Thunderstorms Proven To Create Antimatter 153
radioweather writes "Scientists using NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope have detected beams of antimatter from thunderstorms in the form of positrons hurled into space. Scientists think the antimatter particles were formed in a terrestrial gamma-ray flash, a brief burst produced inside thunderstorms and shown to be associated with lightning. 'These signals are the first direct evidence that thunderstorms make antimatter particle beams,' said Michael Briggs, a member of Fermi's Gamma-ray Burst Monitor team. He presented the findings at a news briefing at the American Astronomical Society meeting in Seattle."
Posibilities (Score:1)
So, when can we place those beams on shark heads?
Re:Posibilities (Score:4, Funny)
we'll first need to breed anti-sharks to carry them.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe standard sharks would suffice if they can generate a powerful enough electromagnetic field.
Re: (Score:2)
we'll first need to breed anti-sharks
How about guppies?
Re: (Score:2)
Then bearded Fonzie can jump the anti-sharks with lasers.
Call Tesla (Score:2)
He'll want to know he was right...
--
http://www.twilightcampaign.net/ [twilightcampaign.net]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Scientists think the antimatter particles were formed in a terrestrial gamma-ray flash
Screw that. Quick, someone get Bruce Banner [wikipedia.org] up there in an airplane!
Re:Call Tesla (Score:5, Funny)
Scientists think the antimatter particles were formed in a terrestrial gamma-ray flash
Screw that. Quick, someone get Bruce Banner [wikipedia.org] up there in an airplane!
That'll make him angry. You wouldn't like him when he's angry.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
...It's Life Jim, but not as we know it...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He does care or else he wouldn't have invented a machine to communicate beyond the grave.
Destroy the planet! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Destroy the planet! (Score:5, Funny)
I saw what happened when Neo let a single drop of antimatter fall out of the Millennium Falcon to destroy the elves' homeworld
I know it's a joke, but somehow I still want to see that film...
Re: (Score:2)
Coming soon to a Kinect-motion-captured Machinima near you
Re: (Score:2)
I saw what happened when Neo let a single drop of antimatter fall out of the Millennium Falcon to destroy the elves' homeworld
I know it's a joke, but somehow I still want to see that film...
You'll see basically that in the Imagination Land episodes of South Park.
Re: (Score:1)
Somehow I thought it was a reference to the latest Star Trek film ...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So, here's a question... (Score:3, Interesting)
Does this process potentially make the world more massive, in creating particle pairs - one of which escapes into space? Would this potentially be a way of testing gravity theories in controlled circumstances?
Ryan Fenton
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Charge conservation has something to say about pairs. And evidence of a violation of that would be in the headline...
Re: (Score:2)
Also lepton number conservation.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, because for every pair of which a positron escapes and a electron doesn't, there's another pair for which an electron escapes but the positron does not. On average it will make no difference.
Re: (Score:1)
On average it will make no difference.
Are you sure about that? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I'm sure about it.
The positrons are coming from gamma rays via pair production. I'll let you work out why it is called pair production.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it generates electron-positron pairs. If the positron escapes into space, the Earth is less massive by the mass of one positron.
Despite being called "antimatter", antiparticles have positive energies and positive masses, just like regular particles.
Re: (Score:2)
Antimatter doesn't have negative mass. *If* the positrons *were* able to escape, that would imply that the world would become *less* massive, not more. Because some of its
Nope. The energy that created 'em had mass. (Score:3)
Does this process potentially make the world more massive, in creating particle pairs - one of which escapes into space?
Nope. Makes the planet lighter by the amount of mass + (kinetic energy / csquared) that escaped.
