Re: Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- From: phoenix@xxxxxxx (Damien Sullivan)
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 01:11:36 +0000 (UTC)
IsaacKuo <mechdan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
that produce a lot more energy than simply annihilating the anti-
protons.
Exactly. Isaac, you haven't heard of antimatter catalyzed rockets?
Sure, but how much of a multiplier in energy are we talking about,
here? The puny amount of anti-matter available is still puny, so
even if you multiply the energy by a factor of a hundred or a thousand
it still looks pathetic compared to solar-electric.
ICAN-II was specced out to use 140 nanograms. Manned mission to Mars.
The point is to be able to trigger fission or fission/fusion reactions
at smaller scales than fission bombs.
-xx- Damien X-)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- From: Kevin Cherkauer
- Re: Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- From: James Nicoll
- Re: Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- From: Damien Sullivan
- Re: Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- From: IsaacKuo
- Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- Prev by Date: Re: Massive ice shelf collapsing off Antarctica
- Next by Date: Re: Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- Previous by thread: Re: Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- Next by thread: Re: Fate of SF as World Slides Down Back Side of Hubbert's Curve?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|