B Does antimatter have positive or negative mass?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether antimatter possesses positive or negative mass. One viewpoint argues that antimatter, such as positrons, has positive mass because annihilation with electrons produces positive energy photons. However, the concept of black holes and Hawking radiation introduces complexity, suggesting that when particles are created from the vacuum, the behavior of antimatter could imply negative mass. Critics argue that the description of virtual particles in Hawking radiation is misleading, asserting that only one particle from a pair becomes real, and that virtual particles do not equate to actual antimatter. Ultimately, the debate remains unresolved, with strong opinions on both sides regarding the nature of antimatter's mass.
MikeL#
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Black holes suggest anti-matter has negative matter but is this true?
I think anti-matter has positive mass - e.g. a positron and electron annihilate giving off 0.5MeV + 0.5MeV photons where these photons have a huge positive energy. If the positron had negative mass then there would be no 1.0MeV of photon energy created.
But when 'explaining' evaporating black holes (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Overview)- matter [e.g. electron] and corresponding anti-matter [positron] are created out of 'the vacuum', If the electron is ejected, then the positron is absorbed in the black hole which loses mass. In this case the positron mass is negative.
So does anti-matter have positive or negative mass-energy or both?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
MikeL# said:
Black holes suggest anti-matter has negative matter
They do not.
MikeL# said:
I think anti-matter has positive mass
That is the expectation of basically everyone.
MikeL# said:
But when 'explaining' evaporating black holes (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Overview)- matter [e.g. electron] and corresponding anti-matter [positron] are created out of 'the vacuum'
That is a problematic pop-science description, not the actual physics.
If an electron escapes, there is no positron involved at all.
 
A virtual positron is not the same thing as a positron. Hawking radiation comes from virtual particle pairs, of which only one of which becomes a real particle.
 
newjerseyrunner said:
Hawking radiation comes from virtual particle pairs
It does not. If you check the actual calculations, there is no virtual particle pair involved.
 
  • Like
Likes newjerseyrunner
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top