<a class="postlink" href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.4982" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.4982</a>
holy shit...once you can hold anti-matter f0r 1000 sec...longer isnt so hard anymore would be my guess Btw: this would be the first use probably [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_XbMRRtEJ8[/youtube]
Yes Angels and Demons, aka the bernini mystery. Also I've got no clue what that really was about. Trapping anti-matter... okay sounds cool... I'm a social studies guy, dropped out science and chemistry as soon as I could. What can we do with this knowlegde? (Except for making weapons, because mankind will always find a way to turn a new technique into a weapon.)
Everything: If we can hold anti-matter, would be one of the biggest breakthroughs in mankind, like nuclear energy... Medical: Treating cancer (like ion therapy) Fuel: (intergalactic) travel (1 kg of anti-matter has energy of 43 megaton TNT (biggest H-Bom)) Futurama isnt all silly
Weapons, lots of powerful undetectable explosives. Well, basically, every particle has his own anti-particle. If an antimatter particle was to collide with his normal matter counterpart, then both matter particles will be transformed into pure energy. This awesome Einstein guy was the first to preach about matter and energy being equal, according to E=MC². So, in this formula, E is obviously energy in joules, M is the mass in kilos and C is the speed of light in meters per second. So as most of you people know, the speed of light is a rather big number, 299792458 to be precise (by heart, all errors reserved). Which means that if we were to convert just a mere gramme of matter, this would yield far more energy than your average nuclear warhead.
lets put it this way: 1 atom = a load of energy. 1 gram = laying waste of a province 1 kg = laying waste to entire west europe. one downside tho... to make antimatter, they will have to use a LOT of energy: <a class="postlink" href="http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/embedded-systems/powering-the-large-hadron-collider/2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/embe ... collider/2</a> And this is just for atoms/molecules... imagine now they will make a gram of it: 3.350*10^19 atoms for 0.001 liter of water. yes, that is 33.500.000.000.000.000.000.000 atoms. And then to use it as a fuel, they will have to "invent" to have it as a controlled process. Which is near impossible, and can be only be experimented in space.... nice... create it in LHC, and then rocketshoot it up in space, to experiment there, etc. If then like with the Challenger it goes wrong, we lay waste to the country. <a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shut ... r_disaster</a> /edit: altho I dont know where they made that anti-matter, I think they don't need the LHC for that.
I agree with Pablosky and DataStorm on that matter. Annihilating matter with an Antimatter particle converts all of it's mass to pure energy. Pure energy! And that's a lot, believe me. Just a few kilograms of antimatter could produce energy output as much of the entire Sun for a few minutes! For example - the current tripple-fusion nuclear weapons produce only 1.5 - 3.0 % of all their mass to energy, which is a big waste. In that sense, a pen-sized antimatter container could store an energy for all the nuclear weapons ever tested by the humanity...in your pocket! Scientist speculate that during the moment of the Big Bang, the antimatter was as abundant as the matter in a term of mass. The particles collided with each-other releasing an enormous mass of energy which expanded and formed all the galaxies, stars, planets and all that exists as we know it. But still the matter was more than the antimatter, that's why we exist and matter is much more abundant than antimatter in the universe, which is a topic still under research. If humanity could produce sufficient quantities of antimatter, this would allow us to develop new revolutionary ways of energy storage and production. We could easily have all the electricity and heat we need, reach new stars with ease, space travel will not be just science fiction... The problem is E=MC²...so in our "material" universe we need at lest the same amount of energy to produce antimatter from regular matter (to use as fuel later) rendering it absolutely ineffective in the current technological development. Source: Wikipedia
Maybe visuals will make it easier [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo8a9FCgnfk[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzsj1biDfpQ[/youtube] This would a 1 kg antimatter bomb do (1kg: +/- 50.000.000 TNT) [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxD44HO8dNQ[/youtube]
so, for all purposes to make fuel for a long distance mission of anti-matter, the things are: - a space station the size of Babylon 5 or w/e would be needed, to create the anti-matter in quantities, and for safety some other small station for storage of it. - then experiments must be done to start "using" it as a proppellant. I'm not entirely sure on the mass-accelerant-conversion or w/e of it. Energy doesn't mean perse that a acceleration can be made out of it. As its not really a "controllable" substance, any "fail" would blow up the testrig, requiring a new one. - Talking bout acceleration, acceleration in space is done by throwing matter away in a specific direction in highest speed that can be done. why? cos if you are in space, and you trow a rock away from you, the acceleration you get is speed times the mass of the rock divided by your own mass in the opposite direction. The higher the speed you can trow something away, the less mass is needed to trow away to get the same speed. 1 kg of anti-matter converted to energy uses another kg of normal matter. so say thats 2 kg x speed of light (energy would be blasted away that fast I'd guess). For ease of calculation we don't lose on the sides. @ 100% conversion this would mean 2 kg times 300.000.000 meter per second = 600.000.000 / by the mass in kg's of the craft.... oh wait, that thing weights say 6000 tonnes, 6.000.000 kg, great, now we go 50 meter per second faster. hmm, that is really fast man, we reach with that our nearest neightbour in... 4 lightyear = 300.000.000 meter x 4 year x 365 days x 24 hours x 60 minutes x 60 seconds / 50 meter per second. well, its at least 7 times as fast as walking. /edit: to be usable in going somewhere else, we'd need ~60 % of light speed or so. 300.000.000 * 0.6 = 180.000.000 m/s / 50 = 3.600.000 kg thrust / 2 = 1.800.000 kg of anti-matter....and 1.800.000 kg of normal matter to let it blow up. and then again, we need to slow down once we arrive there.... so thats another 1.800.000 kg of antimatter that needs to be stored for that purpose for 6 years without incident. wait, what? oh, but we going to make antimatter along the way.... yeah right. TL;DR: for all practical purposes is anti-matter nice and all, but not usable.
