Slashdot Mirror
Physicists Investigate Why Matter and Antimatter Are Not Mirror Images (economist.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: As mismatches go, it's a big one. When physicists bring the Standard Model of particle physics and Einstein's general theory of relativity together they get a clear prediction. In the very early universe, equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have come into being. Since the one famously annihilates the other, the result should be a universe full of radiation, but without the stars, planets and nebulae that make up galaxies. Yet stars, planets and nebulae do exist. The inference is that matter and antimatter are not quite as equal and opposite as the models predict.
This problem has troubled physics for the past half-century, but it may now be approaching resolution. At CERN, a particle-physics laboratory near Geneva, three teams of researchers are applying different methods to answer the same question: does antimatter fall down, or up? Relativity predicts "down", just like matter. If it falls up, that could hint at a difference between the two that allowed a matter-dominated universe to form.
This problem has troubled physics for the past half-century, but it may now be approaching resolution. At CERN, a particle-physics laboratory near Geneva, three teams of researchers are applying different methods to answer the same question: does antimatter fall down, or up? Relativity predicts "down", just like matter. If it falls up, that could hint at a difference between the two that allowed a matter-dominated universe to form.
Couldn't this be a case of a butterfly flapped its wings billions and billions of years ago, and now we have more matter than anti-matter?
Can you explain us how do you create antimatter in this universe?
This problem has troubled physics for the past half-century...
This "problem" is why we are here. How about not calling the existence of the universe a "problem"?
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
falls down.
That depends on which side has been lovingly spread with anti-butter by a hungry anti-dad just before his anti-son runs through the anti-kitchen jostling his anti-arm...
There is a retired scientist called Jean-Pierre Petit that has some ideas about this question (spoil: this antimater will fall down). This is the Janus cosmological model
. I do not know if he is right or wrong, but the videos are worth a look
Trust and Antitrust aren't mirror images either. No one's worried about that. :-)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
No problem. The Apple watch has an app for that.
Is that also the part of the story that makes sense?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I donâ(TM)t know if anyone considered that some normal matter might have existed before the Big Bang. It would explain the uneven spread of the universe.
The goatee that antimatter seems to have of course its not an exact mirror image
Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
Cue random uneducated theories...
THREE
TWO
ONE
GO SLASHDOT!!!
General relativity is based on the premise that there is no difference between gravity and acceleration, that is, gravitational mass is always exactly equal to inertial mass. If antimatter falls up, the whole theory collapses.
If antimatter repels ordinary matter but attracts itself, I suppose the universe would self-segregate into galaxy clusters made of one or the other. How sure are we that distant superclusters are made of the same stuff we are?
Well, perhaps not, but this would explain why this universe is "normal" matter with no "anti"-matter. In the gigantic virtual particle event that created this universe, there would of course need to be a paired "anti" universe where "normal" matter is scarce. Someday in the distant future the two will recombine and balance the books to zero sum... and then our universe will cease to be "The Ultimate free Lunch".
-- Insert witty one-liner here. --
CERN experiments to test the free-fall of antiatoms
https://cerncourier.com/does-a...
Can't the recombination happen soon? I don't want to go back to work on Monday.
God uses Intel floating point numbers.
Table-ized A.I.
Similarly, the matter that we have in the universe today might just be the statistically insignificant leftover excess matter that happened to not get annihilated when approximately equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Except it doesn't, you just ignore the screaming problems with it. i.e. stuff going backwards in time, that we pretend doesn't break causality.
Magic forces at a distance, even stretching backwards in time, that only work if you filter (they ARE the filtering).
When you decide you can break anything, even the flow of time, everything becomes possible.
Or it s model of the net effect of a flock of starlings, as viewed by myopic eyes that can only see the flock not the individual starling.
Life is dull in the dipole model. I can dumb it down to a single slash comment. Two particles, no mass, a single force electrostatic, a different simplified definition of time, inertia and momentum rewritten using force deltas, and all the weird shit you see results from just that.
Dipoles try to kick each other to maximize the attraction force (think of how magnets always stick together when they have repelling ends and attracting ends, yet they will always attract because they organize the repelling end to be further away). At macro scale this is gravity, mass is just some proxy we made for this potential binding force at scale.
