• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Antimatter Containment

Herkimer Jitty

Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
I just realized something.

Wouldn't a magnetic field be as good at holding antimatter in as a paper bag is at holding water in? Wouldn't some kind of gravitational/antigravitational thing work better? Or is there something I'm missing?
 
Last edited:
In the real world, it's nearly impossible to create antimatter that would not carry an electric charge and thus be easily manipulated by EM fields. So magnetics should work just fine.

However, in Trek, it appears that antimatter is in the form of electrically neutral antideuterium (that is, entire antiatoms or even antimolecules of D2), and is contained by "forcefields". And Trek forcefields aren't EM fields - from the TNG Tech Manual onwards, they have been claimed to be a combination of subspace and gravity control technologies, both elements being equally fictional.

Sure, there is reference to "magnetic seals" sometimes in connection with antimatter handling. We may assume that EM fields are a good solution in some parts of the containment chain, or we may assume that "magnetic" is a generic word that refers to any and all pulling-attracting stuff. After all, the "magnetic" boots of ST6 or ST:FC fame are probably gravitic rather than EM, considering how they readily attach to surfaces that do not appear to be metallic or magnetic.

Timo Saloniemi
 
In the real world, it's nearly impossible to create antimatter that would not carry an electric charge and thus be easily manipulated by EM fields. So magnetics should work just fine.
I also remember reading several years ago about the creation of a magnetic bottle designed to hold antimatter. Don't know anything about the specifics, though.
 
However, in Trek, it appears that antimatter is in the form of electrically neutral antideuterium (that is, entire antiatoms or even antimolecules of D2), and is contained by "forcefields". And Trek forcefields aren't EM fields - from the TNG Tech Manual onwards, they have been claimed to be a combination of subspace and gravity control technologies, both elements being equally fictional.

Timo Saloniemi


Interesting. Just curious, but where is it mentioned specifically to be fully neutral antideuterium; in the Tech Manual or in an episode? I don't currently have access to my copy of the Tech Manual.

Is that just in storage as fuel (in those hexagonal pods I seem to recall) or is it mentioned to be utilized as such during the full warp core process? That would seem to be a scientific gaffe considering how often they mention plasma in the process. The moment you have plasma you've lost that neutrality.
 
According to the Tech Manual p.57, the process of feeding the deuterium involves preheating it to a million Kelvins, so it's charged plasma going in already. Yet it's not quite clear if the same is done to the antideuterium, as p. 58 speaks of a "simplified" arrangement.

It is known, though, that the antideuterium consists of neutral atoms, as per p. 67, and is stored as such aboard Galaxy class starships. The Manual constantly and consistently speaks of "magnetic" containment, but as said, that may be shorthand for "stuff that pulls", because onscreen references to antimatter containment typically feature "forcefields" instead.

One could speculate that the neutral antideuterium in the tanks is preheated and stripped of positrons just like the deuterium is of electrons, thereby making the "magnetic" seals of TNG "Contagion" fame literally EM devices. The neutralizing of the antideuteron nuclei with positrons for storage may be a smart move, as neutral D2 would probably be easier to cool down to compact slush than the Coulomb-repulsed D nuclei alone.

Overall, onscreen references to how it all works are extremely limited. Perhaps thankfully so...

Timo Saloniemi
 
Wouldn't a magnetic field be as good at holding antimatter in as a paper bag is at holding water in? Wouldn't some kind of gravitational/antigravitational thing work better? Or is there something I'm missing?

The gravitational force is only 1/10000000000000000000000000000000000000th (10^-37) as strong as the electromagnetic force. Magnetic fields are much, much better. And the magnetic containment of antimatter is real, not hypothetical; scientists have been generating minute quantities of antimatter and storing them in magnetic bottles for decades. Of course there is some risk of particles escaping, and if we ever do manage to find a way to manufacture antiparticles in bulk, it will be necessary to improve the magnetic containment technology. And most likely, the antimatter will need to be cooled to a cryogenic slush to reduce particle motion to a minimum and thus reduce the amount of magnetic energy needed to contain it. (A paper bag can hold water pretty well if the water is frozen.)
 
For an interesting discussion on antimatter storage, go here. Somewhere down there's a proposal that a storage tank could have an 'inner wall' of anti-iron, which is easier to keep away from the storage walls since its ferromagnetic. You could then store any sort of antimatter material inside. Expensive. Complicated. Sounds like something right at home in the antimatter alley.

