Antimatter atoms produced and trapped at CERN

[Zilla]

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2010/PR22.10E.html

 

Geneva, 17 November 2010. The ALPHA experiment at CERN¹ has taken an important step forward in developing techniques to understand one of the Universes open questions: is there a difference between matter and antimatter? In a paper published in Nature today, the collaboration shows that it has successfully produced and trapped atoms of antihydrogen. This development opens the path to new ways of making detailed measurements of antihydrogen, which will in turn allow scientists to compare matter and antimatter.

 

Antimatter or the lack of it remains one of the biggest mysteries of science. Matter and its counterpart are identical except for opposite charge, and they annihilate when they meet. At the Big Bang, matter and antimatter should have been produced in equal amounts. However, we know that our world is made up of matter: antimatter seems to have disappeared. To find out what has happened to it, scientists employ a range of methods to investigate whether a tiny difference in the properties of matter and antimatter could point towards an explanation.

 

One of these methods is to take one of the best-known systems in physics, the hydrogen atom, which is made of one proton and one electron, and check whether its antimatter counterpart, antihydrogen, consisting of an antiproton and a positron, behaves in the same way. CERN is the only laboratory in the world with a dedicated low-energy antiproton facility where this research can be carried out.

 

The antihydrogen programme goes back a long way. In 1995, the first nine atoms of man-made antihydrogen were produced at CERN. Then, in 2002, the ATHENA and ATRAP experiments showed that it was possible to produce antihydrogen in large quantities, opening up the possibility of conducting detailed studies. The new result from ALPHA is the latest step in this journey.

 

Antihydrogen atoms are produced in a vacuum at CERN, but are nevertheless surrounded by normal matter. Because matter and antimatter annihilate when they meet, the antihydrogen atoms have a very short life expectancy. This can be extended, however, by using strong and complex magnetic fields to trap them and thus prevent them from coming into contact with matter. The ALPHA experiment has shown that it is possible to hold on to atoms of antihydrogen in this way for about a tenth of a second: easily long enough to study them. Of the many thousands of antiatoms the experiment has created, ALPHAs latest paper reports that 38 have been trapped for long enough to study.

 

For reasons that no one yet understands, nature ruled out antimatter. It is thus very rewarding, and a bit overwhelming, to look at the ALPHA device and know that it contains stable, neutral atoms of antimatter, said Jeffrey Hangst of Aarhus University, Denmark, spokesman of the ALPHA collaboration. This inspires us to work that much harder to see if antimatter holds some secret.

 

In another recent development in CERNs antimatter programme, the ASACUSA experiment has demonstrated a new technique for producing antihydrogen atoms. In a paper soon to appear in Physical Review Letters, the collaboration reports success in producing antihydrogen in a so-called Cusp trap, an essential precursor to making a beam. ASACUSA plans to develop this technique to the point at which beams of sufficient intensity will survive for long enough to be studied.

 

With two alternative methods of producing and eventually studying antihydrogen, antimatter will not be able to hide its properties from us much longer, said Yasunori Yamazaki of Japans RIKEN research centre and a member of the ASACUSA collaboration. Theres still some way to go, but were very happy to see how well this technique works.

 

These are significant steps in antimatter research, said CERN Director General Rolf Heuer, and an important part of the very broad research programme at CERN.

 

Full information about the ASACUSA approach will be made available when the paper is published.

 

• For further information on ALPHA experiment, please read here: http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/30577
• Pictures available here: http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1307522
• Footage available here: http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1307524

 

And another article: http://cms.web.cern.ch/cms/News/2010/FirstZs-HeavyIons/index.html

 

Keep going CERN. It also interest me the fact that an equal amount of Anti-Matter should have been produced when the universe formed, but it all disappeared. Hopefully their studies can lead to some great discoveries.

[Alg]

Interesting to see where this goes.

 

Specifically this bit:

Antimatter – or the lack of it – remains one of the biggest mysteries of science. Matter and its counterpart are identical except for opposite charge, and they annihilate when they meet. At the Big Bang, matter and antimatter should have been produced in equal amounts. However, we know that our world is made up of matter: antimatter seems to have disappeared. To find out what has happened to it, scientists employ a range of methods to investigate whether a tiny difference in the properties of matter and antimatter could point towards an explanation.

Not much more I can ask without echoing the article. Probably something that everyone there is overlooking, or they're all looking for the wrong thing.

[Danqazmlp]

The whole matter and anti-matter thing went straight over my head. It is probably a really cool discovery, but I haven't got a clue.

[Will H]

The whole matter and anti-matter thing went straight over my head. It is probably a really cool discovery, but I haven't got a clue.

 

This is going off A-level knowledge but basically, it's possible to create matter from energy if you've got enough of it. The only snag is every time this happens, two particles are always created instead of one. One is considered 'matter' and the other 'antimatter'. As far as we know, they are physically identical, although they have opposite charges. So, if you have the right wavelength of light, it can split into an electron and a positron, which will arc away. These particles can also collide in the reverse process, producing the photon with the same wavelength and energy which created them in the first place in a process called annihilation. The same thing can be done with any particle if you've got enough time and energy to do so. It's so difficult to keep antimatter in a container made of matter because it will easily hit the side and convert into photons again.

