🚀 go-pugleaf

On 30 Jan 1996 02:05:00 GMT, dje1871@silver.sdsmt.edu (Dan Eisenhauer)
wrote:

>
>Actually, anti-matter has been produced for many years... not in atomic 
>form, actually just as anti-protons.  It would be a good fuel if 
>production efficiency could be increased, and it is likely that it can 
>be.  Anti-matter, as a fuel, would work like this.... methane would be 
>used as a repellant... it would be mixed with a very small amount of 
>anti-matter, causing radiation and heat.  This causes the gas to expand 
>and jet out the back, as in ordinary rockets.  Not really so dangerous 
>that you have to be a great distance away.... a rocket could even 
>theoretically be launched from Earth orbit with this system...
>

I can't see that working. Most of the energy would either materialise
as high energy particles or emerge as hard gamma. My guess would be
that only a tiny fraction of the reaction products would be absorbed
by the gas. A depressing large percentage would head for your crew
compartment.

And consider what happens to those particles that do happen to hit a
carbon atom from the methane. If they hit only the electron cloud they
probably scatter depositing only a fraction of their energy in terms
of ionisation. If they hit the nucleus they'll be absorbed (locking up
much of their energy as mass) or maybe the nucleus will undergoes
fusion which, for carbon, is an endoenergetic process.

Overall if you got 1% of the energy out as propulsion it would be a
miracle.

---------------------------------+----------------------------------
I was born weird:  This terrible | Like Pavlov's dogs we are trained
compulsion to behave normally is | to salivate at the sound of the
the result of childhood trauma.  | liberty bell.
---------------------------------+----------------------------------
Malcolm