Antimatter trapped

[TimberWolf]

A few dozens of antimatter atoms* have been trapped for a record 1/5 second, paving the way for experiments on antimatter behaviour and properties to be carried out.
UC Berkeley physicists trap antimatter atoms

Despite the talk of Star Trek physics being possible, and that antimatter is the most energy dense (energy/mass) material theoretically possible, 100 times than that from nuclear fusion, that's still flip all enough to go zooming around the stars. Ever. Doomed.



* It's reported as atoms, but may just be antiparticles, positron, antiquark, etc.

[VectraMan]

Why is antimatter more energy dense than matter? Surely it's just the same thing, but opposite?

[TimberWolf]

Why is antimatter more energy dense than matter? Surely it's just the same thing, but opposite?

Yes, the same E=MC^2 which is as energy dense (per unit mass) as you can get, potentially converting matter to pure energy. You'd need equal masses of matter and antimatter to do that.

[d000hg]

Why is antimatter more energy dense than matter? Surely it's just the same thing, but opposite?

Because you struggle to convert 1g of uranium fully to energy, but .5g matter + .5g antimatter automatically annihilates. Technically, you're right, it's more a question of practicality.

[VectraMan]

Because you struggle to convert 1g of uranium fully to energy, but .5g matter + .5g antimatter automatically annihilates. Technically, you're right, it's more a question of practicality.

I see. So really matter is just as useful, you just need to find a supply of antimatter to release its potential.

[VectraMan]

Total conversion of matter into energy.

That's the real fix for the energy crisis.

Until your planet disappears.

On the Simon Mayo show last night on their "homework sucks" feature the question was whether the earth was getting heavier of lighter. And the expert answer was that although the Earth regularly loses atmosphere, that's outweighed by the space dust and metorites it attracts.

So if we were clever we could convert that extra into energy with no net loss of planet.

[TimberWolf]

On the Simon Mayo show last night on their "homework sucks" feature the question was whether the earth was getting heavier of lighter. And the expert answer was that although the Earth regularly loses atmosphere, that's outweighed by the space dust and metorites it attracts.

So if we were clever we could convert that extra into energy with no net loss of planet.

The Earth also gains mass from the energy it receives from the Sun (E=MC^2 again, but in reverse, energy to mass), though whether there is a net gain (from radiated losses) I don't know.

[VectraMan]

The Earth also gains mass from the energy it receives from the Sun (E=MC^2 again, but in reverse, energy to mass), though whether there is a net gain (from radiated losses) I don't know.

There can't be a net gain otherwise the Earth would be getting warmer....

[NotAllThere]

...

* It's reported as atoms, but may just be antiparticles, positron, antiquark, etc.

No, it's reported as atoms of anti-hydrogen. So positron bound to antiproton. The report says they'll soon be making considerably more than a few atoms....

(...at that point there was a very loud bang, and California fell into the sea ).

[Alf W]

Why do scientists want to f*** about with all this anti-matter and black hole stuff? Surely this is the adult equivalent of the game that we used to play as kids chucking bigger and bigger stones at a window until you found the one big enough to cave it in (at which point you realise the game was never that good an idea in the first place).