Particle Beams

[orion1836]

Just noticed Spacedock did an episode on particle beams. Worth the watch!

[G. Janssen]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh-My-God_particle
When I came across this years ago, I spat my coffee back in the cup. 51 joules for a single particle. Try to imagine it: a single, minute particle like a proton having this amount of energy.

Kinetic energy = 1/2 * mass * speed^2
If the mass is one kilogram, then 51J = 1/2 * 1 * 10.1^2
This single proton would hit with the same energy a one kilogram iron weight would hit if it had a speed of 10.1 meters/second or 36.4 km/hr. Except that all of the particle's energy is concentrated in a single point.

Imagine a beam of these things. It would slice through anything.

Also imagine the size and power consumption of the beam generator/accelerator and the energy bill.

[Demarquis]

That is fascinating. A little context: "The Oh-My-God particle was an ultra-high-energy cosmic ray detected on 15 October 1991 by the Fly's Eye camera in Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, U.S. It is the highest-energy cosmic ray ever observed."

But I'm wondering how much energy such weapons require.

[Arioch]

Such weapons will require a lot of power, but the actual mass of the beam is fairly small, so I think the power requirements of the weapons will pale in comparison next to the power requirements of the drives, if they can push a massive starship at high accelerations.

[Bamax]

Such weapons will require a lot of power, but the noactual mass of the beam is fairly small, so I think the power requirements of the weapons will pale in comparison next to the power requirements of the drives, if they can push a massive starship at high accelerations.

A possible power source for the beams is... once again Taimat.... or a derivative of it

Kind of like a liquid fuel you can dump an overwhelming amount of energy into without heating or compressing it... which coincidentally would give it excellent heat sink properties as well. That way when you discharge it as a particle beam the waste heat won't be an issue... since the fuel source itself has waaay more energy than the waste heat anf absorbs thermal energy to a certain limit with no effect anyway.

The only downside is that your handy dandy particle beam pistol has enough energy in it to be a potential bomb... so if your pistol is hit bad enough to burn through it's fuel supply... you and your immediare surroundings are going up in flames.

The obvious saftey guard is to make pistols as heat resistant as possible... maybe even ablative.

Chemical lasers are more powerful and efficient per power supply mass than electric lasers... which requitre a big powerplant or antimatter to do as well. Yet you only have a limited number of shots before you run out since chemical does run out.... but electric won't so long you have power.

Obviously Taimat inverts this, since it is a chemical with energy levels on par with antimatter and safer properties too. You can still run out of shots..but it will be a while before you ever have to reload your fuel supply unlike normal ammo guns.

[G. Janssen]

Such weapons will require a lot of power, but the actual mass of the beam is fairly small, so I think the power requirements of the weapons will pale in comparison next to the power requirements of the drives, if they can push a massive starship at high accelerations.

The figures are absolutely mindboggling and once again, the OMG particle lives up to its name.

I looked up a few numbers from the CERN site.
The total CERN energy consumption is 1.3 TWh per year. The total electrical energy production in the world is around 20,000 TWh.
The EU produces about 3,400 TWh per year.

At peak consumption, usually from May to mid-December, CERN uses about 200 megawatts (1 Watt = 1 joule per second) of power, which is about a third of the amount of energy used to feed the nearby city of Geneva (627,000 inhabitants) in Switzerland. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) runs during this period of the year, using the power to accelerate protons to nearly the speed of light.

So, the LHC uses about a third of the power needed to power a city with 627,000 inhabitants to accelerate its particles while it accelerates them. If it takes CERN one hour to accomplish that, CERN uses the power to power one third of Geneva for one hour.

Wikipedia says that the energy of the OMG particle was some 40 million times that of the highest-energy protons that have been produced in any terrestrial particle accelerator.

I'm only an Oompa Loompa of science, but seeing that it's only possible to get an amount of energy out of a system after at least putting that amount in first in one form or another, doesn't that mean that the amount of energy needed to produce an LHC sized particle beam that consists of OMG particles, is enough to power 40,000,000 / 3 = 13,333,333 cities the size of Geneva while those particles accelerate?

That's power for 13,333,333 * 627,000 = 8.36*10^12 city folks. That's 1,045 times the current world population if everyone would live in a city like Geneva.

That's a lot of Starbucks lattes. And a lot of cuckoo clocks.

I think that it's safe to say that particle beams that consist of OMG particles are out of the question, unless fired from a Deathstar.

Unless I made a mistake.

Let's do starships next.

From some university site: to calculate acceleration from joules of energy, multiply the energy by 2, divide by the mass, square this result, then divide by the time. Finally, take the square root of this result.

