Antimatter warheads..

[ev]

Whilst there is currently research being done into the electricity production capabilities of antimatter, there is also millions of dollars being spent by the USAF on the military applications of Antimatter, mainly for warheads and propulsion.

Now, if such WMD's were to be produced, they would not be governed under current international legislation, and, I believe this could create another arms race in the advent of the Antimatter technology.

Now for those of you who don't already know, the weight for weight, hydrogen fusion releases 2.5 times as much energy as uranium fission.

The annihilation of antimatter with matter produces, weight for weight, 1000 times as much energy as uranium fission (400 times more energy than hydrogen fusion). However, whereas uranium fission and hydrogen fusion are useful because these potential-energy-containing materials are abundant in nature, antimatter annihilation is not so useful because antimatter is not found in nature that we know of, and it can be created only extremely slowly using far more energy than what we would get from annihilating it.

In an Antimatter warhead, the Antimatter would need to be contained in some sort of electromagnetic container in order to prevent the contents from interacting with normal matter and producing an explosion, now if an EMP were to disrupt that electromagnetic field and the antimatter was to come into contact with the matter surrounding it then it would result in a premature detonation of the device, now in if that was stored with other antimatter warheads then they too would contribute to the overall yield of the explosion resulting in a massive detonation. In theory a mass of antimatter equivalent to the mass of a paper clip would be enough to destroy an entire city, therefore the military applications of such devices are significant.

How does everyone feel about the United States military doing research in new ways to destroy us all?


notes:
* http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/10/04/MNGM393GPK1.DTL
* http://cui.unige.ch/isi/sscr/phys/antim-Thee.html
* http://www.kitsune.addr.com/Rifts/Rifts-Rules/Anti-Matter.htm

[mikelepore]

Interesting article that mentions antihydrogen weapons at the CERN site, http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/Spotlight/SpotlightAandD-en.html

[Bitter Ashes]

Interesting article that mentions antihydrogen weapons at the CERN site, http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/Spotlight/SpotlightAandD-en.html
Haha. Just like Angels and Demons! :lol:

It's not as dangerous as you might think for them to be researching, but it is plenty stupid.

The nuclear arms race is all that kept the Cold War turning into WW3, due to the principles of Mutualy Assured Destruction. Adding more missiles and putting different, more powerful, warheads warheads onto those missiles wont change MAD, so the situation remains. There's also more than enough nuclear weapons on the planet to destroy the world several times over, which is already overkill. Souping up the warheads again is pointless.

Possibly the most worrying thing would be the magnetic containers for the antimater. I dont know that much myself about the stuff, but in Angels and Demons (probably not a good source I'll admit) the container needed power, or the antimatter inside would fall and make contact with the matter of the container obliterating it and releasing it. So, where as a lump of plutonium sitting in a warhead in a silo is pretty safe, this is a move towards something that all it needs is a powercut in order to "detonate". So, there's the stupid bit.

[eyedrop]

Haha. Just like Angels and Demons! :lol:

It's not as dangerous as you might think for them to be researching, but it is plenty stupid.

The nuclear arms race is all that kept the Cold War turning into WW3, due to the principles of Mutualy Assured Destruction. Adding more missiles and putting different, more powerful, warheads warheads onto those missiles wont change MAD, so the situation remains. There's also more than enough nuclear weapons on the planet to destroy the world several times over, which is already overkill. Souping up the warheads again is pointless.

Possibly the most worrying thing would be the magnetic containers for the antimater. I dont know that much myself about the stuff, but in Angels and Demons (probably not a good source I'll admit) the container needed power, or the antimatter inside would fall and make contact with the matter of the container obliterating it and releasing it. So, where as a lump of plutonium sitting in a warhead in a silo is pretty safe, this is a move towards something that all it needs is a powercut in order to "detonate". So, there's the stupid bit.

I've read that book a while ago and I can't remember much from it except that the physics from it was wildly inaccurate. Why can't a famous writer even bother to do some minute research about what he is to write a book about, instead of spreading half-myths even further.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The annihilation of antimatter with matter produces, weight for weight, 1000 times as much energy as uranium fission (400 times more energy than hydrogen fusion). However, whereas uranium fission and hydrogen fusion are useful because these potential-energy-containing materials are abundant in nature, antimatter annihilation is not so useful because antimatter is not found in nature that we know of, and it can be created only extremely slowly using far more energy than what we would get from annihilating it.

