|
Ever get worried about cults (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Tangil
A friend and I are going to join scientology. The first one to leave has to pay the other $100.
I'm having a few doubts about it, does anyone think it is a stupid idea? |
Are you really serious? |
|
|
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Its not that complex
1. Get antimatter
2. put anti matter in magnetic force shell
3. put containing magnetic force canister in casing warhead
4. position or deploy based on bomb or missle type
5. disolve canister by turning off shield - watch annihilation occur.
It is not that it can't be done it is the cost involved in doing it. This didn't stop the moon landing, or the manhattan project.
The real question is why?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_weapon
PS I've heard unsubstantiated reports they have already been made.
That why is.. well no fallout. The power of anhilating your enemy without nuclear fallout has advantages.
Not quite like fallout from a nuetron bomb-- basically nuetron bomb = no living opposition but structures left intact
antimatter bomb = no danger to life after the strike. |
They keyword in the Wikipedia article is the sixth word...
HYPOTHETICAL |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
Also note this paragraph:
| quote: | | There is considerable skepticism within the physics community about the viability of antimatter weapons. According to an article on the website of the CERN laboratories, which produces antimatter on a regular basis, "There is no possibility to make antimatter bombs for the same reason you cannot use it to store energy: we can't accumulate enough of it at high enough density. (...) If we could assemble all the antimatter we've ever made at CERN and annihilate it with matter, we would have enough energy to light a single electric light bulb for a few minutes." |
Besides, someone could send the world to hell using the weapons already available. Just have to detonate one of those suitcase nukes in LA or NYC and watch the chaos unfold. |
|
|
| w_ashley |
It goes on to state that a 2000 MW powerplant made to produce anti matter could make a gram every 24-48 hours. CERN LHC itself used up 1000 GWh in 2009 or about 2.7 GWh / day or about 2 GWh per day or 2000 MWh... coincidence? (It isn't running at full tilt for another 3 years...)
1000 GWh would produce 500 grams of antimatter per year more than enough for a few bombs. one gram yeilds more destructive force than the hiroshima bomb. one gram = "180 terajoules, the equivalent of 42.96 kilotons of TNT (approximately 3 times the bomb dropped on Hiroshima " 500 grams (around 1 lb) would yeild 1500 times the force of hiroshima
Cern cost 18 billion to this point - the latest aircraft carriers cost about 6-10 billion each |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Its not that complex
1. Get antimatter
2. put anti matter in magnetic force shell
3. put containing magnetic force canister in casing warhead
4. position or deploy based on bomb or missle type
5. disolve canister by turning off shield - watch annihilation occur.
It is not that it can't be done it is the cost involved in doing it. This didn't stop the moon landing, or the manhattan project.
The real question is why?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_weapon
PS I've heard unsubstantiated reports they have already been made.
That why is.. well no fallout. The power of anhilating your enemy without nuclear fallout has advantages.
Not quite like fallout from a nuetron bomb-- basically nuetron bomb = no living opposition but structures left intact
antimatter bomb = no danger to life after the strike. |
man you're a stupid . |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
It goes on to state that a 2000 MW powerplant made to produce anti matter could make a gram every 24-48 hours. |
But only if...
| quote: | | ...it were possible to convert energy directly into particle/antiparticle pairs without any loss... |
...and that is not possible. |
|
|
| w_ashley |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
But only if...
...and that is not possible. |
cern LHC is 100% energy efficient on conversion - it has the coldest point in the universe (so said) 1 degree colder than all other space. (if you can believe that)
and I bet with a higgs boson it would be possible.
heck a higgs boson could cure the blind and raise the dead. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
cern LHC is 100% energy efficient on conversion |
No it is not, LOL. It is obvious you have no clue what you are talking about, and this is coming from someone who knows only a little about physics. |
|
|
| Tangil |
| quote: | Originally posted by EddieZilker
Are you really serious? |
I was. Not sure anymore. Would be an interesting experience all the same. At the first instance of them asking for money I'd bail though. |
|
|
| saluyamo |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Its not that complex
1. Get antimatter
2. put anti matter in magnetic force shell
3. put containing magnetic force canister in casing warhead
4. position or deploy based on bomb or missle type
5. disolve canister by turning off shield - watch annihilation occur.
It is not that it can't be done it is the cost involved in doing it. This didn't stop the moon landing, or the manhattan project.
|
I stand by my original statement. Anyone who thinks that antimatter is a worthwhile weapon doesn't understand what they are talking about.
First of all 'getting antimatter'. Antimatter is said to be the most costly substance in existence, with an estimated cost of $25 billion per gram for positrons, and $62.5 trillion per gram for anti-hydrogen.
Now assuming a Government was willing to spend an insane amount of money and got 1kg of the stuff, just how big of an explosion would it make
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 = mc˛), or the rough equivalent of 43 megatons of TNT, the same amount as the Tsar bomb which was made in the early 60's.
So spend trillions upon trillions and have constant blackouts unless you have fusion power plants to have the same destructive power as 1 bomb. |
|
|
| w_ashley |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
No it is not, LOL. It is obvious you have no clue what you are talking about, and this is coming from someone who knows only a little about physics. |
Where does the energy go from the matter that collides?
Why does it take energy to cool stuff - wouldn't supercooling something remove the energy?
If you are breaking apart matter without antimatter - what are you using to do it?
Would this not mean that antimatter exists only when it is brough into collision by increasing the level of energy.
IE antimatter exists at a higher state of energy? Meaning you must elevate the level of matter high enough for matter energy convession and anti matter exists at the threshold infinitely at that threshhold of energy which will allow the conversion. pretty simple stuff here. So by reaching that level of energy you essentially connect matter with antimatter causing the conversion yeilding energy.
Energy cannot be lost only converted.
There is no antienergy other than the conversion element --- that combines energy and decouples the antimatter.
That is the simple logic and it would all have to do with the oscilation rate.
With things super cold energy would naturally expand and cool into that point, so by hyper oscilating the energy to that level and enticing rapid cooling you would be trapping the energy in cooled space pocket.
eg.. how it works is the matter is sped up at a high enough rate that it breaks apart on collision releaseing matter ---- but in order to break apart matter antimatter - needs to be created - to create this though you must summon naturally occuring antimatter to the point of contact - unless you believe energy can combine to a different form antimatter is just a super hot/high frequency energy threshold that exists beyond the heat of light/photon electron frequnecy - which would be upper cosmic ray type stuff like super high freqency. Meanwhile by creating super cold you are expelling all energy from the area, energy will try to find the easiest pathway becaues they still have an energy state that will repel one another because they exist at a hot enough level that they will not be combined to form matter particles or some like that.
basically enough space needs to be formed in orbit to create a stable piece of matter which is cold enough in an external shell - but how do you trap cold around matter? by using antimatter which is hotter than the energy creating a pocket of energy within antimatter, but how is it that anti matter wouldn't come into contact with antimatter or matter and just break apart - antimatter repels energy, and vice versa in its stable state.. meaning antimatter itself would be atleast two forms of energy/particles that can also be interceeded at a higher energy level which will allow them to open up enough to .....
and so on. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
You are just babbling. You cannot reel off some physics terms in semi-coherent sentences and claim to understand the subject. Read the Wiki energy conversion efficiency article to figure out why you are wrong.
Two-way 100% conversion efficiency would mean perpetual motion. 100% conversion efficiency means no heat loss, no friction, and no radiation or matter escaping the system. Please do not say you think that is possible, LOL. |
|
|
|
|
