Antimatter rocket

1.1 Pure antimatter rocket: direct use of

reaction products
Antiproton annihilation reactions produce charged and
uncharged pions, in addition to neutrinos and gamma
rays. The charged pions can be channelled by a magnetic
nozzle, producing thrust. This type of antimatter rocket
is a pion rocket or beamed core conguration. It is not
perfectly ecient; energy is lost as the rest mass of the
charged (22.3%) and uncharged pions (14.38%), lost as
the kinetic energy of the uncharged pions (which can't
be deected for thrust), and lost as neutrinos and gamma
rays (see antimatter as fuel).[2]
Positron annihilation has also been proposed for rocketry. Annihilation of positrons produces only gamma
rays. Early proposals for this type of rocket, such as those
developed by Eugen Snger, assumed the use of some
material that could reect gamma rays, used as a light
sail or parabolic shield to derive thrust from the annihilation reaction, but no known form of matter (consisting
of atoms or ions) interacts with gamma rays in a manner that would enable specular reection. The momentum of gamma rays can, however, be partially transferred
to matter by Compton scattering.[3][4] A recent approach
is to utilize an ultra-intense laser capable of generating
positrons when striking a high atomic number target, such
as gold.

A proposed Antimatter Rocket.

An antimatter rocket is a proposed class of rockets that

use antimatter as their power source. There are several
designs that attempt to accomplish this goal. The advantage to this class of rocket is that a large fraction of the rest
mass of a matter/antimatter mixture may be converted to
energy, allowing antimatter rockets to have a far higher
energy density and specic impulse than any other proposed class of rocket.

1.2 Thermal antimatter rocket: heating of

a propellant

Methods

This type of antimatter rocket is termed a thermal antiAntimatter rockets can be divided into three types of ap- matter rocket as the energy or heat from the annihilation
plication: those that directly use the products of antimat- is harnessed to create an exhaust from non-exotic mateter annihilation for propulsion, those that heat a working rial or propellant.
uid or an intermediate material which is then used for The solid core concept uses antiprotons to heat a solid,
propulsion, and those that heat a working uid or an in- high-atomic weight (Z), refractory metal core. Propeltermediate material to generate electricity for some form lant is pumped into the hot core and expanded through a
of electric spacecraft propulsion system. The propul- nozzle to generate thrust. The performance of this consion concepts that employ these mechanisms generally cept is roughly equivalent to that of the nuclear thermal
fall into four categories: solid core, gaseous core, plasma rocket ( Isp ~ 103 sec) due to temperature limitations
core, and beamed core congurations. The alternatives to of the solid. However, the antimatter energy conversion
direct antimatter annihilation propulsion oer the pos- and heating eciencies are typically high due to the short
sibility of feasible vehicles with, in some cases, vastly mean path between collisions with core atoms (eciency
smaller amounts of antimatter but require a lot more mat- e ~ 85%).[1] Several methods for the liquid-propellant
ter propellant.[1] Then there are hybrid solutions using thermal antimatter engine using the gamma rays proantimatter to catalyze ssion/fusion reactions for propul- duced by antiproton or positron annihilation have been
sion.
proposed.[5][6] These methods resemble those proposed
1

2 DIFFICULTIES WITH ANTIMATTER ROCKETS

for nuclear thermal rockets. One proposed method is

to use positron annihilation gamma rays to heat a solid
engine core. Hydrogen gas is ducted through this core,
heated, and expelled from a rocket nozzle. A second
proposed engine type uses positron annihilation within a
solid lead pellet or within compressed xenon gas to produce a cloud of hot gas, which heats a surrounding layer
of gaseous hydrogen. Direct heating of the hydrogen by
gamma rays was considered impractical, due to the diculty of compressing enough of it within an engine of reasonable size to absorb the gamma rays. A third proposed
engine type uses annihilation gamma rays to heat an ablative sail, with the ablated material providing thrust. As
with nuclear thermal rockets, the specic impulse achievable by these methods is limited by materials considerations, typically being in the range of 10002000 seconds.

of fusion fuel, for example deuterium-tritium, or lithium

deuteride. Antiproton annihilation occurs at the surface
of the hemisphere, which ionizes the fuel. These ions heat
the core of the pellet to fusion temperatures.[9]
The antiproton-driven Magnetically Insulated Inertial
Connement Fusion Propulsion (MICF) concept relies on
self-generated magnetic eld which insulates the plasma
from the metallic shell that contains it during the burn.
The lifetime of the plasma was estimated to be two orders of magnitude greater than implosion inertial fusion,
which corresponds to a longer burn time, and hence,
greater gain.[9]

