ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Antimatter goes to the movies

Posted: Thursday, May 14, 2009 6:50 PM by Alan Boyle


Columbia Pictures
Click for video: Watch
a clip from "Angels and
Demons" that explains
how the (fictional)
antimatter bomb works.

They're making antimatter at the Large Hadron Collider?! That little jolt of reality is what sets the plot in motion for "Angels & Demons," Hollywood's follow-up to "The Da Vinci Code."

The good news is that you don't have to worry about an antimatter bomb blowing up the world. Physicist Michio Kaku says so. The better news is that the antimatter being made at Europe's CERN physics lab is used for good, not for evil.

The physicists who do real-life research with antimatter and other exotic substances see "Angels & Demons" not as a threat but as an opportunity. CERN is just one of the scientific institutions to capitalize on the "science behind the story."

The US/LHC research group has organized an entire lecture series around the movie, including virtual lectures you can watch on the Web. And at 1 p.m. ET next Tuesday, the National Science Foundation will present a Webcast featuring CERN's director-general, Fermilab's Boris Kayser and Nobel-winning physicist Leon Lederman - who literally wrote the book on "The God Particle."

CERN has been through this before, back in 2000 when "Da Vinci" author Dan Brown's book version of "Angels & Demons" came out. "The hits on our public Web site went up by more than a factor of 10, and I guess this will happen again now that the movie is coming out," said Rolf Landua, who led the research team for the ATHENA antimatter-making experiment at CERN.

That experiment didn't take place at the Large Hadron Collider, but at CERN's antimatter factory, more formally known as the Antiproton Decelerator. "We can make antimatter, we can slow it down to almost zero speed, we can trap it, we can manipulate it. But that's it," Landua told me.

Antimatter has been called the "evil twin" of ordinary matter. In ordinary atoms, negatively charged electrons swirl around positively charged protons. In antiatoms like the ones that Landua and his colleagues made, positively charged antielectrons, or positrons, orbit nuclei that contain negatively charged antiprotons. If atoms of matter and antimatter come into contact, they annihiliate each other, just like they do in "Angels & Demons" - or, for that matter (heh, heh), "Star Trek."


CERN
This is an image of a matter-
antimatter annihilation in the
ATHENA experiment at CERN's
Antiproton Decelerator. Yellow
tracks indicate pions produced by
the antiproton, and red tracks are
gamma rays from the positron.

So if scientists can really make antimatter, why couldn't they create an antimatter bomb, or at least a new source of energy? Landua explains that it takes about a billion times more energy to make antiatoms than the energy you get by destroying them. This is why antimatter is considered the most expensive material on Earth. A commonly quoted figure is that it costs $1.75 quadrillion per ounce - and although that figure may be subject to debate, the bottom line isn't: No one could afford to make enough antimatter to cause trouble.

Then there's the problem of keeping the antimatter around once it's made. The antiatoms that Landua and his successors at CERN have made tend to drift out of the "traps" where they're created and quickly blip out of existence. "It's still not completely clear what atomic state they're in when they're made, and what their kinetic energy is," Landua told me.

OK ... so if you can't keep those antiatoms together, and if they cost so much to make, why make them at all? The main reason is to study why it is that matter won out over antimatter in the universe's earliest moments. The traditional view holds that matter and antimatter should be perfectly matched, and that they should annihilate each other so totally that nothing would be left but a cosmic sea of light.

"That would have happened to the whole universe," Landua said. "It happened almost, but a little bit of matter was left - only a tiny, tiny bit - which now makes up all the stars, planets and us."

Previous experiments have suggested that there is a slight asymmetry in the way that matter and antimatter decay. One of the LHC's experiments, known as LHCb, will look specifically at that issue once the big collider is started up this fall. "It has nothing to do with an energy source, or 'Star Trek,'" Landua said. "It's a basic, fundamental science question, which is coupled to the question of why we are here."

There are practical applications for antimatter, but they have more to do with medicine than propulsion physics. For example, positrons are used routinely in PET scans to trace the inner workings of your body.

