There is no evidence that antimatter has antigravity properties. Why do you need a large amount to take measurements?
matter and anti matter
- Thread starter Kaziarl
- Start date
I doubt that's 100% true, since we have successfully generated a very TINY amount of antimatter already. I doubt, based upon what we know of this class of materials, that it reacts differently to gravity than "normal" matter does.
Then again, if the guys who created that small amount noticed it tending to float in it's vacuum bottle, well...
Because gravity is such an insanely weak force that it's difficult of not impossible to measure for a group of atoms barely large enough to make a single molecule.
Alpha, you do realize that the components of anti-matter we're talking about do indeed have mass and therefore gravity as related to mass? This isn't the 1950s pulp view of 'anti-matter' where everyone wear's beards and if you spray-paint with anti-matter all the letters appear backward...
Are you certain? Or would that be anti-mass?
I'm not subscribing to the 50s view that would have the antimatter version of you be female and/or photo-negative. But we don't know enough about the mechanism of gravity (gravitons?) to know if the same thing that causes magnetic polarity to be reversed in antimatter would reverse gravitation (or produce anti-gravitons?), as well.
The detection of anti-matter partially relied on nano-sensitive measurments of mass within a vacuum. The properties of anti-matter really do (apparently, and again, this is overall very novice-level knowledge for science yet) seem to largely be the same as regular matter.
Of course, you're the universal genius expert on everything, I naturally bow to your superior intellect and dashing good looks.
Antimatter does not have anti-mass, AFAIK. I recall experiments to be perform to see how antimatter particles are affected by gravity.
Someone posted an excellent Wikipedia link above that addresses this.
There is clearly no consensus as to how how anti-matter interacts with the gravitational force.
Of course, you're the universal genius expert on everything, I naturally bow to your superior intellect and dashing good looks.
At least now we're getting somewhere!
I don't have to know everything, I just have to be willing to find out. The anti-matter experiments were interesting bylines on www.instapundit.com some time ago, so the links were relatively easy to find.
Of course, you're the universal genius expert on everything, I naturally bow to your superior intellect and dashing good looks.
At least now we're getting somewhere!
I don't have to know everything, I just have to be willing to find out.
Right, because the only reason anyone could POSSIBLY disagree with you is because they don't know any better.
For the record, I've spent a considerable amount of time researching this very subject in the not too recent past. My conclusion is that there is NO consensus on the gravitational properties of antimatter. The most definitive statement I got was a family friend at the UIC science department who told me it is "probably" attractive to normal matter, but that there are some cosmological theories that make alot more sense if it isn't.
You know, Alpha, you've come in here and have been wrong so many times, and have constantly resorted to personal attacks and vitriol when anyone disagrees with you on anything, that I honestly don't think you have anything to add to any conversation that you're in.
There are people on this board who really are scientists. There are people here who did work on these shows and movies (and still do, in some cases). In the face of this, you want to 'claim expertise' by pulling shit out of your ass and throwing a hissy fit the moment that someone doesn't fully follow you.
On the other hand, my counter to that is to basically say 'try Google or ask around if you're not sure' - which is what I do myself when questions are raised. It's not that hard to do, particularly with the insane amount of resources available at a click's notice.
Honestly, and please take this to heart, it seems like you're confusing having a bigger dick with being one.
There are people on this board who really are scientists. There are people here who did work on these shows and movies (and still do, in some cases). In the face of this, you want to 'claim expertise' by pulling shit out of your ass and throwing a hissy fit the moment that someone doesn't fully follow you.
On the other hand, my counter to that is to basically say 'try Google or ask around if you're not sure' - which is what I do myself when questions are raised. It's not that hard to do, particularly with the insane amount of resources available at a click's notice.
Honestly, and please take this to heart, it seems like you're confusing having a bigger dick with being one.
Man, this forum is full of good TV tonight!
Truth is, everyone on this BBS is accustomed to being the "trek expert" in their local circle... but that's seldom the case in this situation. We're all "experts" on something which is entirely fictional, and our "expertise" is often pretty subjective - that is to say, the "Trek facts" that I'm certain of may be 100% accurate, and still may be entirely different from the "Trek facts" you may hold to, which may also be 100% accurate. Fiction does tend to work that way, after all...
That said... real science and technology falls into a totally different category. In those cases, the worst thing ANY of us can do is pretend that we know - CONCLUSIVELY - something which we don't "know" at all. Believe me, what is popularly referred to as "the scientific community" is chock-fulla people who do exactly that, so it's not limited to this BBS. Hell, how many times have we been told that there is a "scientific consensus" (which, by the way, is a totally MEANINGLESS statement, since "consensus" is a statement regarding opinion, and TRUE SCIENCE not only should, but DOES, BY DEFINITION, disregard all "opinion" whatsoever)?
Here's the reality...
We have, here on Earth, several different HYPOTHESES about antimatter.
I say "hypotheses" because they fail to rise even to the level of theory. Theory, after all, is based upon limited (not entirely conclusive, in other words) experimental or observational support. Hypotheses, on the other hand, are a step "lower" on the scientific-methodology ladder... they are, stated as simply as possible, "a possible explanation" which has yet to see any real proof.
We have, here on Earth, produced an infinitesimally-small quantity of antimatter. Or rather, we THINK we have (is it possible that the team who "accomplished" this might have been mistaken? Sure... all we REALLY know is that they did "A" and then they observed "B" which seems to agree with what was expected to happen had antimatter been created. Nobody ever SAW the antimatter, nor did anyone ever touch it, nor measure it in any fashion whatsoever.
