mnw@trwrba.UUCP (12/17/84)
>We all know that antimatter is a difficult material to handle; contact with >any matter (even gases) produces an, uh, energetic reaction. From >"Obsession": "Imagine--an ounce of antimatter, more powerful than 10 000 >cobalt bombs." Also , we're told that the resulting blast will "rip half >the atmosphere from the planet." Remember that this antimatter was >drained from the warp drive--presumably Enterprise carries much more than >an ounce. (Someone else can argue for the definition of an ounce of >antimatter.) So the reaction of all the antimatter carried by Enterprise >would produce a big bang indeed, if not moderated. > >Now the problem with antimatter is that you can't store it in a reactive >container i.e. a container made of matter; even Teflon coated polyethylene >is out. Fortunately, it is possible to create electromagnetic (and even >gravitational-field) "bottles" which can effectively isolate the antimatter >from contact with any matter. All you need is the FIELD GENERATOR, and a >POWER SUPPLY. > >So now the warp drive is damaged beyond repair, the Klingons are coming, and >you'd like to abandon ship. You'll initiate a sequence of commands that >will effectively destroy your ship--let's say you set off "controlled" >explosions on the bridge, computer center, engineering, etc. These ex- >plosions will disrupt power supplies. But what happens to the antimatter >field-isolation bottles, and the antimatter stored in them?? > > B O O M !! > >Once you destroy your ship, you destroy the only thing that keeps your >matter and antimatter apart. PLEASE don't argue that the field bottle >would survive the self-destuct; electromagnetic bottles are difficult >at best to maintain, and are notorious for their power consumption! And >remember--the field-generating equipment has to be OUTSIDE this force >field, or else! > >One bonus, however; you wouldn't need a distress signal!! > > Cheerfully ruining everyone's day, > > George Raiche > Dept. of Chemistry > Dartmouth > > > "Take great care; the police > are everywhere!" > I know that this has been addressed quite a few times on the net, but here is my two cents worth. First, you could blow up the saucer (bridge) without disrupting the anitmatter in the narcelles. You can separate the saucer from the rest of the ship and proceed using only the impulse engines. So, power would still be available to keep the antimatter from touching any of the matter parts. Otherwise as soon as you separated, the engineering section would blow up and you with it! The actual problem with the destruction sequence was when the ship entered the atmosphere and started breaking up, the anitmatter would have been unleashed and a great explosion should have ensued. Of course this would have destroyed the Klingon ship and the planet! Harve did not handle this quite right. Also, I don't believe that the Enterprise would have been close enough to the planet to fall into it's atmosphere. If I were going to destroy my ship and had to beam down to the planet, I would definitely have the ship pointed away from the planet! Any other thoughts out there? "Live Long and Prosper!" Michael N. Washington TRW E&DS Redondo Beach, Ca. 90278 {ucbvax,decvax,hplabs}!trwrb!trwrba!mnw
mnw@trwrba.UUCP (Michael N. Washington) (01/08/85)
>Hmm... Perhaps the fabled "dilithium crystals" (described as 'cosmic >spark plugs' or some such nonsense) are the key. Suppose there is a >device that uses dilithium crystals and other assorted stuff in Scotty's >dept. which "transmutes" some form of normal matter into antimatter. >Then there would continually be only a small amount of antimatter actually >aboard the Enterprise at any given time. > >This would explain many things. When the Enterprise destructs, only the >amount of antimatter currently being used (presumably small) would go >FOOM. Also, as the dilithium crystals deteriorated, the ability to >produce antimatter would go down, and thus leave the Enterprise unable >to use its warp engines. When kirk needed a bunch of antimatter to >blow off half a planet's atmosphere, just crank up the converter for a >while and drain off the excess antimatter. > >Presumably, Those In Charge would desire that there be a minimum of >antimatter overhead, to minimize the possible damage in the event of >an accident near an inhabited planet. What do you think? > >derek (These opinions are mine only, not necessarily those of Starfleet > Command) > >"I'm a doctor, not a scriptwriter!" >-- >Derek Zahn @ wisconsin >...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,sfwin,ucbvax,uwm-evax}!uwvax!derek >derek@wisc-rsch.arpa Hmmm... Granted having a small amount of anitmatter aboard at any one time would seem to be a logical thing to do, but there is no evidence that this is the case. Also, the dilithium crystals only channel the power from the matter/anitmatter reactors. Without the crystals, the power of the reactors can only be inefficiently used through other circuits aboard the Enterprise. From the TV series, if the Enterprise were exploded using the destruct sequence, there should be an enormous explosion, probably converting most of the matter to energy (because of the anitmatter). But, Derek's hypothesis is as good as any. Who know's!!! "Live Long and Prosper!" Michael N. Washington TRW E&DS Redondo Beach, Ca. 90278 {ucbvax,decvax,hplabs}!trwrb!trwrba!mnw
cjn@calmasd.UUCP (Cheryl Nemeth) (01/09/85)
Don't forget that the Enterprise, and probably all other ships in the ST universe, use antimatter for their photon torpedoes. If Enterprise gets ambushed (a somewhat common event) then how do you fight? Or is that the reason the Enterprise is continually getting crippled by ships half her size? James Mooore All opinions are my own.