Then there's Atomic Rockets which is more conventional:

Unsurprisingly, it is very difficult to safely contain antimatter. Earnshaw's theorem proves that no set of static charges can be used to create a stable trap. The best you can do is metastable, and the vast majority of configurations are actively unstable. You need to cheat with nonstationary fields, as in a 'Paul Trap'. Dr. Robert Forward spoke of storing antimatter in the form of a frozen snowball of anti-hydrogen at temperatures below two Kelvin, levitated in a magnetic field to avoid contact with the chamber wall. In a vacuum, of course. The cold temperature is to keep the blasted stuff from sublimating any anti-atoms from the surface and starting an annihilation reaction with the chamber. There will be some infrequent annihilation events caused by stray cosmic rays, but these should not be a problem.
 
A lot easier to just "flip" matter along the 4th dimension near the chamber and then newly flipped matter becomes anti-matter and then you combine it with normal matter to power!
 
Essentially, the TNG Tech Manual claims that this is what Starfleet is doing.

...Except that the flipping of matter into antimatter consumes humungous amounts of energy, and is done in special fusion-powered (I think they used stars) plants at various locations in the Federation, after which the product is packed in these fancy pods and loaded to starships. If the ships themselves were to do this flipping, they would not derive any net energy, but would instead lose what they hoped to gain tenfold.

Timo Saloniemi
 
^^However, it was asserted that starships do have spin-reversal systems for generating emergency supplies of antimatter, although they're very inefficient.
 
Why would you do it anyway though? If you can generate the energy to do the reversal... wouldn't it be a lot more efficient just to use that energy directly in propulsion? Antimatter's an energy carrier, not an energy source (as hydrogen would be if hydrogen-powered cars ever become an everyday reality - splitting water [or "other hydrogen containing substance X"] to get the H2 would take more energy than you get from burning the hydrogen/running it through a fuel cell. It's just that you can't hoik a nuclear power plant or something of the sort around on the back of your car.)

The other thing that always bothered me is that matter-antimatter reactions = high-energy gamma radiation. How do you then render the gamma into usable form?
 
It's all about the energy density per volume/mass on a spaceship. Antimatter may provide that, assuming you've got the tech to make it superior to the alternatives (like, as you point out, getting energy from gamma rays, neutrinos, etc..)

Then again, we're not talking about a realistic environment in Star Trek. After all, there the AM goes through magical dilithium crystals to help form some sort of fancy plasma. At this point, when many of the steps are filled with question marks and "a miracle occurs", anything goes.
 
As I understand it, the "magical dilithium crystals" have their own unique magnetic properties that render them "transparent" to the annihilations common to M/AM reactions. When mixing matter and antimatter the antimatter is channeled through the crystals. This is the so called "tuning." Not sure why this is necessary. However, use just a teeny bit more matter than antimatter in your "blend" and the resulting gamma rays energize that remaining matter which would in fact be the "fancy plasma." Channel that plasma all the way to your warp coils and voila.

Though this is the accepted use of dilithium in the current Trek tech, I am of the opinion that dilithium crystals can perform multiple functions on any starship given how loosely they were used in the early Trek years and films.
 
Why would you do it anyway though? If you can generate the energy to do the reversal... wouldn't it be a lot more efficient just to use that energy directly in propulsion?

As stated, it's an emergency system. The idea is that if a starship runs out of antimatter, it can use fusion energy or perhaps solar power to very gradually generate enough antimatter to power the warp engines long enough to reach the nearest gas station, err, starbase. It might take days or weeks sitting idle before you have enough for a warp hop of a few hours.

The other thing that always bothered me is that matter-antimatter reactions = high-energy gamma radiation. How do you then render the gamma into usable form?

Electron-positron annihilation produces gamma rays. But proton-antiproton (or neutron-antineutron) annihilation produces both gamma rays and pions, and charged pions quickly decay into muons and neutrinos, with the muons decaying in turn into electrons, neutrinos, and their antiparticles. The gamma rays and neutrinos escape, but those charged pions, muons, electrons, and positrons can be redirected and contained by a magnetic field and used as an exhaust stream or as a means to heat a propellant, according to real-world proposals for antimatter rockets. So these particles probably constitute the "warp plasma" that results from the annihilation reaction and is used to channel energy to the warp coils.


As I understand it, the "magical dilithium crystals" have their own unique magnetic properties that render them "transparent" to the annihilations common to M/AM reactions. When mixing matter and antimatter the antimatter is channeled through the crystals. This is the so called "tuning." Not sure why this is necessary.

