Anti-matter manufacturing and fabrication.

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
Im not speaking of the emissions of an annhilation. But rather the type of shockwave we would see from it.

Nuclear weapons produce halo shockwaves.

Anti-matter/matter contact would produce not a halo, but a sphere.

I'm at a loss for words here. Why do you think nuclear weapons produce 'halo shockwaves', and why do you think antimatter annihilation produces spherical ones? Shockwaves of what sort?

Is there a particular place you're getting this from? Because it's just not true, seriously.

Street Corner Philosopher,

Isn't CERN in Geneva?

If we did have a few grams of anti matter could we make an engine to use in space? I mean do we have everything (well almost everything) we need to build an engine. Or would it be that we would need to develop new technologys and materials to make that ship. I belive that we humans are destined to cruise the stars but unfortunately not in my lifetime.

Thanks in advance to any who respond to my question.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
Im not speaking of the emissions of an annhilation. But rather the type of shockwave we would see from it.

Nuclear weapons produce halo shockwaves.

Anti-matter/matter contact would produce not a halo, but a sphere.

I'm at a loss for words here. Why do you think nuclear weapons produce 'halo shockwaves', and why do you think antimatter annihilation produces spherical ones? Shockwaves of what sort?

Is there a particular place you're getting this from? Because it's just not true, seriously.

Im not getting it from anywhere. I look at the way our universe might of been created at the time of the big bang. I have a mental model of it, thats all. The universe is a sphere, rapidly expanding. Anti matter production proves the big bang is very plausible. A sphere, something that would expand and collaspe in on it self, almost like a black hole. The density when collapsing would be so concentrated, it would probably emit gravitational vaccum. Einstein would agree.

What type of shockwaves !!...im at a loss for words now. There is only one type since we are on the subject of nuclear weapons. Blast waves of course !. Besides , the wave from a nuke is basically 2 dimensional. The blast from Antimatter contact would be sphere -like. Just like the big bang.

[edit on 6/25/2006 by StreetCorner Philosopher]

Originally posted by i4cu2
Street Corner Philosopher,

Isn't CERN in Geneva?

If we did have a few grams of anti matter could we make an engine to use in space? I mean do we have everything (well almost everything) we need to build an engine. Or would it be that we would need to develop new technologys and materials to make that ship. I belive that we humans are destined to cruise the stars but unfortunately not in my lifetime.

Thanks in advance to any who respond to my question.

Perhaps your next life time. Dark matter is apparently spreading everywhere. Neurtrino particles makes up Dark matter. It can be considered Anti- matter. Plasma could even be considered Anti-matter. But real Anti-matter is the anti-hydrogen created at CERN...I thought it was in Scotland, I could be wrong though.

livefromcern.web.cern.ch...


Interesting stuff...really. Dark Matter is another obsession of mine.

E=mc^2
So a tiny gram of matter ,nullifying a tiny gram of antimatter ,will produce energy of ...300000000*300000000*1 jouls.
Antimatter "torpedoes" are too powerfull to be used on Earth
Better stick to the ol' laser "canons" and plasma projectors
Good luck!

Engines are a different story ..than bombs
We have "antigravity" engines,used in "flying saucers" (concentric discs rotatting at 4000 rpms in opposite directions) ,but they are quite useless in leaving the solar system.
Think about it: with light speed ,it takes 8 minutes to reach the Sun...which is really far away ,but it will take 4 years to reach the nearest star..Alfa Centauri
So we need a "jump engine" which opens an Einstein-Rosen bridge to a similar point in space.Similar does not mean it's near by...could be at the other end of the 4-d Universe.
In the 4-D space ,given an object with positive mass it is impossible to breach the light speed.So antimatter engines are useless as well.

The Jump engine would be how a real warp drive would work. When travelling @ light speed, your basically curving space time. It's like playing with a bowl of jelly. The universe is very much like the protoplasm in a cell. So Id think the reason you see ships jump and(dissapear) in the sci fi films like BS galactica for ex. is because space curvature would deform and fold and a wormhole connecting the two ends of space time might allow you to cross a galaxy. But your ship never actually moves at all.

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
Im not getting it from anywhere. I look at the way our universe might of been created at the time of the big bang. I have a mental model of it, thats all. The universe is a sphere, rapidly expanding. Anti matter production proves the big bang is very plausible. A sphere, something that would expand and collaspe in on it self, almost like a black hole. The density when collapsing would be so concentrated, it would probably emit gravitational vaccum. Einstein would agree.

What type of shockwaves !!...im at a loss for words now. There is only one type since we are on the subject of nuclear weapons. Blast waves of course !. Besides , the wave from a nuke is basically 2 dimensional. The blast from Antimatter contact would be sphere -like. Just like the big bang.

