What Happens to Neutrons in Matter/Anti-Matter Annihilation?

[Ryan_m_b]

Go take that dribble else where.

I am well within the boundaries of the rules of this site, which quite clearly states that people may put forward ideas, if you can show reason to disprove my hypothesis go ahead and do so.

but you can't just say my argument is flawed when you your self can't prove that is impossible to annihilate 100% of a ball of matter and a ball of anti-matter.

Quoting from the rules

It is against our Posting Guidelines to discuss, in most of the PF forums or in blogs, new or non-mainstream theories or ideas that have not been published in professional peer-reviewed journals or are not part of current professional mainstream scientific discussion. Personal theories/Independent Research may be submitted to our Independent Research Forum, provided they meet our Independent Research Guidelines; Personal theories posted elsewhere will be deleted

You cannot put forward an idea that conflicts with current mainstream understanding and then say that you are in the right because no one has disproved you.

Read the Drakkith's post again, It's saying what I have clearly failed to make you realize in the rest of this thread. You have some misconceptions which is fine except you are sticking to them so that you can keep your idea of artificial SciFi gravity.

gravity is thought to be as strong as the electro magnetic force by some scientists, however we experience it as a weaker force due to extra dimensions that gravity splits it's self upon.
so if we can get gravity to act i 1 dimension then we could make the field far stronger then normal, meaning the masses of the matter and anti-matter annihilation process would not need to equal half an Earth each to create an Earth like gravity.

There is no firm evidence to explain the strength of gravity. Regardless what you are talking about is pure speculation, the idea of forcing gravity in one direction and strengthening it has no basis in mainstream understanding. Yet again though why would you need Am/M? If you had a magic machine that can strengthen and direct gravity then why wouldn't you just use mass rather than Am/M?

You really should start providing some references to peer-reviewed sources rather than just continue to spout pseudo-scientific ideas. Otherwise this thread will probably be locked.

 

[Danger]

Forgive me if I repeat something that has already been stated; I had to quit reading about half-way through the second page.
It seems that someone has no idea that a "black hole" is not a physical object. It is a "hole" in the local spacetime continuum caused by a gravitational field that is too condensed for our universe to contain. Once something passes the event horizon, there's no going back. The only two ways to extract energy from the BH are through a "slingshot" manoeuvre as can be done with any large mass, or to exploit the ergosphere of the BH. BH's have several different relevant radii associated with them. Static limit, ergosphere, photon shell, event horizon, singularity...
They are not something to be easily exploited, and the matter or antimatter discussion in reference to a BH is totally irrelevant. If something approaches too closely, it's done for. Keep in mind, though, that the overall strength of the gravitational field is the same that it would be for any other object of that mass.
It's not physically possible for this particular event to occur, but I'm going to use it as an example. If our sun were to suddenly become a black hole without any of the attendant problems, the orbits of the various planets and moons would not be disrupted in any way. The gravity will be the same as it was with the original sun, but more concentrated.
Jeez, but I wish that Space Tiger was still around to deal with this stuff...

 

[Geezer]

Here's the thing, there is no such thing as pure energy, it comes in the forms kinetic, heat, sound and light.

Really? Where did you get that information?

Classically, we think of energy as "transforming" from one type to another (e.g. kinetic energy converted to heat energy); it's nothing more than acknowledging energy conservation in the classical regime.

However, energy is a tad different in the quantum regime. For example, there's such a thing as vacuum energy--which is quite cool, by the way. It's "pure" energy in the sense that it's NOT kinetic, NOT heat, NOT sound, and NOT light energy (being made of virtual particles...it's not really anything except energy).

 

[Danger]

(being made of virtual particles...it's not really anything except energy).

But since virtual particles don't actually exist, would that not constitute virtual energy which work can not be extracted from?

 

[Geezer]

But since virtual particle don't actually exist, would that not constitute virtual energy which work can not be extracted from?

Two Casimir plates being squooshed together...virtual work?

ETA: I've read this thread two times now and I cannot understand the OP's logic one bit. It's like some sort of gibberish. I keep hearing the words "black holes", "gravity," "anti-matter," but they're never strung together in any way that makes any sense to me. Am I really the only one who doesn't understand what's going on in this thread?

