News about antihydrogen being "trapped" at CERN has prompted this video into the topic. More physics at www.sixtysymbols.com/ With Mike Merrifield and Ed Copeland
Cool! I knew about positrons, antiproton's, etc.., but I didn't know we could actually build anti elements like anti hydrogen because, as prof Copeland said, annihilation. Awesome and fascinating, IMO!
If that blows your mind, look up the wiki article on positronium. It's an exotic 'atom' consisting of an electron and a positron in a binary orbit with each other. I might look for this later, but there is also a fascinating paper on what the universe will look like in the distant future that says that when nearly all matter is gone and the only thing left are photons and electrons/positrons, there will be atoms of positronium as large as the observable universe. Which is to say, matter will be so sparse that an electron and a positron will be able to attract each other from across the universe and spiral in toward each other, and after an unimaginable length of time, eventually meet and annihilate.
The difference is in the quarks that make it up. Though the whole particle has the same charge, it's made up of anti-quarks that have opposite charges from their own matter counterparts.
hey! just wanted to let you know that i quoted professor merrifield in one of my research papers for school on antimatter. of course i put an source citation underneath and attached a paragraph filled with rambling about how awesome and educational this channel is. :P brady, you and the profs are my heroes. thank you a lot!
Since all particles exhibit wave-particle duality, is matter-antimatter annihilation a consequence of destructive interference? I mean, with all waves, the wave disappears when combined with one with an opposite polarity, but all energy is conserved. It's just like with matter and antimatter.
just wana take this time to thank the creators and the people in take part in these videos. ive had more fun and learned more then i ever did at school.
Ok, so I've been really obsessed with antimatter now. I found out while investigating that if there is no way of annihilating it with matter, you can actually have structures of these. I still don't know if I'm right though... so I have these questions: 1) Could there be a universe made out of antimatter and few matter hypothetically speaking? 2) Are the primary colors of light of antimatter the opposite of those of matter? 3) Are black holes made out of antimatter? If yes, are they antimatter stars? If so, is part of they're pull because matter is attracted to antimatter and viceversa? 4) Is there any possibility gravity works the same for both types of matters since they're only opposite in charges and color, but not in the fact that both occupy mass and curve space-time? 5) And last but not least, can we even answer those questions yet? I did a mess right there, but hopefully someone will fill this knowledge-thirst human with information o.o
First thing to declare is that i am in no way a professional physicist or anything close to being that, hence the answers below are to the best of my knowledge and I apologize in advance for any errors. 1) Q:Could there be a universe made out of antimatter and few matter hypothetically speaking? A: Technically, both antimatter and matter can form individual solar systems on their own. Both can exist in the same universe, as long as they are not in contact of each other (e.g. lights years away from each other like the current distance between us and the closest solar system). As for differents universes that you are talking about in your question, I believe it will involve the frontier fields of physics in string theory as to the types of universe and so on. Hence, the simple answer is that yes, both can exist in the same universe as long as they do not come in contact with each another. As the the question of universes, we are still unable to test the types, or even if there is an existence of the multiverse (multiple universe) although the maths seems to be pretty sound with regards to the multiverse theory. 2) Q: Are the primary colors of light of antimatter the opposite of those of matter? A: This will involve the understanding of what is primary colors are. This would be better named as the human primary colours as humans only have 3 different colour receptors (red, green, and blue) in our eyes. The reason why we can see so many colours is that our brain takes the information from the 3 receptors and infer what the actual colour of the object is. An example is that a dog only has 2 receptors, so the primary colours for dogs will be these 2 colours instead. Hence, as there is no change in our eye's receptors, we will still see the same primary colours for antimatter or matter alike. 3) Q:Are black holes made out of antimatter? If yes, are they antimatter stars? If so, is part of they're pull because matter is attracted to antimatter and viceversa? A: Black holes are formed when an object attains gravity so high in a small point that it rips apart the fabric of space-time causing a singularity. As long as you are able to create such a high gravity on a small point (no matter is it matter or anti-matter), you will get yourself a black hole. Also, no objects, matter and antimatter or even light can escape the pull of the black hole if it is close enough to the black hole. It probably gobbles up antimatter and matter the same way, not a picky fellow when it comes to gobbling things up. 4) Q: Is there any possibility gravity works the same for both types of matters since they're only opposite in charges and color, but not in the fact that both occupy mass and curve space-time? A: Gravity should probably act the same way under our current known theories as it is not known that antimatter has any special properties when it comes to mass and gravity. However, if this is not yet tested in experiments or at least it is currently being tested, the hope is that it will be different and hence give us a hint for the future progress of physics as our current physics system is definately not complete as it is unable to unify relativity (gravity) with quantum mechanics. You might wish to take a look at the double slit experiment into understanding why results that differ from our current theories might actually be beneficial to physics. 5) Q:And last but not least, can we even answer those questions yet? A: We are mostly able to or undergoing the process of confirming the answers to these question, but the millions dollar question is still how do we unify relativity (gravity) with quantum mechanics.
Oh goodness, I thought no one would ever reply! Thank you so much! I'm glad I got my questions answered. With this, plus with the information I researched, I think I can say I understand it a little bit more. Thanks for making someone learn something :D
Daphness Nohansen Hyrule About the first they made a video saying that it is unlikely. 2) and 4) the "colors" you obtain from anti-matter and the gravitational properties of anti-matter are expected to be the same as regular matter. in this video they mentioned that they are doing these experiments to find that out. 5) Our current physics can predict how it should behave but we are not certain if they really behave that way (it was pointed out in this video).
antimatter for a bomb is incredible due to the huge amount of energy it releases .. its more then nuclear or fission .. it also releases more gamma and stuff
Bear Creek An antimatter bomb would definitely be powerful. But the problem would be actually storing antimatter for any meaningful period of time to make it usable in any kind of explosive. Radioactive substances like uranium can work if they don't decay too quickly (And some uranium isotopes have pretty love half-lives), and because they don't annihilate matter like antimatter does. Unless a method of storing antimatter for a reasonable amount of time is found, antimatter bombs are impractical. And don't get me started on the cost.
