He would get way more views overall if he stuck to one channel. There's literally no advantage in spreading them out unless you're worried about getting copyright strikes.
Antimatter is energy storage medium not energy creation (no I don't know better word). To create 1g even at best you would need to use as much energy as there are in 2grams (because you would create 1g of matter 1 of antimatter)
If antimatter weapons ever exist I can only imagine it'd be in the form of some sort of beam weapon that generates the antimatter as it fires, rather than storing it like a bullet in a chamber
In Star Trek TMP, phaser power has been increased by channeling through the warp core, which is a form of anti-matter-/matter plasma. Enough to blow up a planet with ease. :@) Of course you have the Genesis torpedo....thankfully this will all remain in science fiction.
@@ursusthewhite9824 Star Trek has a fictional substance (dilithium) that can be made non-reactive with antimatter under certain conditions. This is not possible in real life. That's what causes the M/AM reaction to produce a controlled plasma rather than just blowing up the ship.
So that's how the Archangel in Gundam SEED fires its antimatter positron beam cannons! (Of course, they do not remotely work in the same way as the antimatter here is described.)
The barrel of such a gun would have to be opened at one end to allow the beam to exit. That means that it would have air in it. So the particles of antimatter would annihilate as soon as they are created in the chamber, blowing up the weapon...
I wouldn't doubt humanity on this one. Someone will probably figure out a way of rapidly assembling a small amount of antimatter. Once they do that, reducing the size of the device may leave us with weapons capable of producing their own antimatter, but are essentially inert until activated and triggered. You'd still need containment so the desired amount could be made, but not for long. Of course, this is assuming humanity hasn't largely died in nuclear fire / winter by that time.
Antimatter weapons WILL exist. We can make antimatter. We can't contain it. Once we can, we can transport it. If we can transport it, we can put it in a missile. It's not an if, it's a when.
"without causing a nuclear winter" actually, nuclear winter caused by the large amount of dust and such getting pushed into the atmosphere by the blast and the following firestorm and fires, so an antimatter bomb would do it just as likely as a nuclear one. even more, since it would be used more willingly (maybe) and more blast and fires would happen.
@@QBCPerdition A nuclear winter is from soot in the air, not the radiation contamination that may or may not come along with it. They are considered different issues with regards to a nuclear war/explosions.
@@QBCPerdition I know it doesn't make much sense but the term nuclear winter really doesn't have anything at all to do do with the fallout. its all about everything be blown back up into the atmosphere blocking out the sun. its likely what also killed the dinosaurs on top of other ELEs. so even if we got smashed by a giant meteor or not even a small one, we'd still be faced with whats called a nuclear winter. or it can also be caused by super volcano's. That's what caused the last nuclear ish winter the earth has seen in while occurring 1816 when Mount Tambora erupted. It's known as the year without a summer. still considered a nuclear winter yet just a small short one as it didn't really last long enough to kill everything although it did create massive food shortages and like took out a fair percent of the population. They basically just call it a nuclear winter simply because if a real nuclear war broke out and all those nukes started going off all over the planet around the same time the atmosphere would be so densely packed with dust and dirt that it would take several years for it all to fall back to earth and by that point most life on earth would starve out and or freeze to death
Antimatter weapons are absolutely something to worry about. I’m almost positive they are already being tested. Think about it. They have already created and stored it. All they have to do is scale the containment system down and you have antimatter shells
There's a video on the excellent Fermilab UA-cam channel that puts things succinctly. After 25 years as one of the world's leading production facilities, they had made enough antimatter to heat up a pot of coffee. Not quite the apocalypse, but maybe one day.
You know something is expensive when the cost-saving measure currently being explore is: "Send magnetic scoop up into the Van Allen belt to harvest it from space"
The only solution I can think of in terms of storing anti-matter is that you would need a device of some kind that produces the anti-matter and THEN sends it to the firing mechanism. This would greatly reduce the time that the anti-matter could come into contact with any normal matter, but you would probably need a weapon the size of the CERN super collider so HAVE FUN WITH THAT. lol.
Even then it wouldn't really make sense. Why take the path through antimatter when you can use all that energy to fire a laser or regular high energy particles?
@@Irthex An electron and positron beam take the same amount of energy, anti-protons are a bit hard to source, but would take the same amount of energy as a proton beam. (They already do electron, positron, anti-proton and proton beams at particle accelerator facilities like CERN - neat papers, but way to far over my head for anything other than a source for inspiration for realistic sci-fi weapons.) Currently, the best energy to target system we've got is kinetic - the numbers scale so fast with velocity that the energy release quickly exceeds WMD outputs. (We can already get things going fast enough that an inert iron warhead adds more energy than our very best explosives)
It wouldn't take that much antimatter to be incredibly destructive. It would be likely the first step for weapons is antimatter triggered nuclear fusion bombs which the majority of the energy comes from fusion of hydrogen.
he Tsar Bomba reached 57 megatons. This was with a lead tamper. If that tamper had been made of uranium as originally designed, estimated yield would have been around 110MT. That is an insane level of energy.
@@moneybilla LMAO yeah find me a single drop of antimatter. We can't even make a single microgram of anti-hydrogen much less contain it. Take your sci-fi and remember that regarding actual antimatter, antimatter bombs are still FICTION.
Photon Torpedoes warhead had a detonation chamber with antimatter. Upon detonation the torpedo created a matter-antimatter explosion and a flood of ion radiation.
An Antimatter bullet would basically I imagine be like making a literal disruptor type gun... an as a small arm would totally redefine the term overkill. It's be even WAY more powerful even then the most over kill 50 cal "small" arms. In hand cannons (literally) an sniper rifles.. probably by factors too. Would there even be much of the poor unfortunate target victim after getting hit center mass by a antimatter bullet slug if such a thing was even possible?? Doubt we even know how to really defend against that sorta thing.
The Sci-Fi weapons in my novel are created through gravity manipulation. The space ships are wrapped around a neutron star, that they harness for power. The weapon is a singular 'gun'. Though what it is is stripping a section of the neutron star off, holding it in the hyper compressed state, packing it into a containment box with enough power to keep it compressed, then gravitationally accelerating it out of the barrel. The little containment unit then flies harmlessly through space until it hits something. At which point the containment unit breaks releasing all the compressed matter in an instant. Not only does my gun fire kinetic projectiles at fractions of C, those projectiles have the mass of a mountain, and the strong nuclear force rebuffs gravity rapidly expanding to fill the correct amount of space at the moment of impact. Nothing like throwing a mountain that then explodes in an actual mini-nova.
All these problems are potentially solvable- there is a third state of theoretical matter for example that doesn't react with either matter or antimatter. Make that, and you can safely store your antimatter in it. And once we get practical fusion power, antimatter becomes much cheaper to make. So, anyone want a photon torpedo?