I'm not sure why you think anti-matter production proves much about the big bang. The only interesting connection between the two that immediately comes to mind is, why was the creation of matter biased towards terrene matter, and not split 50/50? An interesting dilemma for which I have heard several theories, which will no-doubt be difficult to prove.

At any rate, nothing expands and collapses here. No density changes that emit 'gravitational vacuum' whatever that might be. What you get is a straightforward emission of gamma rays for positron-electron annihilation, and for protons and neutrons you get an intermediate spray of pions and neutrinos, of which the pions proceed to decay and produce some more gamma radiation of lower energy.

As for nuclear weapons, there are several distinct evolutions of energy from x-ray to thermal IR to mechanical overpressure waves. And, you could say for a weapon detonated in atmosphere that you would have Cerenkov radiation, which is in itself a sort of shockwave. Actually I thought you might have been referring to that, since the rest didn't make sense.

Blast waves from a nuke are most definitely not two dimensional. As a casual observer, you would be hard-put to detect a difference between the introduction of anti-matter or a nuke, given sufficient quantity of anti-matter. You could tell the difference with instruments based on the emission spectra and amplitude signatures.

As for plasma being co-identical with anti-matter, no, not at all. They are not related.

[edit on 25-6-2006 by Tom Bedlam]

When I spoke of blastwaves, I never intended to determine radiation emission types. I would assume the radiation would be Far-infared, or near infared. I doubt we would see UV or microwaves . Maybe after a nuclear test, we might get High definition audio on our radios from high levels of radio waves ? joke of course .

But..the whole sphere thing is described because of the model of the big bang. Thats all. It probably depends on the anti matter. Anti Hydrogen , what humanity has been able to convert into its opposite charge is the only particle we can make anti matter with now.

gravitational vaccum is what I call empty space. Space is not empty at all. Its vaccum or (dark matter) that makes up for the missing space between all the matter. According to Einstein, gravity and matter are separate. But what if gravity is something we entirely do not understand. Science has not understood gravity yet. Definatly not a subject science has figured out. But Dark Matter and space vaccum has nothing to do with Newtonian physics. Einstien never got to that part of the universe. It's extremely new.

matter is a concentration of energy,given by Einstein's formula:E=mc^2
There are 63 dimensions and each universe is contained in the upper-level one.
For instance ,the 5-D beings,who have 4 dimensions(time is a part of their bodies) see us as cartoons.
Each universe is made of something,called dark matter
Imagine: living in an empty room is much better than living in the street!and the price of the apartment is higher than the price of the furniture inside.
So the ability to contain things is a matter of energy
Light travels this "space-time continuum" at a fixed ,higher speed: 300000 km/sec and it's curbing its trajectory near masses
What gives us the idea that matter itself,as a concentration of energy,is also a concentration of dark matter!!! the universe is concentrated on masses,like a dirty handskirt ;if the concentration is too big,the 4-D space is broken and a 5-D Einstein -Rosen bridge opens.After all,all energy is the same at the most basic quantic level.
Black holes,white holes,quasars, wormholes,galaxies rotating around massive black holes,Earth rotating around SUn and "something" having equal Sun mass in the other focus point of the ellipse are all facets of the same reality

What we see is not realityur brain interpolates,mathematically,the various fields of energy and gives us an image of the reality

You hold a pen in your hand:the pen is an energy field denser than the air beneath it ,but different form the enegy field of your hand
(however at atomic level these two fields are intersecting on the margins,not deeper because of the diffrent nature of these fields)
Earth is a much wider field than the pen and its density is greater than air.
You drop the pen: the attraction between the pen and your hand is much smaller than the attraction between the pen and Earth ;because of different densities,the pen goes through the air and meets the stronger field,the earth

So,really antimatter is matter of opposite spin ,protons are anti-protons,electrons are pozitrons ,and so on. Once you understand that you only have to change the spin ,you can make antimatter easier.

Antimatter must be produced and kept at all time into a magnetic field
Otherwise it will be like holding water in your hands

Originally posted by Caligulas
Antimatter must be produced and kept at all time into a magnetic field
Otherwise it will be like holding water in your hands

Not the case here in Penn. st. university. Their "penn trap" freezes the antimatter.

Originally posted by Caligulas
What we see is not reality

ur brain interpolates,mathematically,the various fields of energy and gives us an image of the reality

You hold a pen in your hand:the pen is an energy field denser than the air beneath it ,but different form the enegy field of your hand
(however at atomic level these two fields are intersecting on the margins,not deeper because of the diffrent nature of these fields)
Earth is a much wider field than the pen and its density is greater than air.
You drop the pen: the attraction between the pen and your hand is much smaller than the attraction between the pen and Earth ;because of different densities,the pen goes through the air and meets the stronger field,the earth

So,really antimatter is matter of opposite spin ,protons are anti-protons,electrons are pozitrons ,and so on. Once you understand that you only have to change the spin ,you can make antimatter easier.

