In message: [email removed] Stephen D. Smith writes:
>
>> 1. 1 milligram of antimatter is roughly equivalent to 10 kilos
>> of TNT. That ain't gonna bother the pirate much.
>> (approximately .01% of the mass in a fission bomb is
>> converted to energy, a 20 kT bomb has about 10 kilo's of
>> fissionables. The rest is simple calculations)
>
> I was under the impression that a matter/antimatter
>explosion was a FUSION reaction, and 100% complete energy
Nope. Fusion is, basically, slamming atoms together hard enough that
they "fuse" (that is, meld together to form a new, heavier atom). For an
example, look at the Hydrogen -> Helium reaction (the one that makes
sunlight, among other things).
A matter-antimatter reaction, on the other hand, is the *total
conversion* of mass into its equivalent quantity of energy (I'm given to
understand that this reaction produces mostly gamma radiation, but my
knowledge may be obsolete). For a given amount of antimatter (or
contra-terrene matter) m, the reaction optimally converts a mass of 2m
(the antimatter plus an equivalent amount of normal, or terrene matter)
into energy. The relationship is shown mathematically with the famous
equation:
2
E = mc (1)
where E is the energy produced, m is the mass, and c is the speed of light
in a vacuum (approximately 3e8 m/s). As you can see, even a small amount
of mass represents a *huge* (at least, in human terms) amount of energy.
In the above example of 1 mg of antimatter, the reaction would
involve 2 mg of mass (don't forget your normal matter), so the energy is
(using cgs):
E = (2e-3) * (3e10)
= 6e7 ergs
Not bad, but not catastophic, either. Don't forget, in the example
above, this energy is applied to the *hull* of a starship. Starship hulls
are made of the toughest materials available, since they have to endure
a very hazardous environment.
>conversion, not .01%. I do puzzle at a ship that could take a
>10 kilo TNT explosion on it's hull and not be bothered. (I
>guess Megatraveller ships are a LOT tougher than I thought.)
Bothered? Maybe. We *are* talking about a fairly dense gamma flux
applied to a small area of hull. I'm sure that it (as well as the shock)
would be noticed. But I doubt that it would do even as much damage as
a standard HE ship-to-ship missile.
>> 2. This happened in *space*. Therefore, the hydrogen fuel is
>> no big deal. Hydrogen is *NOT* explosive. Hydrogen mixed
>> with an oxidizer is. Blow a hole in a fuel tank, and you'll
>> cause a small side thrust due to the escaping fuel. You'll
>> also make them worry about their fuel reserves.
>
> If a FUSION reaction took place in a hydrogen fuel tank
>might not SOME of the hydrogen participate in the reaction? It
Not enough to matter. Remember, fusion reactions are *extremely*
difficult to maintain (if it was easy, everybody'd be doing it--literally)
*If* the antimatter suddenly appeared in the fuel tank, the conversion
*might* cause some of the neighboring hydrogen to fuse, but the energy
output of this secondary fusion would be negligible in comparison to the
yield from the matter-antimatter reaction.
> wouldn't
>the gamma radiation mess up the ship systems, as well as the
>biological systems?
Probably not. The amount of radiation produced is quite a bit
below that of a nuclear (or thermonuclear) device. I think the hull
could take it in stride, especially at higher tech levels.
- --
Brent
INTERNET: [email removed] / [email removed]
USENET: [email removed]
FIDONET: [email removed] (from Internet) or
Brent Woods@1:201/40.303 (from FidoNet)
[address removed]
PHONE: [phone removed] (voice)
All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: [email removed], or [email removed]
Administrator: [email removed] (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.