 

[Danger]

Am I really the only one who doesn't understand what's going on in this thread?

Not at all. I got involved only because of the absurdity of what I was reading in reference to the very subjects that you mentioned. I know a reasonable bit about black holes and antimatter, and I know that gravitons are merely hypothetical. The attempt to make a Pangalacticgarbleblaster out of them just struck me as too weird to ignore.
(And I am embarrassed to admit that I don't know anything about the Casimir effect. I've heard of it, of course, but never investigated it.) Isn't that the base concept of the ZPM's in the "Stargate SG1" and "Stargate Atlantis" shows?
That's not a put-down, just a point of curiosity. I honestly don't know whether or not that is a possible resource.

 

[hakon]

for a quick recap on the things being discussed, since some have trouble following.

the first question asked was about what would happen in the event of 1 black hole being combined with 1 black hole which originated from the collapsed star made of anti-matter, both being of equal proportion, and assuming the matter and anti-matter in each singularity is still able to work while under the immense pressure.

the answer concluded was the black holes size would double from the 2 into 1, however from the outside no change would occur, on the inside it would be nothing but photons, however the amount of photons created from 2 such objects would not be enough to sustain the same gravity, hence there must be extra gravity created. wether these are just a field, force or a hypothetical particle called a graviton is unknown, but gravity must be made in some form.

the second question was: if you can force the anti-matter and matter to completely act with each other through electro-magnetics or whatever you like other then a black hole could the complete reaction of the 2 charge apposed materials then create photons and gravity.

no one wanted to answer the question or provide any sort of rational reason on what would occur so i simply went on without them.

i then suggested, if gravity is left over maybe we could use it through some yet unknown application of physics.


and as this is a question waiting for people to provide their physics knowledge as to why or why not a anti-matter and matter combination would or would not create gravity, this topic is following the forum rules under quote "There are many open questions in physics, and we welcome discussion on those subjects provided the discussion remains intellectually sound."
Remember there is no such thing as a stupid question except 1 which is not asked, i am asking about in depth knowledge in regards to a matter anti-matter combination, if you know the answer please fill me in.

and as for the person who said there are only 2 ways to exploit a black hole, can you not also use it as a battery in the sense of using the hawking radiation it gives off as a power source. unless that's what you meant by ergosphere.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

on the inside it would be nothing but photons, however the amount of photons created from 2 such objects would not be enough to sustain the same gravity, hence there must be extra gravity created. wether these are just a field, force or a hypothetical particle called a graviton is unknown, but gravity must be made in some form.

Why do you assume that a black hole made from a collapsed star will contain anything other than a singularity on the inside? Moreover why would an equal amount of photons not have the same gravity as the mass that annihilated to make it?

the second question was: if you can force the anti-matter and matter to completely act with each other through electro-magnetics or whatever you like other then a black hole could the complete reaction of the 2 charge apposed materials then create photons and gravity.

no one wanted to answer the question or provide any sort of rational reason on what would occur so i simply went on without them.

i then suggested, if gravity is left over maybe we could use it through some yet unknown application of physics.

A few fallacies here, first as has been adequately explained it would be difficult to completely annihilate Am/M because the resultant blast would knock some of the as yet annihilated Am/M away.

The next fallacy you make is to presume that your previous proposal (that the gravity well of the resultant photons would not equal that of the previous mass) is true. This leads you to erroneously claim that there is something missing that is creating gravity and then suggest that we could use this unknown to create directional and hyper-powered gravity for artificial gravity purposes.

this topic is following the forum rules under quote "There are many open questions in physics, and we welcome discussion on those subjects provided the discussion remains intellectually sound."
Remember there is no such thing as a stupid question except 1 which is not asked, i am asking about in depth knowledge in regards to a matter anti-matter combination, if you know the answer please fill me in.

