SCIENCE!
First, a quote
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"Best science moment?"
"When I learned that NASA and a few other organizations actually store anti-matter. Anti-matter is currently the most expensive substance in the world.
I used to think storing anti-matter was impossible simply because it would annihilate instantly with anything it came into contact with. Apparently the trick is to store it in a vacuum chamber and keep it from annihilating with the walls of the chamber by using a magnetic field to create a 'magnetic bottle.'"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Then, a site of videos. Go hydrogen!
<a href="http://www.periodicvideos.com/#" target="_blank">http://www.periodicvideos.com/#</a>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"Best science moment?"
"When I learned that NASA and a few other organizations actually store anti-matter. Anti-matter is currently the most expensive substance in the world.
I used to think storing anti-matter was impossible simply because it would annihilate instantly with anything it came into contact with. Apparently the trick is to store it in a vacuum chamber and keep it from annihilating with the walls of the chamber by using a magnetic field to create a 'magnetic bottle.'"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Then, a site of videos. Go hydrogen!
<a href="http://www.periodicvideos.com/#" target="_blank">http://www.periodicvideos.com/#</a>
Comments
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Antimatter is said to be the most costly substance in existence, with an estimated cost of $62.5 trillion per milligram.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->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 = mc²), or the rough equivalent of 47 megatons of TNT. For comparison, Tsar Bomba, the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated, reacted an estimated yield of 50 Megatons, which required the use of hundreds of kilograms of fissile material (Uranium/Plutonium).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If we could assemble all of 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.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Er, actually it's just some ordinary guy on a nerdsite I frequent who said it...
<!--quoteo(post=1702442:date=Mar 10 2009, 09:42 PM:name=SkulkBait)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SkulkBait @ Mar 10 2009, 09:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1702442"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Wikipedia (naturally) has a pretty good page on antimatter. Some select facts:<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought it would be more dangerous than even that.
That's the exact premise of Angels and Demons. Maybe they actually did start doing that, but when you think about it, what's the purpose of storing antimatter, especially when it would take so much energy to have that strong of a magnetic field.
For the same purpose as creating a battery. If the energy used to produce and contain anti-matter can be lowered to something less than the energy (or value of energy) created when it's used in a specific circumstance, then it's worth it.
For example, it may cost more to store energy in a battery than to just send it directly to a light bulb; however, the means to produce this electricity are not present in the bottom of a mine shaft, so it's worth it to waste some energy to make those batteries and use them in remote locations.
For example, it may cost more to store energy in a battery than to just send it directly to a light bulb; however, the means to produce this electricity are not present in the bottom of a mine shaft, so it's worth it to waste some energy to make those batteries and use them in remote locations.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Antimatter would never be good for a battery for the same reason flywheels will never be good: catastrophic failures.
And while I can believe we can use electromagnetic fields to contain antimatter(see the late great Bussard's Fusion Project) I don't believe we're near the level of antimatter storage at all(see the late great Bussard's Fusion Project)
That 47 megatonne number for 1 KG of antimatter seems a bit low, not sure though. I came to 2 megatonnes when I did the calculation myself, can't work out what I did wrong.
--Scythe--
<center><object width="450" height="356"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CybozuChzNw"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CybozuChzNw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="356"></embed></object></center>