Slashdot Mirror


Cern Mass Produces Anti-Hydrogen

Izeickl writes "The BBC is reporting Here about scientists in the Cern particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland have mass produced over 50,000 atoms allowing them to test basic Physics using them, however "Harvard physicist Gerald Gabrielse said: "Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced.""

256 comments

  1. After the "first post" idiots are through, you can by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 2, Funny

    insert Lame Star Trek Joke Here

    --

    In Soviet America the banks rob you!
  2. Whoops by Metatron · · Score: 1

    *Blink* ... sorry, missed it, try again ;-)

  3. Cool! by otuz · · Score: 1

    I wonder how this will affect the future of computing :)

    1. Re:Cool! by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well we could built an anti-computer out of anti-silicon, run anti-windows98 on it, then laugh when the whole thing explodes and blame it on microsoft :)

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    2. Re:Cool! by taliver · · Score: 2, Funny

      then laugh when the whole thing explodes and blame it on microsoft

      That would be anti-microsoft, or macrohard.

      --

      I demand a million helicopters and a DOLLAR!

    3. Re:Cool! by Alranor · · Score: 3, Funny

      anti-microsoft

      Surely then it wouldn't explode, it would just keep working for a very long time?

    4. Re:Cool! by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      Actually if you're looking for anti-microsoft it's right here at slashdot

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    5. Re:Cool! by otuz · · Score: 1

      I guess that would redefine the word anti-piracy too : )

    6. Re:Cool! by dev!null!4d · · Score: 1

      Why did I just think of pron... hehe...
      MacroHard...

      --
      ~www.devnull.co.uk
    7. Re:Cool! by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but if it were anti-windows98 it would NEVER crash or blow up, and run PERFECTLY FOREVER!!

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    8. Re:Cool! by Evil-G · · Score: 1

      Would anti-windows98 have a "finish" menu instead of a start menu?

    9. Re:Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it had a Finish menu, wouldn't it be Linux?

    10. Re:Cool! by ikoL · · Score: 1

      Well we could built an anti-computer out of anti-silicon, run anti-windows98 on it, then laugh when the whole thing explodes and blame it on microsoft :)

      No, we'd blame anti-microsoft...ie Linux

    11. Re:Cool! by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 1
      Well we could built an anti-computer out of anti-silicon, run anti-windows98 on it, then laugh when the whole thing explodes and blame it on microsoft :)

      Works for me, since BillG is the anti-christ! [/obligatory M$ bashing]

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    12. Re:Cool! by Sgt+York · · Score: 1

      Good God I wish I had mod points....

      --

      There is a reason for everything. Sometimes that reason just sucks.

    13. Re:Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know; maybe you just have some kind of sick fetish?

      Prons just don't do it for normal people the way they apparently do for you...

    14. Re:Cool! by flyneye · · Score: 1

      next is the discovery of anti-methane.so when the guy in the next cubicle farts you have somethng to counteract it.now if that doesnt affect computing i dont know what does.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  4. some more links by tanveer1979 · · Score: 5, Informative
    This has meen dome before but its the first time 50000 atoms have been produced. A little more tech info.

    From the horses mouth :-) Athena, the guys who did it
    Nature.com article(PDF)
    home page of the experiment

    --
    My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
    FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
  5. Actually one of the first experiments... by taliver · · Score: 1

    Would be to check if it falls down. Most theories predict that it should, but there are just enough interesting alternative theories of gravity that this certainly deserves verification.

    --

    I demand a million helicopters and a DOLLAR!

    1. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny


      of course it will fall down.

      it's anti-hyrogen, and hydrogen falls up, just ask Herr Hindenburg.

    2. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by dfgdfgdfg · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Would be to check if it falls down.

      It would fall down because it has the same mass as matter. Antimatter does not have negative mass. Instead, each particle has opposite charge. One antihydrogen atom is composed of an antiproton (negative charge, same mass as the proton), and a positron (positive charge, same mass as the electron).

      On checking in which directory it falls, I think gravity is negligible compared to other forces at the particle level.

      --
      -- 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Sc3 de4: 4.Se4: Sd7 5.Sg5 Sgf6 6.Ld3 e6 7.S1f3 h6 8.Se6:
    3. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the naive expectation. However, like your parent poster said, there are some weird & wonderful theories of gravity that have it that antimatter behaves differently to normal matter under gravity. The experiment has never been done as we have never been able to produce large enough amounts of antimatter for long enough. Without doing the experiment, we simply do not know if antimatter behaves like you say or not.

    4. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by hatchet · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually in vacuum hydrogen would fall down. And those anti-matter particles are created in vacuum (held in place by strong electromagnets).. but they probably wouldn't "fall up", because the only thing that differs between particle and antiparticle is it's spin. (it's not really the speed particle is rotating at.. but more like internal momentum).

    5. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      they probably wouldn't "fall up"
      How do you know? Have you done the experiment? Some credible theories say one thing, some say another. We don't know. That's what the original poster was saying, and he or she is right
    6. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by hatchet · · Score: 1

      I didn't say i know.. that's why i said "probably".. It's possible, but it's unlikely. You can find more info on t these forums, there are quite some physics freaks posting interesting things. They are answering to other questions too, like "what is the speed of gravity?".

    7. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative


      Actually, Hindenberg was a general and a politician, not any sort of scientist. You may mean Herr Zeppelin...

    8. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by esonik · · Score: 2, Informative

      because the only thing that differs between particle and antiparticle is it's spin

      that's wrong, it's the electric charge that is opposite for particles and their antiparticles. The total spin (magnitude of spin) is the same for both and the actual spin vector is not a fixed property for a particle (except when it's zero).

    9. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, what sort of scientist do you have to be to know that a load of hydrogen in a big bag goes up?

      it's hardly rocket science. In fact, that's probably not as tough as they make out, either.

    10. Re:Actually one of the first experiments... by MayorDefacto · · Score: 1

      That's GRAF Zeppelin to you, pally....

  6. I found the perfect way... by roalt · · Score: 2, Funny
    ...to finally spent my billion dollars, see this story.

    Now I know how I want to illuminate my garden!

    Making antiprotons requires 10 billion times more energy than it produces. For example, the antimatter produced each year at Cern could power a 100 watt light bulb for just 15 minutes.
    1. Re:I found the perfect way... by JustShowMeTheFives · · Score: 1

      Making antiprotons requires 10 billion times more energy than it produces. For example, the antimatter produced each year at Cern could power a 100 watt light bulb for just 15 minutes.

      That is tremendous for 50,000 atoms' worth of fuel. My god, imagine if you could mass produce them. You'd never need oil again, or anything at all except a antiproton factory.

    2. Re:I found the perfect way... by Redoc66 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "You'd never need oil again, or anything at all except a antiproton factory." ....except billions of times the outputted energy to make them in the first place. While it may have implications for portable fuel, it seems a little hard to believe we will be having anti-fuel for a while.

      --
      Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
    3. Re:I found the perfect way... by mbyte · · Score: 2

      Put a station near to the sun, and produce antimatter there. Enough solar energy, and the perfect small medium to transport energy. Now .. only be carefull about that transports ;)

    4. Re:I found the perfect way... by Alranor · · Score: 1

      Just watch out for the Confederation Navy, they're not big fans of antimatter stations - if you're really lucky you might get a life sentence if they want to refuel the Lady Macbeth there, otherwise they'll just blow you up. :)

    5. Re:I found the perfect way... by Kong+the+Medium · · Score: 1

      So the reality is dysfunctional?

      --
      ... whenever a text is transmitted, variation occurs. This is because human beings are careless, fallible, and occasiona
    6. Re:I found the perfect way... by crapulent · · Score: 1

      That's for the entire amount of antimatter produced in a year. Presumably they make more than a single batch of the stuff.

      And what good would this super-duper fuel be if you must dissipate a significant amount of energy to contain it? You could "bleed a little off" to sustain the containment perhaps, but that seems like a pile of hand-waving right there.

    7. Re:I found the perfect way... by YanceyAI · · Score: 2

      Yeah...Now if we could only keep them from being destoyed when they collide with stray matter, then we could store them!!!

      --
      Can I bum a sig?
    8. Re:I found the perfect way... by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1
      Yuo can store them in a magnetic field... They may be anti-matter but they still obey the law of physics..

      Create a case which can
      1) Have a vaccume inside 2) Generate a magnetic bottle

      --
    9. Re:I found the perfect way... by thesadmac · · Score: 0

      3) Profit

    10. Re:I found the perfect way... by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      No, you can't store them in a magnetic field because they obey the laws of physics.

