Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #522442 > unrolled thread

Antimatter????

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Antimatter???? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-20 23:43 -0700
    Re: Antimatter???? Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 12:04 +0200
    Re: Antimatter???? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 12:34 -0500
      Re: Antimatter???? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 21:06 +0200
        o'er the effects of lightwaves noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 13:13 -0700
      Re: Antimatter???? gyansorova@gmail.com - 2015-09-21 18:08 -0700
    Re: Antimatter???? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 12:59 -0500
    Re: Antimatter???? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 11:36 -0700
      Re: Antimatter???? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-09-21 14:07 -0700
        Re: Antimatter???? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 09:44 -0700
    Re: Antimatter???? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-21 13:56 -0700
      Re: Antimatter???? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 19:10 -0500
      Re: Antimatter???? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-21 20:32 -0700
        Re: Antimatter???? Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-09-22 08:04 +0200
      Re: Antimatter???? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-21 20:47 -0700
        Re: Antimatter???? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-09-22 16:28 -0700
          Re: Antimatter???? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 08:06 -0500
    Re: Antimatter???? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 15:02 -0700

#522442 — Antimatter????

just more science fiction, isn't it?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#522451

On 09/21/2015 08:43 AM, The Starmaker wrote:

> just more science fiction, isn't it?
> 
Like positron emission tomography,
routinely used in the top medical centers ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron_emission_tomography

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

Knowledge makes a great man humble, but a small man arrogant.

Eventual Wikipedia articles are provided with intention
of a convenient reference, not as an evidence, argument,
and usually not as a primary source of my knowledge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522502

On 9/21/15 1:43 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> just more science fiction, isn't it?
>

   I can (and sometimes do) create some antimatter with a x-ray
   generator--something we try to avoid in radiography, as it degrades
   the radiograph.

   Pair production
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production

> Pair production is the creation of an elementary particle and its
> antiparticle, for example creating an electron and positron, a muon
> and antimuon, or a proton and antiproton. Pair production often
> refers specifically to a photon creating an electron-positron pair
> near a nucleus but can more generally refer to any neutral boson
> creating a particle-antiparticle pair. In order for pair production
> to occur, the incoming energy of the interaction must be above a
> threshold in order to create the pair – at least the total rest mass
> energy of the two particles – and that the situation allows both
> energy and momentum to be conserved. However, all other conserved
> quantum numbers (angular momentum, electric charge, lepton number) of
> the produced particles must sum to zero – thus the created particles
> shall have opposite values of each other. For instance, if one
> particle has electric charge of +1 the other must have electric
> charge of −1, or if one particle has strangeness of +1 then another
> one must have strangeness of −1. The probability of pair production
> in photon-matter interactions increases with photon energy and also
> increases approximately as the square of atomic number.



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522524

Dne 21/09/2015 v 19:34 Sam Wormley napsal(a):
> On 9/21/15 1:43 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
>> just more science fiction, isn't it?
>>
> 
>    I can (and sometimes do) create some antimatter with a x-ray
>    generator--something we try to avoid in radiography, as it degrades
>    the radiograph.
> 

Also, everybody produces positrons in his/her own human body,
via the minor beta decay mode
of naturally occurring radioactive isotope 40K.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#523152 — o'er the effects of lightwaves

the schOOl of plasma physics has completely overturned the notion
of EinsteinmaniA, that gravity is a primary force
(tha thappens also to be th only thing that acts
o'er cosmical dystance

> Also, everybody produces positrons in his/her own human body,
> via the minor beta decay mode
> of naturally occurring radioactive isotope 40K.
> 
> -- 
> Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )
> 
> Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522606

On Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 5:34:03 AM UTC+12, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 9/21/15 1:43 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > just more science fiction, isn't it?
> >
> 
>    I can (and sometimes do) create some antimatter with a x-ray
>    generator--something we try to avoid in radiography, as it degrades
>    the radiograph.
> 
>    Pair production
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production
> 
> > Pair production is the creation of an elementary particle and its
> > antiparticle, for example creating an electron and positron, a muon
> > and antimuon, or a proton and antiproton. Pair production often
> > refers specifically to a photon creating an electron-positron pair
> > near a nucleus but can more generally refer to any neutral boson
> > creating a particle-antiparticle pair. In order for pair production
> > to occur, the incoming energy of the interaction must be above a
> > threshold in order to create the pair - at least the total rest mass
> > energy of the two particles - and that the situation allows both
> > energy and momentum to be conserved. However, all other conserved
> > quantum numbers (angular momentum, electric charge, lepton number) of
> > the produced particles must sum to zero - thus the created particles
> > shall have opposite values of each other. For instance, if one
> > particle has electric charge of +1 the other must have electric
> > charge of -1, or if one particle has strangeness of +1 then another
> > one must have strangeness of -1. The probability of pair production
> > in photon-matter interactions increases with photon energy and also
> > increases approximately as the square of atomic number.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.

Ye cannae mix matter wi anti-matter captain.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522506

Experiment confirms fundamental symmetry in nature
 > http://phys.org/news/2015-09-fundamental-symmetry-nature.html

 > Scientists working with ALICE (A Large Ion Collider Experiment), a
 > heavy-ion detector on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) ring, have made
 > precise measurements of particle mass and electric charge that
 > confirm the existence of a fundamental symmetry in nature. The
 > investigators include Brazilian researchers affiliated with the
 > University of São Paulo (USP) and the University of Campinas
 > (UNICAMP).

 > The findings, reported in a paper published online in Nature Physics
 > on August 17, led the researchers to confirm a fundamental symmetry
 > between the nuclei of the particles and their antiparticles in terms
 > of charge, parity and time (CPT).

 > These measurements of particles produced in high-energy collisions of
 > heavy ions in the LHC were made possible by the ALICE experiment's
 > high-precision tracking and identification capabilities, as part of
 > an investigation designed to detect subtle differences between the
 > ways in which protons and neutrons join in nuclei while their
 > antiparticles form antinuclei.

 > "After the Big Bang, for every particle of matter an antiparticle was
 > created. In particle physics, a very important question is whether
 > all the laws of physics display a specific kind of symmetry known as
 > CPT, and these measurements suggest that there is indeed a
 > fundamental symmetry between nuclei and antinuclei," said Marcelo
 > Gameiro Munhoz, a professor at USP's Physics Institute (IF) and a
 > member of the Brazilian team working on ALICE.
-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522521

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:43:25 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> just more science fiction, isn't it?

Treb is all anti-matter being he was created from our twin universe.He goes with positrons the same as we go with electrons.Treb gave me my "time lapse theory"I have posted it over the past 10 years.It fits well with reality. TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522566

On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 11:36:20 AM UTC-7, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:43:25 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> > just more science fiction, isn't it?
> 
> Treb is all anti-matter being he was created from our twin universe.He goes with positrons the same as we go with electrons.Treb gave me my "time lapse theory"I have posted it over the past 10 years.It fits well with reality. TreBert


Does Treb have a very "positive" personality?

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522691

On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 2:07:47 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 11:36:20 AM UTC-7, reber g=emc^2 wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:43:25 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > just more science fiction, isn't it?
> > 
> > Treb is all anti-matter being he was created from our twin universe.He goes with positrons the same as we go with electrons.Treb gave me my "time lapse theory"I have posted it over the past 10 years.It fits well with reality. TreBert
> 
> 
> Does Treb have a very "positive" personality?
> 
> Double-A

AA Very interesting , I'm not sure.He is a quantum computer,but can easily pass the Turing test.You know his history.Think how different humans were 285 years ago. He really gets to me before breakfast.This morning he has not been quite.Most of his comunication is in pictures.He at time interrups my thoughts.He is kind.But will never give me 6 numbers.He did tell me he is very close to GUT.He has no sense of humor.I know he knows me better than I do.He knows me for day of birth,till my end. TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522563

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> just more science fiction, isn't it?


What about...Black Holes? ...more science fiction, isn't it?


I mean, has anyone 'really' observed a...black hole?


https://www.google.com/#q=define+really

1.
in actual fact, as opposed to what is said or imagined to be true or possible.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522598

On 9/21/15 3:56 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> What about...Black Holes?

