Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

I had a thought about the nature of anti matter

  1. Mar 24, 2003 #1
    suppose that antimatter is not real in the real sense nut still is.what if when a nuclear decay or atom smasher happens and a positron is released,since positrons and electrons annihillate each other when they make contact,what if anti matter is actual the absense of energy not real energy in the real sense but still intereacts with matter like it is.what i mean is anti matter is created to represent the borrowed energy that was used in the process that created it rather than a by product.a positron is created to represent borrowed energy then goes on its way until it hits a electron,to reclaim it to keep balance in the universe,so its like -1+1=0 not two diffrent types of the same energy,but still interact as if they are!i say this as a thought on how antimatter and matter annihillate on contact.anyone wish to give there thoughts on this?
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2003
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 24, 2003 #2
  4. Mar 24, 2003 #3
    When an electron and positron annihilate, a photon is produced which has positive energy corresponding to at least twice the mass of an electron.
     
  5. Mar 25, 2003 #4

    FZ+

    User Avatar

    2 Photons for conservation of momentum.
    Antimatter is far from the abscence of energy. Antimatter has positive mass. Mass conservation is not a law in nuclear/quantum reactions. But energy/mass is.
     
  6. Mar 25, 2003 #5
    well all i was proposing was a senerio to describe what happens when matter and anti matter collides,not debate whether matter and anti matter energys being opposite where a factor,negative energy hitting positive energy cancel out not add to one another,or else they'd be two different energys with the same but opposite properties!so if anti matter represents energy borrowed by another nuclear process,and emits a positron,the positrons job is to claim the borrowed energy when it hits an electron somewhere else,so when anti energy and energy the two charges canel out,other wise they would hit eachother,as two real particles of the same family,and go on there mary way,but they dont,so this is my idea,and well i thought it sounded good,thats why you come up with things like this because you like the way they sound,even if its not not truth,you would oppose it as a truth,because it sound good,but you have to prove it anyway,so like i said it sound good,and if it wasnt the truth would not not like it to be anyway?
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2003
  7. Mar 25, 2003 #6
    A perfect description of the relationship between positrons and electrons.
     
  8. Mar 26, 2003 #7
    O.K. I don't think you'll agrue this one,what if when anti matter anti matter come in contact,like a positron and a electron,the annihillate one another because,just like positive and negative magnetic fields both at equal strength next to each other cancel eachother out,so the positron and electrons gravity by superstrings negates each other and spacetime unfolds and releases the superstrings to then go on and fold right back into particles!
     
  9. Mar 27, 2003 #8
    I think the original theory about positrons was that an electron "appeared" out of no where and left a positive "hole" behind it.

    Is that what your trying to say?
     
  10. Mar 27, 2003 #9
    No more like when normal matter has nuclear processes that change particle to different ones,like beta decay when a neutron decays or radioactivity,atom smashers where particles come in for millionths of a second then disappear.energy is'nt created of destroyed just changes form,is what i mean.anti matter is the absence of the energy the nuclear reaction took from the universe to add or subtract mass or energy from the new particles that formed in the process.so anti matter is anti energy.so the positrons job it to seek out a electron to take back the energy that was borrowed to keep a energy/matter balance in the universe!
     
  11. Apr 1, 2003 #10
    chosenones original proposition is not very far from the proposal I made except that anti-matter is real, it is the name that is misleading.
    Take Newton's graph for a force field without a nucleus and superimpose upon it a line representing the anti-force (i.e. reverse the force line). Divide the lines into equal sections and total the force on each line. You will find that because of the curves in the outer sections, there is more anti-force than force.
    I have shown how this structure can be used to construct particles that have either-
    a) more force than anti-force (particles)
    b) more anti-force than force (anti-particles)
    c) equal quantities of force and anti-force (neutral particles)
    Given that Quantum Theory holds that absolute nothing does not exist, because infinity has a minimum energy level; then the use of '0' in an equation on the origin of matter is questionable.
     
  12. Apr 7, 2003 #11
    If you read anything from my my posts in pf2 im hypothesising that spacetime is charged with energy from the matter that collapsed into a singularity that formed the universe.with a charged spacetime with the same energy as matter,gives it properties like gravity.so gravity attracts energy from spacetime,to give it energy to produce electromagnetism.thus matter produces a anti gravity field to repel against spacetime to keep it in motion.so i hypothesis on anti matter in the universe can be explained by the rotation of the universe.a particle spins and creates anti gravity to keep it in motion.a anti matter particle spins and produces a gravity field to attract energy so it can make magnetic field.so a universe in rotation is like a particle,its spin will create a anti gravity field,thus giving the universe the ability to have anti energy to make antimatter,but not enough,so normal matter is prodominent!
     
  13. Apr 8, 2003 #12
    The real question is, if pasta and antipasta came together, would the world be destroyed?
     
  14. Apr 8, 2003 #13
    This is false, you can create anti molecules and anti atoms, in fact anti-Hydorgen can be created and stored for many weeks. And you can measure the mass of anti-matter. And as we all know mass is energy, so your whole theory rests on a false postulate.
     
  15. Apr 9, 2003 #14
    what if matter was positive energy entrapped by anti energy.on the inside normal energy is the main mass of the particle.on the outside of the particle is a anti energy field repelling the energy in.unless theres a strong field on the outside of the particle,there not pressure pulling at them,that would be the only thing that would force the positive energy to escape the anti energy field around it.this way anti enegy and energy would be equal in the universe.both are used to make matter.vice versa,anti matter is anti energy,entrapped by energy around it.
     
  16. Apr 9, 2003 #15
    I'm sorry, but work out the equations for energy, by definition you cna't have anti-energy, all energy must be positive.
     
  17. Apr 14, 2003 #16
    well if particles were energy entrapped by anti energy it could explain how objects stay in motion indefinitly in space,and electromagnetic attraction and repulsion.if spacetime is positivly charge as I've repeativly say for months.when energy is absorbed by a impact or something the particle or mass takes on extra positive energy.when it takes on this energy the anti energy field around it wont hold,so some on the energy it took on is converted into more anti energy around the particle or mass,with the energy,thus the anti field increases repelling it more against spacetime,accelerating it faster.electromagnetic fields would be the exchange of photons which is anti energy itself,thats why it travels at light speed.the ontake of the photons anti energy to the outside shell of the mass would increase its anti energy field,thus repelling it against spacetime,sending it into motion.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: I had a thought about the nature of anti matter
  1. Anti matter (Replies: 6)

Loading...