Antimatter Atoms Captured 476
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?"
How cool is that? (Score:5, Funny)
But on the other hand (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Warp Drive (Score:5, Informative)
Well, if we took
so If we take E=MC^2
Where M=mass(in kg), C=speed of light (3*10^8 m/s)
= 1*10^-5* 3*10^8 * 3*10^8
= 1*10^-5 * 9*10^16
= 9 * 10^11 Joules of energy
Which is enough to light 10,000 100 watt light bulbs for about 10 days
Yeah? (Score:4, Funny)
*grin*
Re:Yeah? (Score:4, Funny)
News for Nerds. Stuff that's antimatter.
a little help here? (Score:2)
Ok, they THINK they have? How can you tell?
IAECOTT--I am extremely clueless on this topic, so please someone out there give a newbie a little help with this....
thanks, and I hope to god I am not the only clueless one on this subject here.
Re:a little help here? (Score:3, Funny)
(ducks flying objects)
/Brian
Re:a little help here? (Score:2, Interesting)
The only way they can test it is if they fire off a single hydrogen atom in there and note the massive explosion followed by all the other anti-particles flying out of containment and then destroying the rest of the normal matter in anti-matter-matter annihilation.
For all they know, firing a stream of positrons at anti-protons created normal atoms (since this is all theory)
What I wonder is how they're gonna get rid of several thousand anti-hydrogen!
Re:a little help here? (Score:2)
Re:a little help here? (Score:2)
Now, wait a second - if this is true, and the atom holds together, you could step down to any arbatrary lighter element (and create very odd isotopes, since you'd have loads of neutrons sitting in a suddenly much "lighter" atom).
Anybody up on their physics a bit more than the people in this thread care to shed some light on this possibility (at least theoretical enough to be able to write a nifty SF story about it). :)
--
Evan
Amendment (Score:2)
That aside, I'm still curious how they plan to get rid of the stuff, especially as they refined the production capabilities and are able to create more of the stuff?
Re:a little help here? (Score:4, Informative)
All the quantum numbers of anti-particles are of the opposite sign as compared with normal matter. These quantum numbers include things such as electric charge, but also baryon and lepton number. Anti-neutrons would have a baryon number of -1 as opposed to neutrons which have a baryon number of +1.
Re:a little help here? (Score:4, Informative)
To double-check this, they're going to run the experiment again, and do a spectral analysis of what they've got in the particle trap later this year. I guess they've already got a theory on how the spectral emission/absorption lines of anti-hydrogen will compare to those of hydrogen.
Chris Beckenbach
Re:a little help here? (Score:2, Interesting)
Let's all assume (correctly) that a particle of 'normal' hydrogen has a neutral charge by having a single Proton and a single Electron. By definition, aparticle of anti-hydrogen has a neutral charge, as well. Seeing as both of these partcles have neutral charges, does it not stand to reason that they will not be attracted to one another due to opposite charges? Maybe my high-school physics classes were a little basic, but it sounds like there's more to do than just introduce hydrogen to anti-hydrogen for there to be a reaction between to two particles with neutral charges. Unless there's some sort of anti-neutral (?!) charge that I'm missing, this doesn't seem dangerous.
Not until you think a little deeper. There are lots of other particles that are *not* neutrally charged that could be used to release energy in the fashion we're all thinking. Further still, this may change chemistry as we know it, as we now might (keyword here, "might") have the ability to mix one anti-element with a different 'normal' to get some desired results.
As someone else suggested, how would anti-water work? Could it still be used to put out a fire? I don't think you'd want to drink it (as the body is over 70% 'normal' water, anyway), but I'm sure it could have some uses. Ta-da! The science of anti-chemistry is born!
Just some random thoughts. If I'm incorrect in my assumptions, let me know. Don't flame me. I'm not that smart, really. I just ask lots of questions.
Re:a little help here? (Score:2)
I guess they've already got a theory on how the spectral emission/absorption lines of anti-hydrogen will compare to those of hydrogen.
Yes indeedy ... hydrogen and anti-hydrogen should have exactly the same spectra. If they are NOT identical, that will be extremely cool.
