Detecting Anti-Matter: Can We Tell?

  • Thread starter kumar1988
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Anti-matter
In summary: The second cosmological paradox is the dark matter problem. According to the theory of the expansion of the universe, the amount of matter in the universe should be decreasing over time. However, observations suggest that the amount of visible matter is actually increasing. This discrepancy is known as the dark matter problem.Supporters argue that antigravity technology could solve this problem by creating a form of "exotic" matter that would explain the discrepancy.
  • #1
kumar1988
1
0
Suppose a galaxy out there was made entirely of anti-matter and never comes in contact with normal matter would be able to tell that it is made of anti-matter and not matter? If yes how would we do it?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
kumar1988 said:
Suppose a galaxy out there was made entirely of anti-matter and never comes in contact with normal matter would be able to tell that it is made of anti-matter and not matter? If yes how would we do it?

To the best of my knowledge there would be no observable difference.
 
  • #3
It is not impossible, but highly unlikely galaxies composed entirely of antimatter exist in the known universe. Intergalactic space is largely occupied by vast clouds of ordinary matter particles. Matter / antimatter collisions would result in very high energy gamma rays. These are not observed. See
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/antimatter_sun_030929.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
Chronos, there are limits to this. At sufficient distances, and we're talking at least tens of megaparsecs, this annihilation radiation is lost in the diffuse gamma ray and x-ray background. However, we also have some searches for anti-helium nuclei (produced in anti-stars) in cosmic rays to attempt to push this threshold out.
 
  • #5
Vanadium 50 said:
Chronos, there are limits to this. At sufficient distances, and we're talking at least tens of megaparsecs, this annihilation radiation is lost in the diffuse gamma ray and x-ray background. However, we also have some searches for anti-helium nuclei (produced in anti-stars) in cosmic rays to attempt to push this threshold out.

Is there anything distinctive about anti-helium that would make it observationally different from normal helium? It seems the crux of the OP's question is whether there's any detectable difference between matter and antimatter structures barring annihilation events.
 
  • #6
Anti-helium nuclei carry -2 units of charge rather than +2.
 
  • #7
Clearly.

But as I understand it, all atomic transitions and interactions with other antimatter (antimatter-antimatter interactions) appear exactly identical to those produced by interactions between normal matter (matter-matter interactions). So an antimatter galaxy would look to us exactly the same as a matter galaxy.
 
  • #8
Nabeshin said:
So an antimatter galaxy would look to us exactly the same as a matter galaxy.

Except that the cosmic rays coming from it would contain anti-nuclei. Which is what people have been and are continuing to search for.
 
  • #9
Ah, I see what you were talking about now. Okay.
 
  • #10
Vanadium 50 said:
Chronos, there are limits to this. At sufficient distances, and we're talking at least tens of megaparsecs, this annihilation radiation is lost in the diffuse gamma ray and x-ray background. However, we also have some searches for anti-helium nuclei (produced in anti-stars) in cosmic rays to attempt to push this threshold out.
Agreed, diffuse annihilations would be lost in the background noise at sufficiently large distance. But even an asteroid size intruder comprosed of ordinary matter would result in a detectable emission. Furthermore, if entire galaxies of antimatter do exist, rogue antimatter bodies [stars, asteroids, gas clouds, etc.] must also surely exist. The characteristic high energy gamma bursts that would result from collisions with their counterparts have not been observed.
 
  • #11
a star of antimatter would emmit lots of gama rays. but I guess it would look the same.
 
  • #12
A photon is its own antiparticle, so it's logical to think that a star and an antistar would be observationally indistinguishable. But I read somewhere (can't remember where) that antistars may be distinguishable from anti-stars by the polarization of their photons. So the polarization of gamma-rays emitted from supernovae would be somehow different than from anti-supernovae. Can anybody confirm if this is true?
 
  • #13
Collisions between antimatter / matter bodies is the only thing detectable. In a 50-50 universe, it would be blatantly obvious. It would also be obvious down to about 99.999%. Like most of science, nothng can be ruled out, merely ruled highly improbable.
 
  • #14
Maria76 said:
A photon is its own antiparticle, so it's logical to think that a star and an antistar would be observationally indistinguishable. But I read somewhere (can't remember where) that antistars may be distinguishable from anti-stars by the polarization of their photons. So the polarization of gamma-rays emitted from supernovae would be somehow different than from anti-supernovae. Can anybody confirm if this is true?

the solar winds would also be somewhat deadlier, I guess antimatter is not the friend of life.
 
