Could we use antimatter-based propulsion to visit alien worlds?

An artist's depiction of a mission to an exoplanet.
An artist's depiction of a mission to an exoplanet. (Image credit: Naeblys via Getty Images)

Astronomers are finding new exoplanets almost every day, but due to the incredible distances between star systems, space exploration has been limited to our solar system. For example, it is estimated that the Voyager 1 spacecraft, presently traveling away from the sun at 10.7 miles per second (17.3 kilometers per second), would take over 73,000 years to reach Proxima b, the nearest confirmed exoplanet. 

But what if traveling to exoplanets were no longer the purview of science fiction? What if we could actually do it? 

To solve this physics-defying conundrum, scientists would have to turn to propulsion systems that are far more advanced than the chemical rockets we currently employ for our exploration needs. One such proposed technology is antimatter-based propulsion, which, as its name implies, involves using antimatter to power a spacecraft to velocities reaching a few percent of the speed of light

Related: Is interstellar travel really possible?

Antimatter isn't new for physics; its existence was first confirmed in 1932 by Carl Anderson, who discovered positrons, electrons that exhibit a positive charge instead of a negative one. But how important is it to establish antimatter-based propulsion systems to explore beyond our solar system?

"Setting priorities is always a matter of weighing costs and benefits," Gerald Jackson, co-founder and president of Hbar Technologies Inc. and the author of a new paper investigating the idea of using antimatter-based propulsion for exoplanet exploration, told Space.com in an email. "Is antimatter-based propulsion for interstellar travel more important than childhood glioma in the next year? Of course not. In my opinion, there should at least be some small amount of support for long-term technologies that are not needed in the current or next fiscal year. There are many examples of technologies that enjoy low level support, only for society to find that they desperately need it. 

"There are many scenarios where humanity may find that it needs to quickly send spacecraft into interstellar space," he said. "In my opinion antimatter-based propulsion is the best solution for such a need."

Jackson's study focuses primarily on the physics responsible for the propulsion system to work, with an emphasis on nuclear fission; the paper describes an electrostatic nozzle and trap meant to carry out the necessary fission. So when could we expect this antimatter-based propulsion technology to actually be developed? This is a common question but also a common trap, Jackson said. 

"Robert Goddard developed liquid fuel rockets, staging, and gyroscopic guidance systems long before they were needed for manned [sic] exploration of low Earth orbit and the moon," he told Space.com in an email. "If it had not been for World War II and the subsequent Cold War, you could argue that mankind would still have not landed on the moon. In human history, need plays a dominant role in technology development speed. I do not have a good enough crystal ball to give a good answer. Of course, funding levels go hand-in-hand with need."

Jackson referenced attempts to develop the necessary technology to travel to Proxima b. One such attempt was the May 2016 decree by then-U.S. Rep. John Culberson that NASA travel to the Alpha Centauri system by 2069, the 100th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing. But Jackson noted that there is "insufficient time for any prospective technology to be developed sufficiently to meet that optimistic date." He also cited Breakthrough Starshot as another ongoing attempt to send a mission to Proxima b but noted that there's still a long way to go.

"At this moment there is almost no research money dedicated to advanced, deep-space propulsion research," he told Space.com in an email. "Sporadically there are miniature bursts of activity, such as current work resurrecting nuclear propulsion for manned Mars missions and privately funded Starshot. Even the NASA NIAC [Innovative Advanced Concepts] program is spread too thin to provide consistent funding. What is needed is a long-term, steady level of funding that allows a dozen researchers or so to work for decades on a broad array of innovative propulsion concepts."

The antimatter propulsion proposal is described in a paper published in the journal Nuclear Technology

Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Laurence Tognetti
Contributing Writer

Laurence Tognetti is a six-year USAF Veteran and science writer who earned both a BSc and MSc from the School of Earth and Space Exploration at Arizona State University. Laurence is extremely passionate about outer space and science communication, and is the author of “Outer Solar System Moons: Your Personal 3D Journey”. Follow him on Twitter and Instagram @ET_Exists.

  • MiddlePillar
    Admin said:
    Antimatter-based propulsion offers a unique opportunity for missions to exoplanets.

