Researchers fire most powerful antimatter beam ever

Scientists at North Carolina's PULSTAR nuclear reactor facility fired a positron bean five times stronger than any other ever created earlier this month, breaking a record previously held by a team in Germany. The antimatter device -- which apparently looks like a Star Trek warp reactor -- was developed as part of a two year project by NC State, the University of Michigan, and Oak Ridge National Labs. Now that the device is working, the team is looking for practical applications for the tech, including building an "antimatter telescope," which would allow even closer observations of atomic interactions. Or they could use it to blow up the universe. You know, whatever.

[Via TG Daily]

[Chris @ Oct 27th 2007 11:27AM]

I don't know what all that means... but at least it looks cool!

[2ASquared @ Oct 27th 2007 12:07PM]

Don't want to be picky, but I think to article said they were looking to build an antimatter microscope, not a telescope.

[nih @ Oct 27th 2007 12:33PM]

What they're not telling you is that anti-matter is destructively opposite matter! The more anti-matter they produce, the less matter there is to go around.

Stop anti-matter beams now! Protect our matter!

[Josh @ Oct 27th 2007 1:49PM]

It doesn't matter

[strider_mt2k @ Oct 27th 2007 2:00PM]

Mind
Matter

[bombastinator @ Oct 27th 2007 2:42PM]

are you sure antimatter matters all that much? Or is it just a lot of patter?

[James @ Oct 28th 2007 12:44AM]

*groans*

[JeffinLA @ Oct 27th 2007 11:27AM]

She canna hold together capn!

[heng @ Oct 27th 2007 11:31AM]

hmm.. Eat baked beans, they're good for your heart.. I wonder what plant positron beans come from?
but they are mighty .. ;) lol.

[rTwelve @ Oct 27th 2007 1:23PM]

I planted them into the ground--
And instead of a magical beanstalk, the world caved in on itself.

[Corndog @ Oct 27th 2007 1:59PM]

Beans beans the nuclear fruit.
The more you eat the more you shoot.
The more you shoot, the more you atomically interact.
Have positron beans with every meal!

[gene f @ Oct 27th 2007 11:30PM]

Yeah, you picked up on that
"positron bean five times"

Don't they ever READ these before they post?

[ColonelKernel @ Oct 27th 2007 11:41PM]

Whatever you do, do not substitute, "positron beans" for kidney beans in your chili. Explosive stuff.

[michael @ Oct 27th 2007 11:52AM]

What else could you do with antimatter? Besides evil?

Are there any practical uses for it? Is there something antimatter can do, but they haven't found yet?

I would appreciate anyone answering this.

[DickHardknocks @ Oct 27th 2007 11:56AM]

Antimatter - Matter anihilation yields ENERGY.

With any Energy release, there is the possibility of doing great good: heating food, converting salt water to potable, clean energy for vehicles, etc...

...but, there is also the great evil. WEAPONS - considerably more powerful than nuclear bombs, but, theoretically cleaner (with the exception of ejected dust into the atmosphere).


Antimatter will most likely be what powers space exploration unless FUSION power becomes viable first.


A satellite could theoretically release an antimatter stream for a VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME until it built up tremendous speed allowing it to travel fast and far out into interstellar space.

[DickHardknocks @ Oct 27th 2007 11:56AM]

Antimatter - Matter anihilation yields ENERGY.

With any Energy release, there is the possibility of doing great good: heating food, converting salt water to potable, clean energy for vehicles, etc...

...but, there is also the great evil. WEAPONS - considerably more powerful than nuclear bombs, but, theoretically cleaner (with the exception of ejected dust into the atmosphere).


Antimatter will most likely be what powers space exploration unless FUSION power becomes viable first.


A satellite could theoretically release an antimatter stream for a VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME until it built up tremendous speed allowing it to travel fast and far out into interstellar space.

[Andrew @ Oct 27th 2007 12:00PM]

Lol - a positron bean!

[salientarbiter @ Oct 27th 2007 12:03PM]

I assume this is a serious question?

Antimatter has nothing to do with "evil." In fact, you can't blow anything up with it either. When an antimatter particle comes in contact with its normal opposite, the two simply cancel each other out. There is no explosion, they simply cease to exist. Antimatter studies have tons of applications as well.

You may have heard of particle accelerators, such as the one in Chicago and CERN currently being built in Europe. They accelerate particles and smash them together and see the elementary particles that are produced (quarks, gluons, etc.) and this helps us understand our universe better. (I know it sounds outlandish but it really has lead to a lot of advancements in physics) Antimatter consists of the majority of studies being done in particle smashing right now, since its relatively new compared to study of ordinary protons. Plus, newer accelerators are using antimatter to do the actual monitoring of the particles that come out.

A "bomb" of antimatter would never EVER be feasible on any scale. First of all, there's the whole problem that I explained above how it doesn't blow up, it simply makes something cease to exist on a very VERY small scale. Also, the efforts laboratories have to go through just to obtain antimatter is tremendous. To obtain just a couple hundred positrons (antimatter protons), it could take up to hundreds of hours of work and tons of funding, and then if there's a slight jogging of the equipment the positrons could hit the side of their magnetic holding chamber and all disappear.

