anti matter is a viable form of energy? will we see it in our lifetime? or will it be a bit longer or will it never happen?
anti matter is a viable form of energy? will we see it in our lifetime? or will it be a bit longer or will it never happen?
r.i.p. alleria. 1997-2017. blizzard ruined alleria forever. blizz assassinated alleria's character and appearance.
i will never forgive you for this blizzard.
Anti-matter will probably never be a viable source of energy. Not unless we find a source of it.
First off, by itself antimatter acts no differently than normal matter (Excepting electric charge).
Second, the only way to extract energy from antimatter is to annihilate it with matter. So if you have, say, 1 gram of antimatter, the only way to get energy out is by annihilating it with matter... which would yield a 1.8*1017 joule explosion. Rounded up that's 200 PJ... so about the size of the largest atomic weapon ever detonated. Yes, from 1 gram of antimatter.
Then there's the matter of creating it which takes FAR more energy to do than you can get out of the other end.
Then there's safe transport and storage (to avoid the aforementioned cataclysmic explosions).
Not to mention the absurdly slow rate at which the stuff can be created.
So if it were ever to be a viable source of energy... it won't be seen in our lifetimes.
- - - Updated - - -
You mean after it's no longer needed?
What are you asking? Viable is the completely wrong word to use when describing energy.
As soon as we get our heads around Nuclear Fusion we shouldn't need any other source of energy. My personal belief anyway.
As a source? Never, unless current observations on baryon asymmetry are wrong.
As a means of storage? If we ever find an efficient means of production and a large source of energy (e.g. cover Mercury in solar panels).
You've got a few too many zeros in there or you jumbled gram and kilogram. 2 grams *c^2 is 1.8*10^14 joules, which is about 2 Fat Mans worth of boom.
- - - Updated - - -
Sure. But you might take to take some of that power with you to run your 546371th generation iPod when you go on a day trip to OGLE-2005-BLG-390Lb.
Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mindMe on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW charactersOriginally Posted by Howard Tayler
I'm inclined to say never. Or, if that's really too arrogant , it's impossible to say (apparently, we folk who don't doubt science are always too definitive and too quick to discard ideas... apparently, we're close minded... oh, and everything's possible!). <---- sarcasm
I wont even go over why antimatter probably won't be a viable source of energy, Laize has already done that, I'll just say that fusion power will give us practically unlimited amounts of energy. We wont even need to think about antimatter once we start using hydrogen from sea water to start up mini-suns all over the world. And that's happening within the next 50 years.
You're right. I always do that.
I sure do wish the metric system, as superior to imperial as it is, would be consistent in its use of units. It seems more than a little silly that you would use 1000 of the base unit (gram) for derivative units such as Newtons and Joules.
And if it's just a convenience thing then why isn't the kg just the g and what is now called the gram would be the milligram.
A Dyson Sphere is a basically a hypothesized structure capable of harnessing a significant portion of the energy output of a star.
Imagine hundreds or thousands of satellites arranged in a sphere with a star at the center, collecting solar energy and beaming it back to power stations for use by civilization.
Basically a structure like this would be the foundation of a Type II civilization.
We're a long way away from there. Like... in terms of energy output (as a civilization) we're about 18 orders of magnitude away.
Never.
It takes a lot of energy to contain antimatter, and it is still susceptible to the laws of physics, so it will slowly quantum tunnel out of its magnetic containment field.
Also, in a situation of 100% efficiency, it takes an equal amount of energy to produce antimatter as it is capable of releasing when annihilated. Because you have to smash particles together with immense force, and within the chaos of the collision you sometimes get the spontaneous formation of a particle along with its antiparticle. You then have to immediately segregate the two, which takes additional energy.
So in order to create enough antimatter for a power plant you would end up exerting more energy producing and containing it than you would by reacting it. A lot more.
So while it does have some very important uses (Positron Emission Tomography, for example) power generation is not one of them.
Some antiparticles are created by the natural radioactive decay of certain elements, but that would not be enough for a power plant.
Hydrogen and Helium are the 2 most abundant elements in the Universe, so coming up with a sustainable fusion reactor design is a far better idea than wasting time with antimatter. And there are international projects underway with the purpose of creating that reactor.
And practical fusion reactors are really only missing either A. a chamber material capable of withstanding violent neutron bombardment, or B. a practical method of heating Helium-3 to its fusion point, which is much higher than Hydrogen.
So essentially 1 scientific breakthrough can make controlled fusion power plants a reality. Whereas there's just too many obstacles for controlled antimatter reaction.
Too many special interest to even allow something like that to become public. Sorry but too many people employed by big oil and energy to do that. Welcome to the way this shit hole we call a world works. I personally wish the ice caps would melt right now and give a reality check sooner then later.
You make my head hurt.
You do realize that all of the oil and special interests in the world couldn't stop antimatter from becoming a reality (if it were possible given current technology) given its potential as a WMD the likes of which could make thermonuclear weapons look like bottle rockets... right?
Energy companies in Louisiana got a law passed that says if 0.5% of the energy from the grid comes from solar they can legally stop issuing net meters. Do not tell me that special interest do not control this company.
My own Democrat senator post pictures of her sitting in boardrooms with big oil lobbyist on her Facebook. Texas and North Carolina are passing laws against selling electric cars.
If you do not think for a second they would make anti matter illegal under some BS excuse that it could be weaponized you are on crack. If you think anything of significance will happen in this world within the next century to change shit you need help or a serious reality check.
Here is what you do. If you discover this power source publish it on every single website on the internet you can find before they have a chance to stop you and lobby against it.
What do you not understand about the MIC being 100 times more powerful than the energy companies?
Furthermore, why do you even bother trying to make this point when it's an impossibility (given current technology) in the first place? By the time we even have the capability to store antimatter in a useful quantity, we won't need it OR oil. We'll either be completely solar powered (There is no other energy source powerful enough [real or hypothetical] to facilitate a transition from Type I to Type II) or we'll be extinct.