The lattice structure of dilithium is such that, when in an EM field, it functions as a sort of "magnetic bottle" on a microscale, holding the antiparticles within the gaps in the atomic lattice so that they don't annihilate the crystal's particles. As for why this is needed, I assume it's to concentrate and confine the reactants. If you just allow particle and antiparticle streams to slam directly into each other, most of the particles will miss (because the streams are mostly empty space), and the eruption of energy from those that do annihilate will blow apart the remaining particles and prevent them from coming into contact, halting the reaction. Presumably, a dilithium crystal channels the particles and antiparticles into colliding more consistently and keeps them confined so they don't get scattered, thereby intensifying the reaction greatly.

However, use just a teeny bit more matter than antimatter in your "blend" and the resulting gamma rays energize that remaining matter which would in fact be the "fancy plasma." Channel that plasma all the way to your warp coils and voila.

That's quite possible -- except it contradicts "Coming of Age," which alleged that the matter/antimatter intermix ratio must always be 1:1. However, your suggestion is closer to real proposals for antimatter power -- using more matter than antimatter and using the heated excess matter as a working fluid or reaction mass -- so I'm inclined to disregard what "Coming of Age" claimed. In fact, that would probably be entirely necessary to deal with the problem of gamma-ray escape mentioned above. Those gamma rays would represent a lot of energy, and it would be kind of pointless to let them just radiate away uselessly. If they instead irradiate the extra particles in the matter stream, those particles will absorb much of their energy and be able to transmit it to the engines.

So I'd say you're right. The pions, muons, electrons, and positrons resulting from the deuteron-antideuteron annihilations must only be part of the warp plasma, with the rest being extra deuterium nuclei energized by an absorption of gamma rays (which might split them into protons and neutrons).
 
except it contradicts "Coming of Age," which alleged that the matter/antimatter intermix ratio must always be 1:1.

But this was the answer to a question in an exam directed at young supergeniuses - and a trick answer at that, according to Wesley. I really, really doubt it was a statement of any generality on how warp drives operate. Instead, it is likely to have described a very specific case, and in a misleading way to boot.

...Of course, it may have been a relatively simple question instead, and Wesley just got it completely wrong. The correct answer might have been "m/am=(0.03*t)/9 for t = 0 to 100 seconds" for all we know. ;)

Timo Saloniemi
 
However, use just a teeny bit more matter than antimatter in your "blend" and the resulting gamma rays energize that remaining matter which would in fact be the "fancy plasma." Channel that plasma all the way to your warp coils and voila.
That's quite possible -- except it contradicts "Coming of Age," which alleged that the matter/antimatter intermix ratio must always be 1:1. However, your suggestion is closer to real proposals for antimatter power -- using more matter than antimatter and using the heated excess matter as a working fluid or reaction mass -- so I'm inclined to disregard what "Coming of Age" claimed. In fact, that would probably be entirely necessary to deal with the problem of gamma-ray escape mentioned above. Those gamma rays would represent a lot of energy, and it would be kind of pointless to let them just radiate away uselessly. If they instead irradiate the extra particles in the matter stream, those particles will absorb much of their energy and be able to transmit it to the engines.

So I'd say you're right. The pions, muons, electrons, and positrons resulting from the deuteron-antideuteron annihilations must only be part of the warp plasma, with the rest being extra deuterium nuclei energized by an absorption of gamma rays (which might split them into protons and neutrons).

Using a 1:1 ratio, they can separate the M/AM reaction from the coolant system. The gamma rays and the rest of the particle heats up the coolant, which transports the heat to the ESP and the warp engines via a heat exchanger. Not very advanced technology, but why change? I guess this would result in a more controlled reaction. Plus you can use a material that absorbs gamma rays more easily than hydrogen isotopes (i.e. a high atomic number element). The coolant then becomes the warp plasma or it heats up the warp plasma.
 
I just realized something.

Wouldn't a magnetic field be as good at holding antimatter in as a paper bag is at holding water in? Wouldn't some kind of gravitational/antigravitational thing work better? Or is there something I'm missing?

As an alternative to magnetic confinement, why don't Trek starships just store it in a transporter buffer and remateralize it directly into the injection system. Since it is just an element, you don't need to keep the pattern coherent.

Now that I think about it, doesn't the existence of a transporter kinda make matter-antimatter reactors obsolete? They could just beam the matter into the buffer, then siphon off the energy. Sort of half of the transportation process.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top