Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Create Di-positronium Molecules

doxology writes "The BBC reports that scientists have been able to create di-positronium molecules. A di-positronium molecule consists of two positronium atoms, exotic atoms which are made from an electron and a positron (the anti-particle of the electron). A potential use of these molecules is to make extremely powerful gamma-ray lasers, possibly on sharks."

16 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. And doxology ruins the whole thread by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hey! You're supposed to let US make the jokes.

  2. Someone get Wheaton in here by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

    If ever there was a topic which he could explain it would be this.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  3. Re:Sharks by y86 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Err.. does anyone else wonder why specifically sharks?


    Dr. Evil: You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads! Now evidently my cycloptic colleague informs me that that cannot be done. Ah, would you remind me what I pay you people for, honestly? Throw me a bone here! What do we have?

    Its an Austin Powers joke. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118655/quotes/
  4. Possibly on sharks? by fgaliegue · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the end of the summary, the very end in fact:

    [...],possibly on sharks Can the author of the news please elaborate? I just don't see how this discovery possibly relates to an undeservedly frowned upon species of fish...

  5. On the good side by Billosaur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a result, there is a huge interest in the technology from the military as well as energy researchers who believe the lasers could be used to kick-start nuclear fusion in a reactor.

    Well, I'm not sure if letting the military get their hands on it is such a good thing, but the use to initiate nuclear fusion could be the key to cleaner power for everyone. The hardest part of initiating fusion has been pouring enough energy in to start the reaction and allow it to become self-sustaining. This discovery might lead to technology capable of generating the necessary energy.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  6. Re:Not fair! by somersault · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Soviet Russia, electron is anti-particle of positron!

    --
    which is totally what she said
  7. Can you imagine by ciaohound · · Score: 5, Funny

    what would happen if Scotty reversed the polarity on those?

    --
    Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
  8. Re:Marvel comics... by y86 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sweet, one step closer to me getting gamma-induced powers...HULK SMASH....


    Or cancer.
  9. The "optics" of a gamma laser by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 5, Informative

    A gamma-ray laser would certainly have many applications. Maybe the energy density is so high that it becomes irrelevant, but the problem that jumps out at me is that you really can't refract high-energy photons. About all you can do is stop them. I don't see this type of "laser" being used in most applications where you traditionally think lasers would be useful, since you wouldn't be able to easily focus these beams, guide them in fiber, or anything like that. The most useful thing you could do with this type of laser, I would guess, would be ablation--THAT it should be pretty darn good at.

    Anyhow, it'll be interesting to see the radiometry for these lasers in however many years it'll take for them to be in a position where they can even think about that sort of thing. From that, you can figure out the dosimetry if you were to turn one onto a person. In this situation, a medical linac should be to this sort of thing what a flashlight is to a laser in terms of photon flux. When you're talking about gamma photons instead of visible ones, I imagine you could give someone a pretty serious radiation dose in pretty short order. From a military perspective I don't think that putting that in a hand-held weapon would exactly rival bullets (which are pretty good at disabling people quickly, something that radiation couldn't do reliably barring stupidly high doses over large areas of the brain or GI), especially considering the cost. Putting one on a satellite and blasting ICBMs in orbit, however, could be a very different story--you don't have nearly as much atmosphere to get through, and you ought to be able to put an awful lot more energy in that missile with similar fluxes of gamma photons versus lower-energy photons. The gammas would probably significantly penetrate the housing of the missile, too, which could be good or bad--bad in that it spreads out the heating effect you'd get, good in that you can significantly heat things that are behind a few layers of metal.

    Come to think of it, considering that medical linacs have caused serious burns (and then death from ARS) in the past, turning a gamma laser on someone would probably basically burn right through them--so maybe dosimetry really isn't an issue (for the target--for the operators, on the other hand...)

    Anyhow, that's way in the future. For now, all we have are jokes about sharks that can turn people into the Hulk from ten meters.

    1. Re:The "optics" of a gamma laser by marcosdumay · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Putting one on a satellite and blasting ICBMs in orbit, however, could be a very different story"

      I doubt it. If you can't focus the bean, you don't have much chance of using it at distance.

    2. Re:The "optics" of a gamma laser by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 4, Informative

      You actually can focus gamma rays.

      --
      Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
  10. Re:Not fair! by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

    Anti plants? Are you nuts? Anti plants do anti photosynthesis. And while glowing oaks might be cool, their carbon emissions are just way too high.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Can they take it to three? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Although dipositronium (Ps2) is considered to be a huge advance, scientists will be disappointed to discover that tripositronium (Ps3) will never be as popular as tungsten-diiodide (WII).

  12. Re:Why is this an "atom?" by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Calling an electron-positron pair an 'atom' is a bit suspect, but not too bad. Any semi-stable collection of elementary particles can be referred to as an 'atom'. They took the analogy even further, saying that when these 'atoms' met each other they formed 'molecules' -- large, electromagnetically bound accumulations of electron-positron pairs. Kinda cool.

    As for what's keeping them from annihilating each other...well, at first it's angular momentum and the Pauli exclusion principle. Both the electron and the positron are fermions, and they must occupy discrete states. Give the pair enough energy and they will occupy a semi-stable state that does not allow them to contact and destroy each other.

    But before long they *do* annihilate each other. That's why it's called an 'annihilation laser'. The matter-antimatter pair collapses, liberating enormous amounts of energy in the form of gamma rays.

    I think 'matter-antimatter annihilation laser' sounds cooler, but there's a certain mad scientist flavor to the 'gamma ray' bit, too.

    --
    Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
  13. Re:Marvel comics... by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sweet, one step closer to me getting gamma-induced powers...HULK SMASH....


    Or cancer. I realized long ago that the Marvel universe is identical to our own except for one fundamental detail: In our universe, when a freak accident occurs, people die. In the Marvel universe, they get super big, super strong, and oddly colored.
    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  14. Re:non-shark-related by Ecuador · · Score: 4, Informative

    First of all, the electrons orbiting around the atom's nucleus is an atomic model that was valid during the first couple of decades of the 20th century. Our atomic models of the last 80 years are not as simple as that.
    You are right about the electron and the positron being able to annihilate each other (producing a couple of photons IIRC, I guess your "explosion" of radiation). However, you are limited to high school level (particles orbiting each other) and Hollywood level (matter-antimater explosions) physics, but you are getting in quantum physics territory, where the particle-antiparticle annihilation does not exactly happen when the particles "touch". In fact we cannot even say that two particles "touch" in the traditional sense of the word.
    Anyway, without being a particle physicist and without RTFA (leaving for work now), I can tell you that I don't see a reason that a positron-electron pair could not survive for a brief time. Where "brief" in physics is measured in ps or at least ns. When you hear physics news like "we created the xxx exotic particle" they are usually referring to something that existed in their accellerator for a picosecond or so...

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS