|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 10, 2017 10:29:22 GMT
Yes, Anti-ions will be repelled of the electron cloud of the fullerene. Anti-helium is a good candidate for its negative charge of two. 1 mol of Buckyballs has 720g of mass. And one mol of helium has 4g of mass. A ratio of 180. Resulting in a energy density of 500TJ/kg (Considering an efficiency of 50%. It would be 1,4 times Stronger than the most Energy dense (reallistic) Fusion fuel D-He3.) and, because the game gives you sliders without caring about the price, you could make a nuke using like 10 tons of that stuff Don't forgot the best thing about it. It is basically a chemical explosive with the power of a nuke.Rapid-firing railguns delivering kilotons per second of devastastion. Or Blast Launchers with like a hundred 1g Buckybombs. Each yielding 100t, and could fit on a 5kg Micromissile. |
|
|
|
Post by matterbeam on Aug 10, 2017 11:37:36 GMT
and, because the game gives you sliders without caring about the price, you could make a nuke using like 10 tons of that stuff Don't forgot the best thing about it. It is basically a chemical explosive with the power of a nuke.Rapid-firing railguns delivering kilotons per second of devastastion. Or Blast Launchers with like a hundred 1g Buckybombs. Each yielding 100t, and could fit on a 5kg Micromissile. If such a propellant is available, then electromagnetically contained regular guns are viable; no need for a railgun and its heavy power generation mechanisms. Just load up the bullet and the propellant and let it go boom inside the magnetic field. |
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 10, 2017 11:50:15 GMT
Don't forgot the best thing about it. It is basically a chemical explosive with the power of a nuke.Rapid-firing railguns delivering kilotons per second of devastastion. Or Blast Launchers with like a hundred 1g Buckybombs. Each yielding 100t, and could fit on a 5kg Micromissile. If such a propellant is available, then electromagnetically contained regular guns are viable; no need for a railgun and its heavy power generation mechanisms. Just load up the bullet and the propellant and let it go boom inside the magnetic field. Replacing heavy power generation with heavy magnetic field generation? At these energy densities it is basically a fusion fuel that can be ignited by a match. And containing highly relativstic particles moving up to 0.94c is pretty damn hard. But damn it, I want my Melta so I can vaporize those xenos. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 10, 2017 14:34:40 GMT
I was thinking of the "Keep it simple, stupid" plan
|
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 10, 2017 15:14:24 GMT
I was thinking of the "Keep it simple, stupid" plan Who or what you mean? |
|
elukka
Junior Member
Posts: 73 
|
Post by elukka on Aug 10, 2017 15:25:30 GMT
and, because the game gives you sliders without caring about the price, you could make a nuke using like 10 tons of that stuff Don't forgot the best thing about it. It is basically a chemical explosive with the power of a nuke.Rapid-firing railguns delivering kilotons per second of devastastion. Or Blast Launchers with like a hundred 1g Buckybombs. Each yielding 100t, and could fit on a 5kg Micromissile. Well... having the power of a nuke also means that your gun and payload have to somehow withstand the power of a nuke without promptly flashing into a plasma and dissipating into nothing. That's also the problem with extremely high thrust and high isp antimatter rockets. |
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 10, 2017 15:38:05 GMT
Don't forgot the best thing about it. It is basically a chemical explosive with the power of a nuke.Rapid-firing railguns delivering kilotons per second of devastastion. Or Blast Launchers with like a hundred 1g Buckybombs. Each yielding 100t, and could fit on a 5kg Micromissile. Well... having the power of a nuke also means that your gun and payload have to somehow withstand the power of a nuke without promptly flashing into a plasma and dissipating into nothing. That's also the problem with extremely high thrust and high isp antimatter rockets. Uh, what? I think you miss understanded me, i proposed it as an ammo, not as an propellant. Antihydrogen-Carbon annihilation released nearly 100% of it's mass energy as charged particles. Which can be directed by an 12T strong magnetic field. Modern MRI's can exceed this value already. But you are right about the outdated version Astrogator listed. 100g/s would result in 2.1MT of energy. Of which 33% can't be directed. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Aug 10, 2017 15:55:28 GMT
I was thinking of the "Keep it simple, stupid" plan Who or what you mean? don't muck about with giant magnets to store antimatter |
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 10, 2017 16:09:32 GMT
don't muck about with giant magnets to store antimatter What does this refer to exactly? |
|
|
|
Post by 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖒𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖈𝖑𝖊 on Aug 10, 2017 21:15:11 GMT
