On the subject of anti-matter...

[EUROFAG !9oHNTFCqdg No.1019287]

If anti-matter exists, then it needs to be something, even just a stream of particles. But then it would have a matter, and therefor not be anti-matter. How can it exist then?

[Anonymous No.1019324]

>>1019287
protip: you don't know what anti matter is. lrn2google

[Anonymous No.1019335]

>>1019287

We don't know.

Antimatter by definition is something that we shouldn't be able to rationalise except under entirely philosophical grounds.

[Anonymous No.1019346]

>>1019287

You're seriously stupid. Please kill yourself.
Please?

[Anonymous No.1019351]

>>1019335
>>1019287

Both retards, please leave my species.

[Anonymous No.1019361]

ITT: Anti-trolls

[Anonymous No.1019365]

dun dun

[Anonymous No.1019371]

>>1019335
LOL idiot, gtfo

[Anonymous No.1019385]

>>1019361
you forgot the dx's (or du's)
quite ambiguous, because it's not sure whether you're integrating with respect to u or x

[Anonymous No.1019444]

>>1019361
NO! That is very wrong! Cling to your pathetic idea of fluid exchange.

[Anonymous No.1019593]

>>1019287
Anti matter is a form of matter. The name "anti-matter" is somewhat misleading. It's just backwards matter, and when the particles hit each other their spins screech to a stop and they assplode.

[Anonymous No.1019615]

>>1019287
You're retarded.

>>1019335
So are you. We've made anti-matter before.

[Anonymous No.1019659]

>>1019593
It's just backwards matter? No its just matter with an opposite charge. An antielectron, otherwise known as a positron, is just a positively charged electron. Everything else about it is the same. An anti proton is just a proton but all the charges of the constituent quarks are opposite to normal quarks and these quarks are then antiquarks. It's not backwards.

[Anonymous No.1019666]

>>1019385
That whole thing is just frought with errors and ambiguity.

[Anonymous No.1019685]

>>1019659
>It's not backwards

Technically it backwards (realative to time), in feynman diagrams. Looks like you should read up little engineer!

[Anonymous No.1019706]

>>1019287

>>1019335

Please remove yourself from the gene pool. Thanks in advance,
The human race.

[Anonymous No.1019717]

>>1019685
Technically thats just a graphical representation. It by no means represents any true nature of the particles. I could draw a graph saying it's an elephant but that wouldn't make it true now would it? Feynman Graphs are a common way of representing and easily seeing how certain nuclear reactions would work.

[Anonymous No.1019730]

Y'all motherfuckers lyin', and gettin' me pissed.

[Anonymous No.1019738]

>>1019717
The graphs are way more than just pictures that look nice. Anti-matter is simply another degree of freedom, which was first introduced in the Dirac-Equation. Subsequently, the positron was the first particle whose existance was deduced from theoretical physics.

In Feynman-diagrams, you can write anti-particles like they move backwards in time.

[Anonymous No.1019739]

CPT motherfuckers

do you know it???

[Anonymous No.1019752]

>>1019659
>>1019685
>>1019717
>>1019738
No, it literally is backwards. The only difference is that it spins the other way. That also reverses its charge. Because it spins the OTHER WAY. It is backwards matter. It spins backwards and has a backwards charge as a result, and when it touches, it stops and assplodes.

[Anonymous No.1019753]

>>1019717
>certain nuclear reactions would work.

Wrong again little engineer. Feynman graphs are use in particle physis to represent "all particle interactions". Not just in nuclear physics.

[Anonymous No.1019805]

Place a blood and a crip in the same room. Even though they are both matter, their properties (ie, being stupid niggers) will force them to negate eachothers existance.

[Anonymous No.1019808]

>>1019753
Fine whatever. I know it can be used for any particle interaction. If you want to be a nitpicky prick, I'm done trying to discuss things with you. And for the person saying the spin was backwards. Just how do you define a backwards spin? Cause whenever I was studying quantum mechanics, the spinors representing spins of particles had various states depending on the particle. What's backwards of a spinor equaling [3i,2]? Hm?

[Anonymous No.1019838]

Take the charges of an atomic structure.
Reverse them.
Now have a universe that can conform to laws of physics that support that.
Anti-Matter universe.

It's not that hard.

[Anonymous No.1019842]

>>1019335
You're thinking of dark matter, or something else entirely. We've made (very) small amounts of antimatter, it's far from purely philosophical.

[Anonymous No.1019852]

>>1019838
>>1019752

Good luck explaining the antineutron by reversing the charge of the neutron..

[Anonymous No.1019871]

>>1019852
You can't reverse the charge of something that doesn't have a charge.


....or can you?

[Anonymous No.1019877]

>>1019808
[2,3i]

[Anonymous No.1019879]

>>1019852
I was thinking about pointing this out for him but I wanted to watch him squirm.

All particles are defined by the vibrations of their quarks/strings (sorry can't remember if they are interchangeable or if the strings are the fundamental particle of quarks, these string vibrate differently and this creates unique particles.