Re:a little help here? (Score:3, Insightful)
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
Re:a little help here? (Score:2, Informative)
That should answer your questions. Both antiprotons and positrons (aka antielectrons) are electrically charged. Therefore they are accelerated if you apply an electric field. The antihydrogen atom consists of one antiproton and one antielectron. Since the charge of antiprotons and that of positrons is opposite, the antihydrogen atom has no net electric charge and stays immobile in an electric field. So they guess that, if it doesn't move, it must be an atom! There are of course more elaborate tests one can do, and will do. For example, ordinary hydrogen atoms emit light at very specific frequencies [colorado.edu] (maybe some of you will remember the terms Lyman series, Balmer series etc. from freshman physics). Since the antihydrogen is the exact "mirror image" of the ordinary hydrogen atom, these frequencies must be the same. Observation of these frequencies should yield definite proof (or reveal it as a flop :-)
AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2, Informative)
Joe
Yup (Score:3, Informative)
Yummy on Cheerios.
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:3, Interesting)
Anti-matter/matter is a 100% conversion of matter into energy, and unlike a nuclear explosion where the only way to get energy out of a core is by a massive, simultanious event, you can in theory feed a controlled amount of anti-matter into a suitable 'reactor', and produce a controlled reaction. Due to the near perfect mass/energy conversion, you can generate a lot of power from a very small amount of fuel, meaning things like fueling spaceships become a lot more practicle since you don't have to lug around thousands of tons of chemical fuel everywhere you go.
Of course, a few hundred atoms of anti-matter isn't much, and won't generate much energy. In time though, research like this will hopefully lead to the ability to generate large amount of anti-matter, allowing us access to a very powerful form of stored energy to do all sorts of cool things - one of the first I'm sure will be anti-matter weapons.
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:4, Informative)
This brings us closer to one of the propulsion systems envisioned by hard science fiction writer and physicist Robert L. Forward in a number of his books, the latest of which is "Indistinguishable From Magic".
http://www.whidbey.com/forward/
His books are prime reading for slashdotters. They are a throwback to the early SF of Campbell and Heinlein, but with much more real science thrown in.
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2)
First of all, the outer edge of the antimatter sphere is going to contact the air first, but the inside won't quite yet. The outside layer converts to energy, presumably causing an "explosion" which sends energy in all directions, symmetrically, both out into the air and back into the antimatter sphere. This explosion will, for a short period of time, keep the matter and antimatter separate, so they will not be further reacting. After a few milliseconds, more of the antimatter will start reacting, but probably in a nonsymmetrical manner, and we end up with a prolonged (in reactive terms; a fraction of a second instead of the few milliseconds it takes for a normal chemical or even nuclear explosion to take its course) release of energy.
Thoughts? Am I wrong? Right? Deranged? (Well, yeah.)
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:3, Funny)
Hmmph. I've met quite a few "anti-me" types. The worst that ever happened was a black eye. That Hawking guy ain't so smart after all..
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2)
Quite obviously, you haven't looked at your credit report recently . .
:)
hawk
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2)
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:5, Informative)
The mass of an antihydrogen atom is roughly 1e-27 kilograms, the same as a hydrogen atom. Using Einstein's famous formula, with the speed of light given as 3e+8 meters/second, the annihilation of one anti-hydrogen atom and one hydrogen atom would produce 2*(1e-27)*(3e+8)^2 = 1.8e-10 joules. The specific heat capacity of water is 4.2 J/(g*K), so 1.8e-10 joules would raise a 300g cup of coffee by 1.4e-13 degrees Kelvin. (I haven't had my coffee yet ... does that sound right? Anyone?)
The point is, one hydrogen atom makes little difference, but annihilating kilogram's worth of hydrogen atoms would liberate 9,000 terajoules of energy. Compare that to a kilogram of coal, wood, or oil ...
then again... (Score:2, Interesting)
... how many terajoules will it take to make those kilos of antihydrogenatoms in the first place??..
oops..
Re:then again... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2)
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2)
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:3, Informative)
...so I'll be gentle.
Second law of thermodynamics (Score:2)
(Note: I'm not implying the parent doesn't understand this already. I just wanted to head off a misconception before it started.)
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2)
It could be a good energy storage technology. The great advanatage is that it holds more energy per gram than any other fuel. Half a kg of antihydrogen combined with half a kg of hydrogen releases megatons of energy.
Re:AntiHydrogen atom? (Score:2, Insightful)
Since then (Score:2, Funny)
anti-hydrogen + anti-oxygen? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:anti-hydrogen + anti-oxygen? (Score:3, Funny)
anti-water! A new sports drink for the new millenium...
Yeah, and heartburn like you wouldn't believe...
Oh, the possibilities for tag lines: "It's got BITE!" "A real taste explosion!" "It has quite a kick to it, doesn't it?"
Re:anti-hydrogen + anti-oxygen? (Score:2, Informative)
Wow, antimatter atoms already (Score:5, Interesting)
Last time I heard about any "really new" developments in antimatter, they were just figuring out how to contain 10-100 protons (circa 1992) (I know, I'm dating myself, whatever. :-) This is really cool news.