It's not the "nuclear" that causes the winter directly. Nuclear winter theory is kind of debatable, but it's the lofting of soot and dust into the stratosphere that's supposed to cause the cooling. Antimatter weapons of similar yield could probably do the same thing... Also, I'm not sure deterrence works in a way that would let countries be cavalier about using antimatter weapons. "If you launch antimatter bombs at us, we'll launch our nukes" is still going to amount to MAD.
few kg of antmatter enters our solar system every second and plandets like jupeter would be like natral penning traps so if we have space mining we have antimatter weapons
A far more pertinent question: could one create a *pure* fusion weapn, without the need for fission stages? This would also be a much "cleaner" bomb, without nearly as much long term fallout.
This would be a geopolitical disaster. Such bombs would be more cheaper to produce, since the uranium Core are expensive. Theoretically are possible to produce Pure fusion bomba, but the Fusion issues due to produce a nuclear ignition precludes their development. An anti-matter bomb are ever simpler, just Turn off the electromagnetic trap that maintain the deposits of matter and antimatter and boom! Once the production of anti-matter improves the production of a bomb becomes more a reality. In fact a single gram anti-matter bomb (that could be launched by a cheap drone) could release the same energy of a Nagasaki nuclear bomb!
The entire analysis is wrong because ur not up to date with anti matter tech. There are at least two startup companies able to manufacture anti matter in a more industrial quantity. They use it for thrusters. But it can be used as easily for weapons.
Well, those people at CERN certainly seem to think this is a worthwhile prospect, and theres a reason they keep pouring billions of dollars into this project. Antimatter energy would be incredibly efficient, bomb or no bomb. So...I'll leave it to them to decide whether or not this is possible. Determination is a human trait and it's the reason we have the technology we have today that used to be considered science fiction. Let them keep working, they'll find a way. Probably not in my lifetime though 😢
What if in the early universe matter and anti-matter were in more or less the same ratio. They combined and released massive amounts of energy and heat. This energy then cooled enough to form matter, and a slight skew toward matter rather than anti-matter. The antimatter then combined with the same mass of matter, releasing huge energy and heat. This cooled with a slight skew toward matter. Repeat repeat repeat and the concentration of matter increases. So rather than a big bang, it would be more like a bang and echoes
I think an antimatter bomb would still create a nuclear winter. That has more to do with throwing lots of particulate matter (soot and smoke from the collateral fires caused by the high temperatures, and to some extent dust,) into the air that blots out the sun than to radiation.
Wouldn't it be an antimatter winter if it's nothing to do with a nuclear bomb? The nuclear radiation has nothing to do with the ensuing nuclear winter, it's just that nukes would cause it.
@Conor Beech technically absolutely. However, I have heard of megavolcanoes described as calling a nuclear winter so... finally, is matter antimatter collision not a form of nuclear reaction?
Actually the nuke's mushroom cloud gets dust trapped in the upper atmosphere. This is what causes the nuclear winter, not the radiation. Similar sized explosions via different means will have the same winter effect minus the radiation.
D'oh! And here I was hoping for a couple of Photon torpedoes to be made in my lifetime! Lol! Great video, Simon! Can't wait for the next one! 😁 Be safe and healthy! LLAP 🖖 😎
Simon's dream of having Danny and the other basement drones build him an arsenal of photon torpedoes were dashed. Only a session of beatings until morale improved could now satiate his disappointment.
I've always wondered with the imbalance at the big bang of matter and antimatter is there a chance there's a galaxy out there thats made from antimatter?
Some scientists definitely have speculated that this is the case. My personal gut feeling is that it would be unlikely, but I'm literally just guessing. While it has been speculated this is possible, I believe that it's the minority opinion among scientists; I'd have to double check on that though.
The answer is 99.999999% no because if 1 existed then multiple antimatter galaxies would have to exist. And if multiples existed our night sky would be much more ... energetic!
The best way to power the containment of an antimatter bomb, would be to feed small amounts of the antimatter into a reactor with equal amounts of regular matter, using the antimatter as fuel. Of course, if the reactor breaks down, it could detonate prematurely, but if it runs out of fuel, and shuts down, you'd be out of antimatter.
Well the thing is curent cnowledge about making antymater and storing it is insoficient as we progres anymater might be easier to make it and store it as well meybe not a bomb but i think they make som reactor in the future to power space ships
Anti-matter explosions nuclear weapon size would still throw massive amounts of particulates into the atmosphere. So yea, ya still get "nuclear winter". 🤯
Geeebus... I'm thinking of how often anti-matter is mentioned in Star Trek.... Weaponry, propulsion, it's a virtual Swiss Army Knife tool in Star Trek. You'll have this in science fiction.
If I say "you are the Light of my life" or "I can see the Light at the end of the tunnel" or "that certainly shed Light on the subject" am I speaking of visible light? If one looks at the Bible as a collection of ancient metaphors that modern religions have simply misinterpreted, it can allow you to look at it in a new "Light".
The fact that there was no clip at all of a Star Trek character saying that they're losing anti-matter containment on a show about scifi tech is inexcusible. lol I want to speak to the manager.
Anti-iron with magnetic capabilities could be placed inside an iron casing with a lead (Pb) outer layer and made into a bullet, the size wouldn't be an issue because just 1/10 of a gram is insanely powerfull
Not to be a religiously inclined pedant. But I'd argue that within the Genesis creation narrative, the first five verses are by far the easiest to reconcile with science, requiring very little if any "interpretation" to do so. Make of that what you will. Though within the framework of a "creatio ex nihilio" narrative (like the one in Genesis), it does make logical sense for "simpler" things to be created first.
2:27 - I produce antimatter every day. When I fart, everything that matters is destroyed & the only thing left is the desperate, frantic quest for a single breath of fresh air.
Yes you get very efficient matter-energy conversion in matter-antimatter annihilation... but you also have to put *IN* that energy to create the antimatter in the first place and THAT reaction is at best 50% efficient as you are creating 50% matter and 50% antimatter out of energy so as a power source? No. Not unless you could mine it from idk an antimatter asteroid?
I read a theary a few years ago that I liked. If antimatter is the exact opposite of normal matter, why couldn't it be moving the opposite way through time (at least under certain circumstance)? Imagine if the Big Bang did produce an equal amount of antimatter, that has been expanding in the opposite direction in time. So there's an anti-universe that's getting further and further away from us in time and is now about 30bn years ago. It didn't become a mainstream theory, but it's cool to imagine it's true. On the note of bombs not going bang until you want then to, the Nazis accidentally created a substance that become known as Devil's Pi**. It was so reactive on contact with anything that it would have made an almost nuke level bomb or a more powerful propellant than rocket fuel. But even they abandoned it because they couldn't safely contain it. NASA later tried, even diluting it, and in one accidental spill it inconsiderated 15ft of concrete. And even the US military won't go anywhere near it. So if we can't even contain regular matter that does something similar, we're probably not going to contain antimatter anytime soon. But hey, here's hoping that by the time we do, we're mature enough as a species to use it as an energy source and not for weapons. Though even in Star Trek they do. So, hopefully, by then we are at least sensible enough not to wipe ourselves out.
