Air Force's dream, Homeland Security's nightmare

[rinselberg]

The U.S. Air Force is quietly spending millions of dollars investigating ways to use a radical power source -- antimatter, the eerie "mirror" of ordinary matter -- in future weapons. From the front page of the San Francisco Chronicle, October 4, 2004.

From the same article: About 0.00005 grams (fifty one millionth parts of a gram) of antimatter could generate a blast equal to 4000 pounds of TNT, or about the same explosion as destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995.

But it would be premature for anyone to panic. That's just the explosive charge. Even assuming that the antimatter bomb becomes a reality, who could say yet what the equivalent of an antimatter fuse or detonator would come to in size and weight? Maybe something the size of Arizona? (Just speculating!) Does anyone recall some time ago when there were news (?) stories circulating aboout secret DoD projects involving Hafnium, which is a chemical element? They sounded like hoaxes to me. I wonder if anyone on OB also saw any of those stories. Of course, I could probably "google" my way to further enlightenment.

[rinselberg]

If you read and appreciated my recent post on Air Force Antimatter Research (above), you may want to visit:

http://www.spacewar.com/

[coda]

I guess i'm not sure what you're concern is. You're clearly a hawk and this is a fairly benign weapons system. My, admitedly limited, understanding of high energy physics leads me to belive that a matter-antimatter based weapons system produces little or no unintended residual consequences (no radioactive fallout etc.) just a massive energetic output (as heat and higher energy electromagnetic energy such as x- and gamma- radiation). I guess I'm saying it's a big improvement on 'nukes'.

[Joann Raytar]

rinselberg, this stuff is lost on me but interesting; care to give me a simple summation? I'm not the most high tech.

[Spexvet]

rinselberg, this stuff is lost on me but interesting; care to give me a simple summation? I'm not the most high tech.

Is it possible for Rinsey to say anything in a simple way?

[Joann Raytar]

Of course it is - you just have to ask him. Many of his posts are interesting if you take a good look at them.

[rinselberg]

I guess i'm not sure what you're concern is. You're clearly a hawk and this is a fairly benign weapons system. My, admitedly limited, understanding of high energy physics leads me to belive that a matter-antimatter based weapons system produces little or no unintended residual consequences (no radioactive fallout etc.) just a massive energetic output (as heat and higher energy electromagnetic energy such as x- and gamma- radiation). I guess I'm saying it's a big improvement on 'nukes'.

We've all been here before with the NEUTRON bomb -- a device that I believe was actually tested during the old days of President Carter or somewhere back there in time. The U.S. decided to take that device "off of the table", because of a general fear that it would make it easier for some country to take some action that would lead to an all out, civilization ending atomic war.