Anti matter - the fuel of the future
Anti matter is a rare exotic substance that could be used as extremely efficient energy storage
For example an anti-proton has -1 or a "positron" (positive electron) has a +1 charge. This means atoms and everything made out of antimatter behave just like matter. Anti neutrons exist as well, they are just made out of quarks with the opposite charges which add up to 0. A fundamental trait of anti-matter is that when it collides with "regular" matter it release all of its energy. During the big bang an equal amount of matter and antimatter were created. But for some reason as far as we know in the end an unequal amount existed. For every billion antimatter particles a billion and one matter particles were created. We have theories but no solid evidence as to why this happened. This is one of the mysteries of the early universe. The main reason why it has been studied so much (by governments) is because it has a 100% conversion rate of mass into energy. This means it is the most efficient energy storage possible. This is E =MC^2 joules of energy. A single gram of antimatter can run an average computer for 1.7 * 10^12 years.Or about 12 times the age of the universe. That however doesn't factor in something. Anti matter also turns the same amount of matter into energy when they collide. The full amount of energy could run your computer for about 24 times the age of the universe. (if it only takes about 500 watts.) For comparison last I heard a nuclear fission explosion was at about 0.5% efficiency. No wonder the military wants to build bombs out of this stuff. We have been "making it" for a while now, just a few atoms at a time. However, some people have said "it doesn't exist" putting it nicely. Here is proof, get over it: https://home.cern/topics/antimatter Or how about the first observation of them was in the 1920's. http://www.actforlibraries.org/proof-of-antimatter/ It was an experiment by Carl Anderson. He basically said, " Why are there negative and positive signs all over in relativity and if the square root of something has two answers why can't the universe?" Well turns out it can. He observed anti electrons or "positrons". How did he do this? Well he was photographing a cloud chamber. Cloud chambers allow you to "see" particles. A cloud chamber is basically a container filled with water/alcohol vapor that is ionized when a particle goes through. This allows you to see the path of any particle. If you put magnets on each side you can change the path enough that you can tell what it is. Well, turns out he either found protons with like 1999/2000th of their mass missing or positive electrons. They accelerated to the negative side of the electric field as fast as an electron but with the wrong charge. He decided to write about the positive electrons and not small protons. Antimatter has been proven without a doubt and studies at CERN are going on now. As far as we can figure only the charge is different and everything else is the same. Which means we still have nothing to go on for the big bang inequality. Matter-antimatter pairs are created in a lot of situations in nature. For example gamma rays which usually create electron-positron pairs, which annihilate right away and go back into being a gamma ray.
Anti matter has the opposite charge
Anti matter and the big bang
fuel and energy
(source)Proof of anti-matter
The antimatter section of CERN the top particle physics "group" in the world.Creation of anti-matter
They are also created in something called vacuum fluctuations. Basically pairs of particles are created non-stop and annihilate almost instantly. In many high energy reactions they are created but usually live short lives as well. For example the sun produces it in solar flares.
Humans make them in extremely complex ways. We shoot particles at each other until they collide. We give them as much energy as possible so they can have a chance of creating it. Sadly it only happens one in a million collisions or less. We then use magnetic fields to separate them from normal matter and contain them.
(more here)
Antimatter at this point is the best energy storage, but nowhere near the most efficient for us. This means we can use it in ships and moving objects without need of a battery, but unless we find more efficient ways to create it this will be a large drain on our electrical system.
Science is fun, subscribe for more science.
Hey
This is not correct. At the big bang time, an equal amount of matter and antimatter was created. The asymmetry came later (and is a motivation for beyond the Standard Model theories).
This is again not correct. Fundamental physics is not studied for its practical applications as first motivations...
Except this, how would you store antimatter and use it for practical purposes? We are far from being able to do so. Creating antimatter is one thing, storing it is another thing.
Moreover, you are not considering the energy needed to create antimatter. If creating antimatter costs more energy than the energy that will be released in an annihilation process, you cannot claim it is the fuel of the future.
it takes a lot of expensive tools. That is the reason the government will fund it....
magnetic fields
I don't think you understand......batteries can take more energy to make.....gas....rocket fuel.... they store it extremely well and that is why they are used.
What I am saying the following. In order to produce antimatter, you need to provide some energy. If what you need to provide is larger than what you get, in this case, using it as fuel is not viable.
PS: Thanks for updating your post btw.
You dont understand....... It does not produce more power it is a store of it. We can use it to power things not connected to a grid.......or in other words......fuel.....
No I don't understand. Antimatter does not exist in nature. Before storing it, you need to produce it, don't you?
It doesn't need to produce more energy than was used to create it........it only needs to produce energy........
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/fuel
here is the definition of fuel
I think you are the one not understanding. Before being able to use anything, you must produce it. If the costs necessary to produce this thing exceed the gains, it is not economically viable.
You do not seem to understand at all what antimatter is, how to produce it and how to store it. That's all. Read more about it and then come back to me. This conversation leads to nowhere.
batteries cost more to produce then the power they produce.......
It is literally a battery......it stores power for use on something that is not connected to a grid.......we don't connect cars to the grid.....we need something that can move them that doesn't weigh that much for example.....it would take more power to produce but you can't connect cars directly to a power grid.......you need a fuel
Interesting again ;)
Hey! Following.
Science is fun yeah, but hard to master.
Its a very cool concept but will we be able to provide enough power in the near future to be able to keep it from just colliding and causing mass destruction.
We can just not make atoms out of it. We can use magnetic fields to keep it stored. If we don't make too much we are fine.
Actually we can make antimatter atoms... Antihydrogen atoms are produced, observed and studied for some time already.
We have made helium what I meant was if we make it into atoms it is harder to store
Anti-helium was very hard to produce, as well as anti-hydrogen that is deeply studied. So, you are planning to use positrons or antiprotons as fuel... Really? That's funny.