Still, even a million atoms is really physically small. I wonder
Anyway, just my $0.01. :-)
---NEW! Crash Windows NT/2000/XP from any account using only printf! [zappadoodle.com]
Re:Wow, antimatter atoms already (Score:4, Interesting)
As for energy release -- it'd take about a gram of anti-hydrogen suitably reacted with normal matter to produce the equivalent of a small nuclear bomb (if released all at once) or the energy expended by an largish satellite launch vehicle (if released over a period of several minutes).
Make the math simple, call what they've got the equivalent of 10^-20 of a 10 kiloton nuke (10^10 gm TNT equivalent), then they've got the equivalent of about 1/10 nanogram of TNT. I wouldn't be too worried just yet.
Virus Size (Score:5, Funny)
Western Digital 120 GB HD = 1.32 lb (+/- 0.14 lb)
120 GB = 598.742 g
122, 880 MB = 598.742 g
125829120 KB = 598.742 g
128,849,018,880 Bytes = 598.742 g (+/- 63.5029g)
12 byte virus = 4.6^-10 grams (+/-
Yep, the smallest virus would still be about twice as heavy as the cluster of antimatter atoms
Re:Wow, antimatter atoms already (Score:2)
Chris Beckenbach
anti-atoms (Score:2)
These guys are interesting in that they actually got the stuff to hold still for a while.
Re:Wow, antimatter atoms already (Score:2)
Probably negligible compared to the amount of energy needed to create it in the first place.
Beating plowshares into swords (Score:5, Informative)
I know that the dept tag is supposed to be funny, but the real benefit of this research is insight into very powerful propulsion systems. No? Not very sustainable at our current rate but definitely the next step toward reaching deeply into space.
Of course, anti-matter engines are waaaaaaaay off, but I think that we should see from the next-stop-Crab-Nebula dept. rather than from the I-frag-way-too-much dept.
Re:Beating plowshares into swords (Score:2, Funny)
Not until we find a good source of dilithium crystals to control the reaction in the warp core.
Re:Beating plowshares into swords (Score:2)
Re:Beating plowshares into swords (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, we already have anti-matter engines, they're just not very sophisticated. Pennsylvania State University and NASA are investigating these drives. The drive could power a mission to Mars in 120 days. That's: go to Mars (30 days), stay for 30 days, and come back (30 days). Sum: 120 days. That's awesome.
Ah, here we go:
Antimatter Catalyzed Micro Fission/Fusion [uaf.edu]
NASA Press release [nasa.gov]
Antimatter drives [uaf.edu]
ANTIPROTON-CATALYZED MICROFISSION/FUSION PROPULSION SYSTEMS FOR EXPLORATION OF THE OUTER SOLAR SYSTEM AND BEYOND [psu.edu]
Re:Beating plowshares into swords (Score:2)
Wow. 3/1 time dilation. How close to c do you have to get to lose the other 30 days?
Re:Beating plowshares into swords (Score:5, Funny)
>and come back (30 days). Sum: 120 days.
Is it any surprise these folks keep running into planets?
:)
hawk
Re:Beating plowshares into swords (Score:3, Informative)
That was my (huge) bad. You'd think 4 yrs of engineering would teach me to add.
Important stuff (Score:4, Insightful)
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
Wow (Score:2)
Drop It!!! (Score:2)
The theory goes that anti-hyrdogen should have all the same observable physical properties that hydrogen does.
I can't wait until they drop some of the anti-hydrogen atoms to whether they fall down or fall up.
Positron and antiprotons are charged and weigh almost nothing, so electromagnetic forces on them are waaay larger than gravity and you can't really tell if they fall up or down.
I know current wisdon is that antimatter will fall down... but wouldn't it be cool if the anti-matter fell up, essentially having a negative gravitational "charge"
In Related News... CERN Disappears (Score:5, Funny)
Around 9:30 last night a burrowing squirrel shorted out electrical lines causing an initial power surge followed by a blackout.
Experts believe that researchers had the magnetic containment field generators connected to a household UPS, which proved unable to keep the field in place.
The result of the containment failure has been described as being very similar to that of a "collapsing hrung." Unfortunately nobody has been able to identify what a hrung is, nor why one should choose to collapse on the CERN facility.
Hey, get real (Score:2)
These were only some hundred atoms, nothing more. Even if they did collide with matter, the damage would not be any worse than if you put a Windows XP CD-Rom into your nuker. Remember, they created those anti-atoms, and conservation of energy dictates that the annihilation of said anti-atoms cannot release any more energy than was needed to create them in the first place.
