Anti matter hunt.

[xelasnave]

If the inflation theory is correct then it may be possible to find old anti matter...
For those who may find this interesting

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1030102608.htm

alex

[jungle11 (Greg)]

Forgive my ignorance, but I didn't think it was possible for antimatter to exist outside of relativistic impacts and such because as soon as it was created it would interact with matter and be destroyed.
Is this totally wrong?

[Paddy (Patrick)]

Originally Posted by jungle11

Forgive my ignorance, but I didn't think it was possible for antimatter to exist outside of relativistic impacts and such because as soon as it was created it would interact with matter and be destroyed.
Is this totally wrong?

My impression is that they are looking for areas where the anti matter that was created in the big bang has been isolated from matter by the rapid expansion of the inflationary period:

"If clumps of matter and antimatter existed next to each other before inflation, they may now be separated by more than the scale of the observable Universe, so we would never see them meet," said Gary Steigman of The Ohio State University, who conducted the study. "But, they might be separated on smaller scales, such as those of superclusters or clusters, which is a much more interesting possibility."

This would require that matter and anti matter were distributed in part in discrete clumps.

Seems a bit of a long bow to draw - not that I'd know.

[xelasnave]

I have little faith in the sucess of the hunt.I have faith that wonderful things will result from the chalenge the men and ladies involved are presented with..

The reason (one of) inflation is in the big bang picture is to make sure stuff was spread out evenly and could be the same although separeted by incomprehensible distances.... and so given that premise one would think inflation was the very mechanism to ensure all matter (and anti matter for that matter) was properly mixed... so to think it may have missed a bit is indeed a stretch... however science works in mysterious ways... although funded to find one thing some research finds other usefull stuff...

So although looking for anti matter they may find evidence to support the Gravity Push Universe so one lives in hope

alex

[bojan]

Alex, we have been there couple of times, science does NOT work in mysterious ways, on the contrary.
For me, the only mysterious thing is and always will be people who do not learn from experimental facts and from others who know and are willing to chow them

[xelasnave]

I withdraw that because of the inflection Bojan... what I was refering to was the many things that have been beneficial throw offs of various research programs...

For example...er I can not think of one actually... but there are many where a line of research produces exciting new stuff... A poor example but it was the only one that I can think of..presumably because I have a dicky heart...is viagra..I understand reasearch for a better heart drug produced side effects that enabled progress in other areas of research...

In spite of my limited acceptance of all current science I respect it very highly... as you well know.

Thank you for enabling me to remove the mystery from my statement.

alex

[sjastro]

Alex,

One of the points of the article was to determine how long the inflation period lasted by studying antimatter, not the existance of inflation.

Seems like you were reading the article subjectively rather than objectively.

Having stated that, there is something very wrong with the article.
Antimatter in the form of the positron was discovered in cosmic rays in 1932.

Antideuteron, antihelium nuclei and antihydrogen have been produced in particle accelerators and while not being primordial shows that antimatter can exist in the Universe.

The journalist who wrote up the article doesn't know the difference between antiparticles and antimatter. (Let's hope the scientists didn't make the same mistake.)

Antiparticles in the form of antiquarks may have existed during the early stages of inflation, but if the inflation period is extended so far out that matter/antimatter was formed, the Universe may have become too large to allow matter to coalesce into planets, stars and galaxies.

We would be in real trouble then..


Regards

Steven

[jungle11 (Greg)]

An antipartical is antimatter, isn't it?
surely antiparticles have a short lifespan, or do they not interact with matter, (Quarks can pass through matter, planets ect right)
Would you be able answer that in a way us unwashed masses might comprehend?

[xelasnave]

Thanks for your input Steven and Greg.

Steven in this instance I found it useful to accept inflation ....and the big bang for that matter... as a the reason why there would be no antimatter now .... it is not always easy to discuss things that one lacks a fundamental belief in the theory... I learn by questioning so it may appear a lack of respect in general which is not the case.

AND so much of what I take issue with is the journalist licience that seems to exist when reporting on anything "black" or "dark" that mystery abounds and science becomes the promoter of the next sci fi movie...

Greg... I should look before I answer but I think anti particle belongs to the supersymetry approach and antimatter to the big bang ... there you go that can be your home work... find out and tell the class the difference beteen the two... learning about this stuff can be fun... well it is fun... how good is it humans can get into this... other animals can not.

alex

[xelasnave]

Greg how is this ...

http://www.lbl.gov/abc/Antimatter.html

[xelasnave]

from Wiki....

