Antimatter could fuel rockets, heal patients

CNN.com ^ | 1/10/02 | Fred Katayama

[Brett66]

HUNTSVILLE, Alabama (CNN) --Scientists are looking into a futuristic technology that could lead to interplanetary missions and significantly improve cancer treatments to boot.

Astronauts have gone to the moon, but not other planets in large part because such a trip would require much more propulsion power and time. NASA researchers, however, are investigating antimatter for its propulsion potential.

[Brett66]

Antimatter propulsion is only ten years away. Just as it has been for the last 40 years.

[from occupied ga]

But because no one knows where to find the antimatter, it has to be created.

Obviously not written by someone with any physics background. There isn't any bulk antimatter and hasn't been since the big bang.

Scientists make it by colliding protons in particle accelerators at near light speed into targets made of nickel.

These are the same scientists who would be otherwise gainfully employed in increasing the wealth of society if it weren't for the wealth transfer practiced by the federal tyranny. I smell a pr attempt in this article. Like maybe justifying all of that taxpayer money that's spent on particle accelerators and PhD salaries by making a few meaningless pie in the sky promises for possible useful outcomes for this boondogle.

[Justa]

The article looks more like a victim profile for the next round of taxcuts.

[Brett66]

It will only take a few quadrillion dollars. A few quadrillion dollars here and there, pretty soon it starts adding up to real money. ;)

[goldstategop]

NASA meets Star Trek. News at 11.

[from occupied ga]

The article looks more like a victim profile for the next round of taxcuts

One can hope.

[PBRSTREETGANG]

That reminds me: I've got to hop in my hydrogen-powered car to head down to the antimatter store because my Segway is running a little low.

[Double Tap]

The production process is difficult and expensive. The world's largest maker of antimatter, the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, makes only one billionth of a gram a year at a cost of $80 million.

At that rate, it would take one million years and $80 quadrillion (80,000 trillion) to produce one gram. Unfortunately, a spacecraft would need several pounds, not grams, to travel to the nearest star. One pound is equal to 454 grams.

Does anyone else see this project as a waste of time, or is it just me?

[bagman]

Stupid me! I always thought that photons, not kinetic energy, were produced in a matter / anti-matter reaction. I'm glad that CNN straightened me out.

[mvpel]

And high-energy photons at that, otherwise known as potentially deadly gamma rays.

That said, how does a PET scanner work?

[Old Professer]

Honey, I blew up the kids.

[wattsmag2]

Stupid me! I always thought that photons, not kinetic energy, were produced in a matter / anti-matter reaction. I'm glad that CNN straightened me out.

But, cannot photons in relativistic speed collisons with matter create kinetic energy upon their absorption?

[from occupied ga]

But, cannot photons in relativistic speed collisons with matter create kinetic energy upon their absorption

By definition photons always move at the speed of light and are relativistic indeed. Since photons partake of both the properties of wave and particle, they have momentum and kinetic energy (just not very much). But this is all moot, since this would require bulk antimatter, and it ain't going to happen.

[wattsmag2]

See next post. Also could it not be possible in the future to find a way to change basic properties of particles?

[Bush2000]

But because no one knows where to find the antimatter, it has to be created. Scientists make it by colliding protons in particle accelerators at near light speed into targets made of nickel.

Law of Conservation of Energy: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It merely changes form." The reason that this technology is so unfeasible for the forseeable future is that it requires an inordinate amount of energy -- consumed by a particle accelerator -- to create the antimatter particles. It's the same reason that fusion is so expensive. Eventually, we'll find a way to do these things at less cost but it remains elusive. Frankly, this strikes me more as "Gee, whiz" Popular Mechanics-speak than something practical or imminent. NASA would obviously like more money to fund its particle accelerator project. This is one way to lobby legislators who are interested in alternative energy; however, no one should be fooled into thinking that this basic research will get us closer to achieving a result any nearer than (probably) 30 years from now or possibly longer.

[Bush2000]

Does anyone else see this project as a waste of time, or is it just me?

Basic research such as this is rarely a waste of time, per se. But it needs to be tempered by the reality that infinite cost for very finite results is not acceptable.

[spunkets]

PET, how it works.

[RadioAstronomer]

For extra solar propulsion I recommend a NERVA type engine.

[from occupied ga]

While we're dumping on the nitwit who wrote this article (supposedly a financial correspondent who could be expected to know arithmetic if not physics) did anyone else spot this one?

. The world's largest maker of antimatter, the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, makes only one billionth of a gram a year ... At that rate, it would take one million years...

one billionth of a gram times one million years = 1/1000 of a gram, not one gram