Which means that antimatter cannot be a primary source of energy. Of course, it may be possible to create relatively large amounts of antimatter with orbital solar-powered facilities, which would make antimatter a potentially useful way of storing energy.


In an Antimatter warhead, the Antimatter would need to be contained in some sort of electromagnetic container in order to prevent the contents from interacting with normal matter and producing an explosion, now if an EMP were to disrupt that electromagnetic field and the antimatter was to come into contact with the matter surrounding it then it would result in a premature detonation of the device, now in if that was stored with other antimatter warheads then they too would contribute to the overall yield of the explosion resulting in a massive detonation.It's possible to shield against an EMP attack. Haven't you heard of a Faraday cage? It would be easy to protect an antimatter warhead with one. Of course, other ways of storing antimatter (such as anti-protons suspended within a fullerene matrix) may not need protection from EMP.


In theory a mass of antimatter equivalent to the mass of a paper clip would be enough to destroy an entire city, therefore the military applications of such devices are significant.Antimatter is a potentially extremely potent force multiplier, but there are many scientific and engineering obstacles to overcome. One of them being detonation - unless you get the timing right, you could end up scattering most of the antimatter before it annihilates fully.


How does everyone feel about the United States military doing research in new ways to destroy us all?Isn't that their job? Besides, they're also working on stuff much more likely to come to fruition within our lifetimes, if it hasn't already. Like fuel-air explosives and robotic armies.


Souping up the warheads again is pointless

Hardly. Military strategists would wet themselves if they could pack enough weapons on an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle to glass a continent. More boom for less weight means that space on a missile that was previously dedicated to the rest of the warhead can now be used for more sophisticated electronics, which will weigh less than the dense metal used in nuclear bombs. Less weight means more range as the rocket motor does not have to work with so much mass.


So, where as a lump of plutonium sitting in a warhead in a silo is pretty safe, this is a move towards something that all it needs is a powercut in order to "detonate". So, there's the stupid bit.Engineers study for years in order to solve such problems. Any organisation with the resources to test or produce antimatter weapons is going to have more than enough engineers in the team.

[Il Medico]

I am not that worried, we already have weapons that can kill us all an we have been smart enough not to use them. But if we do, we'll have to leave the completion of communism to the chimps. :lol:

[ev]

Which means that antimatter cannot be a primary source of energy. Of course, it may be possible to create relatively large amounts of antimatter with orbital solar-powered facilities, which would make antimatter a potentially useful way of storing energy.


I totally agree with you, i could imagine huge fields of solar cells collecting power and transferring that into antimatter - antimatter capacitors for a rainy day..


It's possible to shield against an EMP attack. Haven't you heard of a Faraday cage? It would be easy to protect an antimatter warhead with one. Of course, other ways of storing antimatter (such as anti-protons suspended within a fullerene matrix) may not need protection from EMP.

You're right, but with the advent of more electromagnetic military technology (like weapons that produce a static or slowly changing magnetic field, that increases and after crossing a threshold interupts the the electronics containing the antimatter. I cannot be sure whether the US military will implement safety devices like suspending anti-protons within a fullerene matrix, they would probably rush the deployment of such weapons and unknowingly risk a premature detonation.. I'd assume such idiotic decisions would be taken by military commanders with little to no knowledge in particle physics..


Antimatter is a potentially extremely potent force multiplier, but there are many scientific and engineering obstacles to overcome. One of them being detonation - unless you get the timing right, you could end up scattering most of the antimatter before it annihilates fully.

You know more than me on particle physics NoXion, I assume that the engineers who would design such weapons would attempt to overcome such problems to maximize the weapons capabilities, I would expect it to evolve similarly to how the nuclear warhead has, Trinity to the current re-entry devices in ICBM's.


Isn't that their job? Besides, they're also working on stuff much more likely to come to fruition within our lifetimes, if it hasn't already. Like fuel-air explosives and robotic armies.

Yeah, I agree..

Souping up the warheads again is pointless.

