Does antimatter 'shine'


by benk99nenm312
Tags: antimatter, hine
benk99nenm312
benk99nenm312 is offline
#1
May10-09, 07:37 PM
P: 302
Hey. I was wondering, can we 'see' antimatter? By this, I mean, does a positron ever emit photons, or can we shine a light on antimatter and see what it gives off? Are we limited to 'seeing' antimatter by other means, such as annhilation, or charge?

From my understanding, antimatter travels backwards in time. We see things that move forwards in time. However, I am uncertain as to whether photon emissions are a common property of antimatter.

Thanks in advance.
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Physicists consider implications of recent revelations about the universe's first light
Vacuum ultraviolet lamp of the future created in Japan
Grasp of SQUIDs dynamics facilitates eavesdropping
Bob S
Bob S is offline
#2
May10-09, 07:50 PM
P: 4,664
Fermilab produces, accelerates, and stores antiprotons. They go the same way as protons if the magnetic field is reversed, the opposite way if it isn't. Protons and amtiprotons sometimes travel in the same vacuum chamber at the same time, in opposite directions. Antiprotons sometimes collide with protons, but they always go forward in time.
ZapperZ
ZapperZ is offline
#3
May10-09, 07:51 PM
Mentor
ZapperZ's Avatar
P: 28,837
Quote Quote by benk99nenm312 View Post
Hey. I was wondering, can we 'see' antimatter? By this, I mean, does a positron ever emit photons, or can we shine a light on antimatter and see what it gives off? Are we limited to 'seeing' antimatter by other means, such as annhilation, or charge?

From my understanding, antimatter travels backwards in time. We see things that move forwards in time. However, I am uncertain as to whether photon emissions are a common property of antimatter.

Thanks in advance.
Antimatter behaves the same way as the matter counterpart.

When the Advanced Photon Source first came online, it used positrons to go around the synchrotron ring to generate light. They now use electrons in much the same way.

Zz.

Phrak
Phrak is offline
#4
May10-09, 07:51 PM
P: 4,513

Does antimatter 'shine'


Antimatter emmits antiphotons. These are, of course, just photons. So, yeah, antimatter shines.

(Things move in time? When did that start happening?)
benk99nenm312
benk99nenm312 is offline
#5
May10-09, 11:07 PM
P: 302
Quote Quote by Phrak View Post
Antimatter emmits antiphotons. These are, of course, just photons. So, yeah, antimatter shines.

(Things move in time? When did that start happening?)
Thanks.

I assume you meant backwards in time, which is a principal of Quantum Electro-Dynamics. I am not familiar with any notion or theory that disclaims this principal, but it seems that a number of people know about a different way of looking at antimatter.

Quantum states of a particle and an antiparticle can be interchanged by applying the charge conjugation (C), parity (P), and time reversal (T) operators. This is the familiar CPT conjugation. Time is clearly a conjugate, so I am confused as to why so many think antimatter travels forwards in time. Maybe it's something I don't know.
Phrak
Phrak is offline
#6
May11-09, 12:00 AM
P: 4,513
Quote Quote by benk99nenm312 View Post
Thanks.

I assume you meant backwards in time, which is a principal of Quantum Electro-Dynamics. I am not familiar with any notion or theory that disclaims this principal, but it seems that a number of people know about a different way of looking at antimatter.

Quantum states of a particle and an antiparticle can be interchanged by applying the charge conjugation (C), parity (P), and time reversal (T) operators. This is the familiar CPT conjugation. Time is clearly a conjugate, so I am confused as to why so many think antimatter travels forwards in time. Maybe it's something I don't know.
'Motion in time' is one of my pet peeves, I guess. When something moves in space, at one time it occupies one spatial position, and at a later time it occupies anther spatical position.

Now, reapply this meaning to time by replacing all instantiations of "space" with "time":

"When something moves in time, at one time it occupies one temporal postion, and at a later time it occupies another temporal postion."

