Physicists Build Bigger 'Bottles' For Antimatter 119
intellitech writes "Once regarded as the stuff of science fiction, antimatter — the mirror image of the ordinary matter in our observable universe — is now the focus of laboratory studies around the world. While physicists routinely produce antimatter with radioisotopes and particle colliders, cooling these antiparticles and containing them for any length of time is another story. Clifford Surko, a professor of physics at UC San Diego, who is constructing what he hopes will be the world's largest antimatter container, said physicists have recently developed new methods to make special states of antimatter in which they can create large clouds of antiparticles, compress them and make specially tailored beams for a variety of uses."
Pure antiproton (Score:1)
Can they be pure antiproton? Absolutely pure?
Re: (Score:1)
it better be absolutely pure. because if even one atom is normal matter the whole thing goes bang, and maybe big bang.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really, if only one atom is normal matter then it will annihilate with one atom of anti-matter - the rest of the anti-matter will continue to exist without posing a mortal threat to anyone nearby.
the energy could disrupt nearby atoms (Score:1)
Anti-proton wanders through normal matter and hits a proton. Boom, 2 anti-protons gone, lots of energy created. The atom the proton was in not only lost a proton but its nucleus may be shattered as well. Depending on the atom, this may result in a net release or absorption of energy.
In any case, I wouldn't want to be a nearby atom.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting question. (Score:2)
I'm sure there's a temperature below which a mixture of matter and antimatter would be stable, but I haven't a clue as to what it is (other than that it is likely to be low).
Might be some really interesting chemistry here...
Re: (Score:2)
Not really as the system would nevertheless be in an excited state, and would thus have a finite rate of decay.
Re: (Score:2)
There is not, they will annihilate at any temperature. For specific arrangements there can be states that live longer than other states. For example, positronium, the bound state of an electron and a positron (basically hydrogen but with the protron replaced by a positron), lives much longer before annihilation when it is in a higher energy state. The ground state has an annihilation lifetime of only 125 ps, compared to 1.1 us for the 2S state.
Why doesn't slashdot display the mu ascii character?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
As far as classical electromagnetism is concerned, if you consider a classical model of a uniformly, negatively charged sphere of radius R, balanced by a positive point charge at center, there is no electric field acting on a negative charge outside the sphere. Once inside it, an electric field comes out of the center and gets stronger the deeper in it goes. So an antiproton has no trouble there.
You can solve Schrodinger's equation for the case of a point positi
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Pure antiproton (Score:5, Informative)
Unless I've done the math wrong, annihilation of one hydrogen/anti-hydrogen pair yields about 3*10^-9 joules. Not much of a bang.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you're wrong. It's 3*10^-10 Joules.
Re: (Score:2)
Doh! Damn slide rule makes me keep track of the decimals myself. There's gotta be a better way...
Re: (Score:2)
Kinda reminds me of the whole Ghostbusters "Don't Cross the Streams (or the Universe will end)" bit. I dunno, maybe it's just because I'm such a fan of Carl Sagan, but things like antimatter and matter colliding will cause space to warp in on itself or something like that just seem patently riduculous. I think a lot of these things where we say absurd scenarios like that are just from a poor understanding of the subject in general, so we greatly highball our estimations, we exaggerate, we dream.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
'science fiction'? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I see someone's posting from work
Re: (Score:1)
While positrons were experimentally confirmed in 1932, I don't think that qualifies as "antimatter". When people speak of matter they're typically talking about atoms. Antiprotons were not confirmed by experiment until 1955, and there were no reliable reports of anti-atoms until 1995.
I would say until we have millions or billions of anti-atoms to play with, we can't say we have really studied antimatter. Most of the high level properties of atoms we see day-to-day are emergent from millions of atoms inte
Re: (Score:1)
I don't entirely disagree with what you're saying, but without knowing your physics background I think you may be missing info on what the main goal of antimatter study is.
The primary point of interest currently is to determine why matter exists and antimatter doesn't (that is, why the universe is made of matter and antimatter is essentially non-existent). Everything about antimatter *should* be the same as matter, except for opposite charges. If we confirm that with a single atom then we can safely extrapo
Re: (Score:2)
I have a BS in physics, but I'm not sure it matters for this discussion. I do think you have a point. I guess it depends on what you mean by antimatter study.
My personal opinion is that matter and antimatter are entirely symmetrical, and it is only chance that our galaxy is made up almost entirely of matter. The figures I've seen thrown around suggest that only one in a billion "extra" atoms of matter were required to see the distribution we see today, and I think that during early inflation it would hav
Re: (Score:1)
II don't know any reason to believe distant galaxies are made of matter rather than antimatter.
