Nuclear_Dampers

A thread of 2 messages, 18 January 1991 to 21 January 1991, in the order they were sent.

#2091 Nuclear_Dampers

Mark Cook and I had been talking about how certain items work (similar to the
recent Black Globe discussion).  Mark sent me this info off GEnie:

> TOPIC:  NUCLEAR DAMPERS
>
>     Going way to back to Mercenary [p. 42]:
>
>      'A common term, dampers units actually may be used to increase or
>decrease the stability of atomic nuclei.  Projecting from two seperate
>stations, the intersection of the two transmitted broadcasts produces a
>series of nodes and anti-nodes.  In the area of the nodes, the strong nuclear
>force is enhanced, making the nucleus more stable.  In the area of the
>anti-nodes, the strong nuclear force is depressed, making the nucleus much
>less stable.  Anti-nodes are focused on incoming nuclear warheads, causing
>them to shed neutrons at low energy levels, rendering the warheads
>inoperable....  This damper is later developed into a disintegrator weapon,
>beginning at tech level 16.'

My reply:

This is a little weak in the "explanation" area.  It requires "two transmitted
broadcasts" but of what?  Also, the logic of "shedding neutrons" is faulted
from the standpoint that neutrons is what is _required_ to initiate a fission
reaction.  If the anti-node is strong enough to shed lots of neutrons faster
than it takes the fission reaction to occer, then I say you already have your
disintegrator weapon.

If the nodes were focused on the weapon, then any neutron emitted to try and
generate the fission reaction would more likely be absorbed (creating U-236
with a 2.3E7 year half-life (long)) or bounce off (billiard ball
interaction...or rather ping pong ball/bowling ball interaction).  The
increase in the nuclear force would tend to make fission less likely.  This
may be similar technology to what is used to make bonded-superdense material.

Also, if you had to aim the nodes (as it seems), wouldn't it be easier to have
a laser point defense system???

With all my nuclear damper bashing, I suppose I should come up with a
"reasonable" explanation for it...

- - -------------

So I thought I'd throw this into the TML for any other input...

*-=Carl=-*

[email removed]

#2093 Re: Nuclear_Dampers

> This is a little weak in the "explanation" area.  It requires "two transmitted
> broadcasts" but of what?

The answer to that can be as simple as 'we don't know yet; Terra @ 1991 is
only TL8 (or is it 7?)'. It isn't necessary to explain every little detail
of how something like this works; if we knew we'd have invented it here on
this planet...

> Also, the logic of "shedding neutrons" is faulted
> from the standpoint that neutrons is what is _required_ to initiate a fission
> reaction.  If the anti-node is strong enough to shed lots of neutrons faster
> than it takes the fission reaction to occer, then I say you already have your
> disintegrator weapon.

Yes, but the key words were 'low engery'. The decrease in nuclear force
means that the neutrons don't need alot of energy to escape; presumably
their energy is low enough that they don't cause fission reactions.

> Also, if you had to aim the nodes (as it seems), wouldn't it be easier to have
> a laser point defense system???

Who said that the nodes were small? Maybe the 'transmissions' are at a very
low frequency, and so have a large wavelength? It is quite possible to have
an anti-node kilometers or even hundreds of kilometers across; this makes
them easy to aim.


Sure wish we have nuclear dampers in 2300AD; those detonation lasers sure
are deadly!

- - --
C. Harald Koch  VE3TLA                Alias Research, Inc., Toronto ON Canada
[email removed]                 [email removed]               [email removed]
"I think you curdled my Pepsi!"-Gerry Smit, in response to sickening cuteness