Concepts, Problems, & Opportunities for use of Annihilation Energy:

An Annotated Briefing on Near-Term RDT&E to Assess Feasibility

RAND Note N-2302-AF/RC

B. W. Augenstein

EXAMPLE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR ANTIMATTER PRODUCTION

Three Phases -- 20 year program
Phase A
- Basic RDT&E, conceptual designs on production, compact storage issues (YRS. 0-5)
- Content along lines indicated previously
- Go-no go decisions towards end of Phase A
- Cost: $75-125 million
Phase B
- Prototype "mini-factory"
- Demonstrate production, storage at acceptable parameter ranges
- Two overlapping development efforts:
  - P accelerator + adequate targets (YRS. 0-6)
  - Rest of factory system (YRS. 4-8)
- Accelerator to be useful even if no production finally sought (LAMPF II parameters or better):
  - Minimum beam current ~0.1 - 1.0 milliamps, minimum P energy 30-70 GeV
  - Emphasize intense secondary, tertiary beams (muons, neutrinos, kaons, hypernuclei, , etc.)
- production rate goal: 10-100 µg/yr (~2x10¹¹ - 2x10¹² /sec), or better
- Costs: $500-1000 million
Phase C
- Full production factor goal: ~10 mg/yr. or more (YRS. 7-20)
- Initiate if Phase B validates design concepts
- Cost: ~$5-15 billion (depends on l achieved; production levels)
During Each Phase
- Applications concept formulation, design refinement

If any applications of antimatter are to come to fruition, it willbe necessary to resolve basic production and storage issues and to testand develop appropriate production and storage technologies. One way oftackling these problems is by a 3-phase program of the kind suggested onthe chart.

A critical part of Phase A will be discussed shortly (see Slide 23).The proposed Phase B contains one special feature--it treats a criticalelement in a "fail-safe" mode. Namely, we wish to start, concurrentwith initiation of Phase A, a prototype accelerator capable of producinginteresting amounts--much higher in rate (/sec) than is todayavailable, by a factor of perhaps 10² to 10³ -- of antiprotons. Therequired accelerator would have many compelling uses in medium highenergy nuclear physics research. Such uses have been detailed in LAMPFII proposals, and reflect the very interesting physics resulting fromsecondary and tertiary beams producible only from fixed target systems.The proposed accelerator is a not too large upgrade of LAMPF IIparameters. This strategy would result in an enduring dedicated physicstool, even if the outcome of Phase A were to be pessimistic about anantimatter "mini-factory."

At the same time, if the whole "mini-factory" were to besuccessful, a much more confident scaleup by another factor of 10² to10³ to an operationally sized production system would be. possible (Phase C).

Phase A is generally to consider issues approachable with existinglevels of antiproton technology, with emphasis on normal matterexperimental precursors to critical experiments. We would largely focuson problems compatible with handling antiproton productionrates ~ Ł 10⁸/sec,accumulated levels Ł ~ 10¹³,sizing, with a few exceptions,the normal matter experiments accordingly. Other than perhapsintroducing portable/movable traps to make hands-on antiproton researchmore convenient, specific new antiproton production/accumulation facilities would not be mandatory (although desirable -- e.g., a LEAR equivalent or other deceleration/cooling facilities at FNAL).