Question on Hydrogen and magnetism

[Kayra]

Is Hydrogen affected by magnetic fields?

 

I had thought only certain metals (iron, nickle, cobalt, Maganese, Etc) were able to be affected by magnetic fields.

 

If it is not, how is it that they can contain a hydrogen plasma using magnetic fields? :angel:

[Pyrotex]

Is Hydrogen affected by magnetic fields?...If it is not, how is it that they can contain a hydrogen plasma using magnetic fields? :angel:

Because "hydrogen" and "hydrogen plasma" are not the same stuff. :eek2:

 

When you strip off the electrons from hydrogen, you get hydrogen plasma, or just bare naked protons. Protons have an electric charge (+) and will therefore "feel" a rapidly changing magnetic field.

[Kayra]

Because "hydrogen" and "hydrogen plasma" are not the same stuff. :angel:

 

When you strip off the electrons from hydrogen, you get hydrogen plasma, or just bare naked protons. Protons have an electric charge (+) and will therefore "feel" a rapidly changing magnetic field.

 

Makes perfect sense.

 

So a magnetic field cuold basically affect any plasma, regardless of the material makeup of it? And where do those pesky electrons go :eek2:

[Pyrotex]

...So a magnetic field could basically affect any plasma, regardless of the material makeup of it? And where do those pesky electrons go :angel:

Yes. :eek2:

 

Typically, the plasma is a plasma because it is so smuckin' HOT. In this case, the electrons are part of the same plasma, but too hot to reattach to the protons. The magnetic field will affect them very differently than it affects the protons.

 

There are ways to strip out the electrons and make them go elsewhere, but these engineering tricks are not always effective, cheap and easy.

[Kayra]

What if I wanted to accelerate the entire hot mess. Would the same magnetic field work for both electrons and nucleus?

 

Assuming I had a 3.5 Kilometer long spaceship, and wanted to heat some hydrogen up till it Smucks, (I mean turns into plasma, but I like that word) and then accelerator it along the length of this structure using either a particle accelerator or Mass driver.

 

Since the structure is isolated in space, getting rid of the electrons is as important as getting rid of the nucleus.

[Jay-qu]

the same magnetic field with have an opposite affect to the electrons than it does to the protons - because they are oppositly charged.

[Qfwfq]

There are ways to strip out the electrons and make them go elsewhere,

How many of them? :eek2:

[Pyrotex]

What if I wanted to accelerate the entire hot mess. Would the same magnetic field work for both electrons and nucleus?...Since the structure is isolated in space, getting rid of the electrons is as important as getting rid of the nucleus.

Absolutely correct.

Here's how we handle this problem with NASA spacecraft, like Deep Space 1, which was powered by an ion drive (only using a different reaction mass from hydrogen).

 

First, we Smuck (good word!) the reaction mass. In your case, hydrogen. In our case, Xenon. The positive ions, the nuclei, are injected into a linear accellerator and fired out the back, using a combination of electric and magnetic fields.

 

Meanwhile, the electrons are forced into wires having needle sharp tips. These tips cause the electrons to spray outward without having to do any fancy electronics. Not surprisingly, the electrons are sprayed into the plasma exhaust, where they neutralize the plasma as soon as its temperature falls low enough.

[Kayra]

Another question then, although it is not related to the magnetic properties of hydrogen.

 

Assuming the following:

you had a spaceship that was up to 3K long,

had access to a 200 MWH generator (More if required),

no fuel is required to generate the power or heat.

and sufficient radiant energy to turn almost any element into plasma,

 

What would you recommend as the best method of propulsion for interplanetary travel?

 

The ideal system would provide 1 G of acceleration for the entire trip, and would be able to run off of propulsion material that could be found at the destinations. Likely first destination would be asteroid belt.

[Qfwfq]

Meanwhile, the electrons are forced into wires having needle sharp tips. These tips cause the electrons to spray outward without having to do any fancy electronics. Not surprisingly, the electrons are sprayed into the plasma exhaust, where they neutralize the plasma as soon as its temperature falls low enough.