That's because the energy that created them came from the Earth, where it had been for a while (even if it had previously come from sunlight rather than geothermal or combustion sources) and the energy itself - either as energy or as the difference of mass between two forms (before and after) o
Re:So, here's a question... (Score:5, Informative)
I doubt strongly that they are being formed "without a matter counterpart". That would violate a number of cherished conservation rules. A positron/electron pair is formed when a gamma ray of sufficient energy passes close to a nucleus. But it would be difficult to detect the new electrons in the maelstrom of displaced electrons that is a thunderstorm, whereas the positrons are extremely distinctive,
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I'll leave the particle physics to those who know a bit better from now on. :) You're right, there's all sorts of violations that would've stood out if I'd thought about what I was writing some more.
Re:So, here's a question... (Score:5, Informative)
No (Score:2)
the positrons are not escaping into space... TFA has it right
No, TFA says "When antimatter striking [the spacecraft named] Fermi collides with a particle of normal matter, both particles immediately are annihilated and transformed into gamma rays... The TGF produced high-speed electrons and positrons, which then rode up Earth’s magnetic field to strike the spacecraft."
So, either TFA doesn't have it right, or the positrons are traveling all the way up to the altitude of the spacecraft. (I agree with
Re: (Score:2)
Most likely both are right. Most get annihilated in the atmosphere but some make it through.
Re: (Score:2)
I know I won't understand the answer to this, but, if antimatter is being sent into space, (even if it is only a minute amount), and it is either formed, or extracted from what was previously here on earth, would that affect the earth's mass? (Again, I would understand if the answer was "not by a measurable amount")
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, by a truly minute amount. On the other hand, the anti-matter came from energy, and the energy came from sunlight, and the sunlight was matter/energy arriving from the sun. So it is not contributing to a net weight loss from the earth.
And the amount is probably dwarfed by the steady trickle of atmosphere being lost into space.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if thunderstorms can create micro-blackholes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_black_hole [wikipedia.org]
http://www.ukweatherworld.co.uk/forum/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=7952&start=1 [ukweatherworld.co.uk]
Re: (Score:1)
Very unlikely. This reports show energies in the MeV range, required to create electron/positron pairs. To create micro-black-holes requires energies in the TeV range, a million times higher. If those energies were around, as well as huge numbers of MeV positron gammas, you would also be seeing large quantities of GeV anti-proton gammas. And presumably the exploding micro-black-hole would have a fairly dramatic signal as well.
Re: (Score:1)
No, the positron doesn't leave the atmosphere. It annihilates with an electron, and the gamma radiation created that way leaves the atmosphere.
Of course the earth still gets lighter, because the gamma rays transport the energy of the positron and the electron away (unless one of the two gamma photons hits the ground or gets absorbed in the atmosphere, of course; although ultimately that energy will radiate away as heat, too).
Beams? (Score:2)
You mean like 5 metres by 150mm by 100mm
I thought antimatter would only be created one or 2 antiprotons and positrons at a time.
Re:Beams? (Score:4, Funny)
Well, what might only create one or two antiprotons in the US can actually create a whole beam of them in Europe, because of unit conversion.
Not just antimatter (Score:3)
Ride the lightning? (Score:2)
Fix the energy shortage in one bang. (Score:2)
An lightning flash has an enery of about 500 Megajoule, which wil drive your electric car for 2000 km. No other fuel required, just put an iron rod on top and have a reload time of a few seconds...
Re: (Score:3)
The only technologically feasible way to capture lightning energy right now is to have an effing big capacitor. Building-size-effing-big. There's nothing smaller that can be charged to megavolts within a millisecond or so and survive it.
Re: (Score:2)
And for God's sake, DON'T cross the beams!
Re: (Score:2)
Humor us and do some math as to how much energy would be captured if we could harness all the lightning strikes in the U.S. Then contrast that with some estimates on investment required to do so.
You seem to think that reality can be bent your way by throwing money at it. Sorry, but Nature doesn't give shit about money or good intentions.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I forgot: just how much of lightning's energy do you think is spent on antimatter production?
Re: (Score:2)
I am wondering if there might be some way we can use lightning to launch spacecraft or other vehicles/matter into orbit?
