Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum antimatter-source

The mysterious source of this antimatter has now been discovered — stars getting ripped apart by neutron stars and black holes.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/080111-antimatter-space.html

Woweee, That is a wonderful find Pokey. You have made my day.
Unfortunately I have got to run right now, but I'll be back later on this one.

[

Woweee, That is a wonderful find Pokey. You have made my day.
Unfortunately I have got to run right now, but I'll be back later on this one.
[/quote]

[quote=Mike Kremer]

Normal Matter is simple to describe, composed of Atoms, (the smallest particle of an Element).
Within the center of every Atom, there is a Nucleus, made up of two even smaller particles, called Protons and Neutrons.
Surrounding this Nucleus is a moving cloud of Electrons. Electrons always carry a negative charge.
Electron numbers are such that they neutralise the always positive charge of the Protons inside the Nucleus. Neutrons, have no charge.

Anti-Matter is made up exactly the same, except that the Protons are now Negative, and the Electrons are now Positively charged.
It dos'nt exist upon any of the Planets we have visited.
But its proposed that Negative matter might be left over from the Big Bang?
QED? Thats the theory. Facts are harder to come by.

When Matter and anti-Matter combine there is a 99%? release of energy, raw power, total annihilation with no radio activity. Plus Gamma rays.
Since Gamma rays come in from all angles with no particular prefered direction, one could speculate that these powerful rays are being produced all around the universe?
Could that mean anti-matter is being produced and annihilated all the time?
There are deep underground liquid tanks with scintillation counters in 3 or 4 countrys that should answer this question soon?
Its said that 1/2 pound of antimatter could power the USA for 24 hours.
It has been possible to make a few Atoms of Anti-matter in the Lab: by using(close to light speed) collision of matter in a Collider.
I believe you can only keep Anti-matter in a 'Penrose trap' (not a normal container). Although I dont know how a Penrose trap operates. (Positive charged walls?)

Theoreticaly large quantitys of Anti-matter would allow us Humans
to power and save our world. Go virtually anywhere in Space.

But I can't see how we can obtain it. There might be galaxys made of 100% Anti-matter....just how we could even approach such a Galaxy without blowing ourselves up, is beyond comrehension.

Again theoreticaly, an Anti-matter Galaxy could be in existence because it should have normal Gravity. Else how could it contract into a Galaxy?

An Anti-matter Galaxy should bend, and reflect light as normal, probably even looks like a normal galaxy.

I have read about the possibility that anti-matter might have Anti Gravity? I discount that, since matter is matter, Anti matter or not. It must obey the laws of our universe.
Prehaps there is some gravitational repulsion between matter and anti-matter, just before annihilation? Its nice subject to speculate upon.

Mike: "When Matter and anti-Matter combine there is a 99%? release of energy,

Only 99%? What about the other 1%?

Mike: "Perhaps there is some gravitational repulsion between matter and anti-matter, just before annihilation?"

Why do you think that, Mike? CERN and Fermilab seem to have nothing to say about it.

I believe the way to keep anti matter from being destroyed is by storing it in a magnetic bottle which would be a copper cylinder which wraps around on itself and has electricity applied to it so a magnetic field would prevent the anti matter from touching the copper.

I don't know about the 1/2 pound of anti matter powering the entire United States for 24 hours, because that seems rather small a number for the power I understood anti matter to have. Also from what I understand that all of the anti matter which has been made in the world could fit through the eye of a needle. I really don't know and this information could simply have been propaganda.

[quote=Mike Kremer]
I know they say there is a lot of anti-matter in the universe. Its even postulated that there are complete Galaxies made of anti-matter.
I do believe in anti-matter Galaxies......because there is -always an opposite to every physical and chemical process in this world. Light/Dark, Hot/Cold, North/South magnetic fields, +/- Volts, acid/alkalii, .....and so on.

Even the negative matter Galaxys, rotate due to their +Gravity.
mind you we hav'nt actually seen any.....since they look no different from any other galaxy.
But If we were to produce negative matter......in a negative Galaxy......it would stay around and not explode in a puff of energy.
Again
Anti-matter particles have positive energy and mass. Anti-matter does not provide any kind of replusive effect when interacting gravitationally with normal matter.
Another reason I dont believe in anti-gravity.
I did say in my earlier post......"Prehaps there is some gravitational repulsion between matter and anti-matter, just before anihilation?"
I should have mentioned that if there is.......then (prehaps) negative gravity is only effective on macroscopic particles at an atomic scale, in an accelerator.....having no effect in our material world

Mike: "Of course my figure of there being 1% matter left over, is my assumption regards the 1% in amount or quantity.......But in all our/collider annihilation experiments.......there is always a positive quantity of Matter left over. That is a fact."