Hans Fischer I think the same ,both- H and O is made from the same smaller particles - protons, electrons and neutrons. so they will simply annihilate, but not all... Oxygen is made from 8 protons, 8 elektrons and 8 neutrons, Hydrogen is made from 1 proton and 1 electron... So 1 proton , 1 electron , 1 anti-proton, 1 anti-electron disapper and we will still got 7 anti protons, 7 anti-electron and 8 neutron. Mass number of this particle will be 7+8= 15. Atomic number of this particle : 7. So Anti-oxygen will become anti-Nitrogen atom... Hmmm we still need physicist to say am i wrong at this one :)
za909returns in any case there would be enormous energy output that would obliterate everything few km radius would be hard to find all shattered gold around T.T
I have a thought. That antiprotons, and positrons they are also matter that can be turned into energy. If for example when a PET medical scanner uses the properties of positrons. The fact the anililation happens creating energy that can be detected by the machine. Mass and energy are related (E =MC SQUARED). As stated Cern can produce antihydrogen, antiprotons, and positrons and using magnetic field to direct them, and store them. Cern uses protons at nearly the speed of light to smash it a metal plate and some anti protons are produced. The Sun also has high temperatures, and explosive pressure's which might produce antiprotons that are anililation strait away causing energy to be produced. Keeping the Sun burning.
@JoelT23 There is a symmetry between regular particles and antiparticles. You might as well say that the electron was the anti-particle. We have only named them like we have based what there is a lot of. If a particle encounters a different kind of antiparticle, they don't "know" that one is matter and the other is antimatter; they are just different particles.
What I've always wondered was, would it be possible sometime in the very distant future, to create a human being out of antimatter - an antihuman, so to speak - and sustain it for a period of time such that he/she would mature and develop mentally. I think it would be interesting to communicate with such a person, knowing that we created every single atom that constitutes his/her body.
In the theoretical sense, it's a difference in the number and flavour of quarks that compose the particular particle. In the practical sense, both are generated by radioactive decay or various collision processes. Wikipedia is actually very well informed on these subjects and by following the citations illuminated there you can find yourself quite a lot of good original sources to resolve your questions.
I love these videos, thanks Brady. I do have a question though, one I've always wondered about antimatter: why is it that antimatter and matter mutually annihilate when they meet?
To describe someone you would need many different labels like their height, weight, eye color, Etc. The same thing applies to the different particles which make up the standard model. These labels are called quantum numbers. They include electric charge, color charge, baryon number, lepton number, lepton family number, Spin, angular momentum, weak isospin. These labels can be used to describe every particle known to exist. In all particle interactions, you can think of quantum numbers like energy: something that can neither be created nor destroyed, only transferred. Thus, if a collection of particles has +10 units of electric charge, no matter what new particles are produced, the end net electric charge must remain +10. In energetic processes, namely fission and fusion(relying on primarily the strong interaction), all of the particles are the same type and thus possess the same quantum numbers. Since the numbers don't add up to zero, this prevents 100% of mass turning into energy.
@@EbonAvatar only antimatter, called antifermions, possess opposite quantum numbers to matter particles, called fermions. Thus, when the two meet, the electrical charge, baryon number, etc. add up to zero-turning into particles which have no electric charge/baryon number/etc: photons(pure light energy).
@@EbonAvatar the building blocks of matter and antimatter are fermions(the "stuff" like electrons and protons) and bosons(fundamental interactions that allow particles to communicate). The 4 interactions are: gravity. Electromagnetism. Strong and weak. These 4 interactions cause particles to communicate in different ways based on each force's strength, range, and charge. These ways are the quantum numbers i mentioned earlier.
@MICHAELJONSTON as soon as we get the idea and stuff to fuel something with anti-matter, they will develop a particle accelerator that is compact enough for it to be fitted into a car or something of that size.for example look at the computers now and 50 years ago : they were big,room occupying and spent a lot of energy for it's work while memory and process power was so low.now we have netbooks that are even smaller than laptops with win7 installed,usb drives well over 32 gb and external hdds.
@TheIronWaffleMan similar way a proton and a electron work, they have opposite electric charges so they attract to each other and when they meet they form a neutron,only in this case the particles become energy
Well, if you distinguish between matter and energy then in this context you would be sort of, in a practical and somewhat complete sense, creating one from the other.
Sixtysymbols addressed the "antimatter galaxy" thing in one of their viewer question vids, but allow me to paraphrase what I remember: Astronomers can tell that no observable galaxies are made of antimatter because, if one of them were, they would be able to detect the energy made during annihilation (since space is filled with normal particles, an antimatter galaxy would be reacting and annihilating almost constantly).
It's only fast if you're not a native english speaker. And I'm pretty sure that's true of all languages. It only seems fast if you have to spend time translating in your head.
Josh Martin I've never had to translate anything they say. He does always seem like he's at about 1.2 times the normal human speed. That includes his fidgeting and gestures.
@TheToxicRadio Matter is structured out of a huge amount of electromagnetic energy, as it's shown in Einsteins principle of equivalence, where EM energy equals the mass times the speed of light squared. But EM energy in the very condensed form(your body is made out of light so condensed it is solid) of mass is so tightly stabilized that it is at rest (or has no direction, stays in place). When you destabilize that with for example antimatter, all that energy gets a direction or it's released.
@metadaptation Positrons are not created by the PET scanner, it's the radioactive substance that gets absorbed in the patients bloodstream that generates a little heat. It's just a property some types of radioactive substances have (beta+ decay) and concentration is off course as low as it's technically possible to make a good scan. The antimatter at CERN is created in a different experiment than the LHC. It's created the same way, but capturing a positron requires a lot more high tech.
@TheToxicRadio I guess I missed out 1 square on the p, but other than that, it's the same thing. sqrt is shorthand for squareroot. It doesn't matter either way, the important thing is there is some dependance on momentum
@7CellarDoors Using google calc it's rather easy to calculate. I had to look up a megaton of tnt, it is 4.184 petajoules. So assuming you weigh 70 kg, you + your anti-you would weigh 140kg together, so you can enter this into google: 140kg * c^2 / 4.184 petajoules. The result is 3 gigatons of tnt (3 billion tonnes). Or 10^19 Joules of energy.
If the universe is truly infinite then it is a guarantee there is an exact duplicate such as you in normal matter state, somewhere. In fact, if the universe is infinite then there are infinite copies of you, out there, somewhere.