Unless a new and much more effective method of manufacturing and storage of antimatter was discovered and implemented there is no way to use antimatter for anything other than scientific curiosity, let alone weaponizing it. But if there was some discovery that allowed for the mass production and storage of antimatter that's when things could change. Currently there aren't even theories (just a few hypotheses) about how to do this so I don't see it happening in the next century at least.
Yes there are theories on how to do it. First- x ray binaries- neutron stars and black holes are immensely powerful particle accelerators, and produce billions of metric tons of antimatter per second. This antimatter - positronium- is stored for millions of years via gravitational waves.
There are 2 ways(engineering problems) to produce antimatter in large amounts 1. Hawking radiation. As a black hole evaporates, it produces equal amounts of matter and antimatter. 2. Q balls. Dark matter that "flips" matter into antimatter.
@@scifirealism5943 when I say there aren't theories about how to do it, I mean for us to do it. It happening in nature doesn't necessarily translate to some way in which we could take advantage of it. It's not like we have any local black holes to work with.
@alistairgrey5089 Well, yeah. There are engineering problems with creating black holes/collecting dark matter. I didn't say those methods were technologically practical. Just possible in principle.
I think a weapon based on the neutrino would be an interesting to explore. Imagine if you can make a neutrino interact with "normal" matter at a specific point in time and space? Since a neutrino is effectively transparent to all matter such weapon-beam would be super effective. A low powered broadcast or beam can be used for communications. Imagine hitting a target on the other side of the globe by pointing your "cannon" through the center of the Earth. Sending signals could be much faster since the signal would not have to travel the perimeter of the Earth. Heck you can send your beam through the Earth and the moon to contact someone on the dark side of the Moon.
You can't make neutrinos react with regular matter. However, you can do it with anti-neutrinos. If you have two adjustable barrels, one shooting neutrinos and the other - anti-neutrinos, you can make this work
You can make neutrinos interact with matter. Neutron stars and black holes, and exploding stars produce neutrinos with energies high enough to affect matter as frequently as photons do.
the only thing more dangerous than an antimatter weapon is that greenscreen work. Man that was hard to watch. I expect that lever of work on Tiktok, not UA-cam.
Great video as always. Rarely is an "absolute not" absolute. We don't have the technology now, but we probably will at some point. Whether thats 100 years from now, or 1000, we will probably get there. Advances in other areas of energy and physics will happen and open the door. Only took 66 years to get from the first Wright Brothers flight to man walking on the moon. And we went from the first vacuum tube in 1904 to the 2 nanometer MOSFET in 120 years. And I know those are not an perfect comparisons, predictions of technically advancements are usually very wrong, either overestimating or underestimating.
Indeed, the fact we can make antimatter and contain it means 1 day we will be able to weaponize it. Process always get more efficient smaller and cheaper over time.
I like when the different channels cover a similar topic 1, it means Simon and crew can make more content more quickly 2, it's like a multi perspective deep dive on the same topic 3, I'm not paying for this shit, so I'm happy with what I get.
@@KawaiiKasai It very, very rarely means 1. While some topics may come up on multiple channels, I think it is very rare to actually be written by the same person.
1 particle per cubic meter is really tiny, Simon. Do you know how many there are in a mole of hydrogen? 1.008 grams of hydrogen? (Hydrogen as it's the most common)
And how large is the storage unit? We're talking about "usable" amounts of anti-matter, which is going to start taking up space. And if the storage unit is in orbit, it's moving through quite a lot of cubic meters. Only 1 particle needs to make contact with the anti-matter for the whole thing to explode
Yes 1 particle per cubic meter is very tiny, but it's still not a true vacuum. It's enough particles that if you traveled at close to light speed you would receive a lethal dose of radiation from these particles in under a second.
@@ThatWriterKevin yes but light speed is very, very large. The point moreso was to store antimatter in space. if you put it in a high orbit, I reckon it's still many times more stable than low radioactive substances. A cubic metre of Thorium would certainly give you more geiger counts than a equivalent mass (but not volume) of antihydrogen in space. Seeing how this is fantasy land we may as well go all out and store it as anti-osmium so it is small, neat and stays in one place.
I honestly enjoy all your channels, and respect you for the good work and I understand free speech; but "tread softly, but you tread on my dreams". We are all entitled to our own views on religion, and so are you, but I think it would be wiser to stick to your title and not mock some people's 'dreams'; even though they may appear to be 'God deluded'.
I find it odd that god didn’t create the sun and the moon untill the 4th day, but without the sun present, how did we have any ‘days’ at all? It’s almost as if it’s all just made up 🤔
Valid points...for now. the nuclear accelerators used to make antimatter on earth are very expensive as they are very precise tools used to get Nobel prizes in physics :) However, an industrial scale antimatter factory accelerator in space would be optimized for making antimatter and would be able to make it more cheaply. Apparently antimatter particles from the sun and space also get trapped in earth's magnetic field, so that could be harvested in large amounts. Of course the storage method needs to be absolutely reliable long term or it's all for naught!
Matter somehow produces gravity. So would antimatter produce antigravity? If it does, wouldn't all the antimatter that formed at the beginning of the universe have repelled the normal matter instead of colliding with it? (Though under certain circumstances, such as in a particle accelerator, the surrounding magnetic fields don't allow that to happen, thus causing matter-antimatter explosions. This also could have happened at the very beginning of the Big Bang, until the explosive force separated both kinds of matter enough for the gravity/antigravity effect to keep the matter and antimatter separate). Thus most of the original antimatter in the universe would never have been able to collide with matter, but instead, was repelled by it, forming a anti-gravitational wave front that pulled the antimatter outwards faster than the matter of the universe we see around us. If this was true, the antimatter, being pushed by the antigravity wave front that would have formed between the two kinds of gravity, would have quickly spread to the outer reaches of the universe. Which is why we don't find galaxies or clusters of galaxies or even just antimatter dust in space, at least as far as we can tell. The continual natural repelling of gravity from the matter that makes up our universe would also cause the universe to keep expanding. Thus doing away with the need to explain the expansion of the universe by inventing dark energy and dark matter.