      The antiHydrogen was produced by collecting antiprotons (antihydrogen nucleus) and positrons (antielectrons) in magnetic bottles, mixing them so the antiprotons collected positrons...and the antiHydrogen atoms then wandered around because the magnetic bottle could not hold them due to their neutral charge.

      The resulting annihilation of the uncontrolled antimatter is what was detected. No nihilists were detected.

    11. Re:I found the perfect way... by guybarr · · Score: 1

      ...to finally spent my billion dollars,

      kidding aside, I could think of much worse ways to use $10^9 than donating to alternative energy storage research, or to futuristic interplanetary-propulsion research.

      --
      Working for necessity's mother.
    12. Re:I found the perfect way... by N3WBI3 · · Score: 1
      I was spaeking more generall, but you are right.. Perhaps you could store them (anti-protons, anti-electrons) seperatly..

      I was not saying we could do this today, I was just saying that is is possable..

      --
    13. Re:I found the perfect way... by Psion · · Score: 2

      Tell it to Al Capone!

    14. Re:I found the perfect way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, its a bit beyond what is possible now, but the charge distribution in diatomic hydrogen isn't spherically symmetric so there is a possibility of using the weak polarization to contain neutral hydrogen. Another possibility is to get the hydrogen into the metallic state (which IIRC has not been done yet, even for ordinary hydrogen), but a metal would be relatively simple to isolate magnetically.

      Probably the most realistic way of containing antimatter is to make a more complex molecule, something that is magnetic would be ideal.

    15. Re:I found the perfect way... by jaoswald · · Score: 2

      Actually, if the anti-hydrogen is cold enough, you can store it in a magnetic trap. I believe it has to be of a particular spin polarization to stay trapped, however. Check out this proposal.

  7. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That guy has been producing antimatter for ages now.

  8. Re: goatse.cx by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

    If they move on to anti-trolls, I don't think 50,000 is going to cut it anymore. At least not for this site.

    --

    In Soviet America the banks rob you!
  9. Those wacky scientists... by tuxedo-steve · · Score: 4, Funny
    Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced.
    We've produced antihydrogen... just kidding!

    We've discovered Earth-like extrasolar planets... just kidding!

    We've found bacterial life from Mars... just kidding!

    Jeez, these scientist guys need a hobby. :)
    --
    - SMJ - (It's not just a name: it's a bad aftertaste.)
    1. Re:Those wacky scientists... by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You forgot - Element 117 and 118 - Just Kidding!

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    2. Re:Those wacky scientists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hehehehe:

      We've got first post... just kidding! :-)

    3. Re:Those wacky scientists... by ComaVN · · Score: 2, Funny

      That would be Justkiddium and Stillkiddium, right?

      --
      Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
    4. Re:Those wacky scientists... by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 1

      Actually I was thinking Nonexistium and Bullshitium, but yours'll do...

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    5. Re:Those wacky scientists... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here we have a test tube of the first mass-produced anti-hydrogen.... MADE YOU LOOK!

    6. Re:Those wacky scientists... by lindelof · · Score: 2, Informative

      As a member of the team that produced antihydrogen I might want to add for information that the author of that comment, Gabrielse, is the leader of a directly competiting team that has been pursuing the same goal using a different approach.

    7. Re:Those wacky scientists... by Gamasta · · Score: 0

      Well, if you live of indirect evidences of everything, science is pretty much just about a guess... if a hypothesis is not applicable, then some things you predict out of it might not be true.

      --
      reason defies logic
    8. Re:Those wacky scientists... by Strandman · · Score: 1

      May it be that....

      Bureaucrats - If you don't come up with something well cut fundings - NOT kidding!

    9. Re:Those wacky scientists... by TheGreatGraySkwid · · Score: 1
      "Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced."

      We've produced antihydrogen... just kidding!
      Looks like the scientist you're quoting, Gerald Gabrielse, is recanting that sentiment, now. He is now acknowledging that their result is probably positive.

      http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/science/AP-Antihyd rogen.html

      Free registration...yada-yada...
      --
      The Humblest Mollusk on the Net
    10. Re:Those wacky scientists... by falzer · · Score: 1

      Unobtainium?

  10. What a coincidence by karb · · Score: 3, Funny
    scientists ... have mass produced over 50,000 atoms allowing them to test basic Physics using [antihydrogen]

    I also have just mass produced over 50,000 antihydrogen atoms!

    however "Harvard physicist Gerald Gabrielse said: "Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced."

    Also, _my_ long experience with antihydrogen tells me I may have not _really_ produced antihydrogen!

    Look, supernintendo chalmers! I'm learneding!

    --

    Jack Valenti and the MPAA are to technology as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone

  11. I was lucky... by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Enough to actually get to see the antimatter production ring at Fermilab. Once or twice a year, they go into a maintenance shutdown and give small informal tours.

    What used to be the main ring years ago is now the antimatter ring. The magnets were all upgraded to superconductors, and they added buncher/debunchers to the ring to squeeze protons together and apart which, every so often produces a stray anti-proton.

    Cern is way ahead of Fermi in that they are producing full anti-atoms, whereas Fermi is only making anti-particles.

    Definitely forget about efficiency in production, the guy giving the tour said their electric bill is about a million dollars a month, and they make very few anti-protons from all that power! I bet they're ComEd's best customer. They can't run during the summer air-conditioning months, as they would suck too much energy from the grid in Illinois.

    The guide also said as long as the magnets stay supercooled, the anti-protons will stay suspended in the ring for up to a month (unless they hit stray matter and blow up sooner).

    After the tour, we got to play stump the genius - one of the research physicists there was nice enough to give a Q & A session. A most informative and cool tour, getting to see something that most "civilians" never get to lay eyes on.

    --
    -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    1. Re:I was lucky... by mt-biker · · Score: 2, Informative

      IMO, CERN's press release is much more informative than the BBC article.

      But CERN's intranet is also readily searchable and apart from the technical details on the new LHC accelerator (which are publically available and make great geek reading) I also find
      this further information on the AD (Antiproton Decelerator), which makes the trapping of antiparticles possible.

    2. Re:I was lucky... by Mt._Honkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      You say they make very ffew antiprotons from all that power, and I guess that in human terms that is correct. However, I'm looking at live readouts at the Tevatron status, and there are currently 48.38*10^10 anti-protons in the antiproton storage ring you speak of, and another 246.92*10^9 in the Tevatron itself.

      Just you give you a sense of how much antimatter is produced. Cern didn't produce much antimattter at all with these 50,000 atoms. Fermilab doesn't produce any antiatoms because they have no use for them. Only negative antiprotons (pbars) are of any use.

      --

      Don't Bogart the fish sticks
    3. Re:I was lucky... by jaoswald · · Score: 3, Informative

      In comparing the quantities, you should keep in mind that the storage rings you are talking about have very "hot" (high kinetic energy) antiprotons.

      The real achievement is to cool the antiprotons down to about 15 K, and combining them with positrons. The yield of that whole process is very low. I.e., you need large quantities of hot antiprotons to produce 50k atoms of "cold" antihydrogen.

    4. Re:I was lucky... by RichN · · Score: 3, Interesting
      What used to be the main ring years ago is now the antimatter ring.

      Sorry. What used to be the main ring is no longer in service. The Antiproton source was operational when the main ring was being used.

      In recent years, we've added the main injector and recycler rings, to help store the antiprotons left over from the collider studies (since they're so costly to make.)

      I bet they're ComEd's best customer.

      Fermi has its own feed from ComEd. In the past, ComEd has been Fermilab's best customer; they pay/credit Fermi in order to tap off some of the capacity. I don't believe this happened this summer, though (since we're in a Collider Run).

      --

      Rich

    5. Re:I was lucky... by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      One proton has a mass of 1.6726 * 10E-27 kg. Typing that into the Rest Mass Energy Calculator, that's 1.50 * 10E-10 joules.

      The 730,720,000,000 anti-protons at Fermilab are thus 1096 joules (1.096 * 10E3). A gallon of gasoline has 1.3 * 10E8 joules, so Fermilab antiprotons have an energy less than 1 * 10E-5 (0.00001) gallons of gasoline.

      Yes, I'm sure they used a lot more energy than that to produce those antiprotons.