The antimatter-driven P-B11 concept uses antiprotons to

ignite the P-B11 reactions in an MICF scheme. Excessive
radiation losses are a major obstacle to ignition and require modifying the particle density, and plasma temperThe gaseous core system substitutes the low-melting ature to increase the gain. It was concluded that it is enpoint solid with a high temperature gas (i.e. tungsten tirely feasible that this system could achieve I ~105 s.[10]
gas/plasma), thus permitting higher operational temperatures and performance ( Isp ~ 2 103 sec). However, the A dierent approach was envisioned for AIMStar in
longer mean free path for thermalization and absorption which small fusion fuel droplets would be injected into
results in much lower energy conversion eciencies ( e a cloud of antiprotons conned in a very small volume
within a reaction Penning trap. Annihilation takes place
~ 35%).[1]
on the surface of the antiproton cloud, pealing back 0.5%
The plasma core allows the gas to ionize and operate
of the cloud. The power density released is roughly comat even higher eective temperatures. Heat loss is sup- parable to a 1 kJ, 1 ns laser depositing its energy over a
pressed by magnetic connement in the reaction chamber
200 mm ICF target.[11]
and nozzle. Although performance is extremely high ( Isp
~ 104 105 sec), the long mean free path results in very The ICAN-II project employs the antiproton catalyzed
microssion (ACMF) concept which uses pellets with a
low energy utilization ( e ~ 10%)[1]
molar ratio of 9:1 of D-T:U235 for Nuclear pulse propulsion.[12]

1.3

Antimatter power generation

The idea of using antimatter to power an electric space

drive has also been proposed. These proposed designs
are typically similar to those suggested for nuclear electric rockets. Antimatter annihilations are used to directly
or indirectly heat a working uid, as in a nuclear thermal
rocket, but the uid is used to generate electricity, which
is then used to power some form of electric space propulsion system. The resulting system shares many of the
characteristics of other charged particle/electric propulsion proposals (typically high specic impulse and low
thrust).[7][8]

1.4

Catalyzed ssion/fusion or spiked fusion

This is a hybrid approach in which antiprotons are used to

catalyze a ssion/fusion reaction or to spike the propulsion of a Fusion rocket or any similar applications.
The antiproton-driven Inertial connement fusion (ICF)
Rocket concept uses pellets for the D-T reaction. The pellet consists of a hemisphere of ssionable material such as
U235 with a hole through which a pulse of antiprotons and
positrons is injected. It is surrounded by a hemisphere

2 Diculties with antimatter rockets

The chief practical diculties with antimatter rockets are
the problems of creating antimatter and storing it. Creating antimatter requires input of vast amounts of energy, at least equivalent to the rest energy of the created particle/antiparticle pairs, and typically (for antiproton production) tens of thousands to millions of times
more.[13][14] Most storage schemes proposed for interstellar craft require the production of frozen pellets of antihydrogen. This requires cooling of antiprotons, binding to positrons, and capture of the resulting antihydrogen atoms - tasks which have, as of 2010, been performed only for small numbers of individual atoms. Storage of antimatter is typically done by trapping electrically
charged frozen antihydrogen pellets in Penning or Paul
traps. There is no theoretical barrier to these tasks being performed on the scale required to fuel an antimatter
rocket. However, they are expected to be extremely (and
perhaps prohibitively) expensive due to current production abilities being only able to produce small numbers
of atoms, a scale approximately 1023 times smaller than

2.2

Other general issues

needed for a 10-gram trip to Mars.

where c is the speed of light, and Isp is the specic impulse

Generally, the energy from antiproton annihilation is (i.e. Isp =0.69 c ).
deposited over such a large region that it cannot e- The derivative form of the equation is[2]
ciently drive nuclear capsules. Antiproton-induced ssion and self-generated magnetic elds may greatly enhance energy localization and ecient use of annihilation
energy.[15][16]
where Mship is the non-relativistic (rest) mass of the
A secondary problem is the extraction of useful energy or rocket ship, and a is the fraction of the original (on-board)
momentum from the products of antimatter annihilation, propellant mass (non-relativistic) remaining after annihiwhich are primarily in the form of extremely energetic lation (i.e., a =0.22 for the charged pions).
ionizing radiation. The antimatter mechanisms proposed
If it is assumed
to date have for the most part provided plausible mecha- Eq.II cannot be integrated analytically.
2
Isp v
)