Urameshi Yusuke I'll raise the infinity bid here. hold on to your head. -cracks neck- if the universe is infinite, than somewhere, there is an infinite amount of picture perfect copies of you, infinite IMPERFECT copies of you, infinite copies -both perfect and IMPERFECT- of every single human being who ever was, is, and shall be, there are an infinite copies of earths, suns, moons, our galaxy, and every piece of matter in it. and so much more. For the simple reason that infinity completely eliminates chance and probabilirty, period.
Science can only go so far. Some questions are untestable such as buddha's 7 unanswerable questions. (look it up) Things that can not be replicated in an experiment are purely philiosphy until science catches up to maybe answer those questions.
If science can only go that far, the society should invest more time and resources into that area of research in order to get more intel, instead of dumping money into dope fairytales in order to isolate themselves in their small puny worlds where everything is predefined.
Well of course, in the future it will progress (hopefully) and maybe those 7 questions will become answered. For now we can't test and replicate the questions so for now it's strictly philosophy. And who exactly is dumping money? Churches? You don't have to be a Christian or be a Buddhist to be spiritual. Come to your own conclusions about things.
Because science isn't giving you a reason to live so as long as you're able to 'fool' (I actually admire those people) yourself into a meaningful life that helps you overcome everyday hardships instead of just giving up I can't see the problem with being religious
@benjaminlzw Not exactly. A radionuclide is used as tracer, which decays and emits positrons in the process, which I think annihilate with the electrons of the nuclide, and emit a pair of gammarays in the process.
@HaileISela but what I basically want to say is, that this parallel universe stuff people like to talk about, may be understood as another unlimited amount of particles that move around us and just don't share the same space. so imagine a sinus wave on a diagram that includes a scale in between being matter and anti-matter, and one that has the properties of space (being one set of dimensions that I at least feel like understanding) or time (being another) and what you will get is an unlimited
@2344553 Mass is conserved as the matter is transformed to another form of energy, i.e electromagnetic waves (gamma rays) for electrons/protons and this wave can be transformed back into the given particles (theoretically).
@damian13531 People are in contact with radioactivity all the time. The ammount you get from a PET scanner is extremely small. And the help it brings is far more that the damage it does, because it will practically never cause any cancer.
@TheReasonWhyGuy The reason a photon still has energy despite having 0 mass if because the full equation is E=sqrt[(mc^2)^2+(pc^2)] where p is the momentum of the photon
any follow up on all the experiments they talk about ? I'm interested in the chemistry of antimatter (does antiH2 react with anti O2 to create antiwater the same way ?) What about gravity ?
That is a very interested approach, I will agree with you that this is the only way we can think of now.. I wish we find another way in the near future, a lot easier to us.
@flakemusic86 No. They are slowed down and will split other U atoms. That's how the chain reaction works. When all the fissionable material is used up, they will spread and lose their energy by friction to surrounding atoms/molecules (air/ground, whatever they hit). But they will stay neutrons. In the process they can be caught by other atoms and make them radioactive (a property used by neutron bombs that release an especially large amount of free neutrons).
@basslinet creating and storing, according to video. Okay, i woudn't be sure about its visibility anyways. We know too few about anti-particles, so they might as well pass the light unaffected. Thanks for your opinion, though.
@Kestko if you want to put these two particles together with no matter around. its impossible because whatever you use to put the particles together is made of matter
@culwin i would assume that the magnetic field is considered a force and it doesn't matter whether it's generated by a particle or anti-particle. i would also assume that it's possible to make a magnetic field that has more force than the attraction energy of a particle/anitparticle.
PET scanners to be specific. I could be wrong, but a Positron Emition Tomography (PET) scanner is just one type of Computer-Aided Tomography (CAT) scanner.
@flakemusic86 i think you are referring to Uranium - 235, but it does not have 235 neutrons, rather 235 nucleons (neutrons + protons). The element Uranium has an atomic number of 92 and therefor always has 92 protons, but U-235 has 143 neutrons. Ba-139 and Kr-95 also do NOT have 139 and 95 neutrons respectively, rather those numbers represent the mass numbers of those specific isotopes
The is a short-lived bound state of electron and positron (anti-electron) called the positronium. Basically they orbit each other for a short while before annihilation. It was observed in the 1950's.
It is the locational spherical inward absorption density + and -outward emission density of electromagnetic waves that's forming all forces of nature and everything forming antimatter matter annihilation or energy and mass forming positive and negative electric charge and electromagnetic fields, input+0/1-output or resonance and interference now as time unfolds from that individual ref-frame. Time is inverse multiplying+/-dividing or like frequency and wavelength thus can speed up or slow down.
Electrical power is basically kinetic energy carried by electrons. A particle and its antiparticle have opposite charges but equal mass. Charge determines how much the particle is accelerated by an electric field just like mass determines the same for a gravitational field. In any given field, a positron would have the same speed and therefore the same kinetic energy as en electron, but they would be going in opposite directions. So it would be like regular current, except for flowing backwards.
ive been wondering what would happen if one was able to combine 2 antihydrogens and 1 antioxygen... would they bond to form antiwater... just some thoughts
The power plants are not intended to keep things in forever. When they get old they are decommissioned and demolished, and the contaminated parts are put into a final storage solution (perhaps a salt mine). The point though is that there doesn't have to be any long lasting radioactive waste in an antimatter facility.
@Chimaera242 Yes, my only concern was about producing/finding enough antihydrogen to be significant enough to produce a large amount of energy, I'm fine with the maths bit and isn't the correct formula: E2 = p2c2 + m2c4 (this was on another 60 symbols video xD)
i dont think anyone can answer the first part but i can answer the second part. matter is actually a form of energy. the video said that energy is emitted when the two substances touch. this energy is equal to the mass by e=mc^2. energy and matter are always conserved, but they are the same thing in different forms and can change between the two
@anonysquirrel I'm no physicist, but with a large enough magnetic field even a temporary dipole(which are present in gases) could be acted upon like a large magnetic field and held in place.
A "negatron" is synonymous with an emitted electron/Beta particle, who's antiparticle is the "positron because they both have the SAME mass but opposite charge. An "anti-proton" thus has to have the same mass as a proton (not an electron) but opposite charge.
They may be producing a tiny amount of it, but you still get Gamma rays out of annihilation, so it's not a big security issue as long as you have a shield of lead (which is indeed a heavy one) between you and the source of radiation.