In the future, antimatter might be enlisted in the fight against cancer. One experiment indicated that beams of antiprotons were three times as efficient as protons for destroying tumor cells in hamsters. If that technology could be harnessed for radiation therapy, "it looks like you could reduce the radiation to healthy cells by a factor of three," Landua said.

Today, the cost factor is working against antiproton therapy, but Landua said new technologies could bring the cost down - not low enough for bombmaking, but low enough for cancer-killers. "Maybe one day there will be different types of accelerators based on laser wakefields," Landua said. "I'm waiting for the development of powerful Lyman-alpha lasers. That should be the way to go."

For now, Landua and his colleagues can sit back and enjoy the Hollywood wizardry in "Angels & Demons." He and about 50 other scientists from CERN saw the film during an advance screening in Geneva. "They were all really enthusiastic about it," Landau said.

Some of the details weren't quite right: For example, the film shows scientists sitting just on the other side of a window from the LHC's ATLAS detector. In real life, anyone sitting that close to the beam would get a withering dose of radiation. And there's no way the beam would come to full power as quickly and easily as it does in the movie. But Landua, like most scientists, understands that this is Hollywood rather than real life.

"It was so for real, you know?" Landua said. "You see these ATLAS caverns and it integrates so perfectly well that you think, 'My God, is that reality? Did I miss it?' ... We wish we could work at a place which looks like that CERN."

Here are a few extra tidbits to enhance your "Angels & Demons" experience:

  • The movie throws in more references to the Higgs boson, a.k.a. the "God Particle," than I remember reading in the book. "It fits very well into the whole science vs. religion plot," Landua said. However, he said the real-life search for the Higgs boson doesn't have any religious implications, one way or the other. "It does create order in the universe in a certain way," Landua said. "I always call it 'cosmic DNA,' but of course that doesn't make it godlike." If you're looking for a fantastic discussion of the Higgs boson, you must check out this video from Arizona State University's Origins Conference (starting at about the 32:30 mark).

  • Last year, a federal lawsuit was brought against CERN, Fermilab and U.S. federal agencies, claiming that the LHC could set off a global catastrophe by creating black holes or other exotic phenomena. The suit was thrown out last September, but an appeal is still percolating through the court system. Last month, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals turned down a motion to freeze funding for activities at CERN while the appeal was being considered.

  • For more "Angels & Demons" reality checks, check out our rogue's gallery of secret societies, this rundown on antimatter, Illuminati and the Swiss Guard from the Asylum Web site, in-depth antimatter analyses from the Symmetry Breaking blog and LiveScience, and this report on the Illuminati from NPR.

Update for 2:15 p.m. May 19: Particle physicists provided an additional reality check during the National Science Foundation's Webcast - including confirmation that a few things in "Angels & Demons" are actually true. For example, could a quarter-gram of antimatter set off an explosion with the energy equivalent of 5 kilotons of TNT? After running the numbers, Fermilab's Boris Kayser says yes, indeed. "I get 5.7," he said.

CERN's director-general, Rolf-Dieter Heuer, said the physics lab does have an eye-scanning identification system for controlling access to the Large Hadron Collider, as graphically shown in the movie. It's that important to know exactly who is in the vicinity of the collider when it's running, he said.

I asked the physicists about the friendly competition between CERN and Fermilab to find the first evidence of the Higgs boson's existence. Heuer emphasized that the rivalry was not of the tooth-and-claw variety: "I don't mind ... who makes a discovery first. It is the science that counts."

But there is a rivalry, nonetheless. Heuer said the probability for Fermilab finding the Higgs first was "not very good, so I'm still sleeping pretty well."

Nobel laureate Leon Lederman is based at Fermilab but has done a lot of work at CERN as well. Like many physicists, he has divided loyalties - and he guessed that he would experience mixed feelings if Fermilab's Tevatron beat the shiny new, $10 billion Large Hadron Collider in the Higgs race. He joked that it would be "a little like your mother-in-law driving off a cliff in your BMW."

