www.ditl.org

Can somebody tell me what happens when Antimatter is created? I mean, what is the actual process done? Energy is focused how? It "materialise"?

Same way normal matter is created, I believe.

Nickswitz wrote:Same way normal matter is created, I believe.

Actually, they are both created at the same time (methink).

The thing is, I have no idea how.

We do know how, at least the theory for it. It's to do with zero point energy. Basically, pairs of matter/antimatter particles spontaneously appear in a vacuum all the time. Usually they annihilate each other pretty quickly, however, if you apply a large magnetic field to the vacuum they move off in opposite directions. Given a strong enough field the particles separate fast enough that they don't get a chance to annihilate each other. In this way you end up with one antimatter particle and one matter one also.

Tyyr wrote:Interesting idea which immediately begs the question of why wouldn't it be stable given that it's a mirror image of regular matter.

Wild baseless guessing here, but maybe it has something to do with the way the four forces interact with the stuff?

IanKennedy wrote:We do know how, at least the theory for it. It's to do with zero point energy. Basically, pairs of matter/antimatter particles spontaneously appear in a vacuum all the time. Usually they annihilate each other pretty quickly, however, if you apply a large magnetic field to the vacuum they move off in opposite directions. Given a strong enough field the particles separate fast enough that they don't get a chance to annihilate each other. In this way you end up with one antimatter particle and one matter one also.

How appropriate that the explination came from the man with Spock as his AV.

Mark wrote:

IanKennedy wrote:We do know how, at least the theory for it. It's to do with zero point energy. Basically, pairs of matter/antimatter particles spontaneously appear in a vacuum all the time. Usually they annihilate each other pretty quickly, however, if you apply a large magnetic field to the vacuum they move off in opposite directions. Given a strong enough field the particles separate fast enough that they don't get a chance to annihilate each other. In this way you end up with one antimatter particle and one matter one also.

How appropriate that the explination came from the man with Spock as his AV.

Agreed, this is an interesting article, can't wait for the photon torps

Foxfyre wrote:

Mark wrote:

IanKennedy wrote:We do know how, at least the theory for it. It's to do with zero point energy. Basically, pairs of matter/antimatter particles spontaneously appear in a vacuum all the time. Usually they annihilate each other pretty quickly, however, if you apply a large magnetic field to the vacuum they move off in opposite directions. Given a strong enough field the particles separate fast enough that they don't get a chance to annihilate each other. In this way you end up with one antimatter particle and one matter one also.

How appropriate that the explination came from the man with Spock as his AV.

Agreed, this is an interesting article, can't wait for the photon torps

Not so sure. Nuke-scale explosives without the radiation drawbacks? With no way to identify the origin of the bomb's fuel, like you might with atomic nukes?

Like I said, I am not so sure we wanna see AM-ICBM.

Given our current refining abilities no one would be able to afford to actually launch the thing. They'd be firing a century's worth of their GDP away in a single shot.

Tyyr wrote:Given our current refining abilities no one would be able to afford to actually launch the thing. They'd be firing a century's worth of their GDP away in a single shot.

If you accept the theory that political leaders are compensating for something with their weapons, I think what you just wrote isn't entirely out of character for them.

Generally, I'd say they're "compensating" for the fact that most people don't want to fight wars with bare-knuckle combat.