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.

 

Antimatter powered Cube Sat coming in 2019

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 01:00 AM
link   
nextbigfuture.com...




In 2013, Positron Dynamics had seed funding from Paypal billionaire Peter Thiel’s Breakout Labs. Initial simulations show that as much as 10 micrograms of positrons could be produced each week with a linear accelerator," says co-founder Ryan Weed, PhD, a physicist and former cryogenic engineer for Jeff Bezos’s space flight company Blue Origin.

Now they have stated in a new presentation that they will have an antimatter powered cubesat vehicles in 2016-2019. They will be able to keep a cubesat in low earth orbit for seven years instead of few days. Then they will enable high speed spacecraft to go the outer solar system and then to the stars at a significant fraction of the speed of light.


NOTE: these are the guys who set the antimatter production record a couple of years back. at the time they said that if they built a purpose made antimatter production facility it would be able to produce enough for very basic AM propulsion and research. They were mulling over whether to go into Biz on it. Looks like they made up their minds in the mean time. So it makes sense they would be the ones to try something like this.

The Upshot: very soon- much sooner than anyone would have believed; we will have Antimatter powered Space craft. Probably sooner than we will have fusion powered spaceships. Who knew?

Space...

The final frontier (and so forth...)

These are the voyages of the U.S.S Enterprise.

ENGAGE!




posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 01:03 AM
link   
So who will be piloting this thing?

Han or Chewie?



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
no



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 01:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: madmac5150
So who will be piloting this thing?

Han or Chewie?

yoda would have a hard time fitting into a cube sat so it would have to be a pixie or something.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 01:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: madmac5150
So who will be piloting this thing?

Han or Chewie?

yoda would have a hard time fitting into a cube sat so it would have to be a pixie or something.


Didn't Tom Hanks and the Vatican put the kibbash on this nonsense a few years ago???
edit on 22-10-2015 by madmac5150 because: Run Forest!!



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 04:03 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

They are saying that their process could (possibly) make 10 micro-grams of antimatter in a week.

To put this into perspective, one micro-gram equals one millionth of a gram. One million grams is one metric tonne.

According to their graph, to move a 1 metric tonne payload, over interstellar distances, at less than half the speed of light, would require about 1 metric tonne of antimatter.

To make that much antimatter with their "antimatter factory" would take a mere 192 billion years.


edit on 22/10/2015 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 04:57 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

I would go nowhere near a craft with antimatter in it. Even it they succeeded in producing enough antimatter to actually push the craft.

One leak in the Penning trap and boom, you become an example of Shakespeare's "not to be".

Security issues aside, antimatter is the costliest material in the world - it costs $25 billion per gram to produce if you are talking about positrons. As for hydrogen antiatoms, they cost a whopping $62.5 trillions per gram to produce.

The whole idea is just ridiculous.


 


edit on 22-10-2015 by swanne because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-10-2015 by swanne because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 05:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: stormbringer1701

They are saying that their process could (possibly) make 10 micro-grams of antimatter in a week.

To put this into perspective, one micro-gram equals one millionth of a gram. One million grams is one metric tonne.

According to their graph, to move a 1 metric tonne payload, over interstellar distances, at less than half the speed of light, would require about 1 metric tonne of antimatter.

To make that much antimatter with their "antimatter factory" would take a mere 192 billion years.



well fortunate for earthlings; the first two antimatter designs just happen to take nanograms to micrograms to work.

The ICAN II and AIMSTAR designs need just that much antimatter to perform their missions.


You see; those drive ideas use a tiny bit of antimatter to initiate a fusion drive or a fission drive.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Then it's not an antimatter drive, it's a nuclear drive.

The Galileo, the New Horizons, etc. all already have (and had) a form of nuclear drive - plutonium is used to power their equipment, with no need for antimatter.


edit on 22-10-2015 by swanne because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: stormbringer1701

I would go nowhere near a craft with antimatter in it. Even it they succeeded in producing enough antimatter to actually push the craft.

One leak in the Penning trap and boom, you become an example of Shakespeare's "not to be".

Security issues aside, antimatter is the costliest material in the world - it costs $25 billion per gram to produce if you are talking about positrons. As for hydrogen antiatoms, they cost a whopping $62.5 trillions per gram to produce.

The whole idea is just ridiculous.


 



amounts they are talking about wouldn't even expel a nose goblin from your nose. Antimatter is powerful but it's a question of the scales involved. but the amount involved is enough to be propulsion. starting with the fact that ion drives or EM drives produce micro-newtons of thrust but are good enough to be used for deep space probes or satellite maneuvering thrusters and EM drives if they work will even be less powerful but still evoke breathless plans to go to Neptune with them.