    6. Re:I was lucky... by Ed_Moyse · · Score: 1

      They can't run during the summer air-conditioning months, as they would suck too much energy from the grid in Illinois

      That amused me - LEP (at CERN) could't run in the winter heating months as it would suck too much power from ... you get the idea.
    7. Re:I was lucky... by vectra14 · · Score: 1

      i was also lucky to tour cornell's synchotron & storage ring ((almost)nothing to do with producing particles). its really cool.

      its interesting that the machine almost never goes offline since every hour on it costs millions, but its still very expensive to mantain. there are rumors that the administration may cut funding to it :/

      now that these things dont really promise new, more powerful atom bombs, it seems the government (particularly the nsf) is slowly but relentlessly cutting funding to such programs

      yeah, but walking around the ring was pretty fun :) it's under a football field, so its funny to think about those pesky football bullies getting some radiation during their game :) just kidding

    8. Re:I was lucky... by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2

      The real achievement is to cool the antiprotons down to about 15 K, and combining them with positrons. The yield of that whole process is very low. I.e., you need large quantities of hot antiprotons to produce 50k atoms of "cold" antihydrogen.

      How exactly is this done? It's something I've been wondering about for a while (I've seen descriptions of most other processes associated with particle accelerators).

    9. Re:I was lucky... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be nice if they had completed the SCSC in Texas.

    10. Re:I was lucky... by jaoswald · · Score: 3, Informative

      This link describes how the ATRAP collaboration cools the ingredients of Antihydrogen.

    11. Re:I was lucky... by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 1

      Cooling antiprotons is a very simple process. Approximatly 20 feet of copper tubing is coiled and placed in an insulated box. Super-cooled H2O cubes are then dumped into the insulated box, surrounding the coil. A large cylinder of antiprotons, aka a keg or half-barrel, is attached to the copper tubing. At the other end of the tubing is a small valve, aka a tap. The antiprotons are cooled as they moved through the cooper tubing and delivered to the waiting glass.

    12. Re:I was lucky... by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 2

      In the middle of FermiLab there is a pond; the water is used for cooling and I've heard it rumuored that it's "hot" (radioactive). Also, the grounds that the main ring of Fermi occupies is also a forest preserve - we used to joke about the "Home where the Glow-in-the-dark Buffalo Roam"!

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    13. Re:I was lucky... by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2

      This link [harvard.edu] describes how the ATRAP collaboration cools the ingredients of Antihydrogen.

      Interesting. Thanks for the link.

      Do you have a description of how LEAR decellerated antiprotons to 6 MeV in the first place?

    14. Re:I was lucky... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While we are swapping lucky enough stories...

      My father was a physicist at UWisc and later ORNL. While at UW, he helped design a nifty little storage ring for a consortium then known as MURA. This was in the 50s and 60s. We got to tour it when I was a kid. A few years ago, his old boss called him to say that the Smithsonian had taken it to create an exhibit at one of the museums in D.C.

    15. Re:I was lucky... by jaoswald · · Score: 2

      Actually, you need 20 feet of anticopper tubing. And anti-H2O cubes. And an anti-SiO2 glass. But your method still works, in principle....

    16. Re:I was lucky... by gorilla · · Score: 2

      I take it that the answer doesn't involve a giant fridge.

    17. Re:I was lucky... by Mt._Honkey · · Score: 2

      Well, that number is a bit odd based on the way that they make the pbars. They take a proton moving at quite nearly the speed of light from the Main Injector with kinetic energy in the hunreds of GeV (a proton has a mass of ~1GeV/c^2) and slam it into a wall (an expensive wall I should think). When the proton stops so suddenly, all of that kinetic energy turns into mass. Some of that mass turns into pbars. An average collision will yield a few pbars, but usualy not more than one will be harvested, sometimes none. Durring the whole accelerating process, lots of energy is lost to cyclotron radiation, because the protons are accelerating (both linearly and centripitaly), thus emitting radio waves (loosing energy). That's a much bigger problem when you are accelerating electrons/positrons, because they have a much smaller mass. That means they emit a whole shitload more cyclotron radiation. Ask someone from the LEP at CERN about that.

      If there are ~200*10^10 protons and ~50*10^10 anti-protons with 1 TeV of energy, that's about 400,000 joules of kinetic energy, or about equal to a bowling ball moving at the speed of sound, or .003 gallons of gas.

      --

      Don't Bogart the fish sticks
    18. Re:I was lucky... by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      I was using mass at rest, the same way they are in the gas can. Well, relatively at rest.

  12. Um, a handful? by richie2000 · · Score: 5, Funny
    Antihydrogen has been made before, but only a handful of atoms at a time.
    Now, the Cern particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, has produced more than 50,000.

    Sooo, exactly how many hydrogen atoms are in a handful anyway? My first guess would be in the ballpark of "A hell of a lot more than 50k".

    --
    Money for nothing, pix for free
    1. Re:Um, a handful? by gazbo · · Score: 1, Informative
      Vague recollections here:

      1 mole of gas at RTP fills 24 litres (or was it 12?) and there are 6.022*10^23 atoms in a mole. So, assuming a handful is 10ML, it'll be have in the order of 20-21 zeros.

      Put another way, about 16 orders of magnitude over 50,000. But these are rough estimates from memory.

    2. Re:Um, a handful? by gmcraff · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm willing to stipulate that combining a "handful" of antihydrogen atoms with a hand of any sort results in not having much of a hand left, nor arm, nor good part of the city you're standing in.

    3. Re:Um, a handful? by clarkcox3 · · Score: 1
      1 mole of gas at RTP fills 24 litres (or was it 12?
      ITYM 22.4 litres, but your rough estimate is still valid.
      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
    4. Re:Um, a handful? by main() · · Score: 1

      > Sooo, exactly how many hydrogen atoms are in a handful anyway? My first guess would be in the ballpark of "A hell of a lot more than 50k".

      I'm guessing you wouldn't have much of a hand left if you were to test that assumption 8-)

      Si

    5. Re:Um, a handful? by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 2, Funny

      I believe a handful is the equivalent of .000000000000000000000000735 Libraries of Congress, or enough to span the width of .075 human hairs.

    6. Re:Um, a handful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, you would have a hand left, the 50000 anti-protons & 50000 anti-electrons would annihilate against 50000 protons and 50000 electrons, which is a tiny number compared with the number of atoms in a hand.

      Te amount of energy released in the process would do damage too but not much, someone elsewhere estimated the energy as equivalent to 0.00001 gallons of gasoline.

    7. Re:Um, a handful? by Ztream · · Score: 1

      Or how about the more commonly used expression "a handful of people"? Would that equal one moderately sized internal organ, or what?

    8. Re:Um, a handful? by richie2000 · · Score: 2
      Or how about the more commonly used expression "a handful of people"? Would that equal one moderately sized organ, or what?

      I guess that would depend on the size of the organ when the hand grabs it. (boo, hiss!)

      (Oh, the art of selective quoting, a finely tuned craft dating back from the dawn of the first writings of man - "In the beginning, there was *will you kids shut up out there, I can't hear myself think!* ...now, where was I... Damn.")

      --
      Money for nothing, pix for free
    9. Re:Um, a handful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the expression, when used for large objects like people, originally meant "A number of people that can counted on one hand", ie 2-5.

    10. Re:Um, a handful? by Palarran · · Score: 1

      Cuius testiculous habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum.

      I'd say a handful would equal two average males, or three smaller ones.

      One woman is always a handful, in and of herself.

    11. Re:Um, a handful? by main() · · Score: 1


      I was only guessing 8-)

      Si

    12. Re:Um, a handful? by Myco · · Score: 2

      Wow... how many of those does it take to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool? What about a football field? If you lined them up end to end, how many times would they wrap around the equator, or stretch from Earth to the sun?

    13. Re:Um, a handful? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering a handful was being discussed (not 50k), I think your guess is correct.

  13. seems we don't like plausible results by hokanomono · · Score: 1

    Funny, when an institute with a good reputation and high quality equipment publishes the plausible result of their experiments, someone else adds "maybe it's all not real". However when a bunch of people claim that they proved wrong the theory of special relativity with some cheap coax cables, it is left without an expression of doubt. (Not only on slashdot. Here, at least, the posters express their doubt.)

    --
    This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.
    1. Re:seems we don't like plausible results by pediddle · · Score: 1

      However when a bunch of people claim that they proved wrong the theory of special relativity with some cheap coax cables

      Go back and read that article again. Nobody was claiming that they broke relativity. No information was being transmitted faster than light, only the peak of the wave. If you have one wave with a slightly different frequency than the other, the waves will cancel each other out in a way that the peak of the combined wave is faster or slower (think of dissonant sound waves). The wave itself, and the energy and information in the wave, still goes the speed of light.

