Space 1999 Eagle Transporter Forum


Go Back   Space 1999 Eagle Transporter Forum > Deep Space Tracking Station > A Matter of Balance

Notices

SPONSORED BY
&

Reply Bookmark and Share
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-01-2010, 03:12 PM   #1
VTracy
Eagle Pilot
 
VTracy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 596
Default Anti-matter stars??

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/...-+SciTech%2529


This real world stuff gets stranger all the time.

I need to go back to school!
VTracy is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2010, 04:51 PM   #2
Stu73
Communications Officer
 
Stu73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scotland, UK
Posts: 1,381
Default

yeah but this story is on Fox... lol
Stu73 is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2010, 08:17 AM   #3
eaglewingone
Communications Officer
 
eaglewingone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles,CA
Posts: 1,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VTracy View Post
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/...-+SciTech%2529


This real world stuff gets stranger all the time.

I need to go back to school!
When matter and antimatter collide they cancel each other. Usually by a big burst of energy.The reaction of 1 kg of antimatter with 1 kg of matter would produce 43 megatons of TNT. I cannot fathom how they can exist in our universe for any long period of time. They can probably exist in a parallel universe where different rules apply.But recent observations by the European Space Agency's INTEGRAL (International Gamma-Ray Astrophysics Laboratory) satellite may explain the origin of a giant cloud of antimatter surrounding the galactic center.Maybe because there is a supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy.

Last edited by eaglewingone; 13-01-2010 at 08:29 AM.
eaglewingone is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2010, 11:01 AM   #4
DX-SFX
Chief Medical Officer
 
DX-SFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,094
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eaglewingone View Post
They can probably exist in a parallel universe where different rules apply.
Whoa there tiger. That's two massive assumptions that there's just no evidence for.

They might possibly be able to co-exist if there are any parallel universes and if that universe allows them to coexist. Any rule of physics could possibly be broken if a convenient universe that allows physics to be short circuited in a particular way is thrown into the probability equation but that universe is still currently a fabrication of the mind and not of substance. You can't say something is probable or calculate a probability without any data on a currently non existent thing needed to make an impossibility possible.

Last edited by DX-SFX; 13-01-2010 at 11:03 AM.
DX-SFX is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2010, 01:39 PM   #5
StrakersWig
Life Support Technician
 
StrakersWig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 91
Default

Funny that.

We seem to live in a world where serious action is taken based on massive assumptions there's just no evidence for.
StrakersWig is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote

Old 13-01-2010, 01:55 PM   #6
DX-SFX
Chief Medical Officer
 
DX-SFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,094
Default

That's the difference between emotion and science. Postulation is good but until you have tangible results, it's impossible to draw a definitive conclusion.
DX-SFX is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 15-01-2010, 08:06 AM   #7
eaglewingone
Communications Officer
 
eaglewingone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles,CA
Posts: 1,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DX-SFX View Post
Whoa there tiger. That's two massive assumptions that there's just no evidence for.

They might possibly be able to co-exist if there are any parallel universes and if that universe allows them to coexist. Any rule of physics could possibly be broken if a convenient universe that allows physics to be short circuited in a particular way is thrown into the probability equation but that universe is still currently a fabrication of the mind and not of substance. You can't say something is probable or calculate a probability without any data on a currently non existent thing needed to make an impossibility possible.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...the-multiverse

Key Concepts
1.Multiple other universes—each with its own laws of physics—may have emerged from the same primordial vacuum that gave rise to ours.
2.Assuming they exist, many of those universes may contain intricate structures and perhaps even some forms of life.
3.These findings suggest that our universe may not be as “finely tuned” for the emergence of life as previously thought.

The typical Hollywood action hero skirts death for a living. Time and again, scores of bad guys shoot at him from multiple directions but miss by a hair. Cars explode just a fraction of a second too late for the fireball to catch him before he finds cover. And friends come to the rescue just before a villain’s knife slits his throat. If any one of those things happened just a little differently, the hero would be hasta la vista, baby. Yet even if we have not seen the movie before, something tells us that he will make it to the end in one piece.

In some respects, the story of our universe resembles a Hollywood action movie. Several physicists have argued that a slight change to one of the laws of physics would cause some disaster that would disrupt the normal evolution of the universe and make our existence impossible. For example, if the strong nuclear force that binds together atomic nuclei had been slightly stronger or weaker, stars would have forged very little of the carbon and other elements that seem necessary to form planets, let alone life. If the proton were just 0.2 percent heavier than it is, all primordial hydrogen would have decayed almost immediately into neutrons, and no atoms would have formed. The list goes on.