It takes more energy to make the antimatter in the first place than you would get out of it. Pretty good for energy storage density tho', if you can contain it appropriately it'd make a great battery replacement.
Would a positron and a proton react? Would anti hydrogen react with helium? Or is it just positron-electron, proton-anti proton etc? What about tau electron and positron? Is there an attraction between particles and anti particles? Is there a force (ie if you have a cannon shooting positrons and one shooting electrons aligned in parallel, will the beams curve towards each other?
@DeathG4n Yes, but that requires antimatter in a massive scale and it's pretty much impossible to make antimatter without using more energy that you would get from annihilating it.
Correct me if i'm wrong. You create anti-particles by dumping *a lot* of energy into the tiny space. By the very definition of the law of conservation of energy you are then restricted from getting more than that amount back. So if we look at fueling the spacecraft with anti-matter, everything is great, but you're not getting anything more than you put in (well actually more than twice of what you put in, if you destroy the equal amount of regular matter).
@gavyns Actually, if a KILOGRAM of antimatter and a KILOGRAM of matter annihilated, the explosion would be about 43 megatons of TNT, compared to the Tsar bomb's 50 megatons. However, the Tsar used about 10 kg of fissile material to create its own explosion.
To be specific, faster than c does not seem to be possible, at least not as we understand velocity. FTL in a given medium is certainly possible, if not necessarily attainable yet
"Matter is in violent motion simulating rest and balance now through violent motion. Interchange between these two unbalanced opposites is the basis of all motion in this rythmic universe. It is the locational Spherical inward absorption and outward emission of EMR, or light thats forming antimatter matter annihilation forming + and - electric charge and electromagnetic fields as time unfolds. It is the inward absorption and outward emission of EMR thats forming the inward force called gravity."
@holsson85 not really. even if we find ways to contain anti particle and make a working engine with it, Faster than light travel is still a long long way away. "A particle with a non-zero rest mass will need infinite energy to accelerate faster than the speed of light.
Dan Brown taught scientists a very valuable lesson; when you find something really cool like say THE OPPOSITE OF MATTER AS WE KNOW IT and it just so happens to ANNIHILATE WHEN IN CONTACT WITH REGULAR MATTER you should probably let everyone know.
Now see that's what I love about science! I haven't heard about the majorana-fermion concept before and just assumed neutrinos and antineutrinos to be distinguishable, but I am not above to acknowledge that I might be wrong. However you can't determine that we are both wrong, since the jury on those experiments is still out! ;)
E=mc[squared]. take an amount of matter, multiply its mass by the speed of light squared, that's how much energy has been condensed into that matter. the energy can be released.
How is the energy created? This may be too complex to answer in a UA-cam comment, but it almost sounds like antimatter bypasses the Law of Conservation of energy. Love what you're doing with periodicvideos and sixtysymbols and everything; really inspiring stuff.
In theory yes, and, as far as I know, we don't have a clear way to determine if other galaxies for instance are made up of matter or antimatter. Hawking, however, explains why,in the early stages of the universe, most of the anti-quarks (quarks are the building blocks of protons and neutrons) would turn into electrons (the ordinary matter type). You can find a detailed explanation in his book, "A Brief History of Time" (It's quite easy to read as he uses no maths or equations in the book)
We are talking about positrons annihilating electrons. It is natural for an atom to temporarily lose an electron or two, chemical reactions happen because of this. There are electrons everywhere, the ones you destroy are immediately replaced, you aren't doing any damage from that. If you were annihilating protons though, it would be different.
On 26 April 2011, ALPHA announced that they had trapped 309 antihydrogen
atoms, some for as long as 1,000 seconds (about 17 minutes).
WHAT?!?!??
thats incredible!!!
@@davecrupel2817 The latest record is trapping anti-hydrogen for 405 days, lol yeah it's a HUGE jump from 17 minutes to over a year
@@mastershooter64incredible
I like to think that there's scientists in an antimatter universe getting confused as to why atoms are disappearing.
Almost inhaled my coffee... Enjoyed that mental image thanks
Why the hell aren't anti-protons called negatrons?
+Petrov Theovsk positrons refer to the positive version of electrons. Negatron actually means electron. Maybe anti-protons should be called controns.
+cortonimor contons*
+Wulframm Rolf Truuuuuu
+cortonimor haha controns
+BloodyHand29 exactly what I was thinking xD
Excellent editing on these videos. I love the way two separate conversations are blended into a smooth narrative.
Cool! I knew about positrons, antiproton's, etc.., but I didn't know we could actually build anti elements like anti hydrogen because, as prof Copeland said, annihilation. Awesome and fascinating, IMO!
If that blows your mind, look up the wiki article on positronium. It's an exotic 'atom' consisting of an electron and a positron in a binary orbit with each other. I might look for this later, but there is also a fascinating paper on what the universe will look like in the distant future that says that when nearly all matter is gone and the only thing left are photons and electrons/positrons, there will be atoms of positronium as large as the observable universe. Which is to say, matter will be so sparse that an electron and a positron will be able to attract each other from across the universe and spiral in toward each other, and after an unimaginable length of time, eventually meet and annihilate.
But, if anti-particles are particles with the opposite charge, what's the difference between neutrons and anti-neutrons?
The difference is in the quarks that make it up. Though the whole particle has the same charge, it's made up of anti-quarks that have opposite charges from their own matter counterparts.
it might have unlimited energy.... hmmm..
Hhf
well, whats the opposite of zero charge? INFINITE CHARGE!!
my insight into physics gets brighter every time i watch these videos. thank you.
hey! just wanted to let you know that i quoted professor merrifield in one of my research papers for school on antimatter. of course i put an source citation underneath and attached a paragraph filled with rambling about how awesome and educational this channel is. :P
brady, you and the profs are my heroes.
thank you a lot!
Positrons annihilating electrons in my brain is so MIND BLOWING.
badum tch*
Literally
we really do shine as bright as a light bulb
Be careful, puns like that can be dangerous.
Enlightening.
Since all particles exhibit wave-particle duality, is matter-antimatter annihilation a consequence of destructive interference?
