Anti matter and matter cannot be kept together
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Mathematics offers innovative weapons for fighting terrorism
Next: Do it Yourself Solar Green DIY
From: Yousuf Khan on 6 Jul 2010 01:37 Okay, I'm going to give one more response before I give up on you completely. On 7/6/2010 8:51 AM, BURT wrote: > You can't get anti matter to make it through the atmosphere. There is > no negative matter. It doesn't exist. (1) Yes, you can, because it's going so fast it really won't touch any normal matter for thousands of miles, unless it randomly hits one head on. (2) The antimatter being produced in particle accelerators isn't going through the atmosphere anyways, it's going through a vacuum. The vacuum was created specifically so that atmospheric particles don't contaminate the data readouts from the collisions. > What we are seeing in accelerators are plain protons and electrons. > Anti matter is nonsense. In the future this will be known to be true. What they're sending through the accelerators is plain protons or electrons. It's after they collide that the excess energy from them produce such things as anti-matter. Yousuf Khan
From: Jeroen Belleman on 6 Jul 2010 03:20 BURT wrote: > > You can't get anti matter to make it through the atmosphere. There is > no negative matter. It doesn't exist. > > What we are seeing in accelerators are plain protons and electrons. > Anti matter is nonsense. In the future this will be known to be true. Google "CERN AD", "CERN ASACUSA" or "CERN ATRAP" for some real information. I will not participate in any further discussion on this subject unless I judge the arguments genuine. 'nuff said, Jeroen Belleman
From: Victar Shawnberger on 6 Jul 2010 04:08 On Jul 5, 7:00 pm, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > Victar Shawberger wrote: > > The magnetic field comes from the surface atoms of the chamber > > How is this not an interact? > > The issue is not whether antiprotons "interact" with matter, but rather, whether > those antiprotons annihilate with the matter. thanks, however E, M and EM _are_ matter i cant see what sort of matter that would be without those basic constituents > > Atomic traps are specifically designed so the trapped particles do not hit the > walls -- the electromagnetic fields of the trap prevent that. Antiprotons do not > annihilate in EM fields, they just get pushed around by them like any other > charged particle. > > And as I said, even when antiprotons hit matter, they don't annihilate unless > they stop inside the matter; as long as their kinetic energy is above a few keV > the probability of their interacting via strong interactions is rather small, > and is about the same as for protons interacting via strong interactions -- only > strong interactions can annihilate an antiproton. how is this annihilation when it results in a big explosion? explosion of what? > > Any trapped antiproton which hits a wall will stop within a micron > or so and annihilate, which is why they must be kept away from the a micron is a large distance related to a proton !! > walls. The stopping is via EM interactions with the electrons -- > they are light enough to be ionized from their atoms and take energy > from the antiproton; nuclei are heavy and can't do that effectively. > > Remember that to a strongly interacting probe, matter is mostly empty space: > nuclei with radii of a few femtometers separated by distances on the order of > Angstroms. 0.2 nano? this is too large, atoms are smaller than that > The electrons of the atoms don't interact strongly, only the nuclei > do. Once an antiproton is stopped inside some matter (i.e. having velocity < > 0.001 c or so), it will quickly happen to come close to a nucleus, be attracted > to it electromagnetically, and annihilate with it. > But faster antiprotons (v > > 0.001 c) will simply pass through the spaces between nuclei, unscathed except > for rare direct hits on the nuclei -- this is pure chance, because the EM > attraction is not strong enough to divert them into hitting nuclei. > > Analogy: try to stop a passing car by lassoing it with a thread; > it can work only if the car is already stopped. A multi-GeV > antiproton is more like a freight train. > > > If an antimatter particle touch a matter particle is the same thing, > > they must interact by their electromagnetic field > > Charged antimatter particles do interact electromagnetically. But this does not > annihilate them; only the strong interaction can do that. Because strong > interactions are short range, an antiproton must essentially "touch" a nucleus > in order to annihilate, meaning that their positions must be within a femtometer > or so, and their relative velocity must be less than ~0.001 c (at higher > relative velocities the probability of annihilating is nonzero, but very small). > > Tom Roberts thanks, but this imply that the same amount of antimatter, or more, is present around, and do not interact because the probability is low !! and, if the speed of an antiproton is slowed down by the first atoms electron, and not hit its nucleus, then again, slowed down even more by the next surface atom, hence close to zero, the antimatter may remain suspended in between atoms, in a no_man_land so to speak hence, if a shake a piece of iron, it gets hot, because the few antimatter interaction, then it also might disappear if i shake it even more shouldnt their antimatter inertial vector point opposite? thanks