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

It has been recently discovered that bombarding gold with laser light produces abundant positrons. Could this be the beginning of an anti-matter gun?
Should positrons be used on optimists and Negatrons(?)
on pessimists?
All the money being poured into this and we get what exactly? Only useful thing I saw mentioned was dealing with medicine and it would be too expensive anyway. Doesnt seem like a good use of limited resources.
While we're on this topic ...

Physicists have been searching for the graviton for decades.  Lately, they have also been searching for the source of energy behind the universe's accelerating expansion.  What if Mother Nature, in her final and finest irony, made the yet to be discovered graviton and its anti-particle mutually  repellant, instead of mutually attractive?
Optomists and Negatrons...are they Transformers?  XD
Gilbert, Positrons and negatrons should be used on Formosa Termites and Point Clear Mosquitos (I swear they're as big  as chickens)
You really have to wonder about the CERN supercollider the boondoggle that has been constructed in switzerland at a cost of tens of billions of dollars. Austria a long time supporter of the project has recently pulled out very little news has been reported lately does anybody know whats going on over there?
Gil,

I would think it would be more beneficial to use the positrons on the pessimists and the negatrons on the optimists to even them out a bit.

But seriously, you can bet your money that somewhere, some nut-job is trying to figure out a way to make an antimatter bomb right now.  The odds against his success are comforting, but the mere idea that he's out there trying is very troubling.

Have a nice day.
Excellent article Alan!  Nice work on debunking that anitmatter bombs are a threat when antimatter is so expensive to produce.  I sure am looking forward to seeing the LHC work later this summer.  To think some idiot high school teacher is the one whining about stopping the LHC experiments, I saw him on The Daily Show and they exposed him for the fraud he is.  The nut shouldn't be allowed to teach kindergarden science much less high school science.
blah blah blah....thats all i hear
why dont we focus on preparing for whats going to happen in 2012?
So, is the glass half full of positrons or negitrons?
I remember I used to have a Negatron toy.  It would change into a 57' Buick Roadmaster. :p

where does the antimatter go, when as the article states it blips out of existence, there has to be more to it. What is it good for?
Anti-protons should be used to annihilate a particle that is a detriment to science: the Moron.
Err... spoiler alert?
all that billions of money and we still can not stop hunger in this modern world. no way to get rid of or be resistant to all viruses that could wipe out human beings.

also "The better news is that the antimatter being made at Europe's CERN physics lab is used for good, not for evil." how do you know for sure?
Sigh. "Negatrons" are called electrons.
when antimatter and matter annihilate each other, the matter is 100% converted into energy, primarilly visible light, heat, RF, and mostly gamma rays.  When an antiatom "winks out" it does so by annihilating an atom of regular matter following Einstein's E=MC2. Where the "E" consists of the above mentioned photons. (light, RF, gamma, etc).
As far as we know, there's nothing more to it. At that scale matter blips and out of existance constantly.
marv, Pinetop Az...

The antimatter and matter react and are converted entirely to energy.  A whole lot of energy.  E=mc^2.  They do indeed "blip out of existence" as matter -- but a whole bunch of energy "blips into existence."
Marv, the antimatter is the reverse of regular matter;  therefore, when it collides with matter--any matter, even air--it explodes.
Antimatter and matter collide and are obliterated to create photons...some of which are gamma rays. This is the source of energy in fusion.

I know these physicists are extremely brilliant, but I don't think they view the universe clearly. Our scope of the cosmos is far too small to formulate a theory on the origin of...everything. I'm still a steady state guy, and I think eventually we will know enough to dubunk the big bang and even relativity, or adjust it atleast. All we know is that our planet is spinning around the sun with tremendous velocity, which is spinning around the galaxy at tremendous velocity, and for some reason we believe our galaxy is aimlessly flying away from the center of the universe? My meager intelligence allows me to be simplistic here, and assume that the galaxy is also spinning around a center point within the "universe". And am I going to assume that's as big as it gets? Why, because that's the extent of our observable cosmos? And then what is our total velocity? To me it all adds up to all of existence itself being quantized by energy level, just as particles themselves are.

