|
Post by Kerr on Jun 8, 2017 16:00:13 GMT
nope no AM reaction is going to start a fusion reaction not at all, nevermind the more then needed energy released by the AM reaction over a short enough time that it can start fusion, nope, nope, nope Calm the heck down. So amat-catalyzed fusion is a pure bull---- in your view or what? Kinda sounded like sarcasm to me. I did some math, 1µg Antihydrogen should heat 100g D-T to 35-350 MK.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 8, 2017 19:25:00 GMT
nope no AM reaction is going to start a fusion reaction not at all, nevermind the more then needed energy released by the AM reaction over a short enough time that it can start fusion, nope, nope, nope Calm the heck down. So amat-catalyzed fusion is a pure bull---- in your view or what? sarcasam
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jun 8, 2017 22:39:22 GMT
Calm the heck down. So amat-catalyzed fusion is a pure bull---- in your view or what? sarcasam Sarcasam? ZARKAZAM
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Jun 8, 2017 22:44:02 GMT
RiftandRend Are you gonna make DT/D-He³/pB11 fusion with anti hydrogen as fuel? Give it the density of air or something to simulate the gap, and use NdFeB as tank material. The issue with antihydrogen is that it's so energy dense per unit that the reaction reactant counts overload. It's the same issue with antiprotons.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Jun 8, 2017 22:45:02 GMT
I don't really get it, where do these distances come from? And by radiation are you referring to fast neutrons? Is something like this feasible? Inverse square law, for a 1TW D-T rocket use 800GW and the inverse square law, after some distance you get below 4,5 MW per square meters. I don't know how many x-ray it produces at the temperature of 100 kev, only that it is the temperature with the lowest amount of x-ray. It should survive, but now try to build a p+B11, you can achieve higher exhaust velocities. Those 800 GW is the thrust power right?
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 9, 2017 4:35:52 GMT
Inverse square law, for a 1TW D-T rocket use 800GW and the inverse square law, after some distance you get below 4,5 MW per square meters. I don't know how many x-ray it produces at the temperature of 100 kev, only that it is the temperature with the lowest amount of x-ray. It should survive, but now try to build a p+B11, you can achieve higher exhaust velocities. Those 800 GW is the thrust power right? Nope, Neutrons. Engine generates 1TW of energy, 20% of D-T fusion products are charged particles, 80% are neutrons. Your Thrust power per TW is 200 GW, And your heat is 800GW.
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 9, 2017 4:42:28 GMT
RiftandRend Are you gonna make DT/D-He³/pB11 fusion with anti hydrogen as fuel? Give it the density of air or something to simulate the gap, and use NdFeB as tank material. The issue with antihydrogen is that it's so energy dense per unit that the reaction reactant counts overload. It's the same issue with antiprotons. But, Positrons are as energy as Antiprotons. Where is the difference? Both Antiprotons and Positrons have the same energy density per kg. (M*2)*C²
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Jun 9, 2017 5:43:46 GMT
The issue with antihydrogen is that it's so energy dense per unit that the reaction reactant counts overload. It's the same issue with antiprotons. But, Positrons are as energy as Antiprotons. Where is the difference? Both Antiprotons and Positrons have the same energy density per kg. (M*2)*C² It's the way they are defined. One positron has far less energy than an antiproton.