Wasteful of energy! :eek2:

 

I would design it better, if I had the job!

[Kayra]

I get that.

 

I have something in mind for generating the power, and it would require those dimensions. Generating that much power without overheating would (I assume) be an issue normally in space. The only way to get rid of excess heat is radiative.

[Pyrotex]

...you had a spaceship that was up to 3K long,

had access to a 200 MWH generator (More if required),

...sufficient radiant energy to turn almost any element into plasma,

What would you recommend as the best method of propulsion for interplanetary travel?...

Okay, here goes. I'm gonna hafta modify your assumptions to get a decent system.

 

The 200MWH generator IS the source of energy for Smucking your reaction mass (if necessary), AND accellerating it.

 

Simple solution which requires no Smucking: reaction mass (RM) is just powdered whatever you might find on asteroids, pulverized rock and ice. Front end of ship as huge grapples for holding and mining the asteroid, which is about 30 meters in diameter. The "spine" of the ship, which is 3 Km long, is a rail gun using EM fields to accellerate "buckets" full of the RM. First 1.5 Km, they speed up to say 1 Km/sec, release their RM, then slow down to near zero in trailing 1.5K. Buckets circle back to beginning to be reused. Each bucket may hold, say 10 Kg of RM. Assume enough buckets so that there are 100 in accelleration phase at all times. So you are spewing 1000 Kg (one metric ton) of RM per second at exhaust velocity of 1 Km/sec.

 

Note: your ship's accel will NOT be 1G, no matter what solution you take! At these scales of size (3 freakin' Km!) you will be good to get 0.01 G solutions. Which is all you need. At 0.01 G (1 cm/sec/sec) you will achieve 30 Km/sec velocities in just 3 million seconds--about 35 days. That'll get you to almost anything in the solar system in months (Mars) to years (Saturn).

[Pyrotex]

...Generating that much power without overheating would (I assume) be an issue normally in space. The only way to get rid of excess heat is radiative.

Actually, this issue came up on the design of the Space Station. There are two ways: radiating essentially infrared EM radiation (as was chosen) and radiating hot mass, such as steam or CO2.

 

There are two other designs for your ship. One using fusion power (deuterium as fuel, hydrogen as RM). Two: using anti-matter power (~H as fuel, ordinary hydrogen as RM).

 

The fusion solution is being worked but has terrific problems with heat. The plasma must be confined entirely by mag fields for the entire length. The Eiffel-tower-like support structure must hold the humongous magnets which must be supercooled. The graphite/buckytubes/polycarb/whatever building material must ablate to protect the magnets, so you only get a few hundred hours of thrust before everything buckles.

 

The anti-matter solution was verified by Robert Forward, reknown Physicist and pretty good SF writer. At a meeting with Robert, in the home of Jim Oberg, he showed us his engineering analysis he had done for NASA (and other unnamed agencies). You can turn energy into anti-hydrogen (~H) with somewhat <1% efficiency. These factories would be on the Moon (!!!) with its unlimited solar energy and wide open spaces. ~H can be bottled and stored with (relative) safety at 1 Kelvin in magnetic bottles. Extracting a steady flow of ~H in nGrams/sec is doable with lasers. Accellerating the ~H into a reaction chamber with lots of hydrogen will heat the RM to any temperature you can handle, the hotter the better. At T= 5,000 Kelvins, you have a VERY efficient rocket.

 

Conclusion: a really big spaceship with 10% cargo fraction and 75% RM fraction, and just 10 grams of ~H, could go anywhere in the solar system in one year.

[Kayra]

The 200MWH generator IS the source of energy for Smucking your reaction mass (if necessary), AND accellerating it.

 

Nope

Assume heating is seperate, and all the generator output can be used to accelerate mass.

 

Simple solution which requires no Smucking:

 

I was hoping to find a combined method.. something that would create a LARGE amount of plasma, direct it down the spine of the ship, and accelerate it. The main reason for combining is that the system I have in mind has a particularly large amount of heat available to it.

