What is the importance of antimatter?
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? Why antimatter is accepted by the standard model in physics, but anti-time and anti-space appear to be considered cranky topic? Could it be currently we don't have measuring devices and enough precision to detect anti-time and anti-space and the imaginary (in the complex sense) stuff from the square root of negative real in the Lorentz transformations, closely related to relativity?
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
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
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?
Amongst other things, there's a line of research that suggests that it's also helpful in treating cancer - https://horizon-magazine.eu/article/antimatter-and-gamma-rays-help-steer-can... In theory, it could also be used as a fuel in space travel - whether that's ever going to be doable is something else - the idea being that an annihilation is pure energy, so if you can direct it, you may be able to travel quite efficiently. I don't think there'd be a use in Nukes (as we know them). Theoretically you could build a similar weapon, but there'd be a huge cost in acquiring and storing the AM, especially once placed into a weapon. Nukes tend to fail-safe, whereas a failure in an AM weapon would almost certainly result in detonation.
Why antimatter is accepted by the standard model in physics, but anti-time and anti-space appear to be considered cranky topic?
I guess it depends on what you mean by anti-time and anti-space. But in either case, there's a thread of people doing a far better job than I could of explaining here - http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/51224-anti-space/
Could it be currently we don't have measuring devices and enough precision to detect anti-time and anti-space and the imaginary (in the complex sense) stuff from the square root of negative real in the Lorentz transformations, closely related to relativity?
-- Ben Tasker https://www.bentasker.co.uk
participants (3)
-
Ben Tasker -
Georgi Guninski -
jim bell