/sci/ - Science & Math

>Implying we can actually see antimatter using <span class="math">any[/spoiler] wavelength of the electromagnetic spectrum.
myface.jpg

>>1221428
Antimatter has opposite charge, therefore electromagnetic propagation affects it differently, and we would be able to detect this.

>>1221463
Instead of being an ass, you could explain your post, because, like I said, I don't know much about antimatter.

Oh wait, this is /sci/, hardly anyone here is ever helpful.

Could you explain the wavelength-stuff?

If it consisted of antimatter, the boundaries matter/antimatter would emit truly gigantic amounts of energy.

And don't you think 13.7 billions years isn't enough to annihilate all antimatter in the universe?

>>1221494
>Implying you understand baryonic distribution

>>1221485
We cannot see antimatter. It is not visible to any sort of electromagnetic radiation.

We can only see its effects.

As we can see the Andromeda galaxy...

>>1221512
>>1221468
Thank you.

>>1221512

I'm pretty sure we can see antimatter just like we can see normal matter. Why wouldn't we?

>>1221512
Bullshit. Antimatter would behave in the same way as matter as far as the emission and absorption of light is concerned, because electromagnetic interactions are charge conjugation and parity invariant.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't anti-matter have absolutely nothing to do with matter itself, except for it's influence on it? Isn't actually more of an anti-gravity?

>>1221512
>>1221463

>>1221638
It is time to read a book, son.

>>1221485
it kinda explains itself bro

>>1221638
wat

>>1221638
You have it completely backwards. Antimatter has positive mass and behaves the same as matter in a gravitational field. It has everything to do with normal matter, since you literally can't make a consistent theory of electromagnetic interactions, for instance, without antimatter falling out of your equations.

So if there were objects made out of antimatter separated from matter, would be be able to visually see it?

>>1221697
They would be indistinguishible just from the light they give off, but you definitely could tell by an interaction that actually differentiates between matter and antimatter, such as weak interactions. In short, you could probably tell by looking for differences in processes involving neutrinos.

I think a couple people are confusing antimatter with dark matter

>>1221754
That would explain a lot

Antimatter decays quicker than matter thus there would have naturally been a disparity between the two after each annihilated the other in the beginning seconds of the universe. It would have been virtually impossible for any significant quantities of antimatter to live on.

Andromeda is not antimatter.
/thread

>>1221694
Are you sure about the gravitational field bit? I read we have never actually observed the effect of gravity on antimatter, because at atomic/subatomic scales the other forces interfere too much for gravity to be detectable...

>>1221754


Dark Matter= Some sort of thing that we can't find yet. Maybe missing matter or model for gravity is wrong.

Dark Energy=Some sort of anti gravity force. Probably responsible for the expansion of the universe.

Antimatter= A type of matter that doesn't seem to be around in our universe anymore. Probably used to be at least 99.% as much antimatter as matter in the beginning of the universe but it all exploded. If antimatter touches matter its magnitudes more powerful than nuclear reactions.

>>1221799
So, I take it you know a novel source of CP violation that is sufficient to explain the matter-antimatter imbalance we currently observe? Say, why don't you publish and wait for the LHC to get you a Nobel Prize?

>>1221805
Indeed, but we have compelling theoretical arguments that say it should have positive mass. If it "fell up" so to speak, all hell would break lose and we would have to redo particle physics from scratch.

>>1221856

Couldn't we use that like that use element zero in Mass Affect?

>>1221950
Antimatter is soooo hard to make. Very very expensive.

>>1221981

Well if it works like Element zero, I'm sure someone will foot the bill.

ALSO does Antimatter particules behave the exact same as their normal matter counterparts?

I think we should do more research into this. They could behave vastly different from anything we've seen at sufficient masses.

: / I'll be back when /b/ leaves

Let's talk about;

Antimatter
Dark Energy
Dark Matter

I say it wouldn't be possible, because it would have all been eliminated when all the matter in the universe was closer together.

>>1222306
The charges are opposite, so if you apply an electric or magnetic field, it will go the opposite way their matter counterparts would.

That said, weak interactions do make a more fundamental distinction, since some weak decays produce particles and antiparticles at a different rate, which is a good thing, becausee something has to explain why we have only matter now, if in the beggining of the Universe there should have been equal amounts of antimatter. Too bad this is not enough of an imbalance to explain it.

>>1221428
If the entire Andromeda galaxy was composed of anti matter, the abundant matter in the universe would continually be colliding with the galaxy, and we would be observing an extreme amount of gamma rays being emitted from its fringes.

we've only observed positrons and anti-protons.... we have yet to observe, make, or otherwise detect full anti particles with their positrons and anti-protons making up an atom. We tell positrons by their movements inside a magnetic or electric field. They have the same movement as an electron but opposite. I don't know anything about anti-protons.

That's what I know.

>>1224685
Untrue. Look up Antihydrogen. Also, there are many more particles than just protons and electrons. They and their antiparticles are produced routinely at particle accelerators.

>>1224704

What happens when you put 2 anti hydrogen atoms with 1 anti oxygen atom?

>>1224726
Antiwater. Never been done, though. Oxygen is too complicated to make.

>>1224704
ok, cool.

did not know that.

Bump

>>1224741
Could you drink antiwater?

Could you make an antihuman?

>>1225984
If we can make anti Hydrogen, can we make AntiFire?

>>1225984

If we drank antiwater we would explode

But yea, current theories suggest that it would be possible for the entire universe to be made of anti-matter like our universe now is made of matter. We could indeed be made of anti-matter. One of the great questions, though, is why there is so much more matter than anti-matter. If it had been the other way though, we could be all anti-matter.

Don't try to mix the two though. Ridiculous amounts of energy expendature occur.

>>1225984
>Could you drink antiwater?
If you want to spontaneously become a nuclear bomb, yes.

>>1225984
....Seriously, this is getting retarded.

If you were made totally out of anti-matter, and lived in an anti-matter environment, yes you could drink anti-water. However, once anti-particles come into contact with regular matter, you get shittons of gamma radiation.

The main reason this has yet to be even considered as a possible fuel source is because of this annihilation. So far, the only way to slow down antimatter without annihilation occurring is with huge electromagnetic forces, which are costly as fuck, and, in the case of storage, would have to run all the fucking time.
Next, the anti-matter we produce in particle accelerators also requires shittons of energy to produce. We have made less than 30 nanograms of anti-matter overall if I recall correctly. Of course, we could probably make quite a lot more if we focused on production rather than experimentation, but then you have the problem of STORING THE FUCKING STUFF.

Also, we're able to detect antimatter-matter interactions easily, so if Andromeda was made out of Anti-matter we'd be seeing shittons of gamma radiation.

maybe we're the only species made of normal matter and all the other races of the universe are made up of anti-matter and thats why were alone in this universe cause nobody wants to deal with us.

>>1226057
maybe our form of gamma radiation is visible light and all the light we produce is harmful to anti-people that live in andromeda

>>1226095

>maybe our form of gamma radiation is visible light

....Fuck this thread.

would an anti-matter star produce anti-photons?

>>1226133

>>1226114

>>1226133

bump

>>1226133
No answer to this? I tried googling but I get all sorts of confusing answers.