Antimatter trapped

[TimberWolf]

I suppose that if it's undead, then it develops fangs & a thirst for blood.

Okay, that's perhaps taking the analogy a bit too far.

[EternalOptimist]

I have a laymans question for you physicists. Which is the most likely, getting household energy from anti matter, or getting it from fusion.

I emember reading a lot about houshold fusion powerplants by the year 2k, in the OMNI in the late 80's.
it all seemed very exiting at the time

[TimberWolf]

I have a laymans question for you physicists. Which is the most likely, getting household energy from anti matter, or getting it from fusion.

I emember reading a lot about houshold fusion powerplants by the year 2k, in the OMNI in the late 80's.
it all seemed very exiting at the time

Antimatter is for energy storage rather than as an energy source. Fusion already works well for blowing cities up, but as a power source is always 50 years away, although they often deny it and say it is just around the corner, more funding please.

[Troll]

+1

Feeling jealous that I'm in the IT sector rather than in Geneva creating black holes and mini big-bangs. On the plus side IT projects are relatively short and you get to see the fruits of your labour sooner and more frequently than CERN et al do. Still jealous though.

Imagine being a NASA Project Manager - all the excitement of getting the thing to the launchpad and into space.... then <fingers drubbing> wait months (years) (decades for Voyager 1- 17,366,987,132 KM at the mo) until it gets close to the destination

[d000hg]

We know fusion works... the sun is quite good at it. I think we can now sustain fusion (not sure) but it takes more energy to keep running than it produces.

So: I'd say Fusion, because getting hold of AM is tricky.

[TimberWolf]

We know fusion works... the sun is quite good at it. I think we can now sustain fusion (not sure) but it takes more energy to keep running than it produces.

So: I'd say Fusion, because getting hold of AM is tricky.

Tricky is a bit of an understatement given that AFAIK there is no natural source of antimatter in the universe, and we don't really know why, although theories pop up regularly involving asymmetries. And on earth it is probably the most expensive, scarce substance created artificially second only to inkjet printer ink.

[kandr]

Tricky is a bit of an understatement given that AFAIK there is no natural source of antimatter in the universe, and we don't really know why, although theories pop up regularly involving asymmetries. And on earth it is probably the most expensive, scarce substance created artificially second only to inkjet printer ink.

[TimberWolf]

Are you bored with antimatter now?

[EternalOptimist]

Are you bored with antimatter now?

well I'm not.
but the last I heard, printer cartridges cost a bomb

[centurian]

Which interestingly is the way the universe started, allegedly, with heavier elements taking (presumably) billions of years to arrive on the scene, needing stars to go supernova for their manufacture. It will be interesting to see if they can make heavier anti-elements, or even molecules.

Yep. Everything heavier than Iron was cooked up in a supernova billions of years ago.

The lighter elements might have been created in a red giant (i.e. a star that didn't go fully nova).

Either way, all the atoms in our body heavier than helium were created in a star exploding. So we are all made of stardust.