It'd be fun if it has negative gravity (Score:2)
If it did have negative gravitic mass, that would have all kinds of funky consequences. Maybe we could stabilize wormholes, and get faster-than-light travel and time travel. Fun to think about, anyway.
How much do you wanna bet....... (Score:5, Funny)
You know there has to be someone, somewhere who is just dying to be the first person to say that.
Re:How much do you wanna bet....... (Score:2)
Typical Slashdot editor, not reading the story. (Score:2)
It's lukewarm. Didn't you read the article?
Seriously though, we're never going to power a warp drive with that. And let's face it, that's what we really care about, right? So we can all become starship engineers, get neat uniforms, and boldy go and score with hot alien chicks.
Re:Typical Slashdot editor, not reading the story. (Score:2)
1 kilo will produces, about 9000 terajoules.
This is cool.....well hot but whose counting.... (Score:2)
Now, unfortunatley they said they dont even have enough to warm a cup of coffee, How long before weapons research in the US grbs ahold of this ? Or have they already.
To me this is akin to the first sussefull refinment of weapons grade Plutonium and Uranium.
Unfortunatley at the moment it requires too much enery to be usefull as an energy storage medium, but could be really cool for Interstellar travel,
NOW My question, Will Anti-Hydrogen react with say Normal Lithium to create energy or will its positron shell react with at a minimum the elecrton shell of the Lithium ?
If it dosent , storage should be easier than the trap they are now using,
Underwritten by Mr. Coffee? (Score:2)
Make nuclear proliferation seem like peanuts if the next Mr. Coffee can start a chain reaction that ends the universe.
With or without cream.
I was just thinking about that this morning. (Score:2)
Sodium was all I could think of, and obviously a bad idea for several reasons, but some anti-water ought to work nicely!
In related news... (Score:5, Funny)
First step. (Score:2)
-Restil
Re:First step. (Score:2)
the difference in energy might be a reasonable trade off to do away with all the nuclear, coal, and damn energy sources. each one evaluted insipendantly, of course.
would you pay a half cent more per kilowatt if it replace a coal plant? I would.
would you pay even maony if it replaced a nuclear plant? I would.(i am not "anti-nuclear", but nuclear plants are very expensive to operate)
what if it gets to a point where you could go buy a "cell" take it home and do away with the grid?
of course if oit costs 10 time more, then it would be only used planetside when it space savings are worth the price. i.e. powering lasers in the battle field.
Some thoughts (Score:4, Interesting)
A far more efficient method involves concentrating an intense pulse of light into a small enough space, to the point that the energy actually becomes matter. This has been demonstrated.
With efficient free electron lasers, it may be possible to mass produce antimatter on a large scale in this manner, making possible a greater number of experiments, as well as allowing manned interplanetary expeditions (and in theory interstellar).
Antimatter would make an excellent weapon in addition, since one would have the equivalent of a nuke that could be used on very small scales. You could in theory use it to make, say, antitank bullets that could be fired from a handheld gun. No heavy isotope decay products would be left to contaminate the battlefield, thus avoiding the nastiest side effect of nuclear bombs.
The big problem with antimatter annihilation, however, is that the energy released comes out in the form of high energy gamma rays. While the energy is there, it is difficult to harness in a practical device, and in the weapon example the gamma rays might irradiate everyone on the battlefield including the wielder of the weapon while doing little actual damage to the tank.
Finally, doing large scale chemistry experiments using antimatter versions of the elements could be rather dangerous...you'd probably need a kilo or more of the stuff, which would have rather catastrohpic results if it were allowed to interact with normal matter.
Re:Some thoughts (Score:4, Informative)
Suppose you want to create electron-positron pairs via counter-streaming FEL lasers. For the physics buffs out there, the reaction would be similar to the Compton backscattering of light off virtual electron-positron pairs (this non-linear vacuum light interaction was demonstrated at SLAC a year or so ago).
The FEL laser would have to operate well into the hard gamma (photon energy exceeding the rest mass of the electron). Current multi-pass FEL technology has been demonstrated up to the ultraviolet (~250 nm I think is the current record). Multi-pass X-ray FELs are near impossible to make because of the difficulty of producing high quality laser cavities for X-rays.
Single pass X-ray FELs (which rely on an electron beam instability instead of a cavity) have been proposed but not yet demonstrated. If I recall correctly, the SASE-FEL program at SLAC to build a $100M dollar X-Ray SASE-FEL (with a 100m long wiggler) did not receive funding.
