/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.4522828]

Would anti-matter only annihilate with its corresponding element or like oxygen and anti-helium make carbon?

What about complex molecules? Would anti-oxygen react with water and produce hydrogen?

Also… how much money could I get for a gram of anti-matter on the black market?

[Anonymous No.4522839]

>>4522837
sorry, up quarks with anti-up quarks

[Anonymous No.4522837]

it will annihilate with associated fundamental antiparticle. up quarks with up quarks etc.

[Anonymous No.4522841]

> how much money could I get for a gram of anti-matter on the black market?
Nothing. You'd end up killing yourself, and a lot of other people.

[Anonymous No.4522842]

if it reacts "completely" it will produce hydrogen from anti-oxygen and water. most likely the electrons and anti electrons will annihilate causing the water to break up into its ions which will then annihilate and the remaining elements will them worm a compound again (in this case hydrogen). and for 1 gram? on its own, not much since its hard to store, but if its in some container. billions. seeing as you can make a bomb that can release 100000000000000J of energy with it.

[Anonymous No.4522843]

It goes down to the level of fundamental particles (as we understand them). An antiproton is made of antiquarks, so while a proton is made of two up quarks and a down quark, an antiproton is made of two up antiquarks and a down antiquark.

The question is when it's possible for them annihilate, and that gets complicated. The really short answer is "if they get close enough". For nuclear fusion it's really hard to get nuclei close together because they're both positively charged, but antimatter has negative nuclear charge, so they tend to just slam into each other and annihilate, producing a shower of lighter particles and gamma rays.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annihilation#Proton-antiproton_annihilation

Same for electrons and positrons, as far as I know.

[Anonymous No.4522853]

>>4522842
oh, and i define completely as it only creating photons with no other particles mixed in with it.

[Anonymous No.4522859]

>>4522853
That's not quite right. You get neutrinos and such to conserve lepton number, etc.

[Anonymous No.4522869]

>>4522859
>conserve lepton number
electron+positron = 1+(-1) = 0
there should be a lepton number of 0 after reaction, so neutrinos and shit arnt needed.

i did forger about conservation of momentum though, so "complete" is now defined as having only 1 particle after reaction left that leaves the system and doesn't combine with the particles left.

[Anonymous No.4522871]

>>4522859
you are thinking of beta decay or something

[Anonymous No.4522875]

>>4522842
Would the cascade reaction be strong enough to cause the hydrogen produced to undergo fusion?

[Anonymous No.4522879]

>>4522871
No...antimatter reactions = 50% gamma rays and 50% neutrinos

[Anonymous No.4522881]

>>4522869
annihilation results in photon pairs

[Anonymous No.4522887]

>>4522879
>classifying reaction cross-sections of all reaction involving a particle and its antiparticle as the same
>50% with no mention of what value you are talking about
>giving a crosssection that is independent of momentum or angle or spin

wat

[Anonymous No.4522888]

>>4522871
I think you're right.

[Anonymous No.4522891]

>>4522879
just photons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron%E2%80%93positron_annihilation

baryonic annihilations produce all kinds of exotic particles which eventually result in leptons and/or photons

[Anonymous No.4522896]

what about anti-matress?

[Anonymous No.4522898]

>>4522881
>>4522881
right, conservation of momentum only requires more than one photon, so, back to my first definition.

[Anonymous No.4522899]

>>4522891
yeah look...

At energies near and beyond the mass of the carriers of the weak force, the W and Z bosons, the strength of the weak force becomes comparable with electromagnetism.This means that it becomes much easier to produce particles such as neutrinos that interact only weakly.

[Anonymous No.4522908]

>>4522899
if you pump enough energy into an electron hitting a positron, it can create an exact replica of earth along with an exact antimatter replica. but it doesn't mean it is a needed outcome.

[Anonymous No.4522910]

>>4522899
That hardly supports an argument that it's always a 50/50 split. How would you even measure that? Particle count? Total energy?