Antimatter still has mass, not anti-mass, so it should interact with the force of gravity normally. Antimatter isn't magic, it's just oppositely charged. A hydrogen atom is one negatively charged electron rotating around one positively charged proton. An antihydrogen atom would be one positively charged positron rotating around one negatively charged antiproton.
If antimatter had negative gravitational mass. Then it would possess negative inertial mass as well- to conserve the equivalence principle. This is not the case because antimatter responds normally to magnetic fields.
People know that matter and antimatter annihilate when combined, but usually they seem to assume that means that the matter and antimatter involved just vanishes. This isn't actually what happens. Instead a pretty big chunk of the energy that makes up both matter and antimatter is released, so it would be more accurate to see annihilation as just "matter becoming energy". Of course, since matter is basically a form of really, really densely packed energy to begin with this isn't at all a stretch, but it does make antimatter the most efficient energy source you can get at unless you can either extract zero point energy or just build black holes to order.
There is a positive (counterclockwise) and negative (clockwise) magnetic-electric interaction (gravity).A positron bomb is a bomb of accumulating action where, under the influence of a magnetic field, the electric field moves clockwise with a centrifugal acceleration of 200 km/ s, which leads to the formation of positrons in a massive amount
11:05 wow, that was some really easy money for rand, how the hell did they get away with literally pulling numbers out of their ass? That's on the same level as people who claimed world will end in 5-7 years...in the 80ies.
If anti-matter bombs existed, they would be sabotaged. Blowing up your enemies anti-matter stores would be devastating to them and save you a lot of development costs trying to keep up with them.
Simon, how about enlightening us all on the fact the African continent is splitting in two and creating a new ocean? Would love to see this on one of your numerous channels...
Apologies, my comment about "no nuclear winter" was oversimplified and not completely accurate. But the much more important point is bananas: For all of you asking to weaponize bananas, I implore you to go play Soraka in League of Legends.
If more people had the slightest understanding quantum physics, or primarily how nuclear Power plants function. That would not be acres upon acres of land covered in solar panels. Allowing any country to produce more than enough power then what they need! Using any other source if they want it to. I think it's amazing every first world country, trying to eliminate emissions Setting a date, meanwhile trying to tell third world country that they must go from what is equivalent to every first world country 150 years ago, straight to clean energy! Remember when Germany what is a country going all green, because the circumstances “& freezing to death” because they were delusional & relied on another country for something that they could've prevented.. what seemed like over night, they went back to coal! Even in 2023, people are still scared of what they do not understand! Country announces that they're going to build a nuclear power plant! The people immediately think of two things. 1= it go boom! 2= Chernobyl or 3 mile island! Even though it's by far the best option, Believe it or not I bet it's safer than ever! Especially if the requirement for building a new power plant, the design is placed into the hands of those who specialize in it. With all of the disasters “corrupt miss handling” implementing a safe power plant design with multiple redundant systems! I'm stopping, it really doesn't matter what I say. When those in power are faced with efficiency over money. Money always wins!
Sadly, one day improving the cost of producing anti-matter is much like improving the cost of fusion energy. Both can and likely will be used to make even deadlier weapons of mass destruction. People tend to forget that Lawrence Livermore is a nuclear weapon research and development laboratory.
Couple of contradictory points. First off, you'd still get a "nuclear winter", since what causes a nuclear winter is the material lifted into the atmosphere attenuating sunlight, the only reason it's called a "nuclear" winter is that the only two things currently capable of ejecting so much material is nuclear bombs and meteorites. Second, there is no guarantee that there would be no radiactive fallout. Yes, there is no radioactive material to eject into the atmosphere that wouldl rain back down as silent death. However the sheer amount of energy produced in such high density could cause a shower of freshly created subatomic particles pulled into existence from the quantum foam that could transmutate matter into radioactive isotopes. Not likely but it wouldn't exactly take anybody with a basic understanding of quantum mechanics by surprise either.
And Simon said, "Let there be more UA-cam channels!"
…. and there were more UA-cam channels
He would get way more views overall if he stuck to one channel. There's literally no advantage in spreading them out unless you're worried about getting copyright strikes.
how has that not been pinned as top comment? only Simon knows
@@c_n_b the algorithm works in mysterious ways. Amen.
@@playman350 Yeah but he kinda has a point. If you see his channels, they aren't getting a big number of views per channel.
"Matter-antimatter explosions happen so quickly that the crew wouldn't feel a thing. Which is nice!" 😅 Simon really is a legend.
😂😂😂
That last comment got me 💀
Scientist: ,,We can use this to make a lot of electrical energy!”
Military: … weapons?
*American military
@@Alex.The.Lionnnnn Any military. We’re all humans after all.
Antimatter is energy storage medium not energy creation (no I don't know better word).
To create 1g even at best you would need to use as much energy as there are in 2grams (because you would create 1g of matter 1 of antimatter)
If antimatter weapons ever exist I can only imagine it'd be in the form of some sort of beam weapon that generates the antimatter as it fires, rather than storing it like a bullet in a chamber
In Star Trek TMP, phaser power has been increased by channeling through the warp core, which is a form of anti-matter-/matter plasma. Enough to blow up a planet with ease. :@) Of course you have the Genesis torpedo....thankfully this will all remain in science fiction.
@@ursusthewhite9824 Star Trek has a fictional substance (dilithium) that can be made non-reactive with antimatter under certain conditions. This is not possible in real life. That's what causes the M/AM reaction to produce a controlled plasma rather than just blowing up the ship.
So that's how the Archangel in Gundam SEED fires its antimatter positron beam cannons! (Of course, they do not remotely work in the same way as the antimatter here is described.)
I vote for an anti matter rail gun
The barrel of such a gun would have to be opened at one end to allow the beam to exit. That means that it would have air in it. So the particles of antimatter would annihilate as soon as they are created in the chamber, blowing up the weapon...
I wouldn't doubt humanity on this one. Someone will probably figure out a way of rapidly assembling a small amount of antimatter. Once they do that, reducing the size of the device may leave us with weapons capable of producing their own antimatter, but are essentially inert until activated and triggered. You'd still need containment so the desired amount could be made, but not for long.
Of course, this is assuming humanity hasn't largely died in nuclear fire / winter by that time.
Antimatter weapons WILL exist. We can make antimatter. We can't contain it. Once we can, we can transport it. If we can transport it, we can put it in a missile. It's not an if, it's a when.
going back to 13.7 Billion years ago. Tuesday, around 10am.
So basically we just need a sufficient amount of bananas
And antibanas. 😂
"without causing a nuclear winter"
actually, nuclear winter caused by the large amount of dust and such getting pushed into the atmosphere by the blast and the following firestorm and fires, so an antimatter bomb would do it just as likely as a nuclear one. even more, since it would be used more willingly (maybe) and more blast and fires would happen.