    2. Re:seems we don't like plausible results by Sycle · · Score: 1

      Don't forget all the agro posters arguing why the electric car that charges itself up as it goes along isn't a perpetual motion machine because they didn't state it explicitly in the article.

      I think it's more a case that people are being realistic about the real science, but the pseudo science "I have no qualifications but I broke the Laws of Thermodynamics in my bath tub" articles brings out all the crystal waving kooks.

    3. Re:seems we don't like plausible results by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely true. Any introductory wave physics course will most likely do examples where the phase velocity is much bigger than the group velocity. Indeed, typically as you increase the phase velocity, the group velocity actually goes down.

    4. Re:seems we don't like plausible results by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...brings out all the crystal waving kooks.
      If you're going to generalize like that please don't give crystals a bad name in the process. Crystals have very unique properties (and no, I don't buy into pseudo-science).
    5. Re:seems we don't like plausible results by hokanomono · · Score: 1

      The cool thing about Munday and Robertsons (Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 81, No. 11, 2002) Experiment and prominently before them Haché and Poirier (Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 80, No. 3, 2002) is that they observed group velocities much higher than c and higher than the phase velocity for the resp. negative group velocity. The "signal" (which really isn't a signal) arrives before it's been sent.

      The problem is, that the new scientist made a big confusion about it. Most importantly by using the word signal for what is simply a wave group.

      --
      This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.
  14. No Anti-H produced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced."
    It's really easy to figure that one out ....
    BOOOOM!

  15. CERN sound familiar? by KILNA · · Score: 1
    --
    Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
  16. Business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Make anti-hydrogen
    2. ?????
    3. Profit
    4. Realise you didn't actually make anti-hydrogen
    5. Get sued

    1. Re:Business plan by nr · · Score: 1

      Good plan, just make sure to jump ship after step 3 and let some freshman CEO take over the company.

  17. Dimensional Analysis by Wrexen · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's clear at this point that the standard "SI" or metric system is no longer sufficient to describe the events in today's world. As such, the "PS", or "Pop Science" unit system is defined below for those interested by this handy guide

    Information
    Old Unit: bit
    New Unit: Library of Congress

    Time Interval
    Old Unit: second
    New Unit: eye-blink

    Number of Particles
    Old Unit: mole
    New Unit: handful

    Width (small distances)
    Old Unit: millimeter
    New Unit: human hair

    Length (large distances)
    Old Unit: meter, kilometer
    New Unit: football field

    Volume
    Old Unit: cubic centimeter, liter
    New Unit: football stadium

    Energy
    Old Unit: joule
    New Unit: 100-watt-lightbulb-second

    Mass
    Old Unit: gram, kilogram
    New Unit: CowboyNeal

    More units will be assigned as they are needed

    1. Re:Dimensional Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed a few:

      Bandwidth
      Old Unit: GB/day
      New Unit: Slashdots/day

      Storage
      Old Unit: Gigabyte
      New Unit: Equivilent number of HD floppy disks

      Processor speed
      Old Unit: Megahertz
      New Unit: Megahertz * /dev/random

    2. Re:Dimensional Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I think we had one on area sometime ago:

      Old Unit: square-kilometer
      New Unit: California

    3. Re:Dimensional Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For .ukians, we traditionally have
      Height:
      Old unit, meter,kilometer
      New Unit: Double decker buses or Nelson's column

    4. Re:Dimensional Analysis by T-Punkt · · Score: 1

      > Processor speed
      > Old Unit: Megahertz
      > New Unit: Megahertz * /dev/random

      IMHO it's more like:

      Old Unit: MIPS, FLOPS, SPEC*, linpack etc.
      New Unit: Megahertz of a maybe-equivalent Pentium 4 CPU

    5. Re:Dimensional Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We should start using BTU for CPU rating. That way, it would be easier to figure out the heat sink requirement.

    6. Re:Dimensional Analysis by gowen · · Score: 1

      We UKers also have

      Area:
      Old Unit: Acre/Hectare
      New Unit "Wales" -- "Everyday the Amazon rainforest loses tress equal to an area the size of Wales"

      See what I mean?

      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    7. Re:Dimensional Analysis by Ryatt · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, no, no... The industry standard for "really big sizes" is always either "Rhode Island" or "Texas". Example: http://www.cnn.com/US/9908/18/iceberg/ "Rhode Island-sized iceberg moves into Antarctic ship lanes"

    8. Re:Dimensional Analysis by Agripa · · Score: 1

      Emitter area of bipolar transistor:

      Ranchet

      which is equal to 1 picoacre (10^-12)

  18. Re:hey, my site had that news 9hours ago, lol! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and, nine hours on, the article on your site has '1 Reads'.

  19. Re:hey, my site had that news 9hours ago, lol! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why should we believe you? Do you have a copy of the page signed by a reputable timestamping service?

    Furthermore, why should we care? :-p

  20. Still Waiting for AntiMethane by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    When's it going to happen dammit? I'm dying here. My brother is like a bog in that he produces cubic FEET of methane on a daily basis. And I have been waiting for the day when somebody produces antimethane. Once someone has made antimethane I will put some of it in my brother's boxers and wait for the fireworks and subsequent explosion. Then I will get his room that bastard.

    1. Re:Still Waiting for AntiMethane by ard · · Score: 1

      what's wrong with a match?

    2. Re:Still Waiting for AntiMethane by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Disclaimer: I understood that the point of the parent was to be funny, but I still felt the urge to correct him on some scientific facts.

      Any matter will react with any antimatter, so your antimethane wuold probably annihilate itself with the air in the atmosphere or the boxer shorts themselves rather than produce a spectatular energy release when your brother farts.

  21. Another setback... by Cyno01 · · Score: 2

    well, if they didn't really produce anihydrogen, then its gonna be even longer before they can produce antideuterium, so i guess were all gonna have to wait even longer for warp engines

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  22. With apologies to Dizzy. . . by kfg · · Score: 2

    Cold Fusion, Cold Fusion.

    KFG

  23. waste of power by abdulwahid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Making antiprotons requires 10 billion times more energy than it produces. For example, the antimatter produced each year at Cern could power a 100 watt light bulb for just 15 minutes.

    10 billion lightbulbs! So, they used enough electricity to power a small city for a whole year and the result is....they might have been fooled into a false positive result. I am sure there are lots of better ways of using this power rather than chasing gold at bottoms of rainbows

    --
    perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10);'
    1. Re:waste of power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, use an energy efficient light bulb that gives out the equivilent light of a 100 watt filament bulb, and it'll last about an hour. Problem solved.

      Incidently, does anybody else find it really annoying that a lot of people say things like:

      "This lightbulb uses 11 watts of power, but gives out 60 watts of light!!!"

      WOW! If that's the case, why not put a load of solar panels around it, then connect them to more bulbs, then put loads of solar panels around them, then connect them to more bulbs, then put more solar panels around them, then connect them to more bulbs, etc, etc.

      Can I patent that idea?

    2. Re:waste of power by KILNA · · Score: 1

      At first I found your statement rather reactionary, especially since it didn't provide any calculations to back your statement that it could power a small city. Playing with the numbers, I discovered that they could indeed do so.

      100 watt light bulb for 15 minutes translates into 25 watts / hour
      Extrapolating based on the 10 billion figure, 250 billion watt hours were used in the year
      The average home uses about 4.5 million watt hours per year
      Meaning this project could power about 55 thousand homes during that year.

      --
      Error: PANTS NOT FOUND. Press <F1> to continue.
    3. Re:waste of power by N3WBI3 · · Score: 2
      Yea and why did we bother wasteing the time and money it took to learn to fly, we could have bought more cars/gas with that money, and speaking of cars do you know how many horses we could have fed with that R&D?

      This is a new and exciting field which could someday make space travel practical (for no toher reason than you can store alot of energy in a small area). The more you do it the better you get at it, and the cheaper it gets.

      By the way, hows that flat world working out for you?

      --
    4. Re:waste of power by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Can I patent that idea?

      No, unfortunately not.

      Some pseudoscientists are actually selling gas heaters that have photoelectric (IR sensitive) panels inside them. They generate something like up to 500 watts (they claim), and they claim this energy is "free".

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    5. Re:waste of power by perljammer · · Score: 1

      Did the pay for it? If so, what do you care?

    6. Re:waste of power by abdulwahid · · Score: 1

      Did the pay for it? If so, what do you care?