It is a gramatically vacuous. Things do not move in time anymore than a line moves on a graph.
malawi_glenn
malawi_glenn is offline
#7
May11-09, 12:57 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
malawi_glenn's Avatar
P: 4,739
Quote Quote by benk99nenm312 View Post
From my understanding, antimatter travels backwards in time. We see things that move forwards in time. However, I am uncertain as to whether photon emissions are a common property of antimatter.
This is the ugly popular science description again, trying to make particle physics as spooky as possible :-)

The antiparticles propagates (we don't like travel as a concept in particle physics) forward in time, but their state propagates backwards. It is a bit tricky to explain without going into the deep math.

I really don't understand the logic that we see things that move forward in time, we see things (with our eyes) things whos photons reaches our eyes.

Photon interactions are possible for every particle that interact with the electromagnetic-force. And what differs from a proton and an antiproton is just that they have opposite quantum numbers.

One example of antiparticles that DO NOT participate in the electromagnetic is the anti-neutrino, since it's particle counterpart, the neutrino, does not do so.
malawi_glenn
malawi_glenn is offline
#8
May11-09, 12:59 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
malawi_glenn's Avatar
P: 4,739
Quote Quote by benk99nenm312 View Post
Thanks.

I assume you meant backwards in time, which is a principal of Quantum Electro-Dynamics. I am not familiar with any notion or theory that disclaims this principal, but it seems that a number of people know about a different way of looking at antimatter.

Quantum states of a particle and an antiparticle can be interchanged by applying the charge conjugation (C), parity (P), and time reversal (T) operators. This is the familiar CPT conjugation. Time is clearly a conjugate, so I am confused as to why so many think antimatter travels forwards in time. Maybe it's something I don't know.
Pick up any book on relativistic quantum mechanics and study =)
benk99nenm312
benk99nenm312 is offline
#9
May11-09, 08:05 AM
P: 302
Quote Quote by Phrak View Post
"When something moves in time, at one time it occupies one temporal postion, and at a later time it occupies another temporal postion."

It is a gramatically vacuous. Things do no move in time anymore than a line moves on a graph.
A change in the position of space means a change in the position of time. You have said it yourself. If an object is here, and then it is there... there is a chronological advancement in the position of time.

Time is a dimension. We can move around in it, accelerating, decelerating, but not stopping. If things didn't move in time, then we would all be frozen solid, our very atoms and molecules at a stand still. Time is necessary to consider.
benk99nenm312
benk99nenm312 is offline
#10
May11-09, 08:08 AM
P: 302
Quote Quote by malawi_glenn View Post
The antiparticles propagates (we don't like travel as a concept in particle physics) forward in time, but their state propagates backwards. It is a bit tricky to explain without going into the deep math.
Thanks. I think I'm starting to get it. But, aren't the particles determined by their states. If their states move backwards in time, why not the particles themselves? (It's okay to give me a little math.)
hamster143
hamster143 is offline
#11
May11-09, 09:15 AM
P: 986
Question 1. There's a high-voltage power line that connects Austin, Texas, and San Antonio, Texas. San Antonio is 100 miles southwest of Austin.

Which way does the power line run?

a) South and west
b) North and east
c) Depends whether it's made of matter or antimatter
d) The question is vacuous

Now add one more dimension.

Question 2. A particle is in Austin, Texas, today and an identical particle is in San Antonio, Texas, tomorrow.

Which way did the particle propagate?

a) Forwards in time and to the southwest
b) Backwards in time and to the northeast
c) Depends whether its a particle or an antiparticle
d) The question is vacuous
George Jones
George Jones is offline
#12
May11-09, 09:55 AM
Mentor
George Jones's Avatar
P: 6,044
Quote Quote by benk99nenm312 View Post
I assume you meant backwards in time, which is a principal of Quantum Electro-Dynamics. I am not familiar with any notion or theory that disclaims this principal, but it seems that a number of people know about a different way of looking at antimatter.
The modern way .