Cam here to say as much. I agree everything points to there likely being a worse nuclear winter due to the power of the explosion.
It might create a winter, but not a nuclear one. There would be no radiation falling from the skies with the ash and snow.
@@QBCPerdition A nuclear winter is from soot in the air, not the radiation contamination that may or may not come along with it. They are considered different issues with regards to a nuclear war/explosions.
this is what i came to type! 100% still getting nuclear winters
@@QBCPerdition I know it doesn't make much sense but the term nuclear winter really doesn't have anything at all to do do with the fallout. its all about everything be blown back up into the atmosphere blocking out the sun. its likely what also killed the dinosaurs on top of other ELEs. so even if we got smashed by a giant meteor or not even a small one, we'd still be faced with whats called a nuclear winter. or it can also be caused by super volcano's. That's what caused the last nuclear ish winter the earth has seen in while occurring 1816 when Mount Tambora erupted. It's known as the year without a summer. still considered a nuclear winter yet just a small short one as it didn't really last long enough to kill everything although it did create massive food shortages and like took out a fair percent of the population. They basically just call it a nuclear winter simply because if a real nuclear war broke out and all those nukes started going off all over the planet around the same time the atmosphere would be so densely packed with dust and dirt that it would take several years for it all to fall back to earth and by that point most life on earth would starve out and or freeze to death
Antimatter weapons are absolutely something to worry about. I’m almost positive they are already being tested. Think about it. They have already created and stored it. All they have to do is scale the containment system down and you have antimatter shells
Simon says 1kg of antimatter, has the power of the 50MT Tsar Bomba nuke.
There's a video on the excellent Fermilab UA-cam channel that puts things succinctly. After 25 years as one of the world's leading production facilities, they had made enough antimatter to heat up a pot of coffee. Not quite the apocalypse, but maybe one day.
There are two only ways to produce antimatter without particle accelerators.
Hawking radiation and Q balls.
You know something is expensive when the cost-saving measure currently being explore is: "Send magnetic scoop up into the Van Allen belt to harvest it from space"
A ridiculous pipe dream and a threat because of that too
The only solution I can think of in terms of storing anti-matter is that you would need a device of some kind that produces the anti-matter and THEN sends it to the firing mechanism. This would greatly reduce the time that the anti-matter could come into contact with any normal matter, but you would probably need a weapon the size of the CERN super collider so HAVE FUN WITH THAT. lol.
To be fair, spaceships and space platforms can be built to be ridiculously big, depending on the available technologies.
Even then it wouldn't really make sense. Why take the path through antimatter when you can use all that energy to fire a laser or regular high energy particles?
CERN already had something like 10 nano grams in storage
Gravitational waves can store electrically neutral antihydrogen.
@@Irthex An electron and positron beam take the same amount of energy, anti-protons are a bit hard to source, but would take the same amount of energy as a proton beam. (They already do electron, positron, anti-proton and proton beams at particle accelerator facilities like CERN - neat papers, but way to far over my head for anything other than a source for inspiration for realistic sci-fi weapons.)
Currently, the best energy to target system we've got is kinetic - the numbers scale so fast with velocity that the energy release quickly exceeds WMD outputs. (We can already get things going fast enough that an inert iron warhead adds more energy than our very best explosives)
It wouldn't take that much antimatter to be incredibly destructive. It would be likely the first step for weapons is antimatter triggered nuclear fusion bombs which the majority of the energy comes from fusion of hydrogen.
Current bombs are also much safer, and good enough.
@@Poctykyep
The same thing was said about separating U-235 from U-238. How did that work out.
Thank goodness you uploaded the right video this time!
he Tsar Bomba reached 57 megatons. This was with a lead tamper. If that tamper had been made of uranium as originally designed, estimated yield would have been around 110MT. That is an insane level of energy.
Its s single drop of water in a bucket for a anti-matter WMD
@@moneybilla LMAO yeah find me a single drop of antimatter. We can't even make a single microgram of anti-hydrogen much less contain it. Take your sci-fi and remember that regarding actual antimatter, antimatter bombs are still FICTION.
Photon Torpedoes warhead had a detonation chamber with antimatter. Upon detonation the torpedo created a matter-antimatter explosion and a flood of ion radiation.
An Antimatter bullet would basically I imagine be like making a literal disruptor type gun... an as a small arm would totally redefine the term overkill. It's be even WAY more powerful even then the most over kill 50 cal "small" arms. In hand cannons (literally) an sniper rifles.. probably by factors too. Would there even be much of the poor unfortunate target victim after getting hit center mass by a antimatter bullet slug if such a thing was even possible?? Doubt we even know how to really defend against that sorta thing.
I like science fiction but when the deep fuctions of the universe are talked about it scares me more than any horror movie could.
The Sci-Fi weapons in my novel are created through gravity manipulation. The space ships are wrapped around a neutron star, that they harness for power. The weapon is a singular 'gun'. Though what it is is stripping a section of the neutron star off, holding it in the hyper compressed state, packing it into a containment box with enough power to keep it compressed, then gravitationally accelerating it out of the barrel. The little containment unit then flies harmlessly through space until it hits something. At which point the containment unit breaks releasing all the compressed matter in an instant.
Not only does my gun fire kinetic projectiles at fractions of C, those projectiles have the mass of a mountain, and the strong nuclear force rebuffs gravity rapidly expanding to fill the correct amount of space at the moment of impact. Nothing like throwing a mountain that then explodes in an actual mini-nova.
What’s you novel called? Sounds interesting!
That seems like pretty intense overkill. Any kinetic projectile at a meaningful % of C should absolutely destroy the target.
A NEUTRON GOES INTO A BAR AND ASKS THE BARTENDER "HOW MUCH FOR A DRINK?"
THE BARTENDER SAYS, "FOR YOU, THERE'S NO CHARGE."
All these problems are potentially solvable- there is a third state of theoretical matter for example that doesn't react with either matter or antimatter. Make that, and you can safely store your antimatter in it.
And once we get practical fusion power, antimatter becomes much cheaper to make.
So, anyone want a photon torpedo?
Gravitational waves
It's not the "nuclear" that causes the winter directly. Nuclear winter theory is kind of debatable, but it's the lofting of soot and dust into the stratosphere that's supposed to cause the cooling. Antimatter weapons of similar yield could probably do the same thing...
Also, I'm not sure deterrence works in a way that would let countries be cavalier about using antimatter weapons. "If you launch antimatter bombs at us, we'll launch our nukes" is still going to amount to MAD.
few kg of antmatter enters our solar system every second and plandets like jupeter would be like natral penning traps so if we have space mining we have antimatter weapons
A far more pertinent question: could one create a *pure* fusion weapn, without the need for fission stages? This would also be a much "cleaner" bomb, without nearly as much long term fallout.