I mean, with all waves, the wave disappears when combined with one with an opposite polarity, but all energy is conserved. It's just like with matter and antimatter.
just wana take this time to thank the creators and the people in take part in these videos. ive had more fun and learned more then i ever did at school.
This is such a fantastic channel, thank you so much for providing such fascinating and enjoyable content.
Ok, so I've been really obsessed with antimatter now. I found out while investigating that if there is no way of annihilating it with matter, you can actually have structures of these. I still don't know if I'm right though... so I have these questions:
1) Could there be a universe made out of antimatter and few matter hypothetically speaking?
2) Are the primary colors of light of antimatter the opposite of those of matter?
3) Are black holes made out of antimatter? If yes, are they antimatter stars? If so, is part of they're pull because matter is attracted to antimatter and viceversa?
4) Is there any possibility gravity works the same for both types of matters since they're only opposite in charges and color, but not in the fact that both occupy mass and curve space-time?
5) And last but not least, can we even answer those questions yet?
I did a mess right there, but hopefully someone will fill this knowledge-thirst human with information o.o
First thing to declare is that i am in no way a professional physicist or anything close to being that, hence the answers below are to the best of my knowledge and I apologize in advance for any errors.
1)
Q:Could there be a universe made out of antimatter and few matter hypothetically speaking?
A: Technically, both antimatter and matter can form individual solar systems on their own. Both can exist in the same universe, as long as they are not in contact of each other (e.g. lights years away from each other like the current distance between us and the closest solar system).
As for differents universes that you are talking about in your question, I believe it will involve the frontier fields of physics in string theory as to the types of universe and so on.
Hence, the simple answer is that yes, both can exist in the same universe as long as they do not come in contact with each another. As the the question of universes, we are still unable to test the types, or even if there is an existence of the multiverse (multiple universe) although the maths seems to be pretty sound with regards to the multiverse theory.
2)
Q: Are the primary colors of light of antimatter the opposite of those of matter?
A: This will involve the understanding of what is primary colors are. This would be better named as the human primary colours as humans only have 3 different colour receptors (red, green, and blue) in our eyes.
The reason why we can see so many colours is that our brain takes the information from the 3 receptors and infer what the actual colour of the object is.
An example is that a dog only has 2 receptors, so the primary colours for dogs will be these 2 colours instead.
Hence, as there is no change in our eye's receptors, we will still see the same primary colours for antimatter or matter alike.
3)
Q:Are black holes made out of antimatter? If yes, are they antimatter stars? If so, is part of they're pull because matter is attracted to antimatter and viceversa?
A: Black holes are formed when an object attains gravity so high in a small point that it rips apart the fabric of space-time causing a singularity. As long as you are able to create such a high gravity on a small point (no matter is it matter or anti-matter), you will get yourself a black hole. Also, no objects, matter and antimatter or even light can escape the pull of the black hole if it is close enough to the black hole. It probably gobbles up antimatter and matter the same way, not a picky fellow when it comes to gobbling things up.
4)
Q: Is there any possibility gravity works the same for both types of matters since they're only opposite in charges and color, but not in the fact that both occupy mass and curve space-time?
A: Gravity should probably act the same way under our current known theories as it is not known that antimatter has any special properties when it comes to mass and gravity. However, if this is not yet tested in experiments or at least it is currently being tested, the hope is that it will be different and hence give us a hint for the future progress of physics as our current physics system is definately not complete as it is unable to unify relativity (gravity) with quantum mechanics.
You might wish to take a look at the double slit experiment into understanding why results that differ from our current theories might actually be beneficial to physics.
5)
Q:And last but not least, can we even answer those questions yet?
A: We are mostly able to or undergoing the process of confirming the answers to these question, but the millions dollar question is still how do we unify relativity (gravity) with quantum mechanics.
Oh goodness, I thought no one would ever reply! Thank you so much!
I'm glad I got my questions answered. With this, plus with the information I researched, I think I can say I understand it a little bit more. Thanks for making someone learn something :D
Daphness Nohansen Hyrule No probs.
Daphness Nohansen Hyrule
About the first they made a video saying that it is unlikely.
2) and 4) the "colors" you obtain from anti-matter and the gravitational properties of anti-matter are expected to be the same as regular matter. in this video they mentioned that they are doing these experiments to find that out.
5) Our current physics can predict how it should behave but we are not certain if they really behave that way (it was pointed out in this video).
What iss what we call matter is actually antimatter? And antimatter is matter?
Mind blown
>Applications to antimatter
BOMB
antimatter for a bomb is incredible due to the huge amount of energy it releases .. its more then nuclear or fission .. it also releases more gamma and stuff
Nofukoff Take into consideration the cost and the energy required to make something like that.
Bear Creek An antimatter bomb would definitely be powerful. But the problem would be actually storing antimatter for any meaningful period of time to make it usable in any kind of explosive. Radioactive substances like uranium can work if they don't decay too quickly (And some uranium isotopes have pretty love half-lives), and because they don't annihilate matter like antimatter does. Unless a method of storing antimatter for a reasonable amount of time is found, antimatter bombs are impractical. And don't get me started on the cost.
I have had quite a few PET scans and always wondered how that worked - so cool!!
These videos are so pleasurable. Thankyou
Short question: When H and Anti-H collide, they both disapper and emit energy. What happen when H and Anti-O collide?
Hans Fischer I think the same ,both- H and O is made from the same smaller particles - protons, electrons and neutrons. so they will simply annihilate, but not all... Oxygen is made from 8 protons, 8 elektrons and 8 neutrons, Hydrogen is made from 1 proton and 1 electron... So 1 proton , 1 electron , 1 anti-proton, 1 anti-electron disapper and we will still got 7 anti protons, 7 anti-electron and 8 neutron. Mass number of this particle will be 7+8= 15. Atomic number of this particle : 7. So Anti-oxygen will become anti-Nitrogen atom... Hmmm we still need physicist to say am i wrong at this one :)
+oGOGLITo that's alchemy bro, now where is my lead and my anti-H ...
+Lapuka I'd say smashing two kinds of atoms into eachother to make gold would still be a lot easier.
za909returns in any case there would be enormous energy output that would obliterate everything few km radius would be hard to find all shattered gold around
T.T
Anti-hydrogen filled Zeppelins. BRILLIANT!
