Can anti-matter create anti-gravity and is it related to photon pairing?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter hubble_bubble
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Anti-matter Properties
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between antimatter and gravity, specifically whether antimatter can create antigravity and its potential connection to photon pairing during particle interactions. Participants explore theoretical implications, experimental observations, and the nature of particle-antiparticle interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that antimatter, being the mirror of matter, might produce antigravity, while others question this assumption, suggesting that gravity depends on mass and energy, which are the same for both matter and antimatter.
  • There is a discussion about whether antimatter molecules have been created, with references to the production of anti-helium-4 nuclei.
  • Participants clarify that antiparticles have positive mass and energy, leading to the conclusion that they would experience gravity similarly to their matter counterparts.
  • Some participants mention ongoing experiments at CERN, such as AEgIS, which aim to investigate potential repulsive forces involving antimatter.
  • Questions arise regarding the conservation of mass and energy during particle annihilation, with discussions on how photons are produced in these interactions.
  • There is confusion about the process of pair production, where high-energy photons can create electron-positron pairs, and the conditions required for this to occur, including the necessity of conservation of momentum.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether antimatter can produce antigravity, with no consensus reached. There are also varying interpretations of particle interactions and the implications of conservation laws, indicating unresolved questions in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of mass and energy, as well as the complexities of particle interactions that are not fully resolved in the discussion.

hubble_bubble
Messages
135
Reaction score
0
As the positron has a positive charge and is the mirror of the electron and the antiproton is negative and a mirror of the proton, will then anti-matter produce anti-gravity. If not then why not? Is this linked to the photon pairing of electron and positron?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hubble_bubble said:
As the positron has a positive charge and is the mirror of the electron and the antiproton is negative and a mirror of the proton, will then anti-matter produce anti-gravity. If not then why not? Is this linked to the photon pairing of electron and positron?

I'll turn the question around. Why should it produce antigravity? Gravity depends on mass and energy - whether the stuff is matter or antimatter doesn't matter.
 
I am assuming that you mean because the charges balance out there will be the same net effect? if so have anti-matter molecules been created yet?
 
:confused: No balancing is involved. The mass of an antiparticle is positive. The energy of an antiparticle is positive. The effect of gravity on an antiparticle is in the same sense (attractive) as the corresponding particle. Particles attract particles. Particles attract antiparticles. Antiparticles attract antiparticles.
 
I notice that anti-helium-4 nuclei have been produced now.
 
in response to the original question, anti-particles have opposite 'charge' of the normal particles. There are several different kinds of 'charge', including electrical charge and lepton number, etc. But mass is not one of these types of 'charge'. So the mass of anti-particles is the same as mass of normal particles.
 
BruceW said:
in response to the original question, anti-particles have opposite 'charge' of the normal particles. There are several different kinds of 'charge', including electrical charge and lepton number, etc. But mass is not one of these types of 'charge'. So the mass of anti-particles is the same as mass of normal particles.

Thanks. I believe some of the proposals at CERN are to detect if there is even a negligibly small repulsive force. They don't seem to favour this though. I wonder what they will find to explain the discrepancy between the amounts of matter and antimatter in the universe.
 
The CERN experiment is called AEgIS. See here and here. They will use a beam of antihydrogen atoms.
 
Would someone please explain? Based on BruceW, Bill_K comments... it appears our universe does not have "conservation of mass" as a basic law of particle interaction - two particles can anihilate with mass disappearing. Since mass is in many ways equivalent to energy, is there a discrepancy here and how is this normally explained (or is it an unsolved problem)? Thanks
 
  • #10
When two particles annihilate, some other form of energy must be given off. For example, photons, which carry the energy away.
 
  • #11
BruceW said:
When two particles annihilate, some other form of energy must be given off. For example, photons, which carry the energy away.

What I am trying to grasp is the electron/positron pairing in photons when matter and anti matter annihilate. When photons are released from matter only what are they then composed of? Electrons only?
 
  • #12
eh?! Let's say that an electron and positron collide and annihilate. This means that the electron and positron disappear. But then two photons will appear instead. (And in higher-energy collisions, other massive particles can be created).

So in the simple case, we start off with an electron and a positron, and we end up with two photons. These photons are not composed of anything.
 
  • #15
Drakkith said:
What exactly don't you understand?

Well high energy photons can produce an electron and a positron pair. From where?
 
  • #16
hubble_bubble said:
Well high energy photons can produce an electron and a positron pair. From where?

From the energy they possess. That's all I know. Particle creation can happen according to some very complex rules, but it all comes down to having enough energy/mass to create the new particles.
 
  • #17
Sorry I should have said earlier composed from electron energy only.
 
