/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11279638
You were probably looking at my thread of /pol/ yesterday. It is very real. There was a guy on Fark and ATS that is/was a subcontractor for some MIC firms.
>Bedlam/Tom Bedlam - ATS
>Erewhon - Fark
>Some links for your reading pleasure
https://m.fark.com/comments/1203844/last
https://m.fark.com/comments/1386759/11882728#c11882728
https://m.fark.com/comments/4371964/50903132/Scientists-think-warp-driven-starships-may-be-possible-one-day-at-least-until-some-acting-ensign-pulls-o#c50903132
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread637964/pg2

>>11279638
Also, it's not stored....we make that shit on demand.

>>11279638
>>11279898
>>11279921
>>>/x/

>>11279638
the laser they were developing for the fusion reactor system (which is a stupid way of doing it) could actually be used for a particle beam. theoretically it is possible.

>>11279638
>Long-lived storage of positronium from the fine folks at Raytheon
https://patents.google.com/patent/US6813330B1/en
Also, would look up Alan Mills Jr. and David Cassidy of UC Riverside/UT Austin Tx Petawatt and their work towards a "positronium annihilation driven gamma ray laser"

>>11279638
>Mass production of positrons
https://www.nature.com/articles/nphoton.2009.56
https://www.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-wrap/getdoc/ssi97-029.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi55ruEp-3mAhXWXc0KHVmeBPQQFjAQegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw2lNNo4UmufBbVyH3VW4NOB&cshid=1578256382538

>>11279995
positrons from lasers... huh ill believe it when I see it.

>>11280079
You can believe LLNL

>>11279638
Dude, it's obvious FUD action.

>>11280232
Not sure if trolling

>>11279995
Fark and ATS are not credible sources of information. Your other links however are interesting to say the least (tho the Stanford link is dead).
Do you have additional publications regarding producing Ps* “on demand?”

>>11280297
I'm not saying they are; however, there people that post that do post interesting things. It's your job to look into it to determine if it's potentially real application or just sci-fi bullshit.
https://www.nist.gov/publications/exceeding-sauter-schwinger-limit-pair-production-quantum-gas

>>11280285
Read the Nature article. And I meant LANL.

>>11280439
>Another example of finding little nuggets of this here and there
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread617980/pg11
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread901726/pg3

>>11280456
>For reference who LiJun Wang is
http://www.nec.co.jp/press/en/0007/images/1901.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjY2bXn0-3mAhUF7awKHUf-DK4QFjACegQIChAB&usg=AOvVaw2P5aSLzPjOLlyGYtscZ0ay

>>11279638
>the U.S. has not only a working particle weapon, but one that flings around fucking positronium.

I don't know if they do or dont, but I know /x figgurred it out

>It's a flare stack doing a heavy burn. Sends up a beam of light like a laserpointer from the refinery top. Probably related to recent oil market shakeups. When you have a hazy layer of clouds you get spooky beams. Definitely scary for folks who don't live near refineries.

>>11280569
Maybe, but this one is part of the only set of images I know are legit.

>>11280569

>>11280569
There definitely is no oil refinery at Dugway Proving Grounds.

>>11280439
> We emulated field strengths far in excess of Sauter-Schwinger's limit for pair production in quantum electrodynamics, and therefore readily produced particles from "the Dirac vacuum"
Jesus fucking Christ you have got to be kidding me

>>11280694
Doesn't sound so ridiculous now, does it?

>>11279961
>using hydrogen to store what is effectively light weight anti-matter
What the flying F***
Nigga we gon' die!

>>11280774
Something must be missing or I’m overlooking something. This combined with that Raytheon patent implies anyone with the right resources could create something akin to antimatter fuel. If that’s the case then why bother with fusion at all when we can make a god damn antimatter generator? No way. Can some physics fag tell me why this isn’t possible ?

Fuck off /x/

>>11280892
I LITERALLY FUCKING CAN'T
YOU MEAN TO TELL ME THESE PAPERS ARE JUST LYING AROUND?!

>>11280898
>/x/
How is it /x/ when there’s enough publications from a number of well established institutions all describing methods for production and storage of this shit?

>>11280912
There is no evidence “particle beams” have been used. Prove it or fuck off

>>11280904
I honestly can't believe it either. I guess they can't catch everything

>>11280892
I don't think your missing anything. That's the scary thing.