I first would like you to know that the explaination in the post above was very helpful, and it's also very easy to understand the logic there. The difference in molecular density. The molecular structure is basically the configuration of atoms to create the visual we experience in our internal world that only we, the observers consider our reality. Or is our brain only capable of registering 3D quanta information.

Yes.our brain is 3-D,so any field is reduced to a 3-D perception.
This means,that in theory,the chair you are standing on in front of your computer may be a 4-D "angel" visiting the 3-D universe,in the same manner as we draw cartoons on a piece of paper
Our vision is limited ,also,the eyes cannot perceive the majority of wavelenghts ,such as infrareds and ultraviolets.
I guess that's why certain people saw "ghosts" in certain places.

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
Its the only energy source with a 1:1 ration. A gram of Anti-matter touching the ground would create a huge sphere of light that would incinerate 12 square city blocks. Picture a sphere of light expanding and then collapsing in on it self, leaving a huge crater behind.

CERN is in Scotland, and they have made the most so far. Atomic energy needs to be used to it's full potential first. Besides bombs. Plasma engines need matter to contain the high heat. Titanium would melt.

Heh my ass. CERN is definitely NOT in scotland. How come you can even say something like that? I didnt have to look it up but only thing you have to do is to google it. But isnt it so that you being from USA you dont much know anything about geography? =)
Just slightly kidding here. But seriously 2 of you north americans in this threatt have shown some amazing geography knowledge. Laughing my ass out here...
Cern in scotland or someone said that all those three are in the states. Oh man oh man....
public.web.cern.ch...

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher

Originally posted by Caligulas
Antimatter must be produced and kept at all time into a magnetic field
Otherwise it will be like holding water in your hands

Not the case here in Penn. st. university. Their "penn trap" freezes the antimatter.

Um, no.

That would be a "Penning trap", not a "penn trap". A Penning trap uses a quadrupolar electric field and an axial magnetic field to produce a space in the center where charged particles tend to spiral endlessly. There is a mathematical function that relates the field strengths, particle masses and velocities and gives you a likelihood that a particle will escape the trap. The faster and more massive a particle is (faster = "hotter") the more likely it will get out and hit the walls. You can also get weird oscillatory interactions between "hot" antiprotons and the trap itself, if you have too many antiprotons in the trap. Since you can't do anything about the mass, you try to "cool" the particle so that it won't move around so fast. The techniques they use probably wouldn't correlate to any "cooling" you're familiar with though. There are other sorts of traps, such as Pritchard traps, Ioffe traps and radio-frequency cavity traps. You'd use something like an Ioffe trap for neutral particles like anti-hydrogen.

Um, to the guy that said only the spin was different, wrong. Antiparticles are made up of antiquarks. So the spin is different (the absolute value is the same, but up-down is reversed), but also lots of other stuff like color charge, the magnetic moments and electric charges, if it's a charged particle. It's not a simple matter of the spin being reversed. A better simple definition would be that an antiparticle is any particle made up of antiquarks, positively charged leptons or right-handed neutrinos.

Originally posted by finallianstallion

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
Its the only energy source with a 1:1 ration. A gram of Anti-matter touching the ground would create a huge sphere of light that would incinerate 12 square city blocks. Picture a sphere of light expanding and then collapsing in on it self, leaving a huge crater behind.

CERN is in Scotland, and they have made the most so far. Atomic energy needs to be used to it's full potential first. Besides bombs. Plasma engines need matter to contain the high heat. Titanium would melt.

Heh my ass. CERN is definitely NOT in scotland. How come you can even say something like that? I didnt have to look it up but only thing you have to do is to google it. But isnt it so that you being from USA you dont much know anything about geography? =)
Just slightly kidding here. But seriously 2 of you north americans in this threatt have shown some amazing geography knowledge. Laughing my ass out here...
Cern in scotland or someone said that all those three are in the states. Oh man oh man....
public.web.cern.ch...

Hey,looks like its someone who thinks americans are idiots because of geographical mistakes. Meanwhile the mistake I made was admitted in another post up above and the location of a particular facility has nothing to do with geography at all whatsoever !!! Talk about being behind in logic. You should leave your biased remarks under your tongue. Geography? the location of a facility? ohhh, you easterners are soo brilliant. CERN's location is irrelevent to this topic anyways. Whether it's in Geneva or west bubblefrak.



[edit on 6/26/2006 by StreetCorner Philosopher]

Well,don't be such a perfectionist!
Of course we will never be able to produce *true* antimatter and blow the whole Universe apart!
But if you change the spin ,you will get a "antimatter effect" as ,by flipping a coin on a table ,it gets an "antigravity effect"
Our task after all,is not to produce antimatter,but to find power sources for starships and other human mundane activities.