I think it would probably be inefficient to delay a launch until there happened to be a thunderstorm over the lightning rods/space shuttle. Plus, while I'm not a rocket scientist, nor do I work at NASA, it seems to me like there might be issues with launching in a thunderstorm.
Re: (Score:2)
I recall some discussion about 20-30 years ago (?) about building a launcher that went up Pike's Peak in Colorado. I still think something like that would be a good idea, somewhere - maybe somewhere on the slopes of the Andes, close to the equator, that would not require so much correction to get to an equatorial orbit.
In fact, that's probably an interesting idea for Ecuador to pursue. They have a good coastal plain with a reasonable infrastructure, and mountains. If a compatibly-shaped mountain is avail
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like vintage Heinlein. "Man Who Sold the Moon" mentioned a Pike's Peak catapult (proposed, not built in the story)....
Re: (Score:2)
Or you could have a hybrid system: the craft would still use rockets, but it would get an initial boost from a railgun, so it wouldn't need to carry as much fuel.
Something the Mythbusters can test! (Score:2)
Jamie want big boom!
Re: (Score:2)
Coming up on Mytrhbusters; Does antimatter and matter really explode when it comes into contact with each other?
Great! (Score:2)
Now when we're invaded by aliens, we'll just induce a couple of thunderstorms directly beneath their ships as they approach!
Obligatory antimatter quote (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Does it mean it doesn't matter?"
It's stuff that antimatters.
Sprites / elves? (Score:4, Informative)
What gave them the idea? (Score:4, Interesting)
What gave them the idea to look for these antimatter bursts? Did some scientist theorize it was possible and ask them to look? Or did the spacecraft start receiving bursts that they eventually tracked down to thunderstorms on earth?
Re:What gave them the idea? (Score:4, Informative)
Terrestrial Gamma Flashes have been detected by orbiting instruments for some time; at least since 1991,iirc. What's new here is the definite signature of positron annihilation; this can only be done with a sufficiently large detector looking at the right energy. The Burst Monitor on Fermi was designed to catch the medium energies of gamma-ray bursts (as well as low- and high energies), so this was a nice add-on to the main science.
Re:What gave them the idea? -BATSE (Score:1)
Rob-
Thanks for the BATSE plug.
For the past ~14 years (~1993 to 2007), I couldn't get anyone else, even on our own team, interested in TGFs, theory or obervations. It took the RHESSI observations, and the efforts of the fine scientists, David Smith and Joe Dwyer, along with the RHESSI observations, to invigorate the field. (Bob Malozzi and Berl Peterson were the only two persons who worked with me on TGFs in ~1999. Now its a big deal.
Jerry
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do these bursts have anything to do with the recently (past 10 years) documented phenomena of lightning that goes from the cloud tops out into space?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, gamma ray bursts were originally used by the military to detect nuclear weapons testing. It was then they found out that gamma ray bursts came from space as well. I was hoping to see an ironic loop in that gamma ray detectors set up to detect nuclear explosions on earth found gamma ray bursts in space. And that further study of the space phenomena led to discovery of phenomena here on earth.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, first the proved that aliens have nuclear bombs, and then they found that flashes are nuclear explosions. :-)
we can have warp drive soon (Score:1)
Are you telling me that we are that much closer to getting our warp drives???
Re: (Score:2)
Nope still screwed.... we still have not found a source for Dilithium Crystals.
Delorians all around? (Score:2)
Charge up the anti-matter engine and prepare for an infusion of 1.21 Gigawatts! We're going BACK... ...to the future!
Drugs and Scientists.. (Score:2)
- Dan.
Funny use of the word "proven" (Score:2)
Nuclear fusion, too? (Score:2)
If electrical discharges in a thunderstorm can concentrate energy enough to create gammas energetic enough to create electron-positron pairs (2 x 511 keV), I'd expect that (given the large concentrations of hydrogen in the cloud's water) they can also produce initiation energy for nontrivial amounts of nuclear fusion. (D D or D T at about 15 keV or P B at about 123 keV.) These reactions produce tens of MeV of output energy, some of which could appear as the gammas that produce electron-positron pairs.
