From: Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> What is the importance of antimatter?
As is known, I don't understand physics. The front page of wikipedia links to new results in antimatter related to antihydrogen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antihydrogen
What is the importance of antimatter not counting nukes? I'm not aware of any significance of antimatter in regards to nukes. (neither bombs nor fission reactors; there are many potential fusion reactions; I don't recall if any produce a substantial number of antiparticles. )
Why antimatter is accepted by the standard model in physics, but anti-time and anti-space appear to be considered cranky topic? The anti-electron (aka positron) was predicted in 1931 by Paul Dirac. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron It was actually discovered in 1932, presumably as a spiral in a cloud chamber. (It would be circling similar to an electron, because it has the same mass, but in the opposite direction, since it has a positive electric charge, in the static magnetic field applied to the cloud chamber.) You ask why it is "accepted": Generally, things that are found tend to be "accepted". What's the alternative?
For years, it was speculated that the Big Bang 'should' have produced equal amounts of ordinary matter and anti-matter, but despite this seemingly the vast majority of the known universe is ordinary matter. (evidence: absence of gamma rays that would exist profusely if electrons and positrons were continuing to collide and annihilate in today's world.) Jim Bell