Thats why spacetravel is nearly impossible in terms of 2 dimensions...you have to bend space to you...
true, but bending space requires a gravity well bigger then any known black hole, I'd guess we'd not survive that trip. Altho I would find it interesting to be within the relativity zone where light doesn't escape to be close enough to space that has been bended, I'd guess I wont be able to run fast enough away to keep myself from falling in the black hole. as time plays tricks there it would be hard to time at relativistic accelerations to get a right fix to make that punch thru space to another location. And even if, on the other end is another black hole to escape from. And I'd not be so sure on what happens when 2 black holes "short-circuit". and then I'd not even talked bout the tidal forces. just that would rip you apart before even getting any close. /edit: yes, all this is bogus in regards to bending. It is true one needs gravity to bend, but gravity isn't a property, its an effect of mass in space. Question is, can we generate "gravitational" distortions to simulate gravity. So far only stars and black holes seem to be able to do such, and planets like earth in a much lesser extend.
And the existence of your short circuit....a white hole has never been found (looks like slang talk now ) There are black holes (rotating black holes) where the space-time singularity (hybrid singularity's) is not as destructive and would be theoretical possible to travel through.... Well maybe in 60 years we would laugh about this while we move to Andromeda
You can't "go through" a black hole. It's not actually a "hole", but a uber-massive gravitational source. Flying into it will destroy you in any way possible to get destroyed. A wormhole is a different thing though...
??? A wormhole is a bridge between two spacetime fields....This can be only achieved by massif gravity = a black hole deforming the singularity's in spacetime...so a wormhole is technically a black hole and a (white) hole combined (and not yet proven). So yes they are the same...
I am not a physicist so I don't pretend I'm right, but as long as I know a "black hole" is formed when a super-massive star burns out all it's hydrogen in the end of it's lifespan, so there is nothing to oppose its enormous gravity. So it starts to collapse into itself until it becomes as small as a point. By that time it's gravitation is so strong that even photons can't escape it's near vicinity, literally sucking all matter without a chance to escape. I can't even imagine what it could possibly do to a supposed starship trying to reach it. A wormhole is something hypothetical that could allow one to travel through the spacetime. They say a wormhole could exist near a black hole because of the enormous gravitational force needed to create one. They are not the same thing. Anyway, I don't think I'll be alive to see they figure this one out...
Spacetime is a grid where planets and stars lay on... You see here that the gravity of earth disturbes the grid, what we call gravity. a blackhole disturbes this grid much harder = more gravity. (uncontrollably) you see the singularity's are much more disturbed.... so a wormhole has to be a black hole to achieve this. As I said before there are different blackholes (various strengths) in the universe. In the blackhole there are less disturbed singularity's where you wouldn't be torn apart...a blackhole + a whitehole form a wormhole...but this is all hypothetically cause an exit 'aka' whitehole has never been seen or found... We dont know what happens inside a blackhole, the torning apart isnt on every singularity has hard. So theoretically you could come out alive: you just need to know where to travel and thats the tricky part as Datastorm said. I get your confusion: as there would be a wormhole with massif gravity disturbing to the spacetime grid different form a blackhole, but its never seen. The only thing we know with that kind of massif gravity disturbing are black holes. So for now thats our only chance in spacetravel. Hope its a little clearer now. Edit: btw I hope to see it, but it would be impossible to at least travel to a wormhole...so no would be sadly the answer aldo if Im 80 or so, they can use me as a test person