The Scientific American describes the CPT symmetry of matter and antimatter in the following way:

"The operation of changing particles with anti-particles is called Charge conjugation (C). Particles and anti-particles have the exact same mass and equal, but opposite charges and magnetic moments; if they are unstable, they have the same lifetime. This period is called the Charge Conjugation-Parity-Time (CPT) invariance, which establishes the fact that if you interchange particles for anti-particles (C), look in a three dimensional mirror (P) and reverse time (T), you cannot tell the difference between them."

So, from that, one is convinced that there could be 'a positive quantity of matter left over', only if experiments actually provide an initial imbalance between the matter and antimatter.

As for the Big Bang, it was thought that there was a tiny imbalance between the actual quantities of matter and antimatter.

So, I asked myself, if what you say is true, where is that theory wrong? - After all CPT symmetry has been recognized to be a fundamental property of physical laws.

Then I found this:

http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/212_fall2003.web.dir/tyler_freeman/bigbang.htm

"The current hypothesis [following experiments at Fermilab] that explains the lack of antimatter [in the observable universe] is that matter and antimatter are not symmetric. This created an imbalance during the big bang and resulted in the creation of about .0001% more matter than antimatter. After one second almost all of the matter and antimatter had annihilated each other, which would have left that .0001% of matter to form the current universe."

The figure of 0.0001% is only 1/10000 of the figure you gave, but you are evidently quite right in principal!

Incidentally, if the Fermilab findings are correct, then the Wiki entry "CPT symmetry" is out of date.

ive heard that anti matter completly Annihilates matters if so then doesnt that brake the law of matter can not be created or destroyed?

Conversion between matter and energy can, and does, take place. The point is that matter and energy are forms of essentially the same thing, which is neither created nor destroyed.

Matter/antimatter pairs are regularly created (m=E/c^2) in particle accelerators, but they almost instantly combine and are converted (E=mc^2) into photons - which, being massless, are considered not as matter but as energy.

see: http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970724a.html

Also, take a look at how the sun works:

"The helium-4 atoms are less massive than the two hydrogen atoms that started the process, so the difference in mass was converted to energy as described by Einstein's theory of relativity (E=mc2). The energy is emitted in various forms of light (ultraviolet light, X-rays, visible light, infrared, microwaves and radio waves)."

http://science.howstuffworks.com/sun2.htm

We should bear in mind that at the moment of the Big Bang (in the Planck Epoch) the universe was energy, and contained no electrons and no quarks. They came into existence an instant afterwards.

http://burro.astr.cwru.edu/stu/advanced/cosmos_history.html

"...when the universe was approximately 10-43 seconds old, it was 2x1032 °F. At this age, electrons did not even exist...When the universe was 10-35 seconds old, it had cooled by a factor of 10,000 to 1028 K (2x1028 °F). The universe was now cool enough for particles that are the building blocks of atoms to form. In name, this was the time of Baryogenesis, where baryonic matter formed, which includes quarks and all particles made of three quarks, such as protons and neutrons. The universe was still too hot for the quarks to combine into these heavier particles, so all that existed during this time were quarks."

In the case of antimatter that contains charged particles, it is possible to store it in a device known as a 'Penning trap'. This is composed of a combination of an electric and magnetic field but cannot be used to store uncharged antimatter particles.

Well, when say, an electron and a positron (the antimatter opposite of an electron) meet and annihilate one another, radiation is given off which is equal to the mass of the original two particles. Don't forget that mass is just another form of energy.

It kind of depends how you define mass. I'd rather say mass is lost (no need to require it to be conserved), and the radiation carries away all the energy (including rest energy) that the initial particles had.

Is my thinking correct?

Positively and negatively charged particles of different types do not spontaneously annihilate when they meet. If, for example, alpha particles and electrons did this we could probably solve the world's energy crisis.

Only Pos. & Neg. charged particles of the same mass display this violent tendency.

Why?

If I recall correctly, at high enough energies protons and electrons fuse into neutrons. I do not know if that is energy-creating or energy-consuming - it also occurs in places like neutron stars; probably beyond our abilities to achieve in-lab, or in a commercial reactor.



Alpha particles are simply "naked" helium nuclei. They can, and do, "steal" electrons from other atoms in order to become neutrally charged. I doubt this would make for a good energy source though.

But both of the above processes are far different than matter-antimatter reactions.

Bryan

This illustrates the problem I have with many P S books. I accept that the processes are different, but I still want to ask why they are so different, simply because in one case the masses are different and in the other they are the same.

GENEVA (AP) - Scientists claimed a breakthrough Thursday in solving one of the biggest riddles of physics, successfully trapping the first "anti-atom" that they hope will help them understand what happened to all of the antimatter created by the Big Bang.

The international team of physicist at the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, managed to create an atom of anti-hydrogen and then hold onto it for long enough to demonstrate that it can be studied in the lab.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20101118/D9JIGQ5O0.html