Energy from matter-matter annihilation (relation to Dark Matter)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the theoretical possibility of generating energy from matter-matter annihilation, particularly in relation to dark matter and its potential as an energy source. Participants explore concepts related to particle physics, including the properties of dark matter candidates like WIMPs and neutralinos, and the feasibility of such annihilation processes compared to matter-antimatter annihilation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether energy can be produced from matter-matter annihilation without the use of antimatter, suggesting dark matter neutralinos as potential candidates.
  • Another participant challenges the notion of matter-matter annihilation, emphasizing the need for empirical evidence and distinguishing it from processes observed at the LHC.
  • A participant cites a paper discussing dark matter WIMPs as an example, but another cautions against extrapolating this into a viable energy source without further verification.
  • Concerns are raised about the practicality of capturing dark matter particles and achieving sufficient energy output for economic viability.
  • One participant notes that even if dark matter could be converted into energy, the quantity available would be insufficient for significant energy production.
  • Questions are posed about the existence of other particles that might allow for matter-matter annihilation and whether properties could be altered to facilitate such processes.
  • Participants discuss the transformation of fermions into bosons, with references to particle interactions like electron-positron annihilation.
  • There is mention of pair production as a process where energy is converted into matter, although this is acknowledged as a supposition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some supporting the exploration of dark matter as an energy source while others remain skeptical about the feasibility and evidence for matter-matter annihilation. The discussion reflects multiple competing perspectives and remains unresolved on several key points.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of empirical evidence for matter-matter annihilation, dependence on theoretical models of dark matter, and unresolved questions regarding the practicality of energy extraction from such processes.

Schreiberdk
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
Hi PF

Would it be theoretically possible to create energy (for example photons) from matter-matter annihilation (not using anti-matter), so that we could create a powerplant based on this, without the need of producing anti-matter for the energy production?

I know that Dark Matter WIMP's are good candidates for such a powerplant, since the neutralino is it's own anti-particle. Now if our universe is dominated by Dark Matter, and the neutralino is it's own anti-particle, how come all the Dark Matter just does not annihilate on its self, and cease into existence? If this is not that case (as observation states it is, since we observe a candidate for Dark Matter), then this would not be a good source for the powerplant, so what other possibilities does one have?

\Schreiber
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you show me an example of a matter-matter annihilation, both the physics supporting such a phenomenon, and experiments that indicate that this might be possible? Note that what is done at the LHC (proton-proton collision) has NEVER been referred to as matter-matter annihilation. The physics is different than what we refer to when we deal with matter-antimatter annihilation. So this collision is not an example.

Zz.
 
Er... OK. If this is your example of "matter-matter" annihilation, then maybe you need to wait a while for this to be established, both in terms of the physics AND empirical verification, before extrapolating it into an energy source. And this is BEFORE one actually discusses the feasibility of (i) trying to capture such particles and direct them to collider and (ii) trying to get enough luminosity to actually make for a more than breakeven energy production (i.e. the economics).

Zz.
 
Well I was hoping that someone might know another example of this phenomenom (other than in Dark Matter) :)
 
Even if you could magically turn DM into energy, there's not enough of it around to make a difference. If you could collect ALL the DM in the Earth, and turn it into electricity, it would power the world for maybe a week.
 
But does any other particles have properties that would allow for matter-matter annihilation (supersymmetric, ordinary or hypothesized particles)? Or could they be sort of "stripped" for all properties, so that only the energy would be left, and annihilation then would be possible?
 
Anything else you would have to make, and you could not get any more energy out than the energy you put in.
 
Can fermions be transformed into bosoms?
 
  • #10
Everybody understands deriving energy from matter via E=mc2. Has matter ever been created out energy by Man? I've often thought this is how a singularity condenses into matter, explaining the BB. I do understand this is a supposition, though.
 
  • #11
Dropout said:
Can fermions be transformed into bosoms?
Assuming you meant "...bosons" (picks self up off floor after riotous laughter!) - yes, this happens whenever an electron and positron annihilate into a pair of gamma rays (photons).
 
  • #12
Burnerjack said:
Everybody understands deriving energy from matter via E=mc2. Has matter ever been created out energy by Man? I've often thought this is how a singularity condenses into matter, explaining the BB. I do understand this is a supposition, though.

Please look up, for example, pair production.

Zz.
 
  • #13
Dropout said:
Can fermions be transformed into bosoms?

Bosoms are made of fermions (as far as non-virtual constituents goes).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K