Could antimatter potentially be used as a fuel source in the

>>8961463
Alright, just trying to ballpark it here, if anyone is more knowledgable about this topic than me feel free to make corrections.
A proton and antiproton each have a mass of around 1.67x10-27 kg. The total energy of a particle with rest mass m moving at velocity v is E=γmc2, where γ is the fraction 1/[1-(v/c)2 ]. Assuming the particles are nearly at rest (unrealistic, but you can try plugging in a value of v yourself to see how it effects the numerical result, you have each particle contributing an energy of E=mc2 =1.67x10-27 x (3x108 )2 . Evaluating that and multiplying by 2, you get 3.002x10-10 Joules.
Running this through google, it's pretty close to the 1.88 GeV reported by Fermilab. In reality, these protons could be moving very quickly, which would scale this result by the gamma factor mentioned above.
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/questions/antimatter1.html

>>8961463
We don't have any source of it and creating it in a particle accelereator is almost hilariously energy inefficient.
Moreover Antimatter is also basically the most dangerous stuff in the universe. Storing and handling it in any quantity above individual atoms seems like a good way to accidentally nuke an entire area.

>>8961763
>almost
Scratch that. Don't know how it got there. It is hilariously energy inefficient.

>>8961463
It takes more energy to make antimatter than you get by annihilating matter with it. Until you can harvest it from somewhere, it's useless for any non-military purposes.

>>8961801
>build solar array around venus to cool it down in century or so
>it doubles as anti matter production facility to power interplanetary and interstellar rockets
There's no reason why this wont work.

Wasn't there some object somewhere in our galaxy ejecting antimatter? I remember reading about this years ago

>>8961823
antimatter is all around us. potassium emits it constantly.
>>8961763
CERN can't collect the whole antihydrogen atoms it creates. the atoms have too much kinetic energy. though there are smaller accelerators that can collect positrons.

No. It generates too much gamma rays, which pass through pretty much anything.

>>8962079
I was talking about a particular object apparently emitting a large amount of it
But whatever, I already found it, it's the The Great Annihilator

>>8961463
>But could the energy gain created from antimatter outweigh the cost of creating and storing it?
Never.