Last edited by eaglewingone; 15-01-2010 at 10:08 AM.
eaglewingone is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 15-01-2010, 08:08 AM   #8
eaglewingone
Communications Officer
 
eaglewingone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles,CA
Posts: 1,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD View Post
Nothing in the article said they did. It said the mass of the star was generating the opposed-charge particles, which then annihilate themselves by contacting 'normal' matter. Regarding the individual particles of anti-matter, you could be looking at timeframes on the order of milli-seconds.
I agree with you. Interesting to note that the USAF has started to look into using antimatter as a weapon.This particular design uses antihydrogen as fuel and produces a 1kt burst. The more antimatter is used the bigger the explosion but you do not get the fallout.



This is the basic design. The problem is maintaining containment and the price of producing antimatter. I think that science is close to solving both problems.


This is a Penining Antimatter Trap. It is a device for the storage of charged particles using a magnetic field and a spatially static electric field

Last edited by eaglewingone; 15-01-2010 at 08:42 AM.
eaglewingone is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 15-01-2010, 08:41 AM   #9
Slartibartfast
Weapons Technician
 
Slartibartfast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Rochdale
Posts: 148
Default

Scientists should be doing their damnedest to get things like this NOT to work!

It annoys me no end to think of people slobbering over ideas like this.
Slartibartfast is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 15-01-2010, 08:46 AM   #10
eaglewingone
Communications Officer
 
eaglewingone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles,CA
Posts: 1,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfast View Post
Scientists should be doing their damnedest to get things like this NOT to work!

It annoys me no end to think of people slobbering over ideas like this.
I think it would make great weapon if the cost was not so high and the number of technical problems it has currently has.But I think very soon that the people at CERN will find a way to produce antimatter and a low price and produce a useful containment system.If they are producing mini black holes they can produce antimatter.The proposed antimatter weapon "torpedo" is very efficient and very clean weapon unlike nuclear weapons which is inefficient.

Last edited by eaglewingone; 15-01-2010 at 09:01 AM.
eaglewingone is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote

Old 15-01-2010, 11:03 AM   #11
DX-SFX
Chief Medical Officer
 
DX-SFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,094
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eaglewingone View Post

"Snip"

1.Multiple other universes—each with its own laws of physics—may have emerged from the same primordial vacuum that gave rise to ours.
2.Assuming they exist, many of those universes may contain intricate structures and perhaps even some forms of life.

"Snip"
Emphasis added by me. I'm familiar with the postulations however "possibly" is not the same thing as "probably". The wording is important.
DX-SFX is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 15-01-2010, 01:54 PM   #12
steve36uk
Communications Officer
 
steve36uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gloucestershire,UK
Posts: 1,229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eaglewingone View Post
I think it would make great weapon if the cost was not so high and the number of technical problems it has currently has.But I think very soon that the people at CERN will find a way to produce antimatter and a low price and produce a useful containment system.If they are producing mini black holes they can produce antimatter.The proposed antimatter weapon "torpedo" is very efficient and very clean weapon unlike nuclear weapons which is inefficient.
Well if they can produce a weapon with the same "bang" as a "normal " nuclear charge,but "clean",that's gonna make the world a WHOLE lot more dangerous wont it?
steve36uk is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 15-01-2010, 08:38 PM   #13
CR
Science Officer
 
CR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: wandering the universe
Posts: 5,472
Default

Interesting how 'it would make a great weapon.'
Not 'it would make a great energy source' or 'it would change our understanding of physics.'
A weapon.

It would make a great weapon for the country that possesses it; not so great for, oh, everyone else. But that's OK, as long as you don't live in the 'everyone else' countries, right?
But fear not! Like so many weapons in history, other countries will soon have it, too, and the balance of power will, well, balance somewhat. Until the next great weapon comes along.

And round and round we go...
CR is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 15-01-2010, 08:57 PM   #14
CR
Science Officer
 
CR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: wandering the universe
Posts: 5,472
Default

And no, I'm not naive enough to think that the world will never need weapons of some sort and we should all just gather round and sing Kum Ba Ya. I'm just a little disappointed that the mindset still exists (and always has existed and will exist) that someone 'needs' to exterminate someone else so completely that such destructive super-weapons are necessary. And that neither side thinks that they are perhaps wrong to think that, and that it's only always the other side's fault.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that anyone on this forum holds those generalised views, nor has stated them in such a way on this thread. I'm just voicing my general opinion, triggered in part by the 'weapon' comment made several posts ago.
CR is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 15-01-2010, 10:05 PM   #15
Slartibartfast
Weapons Technician
 
Slartibartfast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Rochdale
Posts: 148
Default

It's not so very long since Oppenheimer and Co. tested the first atom bomb, unsure that the reaction they were unleashing would ever stop.