Run the model, there is a maximum force when two dipoles are spinning at the same frequency.... i.e. bind{f,f} > bind{f, f+0.0001} and bind{f,f} > bind{f, f-0.0001}.
This is also true at the harmonics, but the local maximum is less, i.e. bind{f, 2f-0.0001} bind{f, 2f+0.0001}, and bind{f,2f}bind{f,f}
And at half harmonics i.e bind{f,f/2} = bind{2f, f}, and other fractional harmonics are all local maxima.
And when the dipoles spin the velocity stretches or compresses the wave, and that can cause a local harmonic, i.e. bind{f,2f} = bind{f, f at closing v}
v is c for the net result of the stuff near us.
In the dipole model, a particle and a photon are just different way of organizing the dipole stuff which creates a larger or smaller binding force. A dipole is a loose cloud bound at the first harmonic relative to the other dipoles in the cloud. Light is not energy, its dipole matter at a different binding harmonic.
Slits? Diffraction? Man that is dull. Send a photon through a perfect simulated slit vacuum and it slows down before it enters the slit and speeds up on exit. Weird? No, just the angle it binds to and the harmonics it binds at. Dull dull dull.
You get forces that first *increase* with decreasing distances then *decrease* with decreasing distance to a limit, when they're zero. A net effect of spin modes over time. Not a new magical force, just the same dull organizational force you're very familiar with at macro scale in everything from crystals to water.
I don't have a charged particle yet from just running the model, it's on my list of things to force. I think you could attach a monopole above and maybe even two opposing monopoles, one above and one below one of my hoop-particles. Or I wait and see. TBD.
And I haven't done the compression cases yet.... what happens when you force them so close together they cannot organize, you'd be left with just monopoles, with net zero force. Without the dipoles you don't even have the 'c' binding maximum velocity either. What would that behave like? TBD.
And what is time, I think its not even a thing. It's simply a parameter that makes 2X take twice as 'long' as X, ultimately just our perception of change based on the physics of our brains relative to the physics of the dipole universe. TBD.
TBD TBD TBD.... man the universe is f-ing dull.
Antimatter is a low-energy loser. Matter made better deals with gravity, believe me! I know science better than Alvin Einstein! Fake news glorifies anti-matter, but it cannot even wipe it's own ass. It came from one of those shit-hole multiverses and deserves to die! Space Force and I will build the great Milkiwall Galaxy to keep their anti-rapists and anti-murderers out! I like particles that don't get annihilated. #MUGA!
Slashdot still doesn't support greater less than symbols???
bind{f, 2f-0.0001} is_less_than bind{f,2f} is_greater_than bind{f, 2f+0.0001}, and bind{f,2f} is_less_than bind{f,f}
What if the anti-particle is just the same particle with opposing monopole bound on the other side. So a neutron has a +ve above and a -ve below and an anti-neurtron is the -ve above and +ve below etc.
It's right there in the math!
Antimatter *literally* is matter going backwards in time!
So naturally, antimatter went *the other way* at the big bang!
And there is no annihilation! There is a bounce, and the *same* particle changes direction!
So like in any situation of a strong outward force, naturally there is little stuff going the other way, even with all the bumping.
Why there are still wannabe scientists in the news, who are so deep inside their little box for robots, that they cannot see the forest for the trees, is the only riddle here!
Anti-neutrons are definitely different from neutrons. Neutrons are made up of 3 quarks, two down and one up whereas anti-neutrons are made of three anti-quarks, two anti-down and one anti-up.
This is because neutrons are made of fermions which have different particle and antiparticle states. Only bosons, like the photon, have the same particle and antiparticle states.
This is almost duplicate since I remember a similar article which talked about some experiment by Italian scientists a few years ago.
But again, our current understanding is that gravity is the curvature of space and time. The anti-matter has no choice but to follow that curvature. It cannot pretend that curvature does not exist.
So, if anti-matter were actually fallen up you can throw general relativity out of the window. I do not expect that will happen.
Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
Funnily enough, I was just wondering what the APK Hosts guy would think about this topic..
Couldn't this be a case of a butterfly flapped its wings...
Short answer: no, assuming you mean some random fluctuation in the early Universe. For the excess of matter over anti-matter in the early universe to be due to such a random fluctuation, there would have to be some process that allows more matter than anti-matter to be created and we have not seen anything that does this yet.
