Antimatter, (Where has it gone?)

[Rade]

I do wonder, the OP question is about "antimatter" , not "dark matter", and it seems a reasonable hypothesis to me that one valid answer to the question, "where has all the antimatter gone" is--well--it has not gone anywhere--it is exactly where quantum theory predicts it to be---within the zero-point-flux (ZPF) of fields that are in superposition with virtual particles (electron & positron), with the positron clearly being the antimatter predicted by the Dirac equation.

 

Here I find is a very easy to read explanation, plus a very interesting suggestion that humans may in the future be able to extract for use the energy associated with ZPF dynamics.

 

The Energetic Vacuum: Implications For Energy Research <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/message.css">

 

I have a hypothesis that humans will find this ZPF energy for future use within the quantum confinement of what we call the proton.

[Pyrotex]

Let me sing you a little song by the Mama and the Papas:

 

Where has the antimatter gone?

Long time searching.

Where has the antimatter gone?

Long time ago.

Where has the antimatter gone?

Gone to gamma rays every one.

When will they ever burn?

When will they ever burn?

 

Thank you. Thank you.

[Boerseun]

Gone to gamma rays every one.

Not quite.

 

Lately, it seems my paycheck's printed on antimatter paper. It disappears the moment it hits my wallet, which is made of normal matter. And the gamma rays they supposedly give off is not so impressive, after all. It doesn't even make my wallet bounce. Nothing. Very disappointing. :hihi:

[Pyrotex]

...Lately, it seems my paycheck's printed on antimatter paper. It disappears the moment it hits my wallet, ...(

Boerseun,

actually your paycheck is printed on paper that is coating with a rare element, Antimoney.

 

That's the cause of inflation, by the way. It not only reacts with the paper the check is printed on, but the gamma rays also render radioactive the electrons that go into your bank account -- the electrons that represent the amount of money printed on the check.

 

And so, over time, those electrons in the bank's computer decay into deductons, feeons and inflatons.

[belovelife]

I do wonder, the OP question is about "antimatter" , not "dark matter", and it seems a reasonable hypothesis to me that one valid answer to the question, "where has all the antimatter gone" is--well--it has not gone anywhere--it is exactly where quantum theory predicts it to be---within the zero-point-flux (ZPF) of fields that are in superposition with virtual particles (electron & positron), with the positron clearly being the antimatter predicted by the Dirac equation.

 

Here I find is a very easy to read explanation, plus a very interesting suggestion that humans may in the future be able to extract for use the energy associated with ZPF dynamics.

 

The Energetic Vacuum: Implications For Energy Research <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/message.css">

 

I have a hypothesis that humans will find this ZPF energy for future use within the quantum confinement of what we call the proton.

 

IMHO I think that dark matter is matter anti-matter pairs without electrons bound to this process

[CraigD]

IMHO I think that dark matter is matter anti-matter pairs without electrons bound to this process

Matter/antimatter pairs have been observed – for example protonium, an “exotic atom” consisting of a proton and an anti-proton, and positronium, one consisting of an positron (anti-electron) and an electron – but aren’t good candidates for dark matter, because they’re very short-lived – less than 0.00001 seconds. When they collapse, their antimatter partners annihilate, ultimately emitting photons and neutrinos. :thumbs_do

 

Don’t give up thinking about dark matter, though – it’s one of the great present-day mysteries of science! :thumbs_up

[HydrogenBond]

My theory is that matter is more stable than anti-matter, therefore matter would always be the last one standing. I tend to believe that positive charge has more stability when attached to the mass of a proton. An anti-proton, by being less stable, tends to dissociate quicker, altering the full impact of complete annihilation in favor of the more stable proton.

 

As a loose analogy, say we have a wave crest and wave trough; equal and opposite. If we dissociate the two so they separate from each other, which of the two can be neutralized quicker if we use gravity to lower the crest and fill in the trough? The crest can fall downward and needs to propagate outward. The trough will have two walls that collapse into each other making turbulence. The proton is at lower potential (more stable) and is therefore the turbulent trough collapse when tends to linger slightly longer.

[CraigD]

My theory is that matter is more stable than anti-matter, therefore matter would always be the last one standing.

Can you support your theory with more than your own opinions? Doing so isn’t optional – it’s a site rule, so do!

 

Although there’s lots of literature around asymmetries to explain why an early universe with nearly equal masses of antimatter and mater had a very slightly greater amount of matter, resulting in our present matter-dominated universe, I’ve seen none suggesting, as you do, that antimatter is less stable than matter. All experimental data involving antimatter supports the idea that, other than reversed charge of fundamental particles, it behaves exactly the same as its matter counterpart.

 

Also, antimatter doesn’t spontaneously decay into matter any more or less than its matter counterpart decays into antimatter. In general, it annihilates with its matter counterpart, both converting to energy (photons). Whenever antimatter annihilates, it does so with an equal mass of matter. Matter was “the last one standing” because there was slightly more of it in the early universe.

[HydrogenBond]

Can you support your theory with more than your own opinions? Doing so isn’t optional – it’s a site rule, so do!

 

Is there any proof that matter and anti-matter has the same long term stability and longevity? That is an unwritten assumption that is used as a premise for subsequent thinking. Without that basic proof the rest is moot and should be considered specualtion extrapolation. I can show proton that are older than any anti-proton that has even been created or observed. This is not a smoking gun but better than the no proof that is currently used.

