Anti-matter vs matter at creation.

[hakon]

During the creation of the universe, aka the big bang, it is recognised that matter was in a greater supply then anti-matter.

The reason for this is unknown.

So we are able to create anti-matter at great expense, have we ever tried to make anti-matter into matter?

Because if the method is different to that required to make anti-matter, could that not solve the question of why matter is abundant?

would love to hear from anyone with experience on the process required to make anti-matter.

 

[HallsofIvy]

I have no idea what you mean by "make anti-matter into matter". You cannot make one into the other.

 

[kloptok]

hakon: I don't know what you think, but antimatter is not "created" from ordinary matter. In the same way, one can not "create" or "transform" antimatter into matter or vice versa. Positrons can be collected from nuclear decays. Antiprotons come from accelerator rings.

See this article for example (go down to "How to make anti-atoms"): http://physics.berkeley.edu/index.p...nagement&act=news&Itemid=419&task=view&id=203

A more technical description of creation and analysis of antimatter: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v419/n6906/full/nature01096.html

 

[hakon]

let me rephrase.

How would we be collecting matter, if the universe and we were made up of anti-matter.

i get you use radiation for the positrons, and accelerator rings for anti-protons, but can it be done the same way in an anti-universe?

 

[Antiphon]

Should be the same but since we don't know why it's the way it is, we can't state so with certainty.

 

[hakon]

just thought maybe scientists trying to solve this problem might benifit from thinking about it in reverse

 

[Drakkith]

Did you know that every single time we have created anti-matter through collisions in colliders, we create exactly the same amount of normal matter?

 

[hakon]

Did you know that every single time we have created anti-matter through collisions in colliders, we create exactly the same amount of normal matter?

yes but we start with particles which originate from matter.

 

[cragar]

I'm sure you could have anti-proton anti-proton collisions that produced protons and anti-protons, provided everything that needs to be conserved is conserved.

 

[Drakkith]

yes but we start with particles which originate from matter.

Yes, but we aren't creating the antimatter from those two particles. We are creating it from the energy of their collision. Depending on the collision energy you can create LOTS of particles, or only a few from two simple protons.

But I think the argument is just semantics.

I'm sure you could have anti-proton anti-proton collisions that produced protons and anti-protons, provided everything that needs to be conserved is conserved.

You are basically correct.

 

[silmaril89]

I think there is something you are not considering. We might be made of anti-matter, and anti-matter is matter. It's completely arbitrary which one is which, they are just opposites. Since we have to a give one of them the name matter, and the other anti-matter, we might as well give the one that we are all made up of matter. It's like deciding on what numbers to call even and which ones to call odd (probably not the best analogy).

They are just mirror opposites of each other. The reason there is a much greater abundance of matter over anti-matter might have something to do with certain symmetry violations in the Weak Interactions (e.g. CP violation).

 

[Drakkith]

I think there is something you are not considering. We might be made of anti-matter, and anti-matter is matter. It's completely arbitrary which one is which, they are just opposites. Since we have to a give one of them the name matter, and the other anti-matter, we might as well give the one that we are all made up of matter. It's like deciding on what numbers to call even and which ones to call odd (probably not the best analogy).

They are just mirror opposites of each other. The reason there is a much greater abundance of matter over anti-matter might have something to do with certain symmetry violations in the Weak Interactions (e.g. CP violation).

Of course. Anti-matter and matter could both be considered Matter, and we could simply say that two particles of the same mass but opposite charges will annihilate each other. We choose to call antimatter that because we live in a matter dominated universe.

 

[silmaril89]

Of course. Anti-matter and matter could both be considered Matter,

No, they aren't both matter. But yea, if my response was so obvious to you, I don't understand where your confusion on matter and anti-matter comes from.

 

[Drakkith]

No, they aren't both matter. But yea, if my response was so obvious to you, I don't understand where your confusion on matter and anti-matter comes from.

I don't think you understand what I meant by that. Matter and Antimatter have almost the exact same properties. Same masses, spins, etc. The charges on each similar particle is opposite, but that is all. They are definitely not opposites. You could consider antimatter as just another type of matter, however we do not.

 

[silmaril89]

You can think of it however you want, it's arbitrary.

 

[Drakkith]

You can think of it however you want, it's arbitrary.

I think we are both saying the same thing.