This would be a geopolitical disaster. Such bombs would be more cheaper to produce, since the uranium Core are expensive.
Theoretically are possible to produce Pure fusion bomba, but the Fusion issues due to produce a nuclear ignition precludes their development.
An anti-matter bomb are ever simpler, just Turn off the electromagnetic trap that maintain the deposits of matter and antimatter and boom!
Once the production of anti-matter improves the production of a bomb becomes more a reality.
In fact a single gram anti-matter bomb (that could be launched by a cheap drone) could release the same energy of a Nagasaki nuclear bomb!
The entire analysis is wrong because ur not up to date with anti matter tech. There are at least two startup companies able to manufacture anti matter in a more industrial quantity. They use it for thrusters. But it can be used as easily for weapons.
Well, those people at CERN certainly seem to think this is a worthwhile prospect, and theres a reason they keep pouring billions of dollars into this project. Antimatter energy would be incredibly efficient, bomb or no bomb. So...I'll leave it to them to decide whether or not this is possible.
Determination is a human trait and it's the reason we have the technology we have today that used to be considered science fiction.
Let them keep working, they'll find a way. Probably not in my lifetime though 😢
What if in the early universe matter and anti-matter were in more or less the same ratio. They combined and released massive amounts of energy and heat. This energy then cooled enough to form matter, and a slight skew toward matter rather than anti-matter. The antimatter then combined with the same mass of matter, releasing huge energy and heat. This cooled with a slight skew toward matter. Repeat repeat repeat and the concentration of matter increases. So rather than a big bang, it would be more like a bang and echoes
I think an antimatter bomb would still create a nuclear winter. That has more to do with throwing lots of particulate matter (soot and smoke from the collateral fires caused by the high temperatures, and to some extent dust,) into the air that blots out the sun than to radiation.
Wouldn't it be an antimatter winter if it's nothing to do with a nuclear bomb? The nuclear radiation has nothing to do with the ensuing nuclear winter, it's just that nukes would cause it.
@Conor Beech technically absolutely. However, I have heard of megavolcanoes described as calling a nuclear winter so... finally, is matter antimatter collision not a form of nuclear reaction?
Actually the nuke's mushroom cloud gets dust trapped in the upper atmosphere. This is what causes the nuclear winter, not the radiation.
Similar sized explosions via different means will have the same winter effect minus the radiation.
You forgetting about AI and quantum computers, they could do the work several times faster than all the humans can do together and make it possible.
I think you're overestimating the current capabilities of both AI and quantum computers.
That Phil Collins diss was cold.😂
D'oh! And here I was hoping for a couple of Photon torpedoes to be made in my lifetime! Lol! Great video, Simon! Can't wait for the next one! 😁
Be safe and healthy! LLAP 🖖 😎
Simon's dream of having Danny and the other basement drones build him an arsenal of photon torpedoes were dashed. Only a session of beatings until morale improved could now satiate his disappointment.
I've always wondered with the imbalance at the big bang of matter and antimatter is there a chance there's a galaxy out there thats made from antimatter?
Some scientists definitely have speculated that this is the case. My personal gut feeling is that it would be unlikely, but I'm literally just guessing. While it has been speculated this is possible, I believe that it's the minority opinion among scientists; I'd have to double check on that though.
The answer is 99.999999% no because if 1 existed then multiple antimatter galaxies would have to exist.
And if multiples existed our night sky would be much more ... energetic!
No because there are no annihilation events observed.
The best way to power the containment of an antimatter bomb, would be to feed small amounts of the antimatter into a reactor with equal amounts of regular matter, using the antimatter as fuel. Of course, if the reactor breaks down, it could detonate prematurely, but if it runs out of fuel, and shuts down, you'd be out of antimatter.
Well the thing is curent cnowledge about making antymater and storing it is insoficient as we progres anymater might be easier to make it and store it as well meybe not a bomb but i think they make som reactor in the future to power space ships
You can harvest antimatter in the Van Allen Belts. And there's tons more around gas giants. But it's storing it thats the main problem.
Not enough to power starships or blow up planets.
Gravitational waves can store antimatter.
Love the added graphics on this channel.
BTW, spinach is actually more radioactive than Bananas.
Anti-matter explosions nuclear weapon size would still throw massive amounts of particulates into the atmosphere. So yea, ya still get "nuclear winter". 🤯
or we could rename it to "element Zero" (so badass) and use it to power space magic!
Antimatter catalyzed fusion propulsion...
Geeebus... I'm thinking of how often anti-matter is mentioned in Star Trek.... Weaponry, propulsion, it's a virtual Swiss Army Knife tool in Star Trek.
You'll have this in science fiction.
If I say "you are the Light of my life" or "I can see the Light at the end of the tunnel" or "that certainly shed Light on the subject" am I speaking of visible light? If one looks at the Bible as a collection of ancient metaphors that modern religions have simply misinterpreted, it can allow you to look at it in a new "Light".
Dropped the like for the Phil Collins double entendre.
Thanks!
The fact that there was no clip at all of a Star Trek character saying that they're losing anti-matter containment on a show about scifi tech is inexcusible. lol I want to speak to the manager.
Anti-iron with magnetic capabilities could be placed inside an iron casing with a lead (Pb) outer layer and made into a bullet, the size wouldn't be an issue because just 1/10 of a gram is insanely powerfull
how the hell does this guy have so many channels and put out so much content. been watching him since he started toptenz, always interesting videos
hez trading his hairs for channel ideas^^
In the beginning, there was nothing, and then Simon Whistler said "Let there be UA-cam Channels"
The first 13 seconds is the biggest fictional story ever.
Not to be a religiously inclined pedant. But I'd argue that within the Genesis creation narrative, the first five verses are by far the easiest to reconcile with science, requiring very little if any "interpretation" to do so. Make of that what you will. Though within the framework of a "creatio ex nihilio" narrative (like the one in Genesis), it does make logical sense for "simpler" things to be created first.
It was less that 50 years between discovering radiation and the use of nuclear weapons so 🤷
2:27 - I produce antimatter every day. When I fart, everything that matters is destroyed & the only thing left is the desperate, frantic quest for a single breath of fresh air.
Lol ! Simon in the 'strangeness' column....cheers RIP Calculon
Yes you get very efficient matter-energy conversion in matter-antimatter annihilation... but you also have to put *IN* that energy to create the antimatter in the first place and THAT reaction is at best 50% efficient as you are creating 50% matter and 50% antimatter out of energy so as a power source? No. Not unless you could mine it from idk an antimatter asteroid?
You have to manufacture it without a particle accelerator.
Q balls can convert matter into antimatter.