Your arguments are not intellectually sound; You claim that photons created from the annihilation of matter do not account for strength of the gravity field created. Yet you provide no evidence from this other than repeating yourself. You state,

the real question is: is there gravity left over or is the gravity=photons, experiments suggest that 2 photons are produced from a electron and proton combining, but that would mean the gravity is less then the original product, so it is only logical to think extra gravity must be produced.

but this just shows your misunderstanding. For a start the antiparticle to a proton is an antiproton and the antiparticle of the electron is a positron.. Secondly you claim that the photons cannot account for the gravity yet do not explain why.

It is also not intellectually sound to claim that we have a gap in our knowledge and then fill that gap with claims regarding strengthening and directing gravity.

 

[chingel]

however the amount of photons created from 2 such objects would not be enough to sustain the same gravity, hence there must be extra gravity created. wether these are just a field, force or a hypothetical particle called a graviton is unknown, but gravity must be made in some form.

I have the same question, why do you say that the photons would not have the same amount of gravity as the black hole had before? How did you come to that conclusion? Everything is stuck in the black hole and assuming they can still react to make photons in the singularity, none of it gets lost.

 

[hakon]

i come to this conclusion based on we know that up to 2 photons are made when an electron and a positron are annihilated together, 2 photons do not have the same mass as 1 electron and a positron, atleast from figures i have seen.

 

[hakon]

I found which of the theories for black holes is the 1 i am basing this on. It is:
A singularity in solutions of the Einstein field equations
and it is one of two things:
a situation where matter is forced to be compressed to a point (a space-like singularity)
a situation where certain light rays come from a region with infinite curvature (time-like singularity)

so effectively from my understanding putting 2 black holes (1 of matter origination and 1 of anti-matter origination) together, the black hole would go from a space like singularity to a time like singularity.

According to Penrose however: The energy condition required for the black-hole singularity theorem is weak: it says that light rays are always focused together by gravity, never drawn apart, and this holds whenever the energy of matter is non-negative.

So here we have 1 black hole with light focused together and 1 where light is spread apart, this would leave us with a black hole consisting of photons with a charge neither negative or positive. leaving us with a result that would not make sense.

(of course both singularities would have to be the exact mass and composition)

 

[Geezer]

i come to this conclusion based on we know that up to 2 photons are made when an electron and a positron are annihilated together, 2 photons do not have the same mass as 1 electron and a positron, atleast from figures i have seen.

A photon may not have mass, but it still has energy and can curve spacetime. No need to have "extra gravity created" whatever you mean by that.

 

[Geezer]

So here we have 1 black hole with light focused together and 1 where light is spread apart, this would leave us with a black hole consisting of photons with a charge neither negative or positive.

Why would one black hole focus light and the other diverge light? Anti-matter behaves just like ordinary matter, even in a gravitational field. Both such black holes are going to "focus" light.

 

[hakon]

so your suggestion is that the photons left behind create a singularity comprised of a time warp where t=infinity rather then a singularity of gravity G=infinity.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

so your suggestion is that the photons left behind create a singularity comprised of a time warp where t=infinity rather then a singularity of gravity G=infinity.

I can't even make sense of this. If the original mass is dense enough to form a black hole then it will. If you annihilate Am/M then you may create a black hole from the blast concentrating photons into one dense area but I don't see what you mean by photons left behind, time warp, and the rest.

The question was what evidence do you have to support the claim that the photons produced from annihilation have less of a gravitational effect than the original mass?

 

[Geezer]

I can't even make sense of this.

Don't even try. I've read through this thread a few times and it makes less sense to me now than it did before. Perhaps if I were tripping acid or something, I'd "get" it...

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Don't even try. I've read through this thread a few times and it makes less sense to me now than it did before. Perhaps if I were tripping acid or something, I'd "get" it...

I'm confused as to who and what some posts are replying to. Like you I've re-read a few times to see if I'm not getting anything but enlightenment isn't coming

 

[Geezer]

I'm confused as to who and what some posts are replying to. Like you I've re-read a few times to see if I'm not getting anything but enlightenment isn't coming

Yup and yup.