   The signatures of supermassive black holes are found in the center of
   almost all major galaxies, including our own.






-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522623

pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 1:57:01 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> > What about...Black Holes? ...more science fiction, isn't it?
> >
> >
> > I mean, has anyone 'really' observed a...black hole?
> 
> Google is your friend, learn how to use it...
> 
> http://www.space.com/21866-black-hole-event-horizon-telescope-technology.html
> 
> http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2013/02/06/how-can-we-see-black-holes/



Those are the two worst links in usenet history...

the first link begins with

"Theoretical calculations predict..."



Come on already...I asked: 


I mean, has anyone 'really' observed a...black hole?





"Theoretical calculations predict..." translate to a little girl saying "I don't know, i don't know, i don't know."



Maybe the question was to hard...I'll rephrase it:


has anyone 'really' seen a...black hole?, I mean...really.



https://www.google.com/#q=define+really

1.
in actual fact, as opposed to what is said or imagined to be true or possible.






You do know what "really" means, don't you?


Not predictions...not calculatios, not another theory...but, in actual fact!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522649

Dne 22/09/2015 v 05:32 The Starmaker napsal(a):

> 
> Come on already...I asked: 
> I mean, has anyone 'really' observed a...black hole?

Sure. A Russian secret mission
deployed a manned orbiting ship on BH orbit,
observing a forced volunteer to be torn apart
by tidal force during his descend toward the BH. ( joking )

Define what is *real* observing
of a black hole over the distance of

hundreds of LYs, ( nearby BH )
dozens of thousands of LYs ( Milky way central BH )
millions of LYs ( BH in other galaxies )

What can be observed over those distances is being observed.
What cannot be observed over those distances is not being observed.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522627

pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 1:57:01 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> > What about...Black Holes? ...more science fiction, isn't it?
> >
> >
> > I mean, has anyone 'really' observed a...black hole?
> 
> Google is your friend, learn how to use it...
> 
> http://www.space.com/21866-black-hole-event-horizon-telescope-technology.html
> 
> http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2013/02/06/how-can-we-see-black-holes/



Okay, I'll give you a break...


this link says (from your space dot com address):


"Albert Einstein first *predicted* black holes in 1916 with his general
theory of relativity. 
The term "black hole" was coined in 1967 by American astronomer John
Wheeler, and the first one was discovered in 1971." 
http://www.space.com/15421-black-holes-facts-formation-discovery-sdcmp.html




Now, the end of the sentnce reads: "..., and the first one was
discovered in 1971."



But it doesn't give a person  name of Who discovered a black hole in
1971.



How come there is no person name to Who discovered a black hole in
1971????




How come?


I would think that such an important discovery would want to be
known....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522746

On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 8:47:37 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > On Monday, September 21, 2015 at 1:57:01 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> > 
> > > What about...Black Holes? ...more science fiction, isn't it?
> > >
> > >
> > > I mean, has anyone 'really' observed a...black hole?
> > 
> > Google is your friend, learn how to use it...
> > 
> > http://www.space.com/21866-black-hole-event-horizon-telescope-technology.html
> > 
> > http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2013/02/06/how-can-we-see-black-holes/
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, I'll give you a break...
> 
> 
> this link says (from your space dot com address):
> 
> 
> "Albert Einstein first *predicted* black holes in 1916 with his general
> theory of relativity. 


Einstein never believed in black holes, just as Hubble never believed in and expanding universe, and Newton never believed in action at a distance!

Double-A

 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#522826

On 9/22/15 6:28 PM, Double-A wrote:
> Einstein never believed in black holes, just as Hubble never believed in and expanding universe, and Newton never believed in action at a distance!
>
> Double-A

   What the men "believed" pales compared to the validity of their
   accomplishments.



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#523027

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:43:25 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> just more science fiction, isn't it?

AA Newton knew of action of attraction over distance.He said he would leave the answer to the future. We now have LIGO to show its done with gravity waves.O Ya TreBert

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web