One thing is for certain; the more we know, the more we realize we don't know.
>Austria a long time supporter of the project has
>recently pulled out

Austria was hardly a major contributor to the project. Many small companies in the US spend more on shipping costs annually than Austria contributed to CERN.

No big loss financially, although it is unfortunate that any partner would walk away from such important research.

Some people have commented on "what good is this research".

Do you want a car that can fly?

Do you want the possibility of discovering new ways to produce energy that don't pollute?

If so, then you need to support research like this.
Marv,

It becomes energy, as does whatever it annhilates. Read up on the Law of Conservation of Matter.
Hey Alan, your article was featured on 3 Quarks, so I saw the link there before I read your site for the day. Very good as usual.

[ALAN ADDS: Cool, thanks for the good word and all the best to the family!]
Yellowhawk, what is going to happen in 2012?  Did I miss something?
YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK:

"This is why antimatter is considered the most expensive material on Earth. A commonly quoted figure is that it costs $1.75 quadrillion dollars per ounce."

YOU KEEP DABBLING IN GOD'S WORK (things that should be off-limits), and don't be surprised when you find yourself KNOCKING OFF THE POLARITY (by a degree of two) OF THE SPIN OFF THE EARTH AND THEREBY WIPING THE WHOLE OF MANKIND OUT OF EXISTANCE! Like the dinosaurs. This precise spin is crucial to maintaining life as we know it on Earth. You foolish, foolish people are tinkering with things that you have no business in.  Instead, the government is raising all of our taxes during a time of recession to pay for this money-wasting project.  The potential (and, very real) dangers of this type of science far outweigh the benefits. STOP USING OUR TAXES TO PAY FOR THIS "JUNK SCIENCE"!!!!!!!
"All the money being poured into this and we get what exactly? Only useful thing I saw mentioned was dealing with medicine and it would be too expensive anyway. Doesn't seem like a good use of limited resources."

To all you nay-sayers and Luddites:  Most of the advances in modern science are the direct result of the sort of inquiry being done with the LHC.  Very good science and wonderous advances arise when science is done "for science sake"...  If all lines of inquiry were restricted to "something useful", then we'd have far fewer breakthroughs and new discoveries.

QUESTION: Perhaps I am wrong, but my understanding of antimatter / matter is that when they come into contact both are then completely destroyed and thus cease to exist. If this is true then don’t we need to scratch out the Law of Conservation of Matter and Energy, which states that mass cannot be created/destroyed, although it may be rearranged in space, and changed into different types of particles? (~Wikipedia) On the other hand, it could be that the action does indeed adhere to the law and when the particles “cease to exist” they are actually transported to another time, dimension, or place in space. Could this be a stepping stone for the discovery of time travel, shifting dimensions, completely removing the smell from my sneakers . . . ? I find this intriguing and exhaustingly confusing, so in the end, does it really “matter”?
We (NOT they) have been producing and using antiprotons for about 20 years at Fermilab, Illinois. None have escaped to create havoc.
"where does the antimatter go, when as the article states it blips out of existence, there has to be more to it. What is it good for?"

Basically, it becomes energy, though depending on the specific matter and anti-matter particles in question, you may also get neutrinos and other stuff.

The simplest case is an electron meeting a positron (which is the anti-matter counterpart of the electron) and becoming a gamma-ray photon of a very specific wavelength...)
Antimater bomb: Some people seems they have fears about this. Truth is: nuclear fission and nuclear fusion bombs are already VERY efficient in what they do. Actually they are so efficient that there is no need to even bother in getting something better.

Not sure about the numbers, but I believe if you are looking into releasing X amount of energy, conventional nuclear devices are much easier/cheaper/well know that antimatter stuff.
And antimatter is hard to contain

So I do not see that an antimatter bomb will provide any type of advantage. Perhaps that you can make smaller bombs for the same X energy to be released

So I would not worry. Antimatter bombs will not make the world a more un-safe place (or less safe) than we already are.
Considering it'd take an equal amount of anti-matter to destroy anything (if you wanna destroy the earth, you need an equal amount of anti-matter, so earth sized amount, to do it)

You're more likely to be killed via out of control nanobots at this point.
"where does the antimatter go, when as the article states it blips out of existence, there has to be more to it. What is it good for?"