However, we have seen a bias between matter and antimatter in decays of certain types of particles made of quarks and anti-quarks bound together. While this is not enough to create more matter than anti-matter if the same effect exists in the oscillations of neutrinos then there may just be enough to explain the excess of matter over antimatter. However, this would still not be a random fluctuation but rather that the universe has an inbuilt bias in the laws of physics which favours matter over antimatter.
As an interesting aside this difference, called CP violation, is also the only physics we know of that requires three generations of quarks and leptons to exist. If there were only two generations we could not have a difference at least via this mechanism.
Can you explain us how do you create antimatter in this universe?
Smash things together with enough energy or, even simpler, find any nucleus which undergoes beta decay. The most common form of beta decay produces an electron and antineutrino (which is antimatter eventhough it will hardly ever interact) but there is also beta+ decay where a positron (antielectron) and neutrino are emitted.
The latter type is used by medical physicists in positron emission tomography. This can detect tumors too small to be seen any other way by using the two photons produced by the positron annihilating with an electron in your body to reconstruct where the molecules containing the decaying nucleus was in your body. It can also be used to study how drugs are absorbed.
If antimatter falls up, then matter would not dominate - rather, antimatter and matter would be segregated. Each galaxy (or perhaps cluster) would have one or the other dominate, in the sense that antimatter should be attracted to other antimatter. Though you ought to be able to tell if some galaxies/clusters are repelled by others and therefore already know this answer.
My money would be on "down", as "up" would also violate the equivalence between gravitational and inertial mass. Unless you're going to say antimatter repels other antimater. Hmm - that would mean antimatter never forms (anti-)stars and thus make it a candidate for "dark matter". That might have some merit after all...
What has happened to Slashdot?
Take off every 'sig' !!
Isn't the result of this also an indication of how time travel might work? As I understand it, from our perspective, there is very little difference between an anti-electron (positron) and an electron travelling backwards in time. One major difference is that positrons would fall downward and electrons travelling backward in time would fall upward. This would get even more interesting if the answer was both, because both exist and we cannot otherwise determine a difference.
And how the hell do they collide if they go in opposite directions?
Maybe it is the effect of the two Lazarus' trapped in the negative magnetic corridor trying to escape?
(Or is the plural of Lazerus, Lazeri?)
Tracy Johnson
Old fashioned text games hosted below:
http://empire.openmpe.com/
BT
Nope, the "big U" Universe is always the ultimate free lunch.
Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
First method: Create isotopes that have a decay mode that emits anti-matter (usually in the form of positrons). This is a tried-and-true method and is already being used in industrial applications of anti-matter.
Second method: Smash particles together with enough oomph. Some anti-matter will be generated. Capture and isolate it.
Not good reporting as per usual. If antimatter has anti-gravity, it may not be a matter dominated universe. But there is actually good reason to think that CP violations result in the matter antimatter asymmetry. So it is really a long shot that gravity doesn't work the same for antimatter. It is important to follow up on the long shots.
The public doesn't need to know about this unless they find something different and it goes through a couple of years of vetting. I say this because people will remember this and many will never hear about how it supported the standard model, and that is a disservice to the public.
See subject: his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & altering /.er's words.
c6gunner tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/com...
So I challenge c6gunner to show he did better work than mine & he CAN'T!
YOU DEMAND PROOF of others here? "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?
So now I DEMAND IT OF YOU & YOU FAIL!
c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!
* c6gunner's LYING saying I did a MacOS X one - I haven't yet & c6gunner's LYING impersonating me hosts work vs. Intel CPU issues (spectre/meltdown).
APK
P.S.=> You say hosts = shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.... ? /.ers & security pros SAY DIFFERENT: /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments.... https://slashdot.org/comments....
SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments....
REAL RESULTS w/ hosts vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments....
EAT YOUR WORDS!
You need local variation due to inflation. From there, you can have vast regions that are purely one or the other.
I think they are testing wrong concept. If gravity generate curvature, it's not the same how the particle act over that curvature that which king of signature generates.
They will find how the particle reacts to gravity. I doubt it does different that matter seeing that light, without mass react in the same way to curvature.
But it's different to see which kind of curvature generates antimatter.
TFA has to be dumbed down for the female womyn of coloure.
Don't be so sexist!