      Yes! We all pay for it. This is my world as much as yours and theirs. Consuming so much energy eats from all of our resources and polutes all of our environment. To me it seems that there are so many more beneficial (to humanity that is not someones ego) projects around that could actually help the world. Especially since such a large proportion of the world lives in poverty. Instead though we have some egotistical scientist carrying out an experiment that can't be proven to work with the crazed hopefullness that one day his work might make a new weapon of mass destruction or be used in a star cruiser. Is this what the world really needs?

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10);'
    7. Re:waste of power by perljammer · · Score: 1

      Well, if you're under the impression that our natural resources are limited, then you've got a point.

      However, we're not running out. It's out there. We just have to go get it.

    8. Re:waste of power by be-fan · · Score: 2

      Yes. Because they advance humanity. It is impossible, with our current resources, to pull people out of poverty. It is work like this that will one day give us the chance to pull humanity out of the gutter. Back when some crazy's were fooling around with dead human bodies, nobody cared. Now, we call them doctors and thank them for delivering us from the horrors of disease. Besides, don't you think there are better uses for the power used by your computer than posting on /.?

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    9. Re:waste of power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and 60 W of visible light would instantly make you blind.

    10. Re:waste of power by abdulwahid · · Score: 1

      It is impossible, with our current resources, to pull people out of poverty. It is work like this that will one day give us the chance to pull humanity out of the gutter.

      That just isn't the case. There have been many marvelous inventions in the last, say, 20 years. The number of those that have actually helped more than a tiny fraction of the worlds population is very small. However, there are many things that could be done to help poverty in the world but only if those who are currently enjoying their thirst of consuming the worlds resources slow down . Currently the average US citizen consumes in the range of 50 times more resources than a citizen in Asia. In other words, the 10 billion light bulbs example would have powered a city in Asia that is 50 times bigger. So tell them that this is not a waste of resouces. Tell the guys who are living in poverty what use an anit-matter atom is going to do. Build a warp drive space ship....sure that would help them. Or perhaps a new weapon of mass destruction we can threaten them with?

      Don't get me wrong I am not against scientific development: if the aim is to further humanity. In this particular case, that doesn't seem to be the motivation. And the crazy thing in this example is that so much resources are being consumed for something that can't be proven to actually work (or exist).

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10);'
    11. Re:waste of power by be-fan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      1) First, this is a drop in the bucket. CERN is one of only a few entities using this kind of power. Take a look at the 55,000 home figure. Say these are your Asian homes, and you end up with 550,000 homes that could be powered by the energy used at CERN. Given the masses of humanity, that adds up to NOTHING. Certainly not enough to justify the potentially disastrous consequences to humanity that could result if we stop this kind of research. The average utility bill at Fermilab (US counterpart to CERN) is 1.5 million dollars. Over the course of a year, thats $18 million. In comparison, the USAID annual budget is $6 billion. The Federal Highway program's budget on the other hand, is $26 billion. Yes, people would rather fix potholes than develop countries. Such is the world we live in. But its not like research money is coming out of the mouths of the poor. The real problem isn't that the world spends too much on research (if only). The real problem is that people have no clue about anything outside the bounds of their tiny meaningless existance. For example, most people, when survayed, said that they thought the US spends too much on foreign aid. When asked how much they thought was appropriate, they said 5% of the budget. The real figure is one-tenth of that number. There are dozens of things you can do to make up the cost of this research, including improving distribution methods, bringing down cultural barries that make access to healthcare inefficient, reforming patent conventions that jack up the cost of medications, etc. In the end, science is not the thing to sacrifice for humanity. BTW, I grew up learning stuff about international development from my dad (that's his line of work), and I was born in Thailand and spent part of my childhood in Bangladesh. I *do* know what I'm talking about.

      2) We're not talking about the "many marvelous inventions in the last, say, 20 years." We're talking about how physics has redefined the universe was we know it over the last 200 years. A large percentage of the modern economy owes its existance to quantum physics. The work at CERN is simply an extension of the very ancient search for knowledge about the structure of matter. Anytime you get a cat-scan or an X-ray, take medicine, use a computer, drive a car, watch TV, etc, you're directly benifeting from that research. Even those in inpovrished countries should thank this research for allowing scientists to use advanced imaging tehnologies to create things like TB vaccines that sells for dollars per dose. Going into the future, the only sure way to relieve poverty is to find more resources. It is not possible for the human population to keep growing, expanding, evolving, reaching towards a higher state of being, without more raw matter. So yes, that warp drive space ship WILL help the guy living in poverty, if you stop being so short-sighted. Giving a man a fish is not the only way to help him.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    12. Re:waste of power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rather than free, isn't a significant portion _lost_ in the conversion? Why aren't these people/companies being sued? Know anyone offhand who sells one?

  24. Quantity? by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 1

    Antihydrogen has been made before, but only a handful of atoms at a time.

    A handfull? Wouldn't that be like... Millions and millions of atoms? Or am I seeing things in the wrong perspective here?

    1. Re:Quantity? by T-Punkt · · Score: 1

      Well, that depends on the pressure and temperature ;-).

  25. oh shit! by P00PY+mcfarkins · · Score: 1

    i hope Dr No doesnt get a hold of this new technology, the whole world will be screwed

    --
    Fudge this, fudge that, fudge everything... mmmmmm, fudge
  26. Re:hey, my site had that news 9hours ago, lol! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't count. That person followed the link from the slashdot story.

  27. Re:hey, my site had that news 9hours ago, lol! by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

    Well, by the time i posted that i was about goto sleep and noticed that slashdot haven't posted it up and decided to post it, i try to avoid same news than slashdot has, apparently Slashdot was just slow on this one. About visitors, well visitors dropped very highly after problems with windows at nearly a week downtime. Thanks to windows site has needed to be rebuild, redesigned and all content was lost, or actually nearly all but haven't yet added the old stuff, links & downloads... Perhaps next time i use some timestamping device to make people believe ;) And why to care? Well dunno, i used to think slashdot being fast on news but was very selective... well apparently not...

  28. Jealousy... by JimPooley · · Score: 3, Funny

    Harvard physicist Gerald Gabrielse said: "Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced."

    Meanwhile scientists at CERN say "The yanks are just jealous because we beat them to it."

    --

    "Information wants to be paid"
    1. Re:Jealousy... by A+Bugg · · Score: 1

      yeah except that gerald works AT CERN as a competing researcher, and that its probably just bitterness talking rather than county/lab pissing contests.
      a bugg

  29. George Bush says... by MosesJones · · Score: 5, Funny

    "We must stop these anti-hydrogen terrorists, I am informed that hydrogen is in things we use everyday like coke, and is even vital to Americans' survival. These people who are anti-hydrogen are anti-american and are seeking to destroy the very basis of our society, you can not be a friend of america if you are not a friend of hydrogen"

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:George Bush says... by Maran · · Score: 1

      "These people who are anti-hydrogen are anti-american and are seeking to destroy the very basis of our society"

      Somehow, I fear you may be too close for comfort. I mean, Shrub's hardly a "scien-tician", is he...

      All it needs is for a Star Trek fan on his staff to make a comment about photon torpedoes using antimater, and CERN will either be bombed to oblivion as a source of terrorist materials, or taken over by the DoD. Yes, I know CERN isn't in America. You think that'll stop them?

      As a matter of fact, CERN helped create the web, didn't they? We all know only terrorists, pirates and other assorted criminals use the web, so CERN's clearly been involved in terrorist activities for some time! In fact, they probably started the whole thing!

      Cynical paranoia - it's not just a hobby, it's a way of life ^_^

      Maran

    2. Re:George Bush says... by N3WBI3 · · Score: 2

      Tries for GWB to get masters =1, Tries for Al Gore = at least 2, (and he failed out of divinity school, cmon how do you fail God school??)

      --
    3. Re:George Bush says... by John+Paul+Jones · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I doubt GWB could have said anything like that without a few "uhhs", "whippersnappers", "crawfished", etc. He couldn't put a complete sentence together if his life depended on it.

      -JPJ
      --
      Feh.
    4. Re:George Bush says... by Mt._Honkey · · Score: 2
      Anyone see the daily show last night?

      Bush on Iraq: There's an old saying we have in Tennessee, in Texas, it's probably in Tennessee too. Fool me once, shame on... ... shame on you. ... ... ... ... ... Fool once not fool me again.
      In the grand scheme of things, it's not that important, but it is freakin' hilarious.
      --

      Don't Bogart the fish sticks
    5. Re:George Bush says... by vectra14 · · Score: 1

      we MUST protect out precious bodily fluids!!!