  • #18
Generating a positron from a collision with matter seems only feasible if matter and antimatter have a connection beyond simple annihilation. Do quarks and anti quarks co-exist in some sense?
 
  • #19
hubble_bubble said:
Generating a positron from a collision with matter seems only feasible if matter and antimatter have a connection beyond simple annihilation. Do quarks and anti quarks co-exist in some sense?

I'm unsure as to what you are asking. I know of no "connection" between matter and antimatter other than what the standard model of particle physics tells me.
 
  • #20
Drakkith said:
I'm unsure as to what you are asking. I know of no "connection" between matter and antimatter other than what the standard model of particle physics tells me.

Well if you think about it a high energy photon hitting matter should produce two electrons as it has not hit anti matter. It makes sense that a photon hitting anti matter would generate the electron's anti particle, the positron. Yet here we have a positron being produced by a photon hitting matter. If an electron will annihilate a positron how can they both be produced without an immediate annihilation taking place? They are after all produced by the same photon. This can be explained I suppose by them leaving in opposite directions. However, we now are in the position where this positron will quickly annihilate with another electron. This will produce two photons, not one, so how did one photon gain the ability to produce the electron and positron if annihilation does not produce a single photon?
 
  • #21
hubble_bubble said:
Well if you think about it a high energy photon hitting matter should produce two electrons as it has not hit anti matter. It makes sense that a photon hitting anti matter would generate the electron's anti particle, the positron. Yet here we have a positron being produced by a photon hitting matter. If an electron will annihilate a positron how can they both be produced without an immediate annihilation taking place? They are after all produced by the same photon. This can be explained I suppose by them leaving in opposite directions. However, we now are in the position where this positron will quickly annihilate with another electron. This will produce two photons, not one, so how did one photon gain the ability to produce the electron and positron if annihilation does not produce a single photon?

Due to conservation of momentum a single photon cannot create matter. It requires either another photon or something like an atomic nucleus to interact with.
 
  • #22
hubble_bubble said:
Well if you think about it a high energy photon hitting matter should produce two electrons as it has not hit anti matter. It makes sense that a photon hitting anti matter would generate the electron's anti particle, the positron. Yet here we have a positron being produced by a photon hitting matter. If an electron will annihilate a positron how can they both be produced without an immediate annihilation taking place? They are after all produced by the same photon. This can be explained I suppose by them leaving in opposite directions. However, we now are in the position where this positron will quickly annihilate with another electron. This will produce two photons, not one, so how did one photon gain the ability to produce the electron and positron if annihilation does not produce a single photon?

In pair production, a single photon does decay into an electron and positron. BUT there must be an atom nearby, to help in conservation of momentum. So really a single photon on its own, without any atoms nearby, cannot create an electron-positron pair.

P.S. to everyone, does the line through his name mean that he is no longer a member of PF?

P.P.S. I just realized I pretty much just repeated what Drakkith said. Sorry about that!
 
  • #23
BruceW said:
P.S. to everyone, does the line through his name mean that he is no longer a member of PF?

I think so.
 
  • #24
<<Would someone please explain? Based on BruceW, Bill_K comments... it appears our universe does not have "conservation of mass" as a basic law of particle interaction - two particles can anihilate with mass disappearing. Since mass is in many ways equivalent to energy, is there a discrepancy here and how is this normally explained (or is it an unsolved problem)? >>

Rest mass is not conserved, but mass is. It is the mass of an object, not its rest mass, that is proportional to energy. So energy is conserved.

If a particle and an antiparticle annhiliate to form two photons, then the energy of that particle antiparticle system becomes exactly the energy of the two photons. Rest mass has gone to zero, but mass/energy unchanged in the reaction.
 
  • #25
ApplePion said:
Rest mass is not conserved, but mass is. It is the mass of an object, not its rest mass, that is proportional to energy. So energy is conserved.

If a particle and an antiparticle annhiliate to form two photons, then the energy of that particle antiparticle system becomes exactly the energy of the two photons. Rest mass has gone to zero, but mass/energy unchanged in the reaction.
I agree. To add to that, the invariant mass of the system is also conserved. So the sum of the rest masses of the individual particles is not conserved, but the invariant mass is conserved.

In the case of a single particle, the invariant mass and rest mass are the same. So if there is 1 particle, its rest mass is conserved. I think this is where people sometimes fall into the mistake of thinking that the sum of the rest masses for a multi-particle system would be conserved. But this is simply not true. (Because the invariant mass is no longer equal to the rest mass, for a multi-particle system).
 
  • #26
hubble_bubble said:
Well high energy photons can produce an electron and a positron pair. From where?
Just to be clear, it takes a pair of photons -- or perhaps a photon and some other particle -- to produce a particle-antiparticle pair. A single photon cannot do it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K