Antimatter Atoms Captured
Whamo writes: "Researchers at CERN think they have created and stored thousands of antiatoms in a particle trap. The researchers first used powerful magnetic fields to trap antiprotons then exposed this to a beam of positrons. Initial results indicate that at least some of the antiparticles have bound together to become neutral antihydrogen atoms. How cool is that?"
Pardon my stupidity on the subject, but what exactly does an ANTI-hydrogen atom do? Is a particular application of this type of knowledge useable such as radioactive waste disposal or something? *clueless*
I SURVIVED THE GREAT SLASHDOT BLACKOUT OF 2002!
Last time I heard about any "really new" developments in antimatter, they were just figuring out how to contain 10-100 protons (circa 1992) (I know, I'm dating myself, whatever. :-) This is really cool news.
Still, even a million atoms is really physically small. I wonder
Anyway, just my $0.01. :-)
---NEW! Crash Windows NT/2000/XP from any account using only printf!
Unless I'm much mistaken, an antiparticle is completely neutral; one anti-proton of negative charge, one positron of positive charge, and one anti-neutron of neutral charge. From a distance it should look identical to a standard hydrogen atom.
The only way they can test it is if they fire off a single hydrogen atom in there and note the massive explosion followed by all the other anti-particles flying out of containment and then destroying the rest of the normal matter in anti-matter-matter annihilation.
For all they know, firing a stream of positrons at anti-protons created normal atoms (since this is all theory)
What I wonder is how they're gonna get rid of several thousand anti-hydrogen!
GPL Deconstructed
The article stated that the amount of heat emitted if these antimatter atoms encountered matter wouldn't heat a cup of coffee, before any of the more panicky readers of /. start expecting the end of the world
First, the method they are using to create the antiparticles is rather inefficient...I believe the proportion of energy expended vs energy stored in antiparticles is something on the order of 10^4.
A far more efficient method involves concentrating an intense pulse of light into a small enough space, to the point that the energy actually becomes matter. This has been demonstrated.
With efficient free electron lasers, it may be possible to mass produce antimatter on a large scale in this manner, making possible a greater number of experiments, as well as allowing manned interplanetary expeditions (and in theory interstellar).
Antimatter would make an excellent weapon in addition, since one would have the equivalent of a nuke that could be used on very small scales. You could in theory use it to make, say, antitank bullets that could be fired from a handheld gun. No heavy isotope decay products would be left to contaminate the battlefield, thus avoiding the nastiest side effect of nuclear bombs.
The big problem with antimatter annihilation, however, is that the energy released comes out in the form of high energy gamma rays. While the energy is there, it is difficult to harness in a practical device, and in the weapon example the gamma rays might irradiate everyone on the battlefield including the wielder of the weapon while doing little actual damage to the tank.
Finally, doing large scale chemistry experiments using antimatter versions of the elements could be rather dangerous...you'd probably need a kilo or more of the stuff, which would have rather catastrohpic results if it were allowed to interact with normal matter.
... how many terajoules will it take to make those kilos of antihydrogenatoms in the first place??..
oops..
Of course, anti-matter engines are waaaaaaaay off
Actually, we already have anti-matter engines, they're just not very sophisticated. Pennsylvania State University and NASA are investigating these drives. The drive could power a mission to Mars in 120 days. That's: go to Mars (30 days), stay for 30 days, and come back (30 days). Sum: 120 days. That's awesome.
Ah, here we go:
Antimatter Catalyzed Micro Fission/Fusion
NASA Press release
Antimatter drives
ANTIPROTON-CATALYZED MICROFISSION/FUSION PROPULSION SYSTEMS FOR EXPLORATION OF THE OUTER SOLAR SYSTEM AND BEYOND
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.
Somebody else may have pointed this out already, and keep in mind that I'm just a low-level geek with knowledge in areas other than this, but...
Let's all assume (correctly) that a particle of 'normal' hydrogen has a neutral charge by having a single Proton and a single Electron. By definition, aparticle of anti-hydrogen has a neutral charge, as well. Seeing as both of these partcles have neutral charges, does it not stand to reason that they will not be attracted to one another due to opposite charges? Maybe my high-school physics classes were a little basic, but it sounds like there's more to do than just introduce hydrogen to anti-hydrogen for there to be a reaction between to two particles with neutral charges. Unless there's some sort of anti-neutral (?!) charge that I'm missing, this doesn't seem dangerous.
Not until you think a little deeper. There are lots of other particles that are *not* neutrally charged that could be used to release energy in the fashion we're all thinking. Further still, this may change chemistry as we know it, as we now might (keyword here, "might") have the ability to mix one anti-element with a different 'normal' to get some desired results.
As someone else suggested, how would anti-water work? Could it still be used to put out a fire? I don't think you'd want to drink it (as the body is over 70% 'normal' water, anyway), but I'm sure it could have some uses. Ta-da! The science of anti-chemistry is born!
Just some random thoughts. If I'm incorrect in my assumptions, let me know. Don't flame me. I'm not that smart, really. I just ask lots of questions.
My sources are unreliable, but their information is fascinating. -- Ashleigh Brilliant
Does antimatter exhibit anti-gravitational forces? One thing I've always been facisnated with, is the idea of anti-gravity. The way I see it, if there are north and south polarities with magnets, why can't we find the equivalent repellent gravitational force?
Incidentally, I'm a physicist and a philosopher:)
;)
We do even better (or worse, depends on your perspective) than knowing hands down if energy is conserved - we declare it to be conserved, then create our physical laws around such a claim. This is one aspect of the "current scientific paradigm". It is so engrained in our thought that we have even predicted the existence of other particles as a result of it. Pauli, hanging on to the principle that energy is conserved, predicted the existence of a small, neutral, lightweight particle, the neutrino. It would take us 26 years after Pauli's prediction to verify the existence of the neutrino.
Incidentally, a whole lot of the theories that have been experimentally verified (especially in thermodynamics) have made use of the conservation of energy. So if energy isn't conserved, then it is very very nearly conserved.
While I'm not saying that energy is undoubtedly conserved, we've done pretty well relying on it thus far. No huge problems have come about that force us to disagree with that assumption. Then again, we all thought mass was conserved until E=mc^2 came about...
As far as mini-black holes are concerned, I wouldn't worry...we can just make a bunch of mini-white holes, put the two together, and they'll cancel out, right?
JoeRobe.
The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
Mass-energy equivalence is demonstrated all the time in particle accelerators, where particle-antiparticle pairs are formed by high-energy collisions. The threshold energies required are mc^2 (in the centre-of-mass frame, more beam energy than mc^2 is required for a stationary target because it recoils and carries some of the energy off). So, yes. matter + antimatter does indeed = lots of energy...
As for the stuff about warp theory... well, people have tried applying general relativity to find ways of travelling FTL, though without accepted success yet... have a search for Alcubierre (though it could be utter crap, I don't know enough about GR to comment!)