the nuke of future

[zxcvbnm]

Neutron bomb doesn't produce radiations?

Ok you need a little bit of elementary of Physics
neutrons are considered as radiations so if a bomb produces neutrons it produces radiations

ok?

Irony. They tried to make a nuke with the least radioactive fallout possible and ended up with causing as much radiation as possible.

Do you even got a clue about how anti-matter works?
Actually, i'll rephrase: do you have any clue?
And what is this obsession from kiddo's for big bombs?
Life isn't a videogame you know.

Anti-matter is the opposite of matter, composed of similar* but opposite particles as matter which when making contact, destroy each other and release mc^2 energy.
*They are considered exactly similar to each other but some studies and theories have hinted of possible differences as matter is the dominant as we know.

 

[philippe]

Anti-matter is the opposite of matter, composed of similar* but opposite particles as matter which when making contact, destroy each other and release mc^2 energy.
*They are considered exactly similar to each other but some studies and theories have hinted of possible differences as matter is the dominant as we know.

Yes, brownie points to you but what are you going to use as element for to trigger the antimatter bomb? H²? O²? H²O? what element are you going to use for an "bunker buster"? Do we even want to "play" with anti-matter? Do you guys realise the ENORMOUS cost and energy required to make such little antimatter.

And why make antimatter bombs anyway (which I doubt actually the mechanic of making an anti-matter bomb will ever work). Don't we got enough deterrents with the good ol' minuteman?

 

[zxcvbnm]

Yes, brownie points to you but what are you going to use as element for to trigger the antimatter bomb? O²? H²O? what element are you going to use for an "bunker buster"? Do we even want to "play" with anti-matter? Do you guys realise the ENORMOUS cost and energy required to make such little antimatter.

And why make antimatter bombs anyway (which I doubt actually the mechanic of making an anti-matter bomb will ever work). Don't we got enough deterrents with the good ol' minuteman?

Anti-matter can be triggered by any element because it is composed of anti-protons, anti-neutrons and positrons which react with protons, neutrons and electrons respectively. Anti-hydrogen is the simplest anti-matter, and when it is triggered with heavier elements, such as uranium, there is also a resulting neutron release as H1 has no neutrons so no anti-neutrons to react with. Thus it's not necessary to keep any specific trigger for anti-matter explosives, as the magnetic holding mechanisms will work fine.

CERN high-speed collider produces minuscule amounts of anti-matter. Jules Verne wrote in 'Paris in the 1960s' about a scientist who invented "nihilium, which costs billion dollars per kilogram [to produce]" That is remarkably like anti-matter in rarity and cost.

The main advantage of anti-matter is its unmatched destructive potential compared to its weight.

 

[rmxtrax]

And what is this obsession from kiddo's for big bombs?
Life isn't a videogame you know.

Is it kiddo's obsession speaking about technology?
naturally we don't want to build a nuke we want only try to understand how it works or will works

that's all

And why make antimatter bombs anyway (which I doubt actually the mechanic of making an anti-matter bomb will ever work). Don't we got enough deterrents with the good ol' minuteman?

You have to ask Einstein and Enrico Fermi

 

[philippe]

You have to ask Einstein and Enrico Fermi

I'm very sure they would horribly dissaprove such further bombs just as Einstein was a pacifist, especially after hiroshima and nagasaki.
Are you aware he was very fervent anti-nuke person after WWII?

 

[zxcvbnm]

Anti-matter bombs could save humanity from killer asteroids. Light but powerful. Exactly something you want to mount upon a rocket to blast them off-course.

 

[Speedo]

I cant see the US or Russia to allow the other or any nation to respond with nukes.

IMO whichever nation is first to fall victim to such an attack is going to be so infuriated that they won't give a damn what we or anyone else tell them.

 

[rmxtrax]

I'm very sure they would horribly dissaprove such further bombs just as Einstein was a pacifist, especially after hiroshima and nagasaki.
Are you aware he was very fervent anti-nuke person after WWII?

Anti-matter will be the technology of future. If we wanna travel in the space we need anti-matter technology. Naturally it's logical that this sort of technology will be used also like a form of weapon. It's about this we are speaking "how will be built a future anti-matter weapons". That's all

I mentioned Einstein and Enrico Fermi who were favourable initially for the building of nuke in order to let you understand the nuke is a inevitable thing. It's better a nuke in our hands or a nuke in Bin Laden's hands. It's obvious that this sort of technology must stay in the right hands under continual control. It's obvious that we must develop this technology as first possible keeping it secret and prevent others to build it. I'm pacifist and for this i want these weapons under our controll and not in Bin Laden's controll.

 

[Speedo]

I'm pacifist and for this i want these weapons under our controll and not in Bin Laden's controll.

Antimatter energy or weapons probably won't be viable for centuries, so I doubt you have to worry about that.

 

[rmxtrax]

Antimatter energy or weapons probably won't be viable for centuries, so I doubt you have to worry about that.

Centuries

ok likely your scientific knowledge are in a bad status

 

[philippe]

Centuries

ok likely your scientific knowledge are in a bad status

oh give us an timetable then, oh, exalted person of wisdom

 

[Speedo]

Centuries

ok likely your scientific knowledge are in a bad status

Source?