    Could we use antimatter-based propulsion to visit alien worlds? : Read more
    I would like to see an in-depth look at Dr Pais' patents with the US Navy as the assignees particularly the mass reduction device which pertains to superluminal travel .
    Dr Pais’ fantastical patents are for:
    A room temperature semiconductor
    An electro-magnetic Forcefield Generator
    A High Frequency Gravitational Wave Generator
    Craft using an initial Mass Reduction Device ( that one is for FTL or superluminal travel )
    The Navy has warranted two of the four as having a confirmed scientific basis, and two as operational.
    Reply
  • bwana4swahili
    Admin said:
    Antimatter-based propulsion offers a unique opportunity for missions to exoplanets.

    Could we use antimatter-based propulsion to visit alien worlds? : Read more
    Always good to have options!
    Reply
  • methomas
    I believe faster than light travel can be done with antimatter propulsion.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JNB6n_ucOsf_97LOdpWcFooNkMOeDE-e/view?usp=share_link
    Reply
  • bwana4swahili
    methomas said:
    I believe faster than light travel can be done with antimatter propulsion.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JNB6n_ucOsf_97LOdpWcFooNkMOeDE-e/view?usp=share_link
    Pure science fiction for the next few centuries!
    Reply
  • methomas
    bwana4swahili said:
    Pure science fiction for the next few centuries!
    Okay, why ? and not 6 effete words. Use intelligence to explain if you will.
    Reply
  • bwana4swahili
    methomas said:
    Okay, why ? and not 6 effete words. Use intelligence to explain if you will.
    First, it would take a HUGE amount of energy and time to generate even a small amount of antimatter.
    Second, the technology postulated is simply that, i.e.: a great science project with no idea how to undertake even a prototype let alone a usable drive.
    Third, lots of ideas of this type thought up over the years that ultimately ended up in the trash bin.
    Fourth, it is in the realm as perpetual motion and we all know that is impossible.
    Reply
  • billslugg
    FTL travel is not possible for any object with a finite rest mass for one overwhelming reason. The energy requirement would be infinite. Kinetic energy is 1/2 times mass times v squared. As an object goes faster its relativistic mass increases by 1/sqrt(1-(v^2/c^2)). As v squared approaches c, the quantity under the square root sign approaches zero. The reciprocal thus approaches infinity. You cannot get to FTL without going through c.
    You could take all the mass in the universe, convert it into energy, apply that energy to a single electron and it still would not reach c.
    Reply
  • methomas
    bwana4swahili said:
    First, it would take a HUGE amount of energy and time to generate even a small amount of antimatter.
    Second, the technology postulated is simply that, i.e.: a great science project with no idea how to undertake even a prototype let alone a usable drive.
    Third, lots of ideas of this type thought up over the years that ultimately ended up in the trash bin.
    Fourth, it is in the realm as perpetual motion and we all know that is impossible.
    Sorry, I can't see any real science in your explanation just slogans.......
    Reply
  • methomas
    billslugg said:
    FTL travel is not possible for any object with a finite rest mass for one overwhelming reason. The energy requirement would be infinite. Kinetic energy is 1/2 times mass times v squared. As an object goes faster its relativistic mass increases by the reciprocal of the square root of quantity 1 minus quantity v squared over c squared. As v squared approaches c, the quantity under the square root sign approaches zero. The reciprocal thus approaches infinity. You cannot get to FTL without going through c.
    You could take all the mass in the universe, convert it into energy, apply that energy to a single electron and it still would not reach c.
    Please, I understand and studied Einsteins equations. I feel it falls apart in space with 99.99999% with no Matter (mass), therefore, E=MC2 theory doesn't apply.
    Reply
  • billslugg
    If you don't believe in the applicability of Einstein's equations then there is nothing I can do to help you. But just for the record:

    Antimatter is extremely difficult to make. If we take all of the atom colliders over all of history and add up all the antimatter they have made, it would amount to about a microgram.
    In order to send a human rated craft to the nearest star to the Sun within a human lifetime, something on the order of several hundred tons would be required.
    It would take the energy from all the sunlight falling on the Earth over several hundred hears to make enough. And then you would have the problem of storing it. There is not really any way to do that. Even if you put a frozen chunk of it in the best vacuum we can generate, the collision of remnant gasses would generate so much heat it would give off heat faster than we could replenish it.
    One assumption underlying the above analysis is that the craft would travel at 0.1c, the minimum speed needed to reach Proxima Centauri and return within a human lifetime. Going to, say, 0.99c would require around 500 times as much antimatter.
    Reply