It w
Not surprising (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Oh, good. I was worried I was the only one that smelled that...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks man... Coke and onion-rings all over the laptop....
Re:Death ray? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Maybe where you're living (US ?). But at CERN, scientists of the LEAR experiment have managed to produce, trap, and store antimatter as far back as 1995. And even to create anti-hydrogen atoms out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If someone's built an antimatter container that can keep it around for, say, long enough to fly it across the atlantic, that really is a new achievement.
Considering that TSA won't even let you bring a shampoo bottle on a plane, I don't think they'll be allowing antimatter on!
Re: (Score:2)
The anti-hydrogen atoms were only stable in the particle-physicist sense - IIRC they lasted about 5 seconds. If someone's built an antimatter container that can keep it around for, say, long enough to fly it across the atlantic,...
Why? Would be US interested in importing anti-hydrogen? What for? Create an Anti H-bomb?
... that really is a new achievement.
So a partial achivement in 1995 is not good enough?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Bah! You wouldn't get 2.81794 femtometres.
Re: (Score:2)
Well sure. But being able to carry around antimatter in a box (or rather a shipping container) would be nice, and I suspect very useful for physics (letting labs around the world get a supply for study from somewhere bigger).
And think of the surprise on the face of the TSA guy who opens it!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Death ray? Not hard. (Score:3, Funny)
Keeping antimatter safe is easy; you can just stuff it in a shoe box, as long as the shoe box is made of antimatter.
Re: (Score:2)
Which you then house in a larger antimatter shoe box and put it under your antimatter bed in your antimatter house.
Re: (Score:2)
I heard you can also put antimatter in a magnetic bottle, cuz no one really knows how magnets work.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Scientists only managed to make a stable antimatter container for the first time a few months back.
To clarify, they have been able to store charged antimatter particles using magnetic containment for quite some time. It is only recently that they have been able to store neutral antimatter particles, like complete hydrogen atoms.
Re: (Score:2)
Harvesting antimatter is incredibly hard. It's not like you can just stuff it in a shoe box. You need to make sure that it doesn't come into contact with any normal matter. This means putting it in a vacuum and using magnetic fields to make sure that it doesn't touch the sides of the container. Scientists only managed to make a stable antimatter container for the first time a few months back.
They were able to contain anti-hydrogen for the first time a few months back. This is hard because anti-hydrogen has no net charge. On contrary, this group at my old school http://positrons.ucsd.edu/ [ucsd.edu], has been trapping and storing (for long durations measured in days!) positron for many years.
Re: (Score:2)
YOUR shoe box. I have a bed made out of the stuff. Don't think that what goes for you applies to everyone, buddy.
Besides, I think everyone reading /. on any semi-regular basis already knows about the whole "capturing anti-matter" thing, so no need to repeat stuff like you're the only one who keeps up on the news.
You're assuming everyone has kept up on this news. It might be new to somebody, in which case this is incredibly helpful.
Re: (Score:2)
Harvesting antimatter is incredibly hard. ...
And you know this how?
I asked Barbie.
Re: (Score:2)
Harvesting antimatter is incredibly hard. ...
And you know this how?
He's only got one hand, you insensitive clod!!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
How do I know the event horizon is replusive?
Re: (Score:2)
And as evident by the effect of a lot of wind blowing away from the event horizon as seen in the films when they do travel.
A non repuslive event horizon has the possibility of causing huge problems if the atmospheric pressure at the starting point was higher than the end point or vicea versa. 1-2 psi in planet size is a crapload of pressure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The anti-matter is probably what made the monster kill.
No, as mentioned elsewhere, the antimatter annihilates with electrons causing gamma rays.
The gamma rays made the monster angry, and the townspeople didn't like the monster when it got angry.