I hope I answered your questions, and don't knock antimatter! They're one of the newly discovered keys to learning more about our universe.

[salientarbiter @ Oct 27th 2007 12:07PM]

@ DickHardKnocks

Matter annihilation does release energy, but not in the form that could be harnessed for any really conventional means.

When antimatter comes in contact with matter, the two eliminate each other and release a mixture of photons and gamma rays (if the magnitude is high enough). Photons just give off light, and gamma rays are harmful radiation. Unless you had solar panels lining the walls of the chamber, or some way to convert gamma rays into useable energy, then antimatter collisions couldn't really be used to initiate any weapons.

[leonheart1987 @ Oct 27th 2007 6:22PM]

wow..I thought the whole technology described in Angels & Demons by dan browns was a fake.but really,could you make anything disappear with that?gosh,who can tell if anyone will produce a new weapon of mass destruct with that..scary

[MikeG @ Oct 27th 2007 12:23PM]

@ salientarbiter

http://www.engadget.com/2004/10/05/air-force-working-on-antimatter-weapons/

This article contradicts near enuogh everything you just said.
I think you responded to the OP's answer with little more than A2 knowledge and with a name of salientarbiter you seem to suit the right age.

[chris @ Oct 27th 2007 3:54PM]

Ok, I'll answer...the reaction between matter and antimatter, on a large scale, can produce enough energy for a theoretical spaceship to travel at 99.9% the speed of light...this means time travel is possible. The creation of sustainable matter/antimatter fuel is the first step toward feasible time travel throughout our universe...just look at Einstein's hypotheses.

[michael @ Oct 27th 2007 4:13PM]

Hey, guys. Thanks for answering.

Now I have a ton more knowledge about antimatter and it's uses.

These comments are pretty helpful. It's pretty interesting what the potential of antimatter can be.

Good job.

[andyo @ Oct 27th 2007 4:16PM]

salientarbiter:

If you are so into particle physics, don't you know about the First Law? Matter or antimatter (energy) can't just disappear. The universe is just a big bowl of energy. Some of it is matter, some antimatter, some are forces and some unknown stuff. Matter and antimatter can't just cancel each other, on the contrary they will have the greatest energy release (photons, methinks), since there is virtually no residuals. A matter/antimatter engine would be the most efficient type of engine, and the most efficient type of bomb.

In fact, scientists know that galaxies are made of either matter or antimatter almost in their entirety, because they don't see huge releases of energy coming out that they would expect if matter/antimatter were colliding. It is not because they don't see matter just disappearing.

[salientarbiter @ Oct 27th 2007 5:55PM]

MikeG, why do you criticize, and then prove yourself wrong? Even in the comments of the article you linked to, it supports what I've said. And the personal attacks aren't necessary, pal. I'm an intern at the Princeton Plasma Physics lab. Not exactly antimatter, but I've had a fair amount of background in the subject before working on plasma fusion reactions. What do you do for a living?

Antimatter + Matter = Energy. That much is extremely obvious, as I've already said that they produce high levels of radiation and photons. They disappear afterwards in the physical sense, something else that I made clear. But there aren't any BOMBS that are made of light and radiation. There's no explosive force to be harnessed, no reactions taking place. If anything, a huge amount of positrons placed in our atmosphere would simply cause a vacuum and an inhabitable place for a while with all the gamma radiation.

I'll rephrase it once again. Antimatter does produce output, but only in the form of LIGHT and RADIATION. It would never be an "efficient source of energy," do you have any idea how much funding and electricity it takes to even produce a teeny amount of positrons? They don't just catch these things in the wild, they make and isolate them first. And that's extremely intensive to do and maintain in the first place, let alone capture them and put them in the fuel tank of some vehicle and feed them into a reaction chamber ten by ten (re: impossible).

[ballerist @ Oct 28th 2007 7:03PM]

@ - salientarbiter
You show your stupidity when you say that there aren't any bombs made from light. You also show it when you say photons give off light, that doesn't make any sense at all. Saying photons give off light is like saying H2O gives off water, its the same thing. You must have absolutely no concept of what a nuclear bomb is if you think that photons are harmless. Gamma rays are photons, high energy photons actually. The splitting of an atom in a fission bomb, or the fusing of them in a fusion bomb, release energy in the form of gamma radiation (amongst other kinds). This energy is then absorbed by surrounding matter (normally air when we use them). The absorbtion of this energy quickly and greatly heats up the matter causing it to rapidly expand. As you know, air will expand greatly when it heats up, and this expansion is what causes the fireball/blast wave of an atmospheric nuclear detonation. So, put simply, an anti-matter bomb is definitly a feasable weapon, and could produce much more energy compared to it's mass, since ALL of its mass is turned directly into energy. e=mc^2 anybody?