A=SQRT((2∗E/m)^2/t)
Where A is the Joules to Acceleration (m/s^2)
E is the joules of energy (Joules)
m is the mass (kg)
t is the time (s)

Tempest data from the Insider page: 1,200,000,000 kilograms, 30G max acceleration.

Lets accelerate her for a single second at 30G and calculate the energy it would take.

9.81*30=SQRT((2*E/1,200,000,000)^2/1)
294.3=SQRT((2*E/1,200,000,000)^2)
Cross out square root against power of two
294.3=2*E/1,200,000,000
294.3*1,200,000,000=2*E
E=(294.3*1,200,000,000)/2
E=1.766*10^11 joule per second.

Joules to Watts: Watts are defined as 1 Watt = 1 Joule per second (don't you just love Metric?)

This means that Tempest uses 1.766*10^11 / 600*10^6 = 294.3 times the power that the city of Geneva uses to accelerate at 30G.

Or, expressed in power used by city folks, 294.3 * 627,000 = 184,526,100 Uber Eats users would use this amount of power.

[Bamax]

That is the power of taimat. Lots of energy for relatively (given the energy return even large tanks would be small) small amounts of liquid mass.

[Bamax]

Such weapons will require a lot of power, but the actual mass of the beam is fairly small, so I think the power requirements of the weapons will pale in comparison next to the power requirements of the drives, if they can push a massive starship at high accelerations.

The figures are absolutely mindboggling and once again, the OMG particle lives up to its name.

I looked up a few numbers from the CERN site.
The total CERN energy consumption is 1.3 TWh per year. The total electrical energy production in the world is around 20,000 TWh.
The EU produces about 3,400 TWh per year.

At peak consumption, usually from May to mid-December, CERN uses about 200 megawatts (1 Watt = 1 joule per second) of power, which is about a third of the amount of energy used to feed the nearby city of Geneva (627,000 inhabitants) in Switzerland. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) runs during this period of the year, using the power to accelerate protons to nearly the speed of light.

So, the LHC uses about a third of the power needed to power a city with 627,000 inhabitants to accelerate its particles while it accelerates them. If it takes CERN one hour to accomplish that, CERN uses the power to power one third of Geneva for one hour.

Wikipedia says that the energy of the OMG particle was some 40 million times that of the highest-energy protons that have been produced in any terrestrial particle accelerator.

I'm only an Oompa Loompa of science, but seeing that it's only possible to get an amount of energy out of a system after at least putting that amount in first in one form or another, doesn't that mean that the amount of energy needed to produce an LHC sized particle beam that consists of OMG particles, is enough to power 40,000,000 / 3 = 13,333,333 cities the size of Geneva while those particles accelerate?

That's power for 13,333,333 * 627,000 = 8.36*10^12 city folks. That's 1,045 times the current world population if everyone would live in a city like Geneva.

That's a lot of Starbucks lattes. And a lot of cuckoo clocks.

I think that it's safe to say that particle beams that consist of OMG particles are out of the question, unless fired from a Deathstar.

Unless I made a mistake.

Let's do starships next.

From some university site: to calculate acceleration from joules of energy, multiply the energy by 2, divide by the mass, square this result, then divide by the time. Finally, take the square root of this result.

A=SQRT((2∗E/m)^2/t)
Where A is the Joules to Acceleration (m/s^2)
E is the joules of energy (Joules)
m is the mass (kg)
t is the time (s)

Tempest data from the Insider page: 1,200,000,000 kilograms, 30G max acceleration.

Lets accelerate her for a single second at 30G and calculate the energy it would take.

9.81*30=SQRT((2*E/1,200,000,000)^2/1)
294.3=SQRT((2*E/1,200,000,000)^2)
Cross out square root against power of two
294.3=2*E/1,200,000,000
294.3*1,200,000,000=2*E
E=(294.3*1,200,000,000)/2
E=1.766*10^11 joule per second.

Joules to Watts: Watts are defined as 1 Watt = 1 Joule per second (don't you just love Metric?)

This means that Tempest uses 1.766*10^11 / 600*10^6 = 294.3 times the power that the city of Geneva uses to accelerate at 30G.

Or, expressed in power used by city folks, 294.3 * 627,000 = 184,526,100 Uber Eats users would use this amount of power.

Nice calculations... but there is more.

The Tempest... like other Loroi warships... and she is an older model, can do 30g for 100 hours before exhausting their fuel supply.

So that is ultimately more energy than I reckon some ENTIRE countries produce in a year lol.


It is safe to say that Loroi do not really worry about charging their devices... since high enough usage to drain their power would likely take longer than normal day to day or week to week use.

A loroi Ipad could probably go over a month on a single charge assuming you used it nonstop.

Probably also powered by taimat lol.