As far as I'm concerned, those involved in the development and deployment of those bombs against Japan should have stood trial alongside the Nazis at Nuremburg.

Probably inflammatory talk for a model forum, but should we really be applauding the development of these things?
Slartibartfast is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote

Old 15-01-2010, 10:07 PM   #16
DX-SFX
Chief Medical Officer
 
DX-SFX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,094
Default

I've always said that if mankind is going to make it through the 21st century, he has to start using his intelligence. CR, could you start breeding as soon as possible? We need a generation like you.
DX-SFX is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 16-01-2010, 12:44 AM   #17
MkIXHawk
Communications Officer
 
MkIXHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Kent, UK
Posts: 1,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfast View Post
op.

As far as I'm concerned, those involved in the development and deployment of those bombs against Japan should have stood trial alongside the Nazis at Nuremburg.
That is one view, however, had the two A bombs not been dropped, it is very likely that the war would have continued for several more years with consequent casualties on both sides which would have exceeded those of Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.
It is well known that the Japanese Emperor could not surrender to mere humans- the A Bomb was such as incredible power that he could quite legitimately claim that it was a power beyond that of man so could surrender to it.
The Allies had no choice in developing the weapons; atomic fission had been known about since 1917 and with the Nazis developing cruise missiles (Fi-103) then Ballistic missiles (A4), with the real possibility of development of intercontinental missiles, the prospect of an atomic device detonating in New York was truly terrifying. Thus it was considered imperative that the Allies had appropriate retaliatory capability.
What was not known at the time was that, whilst the Nazi scientists had the technical capability to build an atomic bomb - Heisenberg having prepared a report on the possibility for the German Government in December 1939, Hitler refused to believe that Jewish scientists such as Einstein could produce anything of value, so the work was discounted. Furthermore, by 1943, the materials required, such as Uranium, were out of the reach of the Axis Powers. Consequently, although the Axis could have worked out the details of an atomic bomb, there was actually no practical way they could have built one
MkIXHawk is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 16-01-2010, 06:54 AM   #18
eaglewingone
Communications Officer
 
eaglewingone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles,CA
Posts: 1,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve36uk View Post
Well if they can produce a weapon with the same "bang" as a "normal " nuclear charge,but "clean",that's gonna make the world a WHOLE lot more dangerous wont it?
There are only two labs in the world that makes anti-matter. There is FermiLab and CERN. Those facilities can be policed by Air Force Sercurity. The same security forces that guard A-Bomb bases in England and in Europe.They are also guard missile bases in the US. The only country in the world who will have these weapons will be the United States. There are rumors that they are building a facility here in the United States that has the ability to make antimatter.The effect of a large antimatter bomb would likely be similar to that of a nuclear explosion of similar size. The reacting antimatter would release about half of its energy in a form immediately available to the environment, superheating the casing and components of the bomb and the surrounding air, and turning it into an ultrahot plasma which then emits Thermal Radiation in the full EM spectrum

Last edited by eaglewingone; 16-01-2010 at 07:12 AM.
eaglewingone is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 16-01-2010, 06:54 AM   #19
eaglewingone
Communications Officer
 
eaglewingone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles,CA
Posts: 1,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DX-SFX View Post
Emphasis added by me. I'm familiar with the postulations however "possibly" is not the same thing as "probably". The wording is important.
That why they call it theoretical physics.Theoretical physics employs mathematical models and abstractions of physics in an attempt to explain natural phenomena

Last edited by eaglewingone; 16-01-2010 at 07:34 AM.
eaglewingone is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote
Old 16-01-2010, 07:02 AM   #20
eaglewingone
Communications Officer
 
eaglewingone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles,CA
Posts: 1,206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slartibartfast View Post
It's not so very long since Oppenheimer and Co. tested the first atom bomb, unsure that the reaction they were unleashing would ever stop.

As far as I'm concerned, those involved in the development and deployment of those bombs against Japan should have stood trial alongside the Nazis at Nuremburg.

Probably inflammatory talk for a model forum, but should we really be applauding the development of these things?
Many of the people in the Manhattan Project went on to develop ballistic missiles and improved our technology. I applaud those who built the A-bomb and used the same technology for commercial nuclear power. Remember, the Nazis during WWII were also on the same track to building an A-Bomb. So it was essential that the US/UK team in Los Alamos to get there first.

Last edited by eaglewingone; 16-01-2010 at 07:08 AM.
eaglewingone is off duty   Bookmark and Share Reply With Quote

Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This site and contents are copyright © Bernard Walsh 2010 all rights reserved, no reproduction of material in any form without written permission email: Bernie.walsh@mac.com