Now that's an interesting thought... I hadn't considered that possibility. I agree that there is no way to tell the difference between matter and antimatter at that kind of distance. The tiny amount of space debris flying around wouldn't annihilate enough of anything to be noticeable, so isolated clumps of matter and antimatter would appear to be the same.
Most arguments I've seen about matter/antimatter is that they should have been attracted to each other and annihilated immediately at the big bang. Obviou
Re: (Score:2)
Well, anti-atoms are neutral. It's true that charged particle/antiparticle pairs would have strong attraction, and should have been created near one another, but random interactions would carry some minute portion of them far enough to combine to a neutral form (e.g. an atom) that would have no attraction over any kind of distance.
Using antimatter... (Score:2)
Read: blowing stuff up.
I love science!
Re: (Score:3)
Hey now.. this isn't Mythbusters.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
anything? (Score:1)
Will it a positron beam cut through my pile of neutron-star matter?
More seriously, will it cut through muonic atoms that have no electrons?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, my cold fusion machine could make use of some of that muonic atoms you have...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Perils of Modern Living (Score:4, Funny)
Well up above the tropostrata
There is a region stark and stellar
Where, on a streak of anti-matter
Lived Dr. Edward Anti-Teller.
Remote from Fusion's origin,
He lived unguessed and unawares
With all his antikith and kin,
And kept macassars on his chairs.
One morning, idling by the sea,
He spied a tin of monstrous girth
That bore three letters: A. E. C.
Out stepped a visitor from Earth.
Then, shouting gladly o'er the sands,
Met two who in their alien ways
Were like as lentils. Their right hands
Clasped, and the rest was gamma rays.
-- Harold P Furth
Re:Idiots. (Score:5, Informative)
Idiots are going to blow us all to Kingdom Come. You know this is just the first step in making a planet buster bomb.
To produce enough anti-matter to match the destructive potential of the Tsar Bomba hydrogen bomb, you would need the energy output of a gigawatt power station for 6.6 years. And that is assuming perfect production and storage which we are no where close to achieving. In reality, it takes orders of magnitude more energy to crate anti-matter than can get out of the annihilation of that anti-matter, so the actual length of time would be closer to 600 years than 6.
So, sorry, no earth shattering kaboom just yet.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd only need a bit over 1kg of matter and a bit over a kg of antimatter to equal the output of Tsar Bomba.
Re:Idiots. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is salt anti-sugar? Cause I have a kilo of that.
Re: (Score:1)
Now all you need is a bottle of lemon juice (anti sweet).
Re: (Score:2)
It's not clear you could make a useful bomb (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Idiots are going to blow us all to Kingdom Come. You know this is just the first step in making a planet buster bomb.
To produce enough anti-matter to match the destructive potential of the Tsar Bomba hydrogen bomb, you would need the energy output of a gigawatt power station for 6.6 years. And that is assuming perfect production and storage which we are no where close to achieving. In reality, it takes orders of magnitude more energy to crate anti-matter than can get out of the annihilation of that anti-matter, so the actual length of time would be closer to 600 years than 6.
So, sorry, no earth shattering kaboom just yet.
You've answered the total energy problem, but not the power problem. For example a stick of dynamite and a piece of cake have about the same total energy content, its just dynamite releases it at a literally supersonic rate, whereas it takes hour (years?) to use the chemical energy from a piece of cake in my tummy.
Its entirely possible a Tsar Bomba sized antimatter bomb would slowly "burn" like the worlds scariest refinery fire. Might take "a long time" to fully react as a tiny bit blows a very clean vacu
Re: (Score:2)
So perhaps an antimatter bomb would work sort of like the nuclear weapons envisioned by H. G. Wells in The World Set Free. He imagined nuclear weapons as no more powerful that ordinary explosives, but they continued to explode for days.
So the total amount of energy released would be similar to a nuclear weapon as we know them, but not instantaneous. It would be a very effective device for some creative tactical uses, imagine a fire that burns with the power of a conventional bomb for days on end that you ca
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I know H-bombs are made using a traditional atom bomb as trigger. Use the H-bomb as trigger to the antimatter bomb, I figure a multi-megaton blast will mix matter and anti-matter and set off a ton of reactions at the same time. I'm guessing gigaton range...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But the biggest deployed H bomb by the US was 25Mt yield and weighed less than 10tonns IIRC. So by a lot, I don't really mean a lot compared to the size of the planet. In fact 25 tonns of LiD can produce a bomb of over 1 GTon (1000Mt) and would be a cube 3 meters on each side. You st
Re:Cleaning up nuclear waste and other stuff... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes but I think the antimatter annihilation reaction would cause side reactions that would release neutrons and create more nuclear waste...