Exploding panels from star trek anyone?

Loroi tech is based on explodium.

[G. Janssen]

Nice calculations... but there is more.

The Tempest... like other Loroi warships... and she is an older model, can do 30g for 100 hours before exhausting their fuel supply.

So that is ultimately more energy than I reckon some ENTIRE countries produce in a year lol.


It is safe to say that Loroi do not really worry about charging their devices... since high enough usage to drain their power would likely take longer than normal day to day or week to week use.

A loroi Ipad could probably go over a month on a single charge assuming you used it nonstop.

Probably also powered by taimat lol.

Exploding panels from star trek anyone?

Loroi tech is based on explodium.

Indeed. One should never bring math into science fiction. In fact, it should be written "science FICTION". I made that mistake with the railguns on my stealth ships.
Besides, I don't get the formula I used. Energy = mass * acceleration. That would give 1,200,000,000 * 294.3 = 3.5316*10^11 joules. That's double the amount. So why does the formula that I used divide that amount by 2? I found an online calculator that also uses it and it gives the answer that I got after I entered the numbers. https://calculator.academy/joules-to-ac ... #f1p0|f2p0

Is there a scientist in the audience? Why does the formula that calculates energy from mass and acceleration return twice the amount of energy that's needed in the formula that calculates acceleration from mass and energy?

[Demarquis]

"Such weapons will require a lot of power, but the actual mass of the beam is fairly small, so I think the power requirements of the weapons will pale in comparison next to the power requirements of the drives, if they can push a massive starship at high accelerations."

Don't forget, however, that the beam of particles is moving *very fast* compared to the starship. Even at 30g's, it will take quite a long time to get to near lightspeed, compared to the beam (ie, no time at all).

[Arioch]

Indeed. One should never bring math into science fiction. In fact, it should be written "science FICTION". I made that mistake with the railguns on my stealth ships.
Besides, I don't get the formula I used. Energy = mass * acceleration. That would give 1,200,000,000 * 294.3 = 3.5316*10^11 joules. That's double the amount. So why does the formula that I used divide that amount by 2? I found an online calculator that also uses it and it gives the answer that I got after I entered the numbers. https://calculator.academy/joules-to-ac ... #f1p0|f2p0

Is there a scientist in the audience? Why does the formula that calculates energy from mass and acceleration return twice the amount of energy that's needed in the formula that calculates acceleration from mass and energy?

That's because you're using the wrong units in these equations.

F=ma | Force = Mass * Acceleration, where force is measured in kg⋅m/s² (Newtons)
KE=½mv² | Kinetic Energy = ½ Mass * Velocity squared, where energy is measured in kg⋅m²/s² (joules, or Newton-meters)

Energy and Force are not the same thing, and Acceleration is not Velocity squared (it's velocity/time).

[avatar576]

Nice calculations... but there is more.

The Tempest... like other Loroi warships... and she is an older model, can do 30g for 100 hours before exhausting their fuel supply.

So that is ultimately more energy than I reckon some ENTIRE countries produce in a year lol.


It is safe to say that Loroi do not really worry about charging their devices... since high enough usage to drain their power would likely take longer than normal day to day or week to week use.

A loroi Ipad could probably go over a month on a single charge assuming you used it nonstop.

Probably also powered by taimat lol.

Exploding panels from star trek anyone?

Loroi tech is based on explodium.

Indeed. One should never bring math into science fiction. In fact, it should be written "science FICTION". I made that mistake with the railguns on my stealth ships.
Besides, I don't get the formula I used. Energy = mass * acceleration. That would give 1,200,000,000 * 294.3 = 3.5316*10^11 joules. That's double the amount. So why does the formula that I used divide that amount by 2? I found an online calculator that also uses it and it gives the answer that I got after I entered the numbers. https://calculator.academy/joules-to-ac ... #f1p0|f2p0

Is there a scientist in the audience? Why does the formula that calculates energy from mass and acceleration return twice the amount of energy that's needed in the formula that calculates acceleration from mass and energy?

It's been a long time since high school physics and engineering school, but I don't think that math is quite correct. Looking at the formula they use to calculate acceleration on the page you cited, I come up with dimensions of m/s after a dimension check (a method I learned way back in e-school to check if your work and derivations make sense). Acceleration should be given in m/s^2. So let me try my own derivation. I've been sorely sleep deprived since Halloween, so I feel about the way I normally did back in e-school. Means I might actually get this right, but don't bet your life on it .