[meester anderson @ Oct 27th 2007 11:00PM]

umm, i hate to break it to you, but what do you think the end result of such a massive release of energy would be? The energy output of a gram of anti matter annihalating with matter is greater than a 1 megaton nuclear bomb. Now one could argue that nuclear fission is a very inneficient process, meaning much of the destruction is caused by the heat released in the process, not the sum of the energy. But if this is true, than why would fusion bombs exist, as fusion is much more efficient than fission, so if it isn't total energy output that matters, then why are fusion bombs used? People say "it just releases photons, so it will be light and thats it," well photons are one of just three (perhaps four) force carriers and saying photons=light is a GROSS misunderstanding. I'm not sayint the technology will be feasible anytime soon, but lets just say that you guys can stick around when the future antimatter bombs are going off, i'm getting the hell out of there

[matthewfkennedy @ Oct 27th 2007 11:57AM]

They could threaten to destroy the world unless we paid them.....ONE MILLION DOLLARS!!!!

[strider_mt2k @ Oct 27th 2007 11:59AM]

All things serve the beam.

'Say thankya.

[Shunnabunich @ Oct 27th 2007 12:09PM]

"...which apparently looks like a Star Trek warp reactor..."

You mean they put strobing neon lights along the length of the reactor? SWEET! :D

[Dimplemonkey @ Oct 27th 2007 12:38PM]

Can you say, "Missile Command"? I knew that you could, neighbor!

[applefreak @ Oct 27th 2007 1:18PM]

Isn't antimater the (anti)stuf needed for actual hyperspeed, or is that dark matter........could someone set me straight on that?

[Austin @ Oct 27th 2007 2:14PM]

What is hyperspeed?

Is that like Warp speed?

Problem with both of those technologies being analyzed, is even if Warp or Hyper speed is one day invented, who says it will use any technology from today?

Besides, isn't the speed of light still the universal speed limit?

[applefreak @ Oct 27th 2007 2:32PM]

hyperspeed IS warp speed

computer analysis shows that you would need a bubble of this stuff around the ship to protect it.

as far as we know, things ca go AS FAST but not FASTER THEN light

[ak.anthony @ Oct 27th 2007 1:47PM]

you say you cant make a weapon out of antimatter, but things "cease to exist"
sounds kinda like a weapon to me

[salientarbiter @ Oct 27th 2007 5:57PM]

The thing is you would need an equal amount of antimatter particles to the amount of matter particles to make a perfect annihilation. Antimatter is extremely hard to create and maintain, and we're talking about trapping individual particles here. If you want a really inefficient weapon to destroy a couple dozen protons, then yeah antimatter could be a possible weapon :)

[Rob Lewis @ Oct 27th 2007 1:58PM]

i'm giving you all she's got cap'n!

[ethana2 @ Oct 27th 2007 2:10PM]

Hmmm... can they store the positrons somehow? This could be a novel fuel cell... Nuclear afterburn.

'now hit that lead with some antimatter'

[Dan @ Oct 27th 2007 3:40PM]

hopefully they dont use this to kill the pope like in that shitty book.

[NeoteriX @ Oct 27th 2007 3:48PM]

Physicist 1: There's something very important I forgot to tell you.
Physicist 2: What?
Physicist 1: Don't cross the beams.
Physicist 2: Why?
Physicist 1: It would be bad.
Physicist 2: I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean, "bad"?
Physicist 1: Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light... Total protonic reversal.
Physicist 2: Right. That's bad. Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks.

[Xee @ Oct 27th 2007 4:21PM]

Ah, that crazy Spengler and his protonic reversals.

[Eztips @ Oct 27th 2007 4:38PM]

Physicist 3: I dunno, it just popped in there?
Physicist 2: WHAT, JUST POPPED IN THERE?!?

[strider_mt2k @ Oct 28th 2007 9:25AM]

You never studied...

[andyo @ Oct 27th 2007 4:24PM]

chris.

Einstein's "hypotheses" are not hypotheses, at least those regarding time travel (forward only, of course), which is General Relativity. GR has been proven right time and time again. Atomic clocks have been flown in airplanes and have traveled in time nanoseconds into the future.

In fact there are time travelers right now. The record-holder seems to be Sergei Avdeyev, who traveled a whopping 1/50th of a second into the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Avdeyev

[andyo @ Oct 27th 2007 4:26PM]

oops, this was meant for chris.

[andyo @ Oct 27th 2007 4:27PM]

argh! no html! It was for this chris.

chris @ Oct 27th 2007 3:54PM

[ballerist @ Oct 28th 2007 7:03PM]

Meh, thats more a a special relativity clause than general relativity. Remember, special deals with velocity, where general deals with acceleration/gravity

[andyo @ Oct 29th 2007 6:01AM]

For what it's worth.

GR takes into account both speed time-dilation and gravitational time-dilation.

[keyesdt @ Oct 27th 2007 4:46PM]

How much matter can the anti-matter splatter if the anti-matter could splatter matter?

[Kizorblade @ Oct 27th 2007 5:14PM]

All of it ;)