    6. Re:George Bush says... by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

      "America is a very noble nation." *ducks*

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    7. Re:George Bush says... by Fugly · · Score: 2

      Actually, according to the transcript at whitehouse.gov, the actual quote is:

      There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again.

      I cannot believe they actually post a word-for-word transcript in a press release on the white house website. It cracks me up. We elected a fucking rocket scientist didn't we?

    8. Re:George Bush says... by Myco · · Score: 2

      Kinda depends what you mean by "we" and "elected," but yeah.

    9. Re:George Bush says... by G-funk · · Score: 2

      We elected a fucking rocket scientist didn't we?


      Um.... as far as I knew, you elected the other bloke, but the courts decided you could all go jump :)

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    10. Re:George Bush says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is not true:

      1) when asked by a NYT journalists what he and his father talk about, he replied 'We talk about pussy'.

      2) He has denied veminatly having his girlfriend have an abortion.

      3) When asked about coke useage or coke deals, he has replied 'That is none of your business'.
      Complete sentences.

  30. Somewhere in bizarro land by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

    a scientist is gloating that she's just produced 50,000 atoms of hydrogen.

    Is anti-helium next? If they get up to anti-oxygen can they make trace amounts of anti-water??

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    1. Re:Somewhere in bizarro land by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there allready is antu-water, what did you think towels are made from?

    2. Re:Somewhere in bizarro land by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, in theory anti-hydrogen and anti-water should combine to make anti-water, but it's going to be a tricky experiment because we're going to need an "anti-match" to start the reaction.

      Is there such a thing as anti-fire?

    3. Re:Somewhere in bizarro land by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      water is anti-fire

    4. Re:Somewhere in bizarro land by barbazoo · · Score: 1

      Let's produce an Anti-Kirk!

    5. Re:Somewhere in bizarro land by schon · · Score: 2

      If they get up to anti-oxygen can they make trace amounts of anti-water?

      I thought we already had anti-oxygen... isn't that the stuff that gets rid of those free radical thingys that cause cancer?

    6. Re:Somewhere in bizarro land by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just get it hot enough to ignite. You can probably do that by introducing plain old matter into the system.

      If it burned you can still call it fire, except the reaction, of course, is producing anti-water. It still releases electromagnetic energy. And a photon is it's own anti-particle.

  31. How do you market that? by UncleAlias · · Score: 1
    Harvard physicist Gerald Gabrielse said: "Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced."
    You know, this reaaly sounds like this guy used to work for a dot-com. He does know his Vaporware Sale Pitch!...

    --

    Stéphane "Alias" Gallay
    Now, where did I put this witty quote?..

  32. Is that something we should be conCERNed about? by IXI · · Score: 1

    (this body intentionally left blank)

    --
    He saw some dirty arabs and fired. Too bad it was just some friendly kurds, BBC reporters and his fellow cowboys.
    1. Re:Is that something we should be conCERNed about? by N3WBI3 · · Score: 2
      Our last president attacked the Yugo's not becaus eof their strenght but because he had to admint "I *DID* have sexual relations with that woman, Ms Lewinski"

      While I say if the inspectors are there, tommorow, and can go anywhere they want (when they want) dont attack. I doubt this is really the case, there are U@ photographs from the last batch of inspectors showing truckload of equipment being moved hours before UN inspectors show up. Iraq is not holding up to its end of the bargin to end the 1991 Gulf war..

      --
  33. Mass-produced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    The BBC is reporting Here about scientists in the Cern particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland have mass produced over 50,000 atoms allowing them to test basic...

    Wouldn't it be a bit more correct to say that that've been anti-mass-produced? ;-)

    1. Re:Mass-produced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anti-matter does not have anti-gravity, you putz.

  34. Let me add just one: by BESTouff · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Load of a server: Old Unit: Hits per second New Unit: /. (pr. "Slashdot")

  35. Once more ... by BESTouff · · Score: 1
    Let me add one:
    Load of a server:
    Old Unit: Hits per second
    New Unit: /. (pr. "Slashdot")
  36. Allow me tranlsate... by jdreed1024 · · Score: 2
    Harvard physicist Gerald Gabrielse said: "Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced."

    "Shit! Those pesky Swiss folks got there first. Quick, let's discredit them. After all, that's what professional scientists do."

    --
    There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
    1. Re:Allow me tranlsate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As a matter of fact, my friend who works in Gerry's lab said Gerry is very unhappy right now. On condition of anonymity. Is this anonymous? Perhaps commander taco can now backtrack and figure out who I'm talking about. Oh well.

      Can you imagine working 20 years on something, and being second at it? Oy.

  37. Combine with anti-oxygen and... by shoppa · · Score: 5, Funny
    Now all they need to do is
    1. make some anti-oxygen
    2. combine it with anti-hydrogen in a 2:1 ratio
    3. to make anti-water
    4. Drink it and you get thirsty!
    1. Re:Combine with anti-oxygen and... by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 5, Funny

      As long as 'thirsty' is another word for 'every atom in your oesophagus exploding'...

    2. Re:Combine with anti-oxygen and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      4. Drink it and you get thirsty!

      anti-thirsty.

    3. Re:Combine with anti-oxygen and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      would sure as hell have a lot more fizz than carbonated water.

    4. Re:Combine with anti-oxygen and... by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

      New! Instant dehydrated food! Just add anti-water!

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    5. Re:Combine with anti-oxygen and... by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > As long as 'thirsty' is another word for 'every atom in your oesophagus exploding'

      So the only difference between antiwater and any other soft drink is that the TV advertisements for it would be accurate descriptions of reality?

      Hey, that would be a revolutionary breakthrough!

    6. Re:Combine with anti-oxygen and... by Tablizer · · Score: 2


      Or suck in some anti-helium and speak in a low tone, like James Earl Jones.

    7. Re:Combine with anti-oxygen and... by idontneedanickname · · Score: 1

      Someone beat you to it....Coke!

    8. Re:Combine with anti-oxygen and... by Grayswan · · Score: 1
      As long as 'thirsty' is another word for 'every atom in your oesophagus exploding'...

      ...at the speed of light. Total protonic reversal.

      --
      If you open your mind too wide, people will throw trash in it.
  38. WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the fuck is the Cern Mass? Stupid ambiguous English language.

    1. Re:WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In correct English title should be:

      Cern Mass-Produces Anti-Hydrogen

  39. Description of Antihydrogen... by cyrek · · Score: 5, Informative

    There's a simple and to-the-point description of Antihydrogen at the Wikipedia.

    Bizarrely, the person responsible for the original submission is typing this sentence right now. Thankfully, brighter people have improved upon it somewhat since then... :)

    --
    Insert witty sig about inserting witty sig here, here.
  40. Anyone Else... by Njoyda+Sauce · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Find it odd that this was filed under toys? It'd certainly be the biggest most expensive toy on the market.

    --

    You can only be young once, but you can be immature forever.
  41. Re:hey, my site had that news 9hours ago, lol! by crapulent · · Score: 1

    Well dunno, i used to think slashdot being fast on news but was very selective...

    What in god's name ever gave you that impression?

  42. Here is my lame Star Trek reference by jmcwork · · Score: 5, Funny

    You can tell they are anti-hydrogen because they all have little goatees and a really bad attitude.

    1. Re:Here is my lame Star Trek reference by Enry · · Score: 2

      And Worf would rather not talk about it.

    2. Re:Here is my lame Star Trek reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *scoff* You have...no honor.

    3. Re:Here is my lame Star Trek reference by JabberWokky · · Score: 2
      obPedanticTrekCorrection:

      No, that's MirrorHydrogen. Anti-hydrogen requires a tiny ship, and a man named Lazarus.

      (And even then, why bother doing a Trek reference? Antiparticles exist there already with semi-sensible properties, just adding a few whizbang technobabble sidecars for stuff like FTL travel and such).

      --
      Evan (reference, but a damn obvious one)

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  43. Pin by RageMachine · · Score: 1

    50,000 Atoms is about the size of the point on the end of a sewing pin. If you could bunch these together, then it could be quite visible under a standard microscope.

    --

    --------------------------
    Is this a sig?
    --------------------------
    1. Re:Pin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that hydrogen isn't visible under a standard microscope - I presume antihydrogen wouldn't be either. :-)

  44. Anti-hydrogen by balloonhead · · Score: 4, Funny
    I just want to see what happens when they stabilise it, then we can see both hydrogen, and his evil twin, anti-hydrogen, fight.

