Antimatter Just for Weapons?

[phacon]

Hey guys, I was been working with Jimmy on making an antimatter containment field becuase I was
looking at Gallant's
https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=stararmy:basic_engineering_manual
and later at:
https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=occhestan_republic:technology:mam_power
https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=antimatter_production
and I was wondering if people could use a guide for antimatter?

So I was wonder... Does anyone else beside Yamatains use antimatter for something beside weapons? Would a guide for antimatter useful?

If so, I was thinking of adding this to the Engineering Guide:

1. 
   Fun Facts about Antimatter
2. Antimatter is matter made up of antiparticles and is an extension of the antiparticle concept. In turn Antiparticles are particles with the same mass but opposite electric charge as a normal particle.
3. In the Particle Physics, only fermions and other particles with a nonzero charge have antiparticles. With the exception of W bosons, most bosons have 0 charge; therefor bosons and are considered to be their own antiparticle. In other words, an antiparticle of a photon is a photon. If you think about it this makes sense because 0 * -1 = 0.
4. In science fiction, some antimatter reactors and antimatter engines are actually be based on one of two different properties:
   • The positron, the antimatter particle for the electron, can be used as a catalyst in most nuclear fusion reactions especially the highest energy producing reactions. Thus, antimatter can be used to enhance a nuclear fusion reactor or propulsion system.
   • When a particle and antiparticle collide, they annihilate each other produce light typically in the Gamma and X-ray spectrum. This light is of energy 2 that of any normal nuclear reaction. In turn antimatter power is very similar nuclear power, except that the water/fluid is indirectly heated by a heavy element such as Xenon or Lead, which absorbs the X-ray and gamma radiation. As one would expect this water/fluid is then use to either turn generators or provide propulsion
5. Antimatter can be stored by either using a Penning Trap (see Jimmy's picture below) or containment field descendant of the Penning Trap. Since Penning Traps will contain the antimatter as long as their is enough power, most denotations of antimatter weapons involve a loss of power or a device that simply cuts power to the containment field
6. A few antimatter-reactions can be used in medical technology that require nucleotides such as PET scans.

Here is the picture Jimmy did for me for a diagram of Penning Trap aka antimatter containment device aka what stores the antimatter:
http://i665.photobucket.com/albums/vv19/Grumps_McGurt/Anti-mattercontainmentdiagram.jpg
Jimmy working on doing some color of it right now. I think he did such a great job I wanted to know is their anything or anyone else that could use a picture/model of a realistic antimatter containment device?

What do you guys think?
Would it be beneficial to provide links citing #3 or the last point?
Is their anything else I forgotten?

 

[Soresu]

So then. If you can easily access Wikipedia to learn "hard facts" on this stuff then why import it here? A few keystrokes and you already have it on said site and page. So I say again. Isn't this redundant? Why would such a page be necessary to start with when no one really looks at all this detail to start with and just "use" it? And if you wish to continue with this. Why not just use the page on the wiki already in place with some easy explanations for those that may not understand it? Couldn't the present page simply be altered in some ways to do the job instead of making more on the subject?

 

[Wes]

Yeah, that's what the [[wp>wikipage]] syntax is for.

 

[Jimmy]

I hate quoting people, but... (Actually I love quoting people, but this type of stuff makes a little part of me die. )

Why not just use the page on the wiki already in place with some easy explanations for those that may not understand it? Couldn't the present page simply be altered in some ways to do the job instead of making more on the subject?

Wasn't this what the whole topic all about, or am I missing something? (Haven't reread it in a while, and slightly intoxicated atm)

Tell you the truth, it's not a big enough deal to me for me to find reasons for him not to do it. If the man wants a writing exercise about anti-matter, let him either edit the current page, or create his own callled "Anti-Matter In-Depth" or something, linking from the current anti-matter page.

Expanding that, we could have a whole section of Foundation Tech pages which roughly sketch out...never mind, just pontificating again...

