Aero wrote:From the second paper I understand that by shooting a relatively small number of antiparticles at fissile material, fission and even maybe fusion can be initiated with corresponding energy released of 90 mega joules per micro gram.
The standard concept is to use antimatter to ignite fission. After that you use the standard fusion-fission stacked cycle.
Nothing posted here has indicated technology which can produce copious anti-protons (which can be used as nuclear reaction catalysts). All we have is mention of anti-electrons.
There is no reason to connect generation of positrons with generation of anti-protons. So I am afraid this technique, useful though it may be, is a red herring.
An interesting note on anti-proton production: NONE of the presently operational anti-proton producing facilities are specifically designed for this purpose, and at present rates approximately 1 ng are produced per year. With optimizations to processes and anticipated developments, this production capability could be raised by at least 3 orders of magnitude. Check out this journal produced by NASA:
Brandon wrote:An interesting note on anti-proton production: NONE of the presently operational anti-proton producing facilities are specifically designed for this purpose, and at present rates approximately 1 ng are produced per year. With optimizations to processes and anticipated developments, this production capability could be raised by at least 3 orders of magnitude.
Cool. Amazing to think about how easy achieving plasma would be with the high energy yield of antimatter... antiprotons could be fired into the reactor through the injection guns being currently developed (well, a modified version designed for extreme containment so as to avoid a giant crater). The advancement of penn traps for storage will be the deciding factor on antiproton feasability as an ignition source.
