Antimatter and Antigravity Connected ?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Antonio Lao
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Antimatter
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between antimatter and antigravity, asserting that while matter is governed by gravitational attraction, the effects of antimatter on gravity remain largely theoretical. Key points include the confirmation of antiparticles in the quantum realm and the assertion that gravitational forces between matter and antimatter are attractive. The conversation references foundational experiments, such as J.J. Thomson's determination of the mass-to-charge ratio and Millikan's oil drop experiment, to highlight the complexities of mass and gravitational interactions. Participants debate the implications of these findings on the existence of antigravity and the nature of spacetime curvature.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics and antiparticles
  • Familiarity with general relativity and spacetime curvature
  • Knowledge of fundamental forces: electromagnetic, strong, and weak forces
  • Basic principles of gravitational theory and Newton's laws
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of J.J. Thomson's mass-to-charge ratio experiments
  • Explore the concept of spacetime curvature in general relativity
  • Investigate the properties and behavior of antimatter in high-energy physics
  • Examine theories surrounding antigravity and its potential applications
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, cosmologists, and anyone interested in advanced theoretical physics, particularly those exploring the nature of antimatter and gravitational forces.

  • #31
Retro-update on the confinement of anti-particle. Many years ago, Dehmelt was able to confine an anti-particle named Priscilla in a Penning trap for an indefinite time. Long enough to verify some of the constants of nature and for more precisions in their numerical values. Dehmelt and Wolfgang Paul, together with Ramsey, shared the 1989 Nobel Prize in physics for their works.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
Exactly!

Good update, for now.
 
  • #34
I fail to see how the Weeks et al paper breaks any new ground. All it does is arrive at the conclusion the observable universe is finite. That is not the same as saying the 'real' universe is finite. It only infers that our ability to observe is finite. Duh. We cannot 'prove' anything is 'true'. We can only prove that certain pairs of things cannot both be true simultaneously. Our inability to solve the 3 body problem of gravitational attraction illustrates how incompetent we are, not to mention our inability to solve the Dirac equation for anything more complex than a hydrogen atom. We have much to learn.
 
  • #35
Chronos said:
Our inability to solve the 3 body problem of gravitational attraction...

Could nature be simpler than what we want it to be? Newton's law of universal gravitation is a 2-body problem (though a mass disparity of very large and very small). Coulomb's law of electrostatic force is also a 2-body problem of electric charges.

But the n-body problem is solved using statistical mechanics which necessarily incorporate the theory of probability and random variables. Anything more than 3 bodies, probability is involved and the process becomes stochastic instead of deterministic. But when n is just a little bit greater than 2, perturbation theory can be used. In astrodynamics, the n-body problem is solved by taking the interaction of 2 bodies at a time and then add all the 2-body interactions together.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K