The formula for kinetic energy is:

KE = 1/2mv^2

where KE = Kinetic Energy, m = mass, and v = velocity. Energy is given in units of kg m^2/s^2, or joules. This equation is the indefinite integral with respect to time of Newton's second law:

F = ma

where F = force, m = mass, and a = acceleration. Force is given in units of kg m/s^2, or Newtons.
If you want to find the total energy required to accelerate the ship at 30 g for one second, you must find the change in kinetic energy over that time. When a force is applied to a mass to accelerate it, "work" is done on the mass, and that's the number we're looking for. The formula for work is simply:

W = Fd

where W = work, F = force, and d = distance. Work is given units of Newton-meters, which, if you are keeping up with your dimension analysis, is kg m^2/s^2 -- also known as joules. Work can also be defined as the change in kinetic energy. So,

ΔKE = 1/2m(v2^2 - v1^2)

where v1 and v2 are the initial and final velocities, respectively. For simplicity's sake, we can assume that the ship is starting from rest. Even though it may not be at rest, we're only looking for the additional kinetic energy added by one second of 30g acceleration. So,

W = ΔKE = 1/2m(v2^2)

We know the mass (1,200,000,000 kg). Velocity is acceleration times time, which is one second. So it will be 9.8 * 30 = 294m/s. Plugging all this into the above equation yields:

51.8616 TJ, or 51.8616 x 10^12 J

And as already noted, 1 W = 1 J/s, so my math indicates that one second of 30g acceleration requires about three times the entire power output generated on Earth (about 17 TW)

For a sanity check, I will calculate the work done using the force times displacement method.

W = Fd = m*a*d (<--- My sanity check is "mad". *giggle*)

d = 1/2(v2)t

The velocity after one second of 30g acceleration is 294m/s. So:

W = (1.2x10^9)(294)(147) = 51.8616 TJ

Now, here is where the one half comes in that you asked about. Since acceleration is constant in this case, it means that a graphical representation of velocity as a function of time will be linear with an upward slope (velocity is increasing at a constant rate). To calculate the distance traveled over a given time frame, we calculate the definite integral of the velocity function from t0 to t1. That's a fancy way of saying "calculate the area under the curve along the x-axis." That area is triangular. The area of a triangle is 1/2(base)*(height); the same formula above for d.

[avatar576]

dat math stuff...

To bring my analysis in line with the OP, if you were to use the full power output of the drive to accelerate a single proton from rest...

...it would theoretically be traveling over 800 billion times the speed of light! So Arioch's presumption seems to be on the level: Even accounting for inefficiencies, it would only require a tiny fraction of the drive's power output to accelerate a beam of protons to near light-speed.

[G. Janssen]

That's because you're using the wrong units in these equations.

F=ma | Force = Mass * Acceleration, where force is measured in kg⋅m/s² (Newtons)

F=ma
Yes. Newton's second law.
And I wrote E=ma...
OMFG. I really did that, didn't I? Please let me buy you a ticket to the Canaries so you can hit me on the head with a paper fan.

KE=½mv² | Kinetic Energy = ½ Mass * Velocity squared, where energy is measured in kg⋅m²/s² (joules, or Newton-meters)

Yes, I know. But the first formula I used uses acceleration. A has m/s^2 as its unit. That's acceleration.

A=SQRT((2∗E/m)^2/t)
Where A is the Joules to Acceleration (m/s^2)
E is the joules of energy (Joules)
m is the mass (kg)
t is the time (s)

If I restrict acceleration to one second I'm able to get E from A with little efford.

A=SQRT((2∗E/m)^2/1)
A=SQRT(2∗E/m)^2
A=2∗E/m
A/2*m=E
E=1/2Am

Ek=1/2mv^2
This would mean that the energy from velocity^2 equals the energy from accelera... urgh. Then what is that bullshit formula doing on a university site?

Energy and Force are not the same thing,

Let's not mention that anymore.

and Acceleration is not Velocity squared (it's velocity/time).

Forget the ticket. I'm gonna jump of a cliff.

[G. Janssen]

It's been a long time since high school physics and engineering school, but I don't think that math is quite correct. Looking at the formula they use to calculate acceleration on the page you cited, I come up with dimensions of m/s after a dimension check (a method I learned way back in e-school to check if your work and derivations make sense).

Ouch. I felt that.

Acceleration should be given in m/s^2.

It was. I trusted it to be correct.

W = (1.2x10^9)(294)(147) = 51.8616 TJ
And as already noted, 1 W = 1 J/s, so my math indicates that one second of 30g acceleration requires about three times the entire power output generated on Earth (about 17 TW)

Were going to be stuck on this planet forever, aren't we?

[G. Janssen]

Oh man, I really got to stop drinking during the holiday season. Or more so I'm too drunk to type stuff.

[Demarquis]

"Were going to be stuck on this planet forever, aren't we?"

Nah, we're going to get a operational SpaceX Starship eventually.