    --
    This idea was invented by Shampoo.
    1. Re:Anti-hydrogen by bravehamster · · Score: 2
      I just want to see what happens when they stabilise it, then we can see both hydrogen, and his evil twin, anti-hydrogen, fight.


      Anti-hydrogen is the one with the goatee, right?

      --
      ---- El diablo esta en mis pantalones! Mire, mire!
    2. Re:Anti-hydrogen by Ster · · Score: 1

      Convenently enough, I just read somewhere (maybe here on /.?) that someone (ThinkGeek?) is selling what they claim to be is Dilithium Crystals.

      Scotty! Geordi! O'Brien! Get over here! :-)

      (Left out Torres because, well, Voyager... shudder! And I haven't watched enough Enterprise to remember the engineer's name.)

      -Ster

    3. Re:Anti-hydrogen by cokane · · Score: 1

      The engineer in Enterprise is named Tripp.

    4. Re:Anti-hydrogen by entrager · · Score: 1

      I just want to see what happens when they stabilise it, then we can see both hydrogen, and his evil twin, anti-hydrogen, fight.

      It'll be a draw...

  45. Imagine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...have mass produced over 50,000 atoms..."
    Imagine a Be ...
    Never mind ...

  46. Re:hey, my site had that news 9hours ago, lol! by Skal+Tura · · Score: 0

    which part, being fast or very selective? Very selective because of so many news daily and fast because of so many users submitting news...

  47. Antimatter would speed space travel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When anti-matter and matter collide they will become pure energy: E=mc^2 . One gram of anti-matter will give you 0.002*(3*10^8)^2 = 6*10^13 or 60000000000 Joules of enegry.

    This will be enough for fast travel within our solar system. Naturally we need to create anti-matter in large quantities first.

    1. Re:Antimatter would speed space travel by thesadmac · · Score: 1

      And you're gonna be willing to sit in a ship sat next to enough explosives to destroy the whole Earth and then have it fire you into space so fast you form a smear on the back of it?

    2. Re:Antimatter would speed space travel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm, every spacecraft has huge amount of explosives near it when it's on the launch pad.

      Why you should form a smear? You can reach light speed wihtin a year using acceleration equivalent to earth gravity. Since I talked about travel in our solar system, maximum speed would be reached in few days.

  48. In an alternate universe somewhere... by DysonSphere · · Score: 2, Funny

    A slight glow emits everytime they turn this
    thing on.

    ----------

    --
    Mommy. What's a karma whore?
  49. Lightspeed by plarsen · · Score: 0

    If light moves faster in vaccum than in air, how fast does it run in anti materia?

    1. Re:Lightspeed by lindelof · · Score: 1

      Slower. Light particle are their own anti-particles and don't care whether they're interacting with matter or antimatter, the result is the same.

  50. Yes, They Thought Of That Experiment by SEWilco · · Score: 1
    "Tests of the behaviour of antimatter under the influence of gravity are also an interesting future perspective."

    That's a quote from the project's News page. They do indeed want to see if it falls up.

    1. Re:Yes, They Thought Of That Experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Methinks you mis-interpret... I would guess they want to see how STRONGLY it iteracts with gravity, i.e. do H and anti-H have the same strength interaction with gravitons (or whatever your favorite gravity-mediating particle may be). I doubt anyone is expecting anti-matter to have interactions with gravity that are fully flipped in signs. What they would be looking for is probably difference gravitational interactions with the various induced turbulences in the sea of virtual qqbar's. All this is probably 'cause this AC doesn't work in the particle physics game any more... so I don't know anybody inside the Athena collab.

  51. In other news... by PygmyTrojan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Linux supporters warn that a secure OS might not have really been produced by Microsoft.

    --

    Trying is the first step towards failure.

  52. You seem to be confused... by hackwrench · · Score: 2

    Don't you know that not being in the United States only means it is a prime candidated for being bombed to oblivion as a source of terrorist materials or taken over by the DoD. The United States doesn't need to destroy or take over things it already possesses. Why do you think it has so many overseas bases.

  53. Scientists *IN* the CERN accelerator? by Tall_Rob · · Score: 1

    Hope they've got their lead-lined underwear on if they're INSIDE it. Don't try this at home, kids. :-)

  54. Re:Allow me translate... by Raindeer · · Score: 2

    Like a famous Dutch physicist said. If one does research with American scholars, one is sure to be reduced to "a dutch scholar" or "an european scholar".

  55. /. is on the decline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmmm, why the fuck did ./ reject this same story earlier? Nice going guys, the site has been nothing but quality as of lately!

  56. Those wacky star drives by SEWilco · · Score: 1

    But we really need scientists to create the crucial elements which are used by science fiction interstellar drives: Handwavium and Analogousite.

  57. I guess ... by Scholasticus · · Score: 2, Informative

    for a handful the hand would have to be really, really small. By the way, has anybody thought about the fact that even if we could produce antihydrogen in large quantities, it would be pretty useless as a source of energy. Since its charge would be neutral, you couldn't contain it magnetically. You would have to use antiprotons or an anti-element with a positive or negative charge..

  58. Conversion factors for PS to SI units by yerricde · · Score: 2

    Library of Congress

    Close to 80 terabits.

    eye-blink

    Equals 0.1 second. Yes, when you blink your eyes, you miss 10 whole frames of your precious Quake III. Would it be possible to detect closing of eyes and turn off rendering for a split second, giving those cycles to (e.g.) your niced distributed.net or Folding@home client?

    handful

    Depends on molar density (mol/L but not molarity because it isn't a solution). This is the only one I couldn't find a definite conversion factor for.

    human hair

    Close to 50 to 100 micrometers.

    football field

    Approximately 110 m, for both soccer and NFL football. Canadian fields are longer.

    football stadium

    NFL's Cleveland Browns play in a stadium with a volume of about 3 million cubic meters.

    100-watt-lightbulb-second

    Given that a watt of power is a joule of energy per second, this equals 100 joules. A kilowatt-hour equals 3.6 megajoules. A horsepower is about 750 watts, so a horsepower-hour is 2.7 megajoules.

    CowboyNeal

    Assume 90 kg.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:Conversion factors for PS to SI units by gazbo · · Score: 0
      Assume 90 kg

      Have you seen any pictures of him?

    2. Re:Conversion factors for PS to SI units by yerricde · · Score: 1

      background: from anti-hydrogen to popular-science units to the mass of Pater

      Have you seen any pictures of him?

      Other than the picture on the front of cowboyneal.org, no. I'm welcome to corrections in my estimates of conversion factors. How much would you guess CowboyNeal weighs?

      --
      Will I retire or break 10K?
    3. Re:Conversion factors for PS to SI units by gazbo · · Score: 0
      Well, I can't seem to find any of the really good ones, but this should give a good example of mass. Yeah, the top's baggy, but you can clearly see the outline of his gut pushing the fabric out front.

      A good 110kg I reckon.

    4. Re:Conversion factors for PS to SI units by Myco · · Score: 2

      Well, we can just assume he's a uniform sphere of water...

  59. Since no one has bothered yet by ACNeal · · Score: 1

    It wasn't hydrogen that burned.

    The evidence suggests that it was the paint.

    There is even evidence that the Hindenberg never existed.

    In fact the Germans probably never even had balloons.

    In fact Germany never existed. It was all done with paint and mirrors.

  60. Anti-Christ? by yerricde · · Score: 1

    But can the antimatter physicists top this?

    /home/tepples/music/Marilyn Manson/Antichrist Superstar/Marilyn Manson - 1996.txt

    anti choice and anti girl
    I am the anti-flag unfurled
    anti white and anti man
    I got the anti-future plan
    anti fascist, anti mod
    I am the anti-music god
    anti sober, anti whore
    there will never be enough of anti more
    I can't believe in the things
    that don't believe in me
    now it's your turn to see misanthropy
    anti people now you've gone too far
    here's your antichrist superstar

    anti money, anti hate
    anti things I f*cked and ate
    anti cop and anti fun
    here is my anti-president gun
    anti Satan, anti black
    anti world is on my back
    anti gay and anti dope
    I am the faggot antipope
    I can't believe in the things
    that don't believe in me
    now it's your turn to see what'll never be
    anti people now you've gone too far
    antichrist superstar
    anti people now you've gone too far
    here's your antichrist superstar

    anti peace and anti life
    anti husband, anti wife
    anti song and anti me
    I don't deserve a chance to be

    anti people now you've gone too far
    antichrist superstar
    anti people now you've gone too far
    here's your antichrist superstar

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:Anti-Christ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't think of anything nice to say, so I won't say anything at all.