 

[Soresu]

I've asked twice already. Hopefully third time is the charm. "Is it necessary? Is it needed?" It is not simply a matter of just 'letting him do it.' But if it will help or complicate matters in the long run by changing how it has been established to work, used and produced here as well as people having to link off site and learn all the jargon that goes with it. Since if we can take a few seconds to type in wikipedia.org, scroll to the search bar and type in 'Antimatter' do we need the additional 'hard fact' info on site for this?

So why not just modify the current page if it is applicable and with permission from its creator. Include a few additional condensed points of view if possible, with ease of reading/understanding interest and there you go. Problem solved you save having to click to another page, and a small amount of space on a finite wiki server on something simple.

-Has said enough and moves on.-

 

[Jimmy]

You realise we've pretty much been advocating the same thing, right? Only difference is you prefer point form, and I'm for sub-headers. Way to make an mountain out of an anthill, my fault to I suppose.

 

[phacon]

Since if we can take a few seconds to type in Wikipedia.org, scroll to the search bar and type in 'Antimatter' do we need the additional 'hard fact' info on site for this?

Well I been thinking of a more neutral way to say this, but I really don't think look it up on Wikipedia is that easy. I cite somethings in the article to prove my point.

• First their are something things that I know as a physics that are not explicit on Wikipedia. For example, I talk about "bosons are there own antiparticle because bosons have 0 charge and -1*0 = 0" To find in fact just the math of "-1*0 = 0" you have to read have understand the details of the proof in the antiparticle page or you have to go to 2nd equations on Wikipedia's C-Symmetry and simplify it down to "-1*0" like I did.
• Second the thing about applications of antimatter is actually on the middle of the page and do to that fact I think it would be very hard for someone to find. You can get all the information from Wikipedia; however, it may not be easy to find

So why not just modify the current page if it is applicable and with permission from its creator. Include a few additional condensed points of view if possible, with ease of reading/understanding interest and there you go. Problem solved you save having to click to another page, and a small amount of space on a finite wiki server on something simple.

If you mean by modify the current page:

• Merging my antimatter article with antimatter production article. I thought about it before or having condensed points. However, I would need Wes or other admins help with some minor details in integration. If you asking for this then would you like to volunteer to do the merger?
• If your talking about the Engineering article, well honestly Soresu that is necessary and worth the any amount of space, I personally have felt confusion at knowing the scifi of engineering in the same way the people get confusion of the science of engineering. I know that Gallants guide is necessary to encourage greater use of engineers as both npcs and pc on SARP.

Now if you talking about the antimatter article itself, I have agree with Jimmy on this that you kind of over analysed the issue a bit when from the beginning I asked people to look over and see if their where specific sentences that where redundant or needed to be modified

 

[phacon]

Well, maybe it's just me, but I have no real idea at all on anti-matter, all I really understand is that when a hydrogen and an anti-hydrogen atom meet, stuff gets messed up (this what I get for opting out of higher science ). If the article was written in an explanatory manner, rather than a hard and fast rule manner, it would not be constraint on creativity, but a step up. Of course, Wikipedia will always be the source of five-minute-diplomas in subjects like this, but if Phacon feels it's worth his while, who am I to stop him.^^

But if it will help or complicate matters in the long run by changing how it has been established to work, used and produced here as well as people having to link off site and learn all the jargon that goes with it

In reference this concern about the article changing how antimatter works, I have decided not to mention anti-protrons and get rid of the not about antimatter technology, since to my knowledge no one uses them on the site. I vaguely remember I talk with Wes on time about turbo aether plasma and I remember something about antimatter, so to my best guess I think the "turbo" come from injection of antimatter into the exhaust.

If I am wrong, then I could get rid of antimatter being used as a propulsion system entirely since turbo aether engines are the only one I know specifically uses antimatter as a fuel and not a source of energy.

This being said the last to bullet are really the one I am worried might be to complex and I am looking for input on before I go and get this approved.

 

[Soresu]

-Shakes his head.-

I think you both have failed to see my point. How many people know what bosons, penning traps, and fermions are on here? Two? Three people? Over complicating a established piece of lore on here wouldn't be helping much.

