US scientists get glimpse of antihelium

S&F interesting stuff.

BTW nice avatar, Deus-Ex

reply to post by TraptInTheSystem


I found it interesting.

thanks

Apparatus and method for long-term storage of antimatter patent filed in 2008

A long-term antimatter storage device that may be energized by a low power magnetron and can function autonomously for hundreds of hours on the energy provided by batteries. An evacuated, cryogenic container is arranged with a source of positrons and a source of electrons positioned in capture relation to one another within the container so as to allow for the formation of a plurality of positronium atoms. A microwave resonator is located within the container forming a circularly polarized standing wave within which the plurality of positronium atoms rotate. Radioactive sources for small stores and low energy positron accelerators for large stores are used to efficiently fill the device with positronium in seconds to minutes. The device may also be arranged to provide for the extraction of positrons. A method for storing antimatter is also provided.

IMO old news to them, but new and exciting news to the rest of us...

reply to post by richierich931




Great find. Now, onto the next step. Warp drive...

nice S&F

reply to post by yamother44




ok cool thanks

reply to post by JiggyPotamus

Anti-Matter bombs? Would that be the opposite of nuking a city? Instead of a mushroom cloud going into the air, it goes into the ground or something?

I agree with the Fossil Fuels statement. IMO we will never be completely off fossil fuels unless we completely run out (unlikely) or they become too expensive to produce.


S&F for you Slayer.

reply to post by DaddyBare

Your idea is quite credible on the face of it. This is just what we do with ordinary internal-combustion engines: inject a pinch of highly explosive fuel into the cylinder and set it on fire with a spark or through heat generated by compression (as in a diesel engine). And we already know how to confine such tiny amounts of antimatter safely; although our present methods are too expensive and bulky for general use, perhaps they are capable of refinement.

The problem is with the fuel tank. How can you store antimatter in bulk?

Also, where would you get it in the first place? There are no convenient antimatter mines.

*

reply to post by lewman

Just to add to chr0naut’s reply: we have been manufacturing positrons (anti-electrons) in particle accelerators since the 1930s. Antiprotons and antineutrons were first observed in the late 1950s. As you know, an ordinary hydrogen nucleus is just one proton, so you could say we’ve been observing antihydrogen nuclei since then. And in the Sixties, antideuterium nuclei were found. Deuterium is an isotope of hydrogen whose nucleus consists of one proton and one neutron.

Now, after a lapse of some 45 years, we have made it as far as antihelium.

Notice that the rate of discovery is decreasing exponentially as the elements get heavier. Will it take us a century or more to get to antilithium?

More here if you want it, brought to you by the folk who gave you the Large Hadron Collider.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I've never heard of antihelium before you brought it up.

Guess I need to start up my subscription to Popular Science and Popular Mechanics again.

Just as soon as I get a job, get more people involved in Boy Scouts, and take over the world.

Oh shoot, that last part was supposed to be in my head, just keep it between you and me.

Pinky and The Brain Intro


Oh, and SLAYER69, you like robotics, right?

Merit Badge.org - Robotics Merit Badge

You should get invovled, being a robot and all, and help out the Boy Scouts.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
US scientists get glimpse of antihelium

Scientists in the US produced a clutch of antihelium particles, the antimatter equivalents of the helium nucleus, after smashing gold ions together nearly 1bn times at close to the speed of light.

The discovery of antihelium at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven national laboratory in New York will aid the search for exotic phenomena in the distant universe, including antimatter versions of stars and even galaxies.

Antimatter looks and behaves like normal matter but has one crucial difference: particles of antimatter have an equal and opposite charge to those that make up the world around us. When antimatter meets matter, the two annihilate one another, leaving nothing but a burst of energy.

Ok so we are a tiny step closer to potentially solving the riddle of the Big Bang. If such an event actually really did occur. We are still a good deal away from Matter-Antimatter propulsion drives as in Star Trek.