Hardly. Military strategists would wet themselves if they could pack enough weapons on an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle to glass a continent. More boom for less weight means that space on a missile that was previously dedicated to the rest of the warhead can now be used for more sophisticated electronics, which will weigh less than the dense metal used in nuclear bombs. Less weight means more range as the rocket motor does not have to work with so much mass.

Seconded. You must understand Ranma, that from a tactical standpoint, you would only require 1 delivery vehicle to breach an anti-missile defence system to inflict catastrophic damage, more damage than a nuclear device.



Engineers study for years in order to solve such problems. Any organisation with the resources to test or produce antimatter weapons is going to have more than enough engineers in the team.

Right you are, what I think the biggest threat would be is the fact that it would be much easier to destroy an antimatter warhead once it is airborne, I mean, you could probably create artificial electromagnetic fluxuations in the atmosphere by the time they have such weapons creating a "static shield", or even an EMP if the device wasn't correctly shielded it would detonate in the air, and because it would have a high yeild the collateral damage would be insane..

I think if such weapons come into existence then they must not be controlled by the capitalists, I could see a lot of peaceful uses for such technology though..

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I totally agree with you, i could imagine huge fields of solar cells collecting power and transferring that into antimatter - antimatter capacitors for a rainy day..

I'm thinking bigger than that. Cover most of the planet Mercury in solar energy collectors and you have significant amounts of energy coming in - about equivalent to a 8.2 kiloton bomb going off every second.

Were this energy to be used to produce antimatter using today's technology, designed by industrial engineers rather than research scientists, an optimistic maximum efficiency would be about 0.01%. Not very good, but still about 6000 times better than Fermilab. Such a setup would produce just a smidgeon over a third of a gram of antimatter each second.

Not much, but it doesn't have to be. A third of a gram is equal to thousands of millions of anti-protons, more than enough to fuel a fleet of spacecraft capable of taking a trip to the Oort Cloud (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_Cloud) and back.

That's just a second's output. With the output of a year or so, you'd have enough antimatter to fuel a colony ship to a nearby star.

Of course, I'm making the (possibly unwarranted) assumption that by the time we have the capability to cover Mercury in solar collectors, no efficiency breakthroughs will be made in antimatter production. The theoretical maximum for the Mercury antimatter production facility I described above is about 150 grams per second, or approximately 9 kilos of antimatter every hour. That's a lot of energy!

Antimatter has the potential to power civilisation, but my figures may be a little off.


You're right, but with the advent of more electromagnetic military technology (like weapons that produce a static or slowly changing magnetic field, that increases and after crossing a threshold interupts the the electronics containing the antimatter. I cannot be sure whether the US military will implement safety devices like suspending anti-protons within a fullerene matrix, they would probably rush the deployment of such weapons and unknowingly risk a premature detonation.. I'd assume such idiotic decisions would be taken by military commanders with little to no knowledge in particle physics..Military commanders are also very fond of having weapons that don't explode unless ordered to, which is why they seek to employ the best and brightest in their respective fields - government agencies like the Pentagon and DARPA regularly scour universities and research institutions for promising applicants, although unfortunately with military secrecy being what it is, anyone who accepts such an application is not at liberty to discuss their work. Not only is that a personal disappointment as I would love to know what they're working on, but it is also the loss of the scientific community as a whole, as the time and effort of extremely clever people is monopolised and their works miss the scrutiny of their peers.

In short, the danger is not so much in potentially being blown up, but in actually having scientific progress retarded by goverment paranoia.


Right you are, what I think the biggest threat would be is the fact that it would be much easier to destroy an antimatter warhead once it is airborne, I mean, you could probably create artificial electromagnetic fluxuations in the atmosphere by the time they have such weapons creating a "static shield", or even an EMP if the device wasn't correctly shielded it would detonate in the air, and because it would have a high yeild the collateral damage would be insane..Well, they're already working on weapons that target long-range missiles in their launch phase, meaning that if an antimatter warhead was destroyed by such a weapon then it would be the area that it was fired from that would get the collateral, if you know what I mean. In other words, firing antimatter missiles at an enemy with good anti-missile defence could be a risky proposition for the attacker.


I think if such weapons come into existence then they must not be controlled by the capitalists, I could see a lot of peaceful uses for such technology though..Such things remain to be seen. I hope that capitalist misuse of technology does not lead to a widespread backlash against it.