 

[hakon]

Using a Positronium as my example.
the mass of 1 electron is 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg
the mass of 1 positron is 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg

The two particles annihilate each other to produce two gamma ray photons after an average lifetime of 142 ns in vacuum.

leaving behind 2 photons, whose mass is so near 0 we say they have <1×10−18 eV

1 MeV: is about twice the rest mass-energy of an electron.

hence what is produced does not equal what we started with, 1+1 is not equaling 2, so where does the mass go?

 

[Geezer]

hence what is produced does not equal what we started with, 1+1 is not equaling 2, so where does the mass go?

The destroyed mass was converted to energy à la Einstein. And since energy can cause spacetime to bend, the black hole is still there.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Using a Positronium as my example.
the mass of 1 electron is 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg
the mass of 1 positron is 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg

The two particles annihilate each other to produce two gamma ray photons after an average lifetime of 142 ns in vacuum.

leaving behind 2 photons, whose mass is so near 0 we say they have <1×10−18 eV

1 MeV: is about twice the rest mass-energy of an electron.

hence what is produced does not equal what we started with, 1+1 is not equaling 2, so where does the mass go?

The mass of a photon is not "near 0", it is 0. Photons are massless. The contribution to mass comes from the energy of a photon, this follows e=mc2.

 

[Geezer]

This follows e=mc2.

That ^^ might be a little too much math for this guy to handle.

 

[Danger]

Hakon, I have no idea of your age or educational background, so I have to flat-out ask you—do you actually know what a "singularity" is? It does not seem so from your posting.

 

[hakon]

a singularity is a place where the gravity field is infinite.
which is in normal cases created by a blue star going super nova and then collapsing in on it's self, however can be created hypothetically on a smaller scale.

one thing I'm not sure on, does the speed of light remain a constant inside a singularity, or is that unknown at this stage?

 

[chingel]

Using a Positronium as my example.
the mass of 1 electron is 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg
the mass of 1 positron is 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg

The two particles annihilate each other to produce two gamma ray photons after an average lifetime of 142 ns in vacuum.

leaving behind 2 photons, whose mass is so near 0 we say they have <1×10−18 eV

1 MeV: is about twice the rest mass-energy of an electron.

hence what is produced does not equal what we started with, 1+1 is not equaling 2, so where does the mass go?

To my understanding, relativistic mass is the total energy divided by c^2. If you annihilate antimatter with matter, you create energy E = mc^2 and since energy itself has mass, and energy and mass are equivelent by the formula E = mc^2, the relativistic mass of the photons is E/c^2 = mc^2/c^2 = m; meaning the photons you end up with and the particles you started with have the same mass. I don't know where you took the mass of the photons, it depends on the energy they have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence

 

[Geezer]

a singularity is a place where the gravity field is infinite.

That's technically incorrect. A singularity is a mathematical anomaly due to the coordinate system chosen. It's not a physical entity. To describe the physics inside a singularity, you'll have to make some sort of coordinate transformation.

 

[Danger]

It's not a physical entity.

That's why it's so damed weird: it isn't a physical entity, but its existence and effect upon neighbouring matter are very real. The easiest way that I can think of it is that it is a 5-dimensional (or more) object that 4-dimensional brains are trying to understand.

And Hakon, I'm sorry that I missed this before—the ergosphere is indeed the region of a BH that is responsible for Hawking radiation (hair), but it isn't restricted to pure energy interactions. If you drop a load of garbage from your hypothetical ship within that region, you can absorb more energy than you give away, for a net gain that can be huge.

 

[Drakkith]

Using a Positronium as my example.
the mass of 1 electron is 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg
the mass of 1 positron is 9.10938291(40)×10−31 kg

The two particles annihilate each other to produce two gamma ray photons after an average lifetime of 142 ns in vacuum.

leaving behind 2 photons, whose mass is so near 0 we say they have <1×10−18 eV

1 MeV: is about twice the rest mass-energy of an electron.

hence what is produced does not equal what we started with, 1+1 is not equaling 2, so where does the mass go?

In a low energy collision, the rest mass of the electron and positron PLUS any kinetic energy is converted into momentum distributed evently between two photons. Each photon has about 511 KeV of momentum with more depending on the amount of kinetic energy each particle had before annihilation.