| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
26 Mar 2006 09:23:05 PM |
| Object: |
Does this work? |
Upon looking for sites for practical antimatter confinement, I came
across the idea that antimatter can be stored inside a buckyball. Is
this true? One would think that the near spherical symmetry would mean
that there is no net repulsion or attraction anywhere in the buckyball.
It would pass right through the protons. Not only that, but the
buckyball would have to either contain double bonds , be positively
charged, or be attached to other buckyballs.
I think a more practical way of storing antimatter would be in solid
antihydrogen. However, that's my uneducated judgement. What do you
think?
.
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
27 Mar 2006 03:19:54 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Upon looking for sites for practical antimatter confinement, I came
across the idea that antimatter can be stored inside a buckyball. Is
this true? One would think that the near spherical symmetry would mean
that there is no net repulsion or attraction anywhere in the buckyball.
It would pass right through the protons. Not only that, but the
buckyball would have to either contain double bonds , be positively
charged, or be attached to other buckyballs.
I think a more practical way of storing antimatter would be in solid
antihydrogen. However, that's my uneducated judgement. What do you
think?
Are you trolling Starblade?
Anti-Hydrogen Production Under Laser Control
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2005/split/714-2.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
27 Mar 2006 11:29:47 AM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
Starbles@Earthlink.net wrote:
Upon looking for sites for practical antimatter confinement, I came
across the idea that antimatter can be stored inside a buckyball. Is
this true? One would think that the near spherical symmetry would mean
that there is no net repulsion or attraction anywhere in the buckyball.
It would pass right through the protons. Not only that, but the
buckyball would have to either contain double bonds , be positively
charged, or be attached to other buckyballs.
I think a more practical way of storing antimatter would be in solid
antihydrogen. However, that's my uneducated judgement. What do you
think?
Are you trolling Starblade?
Anti-Hydrogen Production Under Laser Control
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2005/split/714-2.html
I think it would be obvious if I were trolling. Like my post on furry
in APO. Simply giving an uneducated judgement is not the basis for
considering one to be trolling.
(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
27 Mar 2006 11:59:34 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
wrote:
Upon looking for sites for practical antimatter confinement, I came
across the idea that antimatter can be stored inside a buckyball. Is
this true? One would think that the near spherical symmetry would mean
that there is no net repulsion or attraction anywhere in the buckyball.
It would pass right through the protons. Not only that, but the
buckyball would have to either contain double bonds , be positively
charged, or be attached to other buckyballs.
I think a more practical way of storing antimatter would be in solid
antihydrogen. However, that's my uneducated judgement. What do you
think?
Are you trolling Starblade?
Anti-Hydrogen Production Under Laser Control
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2005/split/714-2.html
I think it would be obvious if I were trolling. Like my post on furry
in APO. Simply giving an uneducated judgement is not the basis for
considering one to be trolling.
(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)
OK--Do you understand why a Buckyball would not be sufficient to
"contain" antimatter atoms?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
27 Mar 2006 06:09:13 PM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
Starbles@Earthlink.net wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
Starbles@Earthlink.net wrote:
Upon looking for sites for practical antimatter confinement, I came
across the idea that antimatter can be stored inside a buckyball. Is
this true? One would think that the near spherical symmetry would mean
that there is no net repulsion or attraction anywhere in the buckyball.
It would pass right through the protons. Not only that, but the
buckyball would have to either contain double bonds , be positively
charged, or be attached to other buckyballs.
I think a more practical way of storing antimatter would be in solid
antihydrogen. However, that's my uneducated judgement. What do you
think?
Are you trolling Starblade?
Anti-Hydrogen Production Under Laser Control
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2005/split/714-2.html
I think it would be obvious if I were trolling. Like my post on furry
in APO. Simply giving an uneducated judgement is not the basis for
considering one to be trolling.
(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)
OK--Do you understand why a Buckyball would not be sufficient to
"contain" antimatter atoms?
Are you referring to the fact that a buckyball is practically
spherically symmetric? Or that the positron will free itself because it
will crash into electrons? Or because there's not enough space,
according to the heisenburg uncertainty principle?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
27 Mar 2006 10:49:37 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
wrote:
Upon looking for sites for practical antimatter confinement, I came
across the idea that antimatter can be stored inside a buckyball. Is
this true? One would think that the near spherical symmetry would mean
that there is no net repulsion or attraction anywhere in the buckyball.