These unique particles combine together in certain ways which create hadrons of different types.

Bam different types of matter/anti matter.

And lo physics was explained to retards.

[Anonymous No.1019883]

>>1019871

What's the polar opposite of a variable?

Moron

[Anonymous No.1019891]

>>1019852
Neutron is made of an up(+2/3) and two downs(-1/3)(-1/3).
Antineutron is made of anti-up(-2/3) and two anti-downs(+1/3)(+1/3).
Oh look, I just trivially did the thing you challenged me in your ignorance to do.

[Anonymous No.1019906]

>>1019891
Quarks don't have an electrical charge, If I remember correctly

[Anonymous No.1019912]

>>1019906
You remember incorrectly.

[Anonymous No.1019913]

>>1019906
You do not remember correctly.

[Anonymous No.1019931]

>>1019871
Just fucking a bit with you .. charge DOES play a role in Antimatter/Matter things, but not as you think. In the standard model, you exchange quarks with anti-quarks to get to the anti-particle. Some properties of the quarks change, some don't. We don't know all about anti-quarks yet.

[Anonymous No.1019933]

>>1019852
>>1019871
>>1019879
You're all idiots. And to the last one. Stop reading stephen hawking and brian greene and thinking you understand real physics.

[Anonymous No.1019934]

10/10 OP

Would rage again.

[Anonymous No.1019941]

>>1019913
>>1019912

Yep you're right I just checked.

Wierd they have charges of a third.

Well makes sense, so presumably to get an proton all 3 quarks would need a +ve charge? I know this would be common knowledge but lets face it with shit like String theory, M theory and quantum mechanics can't be too careful can we.

[Anonymous No.1019943]

>>1019906

[Anonymous No.1019947]

>>1019879

Protip: String Theory isn't proven. Heck, there is not a single prediction of the string theory that is testable with current technology.

Don't take it as a fact.

[Anonymous No.1019948]

>>1019877
Ok.. All you did was change the order, affectively applying a transformation matrix to the spinor, but that in no way makes in "backwards".

[Anonymous No.1019955]

>>1019933
>implying anyone bothers to read about science

[Anonymous No.1019970]

>>1019955
I do.

Although I'm mathematically retarded and as such my physics wasn't good enough to carry it on into uni I still enjoy it.

[Anonymous No.1019990]

>>1019808
WTF? really? you don't know how to define backwards spin? Do you even know QM? The standard model? are you just talking put your ass? You an enginner? Backwards spin, just means we reverse the z componet of spin. It is a vector after all.

[Anonymous No.1019995]

>>1019990
> spin is a vector
like time?

[Anonymous No.1019997]

>>1019990
agreed

[Anonymous No.1020002]

>>1019970
You shouldn't be reading about it. Science is an exclusive discipline, available only to the select few with sufficient intellect to master it. All others are barely fit to exist, nevermind dabble in something they couldn't possibly understand with their tiny, cluttered minds.

[Anonymous No.1020010]

>>1019995
time isnt a vector! YOUR A FUCKING RETARD!

[Anonymous No.1020003]

>>1019995
No, I didnt say spin was a vector, the "z componet of spin" is a vector.

[Anonymous No.1020014]

>>1019995
Troll harder

[Anonymous No.1020026]

>>1020002
Oh if I felt like learning it I can do it easy, for some retarded reason I was always better at physics than maths and passed among the highest in my class.

I just decided to learn about biology instead and now have students remorse.

Biology is to easy.

[Anonymous No.1020027]

>>1020014
2/3 ain't bad

[Anonymous No.1020041]

>>1019948

[Anonymous No.1020047]

>>1020002

Oh also, I'm currently trying to write a progressive metal album based on the philosophical consequences of quantum mechanics and the multiverse theory.

[Anonymous No.1020060]

>>1019990
That's not backwards, thats just a different state. What if the z component of a proton was [1,0,0] how would you make that "backwards"?

[Anonymous No.1020068]

>>1020047
>metal
>philosophical

[Anonymous No.1020075]

>>1020068
I fucking love that cat

pic related

[Anonymous No.1020079]

>>1020041
Yeah and if you knew any physics you would know those are the two allowed states of the spin of an electron, effectively known as spin up and spin down. One is not backwards from the other one and nothing in that is about backwards spins being antiparticles.

[Anonymous No.1020088]

>>1020068
>HURRDURR

[Anonymous No.1020091]

>>1020079
Okay, I was wrong.
Thanks for pointing it out.
I thought that was right! It's nice to be corrected.
Thank you, /sci/.

[Anonymous No.1020097]

>>1020068
Oh no you didn't!!!

But yeah, s'all your opinion man, in my opinion I feel it could work out quite well.

[Anonymous No.1021155]

>>1019877

Hurrrr

[Anonymous No.1021176]

>>1019931

Anti-up, jack that fool.
Anti-up, kidnap that fool.

[Anonymous No.1021523]

i have anti matter in FFX