home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!igor!yosemite!rmartin
- From: rmartin@yosemite.Rational.COM (Bob Martin)
- Newsgroups: sci.space
- Subject: Re: Antimatter (was propulsion questions)
- Message-ID: <rmartin.711734621@yosemite>
- Date: 21 Jul 92 16:03:41 GMT
- References: <1992Jul17.123315.28475@inmos.co.uk> <6y=mm0p@lynx.unm.edu> <24661@dog.ee.lbl.gov> <1992Jul17.221155.25364@bradley.bradley.edu> <BrLvxL.6w8@zoo.toronto.edu>
- Sender: news@Rational.COM
- Lines: 27
-
- henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
-
- >Getting enough antimatter for interstellar propulsion is harder, because
- >then we start needing kilogram quantities at least. That's probably going
- >to take large-scale facilities in space.
-
- I think it's safe to say that nobody would want kilogram quantities of
- anti-matter concentrated in any one place on the planet. Such a thing
- could ruin th eneighborhood and bring property prices screaming down
- around our ears.
-
- Actually, I wonder if even the moon would be a safe place to
- concentrate a few hundred kilograms of the stuff. Maybe the
- farside... I think I would prefer Mars.
-
- Lets see. 100kg, e=mc^2, thats 9e25 ergs right. The Sun puts out
- 4e33 ergs in a sec and has a surface area of about 6e12 km^2. So, an
- accident with 100kg of antimatter would be sort of like having a piece
- of the sun, roughly the size of Texas, in your back yard for about 1
- second. Not particularily desirable.
-
-
- --
- +---Robert C. Martin---+-RRR---CCC-M-----M-| R.C.M. Consulting |
- | rmartin@rational.com |-R--R-C----M-M-M-M-| C++/C/Unix Engineering |
- | (Uncle Bob.) |-RRR--C----M--M--M-| OOA/OOD/OOP Training |
- +----------------------+-R--R--CCC-M-----M-| Product Design & Devel. |
-