 

Even the idea of primordial matter and anti-matter is speculation, but we got to start somewhere.

 

Say matter and anti-matter were of the same potential. Wouldn't that imply the univere should be dominated by waste energy from the nearly complete annihilation of equal and opposite? If matter was more stable one would expect the universal ratio of matter to waste energy to be >>0.

 

I tried to use an analogy of a water wave composed of a crest and trough. We dissociate this wave-particle into matter and anti-matter by separating the crest from the trough. This analogy is used because the wave-particle nature of matter and anti-matter forms discrete particle states that can exist separately. The original particle-wave duality splits into two particles states; splits the wave. If the wave became whole again, they could cancel and annihilate.

 

But if they remain dissociated particles each will act independently. One will be the crest or hill and the other the trough or valley. If we add a force potential, such as gravity to the water hill and water valley analogy, each will lower this potential in different ways. The (energy) hill will collapse and ripple outward. The (energy)valley can't collapse upward since that means it would gain potential. The walls of the (energy) valley need to fall into the valley, since this implies lowering potential. Rather than a ripple like the hill, the filling of the valley creates another type of hill; stable matter.

[CarlNGraham]

As the universe has a large matter antimatter imbalance, what do people think the chances of it also having a large charge imbalance.

Maybe being heavily electron depleted outside galaxy centres?

 

 

(Only asking because of the possibility of ions beyond H₃⁺ being candidates for hard to see matter)

[Deepwater6]

I saw this news article on BBC's website under the science section. It may answer some of your questions. I found it interesting.

 

BBC News article "Neutrino particle 'flips to all flavours'"

 

 

Deepwater

Edited June 15, 2011 by CraigD
Fixed bad link

[Deepwater6]

Having trouble with my computer and the link may be wrong. Look in the science section on the BBC's website for a story titled. "Neutrino Particle Flips to all Flavours"

[belovelife]

Matter/antimatter pairs have been observed – for example protonium, an “exotic atom” consisting of a proton and an anti-proton, and positronium, one consisting of an positron (anti-electron) and an electron – but aren’t good candidates for dark matter, because they’re very short-lived – less than 0.00001 seconds. When they collapse, their antimatter partners annihilate, ultimately emitting photons and neutrinos. :thumbs_do

 

Don’t give up thinking about dark matter, though – it’s one of the great present-day mysteries of science! :thumbs_up

 

 

what i meant, is that dark matter may be the seed of matter in the universe, where the reaction of matter in space, flowed by time, creates gravity, and mabe some electricity,

if you look at any tangent function, this would symbolize the process kindof, at the asmptotes is the matter anti matter pairs, at which point, time transduces to gravity

 

where dark matter would be this reaction without bound electrons, where bound electrons would be an atom, this would also give reason to why the majority of matter in the universe is hydrogen

since and bound photon turnes into an electron shell,

[Cyberia]

Daniel.132. To all intents and purposes, and away from matter, anti-matter looks and behaves like matter so for all we know there could be anti-matter galaxies about.

[Rade]

Let me present again my point that the answer to the OP question, "where has all the antimatter gone" is that "it has not gone anywhere", it has always been present within our universe in quantum superposition with matter.

 

If true, logic demands that antimatter must then be present in the universe in highest quantity in those isotopic elements most common in the universe, which are the various stable isotopes of Hydrogen nucleus [P], [NP], and Helium [PNP], [PNPN]. Together these 4 isotopes represent the vast majority of what is called stable matter in the universe.

 

It is my argument that antimatter is present within all these isotopes in the form of what classical physics calls MESONS ! This is a logically consistent conclusion given that the most abundant matter in the form of nucleons (protons and neutrons) are bound via a strong force that is mediated by MESON exchange (OK, I understand that modern QCD uses field theory terminology, but the classical theory of meson exchange has never been falsified, only put aside by a more predictive theory that operates at a different scale).

 

There are many, many, many types of mesons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meson but they all have one physical quality in common, they are composed of combination of "matter quarks" [Mq} and "antimatter quarks" [Aq]. All mesons are superposed quantum states of various combination of quarks [Mq + Aq] and they are constantly present within all bound states of matter (stable and unstable) within the universe.

 

In conclusion, antimatter has not gone anywhere, it always has been present within the strong force (and weak force) [as meson quarks] that bind together the elements of the universe.

 

I'll stop here and take comments.

[Cyberia]

But mesons only live for a few nanoseconds. They vanish almost as fast as they come into being, and this is because they contain anti-matter. They are formed in high energy interactions showing that the anti-matter is created (then destroyed) rather than being in some kind of stable position with other fundamental particles of matter.

[Rade]

But mesons only live for a few nanoseconds.

Yes, that is exactly my point. Each nanosecond antimatter meson DO exist (e.g., they are real particles with mass). There are millions of meson exchange events each nanosecond moment for the strong force, never ending, one nanosecond moment after another. So, do the calculation. Add the mass of all the antimatter mesons involved in all possible force interactions for all stable hydrogen and helium isotopes in the universe, do this, nanosecond by nanosecond moment. The result of the calculation will equal the so-called "missing mass" of the universe.