Antiproton ring found around Earth

In a new discovery announced yesterday it seems that scientists have discovered the existence of a new type of antiparticle in the very upper atmosphere of the earth. They are known as antiprotons, and as you may guess are exactly identical but opposite to protons (i.e. they weigh the same but have opposing charges)

The antiproton's appear to circle the Earth, but are confined by the planet's magnetic field lines. The antimatter, which may persist for minutes or hours before annihilating with normal matter, could in theory be used to fuel ultra-efficient rockets of the future.

Previously discovered atomic particles known as positrons, which are the opposite to electrons were found in the radiation belt. Antiprotons are nearly 2000 times as massive as positrons.

Between July 2006 and December 2008, PAMELA detected 28 antiprotons trapped in spiralling orbits around the magnetic field lines sprouting from the Earth's south pole

"I find it very interesting to note that the Earth's magnetic field works a little bit like the magnetic traps that we are using in the lab," says Rolf Landua at the CERN particle physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland. There, researchers have been trying to trap antimatter for ever longer periods to compare its behaviour with that of normal matter.

This is a very interesting discovery and could be useful in the future when we have developed more advanced technology

Future rockets could be powered by the reaction between matter and antimatter, a reaction that produces energy even more efficiently than nuclear fusion in the sun's core.

They cannot possibly give an exact amount, but the they stated:

Millions or billions of times as many antiprotons probably ring the giant planets

Antiproton ring found around Earth

Very interesting discovery, and like most scientific discoveries opens up more questions.

I wonder what purpose, if any, the antiprotons might serve.

And where did they come from? Is this a renewable supply?

Already posted:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But antiprotons are not a new discovery. They are created artificially at Fermilab and have been for a while.

It was theorized that they would be found trapped in Earth's magnetic field but it was not until PAMELA that we had the ability to detect them.

Italian researchers using data from the satellite PAMELA have proven that theories showing there ought to be a ring of antiprotons encircling the Earth due to cosmic rays colliding with nuclei in the upper atmosphere are correct.

www.physorg.com...

reply to post by Glass

I wonder what purpose, if any, the antiprotons might serve.

In the OP

Future rockets could be powered by the reaction between matter and antimatter, a reaction that produces energy even more efficiently than nuclear fusion in the sun's core.

reply to post by Griffo


Yes Yes! A link to a 2006 study found at a link on the tread Phang referenced has a PDF of it
Originally posted by Illustronic

Originally posted by Hypernova86
www.bbc.co.uk...

A fairly new BBC article discussing Pamelas findings.

I was going to post as a new thread, but search turned this one up.
Can I just ask, since I'm questioning it myself... Where does this leave us with the moon landings? Surely if the Van Allen belt was previously held as the biggest cause for doubt upon the moon landings, then the discovery of antiprotons would only make it all the more unlikely for astronauts to have casually glided on through? I may be wrong but I'm sure one of you kind folk will swiftly boot it in to touch if I'm wide of the mark.

.

Peace.

Saw this very article linked elsewhere, and if you noticed the link after the article, the antiproton flux was suspected to exist a long time ago, and a NASA funded study proposes the antiprotons could be collected for a space based fuel depot for antiproton propulsion in the future.

The study was submitted in April 2006 by a team headed by;

Jim Bickford would like to acknowledge the numerous contributions from the people and
organizations that enabled or directly contributed to the success of the phase I program. Funding
was provided by the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (NIAC) under a contract administered
by the Universities Space Research Association (USRA).

The PDF link;

a report for Nasa's Institute for Advanced Concepts.

Here are some illustrations from the report.
Artist's concept.

[img" target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">files.abovetopsecret.com...[/img]












]here.

I'm very bad at linking posts, maybe you can get to the info from this mess.

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by Griffo

 

Can I just ask, since I'm questioning it myself... Where does this leave us with the moon landings? Surely if the Van Allen belt was previously held as the biggest cause for doubt upon the moon landings, then the discovery of antiprotons would only make it all the more unlikely for astronauts to have casually glided on through? I may be wrong but I'm sure one of you kind folk will swiftly boot it in to touch if I'm wide of the mark.

.

I guess the question we should be asking is, what is the density of this antiproton "belt"? If they are few and far between, then what we have here is a situation similar to the Earth passing through the tail of a comet. It may very well be diffuse enough to have been avoided even when we didn't know it was there.

What supports this, for me, is that it's taken this long for this sensitive of a probe to come along to detect this region of antiprotons. This would seem to indicate that the antiproton density is incredibly low.

Seems we need to just stop being lazy and start exploring and mining the Solar system then. If space ships could capture store and use these antimprotons there is not much stoping us from exploring our solar system aside from start up cost...which is really nothing more than human effort.

reply to post by Xeven


The costs would be too immense with our current level of space technology. Look at how much it cost to put a probe on Mars. Now compare the size and weight of a space probe to all of the machinery and people required to mine an asteroid or whatever. Add that to all the fuel required to get there and back and you have a pretty high amount of money.

We would need to wait until we have more efficient methods of space transportation before attempting something like this. That being said, I think we should put time and effort (and money) into researching more efficient methods.

Also, I've just remembered another thing. You would have to take into consideration the extra payload you would need for the return journey, and therefore the extra fuel required

Originally posted by CLPrime

I guess the question we should be asking is, what is the density of this antiproton "belt"?

Not very high.

During about 850 days of data acquisition (from 2006 July to 2008 December), 28 trapped antiprotons were identified within the kinetic energy range 60–750 MeV.

arxiv.org...

reply to post by Phage


So, that's even more diffuse than I suspected - about a single antiparticle every month.
That certainly answers the question of how we managed to get to the Moon through this antiproton belt. If the probe only detected one antiparticle every month, it's no wonder our astronauts, and their capsules, managed to slip through unaffected.

reply to post by CLPrime


I don't know...Would the annihilation of an antiproton in the human body necessarily be very detrimental?

I realize that antiprotons are more massive than positrons (i.e., antimatter electrons), but the annihilation effects caused by positrons reacting with electrons are not necessarily detrimental to the human body. PET scans used by the medical professions use the annihilation of electrons and positrons (which are introduced into the body during a PET scan) within the body as the way of getting images of the body.

Is there a medical expert who knows something about PET scans and these more massive antiprotons who can weigh in on this?

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


No, such reactions in the body (as the PET scan demonstrates) are harmless, to a point. It starts to become a problem, though, when too much tissue is being annihilated (or too much of the spaceship). And, obviously, the antiproton density of the region in question is far too low to cause that sort of damage.
In fact, PET scans cause more annihilations in the human body with a single scan than exposure to the antiproton belt likely would over a lifetime. Probably on the order of 100 to 1000 times more.