Can neutral antihydrogen be stored using magnetic fields?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter vemvare
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Neutral antihydrogen cannot be stored using magnetic fields due to the limitations imposed by Earnshaw's theorem, which states that a charged particle cannot be held in stable equilibrium by any configuration of charges. Attempts to trap an antiproton within a fullerene structure are futile, as the weak electric fields of neutral atoms cannot provide the necessary stability. The ALPHA experiment at CERN demonstrates that while neutral antihydrogen can be manipulated using magnetic fields, it is not feasible to store charged particles like antiprotons in such a manner. The discussion highlights the challenges of antimatter storage and the implications of quantum mechanics on particle behavior.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Earnshaw's theorem
  • Familiarity with quantum mechanics and particle behavior
  • Knowledge of the ALPHA experiment at CERN
  • Basic concepts of electric and magnetic fields
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Earnshaw's theorem in electromagnetic systems
  • Study the principles of quantum tunneling and its effects on particle confinement
  • Explore alternative methods for antimatter storage, including magnetic confinement techniques
  • Investigate the ALPHA experiment's methodologies and findings regarding antihydrogen
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, researchers in particle physics, and anyone interested in the theoretical aspects of antimatter storage and quantum mechanics.

vemvare
Messages
87
Reaction score
10
I'm sorry, this question must've been asked before, I'm just not finding it in my searches.

Has anyone calculated if it is theoretically possible to put an antiproton inside a fullerene?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm assuming you mean "put inside a fullerene in such a way that it would stay there" (i.e. trap it). This isn't possible, which can be argued without even doing a quantum calculation: Earnshaw's theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw's_theorem) says that it is impossible for a charged particle to be held in a stable equilibrium by any configuration of charges—there is always a "leak" somewhere. The electric field of a neutral atom is naturally very weak (effectively zero over distances larger than the typical scale of molecular bonds), so for a best case scenario, imagine you replaced each carbon in the fullerene with a negatively charged particle. In this case, negative charges will be able to leak out through the center of each icosahedron face. So, if the antiproton were slightly displaced from the center (as its own thermal movements would do) it would be carried out by the electric field. Griffiths has a similar exercise for a charge inside a cube of point charges (ex. 3.2) which might be instructive for seeing how this works. So if you can't trap a classical negative charge with an icosahedral distribution of negative charges, you certainly won't be able to do it with neutral atoms whose electric field is much weaker—and if you can't do it for a classical negative charge, you certainly can't do it for a particle obeying quantum mechanics, where quantum tunneling allows even classically trapped particles to escape under the right circumstances.
 
Even worse: The antiproton would not have to leave the cage - once it sees the electric field of a nucleus (at a radius comparable to the electron wave functions), it gets attracted by it and the antiproton can annihilate with a nucleon there.

There are some ways to avoid Earnshaw's theorem, but I think you need neutral antihydrogen for those.
 
LastOneStanding said:
I'm assuming you mean "put inside a fullerene in such a way that it would stay there" (i.e. trap it). This isn't possible, which can be argued without even doing a quantum calculation: Earnshaw's theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earnshaw's_theorem) says that it is impossible for a charged particle to be held in a stable equilibrium by any configuration of charges—there is always a "leak" somewhere. The electric field of a neutral atom is naturally very weak (effectively zero over distances larger than the typical scale of molecular bonds), so for a best case scenario, imagine you replaced each carbon in the fullerene with a negatively charged particle. In this case, negative charges will be able to leak out through the center of each icosahedron face. So, if the antiproton were slightly displaced from the center (as its own thermal movements would do) it would be carried out by the electric field. Griffiths has a similar exercise for a charge inside a cube of point charges (ex. 3.2) which might be instructive for seeing how this works. So if you can't trap a classical negative charge with an icosahedral distribution of negative charges, you certainly won't be able to do it with neutral atoms whose electric field is much weaker—and if you can't do it for a classical negative charge, you certainly can't do it for a particle obeying quantum mechanics, where quantum tunneling allows even classically trapped particles to escape under the right circumstances.

I had actually heard of Earnshaw's theorem, but I can't say understand it very well. I thought that since the fullerene is an aromatic molecule it'd be more like a solid charge-shell, if of course the molecule has a negative charge.

What would happen if one instead tried to keep a charged particle between two charged plates, or in a torus?

Perhaps I should bat my head a bit more against it, though.

mfb said:
Even worse: The antiproton would not have to leave the cage - once it sees the electric field of a nucleus (at a radius comparable to the electron wave functions), it gets attracted by it and the antiproton can annihilate with a nucleon there.

There are some ways to avoid Earnshaw's theorem, but I think you need neutral antihydrogen for those.

How? Are there any other theoretical concepts for storing antimatter? The Brillouin limit is brutalizing my sci-fi fantasies.
 
vemvare said:
What would happen if one instead tried to keep a charged particle between two charged plates, or in a torus?
The important result of Earnshaw: Geometry does not matter. You cannot store a charged particle with electric fields. You can store diamagnetic materials and moving (spinning) ferromagnets, but an antiproton is neither.

How? Are there any other theoretical concepts for storing antimatter? The Brillouin limit is brutalizing my sci-fi fantasies.
Neutral antihydrogen is attracted my minima of the magnetic field strength, and those are possible. This is done at the ALPHA experiment at CERN.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
550
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K