When antimatter collides with matter energy is released. So the antimatter (and matter, for that matter) get converted to energy.
"Considering it'd take an equal amount of anti-matter to destroy anything (if you wanna destroy the earth, you need an equal amount of anti-matter, so earth sized amount, to do it)"

Depends on what you mean by 'destroy.' You don't have to convert the entire mass of Earth into energy, in order to make it rather useless and uninhabitable.

The equation E=mc^2 (Energy equals mass multiplied by the square of the speed of light)essentially says that a small amount of matter can become a large amount of energy. Only a very small amount of the fissionable (or fusable) material in nuclear weapons is converted to energy, but if you've seen pictures of post-nuclear Hiroshima, you know that the amount of energy released can be...quite enough.

Given a means of producing enough antimatter (and it needn't be much), one could have a kind of nuclear thermal rocket wherein a tiny amount of antimatter is introduced into a reaction mass (even water may suffice). The antimatter is annihilated on contact, and the energy released superheats the surrounding the surrounding material into a very hot, high-thrust exhaust jet.

The late Dr. Robert L. Forward wrote at length about this (and some other exotic technologies) and how the antimatter could be produced with space-based, solar powered, high beam current particle accelerators.
At the point in time when matter condensed out of the cooling Big Bang, what held the matter and anti-matter apart long enough for it to then collide and convert back to energy? I'm also asking, is this when the universe finally would have become visible to our eyes? And, third question, would this point in time of explosions from matter and anti-matter not have happened in a spherical layer, in the expanding ball, and just blown creation to a stand still? I'm just a 63 year old who has loved the shared knowledge of so many minds in OUR time. Thought I'd share my wonder and joy of what it is like to walk in a time like ours.
"Sigh. "Negatrons" are called electrons.
Not Completely Uneducated (Sent Friday, May 15, 2009 11:27 AM)"

I am shocked it took as long as it did for someone to point this out.  I commend you sir.  If the rest of you people have no idea what you are talking about, DON'T POST!
"Depends on what you mean by 'destroy.' You don't have to convert the entire mass of Earth into energy, in order to make it rather useless and uninhabitable."

Quite correct, I wasn't thinking uninhabitable, i was talking complete deconstruction of the planet Earth. To make a large area uninhabitable wouldn't take much at all. but at the same time, producing the amount needed for such would be so prohibitively expensive that no nation would be researching into it (I hope -.-)
Who cares?  In the end, even if someone is thinking about or trying to build an anti-matter bomb, what can any of us to slow it down or stop it.  Just go back to eating your pop tarts and pancakes.  Even if there was a serious issue, it is completely out of the hands of a bunch of Wikipedia know it alls.  And I agree with LOLing@your ignorance, if you don't know what your talking about or have to Google it to sound smart, leave it alone or disscuss something that you ko know,like Transformers.
To the people that think 1.75 quadrillion dollars has been spent on this. Do you not realize that much money isn't even in existence? They are making this anti-matter 1 atom at a time... For an ounce of it would be billions of atoms if not trillions needed.
To the people who think that research is a waste of time and money, please consider this story.

Michael Faraday, a physicist who did fundamental work with electricity and magnetism, was giving a lecture on his work.  A businessman asked him of what practical use it was.  Faraday tried to explain to him that it was only research at this point.  Nobody knew then that this work would make possible electric generators and motors which makes our modern way of life possible, and so the businessman persisted and said, "But of what practical use is it?"  Faraday replied, "Of what practical use is a newborn baby?"
So does this mean that matter is constantly shifting in and out of matter-antimatter? And if that's the case, how would anything exist? If there is an equal amount of anti-particles, and particles, wouldn't they cancel out every thing? Whooo... Never was good at science. Even in high school.
I know how to do all three things mentioned here, how to go faster than light, how to make cheap antimatter, and, especially, how to do what they show on "Lost in Space" or "Star Trek", with today's present level of technology, in fact, there's been a suggestion to convert one of the Space Shuttles into a Starship, capable of traveling to at least any star within a dozen LightYears of Earth. The journey would not be longer than the present Mir missions.

