From: g_d_pusch_remove_underscores@xnet.com   
      
   Ian Stirling  writes:   
      
   > Gordon D. Pusch  wrote:   
   >> Ian Stirling  writes:   
   >>> Carey Sublette  wrote:   
   >>>>  "Mike Miller"  wrote in message   
   >>>>  news:5dcb47db.0312300621.14d9d8de@posting.google.com...   
   >>>>> Jonathan Griffitts  wrote in message   
   >>>>  news:...   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> I recall reading that a matter/antimatter annihilation reaction would   
   >>>>>> NOT be a catastrophic explosion, because the reaction cross section is   
   >>>    
   >>>>> However, when larger quantities of anti-matter are released in a   
   >>>>> matter-rich environment (where the mass of matter is>> than the mass   
   >>>    
   >>>> Nuclear weapons release most of their energy in a time scale of   
   >>>> under 100 nanoseconds, so this will be slower. But the outside world   
   >    
   >>> Most of the energy isn't seen till tens or even hundreds of milliseconds   
   >>> due to the highly compressed air in front of the fireball obscuring it.   
   >>>   
   >>> I can't find (despite some half an hour websearch) how far 10.6GeV gammas   
   >>> will go in the atmosphere.   
   >>   
   >> Where the heck are you getting "10.6 GeV gammas" from ?!  The majority of   
   >   
   > Apparently pulling them out my ass.   
   > For some reason I thought that the primary output was gamma, with some   
   > neutrinos.   
      
   Even if that _were_ the case, given that the total annihilation energy   
   is only a mere 2 GeV or so per baryon pair, there would still be the   
   small problem of satisfying the conservation of energy... :-/   
      
      
   -- Gordon D. Pusch   
      
   perl -e '$_ = "gdpusch\@NO.xnet.SPAM.com\n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)