There is considerable speculation both in science and science fiction as to why the observable universe is apparently almost entirely matter, whether other places are almost entirely antimatter instead, and what might be possible if antimatter could be harnessed, but at this time the apparent asymmetry of matter and antimatter in the visible universe is one of the greatest unsolved problems in physics.


Could a simple explaination be that the prospect of anti matter is wrong???

What experimental evidence supports the "theory"

...probably all of current science I expect..but I will look.

alex

[xelasnave]

Are there places almost entirely anti matter... the statement contained in the wiki lift...

AND what evidence do we have of...apparent asymetry of matter and anti matter...

IS this apparent symetry mathmatical in origin? and has the math made the prediction?? is there experiment to show this???

Why is it the greatest unsolved problems in physics???
If we get rid of anti matter do we have a problem???
alex

[jungle11 (Greg)]

Hey there alex, i will check into super symetry as apposed to the big bang - thanks for the link to get me started.

I love these sort of questions too, my favourite would be 'Why is there something rather than nothing" - proberly the biggest question we'll ever ask ourselves (and proberly unsolvable too, oh well)

So many just think of the big bang as the true beginning of um...'something'
But without some kind of existing catylist, there would be nothing to drive it, and without time, process is impossible.

After thinking long and hard over this, i personally reckon there is something because there was no beginning. I believe in the big bang, but only another one of an infinite amount of steps.

How could people not like this stuff!!

cheers

[xelasnave]

The more you learn the more you realise there is so much we do not know... humans I mean...
alex

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by jungle11

An antipartical is antimatter, isn't it?
surely antiparticles have a short lifespan, or do they not interact with matter, (Quarks can pass through matter, planets ect right)
Would you be able answer that in a way us unwashed masses might comprehend?

Quarks and antiquarks are not classified as matter/antimatter.

Matter is composed of the fundamental particles. (Quarks and Leptons).
Quarks and Leptons are the building blocks that form matter as much as an antiquark is a building block for antimatter.

Quarks do not exist in the free state.

Neutrinos are the particles that are able to pass through mass largely unaffected.

Hope this helps

Steven

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

from Wiki....

There is considerable speculation both in science and science fiction as to why the observable universe is apparently almost entirely matter, whether other places are almost entirely antimatter instead, and what might be possible if antimatter could be harnessed, but at this time the apparent asymmetry of matter and antimatter in the visible universe is one of the greatest unsolved problems in physics.


Could a simple explaination be that the prospect of anti matter is wrong???

What experimental evidence supports the "theory"

...probably all of current science I expect..but I will look.

alex

Three Japanese scientists win the 2008 Nobel prize for physics for their work on matter/antimatter asymmetry.

Positron discovered in Cosmic rays in 1932.
Antiparticles produced in particle accelerators, their properties as predicted by the symmetry requirements of Quantum mechanics.

So what exactly is the problem?

Regards

Steven

[jungle11 (Greg)]

What do you do for a living Steven? Soundss like you've studied this stuff seriously.

[jungle11 (Greg)]

Another one Steven.
Maybe 6 months ago on science daily, there was an article stating that there might possibly be a class of star formed by the gravitational collapse of a large star during a supernova, that was more dense than a neutron star (a quark star)
I believe the neutron star exists first, and then collapses further - I wonder if this does indeed break the Pauli exclusion principle - but then again, a quark star proberly is a long shot.

[xelasnave]

There is no problem Steven for you...you have the answers...
The problem for me is I am way past an age where ones brain is reliable trying to learn about stuff that is the realm of great minds both past and present.


I am excited that there are positive answers to my questions I will have a look at the experiments ...to be honest I did not know there was such.


Thanks for more knowledge

alex

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by jungle11

Another one Steven.
Maybe 6 months ago on science daily, there was an article stating that there might possibly be a class of star formed by the gravitational collapse of a large star during a supernova, that was more dense than a neutron star (a quark star)
I believe the neutron star exists first, and then collapses further - I wonder if this does indeed break the Pauli exclusion principle - but then again, a quark star proberly is a long shot.

Greg,

In general the Pauli exclusion principle limits the number of ways fundamental or subatomic particles can interact with each other to from more complex matter.

It doesn't apply in the reverse case, where matter for example is broken down into it's constituent particles.

Neutrons are composed of three quarks, the quarks can only combine as determined by the Pauli exclusion principle amongst other things. However there is nothing preventing the neutron being split into it's constituent quarks.

On a larger scale this also applies to the transformation of a neutron star into a quark star (where the quark star is composed of free quarks), assuming of course they exist...

Regards

Steven