It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are We Ready for this? Anti Matter

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 12:04 AM
link   
Anti Matter You hear how destructive it is and how it would be such a great tool for supplying the Earth with energy , but do you think that the human race should be able to wield such a powerful force? I know these thought were probably discussed when a nuclear bomb was first contructed, but this thing is so much more powerful. Though it is very expensive and we make only nanograms a year, it is still on the horizon.

[edit on 14-12-2004 by The_Final]




posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 12:12 AM
link   
First they have to figure out how to contain the anti-matter. Have they figured out what they will use as the shell? It would be disastrous mistake to make.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 12:16 AM
link   
I am pretty sure they have decided that the safest/best/maybe the only way to hold it is in a vacuum.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Anti-matter sounds to me a like a very volatile and hard to control
type thing.
Because of the "clean bombs" they could make with it, we'd probably
use them more often than the conventional bombs used now.
At least they could use the anti-matter to power rockets to get us
off this earth before we blow it up.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 12:32 AM
link   
It would be like carrying nuclear material around in a paper bag. It is not something that you should "experiment" with. Not until they understand more about it.

Would you hand a gun to your 4 year old?



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 12:33 AM
link   
I never have understood how they could use antimatter as a reactor or some type of propulsion, but bombs that could be created with anit matter ... Enough to fit in the palm of your hand has a huge amount of destructive power. So it would be really easy to move it around.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Based on past technologies you can predict the path of anti matter technology...

Truth - First thing developed with it are weapons but we are told...

1. Total denial it exists
2. Admit its in the future
3. Admit its being developed but ONLY for good purposes
4. Goes underground again, silenced by the petrochechemical industries and military establishment ( used to power military complexes but not released or divulged to civilians - fear of the tech getting to other countries)
5 Told it doesn't work all research in public silenced
6. wait 15 years until another country is in the verge of developing it.
7. Release information about it again, admit they have it
8. Finally leak information out about developments to the level that the public already knows or suspects...

and on and on....

it will never become public in case it is exploited by some 3rd world country you can't trust, like france... who will sell it to the highest bidders..



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 12:45 AM
link   
With today's technology, how would you move anti-matter around? You would be talking about moving an entire building to move just a few grain of matter.

Imagine instead of using a rocket the size of an office building, replacing it with a lighter.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
Based on past technologies you can predict the path of anti matter technology...

Truth - First thing developed with it are weapons but we are told...

1. Total denial it exists
2. Admit its in the future
3. Admit its being developed but ONLY for good purposes
4. Goes underground again, silenced by the petrochechemical industries and military establishment ( used to power military complexes but not released or divulged to civilians - fear of the tech getting to other countries)
5 Told it doesn't work all research in public silenced
6. wait 15 years until another country is in the verge of developing it.
7. Release information about it again, admit they have it
8. Finally leak information out about developments to the level that the public already knows or suspects...

and on and on....

it will never become public in case it is exploited by some 3rd world country you can't trust, like france... who will sell it to the highest bidders..



Oh come on, a third world nation? It is usually the country with power and money who would actually use these weapons.

If it was possible. I would dissemenate to every small, weak country and say, look, they have their nuclear rockets and the ability to destroy any country on earth. I have this fistful of anti-matter that can blow up this entire planet.

I would think people like Bush or the neo-cons would think twice about invading some poor third world country, and using some tin pot dictator as an excuse.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 02:15 AM
link   
With Nucleur weapons for example who are the most unstable nations and scare the world most that they might use them...?

1. America, England, France (ahem), Israel?
or
2. Iran, North Korea, India, Pakistan?

This answers your question as to who would be most likely to use them. Rich countries have many more tools to get their own way, poor countires only have a few.


Originally posted by Justanotherperson
Oh come on, a third world nation? It is usually the country with power and money who would actually use these weapons.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 02:21 AM
link   
If you are talking about precedents and history, than you would know the answer to your question. Then again, admitting it would be another story.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 02:27 AM
link   
Sorry JAP (appropriate acronym based on the topic I think)

There is nothing worse than knee jerk reactions talking about history (obviously WW2) yet not putting it in context to the situation. If America is so dangerous then why have they not used them in Vietnam, or other wars? You are taking one situation out of history and drawing conclusions that are not justified.


Originally posted by Justanotherperson
If you are talking about precedents and history, than you would know the answer to your question. Then again, admitting it would be another story.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Dropping a nuclear bomb in wars (misnomer) like Vietnam, would be no fun. Where is the profit in that? They dropped more bombs in Vietnam than were used in WWII. Very profitable and just as efficient in killing mass numbers of people.

The two bombs dropped on Japan was just an after thought. An experiment to see how destructive that weapon was. Why drop it on white people when you have brown skin JAP people. Who would care.The war was basically over.

Edit: this strays from the original topic of the thread.




[edit on 14-12-2004 by Justanotherperson]


E_T

posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by The_Final
I never have understood how they could use antimatter as a reactor or some type of propulsion, but bombs that could be created with anit matter ... Enough to fit in the palm of your hand has a huge amount of destructive power. So it would be really easy to move it around.
Not so fast.

When anti matter hits normal matter it immediately annihilates itself and equal amount of normal matter which both are converted to pure energy. (in this case normal matter would be your hand)
And for comparison "destruction" of one gram of (anti-)/matter is equal to ~22 kiloton so annihilation of your hand would be smallest of your worries.
hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...

It's much more efficient than normal nuclear reactions but anti matter containment system based to our technology would weight so much that you might get much better "bang for pound" with normal thermonuclear device.
Not forgetting that we're capable to producing only very small amounts of anti matter.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 06:05 AM
link   
The problem with anti matter is that it can only be made with high powered particle accelerators at the moment. The results of which is not grammes of anti-matter its making a fraction of a billionth of a gram of anti matter.

Anti matter has been "trapped" under and vacume and magnetic field. In addition portable containment units have been made.

Anti-Matter is a long way off - there is no cover-up



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Vanguard hit it pretty good - we have it today, under containment and there are portable units to move the stuff around e.g. Penning Traps.

Problem is in creating enough of it at this point and yes there are issues - if you lost containment on even a few grams - KAABOOM!!


Here is a link with a picture of a current trap being used. The same link if you back up a bit will give you lot's of info on this:

www.engr.psu.edu...

I can just hear someone saying "the containment field is losing power - nice to have known you...."



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by E_T

When anti matter hits normal matter it immediately annihilates itself and equal amount of normal matter which both are converted to pure energy. (in this case normal matter would be your hand)


I know I used the hand as an example of how small it could be, not how it would be triggered, but good site.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Ok but I dont think we have the technology to create an antimatter reactor beacuse the only way to keep it controlled is with a massive electromagnetic field. Second you would need to keep the whole reactor at a super cold temp because of the heat created by the reactions. Its just one of those things that we cant control YET.



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 08:05 PM
link   
We create 'artificial' anti-matter because we honestly don't know where it is.

Basically we take an electromagnetic field partical accelerator, speed up the particles and smash em together. This process sometimes creates the anti-matter particles which get seperated by the electromagnetic field.

Something to be noted. from this site
"These high-energy particle accelerators only produce one or two picograms of antiprotons each year. A picogram is a trillionth of a gram. All of the antiprotons produced at CERN in one year would be enough to light a 100-watt electric light bulb for three seconds. It will take tons of antiprotons to travel to interstellar destinations."

LOL be on the lookout in 3000 aliens we're coming for you!



posted on Dec, 14 2004 @ 09:57 PM
link   
I think you will be able to figure it out before the year 3,000. That is if you don't blow up the entire planet trying to attain the sequences for that technology.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join