I have a thought. That antiprotons, and positrons they are also matter that can be turned into energy. If for example when a PET medical scanner uses the properties of positrons. The fact the anililation happens creating energy that can be detected by the machine. Mass and energy are related (E =MC SQUARED).
As stated Cern can produce antihydrogen, antiprotons, and positrons and using magnetic field to direct them, and store them. Cern uses protons at nearly the speed of light to smash it a metal plate and some anti protons are produced.
The Sun also has high temperatures, and explosive pressure's which might produce antiprotons that are anililation strait away causing energy to be produced. Keeping the Sun burning.
@JoelT23 There is a symmetry between regular particles and antiparticles. You might as well say that the electron was the anti-particle. We have only named them like we have based what there is a lot of.
If a particle encounters a different kind of antiparticle, they don't "know" that one is matter and the other is antimatter; they are just different particles.
1g of anti matter can produce enough energy to fly to the moon. Or to blow up a small city.
This is insane stuff.
awesome so all we need now are dilythium crystals and we can make ourselves a warp drive with anti-matter...
We don't actually have any dilythium crystals, but we do have Folger's crystals. Let's replace it and see if they notice.
What I've always wondered was, would it be possible sometime in the very distant future, to create a human being out of antimatter - an antihuman, so to speak - and sustain it for a period of time such that he/she would mature and develop mentally. I think it would be interesting to communicate with such a person, knowing that we created every single atom that constitutes his/her body.
antichrist... duh
amazing, this channel is simply amazing
Could an antihydrogen atom absorb a photon?
Yes it can and that is how they have its emission and absorption spectra.
Aaaaannnnddddd subscribed.
I store antimatter at my auntie's place!
Great video -- very interesting to learn about the PET scanner... Merry Christmas!!
In the theoretical sense, it's a difference in the number and flavour of quarks that compose the particular particle. In the practical sense, both are generated by radioactive decay or various collision processes. Wikipedia is actually very well informed on these subjects and by following the citations illuminated there you can find yourself quite a lot of good original sources to resolve your questions.
Just one step closer to warp drive :)
I love these videos, thanks Brady.
I do have a question though, one I've always wondered about antimatter: why is it that antimatter and matter mutually annihilate when they meet?
Their quantum numbers cancel out-all conserved charges are produced so the only particles that can be created which carry neutral charges are photons.
@@scifirealism5943 But why is their quantum number's cancelling out significant? What is it about that that makes matter and anti-matter annihilate?
To describe someone you would need many different labels like their height, weight, eye color, Etc. The same thing applies to the different particles which make up the standard model.
These labels are called quantum numbers. They include electric charge, color charge, baryon number, lepton number, lepton family number, Spin, angular momentum, weak isospin.
These labels can be used to describe every particle known to exist.
In all particle interactions, you can think of quantum numbers like energy: something that can neither be created nor destroyed, only transferred.
Thus, if a collection of particles has +10 units of electric charge, no matter what new particles are produced, the end net electric charge must remain +10.
In energetic processes, namely fission and fusion(relying on primarily the strong interaction), all of the particles are the same type and thus possess the same quantum numbers. Since the numbers don't add up to zero, this prevents 100% of mass turning into energy.
@@EbonAvatar only antimatter, called antifermions, possess opposite quantum numbers to matter particles, called fermions. Thus, when the two meet, the electrical charge, baryon number, etc. add up to zero-turning into particles which have no electric charge/baryon number/etc: photons(pure light energy).
@@EbonAvatar the building blocks of matter and antimatter are fermions(the "stuff" like electrons and protons) and bosons(fundamental interactions that allow particles to communicate).
The 4 interactions are: gravity. Electromagnetism. Strong and weak.
These 4 interactions cause particles to communicate in different ways based on each force's strength, range, and charge. These ways are the quantum numbers i mentioned earlier.
@MICHAELJONSTON as soon as we get the idea and stuff to fuel something with anti-matter, they will develop a particle accelerator that is compact enough for it to be fitted into a car or something of that size.for example look at the computers now and 50 years ago : they were big,room occupying and spent a lot of energy for it's work while memory and process power was so low.now we have netbooks that are even smaller than laptops with win7 installed,usb drives well over 32 gb and external hdds.
@TheIronWaffleMan similar way a proton and a electron work, they have opposite electric charges so they attract to each other and when they meet they form a neutron,only in this case the particles become energy
Imagine something like anti-Darmstadtium.
Excuse me Professor, did you just say CREATE energy??
Well, if you distinguish between matter and energy then in this context you would be sort of, in a practical and somewhat complete sense, creating one from the other.
From the mass
Sixtysymbols addressed the "antimatter galaxy" thing in one of their viewer question vids, but allow me to paraphrase what I remember: Astronomers can tell that no observable galaxies are made of antimatter because, if one of them were, they would be able to detect the energy made during annihilation (since space is filled with normal particles, an antimatter galaxy would be reacting and annihilating almost constantly).
This is a great question. I would also like to know this!
Does that mean that you could, theoretically, make anti-water?
DerpyGaming Theoretically, yes.
Cool!
Should you drink it?
DerpyGaming I don't think so. Besides, it would probably just annihilate with regular matter before you could anyway.
Ya, that makes sense.
WHY DOES THAT MAN TALK SOOOOOO FAST?????
iluvutoobdou why do you think so slow?
*****
hahahaha!! Yeah,pitty it only lasts like 8 minutes!!
It's only fast if you're not a native english speaker. And I'm pretty sure that's true of all languages. It only seems fast if you have to spend time translating in your head.
Josh Martin I've never had to translate anything they say. He does always seem like he's at about 1.2 times the normal human speed. That includes his fidgeting and gestures.
@TheToxicRadio Matter is structured out of a huge amount of electromagnetic energy, as it's shown in Einsteins principle of equivalence, where EM energy equals the mass times the speed of light squared. But EM energy in the very condensed form(your body is made out of light so condensed it is solid) of mass is so tightly stabilized that it is at rest (or has no direction, stays in place). When you destabilize that with for example antimatter, all that energy gets a direction or it's released.
@metadaptation Positrons are not created by the PET scanner, it's the radioactive substance that gets absorbed in the patients bloodstream that generates a little heat. It's just a property some types of radioactive substances have (beta+ decay) and concentration is off course as low as it's technically possible to make a good scan.