Creating a few antimatter particles for a few seconds is a long, long way from any viable use.

Don't forget the quote from CERN, after all: "If we could assemble all of the antimatter we've ever made at CERN and annihilate it with matter, we would have enough energy to light a single electric light bulb for a few minutes."

 

[Genocidicbunny]

Somebody has been watching too much star trek. Antimatter is a looong way off from being usable. As Speedo quoted, we have barely made enougfh to light up a light bulb. To create a bomb equivalent to a nuke we would need quite a bit more.

 

[zxcvbnm]

30 mg of anti-matter could propel a graphite-uranium sailed spaceship (unmanned) to the outskirts of our solar system. That's not so far away.

 

[rmxtrax]

oh give us an timetable then, oh, exalted person of wisdom

Source?

Creating a few antimatter particles for a few seconds is a long, long way from any viable use.

Don't forget the quote from CERN, after all: "If we could assemble all of the antimatter we've ever made at CERN and annihilate it with matter, we would have enough energy to light a single electric light bulb for a few minutes."

1) CERN isn't a anti-matter factory, it is a lab. The purpose of CERN isn't to make big quantities of anti-matter but to study it. Given that anti-matter is expensive they make only the right quantity for their tests. CERN is only the first step to the fabrication of anti-matter not the last. And then how can you know how much anti-matter cern can produce at maximun level? have you tried it?

2) I think anti-matter technology will be available in more or less 50 years. We will build weapons and spacecraft with anti-matter technologies with huge profit in time and power. the problem is "who will build it the first anti-matter bomb?" We, the chinese or others. This is an important question because if such weapons go in the wrong hands, we will have a lot of problems

 

[Speedo]

1) CERN isn't a anti-matter factory, it is a lab. The purpose of CERN isn't to make big quantities of anti-matter but to study it. Given that anti-matter is expensive they make only the right quantity for their tests. CERN is only the first step to the fabrication of anti-matter not the last. And then how can you know how much anti-matter cern can produce at maximun level? have you tried it?

I know because they publish their data. During their ATHENA tests they were only about to capture 0.04% of the antimatter produced. You do realize, I hope, that labs like CERN have to develop the technologies to produce and capture antimatter efficiently before anyone can dream of using it... right?

2) I think anti-matter technology will be available in more or less 50 years.

Do you have any scientific source at all to support this conclusion?

Hell, I think we'll be very lucky if fusion becomes a viable energy source within the next century. And if we can't even produce a controlled fusion reaction, what makes you think we'll be able to have any kind of control over antimatter?

 

[zxcvbnm]

2) I think anti-matter technology will be available in more or less 50 years. the problem is "who will build it the first anti-matter bomb?" We, the chinese or others. This is an important question because if such weapons go in the wrong hands, we will have a lot of problems

The good news is, making nuke-like amounts of AM is extremely difficult, and AM bombs can't be assembled in my garage.

 

[rmxtrax]

I know because they publish their data. During their ATHENA tests they were only about to capture 0.04% of the antimatter produced. You do realize, I hope, that labs like CERN have to develop the technologies to produce and capture antimatter efficiently before anyone can dream of using it... right?

As i've said before CERN is only a lab, an purpose of reaching anti-matter controll. Have you any idea of how many attempts scientists have done for their discoveries in the history? Being pessimist for the first steps is silly given that we're only at beginnig of research

Do you have any scientific source at all to support this conclusion?

Hell, I think we'll be very lucky if fusion becomes a viable energy source within the next century. And if we can't even produce a controlled fusion reaction, what makes you think we'll be able to have any kind of control over antimatter?

Dont' be pessimist. We are going toward a golden age of development and scientific research. Now only a small part of world population is formed by scientists but in the future scientists will be a big part of population. You're right probably the idea of having anti-matter technogy in 50 years is quite ottimistic but the ideao of centuries for me is excessive

The good news is, making nuke-like amounts of AM is extremely difficult, and AM bombs can't be assembled in my garage.

the garages of 2050 will be different

 

[Speedo]

As i've said before CERN is only a lab, an purpose of reaching anti-matter controll.

Ok then, give me some info on the people who are "really" working on antimatter product. Just a little teaser about how much more efficient their production and capture technologies are.

We are going toward a golden age of development and scientific research.

Quite the opposite, IMO. Our "Golden Age" was the 20th century. Many areas of technological development are beginning to slow simply because the next levels of technology are exponentially more difficult to develop.

 

[rmxtrax]

Ok then, give me some info on the people who are "really" working on antimatter product. Just a little teaser about how much more efficient their production and capture technologies are.

We don't need a mass production of anti-matter because actually it's useless. Nothing uses anti-matter as fuel and scientists prefer to research other thing rather a expensive anti-matter production. But this doesn't mean anti-matter production need of centuries or more

I didn't want to prove we have already anti-matter but just centuries of research is exsagerated

Quite the opposite, IMO. Our "Golden Age" was the 20th century. Many areas of technological development are beginning to slow simply because the next levels of technology are exponentially more difficult to develop.

This is your opinion