That is not to say we are incapable of artifically making hard gamma rays. The aforementioned non-linear light interaction obtained the photons for the experiment by Compton scattering of low energy photons off an ultra-relativistic electron beam. But this would probably be pretty inefficent method to try to create antimatter on a large scale (inefficiencies in electron beam acceleration and cross section issues for both the Compton scattering and the non-linear interaction).
The other possibility would be to try to do a multi-photon interaction to create the electron-positron pairs. In this method, an incredible high electric field is created such that it becomes energetically favorable for electrons-positron pairs to form to shield out the field. I think this has also been demonstrated with some of the extremely high intensity chirped pulse amplification lasers. However, the effectiveness isn't anything to write home about yet.
And given the protons mass is 1836 times that of an electron, to create them on a large scale (i.e. micrograms) is not anything I expect to see in the near future.
Kevin
Let's hope these guys have a clue! (Score:2)
From Sir Ernest Rutherford's speech to the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1933:
Do they have an UPS on that particle trap?
--Charlie
Ok... (Score:2)
How cool is that? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How cool is that? (Score:2)
Re:How cool is that? (Score:2, Funny)
Since you have a beard, you must be the evil one. Therefore, you may indeed find a good version of yourself that is clean shaven.
If this concerns you, just remember that evil always triumphs over good, because good is dumb.
Re:How cool is that? (Score:2)
for a while there I couldn't go anywhere without see a lot of people in goatees and smoking cigars.
Re:How cool is that? (Score:2)
anti Sb? (Score:5, Funny)
Wonderful progress! (Score:2)
Quantum Phsyics (Score:2, Insightful)
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
dilithium crystals (Score:3, Funny)
Oh the HUMANITY! (Score:2, Funny)
Jonathan
How much power? (Score:2, Insightful)
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? (Score:3, Insightful)
Bad Joke #12 (Score:3, Funny)
So, uhh, why does this matter?
<ducks while running out door>
If you want some actual information... (Score:3, Informative)
Antimatter properties? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Antimatter properties? (Score:2)
Townsend Brown. He actually has a patent for
antigravity. Also do research on the Serl Disk.
Re:anti matter (Score:2)
Don't get your panties in a knot just yet.... (Score:2)
If you remember anything form high-school physics, you'll know that's not many.
Or, as the researcher interviewed put it, "you would get only a tiny amount of energy by combining the antimatter with matter--not even enough to warm a small cup of coffee."
Re:anti matter (Score:2)
Re:anti matter (Score:2)
I believe a correct interpretation would be to say that in detonating an anti-matter explosion, it's theoretically possible to get out exactly twice as much as you put into it.
It's like by making one anti-particle, you've instantly turned it and one normal particle into an atomic bomb.
E = (m + anti-m) * c^2
That's part of the joy of anti-matter engines. They're maximally efficient in using their fuel. You only have to bring half of your fuel with you! You can scoop up free hydrogen as you go along.
Re:anti matter (Score:2)
Fission releases energy as electromagnetic repulsion overcomes the strong force. Requires atoms with lots of protons (more than iron has.)
Anti matter and matter obliterating each other releases energy from *everything*. The particles are totally destroyed, converted into energy. All the energy stored in any sort of bond, as well as any mass not created as part of a bond is released.
Fission and fusion convert less than 1% of the material into energy. Antimatter/matter anhillations convert 100% of the energy.
Re:how cool? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Power for the masses (Score:2)
No, I can promise you that this cost them a pile more energy to make then they would ever get out. It might be good for space travel since we could store lots of energy made on Earth in a small area on a spacecraft. If you want 'free' energy, I'd be waiting for fusion, but don't hold your breath.
Re:Does anyone have a real link? (Score:2)
positron = positively charged electron
anti-proton = negatively charged proton
positron + anti-proton = neutral anti-hydrogen
Get it for Xmas!!!! (Score:2)
From CERN toys! Antihydrogen kit! Some assembly required.
Contents: 1 antiproton, 1 positron. 1 magnetic bottle.
WARNING: Contents are volatile.
Re:How cool is that? (Score:2)
While I agree that we have major problems (not the least of which is overpopulation,) I just don't understand why people are so eager to leave the splendors that are available here behind. I do hope that we settle on other worlds, but I won't be going. I, for one, don't want to move permanently to Mars and see nothing but red for the rest of my life, or go to the moon and never see a running stream of a bird in a forest again.
I'd be happy to visit (and I'd probably be willing to pay large sums to do so,) but I'm sticking to this planet until we find something that comes close to the majesty of a rain forest or the coast of New England on a stormy day.
Re:How cool is that? (Score:2)
Re:anti-matter galaxies in our universe? (Score:2)