Is that antimatter secure from anyone who wants to harm the planet?

[ALAN ADDS: Yes, it's secure enough. When I was at CERN I was with the company of folks who worked there, so I can't say how tight or loose security might be for an intruder. But the important thing about antimatter is that it doesn't stick around for very long. The huge apparatus they have for creating antiprotons and antihydrogen atoms can sustain their existence only for the blink of an eye, so we haven't gotten to the point where there's enough antimatter to keep around.]
Whether the Large Hadron Collider (LCH) at CERN will have the same puzzling fate as the now defunct Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) in Waxahachie, Texas is a known only to a handful of people on this planet and the Aliens From Outer Space™ who, at this very moment, are circling our planet in a cigar-shaped spaceship in low-Earth orbit, as they continue to search for the Mirror Matter Popcorn™ they misplaced during a brief visit to the surface in the late-1940s, presumably for the purpose of having a picnic in Roswell, New Mexico, which they need to power the Hilbert Space Hopper Drive™ that enables their spaceship to travel instantly through vast distances and epochs in the continuum we colloquially call "spacetime" . . .

Is is possible that the basic problem with these types of high-energy particle colliders has nothing to do with the potential interactions among the various primitive particles but instead simply is a matter of the universe, itself, somehow disallowing large coils of fiber optic cables to be assembled and powered?

Over the centuries, through the outstanding work of physicists in the field of electromagnetism, we now know that by inserting a standard 16-penny iron nail into the center of a small toroidal coil (also called an "inductor" or "choke") and then rapidly pulling the iron nail away from and through the center of the coil, a significant amount of electricity is generated, but one might suggest that our brightest minds have yet to connect the dots toward the goal of realizing that an analogous transformation occurs when light is circulated rapidly through a coil made from fiber optic cables, thereby creating an highly-intense gravitational field, which among other things has the ability to propel matter through space via the intimate manipulation of gravitons, especially when activated on the surface of a planet such as the Earth, which has a rapidly pulsating and spinning inner core of liquid iron and nickel . . .

Stated another way, will the LHC continue to have "start-up" problems in much the same way as the SSC had "funding" problems all because fiber optic cables are neither correctly arranged nor properly shielded toward the necessary goal of preventing the sua sponte generation of gravitons?

I have no idea, but I often ponder the paradox ever since I first realized the curious relationship among light and gravity, which primarily was the consequence (a) of observing that nearly every third-year physics with calculus textbook is divided into a grand total of four parts, specifically the set {(1) Gravity (a.k. a, "Classical Mechanics"), (2) Electricity, (3) Magnetism, (4) Light}, and (b) of learning that light and gravity appear to be able to travel at the same relative speed, such that for example, the gravitational effects of the launch of the lunar rockets during the late-1960s reached the moon in approximately the same length of time required for light to travel to the moon, which generally is a strong clue to the inner workings of light and gravity, as well as electricity and magnetism (both which also tend to travel at the same relative speed in a vacuum)

And of the four divisions, parts, or sections of a typical third-year physics with calculus textbook, (a) it is well known that (2) and (3) form a pair where one can generate the other, but (b) it is not so well known that (1) and (4) also form a self-generating pair, since apparently I am one of the few people on the planet at present who clearly understanda the fact that the fundamental rules of the universe strongly favor balance and symmetry, especially in third-year college and university science textbooks, as well as in small railroad sets, where it is well known to those fortunate folks who have one of the new Lionel Model 6-30087 "Area 51 Alien Spaceship Recover Set" train sets and have conducted various experiments using circular track layouts in conjunction with rolling stock additions of either (a) the Lionel Model 6-26379 "Pennsylvania Railroad Gondola with Cable Reels" or (b) the Lionel Model 6-26603 "Lehigh Valley Depressed Flatcar with Reels", when the cable reels are wrapped with ultrathin fiber optics which are powered by a small energy system located inside either (c) an adjacent Lionel Model 6-39318 "Wizard of Oz Boxcar" or (d) an adjacent Lionel Model 6-39262 "'Elvis has left the building' Boxcar" . . .