In practice, though, the reason highly radioactive nuclear waste even exists as a problem is because it ISN'T waste - it's unburned fuel. More than 99% of the energy in the nuclear fuel is still remaining, which is why the waste can emit dangerous levels of radiation for thousands of years.
Re: (Score:2)
politics (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
UCSD (Score:2)
Woot, go UCSD!
Ushering in the apocalypse since 1960!
We did a lot of nuke and miltech stuff, especially during the Vietnam War era. I didn't get to do much cool stuff when I was there, just an interference resistant videoconferencing system for soldiers in the field, and some work with severed rabbit hearts kept alive and beating in a vitrious solution...
The Red Shoe was apparently the 4th sign of the Apocalypse, and the Stuart Art collection is rumoured to have another piece as well, though gazing upon it i
1212 is coming? (Score:1)
Ushering in the apocalypse since 1960!
The first 50+ years were just for practice!
So easy (Score:1)
This is sooo easy actually. You just use tachyons and Geordi's visor with a quantum entaglement garage door opener.
Deathrays (Score:2)
...they can create large clouds of antiparticles, compress them and make specially tailored beams for a variety of uses."
And mad scientists all over the world rejoice at the thought of building their first orbital, antimatter death ray.
On a less sinister note, if they can guide an anti- beam in a controlled manner to impact a regular beam they could take the first steps towards some sort of epic anti-matter based propulsion system.
DON'T CROSS THE BEAMS! (Score:1)
if they can guide an anti- beam in a controlled manner to impact a regular beam
Don't cross the beams. Trust me. It will be bad.*
*Blatant copyright violation.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't forget to tell them about the Twinkie.
Re: (Score:2)
The Tevatron has been doing that for years. So far, the earth has not moved.
Dilithium ? (Score:1)
Long-term build-your-own e+ bomb (Score:2)
How much antimatter do you need to make a bomb that will, say, take down an medium-to-high-rise apartment complex?
Once the technology to create and contain antimatter indefinitely is available AND is small enough to fit on a tabletop, how long before some terrorists buys a condo and sets up a "slow bomb" that will detonate in 10 or 20 years, after it's created and stored enough antimatter to take out the building when it goes boom?
OK, maybe he's okay if it doesn't take out the building, he just wants to sca
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
How much antimatter do you need to make a bomb that will, say, take down an medium-to-high-rise apartment complex?ll
Well, given the definition of matter and antimatter, I guess you would need a medium-to-high-rise load of antimatter to take care of the matter stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
How much antimatter do you need to make a bomb that will, say, take down an medium-to-high-rise apartment complex?ll
Well, given the definition of matter and antimatter, I guess you would need a medium-to-high-rise load of antimatter to take care of the matter stuff.
It depends on what you mean by take down. The Hiroshima bomb released about 1.5 mg of mass for enough kilotons to flatten a building.
Re: (Score:2)
May be combined with sharks with frikking lasers on their heads of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Antimatter releases energy when it annihilates itself on contact with matter. It is not the annihilation aspect that people are interested in, but the energy released-- so 1 lb of antimatter is going to have an explosive force greater than pretty much any other 1 lb device we could come up with.
According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] (look at Hiroshima @15kT, and compare to the note on antimatter (1kg=42 MT)), 1 gram of antimatter should be more than sufficient to level a city block. If you got a "medium-to-high-rise load
Re: (Score:2)
Well, given the definition of matter and antimatter, I guess you would need a medium-to-high-rise load of antimatter to take care of the matter stuff.
Yeah just like you would need a similar load of nitro to take it down...
Or you could just put it somewhere structural in the basement.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would Osama have any concern? He got rapid political change after all, and was quite sucessfull in destryoing his opponents up to now.
Landfill Problem Solved (Score:1)
Message from the "Other" matter. (Score:4, Funny)
Speaking for the antimatter, I believe that there is a misconception. We don't appreciate being called the "anti" matter. We are the other-matter to you. From our perspective, you are the antimatter! You don't like it very much when someone calls YOU antimatter do you. I wish we could all just get along but it was not meant to be. We will continue to annihilate any of you that try to contact us. Please! Just leave us alone!!!!
Thank You
Re: (Score:1)
Seriously dude, you're pretty damn negative. What's the matter, want your positrons back?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fine, from now on you are UNCLE matter.
sharks (Score:3)
Can they mount the anti-matter beam emitters on sharks? That would be awesome.
Re: (Score:2)
This sounds interesting:
>and the creation of much larger bursts of positrons which could eventually enable the creation of an annihilation gamma ray laser.
Been done before.... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
annihilation gamma ray laser! (Score:2)
Physicists win! (Score:2)
Half Life anyone? (Score:2)
"I never thought I'd see a resonance cascade, let alone create one."
Aperture Science (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, regardless of moderation. I thought this was funny.