But still a bit closer.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b928d742beb9.jpg[/atsimg]
Physicists observe antihelium-4 nucleus, the heaviest antinucleus yet

-- In 1932, scientists observed the first antimatter particle, a positron (or antielectron). Since then, scientists have observed heavier and heavier states of antimatter: antiprotons and antineutrons in 1955, followed by antideuterons, antitritons, and antihelium-3 during the next two decades.

Advances in accelerator and detector technology led to the first production of antihydrogen in 1995 and antihypertriton (strange antimatter) in 2010. Now, scientists with the STAR collaboration at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven National Laboratory have observed another state of antimatter for the first time: the antimatter helium-4 nucleus, which is the heaviest antinucleus observed so far.

that is very interesting, what will they do next i wonder. and also, if antihelium has opposite affwects of helium, they does it sink instead of float, how much power does it have, maybe in the future the scientists can send a mas of this into the sun, incase it ever almost burns out you might be able to re ignite it.

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


It didnt take long for somebody to come up with a potentially new weapon system from a new discovery

reply to post by Astyanax

Where do you get it?

The WMAP 7-year results estimate that 4.56% of the universe's mass is made up of normal atoms

Seven-Year Wilson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Sky Maps, Systematic Errors, and Basic Results

Thats huge % of exotic atoms out there, here, everywhere. There is no need for a mine. THIS PATENT states that you have to turn the containment device on and the anti-matter is simply attracted to the it. Seems easy when you dumb it down,

reply to post by richierich931

The WMAP 7-year results estimate that 4.56% of the universe's mass is made up of normal atoms. Thats huge % of exotic atoms out there, here, everywhere. There is no need for a mine.

Antimatter

Dark matter

Two different things, you see. There is hardly any antimatter in the universe. Far less than there is ‘ordinary’ matter.

Just a quick question, How can antimatter exsist if it is destroyed when it touches matter. Secondly would it just set off a chain reaction and destroy everything?

Since you guys want to discuss anti-matter and it's interaction with normal matter, etc... you may want to also consider this recent article's concept:

"Antimatter gravity could explain Universe's expansion"
www.physorg.com...

As a new study shows, general relativity predicts that the gravitational interaction between matter and antimatter is mutually repulsive, and could potentially explain the observed expansion of the Universe without the need for dark energy.

It's interesting, but I'm not supporting it. I prefer the 'dark energy' model. Since they are now able to produce and capture anti-matter... I would think it would be easy to determine if it is attractive or repulsive to normal matter. But still waiting to hear the observed conclusion.

reply to post by 4Starlight2Decay0

Antimatter can exist as long as it doesn’t touch ordinary matter. Since all the antimatter we know is in the form of charged particles, we can store it in a vacuum chamber, using a magnetic field to keep it from touching the walls of the chamber.

Antimatter can also exist in deep space. But the reason there is so little antimatter in the universe is that most of it reacted with the ordinary matter in the universe aeons ago, and destroyed itself by conversion to energy. The early universe had a bit more matter in it than antimatter, so that's what we wound up with.

And no, it wouldn't set off a chain reaction and destroy everything. Exactly as much ordinary matter as antimatter would be destroyed, no more. Though there'd probably be a hell of a lot of collateral damage.

reply to post by DaddyBare


All the anti-matter on Earth accounts for only a smidge.
Matter anti-matter reactors won't be a reality until we can safely mass produce and store anti-matter.

Our best bet for massive-cheap power NOW, is the free-energy type concepts that pull power from the ambient Universe.

Fusion is too damn expensive.

reply to post by Astyanax


Thank you for the clarification, my prowess lies elsewhere. From what your saying antimatter could be the ultimate weapon? Or even a great way to get rid of garbage or nuclear waste maybe?

reply to post by 4Starlight2Decay0

That's correct. So long as you don't mind polluting the universe with gamma-ray bursts and potentially depopulating large sections of it.

Here's a new (03 May 2011) article on containing anti-hydrogen for up to 15 minutes:

"Fleeting antimatter trapped for a quarter of an hour"
www.newscientist.com...

It's not the anti-helium (of this thread), but is still anti-matter.