As it happens a couple of plans involving Antimatter propulsion use tiny amounts to initiate a much more powerful fission of fusion engine. these plans (one of them at least) involves nano grams of antimatter. just what these fellows say they can produce.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Then it's not an antimatter drive, it's a nuclear drive. Just like the Galileo, the New Horizons, etc.


neither of those are nuclear. RTGs do not count as a drive.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Yes, but then, we already power crafts with plutonium. Nuclear reaction without the need for antimatter.

Why not trigger the nuclear reactor with neutrons? Just like in regular nuclear power plants? You would eliminate the need (and security risks) of a Penning trap.


edit on 22-10-2015 by swanne because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:12 AM
link   
one more qvetch on your qvetch Swanne...

for positrons that "price of production" thing is unmitigated BS. these guys are talking about positrons. and positrons can be made by a thing no bigger than a microwave oven by the countless trillions of trillions trillions. now it is true that anti-protons are harder and much more costly to make but that is because no one has deliberately designed a purpose built device to do it nor an effective means to contain large amounts of them for long periods of time. they are 2000 times more massive than a positron and thus take 2000 times more energy than producing positrons.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

neither of those are nuclear.

Nuclear properties of Plutonium


RTGs do not count as a drive.

But then, neither does the project in the OP if it intends on using "fission or fusion" to produce electricity. Correct me if I am wrong but it seems to me the project is intending on building a craft with its own nuclear power plant.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Yes, but the we already power crafts with plutonium. Nuclear reaction without the need for antimatter.

Why not trigger the nuclear reactor with neutrons? Just like in regular nuclear power plants? You would eliminate the need (and security risks) of a Penning trap.


no. i am going to turn you argument about ICAN II on it's head. the plutonium in any craft to date other than Soviet Era Krystal nuclear reactors is not directly creating propulsion from a nuclear reaction. it produces heat that is converted to electricity to power the craft's electrical systems. the Krystal reactors also were not for propulsion but they alone were capable of being used as a part of an NTR or as a power source for a high powered ion drive.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:20 AM
link   
But does antimatter actually exist? A quick peruse over the web posits theories but no one has actually "found it". In any case, it's a fantastic topic. S%F.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: swanne

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

neither of those are nuclear.

Nuclear properties of Plutonium


RTGs do not count as a drive.

But then, neither does the project in the OP if it intends on using "fission or fusion" to produce electricity. Correct me if I am wrong but it seems to me the project is intending on building a craft with its own nuclear power plant.


That is not the principle ICAN or AIMSTAR works on. The Antimatter annihilation is used to initiate fission or fusion reactions that are used for thrust. antimatter is used as a starter engine. the antimatter is the starter solenoid. the fission or fusion reaction is the big honking diesel locomotive engine it is attached to. but it would not work without the antimatter.



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: MrCrow
But does antimatter actually exist? A quick peruse over the web posits theories but no one has actually "found it". In any case, it's a fantastic topic. S%F.


tell me: What does the P in the Acronym P.E.T. scanner mean? and how long have those diagnostic machines been used in medicine?
edit on 22-10-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
nuclear reactors is not directly creating propulsion from a nuclear reaction.

Yes, yes I know, but my point is, you are presenting contradictory information. In your OP you state that the CubeSat is using antimatter as direct propulsion method. But then you tell us that in fact the antimatter will trigger a nuclear reactor. I am guessing that this nuclear reaction will in turn produce electrical charges for an ion drive? In which case I fail to see why they don't simply stick with plutonium? And additionally, then why did you say the AM was used as direct propulsion?


originally posted by: stormbringer1701
no one has deliberately designed a purpose built device to do it nor an effective means to contain large amounts of them for long periods of time.

Keyword here: no effective means exist to conserve antimatter for a long period of time. 17 minutes is not an acceptable period of time when it comes to space travel.

This is what we call a Big Biggie.


edit on 22-10-2015 by swanne because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 22 2015 @ 06:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: stormbringer1701


Security issues aside, antimatter is the costliest material in the world - it costs $25 billion per gram to produce if you are talking about positrons. As for hydrogen antiatoms, they cost a whopping $62.5 trillions per gram to produce.

The whole idea is just ridiculous.


 



I think we will be able to collect antimatter in orbit around planets. We need to learn how to create and control massive magnetic fields and then so much will come available to us in many sciences.

www.wired.com...

Data from the cosmic ray satellite PAMELA has added substantial weight to the theory that the Earth is encircled by a thin band of antimatter.

As far as Safety goes. I think you build half mile long structures to put plenty of distance between Crews and exotic Propulsion. It is really not that difficult to build modular Space Craft since you don't have to worry about gravity, aerodynamics etc... Just build a long train track between Crew areas and Exotic stuff. (Track being useful for transfer of people and materials when needed).

We need to get Robots out there mining asteroids for materials and forming them into usable objects. Hollow Asteroid ship for instance.
edit on 22-10-2015 by Xeven because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join