Well... having the power of a nuke also means that your gun and payload have to somehow withstand the power of a nuke without promptly flashing into a plasma and dissipating into nothing. That's also the problem with extremely high thrust and high isp antimatter rockets. Uh, what? I think you miss understanded me, i proposed it as an ammo, not as an propellant. Antihydrogen-Carbon annihilation released nearly 100% of it's mass energy as charged particles. Which can be directed by an 12T strong magnetic field. Modern MRI's can exceed this value already. But you are right about the outdated version Astrogator listed. 100g/s would result in 2.1MT of energy. Of which 33% can't be directed. Im not sure if a 12 tesla feild could contain the equivalent of megatons of TNT per second... or, if it was able to, it would have to be a much larger thing than an MRI, as the MRI would just rip itself apart |
|
|
|
Post by 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖒𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖈𝖑𝖊 on Aug 10, 2017 21:44:56 GMT
its weird to think that a regular asteroid like the one that hit Russia a few years ago would have destroyed the world if it was made of antimatter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 11, 2017 7:21:59 GMT
Uh, what? I think you miss understanded me, i proposed it as an ammo, not as an propellant. Antihydrogen-Carbon annihilation released nearly 100% of it's mass energy as charged particles. Which can be directed by an 12T strong magnetic field. Modern MRI's can exceed this value already. But you are right about the outdated version Astrogator listed. 100g/s would result in 2.1MT of energy. Of which 33% can't be directed. Im not sure if a 12 tesla feild could contain the equivalent of megatons of TNT per second... or, if it was able to, it would have to be a much larger thing than an MRI, as the MRI would just rip itself apart Not contain, direct. A while ago you had to use a 100T Magnetic Nozzle to direct the pions, but few years ago they found out that the pions aren't traveling at 0.94c but 0.8c. The nozzle of the RS-25 (Space Shuttle Main Engine) survives a force of 6 tons of TNT per second without even melting. Also, the magnetic nozzle of the antimatter drive would consist of many superconducting wires with very little area to absorb the energy. |
|
|
|
Post by 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖒𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖈𝖑𝖊 on Aug 13, 2017 7:16:07 GMT
Im not sure if a 12 tesla feild could contain the equivalent of megatons of TNT per second... or, if it was able to, it would have to be a much larger thing than an MRI, as the MRI would just rip itself apart Not contain, direct. A while ago you had to use a 100T Magnetic Nozzle to direct the pions, but few years ago they found out that the pions aren't traveling at 0.94c but 0.8c. The nozzle of the RS-25 (Space Shuttle Main Engine) survives a force of 6 tons of TNT per second without even melting. Also, the magnetic nozzle of the antimatter drive would consist of many superconducting wires with very little area to absorb the energy. While it is true that the engine holds that much force back without melting, it is also cooled by the Liquid oxygen running through it. also, 6 tons per second is 6/1,000,000 of what a nozzle containing i megaton of TNT per second would have to absorb into kinetic energy without destroying the craft or nozzle. |
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 13, 2017 13:35:08 GMT
Not contain, direct. A while ago you had to use a 100T Magnetic Nozzle to direct the pions, but few years ago they found out that the pions aren't traveling at 0.94c but 0.8c. The nozzle of the RS-25 (Space Shuttle Main Engine) survives a force of 6 tons of TNT per second without even melting. Also, the magnetic nozzle of the antimatter drive would consist of many superconducting wires with very little area to absorb the energy. While it is true that the engine holds that much force back without melting, it is also cooled by the Liquid oxygen running through it. also, 6 tons per second is 6/1,000,000 of what a nozzle containing i megaton of TNT per second would have to absorb into kinetic energy without destroying the craft or nozzle. While the difference in output energy is enourmous, so is the fraction of absorbed energy in contrast. 2.1MT is released by the reaction every second, 1.4MT are directed through the magnetic nozzle. 0.7MT of force left. A magnetic nozzle consist of a few wires which produce a magnetic field, the Mag-Nozzle would a thousandth of the area of a conventional nozzle, also these 700kT are Gamma-rays, which means that they have very low interaction cross-sections with matter. This is about the "outdated" variant, if you use Carbon ions as an annihilation partner the resulting fraction of gamma rays would be much lower. |
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Aug 13, 2017 19:25:45 GMT
could you contain anti-matter in carbon buckyballs? Yes, Anti-ions will be repelled of the electron cloud of the fullerene. Anti-helium is a good candidate for its negative charge of two. 1 mol of Buckyballs has 720g of mass. And one mol of helium has 4g of mass. A ratio of 180. Resulting in a energy density of 500TJ/kg (Considering an efficiency of 50%. It would be 1,4 times Stronger than the most Energy dense (reallistic) Fusion fuel D-He3.) I am not so sure... By that logic a regular container (eg. metal) would be able to store antimatter as long as the antimatter is ionized and not substantially hotter than the container. |
|