I read a theary a few years ago that I liked. If antimatter is the exact opposite of normal matter, why couldn't it be moving the opposite way through time (at least under certain circumstance)? Imagine if the Big Bang did produce an equal amount of antimatter, that has been expanding in the opposite direction in time. So there's an anti-universe that's getting further and further away from us in time and is now about 30bn years ago. It didn't become a mainstream theory, but it's cool to imagine it's true.
On the note of bombs not going bang until you want then to, the Nazis accidentally created a substance that become known as Devil's Pi**. It was so reactive on contact with anything that it would have made an almost nuke level bomb or a more powerful propellant than rocket fuel. But even they abandoned it because they couldn't safely contain it. NASA later tried, even diluting it, and in one accidental spill it inconsiderated 15ft of concrete. And even the US military won't go anywhere near it. So if we can't even contain regular matter that does something similar, we're probably not going to contain antimatter anytime soon.
But hey, here's hoping that by the time we do, we're mature enough as a species to use it as an energy source and not for weapons. Though even in Star Trek they do. So, hopefully, by then we are at least sensible enough not to wipe ourselves out.
Fascinating🌌
Unless a new and much more effective method of manufacturing and storage of antimatter was discovered and implemented there is no way to use antimatter for anything other than scientific curiosity, let alone weaponizing it. But if there was some discovery that allowed for the mass production and storage of antimatter that's when things could change. Currently there aren't even theories (just a few hypotheses) about how to do this so I don't see it happening in the next century at least.
Yes there are theories on how to do it.
First- x ray binaries- neutron stars and black holes are immensely powerful particle accelerators, and produce billions of metric tons of antimatter per second.
This antimatter - positronium- is stored for millions of years via gravitational waves.
There are 2 ways(engineering problems) to produce antimatter in large amounts
1. Hawking radiation. As a black hole evaporates, it produces equal amounts of matter and antimatter.
2. Q balls. Dark matter that "flips" matter into antimatter.
@@scifirealism5943 when I say there aren't theories about how to do it, I mean for us to do it. It happening in nature doesn't necessarily translate to some way in which we could take advantage of it. It's not like we have any local black holes to work with.
@alistairgrey5089 Well, yeah.
There are engineering problems with creating black holes/collecting dark matter.
I didn't say those methods were technologically practical. Just possible in principle.
I think a weapon based on the neutrino would be an interesting to explore. Imagine if you can make a neutrino interact with "normal" matter at a specific point in time and space? Since a neutrino is effectively transparent to all matter such weapon-beam would be super effective. A low powered broadcast or beam can be used for communications.
Imagine hitting a target on the other side of the globe by pointing your "cannon" through the center of the Earth. Sending signals could be much faster since the signal would not have to travel the perimeter of the Earth. Heck you can send your beam through the Earth and the moon to contact someone on the dark side of the Moon.
You can't make neutrinos react with regular matter. However, you can do it with anti-neutrinos.
If you have two adjustable barrels, one shooting neutrinos and the other - anti-neutrinos, you can make this work
You can make neutrinos interact with matter.
Neutron stars and black holes, and exploding stars produce neutrinos with energies high enough to affect matter as frequently as photons do.
sounds like star trek was right to use anti-matter as fuel.
Yep
Anti-matter reactors would be amazing
the only thing more dangerous than an antimatter weapon is that greenscreen work. Man that was hard to watch. I expect that lever of work on Tiktok, not UA-cam.
Great video as always.
Rarely is an "absolute not" absolute. We don't have the technology now, but we probably will at some point. Whether thats 100 years from now, or 1000, we will probably get there. Advances in other areas of energy and physics will happen and open the door. Only took 66 years to get from the first Wright Brothers flight to man walking on the moon. And we went from the first vacuum tube in 1904 to the 2 nanometer MOSFET in 120 years.
And I know those are not an perfect comparisons, predictions of technically advancements are usually very wrong, either overestimating or underestimating.
Indeed, the fact we can make antimatter and contain it means 1 day we will be able to weaponize it. Process always get more efficient smaller and cheaper over time.
@@TheLiamis Right. And never underestimate mans desire to destroy on a mass scale.
Is this a repeat like all the other channels? No? Cool.
I like when the different channels cover a similar topic
1, it means Simon and crew can make more content more quickly
2, it's like a multi perspective deep dive on the same topic
3, I'm not paying for this shit, so I'm happy with what I get.
@@KawaiiKasai no I meant because two of his other channels reuploaded videos that they had already uploaded like yesterday and the day before.
@@ZeroKage69 One was a screw up. The other looks like self-censorship via TOS.
@@KawaiiKasai It very, very rarely means 1. While some topics may come up on multiple channels, I think it is very rare to actually be written by the same person.
Simon out chea calling out Phil Collins like he owes him money. Way to go, factboi!
9x)
I'm wager that Simon doesn't know Phil Collins was in Genesis or possibly even that Genesis was a band, but glad you liked the joke
1 particle per cubic meter is really tiny, Simon. Do you know how many there are in a mole of hydrogen? 1.008 grams of hydrogen? (Hydrogen as it's the most common)
And how large is the storage unit? We're talking about "usable" amounts of anti-matter, which is going to start taking up space. And if the storage unit is in orbit, it's moving through quite a lot of cubic meters. Only 1 particle needs to make contact with the anti-matter for the whole thing to explode
Yes 1 particle per cubic meter is very tiny, but it's still not a true vacuum. It's enough particles that if you traveled at close to light speed you would receive a lethal dose of radiation from these particles in under a second.
@@ThatWriterKevin yes but light speed is very, very large. The point moreso was to store antimatter in space. if you put it in a high orbit, I reckon it's still many times more stable than low radioactive substances. A cubic metre of Thorium would certainly give you more geiger counts than a equivalent mass (but not volume) of antihydrogen in space. Seeing how this is fantasy land we may as well go all out and store it as anti-osmium so it is small, neat and stays in one place.
"Phil Collins did that all by himself".....😂...your humor (humour)...as always......brilliant!!
Cern made 1/2 a gram
It should be banned as it would blow holes in the ozone
I honestly enjoy all your channels, and respect you for the good work and I understand free speech; but "tread softly, but you tread on my dreams". We are all entitled to our own views on religion, and so are you, but I think it would be wiser to stick to your title and not mock some people's 'dreams'; even though they may appear to be 'God deluded'.
I find it odd that god didn’t create the sun and the moon untill the 4th day, but without the sun present, how did we have any ‘days’ at all?
It’s almost as if it’s all just made up 🤔
Thank you Simon, for always sticking with BC and never BCE!
“There’s no way they’re going to exist”
So we’re about 30 years away then? Lovely
"Antimatter would make a great source of power/propulsion." You *have* seen Star Trek, haven't you Simon?