Stated another way, my prediction for the near future is that in much the same way as the universe, itself, simply could not allow the town of Waxahachie, Texas to be propelled into outer space, neither will the universe allow the French and Swiss to propel themselves into the far distant regions of spacetime, where by doing careful study of the maps of these two colliders, one cannot avoid noticing that both designs have triangular-shaped surface highways . . .

Are the triangular-shaped surface highway components of the designs just a curious coincidence?

Is there a fundamental rule of physics which prevents the operation of high-powered fiber optic coils directly underneath a set of triangular-shaped surface roads?

Are both of these "colliders" fully functional and currently in use precisely for the purpose for which they were designed, which specifically is to act as spacetime travel portals for use by the Mutants From Outer Space™ who seek to steal our dreams, our desires, our women, our Country Western music, and local control of our bowling leagues, and are not to be confused with the Aliens From Outer Space™ who actually are our allies, although few of us are aware of this consciously?

I have no idea at present, but I am working on it diligently . . .

Thanks!
JD, Seattle, WA (Sent Sunday, May 17, 2009 4:39 AM)

"Mirror Matter Popcorn"

"Hilbert Space Hopper Drive"

"...for use by the Mutants From Outer Space™ who seek to steal our dreams, our desires, our women, our Country Western music, and local control of our bowling leagues..."

Very nice work, JD, all of it; very nice work indeed...

*golf clap*
"So does this mean that matter is constantly shifting in and out of matter-antimatter? And if that's the case, how would anything exist? If there is an equal amount of anti-particles, and particles, wouldn't they cancel out every thing? Whooo... Never was good at science. Even in high school."

Actually, that's a more profound question than you might think. Physicists think that the Universe *should* be equal parts matter and antimatter...yet everything we observe (and even over interstellar and intergalactic distances there are specific signs to look for that could only be explained by matter-antimatter annihilation happening) tells us that the Universe is composed of nothing but matter, except for infinitesimal amounts produced by localized events)

No one knows, or has a good theory yet, as to why.

Instead of worrying about an antimatter bomb scientists in Sweden at the University of Gothenburg have come up with a potential nuclear fusion fuel which could be very simple to use in fusion reactors and quite possibly in fusion bombs.

http://www.science.gu.se/english/News/News_detail?contentId=879280

The material is "Ultra Dense Deuterium".  It is apparently stable at room temperature and pressure.  It is over 100,000 times heavier than water.  A cube, 10 cm a side (1000cc or 1 liter volume) would weigh about 130 metric tons.  One cc, 130 kilograms (287lb).  This is denser than in the core of the sun.

Because of the super density this material can be made to fuse by relatively low power lasers and produces no radioactivity or harmful waste.  Therefore it would be good for power generation.

The downside probably would be that fusion bombs now would be possible without the need for normal fission bombs as a trigger.

Luckily, so far only microscopic quantities of Ultra Dense Deuterium have been produced.  However that is sufficient for laboratory testing.  According to the above URL leading to the University website and article, the scientists are working to see if some sort of mass production could be developed.
Frank,
I still say the apparent matter-antimatter imbalance is because matter is gravitationally attracted to matter, antimatter is gravitationally attracted to antimatter, and matter and antimatter are gravitationally repulsive.  This maintains symmetry and gives us vast regions of space that are matter dominant and vast regions, far, far away, that are antimatter dominant with extremely limited interaction between the different areas.  If the vast region we're in constitutes the "local universe" and other observable galaxies are antimatter dominant much is neatly explained without going to some of the clumsy theories currently in vogue.  So far there is no experimental data available to the contrary.  Although some relatively simple experiments could be contrived to blow this idea out.  Simple experiments, but awkward theories are probably still cheaper.
Frank - The conventional wisdom among physicists is that matter and antimatter differ only in having opposite electrical charges, but have the same type of positive mass.  There are some tests being proposed and done that may settle the question about whether antimatter has negative mass, or whether inertial mass and gravitational mass are the same thing.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1932376

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google