I happen to be in the majority who believe that, yes, they did successfully generate some small quantity of antimatter. But, as someone who practices the scientific method as part of my profession, I don't make the mistake of associating "my belief" with "proven fact." It's not... and if it turns out that they were mistaken, or even committing outright fraud (as we catch fairly regularly, especially where "grant money" is concerned!), I will neither be disillusioned nor shocked.
That said... we have a tiny amount of data, and a tiny amount of what can be called theory regarding antimatter... and a whole lotta hypotheses. It's not all "science fiction" exactly, because it's intended to fit in with reality. But it's far from "fact" at this point.
Does antimatter have negative gravitational properties? I don't know. I doubt it, personally... since antimatter is made up of the same elementary particles (quarks, muons, etc, etc... you may be familiar with the whole elementary-particle bestiary), just at a different "spin" state. It seems unlikely that it would fail to obey the same "mass" rules that the same elementary particles, in essentially the same configuration, would have in "normal" matter.
But it COULD. We just don't know enough (either from really robust, experimentally-supported THEORY, or from direct observation) to say with any degree of certainty.
Right now... everybody is pretty much talking out their asses on this topic, even the scientists who've (apparently) produced a quantity of the material.
Let's try to keep all of that in mind, and keep the "mine is bigger" aspects out of this conversation. Because honestly, anyone who says "my explanation of antimatter is right, and yours is wrong" is full of shit.
That said... real science and technology falls into a totally different category. In those cases, the worst thing ANY of us can do is pretend that we know - CONCLUSIVELY - something which we don't "know" at all. Believe me, what is popularly referred to as "the scientific community" is chock-fulla people who do exactly that, so it's not limited to this BBS. Hell, how many times have we been told that there is a "scientific consensus" (which, by the way, is a totally MEANINGLESS statement, since "consensus" is a statement regarding opinion, and TRUE SCIENCE not only should, but DOES, BY DEFINITION, disregard all "opinion" whatsoever)?
Here's the reality...
We have, here on Earth, several different HYPOTHESES about antimatter.
I say "hypotheses" because they fail to rise even to the level of theory. Theory, after all, is based upon limited (not entirely conclusive, in other words) experimental or observational support. Hypotheses, on the other hand, are a step "lower" on the scientific-methodology ladder... they are, stated as simply as possible, "a possible explanation" which has yet to see any real proof.
We have, here on Earth, produced an infinitesimally-small quantity of antimatter. Or rather, we THINK we have (is it possible that the team who "accomplished" this might have been mistaken? Sure... all we REALLY know is that they did "A" and then they observed "B" which seems to agree with what was expected to happen had antimatter been created. Nobody ever SAW the antimatter, nor did anyone ever touch it, nor measure it in any fashion whatsoever.
I happen to be in the majority who believe that, yes, they did successfully generate some small quantity of antimatter. But, as someone who practices the scientific method as part of my profession, I don't make the mistake of associating "my belief" with "proven fact." It's not... and if it turns out that they were mistaken, or even committing outright fraud (as we catch fairly regularly, especially where "grant money" is concerned!), I will neither be disillusioned nor shocked.
That said... we have a tiny amount of data, and a tiny amount of what can be called theory regarding antimatter... and a whole lotta hypotheses. It's not all "science fiction" exactly, because it's intended to fit in with reality. But it's far from "fact" at this point.
Does antimatter have negative gravitational properties? I don't know. I doubt it, personally... since antimatter is made up of the same elementary particles (quarks, muons, etc, etc... you may be familiar with the whole elementary-particle bestiary), just at a different "spin" state. It seems unlikely that it would fail to obey the same "mass" rules that the same elementary particles, in essentially the same configuration, would have in "normal" matter.
But it COULD. We just don't know enough (either from really robust, experimentally-supported THEORY, or from direct observation) to say with any degree of certainty.
Right now... everybody is pretty much talking out their asses on this topic, even the scientists who've (apparently) produced a quantity of the material.
Let's try to keep all of that in mind, and keep the "mine is bigger" aspects out of this conversation. Because honestly, anyone who says "my explanation of antimatter is right, and yours is wrong" is full of shit.
Plecostomus
Commodore
Truth is, everyone on this BBS is accustomed to being the "trek expert" in their local circle... but that's seldom the case in this situation. We're all "experts" on something which is entirely fictional, and our "expertise" is often pretty subjective - that is to say, the "Trek facts" that I'm certain of may be 100% accurate, and still may be entirely different from the "Trek facts" you may hold to, which may also be 100% accurate. Fiction does tend to work that way, after all...
*clapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapWHISTLEclapclapclapclapclapclap*
Said the pot to the kettle.
Actually, people did, and still do... because the majority of what people call "Einstein's theory" has absolutely nothing to do with anything Einstein, or his theory, ever claimed.
We know about the properties of antimatter particles, based of experiments and theory. It is correct that the gravity experiments have not been done.
We should know more as time progresses.
We should know more as time progresses.
Honestly, with our current technology I'm a little worried about the fact that they are making the stuff now. I know they are taking safety precautions, but safety precautions have a tendency to fail from time to time. A little unnerving, to me anyway. On the other hand, I hope they figure out something useful for the antimater.
Similar threads