Valid points...for now. the nuclear accelerators used to make antimatter on earth are very expensive as they are very precise tools used to get Nobel prizes in physics :) However, an industrial scale antimatter factory accelerator in space would be optimized for making antimatter and would be able to make it more cheaply. Apparently antimatter particles from the sun and space also get trapped in earth's magnetic field, so that could be harvested in large amounts.
Of course the storage method needs to be absolutely reliable long term or it's all for naught!
Matter somehow produces gravity. So would antimatter produce antigravity? If it does, wouldn't all the antimatter that formed at the beginning of the universe have repelled the normal matter instead of colliding with it? (Though under certain circumstances, such as in a particle accelerator, the surrounding magnetic fields don't allow that to happen, thus causing matter-antimatter explosions. This also could have happened at the very beginning of the Big Bang, until the explosive force separated both kinds of matter enough for the gravity/antigravity effect to keep the matter and antimatter separate). Thus most of the original antimatter in the universe would never have been able to collide with matter, but instead, was repelled by it, forming a anti-gravitational wave front that pulled the antimatter outwards faster than the matter of the universe we see around us.
If this was true, the antimatter, being pushed by the antigravity wave front that would have formed between the two kinds of gravity, would have quickly spread to the outer reaches of the universe. Which is why we don't find galaxies or clusters of galaxies or even just antimatter dust in space, at least as far as we can tell. The continual natural repelling of gravity from the matter that makes up our universe would also cause the universe to keep expanding. Thus doing away with the need to explain the expansion of the universe by inventing dark energy and dark matter.
Antigravity! Instead of the dubious "dark energy" which never seemed right to me. Fascinating....
Antimatter still has mass, not anti-mass, so it should interact with the force of gravity normally. Antimatter isn't magic, it's just oppositely charged. A hydrogen atom is one negatively charged electron rotating around one positively charged proton. An antihydrogen atom would be one positively charged positron rotating around one negatively charged antiproton.
If antimatter had negative gravitational mass. Then it would possess negative inertial mass as well- to conserve the equivalence principle.
This is not the case because antimatter responds normally to magnetic fields.
People know that matter and antimatter annihilate when combined, but usually they seem to assume that means that the matter and antimatter involved just vanishes. This isn't actually what happens. Instead a pretty big chunk of the energy that makes up both matter and antimatter is released, so it would be more accurate to see annihilation as just "matter becoming energy".
Of course, since matter is basically a form of really, really densely packed energy to begin with this isn't at all a stretch, but it does make antimatter the most efficient energy source you can get at unless you can either extract zero point energy or just build black holes to order.
There is a positive (counterclockwise) and negative (clockwise) magnetic-electric interaction (gravity).A positron bomb is a bomb of accumulating action where, under the influence of a magnetic field, the electric field moves clockwise with a centrifugal acceleration of 200 km/ s, which leads to the formation of positrons in a massive amount
11:05 wow, that was some really easy money for rand, how the hell did they get away with literally pulling numbers out of their ass?
That's on the same level as people who claimed world will end in 5-7 years...in the 80ies.
20 years from now:
“Hey Super AI, build me an antimatter bomb.”
Well...
When we find some dilithium crystals we can power our matter/antimatter reactors. After that the galaxy is the limit.
Gravitational waves.
Simon has rewritten Creation as part of his Holy Grail of Dome o graphics.
2:20 - Chapter 1 - How dangerous is antimatter
6:10 - Chapter 2 - Absolutely not
10:00 - Wrap up
Why do you think the biggest worry on the Enterprise is the mater/anti-matter reactor confinement field ? WHY ?! 😅😂
If anti-matter bombs existed, they would be sabotaged. Blowing up your enemies anti-matter stores would be devastating to them and save you a lot of development costs trying to keep up with them.
kinda cool seeing the NCR ranger outfit
Well first we'd need an inexpensive way to create and safety store large quantities of antimatter.
Hawking radiation and Q balls can produce antimatter.
Gravitational waves can store it.
"Let there be drums.... and there were drums....
Let there be guitars.... and there were guitars..
LET THERE BE ROCK!!!!"
Simon, how about enlightening us all on the fact the African continent is splitting in two and creating a new ocean?
Would love to see this on one of your numerous channels...
Apologies, my comment about "no nuclear winter" was oversimplified and not completely accurate. But the much more important point is bananas:
For all of you asking to weaponize bananas, I implore you to go play Soraka in League of Legends.
Well... Back to the drawing board....
If more people had the slightest understanding quantum physics, or primarily how nuclear Power plants function. That would not be acres upon acres of land covered in solar panels. Allowing any country to produce more than enough power then what they need! Using any other source if they want it to.
I think it's amazing every first world country, trying to eliminate emissions Setting a date, meanwhile trying to tell third world country that they must go from what is equivalent to every first world country 150 years ago, straight to clean energy!
Remember when Germany what is a country going all green, because the circumstances “& freezing to death” because they were delusional & relied on another country for something that they could've prevented.. what seemed like over night, they went back to coal!
Even in 2023, people are still scared of what they do not understand!
Country announces that they're going to build a nuclear power plant!
The people immediately think of two things.
1= it go boom!
2= Chernobyl or 3 mile island!
Even though it's by far the best option, Believe it or not I bet it's safer than ever!
Especially if the requirement for building a new power plant, the design is placed into the hands of those who specialize in it. With all of the disasters “corrupt miss handling” implementing a safe power plant design with multiple redundant systems!
I'm stopping, it really doesn't matter what I say. When those in power are faced with efficiency over money. Money always wins!
Sadly, one day improving the cost of producing anti-matter is much like improving the cost of fusion energy. Both can and likely will be used to make even deadlier weapons of mass destruction. People tend to forget that Lawrence Livermore is a nuclear weapon research and development laboratory.
With the music in this episode I thought I'd opened Hotline Miami in the background.
1 quadrillion dollar is allot of youtube ad money, I wonder how long that commercial would need to be
6:13 Funny coincidence: I just got an ad to join the bomb unit of the National Guard
Couple of contradictory points.
First off, you'd still get a "nuclear winter", since what causes a nuclear winter is the material lifted into the atmosphere attenuating sunlight, the only reason it's called a "nuclear" winter is that the only two things currently capable of ejecting so much material is nuclear bombs and meteorites.
Second, there is no guarantee that there would be no radiactive fallout. Yes, there is no radioactive material to eject into the atmosphere that wouldl rain back down as silent death. However the sheer amount of energy produced in such high density could cause a shower of freshly created subatomic particles pulled into existence from the quantum foam that could transmutate matter into radioactive isotopes. Not likely but it wouldn't exactly take anybody with a basic understanding of quantum mechanics by surprise either.