Antimatter Atoms Captured

Whamo writes: "Researchers at CERN think they have created and stored thousands of antiatoms in a particle trap. The researchers first used powerful magnetic fields to trap antiprotons then exposed this to a beam of positrons. Initial results indicate that at least some of the antiparticles have bound together to become neutral antihydrogen atoms. How cool is that?"

anti matter

[rigau]

Im not a physics major so excuse me if this is a stupid question but exactly how dangerous is this? is anyone taking this into account before we collapse the fabric of the universe or something like that. the article says that a lot of energy ca be released whe an anti whaever comes in contact with its positive counterpart. Usually things that release a lot of energy can be very dangerous and the more energy the more so they are. Gasoline is dangerous when it releases energy but uranium is more dangerous when it releases energy.

Important stuff

[joshv]

The theory goes that anti-hyrdogen should have all the same observable physical properties that hydrogen does. If we can start to manufacturer and store non-trivial quantities of the stuff we can actually start to test whether or not this is true. We can see if it has the same obsorbtion spectrum as hydrogen, the same atomic weight, etc...

If there is a difference we might be able to use it to confirm or disprove our assumption that the entire universe is made of 'normal' matter. For example, if there is an observable difference between the absorbtion spectra of hydrogen and anti-hydrogen, we'd have a test to determine if a distant galaxy was made of anti-matter. If there is no difference, well, we've found a very expensive way to heat a small cup of coffee.

-josh

Re:anti matter

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt we rip the fabric of time and space any time soon... that would require more power than we can even theoretically generate with theoretical generators that we have imagined in science so far. Though you do have to worry abou that torroid black hole generator that goes online soon in europe.

Remember, anti-particles exist through out the universe as a result of certain energy/mass exchanges and reactions... they are shortlived as even in a vacume in deep space there are particles a plenty and they react violently in self immolating fashion upon interaction with them.

I am worried as to how they are trapping these pesky little buggers. It takes alot of energy to do that I would think, and what happens if containment fails (even for the few microseconds)... blammo! Particle for particle, there is no higher amount of energy released (theoretically) than through the interaction of "normal" and "anti" matter. A few particles could still produce prodigious amounts of rapidly released energy.

I do think that this is tre cool though. This technology, combined with fusion (which is getting closer, though no reactor has yet to produce more power than it consumes) could give us the stars. I read a recent article where fusion as a practical power source on earth in reasonably compact and affordable fashion is less than 50 years out. Comine that with Ionic engines (you can hoist alot of ionic fuel into orbit with nearly unlimited power on tap from fusion) or a p/Ap engine and you get some serious speed.

I also read an interesting article recently by CERN scientist involved in gravimetric research... their aP research is tied into this somehow as they theorize that Gravity is a dimensional wave that can be recreated. Now that is very cool.

Re:AntiHydrogen atom?

[wavecentral]

one use for anti-matter is being able to harvest it, and use it for propulsion. Also, harvesting of anti-matter, or actually the anti-engery that is created by the presence of anti-matter, in enough quantities, can be a big enough negative energy to help in holding wormholes open by creating a Casmir effect ultimately, making Einstein-Rosen bridge a possibility. ->MAG

Quantum Phsyics

[Gyorg_Lavode]

I can't remember much of my quantum physics since it's been a year or 2, but I"m goin to pull out the book and see if I can help. First, the difference between a particle and antiparticle is that the antiparticle has the exact same properties but an opposite charge (and other properties which are opposite signed)

energy released: (Energy is released when an antimatter particle comes in contact with it's opposite particle) e- + e+ (electron plus a positron) releases rougly 1.022MeV of energy
a proton plus an antiproton releases 2 * 938 MeV or 3 * 10^-10 joules per reaction. (The energy is released as photons)

The problem with detecting them is that light and anti light are identical.

Now lets see what energy of 1kg of protons woudl release: 1kg * 1proton/(1.67*10^-24 gm) = 5.69*10^26 protons

5.69*10^26 protons * 3*10^010 J/(proton reaction) = 1.78 * 10^17 J or about 50 billion Kilowatts

How much power?

[cdgod]

Can anyone sum up how much power it takes to create a gram of antimatter? And how much power would a gram of antimater give when it collides with regular matter?

Remember E=mc^2 ? So, since you have 1 mass being antimatter and other mass being regular matter, and they both annihilate each other into energy wouldn't the output energy be
E = kc^2
where,
k = Mass of Antimatter + Mass of Regular matter

So, in the future, even if it costs us 1.9999999 units of energy to create 1 unit of energy worth of antimatter, we would be annihilating it with normal matter (with costs nothing). Then the result would be 2 units of energy. The surplus energy would be minimal (0.0000001 units), but with enough of a kick, we could have this surplus creating more antimatter, right?

(/end rambling)

Isn't antihydrogen electrically neutral?

[dpilot]

So how do you keep a neutral particle in an electromagnetic field? Ionize it, and it's just an antiproton, again. It would seem to me that the lightest *anti-atom* you could keep in an electromagnetic field would be singly-ionized antihelium. (After all, doubly-ionized antihelium is just an anti-alpha particle, or is that alpha anti-particle?)

Re:AntiHydrogen atom?

[EABird]

Just so it is understood... ...current quantum theory states that electrons do not "orbit" the nucleus of an atom in as in a Newtonian model, but rather they exist in all possible states and positions within specific energy boundaries. Electrons by their very nature exhibit the both the properties of a particle and a wave. In fact, by quantifying any of those properties, the other qualities of the electron can not be measured. The problem of Schroedinger's Cat is a great explanation of this collapse of the wave function.

Re:a little help here?

[RobertFisher]

Chris :

I think both of the tests you mention are not really confirmation of the fact that they have actually formed anti-hydrogen.

Why? Let's assume that, for some reason, the atoms in question were not anti-hydrogen, but simply plain run-of-the-mill hydrogen.

How do the spectra compare? The spectrum of hydrogen should be exactly identical to that of anti-hydrogen. Nope. Can't use it as a confirmation of the antimatter state.

How about net charge? Well, hydrogen also has zero charge. Nope, can't use net charge as a confirmation either.

In fact, your argument is not quite correct. Hydrogen atoms do possess a net magnetic moment (primarily due to the spin and orbital angular momentum of the electron, though the latter is zero in the ground state) and therefore do move in a magnetic field. In fact, that was the entire basis of the classic Stern-Gerlach experiment.

I've heard that experimentalists might be able to confirm the existence of anti-hydrogen by smashing the atoms in question against a wall, and looking for characteristic gamma rays. If one knew the initial state were either hydrogen or anti-hydrogen, then one could be assured upon seeing the gamma rays, that the initial state was indeed anti-hydrogen. The problem with this approach is that it destroys the antimatter atoms in the process, so that you are not able to subsequently use them in other experiments.

Bob