What is the True Nature of Antimatter?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bodykey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Antimatter Cern
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of antimatter, exploring its properties, creation, and the possibility of transforming matter into antimatter. Participants engage in conceptual clarifications and technical explanations, touching on the fundamental aspects of particle physics and the interactions between particles and antiparticles.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe antimatter as the "opposite" of matter, noting that particles like electrons and protons have corresponding antiparticles.
  • There is confusion regarding the concept of "flipping" the charge of particles to create antimatter, with some questioning whether this is feasible.
  • One participant argues that charge conservation prevents a particle from simply changing its charge, while another suggests that certain particle oscillations can result in transformations between particles and antiparticles under specific conditions.
  • Another participant introduces the idea of underlying fields, likening the generation of particles and antiparticles to a conceptual analogy involving "3-ness".
  • There is a discussion about the necessity of particle exchanges (like lepton exchanges) for transformations, with some participants debating the terminology used to describe these processes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the possibility of transforming matter into antimatter and the mechanisms involved. There is no consensus on whether charge flipping is a valid concept, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of particle interactions and transformations.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the complexity of particle interactions and the need for precise definitions of terms like "flipping" and "oscillation". The discussion also reflects varying levels of understanding and assumptions about particle physics.

bodykey
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
What is Antimatter -- really?

I've been trying to get a grasp of what they ideal of antimatter is exactly. I do understand that it's the 'opposite' of 'matter'. Electronics, Neutrons, Protons, all have an 'opposite', and I've seen where the folks over at CERN have been smashing atoms together to get an exploding result hopefully creating antimatter. I understand that when one touches the other, they annhiallate. But what confuses me is...if it's about their charge then, and please excuse me if this thought is just stupid, I'm flying by the seat of my pants on this one...wouldn't there be a way to just 'flip' the charge?

I even feel my last statement isn't exactly up to par, but that's why I'm asking the question...what is antimatter?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
and I've seen where the folks over at CERN have been smashing atoms together to get an exploding result hopefully creating antimatter.
Hopefully? They have been doing this successfully for over 50 years now.

But what confuses me is...if it's about their charge then, and please excuse me if this thought is just stupid, I'm flying by the seat of my pants on this one...wouldn't there be a way to just 'flip' the charge?
What do you mean with "flip" the charge?
I guess you mean the electric charge. This is conserved - no particle can just change its charge.
 
hi bodykey! :smile:
bodykey said:
… I understand that when one touches the other, they annhiallate. But what confuses me is...if it's about their charge then, and please excuse me if this thought is just stupid, I'm flying by the seat of my pants on this one...wouldn't there be a way to just 'flip' the charge?

antimatter is pretty much as you have described it

i don't see any point in looking for some reason for it

if by "flipping" you mean like the way an electron in an atom can flip from one energy level to another, the answer is no:

the transformation required (to turn a particle into its antiparticle) would involve turning space (or time) inside-out
 
I don't know to be honest. If you take an individual particle, then no you can't as far as we know. But if you look into neutral meson and baryon(KKbar DDbar BBbar BsBsbar n-nbar etc) oscillations, you can have a pair of particles : Q q~ (*where ~ means anti particle *)and have:
Q q~ > Q~ q

So each flipped from particle to anti-particle and vice versa, as a pair. This happens through an echange of another particle or two, but it can happen nonetheless (its experimentally observed).

So if you ask "Can I flip this electron to a positron?" I can answer with "Yes, so long as you flip this positron over here to an electron, through some long range photon exchange, at the same time."
 
Hepth said:
So if you ask "Can I flip this electron to a positron?" I can answer with "Yes, so long as you flip this positron over here to an electron, through some long range photon exchange, at the same time."
A photon exchange won't work. You will need a lepton exchange, but then I don't think you can call it "flipped" any more. The particles just changed their position.
 
I quite like the minutephysics analogy with "3-ness", i.e. that just as you can call upon the universal spirit of "3-ness" to produce both 3s and -3s, so too can electrons and anti-electrons be summoned from the same underlying electron field.



It's not quite that simple of course, but thinking in terms of the underlying fields is the place to start I think.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hepth said:
I don't know to be honest. If you take an individual particle, then no you can't as far as we know. But if you look into neutral meson and baryon(KKbar DDbar BBbar BsBsbar n-nbar etc) oscillations, you can have a pair of particles : Q q~ (*where ~ means anti particle *)and have:
Q q~ > Q~ q

So each flipped from particle to anti-particle and vice versa, as a pair. This happens through an echange of another particle or two, but it can happen nonetheless (its experimentally observed).
K-Kbar oscillations involve just an individual particle, not a pair of particles. The eigenstates K-long and K-short are linear superpositions of K and K-bar.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 85 ·
3
Replies
85
Views
13K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K