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 bomb

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Wembley
 


Can you give link to research in this area. I wanna check it out. I always thought matter and antimatter cancel each other out and leave a big nothing.



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 10:01 AM
link   
I don't know why you guys want to blow something up unless its a threat like Giant Metor that wiped out the Dinosaurs 65 millions ago. Certainly there may be need for these bombs but it would only be useful if you could build a spacestation between Earth and Mars. Too keep anyone else from building these bombs the station would have to be United Earth SpaceStation
with rotating Admiral from the World Major Powers or from United Earth Command Structure. Expanded NATO Regional Alliances. Artic Pacific Alliance
that would included the former USSR members thus keep ex Soviet Republics out of NATO but provided them protection, China Japan USA Canada maybe even Australia. Indian Ocean Alliance that could include India, Russia and US
along with some Mideast and East Africa nations including South Africa. Americas Defense Alliance which already exist but one that would readmit Cuba
also an Africa Base Alliance. Am I dreaming perhaps but it is my dream why ruin it for me?



posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by torresm1
 


Common man we whom are male must smash.....blowing up meteors is boring..useful yes but not something that happens often enough to satisfy our caveman instincts to smash oohhoohhoohh.



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 07:46 PM
link   
I think that an antimatter bomb is not a good idea
You could blow up a country with a few ten pounds, and the cost would probably be outrageously high.
Bombs of mass destruction aren't good, I mean Hiroshima was bad.
Antimatter makes good rocket fuel, though!



posted on Oct, 8 2008 @ 10:32 PM
link   
have none of you read angels and demons by dan brown?i mean, personally im not a huge fan about being blown up by antimatter but you could make a container with magnets on the outsides, making the antimatter stay suspended in the middle.
area51



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   
It's a really cool idea but the likelyness of ever being able to create a bomb since antimatter reacts to all matter and becomes explosive is very unlikely but if it does happen then I say put your head between your knees and kiss your ass goodbye because their won't be much of an earth left to live on if it's ever used



posted on Oct, 28 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   
If there is a Galactic Lemmings Award out there, has humanity won it yet I wonder?

Sure, the thing is likely possible, along with a gravity bomb, creating a mini-sun spark, or whatever else can be conceived of in all honesty. But I agree with the first post. Humanity needs no more bombs.



posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Dreamstone
 


just to say, using magnets anti matter is sastainable but the energy it takes to at least get all matter out of an area, it's more of a energy problem



posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 11:44 PM
link   
edit : delete

[edit on 10-11-2008 by Ferengi]



posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
I agree that we should only have antimatter bombs that could be used to destroy objects that could destroy the human race.

For instance Earth is overdue both a super volcano and a catistrophic astroid strike. Both of these problems could be solved by launching a "clean" bomb that would eliminate these threats.

Timmy0800



posted on Dec, 3 2008 @ 11:54 PM
link   
I think a better idea to think about right now are anti-matter grenades. Grenades smaller than the size of a pinhead with the force of c-4. Easy to hide, and nearly undetectable, they'd be a valuable asset to: terrorists, undercover agent, POWs, and others.

That amount might even be possible to make in a few years (assuming the production of anti-matter increases exponetially as it has mostly been doing).



posted on Dec, 4 2008 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Timmy0800
I agree that we should only have antimatter bombs that could be used to destroy objects that could destroy the human race.

For instance Earth is overdue both a super volcano and a catistrophic asteroid strike. Both of these problems could be solved by launching a "clean" bomb that would eliminate these threats.

Timmy0800


Wait; how would hitting a super volcano with an antimatter bomb help? It would annihilate a part of the volcano (and the air around the bomb) equal in mass to the antimatter in the bomb itself, and the release of gamma rays and neutrinos would equal about 50-ish megatons per kilogram. The practical explosive force would be closer to about 20 megatons per kilogram. A kilogram is a mind bogglingly expensive and large quantity of antimatter; to get 20 megatons worth of boom, a nuke would be far cheaper, and get the job done just as well.