(1
vc2 ) then the
that
v

I
,
such
that
(1

sp
c2
nisms for harnessing energy from these annihilation products. The classic Rocket Equation with its wet mass ( resulting equation is
M0 )(with propellant mass fraction) to dry mass ( M1
0
)(with payload) fraction ( M
M1 ), the velocity change ( v
) and specic impulse ( Isp ) no longer holds due to the
mass loses occurring in antimatter annihilation.[2]
Eq.III can be integrated and the integral evaluated for
Another general problem with high powered propulsion
is excess heat or waste heat, and as with antimattermatter annihilation also includes extreme radiation. A
proton-antiproton annihilation propulsion system transforms 38% of the propellant mass into an intense highenergy ux of gamma radiation. The gamma rays and
the high-energy charged pions will cause heating and radiation damage if they are not shielded against. Unlike
neutrons, they will not cause the exposed material to become radioactive by transmutation of the nuclei. The
components needing shielding are the crew, the electronics, the cryogenic tankage, and the magnetic coils for
magnetically assisted rockets. Two types of shielding are
needed: radiation protection and thermal protection (different from Heat shield or thermal insulation).[2][17]
Finally, relativistic considerations have to be taken into
account. As the by products of annihilation move at
relativistic velocities the rest mass changes according to
relativistic mass-energy. For example, the total massenergy content of the neutral pion is converted into gammas, not just its rest mass. It is necessary to use a
Relativistic Rocket Equation that takes into account the
relativistic eects of both the vehicle and propellant exhaust (charged pions) moving near the speed of light.
These two modications to the two Rocket Equations re0
sults in a mass ratio ( M
M1 ) for a given ( v ) and ( Isp ) that
is much higher for a relativistic antimatter rocket than for
either a classical or relativistic conventional rocket.[2]

2.1

Modied relativistic Rocket Equation

The loss of mass specic to antimatter annihilation requires a modication of the relativistic Rocket Equation
given as[18]

M0 and M1 , and initial and nal velocities ( vi = 0 and

vf = v ). The resulting relativistic Rocket Equation
with loss of propellant is[2][18]

2.2 Other general issues

The cosmic background hard radiation will ionize the
rockets hull over time and poses a health threat. Also, gas
plasma interactions may cause space charge. The major
interaction of concern is dierential charging of various
parts of a spacecraft, leading to high electric elds and
arcing between spacecraft components. This can be resolved with well placed plasma contactor. However, there
is no solution yet for when plasma contactors are turned
o to allow maintenance work on the hull. Long term
space ight at interstellar velocities causes erosion of the
rockets hull due to collision with particles, gas, dust and
micrometeorites. At 0.2 c erosion is estimated to be in
the order of about 30 kg/m2 or about 1 cm of aluminum
shielding.[19][20]

3 See also
Nuclear photonic rocket

4 References
[1] Fusion Reactions and Matter-Antimatter Annihilation for
Space Propulsion Claude Deutsch, 13 July 2005
[2] How to Build an Antimatter Rocket for Interstellar Missions: Systems level Considerations in Designing Advanced
Propulsion Technology Vehicles Robert H. Frisbee, AIAA
Paper 2003-4696, July 2023, 2003,

REFERENCES

[3] The Antimatter Photon Drive: A Relativistic Propulsion

System Darrel Smith, Jonathan Webby, AIAA Paper
2001-3231, 2001

[18] Evaluation of Propulsion Options for Interstellar Missions

Robert H. Frisbee, Stephanie D. Leifer, AIAA Paper 983403, July 1315, 1998.