  • #15
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_interaction_of_antimatter#Motivations_for_antigravity

4 Motivations for antigravity
Supporters argue that antimatter antigravity would explain several important physics questions. Besides the already mentioned prediction of CP violation, they argue that it explains two cosmological paradoxes. The first is the apparent local lack of antimatter: by theory antimatter and matter would repel each other gravitationally, forming separate matter and antimatter galaxies. These galaxies would also tend to repel one another, thereby preventing possible collisions and annihilations.

This same galactic repulsion is also endorsed as a potential explanation to the observation of a flatly accelerating universe.
 
  • #16
  • #18
  • #19
The observed universe is matter, not antimatter. So no.. But..

One theory that is funny to think about, but in some ways I don't agree with basically states the universe was 50.00001% matter and 49.99999% anti-matter, over time they all destroyed each other and what is left is 0.00001% of the original matter. :) It was an early way of explaining the observed vs theory mass of the universe difference in the Big Bang. Now we just make up something and call it 'Dark Matter' and say "Don't bother testing for it, you can't." IMHO not very scientific, but no other explanations are currently forthcoming.

Like I said, funny to think about, and would make an interesting Sci-Fi book, but that is about all.
 
  • #20
This is PhysicsForums, though, not BadSciFiForums.

First, if the universe were as you proposed, it would be photon-dominated. It's not - by many orders of magnitude. In science, observations are important.

Second, you state 'Now we just make up something and call it 'Dark Matter' and say "Don't bother testing for it, you can't."'

Who is "we"?
 
  • #21
Vanadium 50 said:
The fact that the photon, which is its own antiparticle, falls at the same rate as ordinary matter conclusively excludes the possibility of antimatter being repelled from ordinary matter by gravity.
unless, or course, gravitational time dilation (and shortening of measuring rods) is proportional to the absolute value of the strength of the field rather than to its potential. but that is another thread.
 
Last edited:
  • #22
granpa said:
unless, or course, gravitational time dilation (and shortening of measuring rods) is proportional to the absolute value of the strength of the field rather than to its potential. but that is another thread.

It's also nonsense.

It's bad enough to hijack the thread - does it have to be with nonsense?
 
  • #23
Brantoc said:
The observed universe is matter, not antimatter. So no.. But..

One theory that is funny to think about, but in some ways I don't agree with basically states the universe was 50.00001% matter and 49.99999% anti-matter, over time they all destroyed each other and what is left is 0.00001% of the original matter. :) It was an early way of explaining the observed vs theory mass of the universe difference in the Big Bang. Now we just make up something and call it 'Dark Matter' and say "Don't bother testing for it, you can't." IMHO not very scientific, but no other explanations are currently forthcoming.

Like I said, funny to think about, and would make an interesting Sci-Fi book, but that is about all.


you are mixing two things, you are mixing the baryon asymmetry with the missing luminous matter problems. Those are two, as far as we know, unrelated problems to be solved. So before answering questions here, you should perhaps ask yourself what your level of understanding is. Have you done graduate courses in cosmology for instance?

I have seen many prospects for DM candidates, SUSY particles are among the most popular ones. Heard of the neutralino?
 

1. What is anti-matter and how is it different from regular matter?

Anti-matter is the opposite of regular matter, with the same mass but opposite charge. For example, an anti-electron (or positron) has the same mass as an electron but a positive charge instead of a negative charge.

2. How do we detect anti-matter?

Anti-matter can be detected through its interactions with regular matter. When anti-matter and matter come into contact, they annihilate each other, producing high-energy particles that can be detected by specialized instruments.

3. Can anti-matter be created artificially?

Yes, anti-matter can be created artificially in particle accelerators. However, it is very difficult and expensive to produce and store anti-matter, so only small amounts have been created in laboratory settings.

4. Is anti-matter present in our universe?

Yes, anti-matter is present in our universe, but it is relatively rare compared to regular matter. This is because during the Big Bang, matter and anti-matter were created in equal amounts, but most of the anti-matter annihilated with matter, leaving behind the matter we see today.

5. Can we use anti-matter for energy production?

While anti-matter has the potential to produce a large amount of energy through its annihilation with matter, it is currently not feasible to use it as an energy source due to the difficulty and cost of creating and storing it. Additionally, the process of creating and harnessing anti-matter would also produce large amounts of radiation, making it unsafe for practical use.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
630
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
28
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
24
Views
8K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top