The antimatter at CERN is created in a different experiment than the LHC. It's created the same way, but capturing a positron requires a lot more high tech.
Watched this video... gonna go make a light saber (:
OMG I'M SO HIGH And I'm learning so much!
@TheToxicRadio
I guess I missed out 1 square on the p, but other than that, it's the same thing. sqrt is shorthand for squareroot. It doesn't matter either way, the important thing is there is some dependance on momentum
@7CellarDoors Using google calc it's rather easy to calculate. I had to look up a megaton of tnt, it is 4.184 petajoules. So assuming you weigh 70 kg, you + your anti-you would weigh 140kg together, so you can enter this into google: 140kg * c^2 / 4.184 petajoules. The result is 3 gigatons of tnt (3 billion tonnes). Or 10^19 Joules of energy.
So somewhere out there....there is an anti-me?
Yeah, they're like you but just really good looking :D
No... Or rather its less probable than a perfect normal matter duplicite of you.
If the universe is truly infinite then it is a guarantee there is an exact duplicate such as you in normal matter state, somewhere. In fact, if the universe is infinite then there are infinite copies of you, out there, somewhere.
Urameshi Yusuke I'll raise the infinity bid here. hold on to your head.
-cracks neck- if the universe is infinite, than somewhere, there is an infinite amount of picture perfect copies of you, infinite IMPERFECT copies of you, infinite copies -both perfect and IMPERFECT- of every single human being who ever was, is, and shall be, there are an infinite copies of earths, suns, moons, our galaxy, and every piece of matter in it. and so much more. For the simple reason that infinity completely eliminates chance and probabilirty, period.
science is so awesome. cant believe people are STILL trying to use religion to explain the universe.
Science can only go so far. Some questions are untestable such as buddha's 7 unanswerable questions. (look it up) Things that can not be replicated in an experiment are purely philiosphy until science catches up to maybe answer those questions.
If science can only go that far, the society should invest more time and resources into that area of research in order to get more intel, instead of dumping money into dope fairytales in order to isolate themselves in their small puny worlds where everything is predefined.
Well of course, in the future it will progress (hopefully) and maybe those 7 questions will become answered. For now we can't test and replicate the questions so for now it's strictly philosophy. And who exactly is dumping money? Churches? You don't have to be a Christian or be a Buddhist to be spiritual. Come to your own conclusions about things.
Because science isn't giving you a reason to live so as long as you're able to 'fool' (I actually admire those people) yourself into a meaningful life that helps you overcome everyday hardships instead of just giving up I can't see the problem with being religious
I attended a talk by Frank Close (Oxford) on antimatter a few weeks ago, covered most of this, really interesting stuff.
So pray tell about the photon, if it was mentioned.
I just learned about this! Brilliant! (Also its in his book Cosmos)
@benjaminlzw Not exactly. A radionuclide is used as tracer, which decays and emits positrons in the process, which I think annihilate with the electrons of the nuclide, and emit a pair of gammarays in the process.
@HaileISela but what I basically want to say is, that this parallel universe stuff people like to talk about, may be understood as another unlimited amount of particles that move around us and just don't share the same space. so imagine a sinus wave on a diagram that includes a scale in between being matter and anti-matter, and one that has the properties of space (being one set of dimensions that I at least feel like understanding) or time (being another) and what you will get is an unlimited
@culwin
Magnetic fields don't contain particles as such, if you had a magnet in a vacuum, it would still emit a magnetic field around itself.
@2344553 Mass is conserved as the matter is transformed to another form of energy, i.e electromagnetic waves (gamma rays) for electrons/protons and this wave can be transformed back into the given particles (theoretically).
@damian13531 People are in contact with radioactivity all the time. The ammount you get from a PET scanner is extremely small. And the help it brings is far more that the damage it does, because it will practically never cause any cancer.
@TheReasonWhyGuy
The reason a photon still has energy despite having 0 mass if because the full equation is E=sqrt[(mc^2)^2+(pc^2)] where p is the momentum of the photon
any follow up on all the experiments they talk about ? I'm interested in the chemistry of antimatter (does antiH2 react with anti O2 to create antiwater the same way ?)
What about gravity ?
That is a very interested approach, I will agree with you that this is the only way we can think of now.. I wish we find another way in the near future, a lot easier to us.
@flakemusic86
No. They are slowed down and will split other U atoms. That's how the chain reaction works. When all the fissionable material is used up, they will spread and lose their energy by friction to surrounding atoms/molecules (air/ground, whatever they hit). But they will stay neutrons. In the process they can be caught by other atoms and make them radioactive (a property used by neutron bombs that release an especially large amount of free neutrons).
@basslinet creating and storing, according to video. Okay, i woudn't be sure about its visibility anyways. We know too few about anti-particles, so they might as well pass the light unaffected. Thanks for your opinion, though.
thanks i was looking forward to something on this
@Kestko if you want to put these two particles together with no matter around. its impossible because whatever you use to put the particles together is made of matter
@Dodo385 No, they have opposite charges and would attract each other and then anihilate.
@culwin i would assume that the magnetic field is considered a force and it doesn't matter whether it's generated by a particle or anti-particle. i would also assume that it's possible to make a magnetic field that has more force than the attraction energy of a particle/anitparticle.
@JoelT23 No they have opposite charge. So they attract and then annihilate.
PET scanners to be specific. I could be wrong, but a Positron Emition Tomography (PET) scanner is just one type of Computer-Aided Tomography (CAT) scanner.
@flakemusic86 i think you are referring to Uranium - 235, but it does not have 235 neutrons, rather 235 nucleons (neutrons + protons). The element Uranium has an atomic number of 92 and therefor always has 92 protons, but U-235 has 143 neutrons. Ba-139 and Kr-95 also do NOT have 139 and 95 neutrons respectively, rather those numbers represent the mass numbers of those specific isotopes
How do you go about trapping a neutral atom (or anti-atom) with electric and magnetic fields (something like an magnetic bottle)?
The is a short-lived bound state of electron and positron (anti-electron) called the positronium. Basically they orbit each other for a short while before annihilation. It was observed in the 1950's.
It is the locational spherical inward absorption density + and -outward emission density of electromagnetic waves that's forming all forces of nature and everything forming antimatter matter annihilation or energy and mass forming positive and negative electric charge and electromagnetic fields, input+0/1-output or resonance and interference now as time unfolds from that individual ref-frame.