 

reaction mass (RM) is just powdered whatever you might find on asteroids, pulverized rock and ice. Front end of ship as huge grapples for holding and mining the asteroid, which is about 30 meters in diameter. The "spine" of the ship, which is 3 Km long, is a rail gun using EM fields to accellerate "buckets" full of the RM. First 1.5 Km, they speed up to say 1 Km/sec, release their RM, then slow down to near zero in trailing 1.5K. Buckets circle back to beginning to be reused. Each bucket may hold, say 10 Kg of RM. Assume enough buckets so that there are 100 in accelleration phase at all times. So you are spewing 1000 Kg (one metric ton) of RM per second at exhaust velocity of 1 Km/sec.

 

I am assuming you wanted to use aluminum buckets to harness the paramagnetic effect. (Sp)

 

Would the buckets be required if plasma was used? No buckets means double the distance for acceleration. Would the system even be considered a Mass driver, or would it now be called a particle accelerator?

 

Can a Mass/particle accelerator be built out of low mass components, or is the technology inherantly massive?

 

Note: your ship's accel will NOT be 1G, no matter what solution you take! At these scales of size (3 freakin' Km!) you will be good to get 0.01 G solutions. Which is all you need. At 0.01 G (1 cm/sec/sec) you will achieve 30 Km/sec velocities in just 3 million seconds--about 35 days. That'll get you to almost anything in the solar system in months (Mars) to years (Saturn).

 

Darn.

Not good enough.

While the structure is 3KM long, it is particularly light weight (driver and driver mass aside)

I was really looking for something that would give me at least .1 G as a bare minimum, .5 as dream, and 1g as a wet dream. I guess that will be completely dependant on the mass of the system (including driver mass)

[Kayra]

Actually, this issue came up on the design of the Space Station. There are two ways: radiating essentially infrared EM radiation (as was chosen) and radiating hot mass, such as steam or CO2.

 

There are two other designs for your ship. One using fusion power (deuterium as fuel, hydrogen as RM). Two: using anti-matter power (~H as fuel, ordinary hydrogen as RM).

 

Wouldn't either of those solutions create significant heat in the ship itself?

[Pyrotex]

Nope

Assume heating is seperate, and all the generator output can be used to accelerate mass...the system I have in mind has a particularly large amount of heat available to it....No buckets means double the distance for acceleration. ...Can a Mass/particle accelerator be built out of low mass components, or is the technology inherantly massive?

Okay, you intend to use solar heating for your plasma. Or the fires of Hades. :eek2: That'll work.

 

Yes, plasma requires no buckets, just magnets. Lots and lots of them. Supercooled. Big, honkin, heavy magnets. The tech is inherently massive.

 

Of course, you can always use that esteemed SF technique of making your magnets out of "unobtanium". Say, extremely dense, room-temperature superconducting neutronium/ceramic field magnets. No batteries required! The circuitry for varying the mag field under varying loads could be built directly into the material at the atomic level using massively distributed quantum computers! On weekends, one of these babies could double as a microwave oven!! :eek2:

[Pyrotex]

...Wouldn't either of those solutions create significant heat in the ship itself?

Absolutely!! Fusion and anti-matter reactions kick out massive amounts of high-energy particles such as Protons and Helium nuclei, as well as Gamma radiation that would fry an egg at a 100 meters, plus X-ray, UV, visible, Infrared, Microwave, you name it!!!

 

To obtain propulsion, you must channel as many of the charged particles as you can in ONE direction. Say, you get 50% to go colinear out the rear; the rest scatter in all directions or impinge on the reactor engines themselves. The latter (and all the EM rad) create heat in everything they hit.

 

One design for a fusion propulsion system had the whole engine be an open lattice of carbon supermaterial. Only a few % of rad would hit the system, the rest simply went out through the openings. When "lit", such a fusion engine would (from miles away) look like staring at the filament of an incandescent light bulb inches from your face. :eek2:

 

The habitation section would have to be shielded from either kind of propulsion system, say by a large water tank.