Light bulb in space

[statesmanjeff]

If you were to switch on a bulb in your house that did not have the glass around it containing the vacume it would blow straight away.
What would happen if you were to switch on the same bulb if it were in space?
Would it blow straight away or would space vacume and lack of oxygen keep it from blowing?
Something that came up at work today.........

[Mysterex]

An incandescent light bulb contains a thin wire filament (usually tungsten) that glows hot when an electric current is run through it. In the presence of oxygen, the filament would burn up as a result of the high temperature. A glass bulb, then, is used to keep oxygen away from the filament.

While a vacuum will work, any inert gas that inhibits combustion will also work. Since the vacuum of space would have no oxygen, a bare filament WOULD work as a light bulb without the glass globe.

By the way, even without oxygen present a filament eventually deteriorates as its atoms dissipate. The presence of a halogen gas actually inhibits this deterioration, allowing higher filament temperatures and brighter light bulbs. So the glass globe can also help enhance a bulb's capability.

[trash]

Err... I was going to say something, but Mysterex pretty much nailed it with the article.

Yes, it would work in space just fine. Though the filament would slowly evaporate over time. Actually a little faster than a light bulb would without argon.

The vapour pressure of the metal ions floating around will help reduce the filament evaporating. Normally Argon gas is used to do this in a light bulb.
Space is also a harder vacuum (lower pressure) than a standard light bulb and this too slows down the evaporation and contains the free ions from escaping.

I personally can't help but wonder if they have considered the idea of testing an ion cannon in space. Firing electrons at a target satellite attempting to cook it with X-rays.

[dogknees]

Err... I was going to say something, but Mysterex pretty much nailed it with the article.

Yes, it would work in space just fine. Though the filament would slowly evaporate over time. Actually a little faster than a light bulb would without argon.

The vapour pressure of the metal ions floating around will help reduce the filament evaporating. Normally Argon gas is used to do this in a light bulb.
Space is also a harder vacuum (lower pressure) than a standard light bulb and this too slows down the evaporation and contains the free ions from escaping.

I personally can't help but wonder if they have considered the idea of testing an ion cannon in space. Firing electrons at a target satellite attempting to cook it with X-rays.

Old Tech! "Ion cannons" or Ion thruster, particle thrusters and a few other names have been studied since at least the sixties. They don't produce a lot of thrust, but they are very efficient. Using them as weapons is certainly something the missile defence people are studying.

This wouldn't produce x-rays, but the missile defence folk are also looking at x-ray "guns". One way is to build a specific type of atomic bomb that generates MASSIVE amounts of x-rays when detonated and focuses them in a specific direction. A one-time gun but with a BIG round.

Regards

[trash]

This wouldn't produce x-rays....

Not withstanding all the other things you said which are correct, this is not.

You're not thinking outside of the box.
The weapon does not fire X-rays.
What happens when high energy electrons are rapidly decelerated by the target ?

[tony]

Heat, Radiation - Xrays!

[dogknees]

Not withstanding all the other things you said which are correct, this is not.

You're not thinking outside of the box.
The weapon does not fire X-rays.
What happens when high energy electrons are rapidly decelerated by the target ?

Good point. Though I'd have thought the x-rays produced would head away from the object the electrons hit rather than into it.

[trash]

They scatter depending on the chemical structure of what they hit.
As Tony mentioned, a lot of energy is lost as bremsstrahlung. This is usually in the form of X-rays or heat, but it can also be light or radio waves.

Question is, How much radiation or beam current does it take to destroy something.

[Arbiter]

Infra red-head energy seems to be destroying an entire population as we speak.