Time is inverse multiplying+/-dividing or like frequency and wavelength thus can speed up or slow down.
@MrKingJay99 That, is a really interesting idea! I suspect that might even be the case, it seems like a plausible theory.
Ya that makes complete sense thank you for a nice and decent reply without bull involved :)
Electrical power is basically kinetic energy carried by electrons. A particle and its antiparticle have opposite charges but equal mass. Charge determines how much the particle is accelerated by an electric field just like mass determines the same for a gravitational field. In any given field, a positron would have the same speed and therefore the same kinetic energy as en electron, but they would be going in opposite directions. So it would be like regular current, except for flowing backwards.
ive been wondering what would happen if one was able to combine 2 antihydrogens and 1 antioxygen... would they bond to form antiwater... just some thoughts
The power plants are not intended to keep things in forever. When they get old they are decommissioned and demolished, and the contaminated parts are put into a final storage solution (perhaps a salt mine). The point though is that there doesn't have to be any long lasting radioactive waste in an antimatter facility.
@Chimaera242 Yes, my only concern was about producing/finding enough antihydrogen to be significant enough to produce a large amount of energy, I'm fine with the maths bit and isn't the correct formula: E2 = p2c2 + m2c4 (this was on another 60 symbols video xD)
i dont think anyone can answer the first part but i can answer the second part. matter is actually a form of energy. the video said that energy is emitted when the two substances touch. this energy is equal to the mass by e=mc^2. energy and matter are always conserved, but they are the same thing in different forms and can change between the two
@anonysquirrel I'm no physicist, but with a large enough magnetic field even a temporary dipole(which are present in gases) could be acted upon like a large magnetic field and held in place.
A "negatron" is synonymous with an emitted electron/Beta particle, who's antiparticle is the "positron because they both have the SAME mass but opposite charge. An "anti-proton" thus has to have the same mass as a proton (not an electron) but opposite charge.
They may be producing a tiny amount of it, but you still get Gamma rays out of annihilation, so it's not a big security issue as long as you have a shield of lead (which is indeed a heavy one) between you and the source of radiation.
@noxure And with the same way I mean by creating radioactive isotopes and wait for them to emit positrons.
@bodinian Yes. Photons are their own anti-particles.
It takes more energy to make the antimatter in the first place than you would get out of it.
Pretty good for energy storage density tho', if you can contain it appropriately it'd make a great battery replacement.
Would a positron and a proton react? Would anti hydrogen react with helium? Or is it just positron-electron, proton-anti proton etc? What about tau electron and positron? Is there an attraction between particles and anti particles? Is there a force (ie if you have a cannon shooting positrons and one shooting electrons aligned in parallel, will the beams curve towards each other?
@DeathG4n Yes, but that requires antimatter in a massive scale and it's pretty much impossible to make antimatter without using more energy that you would get from annihilating it.
Correct me if i'm wrong. You create anti-particles by dumping *a lot* of energy into the tiny space. By the very definition of the law of conservation of energy you are then restricted from getting more than that amount back. So if we look at fueling the spacecraft with anti-matter, everything is great, but you're not getting anything more than you put in (well actually more than twice of what you put in, if you destroy the equal amount of regular matter).
The classification of an antiparticle is not based upon its net charge but the composition of antiquarks as opposed to quarks.
@gavyns Actually, if a KILOGRAM of antimatter and a KILOGRAM of matter annihilated, the explosion would be about 43 megatons of TNT, compared to the Tsar bomb's 50 megatons. However, the Tsar used about 10 kg of fissile material to create its own explosion.
To be specific, faster than c does not seem to be possible, at least not as we understand velocity. FTL in a given medium is certainly possible, if not necessarily attainable yet
"Matter is in violent motion simulating rest and balance now through violent motion. Interchange between these two unbalanced opposites is the basis of all motion in this rythmic universe.
It is the locational Spherical inward absorption and outward emission of EMR, or light thats forming antimatter matter annihilation forming + and - electric charge and electromagnetic fields as time unfolds.
It is the inward absorption and outward emission of EMR thats forming the inward force called gravity."
@holsson85 not really. even if we find ways to contain anti particle and make a working engine with it, Faster than light travel is still a long long way away. "A particle with a non-zero rest mass will need infinite energy to accelerate faster than the speed of light.
this is a great explanation
Dan Brown taught scientists a very valuable lesson; when you find something really cool like say THE OPPOSITE OF MATTER AS WE KNOW IT and it just so happens to ANNIHILATE WHEN IN CONTACT WITH REGULAR MATTER you should probably let everyone know.
Now see that's what I love about science!
I haven't heard about the majorana-fermion concept before and just assumed neutrinos and antineutrinos to be distinguishable, but I am not above to acknowledge that I might be wrong.
However you can't determine that we are both wrong, since the jury on those experiments is still out! ;)
@MrKingJay99 matter isn't attracted to matter, matter warps space-time and other matter "rolls" towards it.
We have working fusion reactors, just they require more energy than they produce so they can't be used as a fuel source (to the best of my knowledge)
No, you still need a lot of neutrons (or antineutrons, not sure if those are different from neutrons)
E=mc[squared].
take an amount of matter, multiply its mass by the speed of light squared, that's how much energy has been condensed into that matter. the energy can be released.
How is the energy created? This may be too complex to answer in a UA-cam comment, but it almost sounds like antimatter bypasses the Law of Conservation of energy.
Love what you're doing with periodicvideos and sixtysymbols and everything; really inspiring stuff.
In theory yes, and, as far as I know, we don't have a clear way to determine if other galaxies for instance are made up of matter or antimatter. Hawking, however, explains why,in the early stages of the universe, most of the anti-quarks (quarks are the building blocks of protons and neutrons) would turn into electrons (the ordinary matter type). You can find a detailed explanation in his book, "A Brief History of Time" (It's quite easy to read as he uses no maths or equations in the book)
We are talking about positrons annihilating electrons. It is natural for an atom to temporarily lose an electron or two, chemical reactions happen because of this. There are electrons everywhere, the ones you destroy are immediately replaced, you aren't doing any damage from that. If you were annihilating protons though, it would be different.
@sosroli Energy is the amount of 'work' that can be done by a force.