09-01-2017, 04:03 PM | #41 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Well, it's not that hard to cool something below the freezing point of hydrogen, so if solid storage is easier it's probably going to be solid whether it's antihydrogen or antilithium.
|
09-04-2017, 12:45 AM | #42 | |
Join Date: Feb 2007
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Quote:
When you're dealing with antimatter, basically anything short of 100% containment is Not Good Enough, unless we're talking infinitesimal quantities.
__________________
HMS Overflow-For conversations off topic here. |
|
09-04-2017, 01:26 AM | #43 |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Aren't you going to want to store any antimatter as ions/charged particles anyway, for confinement purposes? A chunk of solid isn't going to stay together unless it's close to neutral...
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
09-04-2017, 09:07 AM | #44 | |
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The plutonium rich regions of Washington State
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Quote:
If the antimatter is superconducting (either through being manufactured as a room temperature superconductor or being made as something like niobium-tin and cooled to cryogenic temperatures) the confinement becomes much stronger. If the antimatter is a ferromagnet, you can get strong magnetic confinement but you need active controls to keep it levitated. If the antimatter is conductive, you can levitate it with induced currents, either with oscillating your magnetic field or constantly moving the antimatter past a static magnet array. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation Luke |
|
09-04-2017, 01:20 PM | #45 |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Wouldn't that first most likely form require an insane amount of power and hence energy over time for any real drive useful storage?
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
09-04-2017, 01:53 PM | #46 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Solid hydrogen is diamagnetic. Lithium is paramagnetic.
|
09-04-2017, 06:01 PM | #47 | |
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The plutonium rich regions of Washington State
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Quote:
Luke |
|
09-04-2017, 07:06 PM | #48 |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
I thought super insanely strong fields required loads of power or intensities beyond that of any permanent magnets.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
09-04-2017, 07:48 PM | #49 | |
Join Date: Feb 2007
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Quote:
__________________
HMS Overflow-For conversations off topic here. |
|
09-04-2017, 08:11 PM | #50 | |
Join Date: Jun 2017
|
Re: [Spaceships] Anti-Lithium for Drives – Does this work?
Quote:
To get higher fields you need massive copper electromagnets. These are huge facilities and pipes of water flow inside the copper could to cool it. These need lots of power but allow you to get to 30-70 Teslas. Higher, you can build a smaller electro-magnet and surround it with explosives. When detonated, the magnetic field implodes. This would not be suitable to hold antimatter! Current antimatter traps (such as a Penning trap) use a superconducting magnets with an electric potential to trap to particles. Of course, now these only hold a minuscule amount of anti-matter. |
|
|
|