>>11280920
Not the particle beam part. That’s meme tier to me. I’m talking about the other links posted here proving antimatter can be handled.
I thought the main evidence against the existence of an antimatter particle beam was that handling the amount of antimatter needed to weaponize it was currently impossible. Then someone started posting links to a few publications and I proceeded to look into specific topics. After reading through a few publications the evidence seems to indicate yes we can actually generate and handle large amounts of antimatter. But I feel like I’m missing something major, otherwise would not such a discovery be spoken about way more or even begin to see slow commercialization in the energy sector or something ?

>>11280939
>The particle beam meme
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/03/990317060831.htm
A lot of it revolves around the creation of BEC/FC, which just so happen is where we observe wave behavior in matter.

So can someone who actually knows what they are talking about explain all this shit to people who have no fucking idea what any of this is and if it is bullshit or not?

>>11280950
Yes. It literally interacts with the void.
Anon, we are on the precipice of learning to cast Graviga.

>photos are clearly just glare
This is UFO tier.

>>11281024
The beam part is likely UFO tier.
The antimatter part is surprisingly legitimate.

>>11281027
>The antimatter part is surprisingly legitimate.
It's also simultaneously the most important thing that has ever been posted on this website, and also the thing most likely to be ignored by brainlets. Once the military has absolute control of it and lets it trickle into the public sector, shit is going to get wild.

>>11280297
>not credible sources of information

SHOCK AND AWE

>>11279638
oh fug it is the death stranding

>>11281110
What can it do?

>>11280892
If I understood it correctly they probed the effect in a solid at the edge of the brillouin zone, meaning it was an effective setting to find a connection between zener tunneling and pair production.
They did not create "real"
antiparticles, but effective ones, meaning missing charge carriers at a certain momentum.

>>11281175
>They did not create "real"
>antiparticles, but effective ones, meaning missing charge carriers at a certain momentum.
Can you elaborate further on the difference between “real” vs “effective” antiparticles? I’m struggling to see the difference in terms of application. Am I correct in my understanding that while an “effective” anti particle may not be the real deal, it will still act as and yield expected reactions of a “real” antiparticle ? Sorry if this is a silly question, I just really want to know if what I think I am inferring in all this is actually correct.

>>11281110
>lets it trickle into the public sector
I believe the existence of the papers linked here and those papers one may find from searches into the appropriate subject matter is, in fact, that leaking happening right before our eyes.
I never thought I would live to see such a thing.

>>11279638
We spend trillions on military, much of it on R&D. I wouldn't be surprised if they had these sorts of weapons. Of course, any new tech isn't going to be public for a few decades for security reasons.

>>11279638
OK schizo

particle weapons do not work in an atmosphere as dense as ours.

>>11279638
This is glare or some boring shit. No device or camera has this shit resolution and this screen ratio. This is digitally zoomed and cropped.

Everyone wants the most mundane unexplained thing to have the most elaborate explanations. You will never be right if this is the way you approach these things.

>>11281448
>Correction for atmospheric distortion
https://library.lanl.gov/cgi-bin/getfile%3F06-01.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi9ranAqO_mAhWQQs0KHVA5DnUQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw166Ezj1M_1MTO4NVGDVHOY

>>11281424
Firstly, as a high energy physicist I'm no expert, so please correct me if I'm wrong. But I think the main difference relevant for the purpose in question (weapons) is that we are still dealing with a solid. That means there is an analogy to the qed effect , but you're not really creating pairs out of the vacuum, but out of the crystal (or whatever) in question. So your "antimatter" only has meaning in this environment, in reference to the fermi energy of the body.
So you could not e.g. "store" this to make an antimatter bomb, since all of your charge-carrier hole pairs only exist in reference to the "vacuum of the solid" if you will.

I'm not a physicist, how exactly would we even create significant antimatter in the first place? Perhaps we can handle and use it, but you can't just pop it into existence, can you?

>>11281795
>but you can't just pop it into existence, can you?
I CAN LOL

I was sitting in my 11th grade history class. My history teacher said "quantum physics is not real". Immediately, I stood up and asked why. He said "there is no evidence". Typical low IQ statement. I started reciting quantum physics equations from my memory. My history teacher stuttered in disbelief, dropped his books and ran out of the room. Everyone in the class stood up and cheered for me. It felt great being smart. Suddenly, the principal walked in and asked for me. Everyone else sat down and I left and went to his office. He asked me why I made the history teacher cry. I replied "sir, my intelligence can not be handled by the weak minded". He thought and then brought out an IQ test. I took it, and within 15 minutes, I had finished. My score was 168. While I was not surprised at all by this number, my principal was absolutely amazed and was at a loss for words. I went back to class and my crush walked up to me kissed me. The day resumed as normal until I went home. I had a letter in the mail. It was from Harvard.

