one would be magor break through
so far i have haven'tread any thing abot any one able to do this yet at least not at a pratical lvl sence with the electricity tech we have now completely constant unintterupted power is very hard to do and keep under control.

sence regulating it would take the most accurate and prestine circuitry ever devised by man and would be problyworth well over the cost of the space shuttle

[Dauth]

Long enough parrellel plates and the magnteic field between them will be almost uniform at the centre and constant as long as the current remains constant and no earthing occurs

[Cryptkeeper]

well i was talking about the current but ya current even with are curent tech lvl almost never completely constant it still has fluxation wich would be a a complete deaster in the case of it holding antimatter.

it would make charnoble look like car accident as anything in the surrounding area depending on the amount of antimatter that pours out would be ablitrated in blink of a eye and anything not destoryed would die due to the outflow of gamma radiation.

but theoreticly if you were able to create such device you would first use normal means of energy to get it started then slowly ween it off and let it produce its own electricty.

[Zero]

I think in the next 100/200 years:
Vehicles/Jets/Airplanes: Hydrogen
Buildings: Nuclear Fusion (maybe cold fusion)
Spaceships: Plasma (short-range), anti-matter anhialation (mid-to-long range)

[Dr. Strangelove]

tskasa1, on 15 May 2008, 21:34, said:

I think in the next 100/200 years:
Vehicles/Jets/Airplanes: Hydrogen
Buildings: Nuclear Fusion (maybe cold fusion)
Spaceships: Plasma (short-range), anti-matter anhialation (mid-to-long range)

-EPIC NECRO-

Jets and airplanes can't be powered with Hydrogen.

Cold Fusion is a hoax and Hot Fusion isn't energy efficient.

How would you use plasma to power a ship? Also, anti-matter is extremely hard to manufacture.

[̀̀̀̀█]

Epic necro isn't an issue.

jets and airplanes will be powered by fusion......

And cold fusion isn't a hoax. The scientist who said they had it working, now that was the hoax. Cold fusion could be possible, but not before we can control the spin of the atoms and whatnot. IE, another 25 years. Well..... Maybe 10... You never know.

and for spaceships, I think those might be weapons....

And o yea, epic necro isn't epic.

Edited by pyrobob, 16 May 2008 - 02:12.

[Cuppa]

Dr. Strangelove, on 15 May 2008, 19:25, said:

tskasa1, on 15 May 2008, 21:34, said:

I think in the next 100/200 years:
Vehicles/Jets/Airplanes: Hydrogen
Buildings: Nuclear Fusion (maybe cold fusion)
Spaceships: Plasma (short-range), anti-matter anhialation (mid-to-long range)

-EPIC NECRO-

Jets and airplanes can't be powered with Hydrogen.

Because...?

[Zero]

Cuppa, on 16 May 2008, 2:43, said:

Dr. Strangelove, on 15 May 2008, 19:25, said:

tskasa1, on 15 May 2008, 21:34, said:

I think in the next 100/200 years:
Vehicles/Jets/Airplanes: Hydrogen
Buildings: Nuclear Fusion (maybe cold fusion)
Spaceships: Plasma (short-range), anti-matter anhialation (mid-to-long range)

-EPIC NECRO-

Jets and airplanes can't be powered with Hydrogen.

Because...?

The dude has a point. First of all airplanes, you could use the same hydrogen power used in cars to turn the rotors (and helicoptors too). Also don't forget Hydrogen is HIGHLY flammable and contains about 3xs the amount of energy of oil and if you can find a way to use Liquid Hydrogen in a jet engine, you will have a much more powerful engine, even if it's just a rigged up oil one because hydrogen is so potent and reactive.

[AllStarZ]

I don't think fusion is possible in any foreseeable future. And by that I mean centuries.

[Dr. Strangelove]

pyrobob, on 16 May 2008, 3:11, said:

Epic necro isn't an issue.

jets and airplanes will be powered by fusion......

And cold fusion isn't a hoax. The scientist who said they had it working, now that was the hoax. Cold fusion could be possible, but not before we can control the spin of the atoms and whatnot. IE, another 25 years. Well..... Maybe 10... You never know.

and for spaceships, I think those might be weapons....

And o yea, epic necro isn't epic.

And maybe if we wait 25 years someone will make magic work.

[Sgt. Rho]

*necroes*

After reading a bit into Helium 3, I figured out why the NASA suddently wants to go to the moon again.
The Moon is basically one huge ressource depot, and we can use whatever ressources there, as it is dead rock, no-one, not even the enviromentalists will have a reason to be mad. Moon dust is full of 3He, and the moon surface is probably meters thick covered in dust. And guess what: 3HE can efficiently fuel a fusion reactor. Yes, I know that it needs 30% more heat to fire it up, but did you know that it has a 60-70% more power output than a Deuterium/Tritium fusion reaction?

The transport from moon to Earth will certainly not be a problem, you can get all the fuel you would ever need on the moon to power a rocket to fly the stuff back to Earth.

Edit: Oh, and the materials to build it too, btw.

Edited by Sargeant Rho, 14 September 2009 - 01:32.