Which is to say, just as badly, since I don't see how nuking a super volcano would help either.



posted on Jan, 25 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
What would make anyone think the military would have any interst in another big bomb? The true is the military is moving away from big bombs. First of all the weapons of mass destruction cause so much collertial damage that it would be in possible to get peace with whom ever is was used on. For an example, there are protests in Iraq every time some one who was an innocent bystander gets kill cause the target was to close to them. As a result the Armed Forces have been making improvements and are looking for ways to turn dumb weapons into smart weapons. The World has change and what use to be acceptable is no longer. This is the reason that such a weapon would not be made now. The whole thing the Air Force was probably intersted in antimatter is for new research for the abandon Atomic propulsion which has been a dream for the Air Force For Years.



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   
I've wondered about an antimatter bomb, and I figure it would leave a crater that would encompass most of Western Europe. Good thing we can't make one!



posted on Aug, 23 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Anti-Matter is way out of our leagues right now, we only have 1 planet, I suggest we build laboratories on the moon and or another body and play with Anti-matter over there. Playing with Anti-matter on Earth is pointing a loaded gun at Earth.



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 11:11 AM
link   
I see 2 possible uses for an anti-matter weapon.

The first would be as a space defense weapon against asteroids and comets (and nasty aliens?).

The second would be as a "doomsday weapon" a country would use as a deterrent to other countries threatening to wipe them out. In effect, they'd be saying attack us and we take everyone else on the planet out - period. Would be like the MAD (mutually assured destruction) doctrine of the cold war on steroids.

The strange thing is that a few countries with these could be what finally ends war on this planet.



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   
"The reaction of 1 kg of antimatter with 1 kg of matter would produce 1.8×1017 J (180 petajoules) of energy (by the mass-energy equivalence formula E = mc²), or the rough equivalent of 43 megatons of TNT."

- That was from from wikipedia so if somebody knows better or has a better source feel free to post a correction....

Thats the most energy dense substance known to man. So for example if you had 1 kg of anti-hydrogen suspended in vacuum in a magnetic field and then released the field and let it contact hydrogen you could generate a large megaton explosion.

For size/power its unbeatable. To get that yield from a conventional hydrogen bomb you need a lot more fissile material (hundreds of KG).

The reason its not done is cost, time to make the stuff and the inherent danger.

Its hard to get a nuclear weapon to go off. An anti hydrogen weapon once created would be very dangerous as the substance needs no encouragement other than contacting its other (very common) opposite.

Anti matter is very very expensive and slow to make. CERN has made anti-hydrogen but they make it in very small quantities. Small amounts of atoms at a time. The current production rate at CERN per year is measured in nanograms.

There are currently more cost effective means of creating megadeath.

Its eventual use is as spaceship fuel where the low mass and high energy return is worth the extra up front energy invested in its manufacture (hopefully off world somewhere).

[edit on 26-8-2010 by justwokeup]



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Segador
 


Given all the equipment that's needed to keep antimatter from exploding, an antimatter bomb would probably not be much more powerful for it's weight than a nuclear weapon. It would also be colossally more expensive, as in hundreds of orders of magnitude more expensive, constantly cost electricity to keep from exploding, and be generally less safe to have around. Also, to make one gram of anti-hydrogen, worth approximately 30kt of explosive power, it would take two billion years at the rate CERN expects to be able to make it in a few years.

EDIT: for perspective, the bombs dropped on japan were about 10-15kT, and it only took about five years to invent, develop, build, and deploy two such devices. And in just a few years there were nuclear weapons orders of magnitude more powerful.

Weaponized antimatter will be the stuff of science fiction for quite some time. For the foreseeable future, it's only use is in various physics experiments.

[edit on 26-8-2010 by mdiinican]



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 02:49 AM
link   
only used in experiemental ? are u sure for that?



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beelzabub
reply to post by Wembley
 


Can you give link to research in this area. I wanna check it out. I always thought matter and antimatter cancel each other out and leave a big nothing.


I am also under the impression that they cancel each other out and do not cause a bang or heated air. If there was enough antimatter to destroy a house all we will see is a flash. Maybe I'm wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join