[4] Thermal Analysis of a Tungsten Radiation Shield for

Beamed Core Antimatter Rocketry Jonathan A. Webb

[19] Space Charge NASA science news, April 6, 2011

[5] A Further Analysis About the Liquid-Propellant Thermal

Antimatter Engine Design Concept G. Vulpetti, ActaAstronautica Volume 15, Issue 8, p. 551-555, 1987
[6] Smith, Gerald; Metzger, John; Meyer, Kirby; Thode, Les
(2006-03-07). Positron Propelled and Powered Space
Transport Vehicle for Planetary Missions (PDF). Retrieved 2010-04-21.
[7] Electric Rocket Propulsion: A Background Jerry M. Seitzman, 2003-2004
[8] High Specic Impulse Superuid and Nanotube Propulsion
Device, System and Propulsion Method Michael Wallace,
Joseph D. Nix, Christopher W. Smith, 2014
[9] Antiproton Driven Magnetically Insulated Inertial Connement Fusion (Micf) Propulsion System Terry Kammash,
NIAC 98-02 Final Report, 1998
[10] Antimatter Driven P-B11 Fusion Propulsion System Terry
Kammash, James Martin, Thomas Godfroy, September
30, 2002
[11] Lewis, Raymond A; Meyer, Kirby; Smith, Gerald A;
Howe, Steven D. (June 2024, 1999). AIMStar: Antimatter Initiated Microfusion For Pre-cursor Interstellar
Missions (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on
June 16, 2014. Retrieved June 27, 2015.
[12] Antiproton-Catalyzed Microssion/Fusion Propulsion
Systems for Exploration of the Outer Solar System and
Beyond G. Gaidos, R.A. Lewis, G.A. Smith, B. Dundore
and S. Chakrabarti, AIAA Paper 1998-3589, July 1998
[13] Laser Pulse Produces Positrons.
2008-11-18. Retrieved 2008-11-18.

Photonics Media.

[14] Chen, Hui; Wilks, Scott C.; Bonlie, James D.; Liang,
Edison P.; Myatt, Jason Myatt; Price, Dwight F.; D.
Meyerhofer, David D.; Beiersdorfer, Peter (2009).
Relativistic Positron Creation Using Ultraintense
Short Pulse Lasers. Physical Review Letters 102 (10):
Bibcode:2009PhRvL.102j5001C.
105001105004.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.105001.
[15] Solem, J. C. (1991). Prospects for ecient use of annihilation energy. Transactions of Fusion Technology,
Proceedings ICENES 91 Sixth International Conference
on Emerging Nuclear Energy Systems, June 16-21, 1991,
Monterey, CA. (American Nuclear Society) 20: 1040
1045.
[16] Augenstein, B. W.; Solem, J. C. (1990). Antiproton initiated fusion for spacecraft propulsion. Report ND-3555SDI (The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA).
[17] Antiproton Annihilation Propulsion R. L. Forward,
September 1985

[20] There and Back Again: A Laymans Guide to UltraReliability for Interstellar Missions Henry Garrett, 30 July
2012

Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

5.1

Text

Antimatter rocket Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_rocket?oldid=725976009 Contributors: Bryan Derksen, Heron, GMan, Quux, Finlay McWalter, Hadal, Akadruid, Eequor, VoX, Rich Farmbrough, Cacycle, Arthena, Pauli133, Oleg Alexandrov, Itinerant,
Christopher Thomas, Bubba73, Ewlyahoocom, Bgwhite, Wjfox2005, Arado, Ospalh, E Wing, SmackBot, Reedy, Elminster Aumar, Audriusa, Can't sleep, clown will eat me, JzG, J 1982, Harold f, Headbomb, Astrobiologist, Duckysmokton, ^demonBot2, Trulystand700,
Jasper Deng, Lightbot, Legobot, Yobot, AnomieBOT, Saadzmirza, Prari, FrescoBot, A412, Tom.Reding, MastiBot, Trappist the monk,
Gisegre, DASHBot, John of Reading, Wikipelli, Mattedia, ClueBot NG, Mightyname, ISTB351, Robert the Devil, BattyBot, Szop, Mogism, Jodosma, Ginsuloft, Jack.R.Black, 3primetime3, UareNumber6, Kees08, GoldCar and Anonymous: 46

5.2

Images

File:Antimatter_Rocket.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Antimatter_Rocket.jpg License: Public

domain Contributors: http://mix.msfc.nasa.gov/abstracts.php?p=577 Original artist: NASA/MSFC
File:PositronDiscovery.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/PositronDiscovery.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Anderson, Carl D. (1933). The Positive Electron. Physical Review 43 (6): 491494. DOI:10.1103/PhysRev.43.491.
Original artist: Carl D. Anderson (19051991)
File:Question_book-new.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Question_book-new.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0
Contributors:
Created from scratch in Adobe Illustrator. Based on Image:Question book.png created by User:Equazcion Original artist:
Tkgd2007

5.3

Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0