"But it would make people understand how anti-matter works."

Possibly. But remember. Is the average player interested in all of that? Or something simple and easily understood that doesn't leave people's head scratching and wondering as they click all these [[links]].

If your talking about the Engineering article, well honestly Soresu that is necessary and worth the any amount of space, I personally have felt confusion at knowing the scifi of engineering in the same way the people get confusion of the science of engineering.

I'm talking "In general". It maybe necessary for you. But is it for others? These are the questions I have been trying to ask in here and have been receiving roundabout answers that I respond to.

Now if you talking about the antimatter article itself, I have agree with Jimmy on this that you kind of over analysed the issue a bit when from the beginning I asked people to look over and see if their where specific sentences that where redundant or needed to be modified.

I'm sorry. But I did not over analyze. I'm trying to look at this from the prospective of a player. A few key points came to mind that I have reiterated several times on here. Necessity, Need, Relevance, Redundancy, And Ease of Reading/Understanding.

It isn't about points and "sub headers". It's about what everyone else will think we they read or have to read this article to use this multi-application source of power. So yes. It is a point I have been trying to get across ever since I've come in here. And will make it easier to understand as I had hoped by answering your question/request with more questions you would understand and take a step back, reanalyze the article and take some of these questions to heart to better it.

1)"Is this a necessity to use antimatter?"

2)"Will the playerbase be able to understand this once done?"

2)"Is this simply how you think it should be, or is it for everyone's benefit?"

3)"Just how much physics jargon will you use? And will we have to look it up to understand?"

4)"Will it be clear cut and easy to read?"

^My questions out of curiosity as well as answers.

1)Ease of reading.

2)Simplify don't over complicate it. Cut down on jargon.

3)Is it simply how you feel on the issue or is it how everyone feels. Something to take into consideration when doing these things.

4)Just how much of a balance of complicated speech and easy to understand explanations should I use?

5) Keep it accessible and engaging to the player. Meaning, don't veer off course into long winded speeches or ramblings. Clear cut and easy as well as to entertain.

Four things any article should have. You wanted suggestions. I gave them. Do those work for you?

 

[SentientRace]

Sorry dude, but I have to agree with Soresu. If the article had some use, then I would agree, but to be honest, I find it kind of useless and baseless.

There are other places that can discuss what anti-matter actually is without going into the actual technobabble of the equations and what have you, so that people that don't understand how anti-matter works can get a better understanding. As I said in the IRC, this article is very redundant, and it only explains something that people have to know before they apply it into a submission anyway. If by making this article you mean to dumb down the explanation to anti-matter, again I stress my point on the first sentence in this paragraph and further mention that anyone who's making a tech article who's willing to use anti-matter in it should learn about it beforehand. I'm fairly certain SARP encourages intelligence and reading up on things; sure, not enough that you have to know the equations or the particularities of it, but at the very least know the theoretical part of it.

Also, by making this article you'd be leaving out other possible ways to use anti-matter, or of producing it. The anti-matter production article is only hoping to make examples of anti-matter production. If not, then I am against it's submission and hope it gets deleted. Why? Because we're never sure if there are other ways to create (or generate or convert, etc...) anti-matter, and we're never sure if the points you wish to bring across on how we can use anti-matter are actually the only ones just as well.


If what you wish to do is to make examples of how anti-matter can be used, then I'm fine with it. However, I should note that this should be added to the previous article (link above) and not need an entire article dedicated to it (which you've already stated you'd need clearance and stuff, but still... get it or something).


It also saddens me that you mentioned in the IRC one of your reasons of making this article in the first place was to be able to place that render Jimmy made somewhere (as that should not be a reason to make an article and submit it to the NTSE), but that's another 20 bucks that might not need mention. I still would suggest, should that still be one of your reasons, creating a whole new device and then submitting that, instead, to place the render in that article.

I've agreed with you in the past, but today is not one such day.