|
I am confused about antimatter. We have learned
that matter takes up space and has a mass. If
each matter has an antimatter how can things exist?
|
Question Date: 2002-04-24 | | Answer 1:
For each matter particle, it is predicted that
there should be an antimatter particle of the same
mass, opposite charge, and opposite other
properties. These particles can be created
artificially, but they have to be isolated from
matter in a strong magnetic field. You are quite
right - matter and antimatter cannot exist
together in the same place, because they mutually
annihilate and create radiation of equal energy to
their masses. This was predicted by Einstein in
his famous equation, E = Mc2 .
Examples of
antimatter in laboratories on Earth are at
Fermilab, antiprotons are created artificially, and
then collided with protons at high energies in the
beam collider. When they collide, they annihilate
each other in a burst of energy, but other
particles are created in the collision, and the
properties of those particles are measured with
big detectors. You can go to their website to
find out more about the process at the
Fermilab website here
We believe that in the very early
Universe, before the age of the universe was about
1 second old, particle-antiparticle pairs were
created out of the radiation field, and then as
soon as they were created, they mutually
annihilated into radiation again. When the
universe expanded and cooled to below the
temperature where particle-antiparticle pair
production could happen, all the antimatter and
matter that were in equal proportions annihilated
with each other, leaving only radiation. A little
bit of matter was left over - about one particle
of matter for every billion photons (that's
basically a particle of radiation), which is why
we are here!
So, although every matter
particle has a theoretical antimatter particle, we
only see antimatter rarely in nuclear reactions
and particle accelerators, and it seems that
antimatter just does not exist for the most part
anymore -at least not nearby, or we'd all
annihilate into pure energy! | | Answer 2:
You've probably learned that, when matter and
antimatter collide, they turn completely into
energy and you're wondering why everything hasn't
turned into energy if there is as much matter as
antimatter. Is that right? Well, it's a really
good question. Particle physicists are still
trying to understand the answer.
You see,
right after the big bang, 13 billion years ago,
there was a lot of energy in the universe and it
all got turned into matter and antimatter. Since
experiments seem to show that whenever you create
matter, you create an equal amount of matter and
antimatter, it seems as if there should have been
as much matter as antimatter in the
universe.
After the big
bang, though, there was a lot of energy and that
tiny chance of getting only matter was enough to
create all of the matter that we see in the
universe today.
There have been some
careful experiments done that detect this tiny
difference between matter and antimatter, so it
does exist. I think, though, that nobody
understands how to go from what is seen in the
experiments to what happened after the big bang to
create all the matter in the universe yet. | Answer 3:
This is a really good question. Physicists have
pondered over your question because the laws of
nature seemed to obey fundamental symmetries with
respect to charge, time, and space. A consequence
of these symmetries was that every time a piece of
matter was created, a corresponding piece of
antimatter was created. Every electron should come
with a positron; every proton, with an
anti-proton; and so on. So shouldn't they all
cancel out in the end?
It turns out that
the laws of nature don't obey the symmetries
mentioned above exactly. They almost do.
Experiments, for instance, show that a certain
type of decay of long-lived kaons produce 301
positron for every 299 electrons. If the
symmetries were exact, the decays should have
produced 300 positrons and 300 electrons. As the
universe evolved after the Big Bang, these very
small symmetry violations may have resulted in the
abundance of matter and the dearth of antimatter
we see today.
It could also be that the
universe just started out with more matter than
antimatter. The universe is made up of matter just
because that's the way it is. We can't really rule
this possibility out, but it's not a very
satisfying answer, at least to me. It's part of a
fundamental question in physics: Why did the
universe start out the way it did?
It could
also be that we just happen to be in a part of the
universe that is made up of matter and other parts
are made up of antimatter. The amount of matter
and antimatter in the universe would be equal, but
the two are separated in space so that they can't
annihilate completely with each other.
Observations, however, don't support this
explanation.
| Answer 4:
Good question- if there was one particle of
antimatter for each particle of matter, and both
were mixed equally in the universe, then
everything would annihilate very quickly.
Some
scientists used to believe that matter and
antimatter became separated somehow, so that there
must be faraway galaxies made of antimatter.
However, if this were true, hydrogen and
anti-hydrogen would inevitably touch and
annihilate near the boundary, and we would see the
resulting gamma rays. We have not seen the kinds
of space gamma rays that come from frequent
matter-antimatter annihilation. However, in
particle accelerators we have seen an interesting
process called CP violation which slightly favors
matter over antimatter - in fact, studying CP
violation is one of the common uses of particle
accelerators. We now believe that when the
universe was less than a millionth of a second old
CP violation slightly favored the production of
matter instead of antimatter. Each type of matter
particle still had an associated type of
antimatter particle, but they were not produced in
equal numbers. There used to be a ten billion
times more matter than there is today, but there
was only 99.99999999% as much antimatter as there
was matter.
Before the universe was a minute
old, there was only the slight excess of matter
left over- which was enough to make us and
everything we see today. If there had not been a
particle-physics mechanism favoring one over the
other, we would not exist. If it had favored
antimatter, we would have simply called antimatter
matter, and vice versa- it wouldn't have really
changed anything. For more about the early
universe and a more thorough answer to your
question, read "The First Three Minutes" by Steven
Weinberg.
Just for fun I calculated how
explosive the matter-antimatter reaction is:
An
anti-bacterium could provide enough energy to keep
you alive for a day.
A speck of anti-dust could
demolish a city block.
4 drops of anti-water
would have the power of the Hiroshima nuclear
bomb.
A briefcase full of antimatter would
turn the LA basin into a sea-filled crater.
A
ton of antimatter could provide all the world's
electricity and power all gas-burning machines for
a year.
17 million tons of antimatter could
power the sun for one second. | | Answer 5:
This is a very good question! It turns out that
we believe, in the very early universe, there was a
little more matter than antimatter. At at point
some time not long after the big bang (within a
couple minutes) most of the antimatter and matter
combined to make photons, leaving just a little
bit of matter left. No one knows yet why there was
a little more of what we call matter than
anti-matter. This is a hot topic of current
research. This is not to say that there is no
anti-matter in the universe at all, there is a lot
of it being created and destroyed all the time.
It's just that the same amount of matter is formed
or destroyed at the same time. If, suddenly, all
the anti-matter in the universe combined with
matter and disappeared, we believe that there
would still be some matter left (e.g. galaxies,
planets, us).
| | Answer 6:
Antimatter also has mass and takes up space.
However, when they meet, matter and antimatter tend
to destroy one another with a tremendous release
of energy. Why there is so much matter and so
little antimatter in the universe is a significant
unanswered question in physics. The current
theory, as far as I understand it, suggests that a
small imbalance toward the production of matter,
rather than antimatter, in the early universe may
be responsible for the overwhelming prevalence of
matter today. Presumably, even a small amount of
additional matter back then would result in much
more matter than antimatter today. Can you
guess why?
| | Answer 7:
Although each particle of matter seems to have an
anti-particle, there does not seem to be the same
number of both kinds of particles. So the numbers
of particles of 'normal' matter seem to outnumber
the number of particles of anti-matter by a
substantial margin, although the evidence for this
is a bit weak for matter are very large distances
from us. Fundamentally, although you might expect
that matter and anti-matter have opposing
properties, this has also been shown to be false.
For example, both protons and anti-protons seem to
be attracted by gravity. Click Here to return to the search form.
| | |
|
|
|
|
Copyright © 2020 The Regents of the University of California,
All Rights Reserved.
UCSB Terms of Use
|
|
|