sfgate.com— The most powerful potential energy source presently thought to be available to humanity is being researched/developed by the Air Force.
Jan 29, 2007View in Crawl 4
uh, string theory is not even an accepted theory of physics, making its predictions irrelevant, although mathematically sound. positron-electron annihilation is verified experimentally. as well, anti-hydrogen was also created in the lab. you cant say the same about strings.
@VikingHammerThe examples you're talking about (such as the hydrogen bomb, and other atomic breakthroughs during the nuclear race), required advances in thermodynamics, while in the case of antimatter we're talking about the principle of conservation of energy. These are two completely different animals. The "antimatter as a weapon" trip comes from the military, who are clueless, not the science community. We don't have enough energy available to create enough antimatter for weapons or generators. To put things in perspective the biggest limiting factor in the production of antimatter is the availability of antiprotons, the CERN accelerator, when fully operational, is capable of producing 107 antiprotons per second. Assuming an optimal conversion of antiprotons to antihydrogen, it would take two billion years to produce 1 gram of antihydrogen while consuming around 1000 Gigawatts per hour of electricity. After the particles are produced, these only exist for a fraction of a second... when stored.
arbguy1Jan 30, 2007
uh, string theory is not even an accepted theory of physics, making its predictions irrelevant, although mathematically sound. positron-electron annihilation is verified experimentally. as well, anti-hydrogen was also created in the lab. you cant say the same about strings.
themadcowJan 30, 2007
This account has been closed by the user
sremickJan 30, 2007
To continue nickrct's thought...<a class="user" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0436971/">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0436971/</a>
miothegreatJan 30, 2007
The high powered magnets and equipment required to maintain the near-perfect vacuum might be a dead giveaway....
miguel077Jan 30, 2007
@VikingHammerThe examples you're talking about (such as the hydrogen bomb, and other atomic breakthroughs during the nuclear race), required advances in thermodynamics, while in the case of antimatter we're talking about the principle of conservation of energy. These are two completely different animals. The "antimatter as a weapon" trip comes from the military, who are clueless, not the science community. We don't have enough energy available to create enough antimatter for weapons or generators. To put things in perspective the biggest limiting factor in the production of antimatter is the availability of antiprotons, the CERN accelerator, when fully operational, is capable of producing 107 antiprotons per second. Assuming an optimal conversion of antiprotons to antihydrogen, it would take two billion years to produce 1 gram of antihydrogen while consuming around 1000 Gigawatts per hour of electricity. After the particles are produced, these only exist for a fraction of a second... when stored.
frnnkdlxxMay 8, 2008
i think i just took a crap on myself. 1 year and 99 days later!