[Anonymous No.4522931]

>>4522910

Yeah it does... its like at relativistic speeds one of the photon pairs coverts to two electron neutrinos, look it up

[Anonymous No.4522938]

>>4522910
http://przyrbwn.icm.edu.pl/APP/PDF/110/a110z501.pdf

[Anonymous No.4522941]

>>4522931
>implying this means that all annihilations produce "50% gamma rays and 50% neutrinos" like you stated earlier
Yeah, no.

[Anonymous No.4522945]

>>4522938
Thanks for the paper, but it doesn't seem to say anything of the sort.

[Anonymous No.4522970]

>>4522941
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_efficiency_of_antimatter

>As much as 50% of energy produced in reactions between nucleons and antinucleons is carried away by neutrinos in these applications.

[Anonymous No.4522976]

>>4522970
>As much as

[Anonymous No.4522980]

>>4522875
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter_catalyzed_nuclear_pulse_propulsion

Have fun :)

[Anonymous No.4522981]

>>4522970
Also
>answers.com
>no sources cited
This is just as bad as a 4chan post.

The most shameful thing here is there you are trying to defend a stupid statement instead of modifying it and becoming better, on a board that is supposedly dedicated science - the pursuit of knowledge and discarding bad ideas for better ones.

[Anonymous No.4522989]

>>4522976
Look buddy all I'm trying to say is at rest energys its possible to get 100% energy in photons and at relativistic energys its possible to get 50% energy in the form neutrinos and 50% photons

So...how is this all possible?

[Anonymous No.4522997]

>>4522989
Oh, you're not just defending this post?
>>4522879

Then what are you asking? How is matter-antimatter annihilation possible?

[Anonymous No.4523015]

>>4522997
No ...I am asking why is it that at speeds close to c, half the energy produced in electron-positron reactions is in the form of neutrinos?

[Anonymous No.4523022]

>>4523015
When you speed the particles up so that their rest energy is not the only significant contribution to their total energy, they have... well, more energy, and this makes it easier to form new particles as part of the annihilation. The actual picture is much more detailed I'm sure, but I'd have to talk to a particle physicist I know to go any further.

[Anonymous No.4523034]

>>4523022
Do you think it has something to do with the weak force like >>4522899 said?

[M No.4523065]

You know, the Earth has an anti-matter belt that replenishes itself constantly. You could get your antimatter from there. The belt extrends from 200 to 2000 kilometers above the Earth but is very dilute in anti-particles.

[Anonymous No.4523071]

>>4523034
Sure, sounds plausible from what I know, he seems to know more particle physics than I do though.

[Anonymous No.4523089]

>>4523065

Yes,but with the cost of creating a bussard collector and sending it to space it would be better to devise a way to just create it more cost efficiently

[M No.4523114]

>>4523089
Are there any methods, even theoretical, that could trap larger amounts of anti-matter than we currently are able to?

[Anonymous No.4523171]

>>4523034

Yes.

[Anonymous No.4523332]

>>4523114

Not that I am aware of.

[Alejandro No.4523346]

>>4523114
Inb4 Angels and Demons

[Anonymous No.4523454]

>>4522842

Your off by about ~ 80 terajoules

one gram of antimatter annihilating with one gram of matter would = 179751035747365.28 Joules

or about ~ 43kt

[Anonymous No.4523575]

>>4523114
I've read that it should be possible to store antiprotons in defects in a crystal lattice. I'm not sure how that's supposed to work, seems like Earnshaw's theorem says it can't, but hey I'm not a physicist.

[Anonymous No.4523717]

>>4523575
Maybe the lattice acts as some kind of magnetic trap?

[sage No.4523837]

>>4522837

If that's the case how can anti-protons annihilate neutrons?

[Anonymous No.4523851]

>>4523837
color confinement. if you hurl it fast enough it will annihilate each other and make some mesons or shit.

[Anonymous No.4523905]

What if you combine a black hole and a anti-matter black hole, would it explode or would it just form a bigger black hole?

[Anonymous No.4523912]

>>4523905
bigger. both have positive mass and energy so you add it.

[Anonymous No.4523975]

>>4523912

So theoretically, tachyons could be used to destabilize a black hole or even cause it to disappear?

[Anonymous No.4524085]

anyone?

[Anonymous No.4524282]

Bump

[Anonymous No.4524321]

Lolwut?
Matter is energy?
This is interesting