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 9, 2017 6:17:10 GMT
But, Positrons are as energy as Antiprotons. Where is the difference? Both Antiprotons and Positrons have the same energy density per kg. (M*2)*C² It's the way they are defined. One positron has far less energy than an antiproton. But a positrons has also far less mass. A positron has 1836x less energy than a antiproton, but it also weights 1836x less than a antiproton. Antimatter doesn't contain any energy. It just annihilate with matter. And thanks to the law of energy conservation it has to create energy out of the mass. The energy density of antimatter, any kind of particle is M times C squared (299792458m/s^2) times 2. Antimatter converts equal amounts of it self and matter into energy. 1kg Antimatter = 2kg rest energy.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Jun 9, 2017 6:35:13 GMT
It's the way they are defined. One positron has far less energy than an antiproton. But a positrons has also far less mass. A positron has 1836x less energy than a antiproton, but it also weights 1836x less than a antiproton. Antimatter doesn't contain any energy. It just annihilate with matter. And thanks to the law of energy conservation it has to create energy out of the mass. The energy density of antimatter, any kind of particle is M times C squared (299792458m/s^2) times 2. Antimatter converts equal amounts of it self and matter into energy. 1kg Antimatter = 2kg rest energy. It's not a matter of mass or anything like that. It's the way materials are defined in children of a dead earth. Positrons are so light that I can get the proper ratio by having 2180 mol of D-T per mol of E-E+. With antiprotons I would need a few quintillion units of D-T mix to get the same ratio. This overflows some part of the game and causes crashes. I did find a workaround, by having the antiproton material have only .000000000000000000000001 % antiprotons by mass, but this is a pain to work with and makes calculating annoying. Thus, I use positrons because they make this easier to mod.
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 9, 2017 6:44:32 GMT
But a positrons has also far less mass. A positron has 1836x less energy than a antiproton, but it also weights 1836x less than a antiproton. Antimatter doesn't contain any energy. It just annihilate with matter. And thanks to the law of energy conservation it has to create energy out of the mass. The energy density of antimatter, any kind of particle is M times C squared (299792458m/s^2) times 2. Antimatter converts equal amounts of it self and matter into energy. 1kg Antimatter = 2kg rest energy. It's not a matter of mass or anything like that. It's the way materials are defined in children of a dead earth. Positrons are so light that I can get the proper ratio by having 2180 mol of D-T per mol of E-E+. With antiprotons I would need a few quintillion units of D-T mix to get the same ratio. This overflows some part of the game and causes crashes. I did find a workaround, by having the antiproton material have only .000000000000000000000001 % antiprotons by mass, but this is a pain to work with and makes calculating annoying. Thus, I use positrons because they make this easier to mod. Sorry for the misunderstanding, also why is the positron mix so cheap?
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 9, 2017 6:52:22 GMT
I've found a interesting fusion ship design: Exacting Class Starfighter That would make a nice realistic drone. 2x 1.08Mm/s railguns (10MWx2) 1x 50MW 41,7% Laser (most efficient laser I have) and some missiles. And a lot of Dv. It can also fly in atmosphere thanks to it's special radiator wing design.
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Jun 9, 2017 7:05:38 GMT
Calm the heck down. So amat-catalyzed fusion is a pure bull---- in your view or what? Kinda sounded like sarcasm to me. I did some math, 1µg Antihydrogen should heat 100g D-T to 35-350 MK. That is assuming any reasonable fraction of it is absorbed. Typically it takes a fair bit of material to absorb high energy gamma rays...
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Jun 9, 2017 7:29:19 GMT
It's not a matter of mass or anything like that. It's the way materials are defined in children of a dead earth. Positrons are so light that I can get the proper ratio by having 2180 mol of D-T per mol of E-E+. With antiprotons I would need a few quintillion units of D-T mix to get the same ratio. This overflows some part of the game and causes crashes. I did find a workaround, by having the antiproton material have only .000000000000000000000001 % antiprotons by mass, but this is a pain to work with and makes calculating annoying. Thus, I use positrons because they make this easier to mod. Sorry for the misunderstanding, also why is the positron mix so cheap? No idea, the game's cost calculations are somewhat broken.
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Jun 9, 2017 11:50:40 GMT
Kinda sounded like sarcasm to me. I did some math, 1µg Antihydrogen should heat 100g D-T to 35-350 MK. That is assuming any reasonable fraction of it is absorbed. Typically it takes a fair bit of material to absorb high energy gamma rays... Sorry to tell you, but I excluded Gamma-rays from my calculations for that exact reason.
|
|