>>11281598
>Correction for atmospheric distortion
Link broke. Got another one?

>>11279638
2 seconds to search and find this at the very least,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle-beam_weapon#Experiments

The U.S. Defense Strategic Defense Initiative put into development the technology of a neutral particle beam to be used as a weapon in outer space.[3] Neutral beam accelerator technology was developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory. A prototype neutral hydrogen beam weapon was launched aboard a suborbital sounding rocket from White Sands Missile Range in July 1989 as part of the Beam Experiments Aboard Rocket (BEAR) project.[4] It reached a maximum altitude of 124 miles, and successfully operated in space for 4 minutes before returning to earth intact. In 2006, the recovered experimental device was transferred from Los Alamos to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC.[5]

>>11281879
Just Google either
>"Principals of Phase Conjugation" by Y. B. Zel'dovich
>"Through The Looking Glass With Phase Conjugation" by LANL
Would post links, but on my phone at work.

>>11281986
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://web.stanford.edu/group/fan/publication/Yanik_SIAM_115_233_2005.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiqw8L14u_mAhVNCM0KHW6PCPwQFjABegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1L7joGn7zc6QlDLHTHC7lV&cshid=1578341160098

>>11281424
In traditional anti-matter you maintain the force of balance with an opposite charge of atomic structure.
For every Anti-Neutron you have an Anti-Proton.
Instead of an electron, you describe it as a positron. The main thing to remember here is the charge is directly opposed to any interaction with matter available to it, and will annihilate anything that remotely touches it in a forced decomposition so volatile that it physically alters the gravity around it.
Effective anti-particles are a composite of "real" and "effective" charged states.
Ergo, "light" weight anti-matter as
>>11280834 stated.

>>11282121
I am the one who eats
THE GRAVITY LOOPS
GIVE ME LOOPS BROTHAR
>>11281809

>>11281986
Thanks anon
>>11282121
Does “light weight” AM produce enough volatile energetic reactions to possibly be viable as an energy source of some kind?

>a particle beam that flings around a positron
What the fuck? Whoever made this news is super fucking ballsy. A particle beam with a fucking positron? That's fucking ridiculous

>>11280892
it would never produce energy, only allow you to store it as anti-matter
but that doesn't matter because it's super inefficient at that

>>11282595
It produces two 511 KeV gamma rays. Get enough gamma photons, you can start a positron cascade from impacts with other electrons.

>>11282634
>Pretty ridiculous indeed
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016RvAST...9...63H/abstract
We've actually been generating positron beams for a good while now at facilities like SLAC.
https://www.ne.ncsu.edu/nrp/user-facilities/intense-positron-beam/
Or, you can Google Allen Mills Jr./David Cassidy and their "positronium annihilation driven gamma ray laser" work at UC Riverside and Texas Petawatt UT Austin

>>11282832
Then this is more a step towards practical application of anti matter for things like energy production instead of a practical application in itself ?

>>11283456
no, you can never use anti-matter for energy production unless you found a bunch of it lying around in space or something

>>11283458
So then why bother with it ?

>>11283461
maybe you want to make a bunch of gamma rays real quick-like
maybe you want to shoot trash out the back of a rocket at significant fractions of the speed of light

>>11283464
Maybe you want take all those gamma photons and use them to charge a Halfnium isomer battery. Maybe this guy at Los Alamos could help you out with another solution.
https://quantumdot.lanl.gov/klimov.shtml
Maybe we would want to start a positron cascade at Iranian nuclear facility.

>>11283464
So instead of fuel for energy to create propulsion you just cut out the middle man and make propulsion right from AM?

>>11283530
you use energy to create the AM that you then send into space to use for propulsion, except you need stupid amounts of it and I don't think the technology to direct and contain it efficiently enough to use as propulsion will exist in this century

>>11283541
This guy has some decent ideas
http://www.niac.usra.edu/files/library/meetings/fellows/mar04/Edwards_Kenneth.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjDtcqX0PDmAhXAAp0JHdn3CW4QFjAAegQIBxAC&usg=AOvVaw0dJsceWDO1gmbb2InAs-aL

>>11283570

>>11283663
I give up. Just search for Kenneth Edwards NIAC and it should pop up.

They are called light pillars, op.
Ffs don't you have google

>>11283541
But effective methods for storing and handling AM are already described in a few places. In particular, Raytheon’s patent linked earlier describes a photon band gap trap utilized as a central mechanism to capture positronium.