From: J. Clarke on 6 Jul 2010 07:45 On 7/6/2010 4:08 AM, Victar Shawnberger wrote: > On Jul 5, 7:00 pm, Tom Roberts<tjroberts...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> Victar Shawberger wrote: >>> The magnetic field comes from the surface atoms of the chamber >>> How is this not an interact? >> >> The issue is not whether antiprotons "interact" with matter, but rather, whether >> those antiprotons annihilate with the matter. > > thanks, however E, M and EM _are_ matter > > i cant see what sort of matter that would be without those basic > constituents While electromagnetic fields exist in atoms they are not matter unless you want to redefine "matter". In any case, antiparticles annihilate with their own antiparticle, not with "matter" in general. You can throw positrons at protons until Hell freezes over and you won't get an annihilation. >> Atomic traps are specifically designed so the trapped particles do not hit the >> walls -- the electromagnetic fields of the trap prevent that. Antiprotons do not >> annihilate in EM fields, they just get pushed around by them like any other >> charged particle. >> >> And as I said, even when antiprotons hit matter, they don't annihilate unless >> they stop inside the matter; as long as their kinetic energy is above a few keV >> the probability of their interacting via strong interactions is rather small, >> and is about the same as for protons interacting via strong interactions -- only >> strong interactions can annihilate an antiproton. > > how is this annihilation when it results in a big explosion? > > explosion of what? The notion that anti matter and matter interacting invariably results in "a big explosion" owes more to science fiction than to physics. The mass of the two particles is converted into energy with most of it coming off in one or more gamma rays. One (or two or ten) gamma ray, no matter how energetic, does not do anything that resembles what most people think of as an explosion. >> Any trapped antiproton which hits a wall will stop within a micron >> or so and annihilate, which is why they must be kept away from the > > a micron is a large distance related to a proton !! > >> walls. The stopping is via EM interactions with the electrons -- >> they are light enough to be ionized from their atoms and take energy >> from the antiproton; nuclei are heavy and can't do that effectively. >> >> Remember that to a strongly interacting probe, matter is mostly empty space: >> nuclei with radii of a few femtometers separated by distances on the order of >> Angstroms. > > 0.2 nano? this is too large, atoms are smaller than that Nope. Google "diameter of atom" and you'll find that the range is about ..06 to .5 nanometers. >> The electrons of the atoms don't interact strongly, only the nuclei >> do. Once an antiproton is stopped inside some matter (i.e. having velocity< >> 0.001 c or so), it will quickly happen to come close to a nucleus, be attracted >> to it electromagnetically, and annihilate with it. >> But faster antiprotons (v> >> 0.001 c) will simply pass through the spaces between nuclei, unscathed except >> for rare direct hits on the nuclei -- this is pure chance, because the EM >> attraction is not strong enough to divert them into hitting nuclei. >> >> Analogy: try to stop a passing car by lassoing it with a thread; >> it can work only if the car is already stopped. A multi-GeV >> antiproton is more like a freight train. >> >>> If an antimatter particle touch a matter particle is the same thing, >>> they must interact by their electromagnetic field >> >> Charged antimatter particles do interact electromagnetically. But this does not >> annihilate them; only the strong interaction can do that. Because strong >> interactions are short range, an antiproton must essentially "touch" a nucleus >> in order to annihilate, meaning that their positions must be within a femtometer >> or so, and their relative velocity must be less than ~0.001 c (at higher >> relative velocities the probability of annihilating is nonzero, but very small). >> >> Tom Roberts > > > thanks, but this imply that the same amount of antimatter, or more, is > present around, and do not interact because the probability is low !! How does it imply anything about the abundance of antimatter? > and, if the speed of an antiproton is slowed down by the first > atoms electron, and not hit its nucleus, then again, slowed down even > more by the next surface atom, hence close to zero, the antimatter may > remain suspended in between atoms, in a no_man_land so to speak First, the mass of an antiproton is about 2000 times that of an electron. Even if you get direct center of mass collisions it will take many, many antiproton-electron impacts to significantly alter the velocity of an antiproton. Second, you will get a particle with no velocity only at absolute zero. > hence, if a shake a piece of iron, it gets hot, because the few > antimatter interaction, then it also might disappear if i shake it > even more If there is abundant antimatter surrounding that piece of iron. There is no reason to believe that such abundant antimatter exists. > shouldnt their antimatter inertial vector point opposite? Are there any experiments that suggest this? > > thanks
From: Raymond Yohros on 6 Jul 2010 11:42
On Jul 5, 11:51 pm, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use...(a)cox.net> wrote: > On 7/5/2010 11:37 PM, Raymond Yohros wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 5, 10:04 pm, "J. Clarke"<jclarke.use...(a)cox.net> wrote: > >> On 7/5/2010 10:52 PM, Raymond Yohros wrote: > > >>> On Jul 5, 9:30 pm, Yousuf Khan<bbb...(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>> On 7/6/2010 12:56 AM, BURT wrote: > > >>>>> On Jul 5, 5:31 am, Yousuf Khan<bbb...(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>> On 7/5/2010 8:07 AM, BURT wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> How does the anti matter get into the trap without interacting with > >>>>>>>>> the matter making up the trap? > > >>>>>>> - The antiprotons are created in high vacuum, > > >>>>>>> How are they created there? How high is the vacuum? > > >>>>>> A particle accelerator creates them during collision events. > > >>>>>> The vacuum is very complete. It's the equivalent of the vacuum of space > > >>>>> You said they were created high in a vacuum. Particle accelerators are > >>>>> not. So which one is it? > > >>>> Are you trying to be deliberately dense here? Of course particle > >>>> accelerators are in a vacuum. They require the vacuum to isolate the > >>>> particles they are colliding together, from the background. > > >>>> Yousuf Khan > > >>> and that is why is perfectly safe to study particles this way! > > >>> otherwise, they will make a big booooooommmmmm effect that > >>> may not be safe. > > >> Why would they make a "big booooooommmmmm effect"? The amount of > >> antimatter that a particle accelerator produces is minuscule. > > > can you imagine any particle collition in something > > that is not a vacuum. what you think it could happen? > > Not much. Hint--"particle collisions" occur in the atmosphere every day > at energy levels higher than any particle accelerator can achieve, with > no "big booooommmmmm effect". Google "cosmic rays". > yeah, that is correct. they are shielded by the atmosfere. do cosmic rays produce any sound? i guess i imagine matter fueling up the collition. r.y |