It would pass right through the protons. Not only that, but the
buckyball would have to either contain double bonds , be positively
charged, or be attached to other buckyballs.
I think a more practical way of storing antimatter would be in solid
antihydrogen. However, that's my uneducated judgement. What do you
think?
Are you trolling Starblade?
Anti-Hydrogen Production Under Laser Control
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2005/split/714-2.html
I think it would be obvious if I were trolling. Like my post on furry
in APO. Simply giving an uneducated judgement is not the basis for
considering one to be trolling.
(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)
OK--Do you understand why a Buckyball would not be sufficient to
"contain" antimatter atoms?
Are you referring to the fact that a buckyball is practically
spherically symmetric? Or that the positron will free itself because it
will crash into electrons? Or because there's not enough space,
according to the heisenburg uncertainty principle?
Unless you can hold the anti atom away from the walls of the carbon
the particles will annihilate till there are no anti particles left.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
02 Apr 2006 10:49:34 PM |
|
|
Of course the best current way to store antimatter is as a sort of
anti-matter plasma confined in a "magnetic bottle".
However, lets imagine anti-atoms, perhaps droplets of liquid
anti-hydrogen or even anti-buckeyballs. Give em a charge end levitate
em just as in the Millikin oil drop experiment. Storing it would be a
LOT easier than making it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
03 Apr 2006 12:39:21 AM |
|
|
In article <1144036174.402338.170760@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>, writes:
Of course the best current way to store antimatter is as a sort of
anti-matter plasma confined in a "magnetic bottle".
However, lets imagine anti-atoms, perhaps droplets of liquid
anti-hydrogen or even anti-buckeyballs. Give em a charge end levitate
em just as in the Millikin oil drop experiment. Storing it would be a
LOT easier than making it.
Aha. And what happens when you have a power failure?
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
03 Apr 2006 01:10:15 AM |
|
|
wrote:
In article <1144036174.402338.170760@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>, writes:
Of course the best current way to store antimatter is as a sort of
anti-matter plasma confined in a "magnetic bottle".
However, lets imagine anti-atoms, perhaps droplets of liquid
anti-hydrogen or even anti-buckeyballs. Give em a charge end levitate
em just as in the Millikin oil drop experiment. Storing it would be a
LOT easier than making it.
Aha. And what happens when you have a power failure?
A weapon comparable in power to fission weapons but a lot more clean.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
03 Apr 2006 01:43:33 AM |
|
|
In article <1144044615.501063.246070@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, "Eric Gisse" <jowr.pi@gmail.com> writes:
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <1144036174.402338.170760@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>, writes:
Of course the best current way to store antimatter is as a sort of
anti-matter plasma confined in a "magnetic bottle".
However, lets imagine anti-atoms, perhaps droplets of liquid
anti-hydrogen or even anti-buckeyballs. Give em a charge end levitate
em just as in the Millikin oil drop experiment. Storing it would be a
LOT easier than making it.
Aha. And what happens when you have a power failure?
A weapon comparable in power to fission weapons but a lot more clean.
Yes, quite clean:-)
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
03 Apr 2006 05:45:52 AM |
|
|
In article <dy2Yf.7$45.615@news.uchicago.edu>,
wrote:
In article <1144036174.402338.170760@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>,
dbohara@mindspring.com writes:
Of course the best current way to store antimatter is as a sort of
anti-matter plasma confined in a "magnetic bottle".
However, lets imagine anti-atoms, perhaps droplets of liquid
anti-hydrogen or even anti-buckeyballs. Give em a charge end levitate
em just as in the Millikin oil drop experiment. Storing it would be a
LOT easier than making it.
Aha. And what happens when you have a power failure?
Would there be time to say, "Oops!"?
/BAH
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Does this work? |
03 Apr 2006 11:22:18 AM |
|
|
In article <e0qud0$8qk_005@s915.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, writes:
In article <dy2Yf.7$45.615@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <1144036174.402338.170760@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>,
dbohara@mindspring.com writes:
Of course the best current way to store antimatter is as a sort of
anti-matter plasma confined in a "magnetic bottle".
However, lets imagine anti-atoms, perhaps droplets of liquid
anti-hydrogen or even anti-buckeyballs. Give em a charge end levitate
em just as in the Millikin oil drop experiment. Storing it would be a
LOT easier than making it.
Aha. And what happens when you have a power failure?
Would there be time to say, "Oops!"?
I'm afraid not.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