I can't resist quoting a passage from Zee's Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell. The last section, Poetic but confusing metaphors, of Chapter II.2, Quantizing the Dirac Field, reads:

"In this closing chapter let me ask you some rhetorical questions. Did I speak of an electron going backward in time? Did I mumble something about a sea of negative energy electrons? This metaphorical language, when used by brilliant minds, the likes of Dirac and Feynman, was evocative and inspirational, but unfortunately confused generations of physics students and physicists. The presentation given here is in the modern spirit, which seeks to avoid these potentially confusing metaphors."
malawi_glenn
malawi_glenn is offline
#13
May11-09, 11:10 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
malawi_glenn's Avatar
P: 4,739
Quote Quote by benk99nenm312 View Post
Thanks. I think I'm starting to get it. But, aren't the particles determined by their states. If their states move backwards in time, why not the particles themselves? (It's okay to give me a little math.)
A physical positron propagating forward in time is the state electron propagating backward in time.
Bob_for_short
Bob_for_short is offline
#14
May11-09, 11:28 AM
P: 1,160
Quote Quote by benk99nenm312 View Post
From my understanding, antimatter travels backwards in time. Thanks in advance.
Yes, it is already in the far past. We may safely forget it. Less of worries :)

I was a joke. Let us admit that there is no antimatter but differently charged particles. (Some of them were discovered earlier, some later.) Then there will be no problem in understanding their dynamics.

Bob.
Phrak
Phrak is offline
#15
May11-09, 09:17 PM
P: 4,513
Quote Quote by benk99nenm312 View Post
A change in the position of space means a change in the position of time. You have said it yourself. If an object is here, and then it is there... there is a chronological advancement in the position of time.
Measurable motion in space is velocity; [itex]\Delta X / \Delta T [/itex]. What are the units and measure of motion in time?

Time is a dimension. We can move around in it, accelerating, decelerating, but not stopping. If things didn't move in time, then we would all be frozen solid, our very atoms and molecules at a stand still. Time is necessary to consider.
Motion in space is a physically measurable with units of velocity. How would you measure motion in time and what would be its units? Physics is an experimental science; it ain't philosophy.
Phrak
Phrak is offline
#16
May11-09, 09:25 PM
P: 4,513
Quote Quote by malawi_glenn View Post
The antiparticles propagates (we don't like travel as a concept in particle physics) forward in time, but their state propagates backwards. It is a bit tricky to explain without going into the deep math.
Hey, malawi. It's been a while. Particles and antiparticles, as far as we know, are arbitary under relabeling--unless things have changed recently--aren't they?

But I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
benk99nenm312
benk99nenm312 is offline
#17
May11-09, 10:04 PM
P: 302
Quote Quote by Phrak View Post
Measurable motion in space is velocity; [itex]\Delta X / \Delta T [/itex]. What are the units and measure of motion in time?


Motion in space is a physically measurable with units of velocity. How would you measure motion in time and what would be its units? Physics is an experimental science; it ain't philosophy.
What are the units and measure of motion in time? How about seconds, or miliseconds, or even planck time intervals. These are simple measures of chronological advancement.

"Motion in space is physically measurable with units of velocity." And so motion in time is equal to Delta X / Velocity. Velocity is real, right?

Even better is this. E=mc^2. So, c=(E/m)^1/2 . c = the speed of light, which involves a measure of time. A measure of simply time can be found by simplifying the dimensional analysis product of that equation.

The very notion of Delta T indicates that a measure of time is necessary. If I throw a baseball, is it flying through the air and in my palm? Obviously not. The baseball has to move somewhere in time. This is not philisophical by any means. How do you explain Special and General Relativity?
Phrak
Phrak is offline
#18
May11-09, 11:22 PM
P: 4,513
Mia copa.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
I have a question regarding creation of anti-matter General Physics 16
why particles in a bubble chamber seam to disappear? High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics 8
How far the light can be shine? General Physics 13
What happens when you shine a light on a black surface? General Physics 11
intrested in Antimatter General Physics 6