  61. First Anti-Hydrogen post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn straight! That's what we need. More anti-hydrogen. I friggin' HATE hydrogen.

  62. I found the perfect way... by SEWilco · · Score: 1

    ...to mass produce antimatter, but my solution will not fit in this space.

  63. Ok, I'm a chemist... by thehappygit · · Score: 0

    ...but I dont understand something about this.

    How is the anti-hydrogen stored? Unike the charged anti-particles generally made, I don't see how atoms can be stored because due to their neutrality, a magnetic field doesn't contain them. Any physicist care to explain?

    1. Re:Ok, I'm a chemist... by szero · · Score: 2, Informative

      Suspension between the superconducted charged magnets.

      --
      "The more you know, the less you understand."
    2. Re:Ok, I'm a chemist... by thehappygit · · Score: 0

      Huh?

  64. Arrogant f*cker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jeez. How arrogant is that? Scientists at CERN mass-produce
    something that others have struggled for small quantities of,
    and a pissed off US counterpart reckons that... well, they've
    probably made some beginner's mistake???

  65. I just hope... by xidix · · Score: 1

    they didn't make any negative strangelets. I've got plans this weekend, and it would really suck if the world blew up tomorrow. But next week is fine, I can pencil it in. Just need to find me a space shuttle and four idiots...

  66. Mass production? by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2
    Cool, how much per kilogram?

    I'll take a tonne. When can you deliver?

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  67. What a coincidence... by Digital+Aje · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I just an article on MSNBC last night (here) that was an exerpt from William Shatner's book Star Trek: I'm Working on That: A Trek from Science Fiction to Science Fact, where he discusses all sorts of Star Trek technologies, notably warp engines and antimatter.

    He discusses the "real science" and problems with space travel, etc., one of them being the difficulties in mass-producing antimatter (said to be the most efficient form of fuel). And then today, we read that CERN (maybe) mass-produced antimatter. Cool! One step closer? :)

  68. gee, a little late by racerx509 · · Score: 1

    Maybe this should have been added here

    --
    13 year old white supremacists are shitty web designers.
  69. This is nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a whole room full of Anti-ANTI-Hydrogen!

  70. just kidding? by elvum · · Score: 1

    Scientist: My results are consistent with the existence of previously-unseen effect "X". More research is required.
    Media: Scientist discovers X!

  71. I would like to protest! by SphynxSR · · Score: 1

    I would like to protest against these test. Atoms should not be used in experiments. They have not had the oppertunity to become the most they can. I would like to setup a sancuary for these atoms, where they can roam free, and collide at will. A little place called Iraq.

    --

    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
  72. Re:I was lucky... URL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  73. Idiots guide to story posting by Mulletproof · · Score: 2

    Cern Mass Produces Anti-Hydrogen = "Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced."

    WTF. So even though they said themselves they are far from certain, you go ahead and post it as fact? Kudos to the editors too... Uhhhg...

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
    1. Re:Idiots guide to story posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually someone ELSE said that.

    2. Re:Idiots guide to story posting by floydigus · · Score: 1

      And then you go and post it in the 'Toys' topic. wtfiuwt?

      The toys topic is the best thing about /., and this story is wasteful pollution.

      --

      All things in moderation; including moderation

  74. Now bring on the anti-Hindenburg.... by coltrane679 · · Score: 1

    Oh, the humanity!

    1. Re:Now bring on the anti-Hindenburg.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so a small thing that never left the ground,moved,or exploded would be bad? when has a rock ever been bad?

  75. Re:why to suspect the results by jaoswald · · Score: 2

    Reading the paper, I'd say the reason to be suspicious is that they seem to only have detected the radiation due to matter-anti-matter annihilation, with the requirement that an anti-proton and positron event happen at pretty much the same time and place. Then they use various comparisons to give additional confidence in the result.

    However, as they say, they can't tell what quantum state these atoms are in.

    Until they see [anti]hydrogen spectral lines, I'm not 100% sure they have real anti-hydrogen atoms; for now, I'd say 85% sure. Maybe Gabrielse knows of some ways that the same signature can be generated by other crap thrown around by the trapping and mixing processes.

  76. Silliness by MyHair · · Score: 1

    Our long experience with these very difficult experiments warns that antihydrogen may not have really been produced.

    Well, it doesn't matter, anyway.

    Ba-dum-bump.

  77. But why??? by zpengo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Personally, I'm holding out for anti-helium. That'll make me sound like Barry White, right?

    --


    Got Rhinos?
    1. Re:But why??? by dexter+riley · · Score: 1

      Helium makes you sound like Barry White. Anti-helium makes you sound like Tiny Tim.

  78. Question by Fjord · · Score: 2

    One thing I've been wondering about anti-matter, does it have anti-gravity, which attracts other anti-matter but repels regular matter?

    --
    -no broken link
    1. Re:Question by Peter+T+Ermit · · Score: 2
      Level 1 answer: A positron is a lepton and an antiproton is a baryon, so they can't annihilate each other.

      Level 2 answer: The capture of a positron by an antiproton is possible, but very unlikely, because it's energetically unfavorable.

      Level 3 answer: You're proposing the k-capture of a positron by an antiproton, which would yield an antineutron and a neutrino. Since the antineutron has more (anti)mass than the antiproton, the probability of this is extremely small, just as it's quite unlikely that a hydrogen atom will k-capture its electron and become a neutron. The reverse process, beta decay, *is* favorable, which is why a neutron can (and will) spontaneously become a proton and an electron (and antineutrino.) (Half-life of around 10-15 minutes, IIRC.) Presumably, an antineutron would also decay via a W-boson exchange into an antiproton, a positron and a neutrino. Measuring the properties of this decay and comparing it to the beta decay of a neutrino would be a *very* cool experiment.

  79. correction by rodentia · · Score: 1

    ...our bodilous fluiditude.

    --
    illegitimii non ingravare
  80. Question by JoeRobe · · Score: 1

    Here's a question that a few of us in our lab are wondering about (we're physical chemists):

    Why do electrons and positrons annihilate when they come into contact with one another, instead of forming a bound state, like the proton and electron do? I mean, what is it about the proton (rather the quarks that make up the proton) or the positron that either keeps the annihilation from happening or makes the two annihilate? The radial distribution of an electron around a regular proton (roughly exp(-r)) shows that the electron is frequently in the region of the proton. So why doesn't the electron hit the proton and annihilate the same way it would for the positron?

    JoeRobe

    --
    The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
  81. Correction by geekoid · · Score: 2

    Volume
    Old Unit: cubic centimeter, liter
    New Unit: state

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  82. Anti-hydrogen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that like anti-bacterial soap?

  83. Much less.... by deathcow · · Score: 2


    The UNIVERSE IS GREEN !

    Wait...

    The UNIVERSE IS TAN !

  84. Wikipedia ?= murder manual? by Skadet · · Score: 1

    So I follow your link (I love wikipedia). Finally I found a description of Deuterium, which linked to a dscription of "heavy water" - when D replaces hydrogen. An interesting read, but even more interesting was the blurb at the end:

    "Heavy water would be an ideal poison for killing someone with, since it is extremely unusual for forensic tests for it to be performed, and it would appear that the person was merely suffering from some mysterious illness; however, heavy water is very expensive, and requires a government license to purchase, making this method of killing someone less attractive in practice."
    http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_water
    Hmm.

  85. Subatomic particles by tres3 · · Score: 1
    I posted a question to Ask-Slashdot about this but my story acceptance rate is low. Comments seem to get posted though so here goes:

    Where is a good reference source to read about things like electrons, protons, and neutrons? What are they made of? What are quarks? leptons? meons? gluons? What other sub-atomic particles are known to exist? What are theorized? I'm looking for information in reference form so that I can easily refer to it when reading articles such as this (and comments such as these).

  86. Strange Politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SCSC should never have been started in Texas due to high cost of digging there. Yet it was due to bush politics. Then it was stopped due to democrats. stupid.
    Clinton started the next shuttle with the X-33. It gets 95% built and Bush kills it almost immeaditly(or turned it over to the military which is my guess).
    This would lowered the cost to space for us. Personally, I think that US should pay attention to china and india for their very cheap programs. India is only charging 15 million / launch.
    Nixon(watergate), raygun(iran contra), bush(iran contra), clinton(monicagate), and w(anthrax amongst other things) have been constant liers and manipulators in office.
    Bad presidents is what is killing US.