 

If you take an electron made of matter, and a proton also made of matter, and let them bind together, they form hydrogen which is found everywhere in the universe. Similarly, if you take an antimatter positron (the counterpart of an electron), and an antimatter antiproton (the counterpart of a proton), they form antihydrogen. Presumably, antihydrogen has its own chemistry and if the stuff didn't annihilate as soon as it touches anything made of matter, you could create bigger things like anticarbon and antimolecules. The problem is, if matter is found everywhere in the universe, where is all the antimatter? Scientists are trying to look for a subtle difference that antimatter has that made so much of it disappear without taking nearly all of the matter from the universe with it. The ability to trap antimatter and keep it in place for a long enough period to study it in detail is a big step forward, although it's not a discovery as such. It's the prelude to a discovery, and I'm looking forward to it.

[Wizz]

Hrm I remember discussing anti matter along with dark matter in Physics. It's really amazing, it breaks the rules of science when they touch. They actually annihilate each other, it actually destroys matter! That's what worries me though, imagine this power in other hands. I'm pretty sure that for now the annihilation would be small, but what if you had more than one antimatter atom?

[Range_This11]

This is coming from a person whose worst subject is science, but, although a little far-fetched, this seems like it could be developed into a weapon, no? Would be pretty sad if it ended up like that.

[Alg]

From what I've heard/read, antimatter is ridiculously expensive to create, and the total amount created hasn't been nearly enough to be dangerous.

 

No Angels and Demons style terrorists for you :razz:

[Will H]

I swear Angels and Demons was both the worst and best things that has happened to particle physics. It's made people interested, but it's given them completely wrong ideas.

 

Antimatter is unfeasible for use as a weapon, or at least by any known or experimental methods. You have to stop the stuff from colliding with the walls of the container. You can do that with very strong electromagnetic fields, but that requires supercooled magnets at a temperature barely a degree above absolute zero. That in turn requires machinery the size of a large office block, not to mention the liquid helium and a huge electrical supply. And that will only hold a few atoms of antimatter. You may as well keep your nukes.

[Range_This11]

I've honestly never read that book or any of Dan Brown's garbage haha. I figured the question had to be asked since nuclear technology has the same dilemma.

[Dizzle229]

At first glance of the thread title I thought that an anteater somehow got trapped in the LHC.

[Giordano]

It's really amazing, it breaks the rules of science when they touch. They actually annihilate each other, it actually destroys matter!

I sense the human race will evolve into wizards. :ugeek:

[Alg]

It's really amazing, it breaks the rules of science when they touch. They actually annihilate each other, it actually destroys matter!

I sense the human race will evolve into wizards. :ugeek:

Unless my understanding is wrong, it doesn't destroy matter as much as it converts it to energy with perfect efficiency. Unfortunate that with our current technology it takes more energy to create it than we'd get from annihilating the particles.

[obfuscator]

Interesting. Good to see the 27 billion is at least doing something and the world hasn't been destroyed yet.

[Will H]

I've honestly never read that book or any of Dan Brown's garbage haha. I figured the question had to be asked since nuclear technology has the same dilemma.

 

Fair enough. Just making things clear. :)

It's really amazing, it breaks the rules of science when they touch.

Interesting. Good to see the 27 billion is at least doing something and the world hasn't been destroyed yet.

 

Particle physics me is now curled up in a corner, silently weeping.

 

Unfortunate that with our current technology it takes more energy to create it than we'd get from annihilating the particles.

 

It's physically impossible to get back more, or even equal energy, no matter how good we get at it. First law of thermodynamics; the energy you put in to create the particles would equal the energy you get out from annihilation. Also, you'll always lose some energy during the process of trying to get the energy into a usable form from the annihilation, probably in the form of heat. On the other hand, it's stores energy with 100% efficiency, which is still pretty funky.

[Dracion1]

I swear Angels and Demons was both the worst and best things that has happened to particle physics. It's made people interested, but it's given them completely wrong ideas.Antimatter is unfeasible for use as a weapon, or at least by any known or experimental methods. You have to stop the stuff from colliding with the walls of the container. You can do that with very strong electromagnetic fields, but that requires supercooled magnets at a temperature barely a degree above absolute zero. That in turn requires machinery the size of a large office block, not to mention the liquid helium and a huge electrical supply. And that will only hold a few atoms of antimatter. You may as well keep your nukes.

 

Not only this, but they also created so little of it there wouldn't be enough to cause any noticeable sort of explosion. They made about 40 or so atoms in total, which wouldn't even heat a small couple of coffee if it reacted, let alone destroy the Vatican.

[Alg]

It's physically impossible to get back more, or even equal energy, no matter how good we get at it. First law of thermodynamics; the energy you put in to create the particles would equal the energy you get out from annihilation. Also, you'll always lose some energy during the process of trying to get the energy into a usable form from the annihilation, probably in the form of heat. On the other hand, it's stores energy with 100% efficiency, which is still pretty funky.

Thinking that the trick isn't getting back more or equal energy as much as it is getting usable energy from something new, or from an old thing in a new way. Probably not going to come from this but would still be interesting if it develops along that kind of path.

 

Out of curiosity, while we get energy out of both atoms, we only have to 'create' the antimatter, right? Might be interesting to see if we could use antimatter as a more efficient* way of disposing of matter we don't need or can't use.

 

* More efficient than burying it or dumping it in the ocean

[fakeitormakeit2]

This is coming from a person whose worst subject is science, but, although a little far-fetched, this seems like it could be developed into a weapon, no? Would be pretty sad if it ended up like that.

That's what Alfred Nobel said about his invention.

[DUELMASTER30]

I swear Angels and Demons was both the worst and best things that has happened to particle physics. It's made people interested, but it's given them completely wrong ideas.Antimatter is unfeasible for use as a weapon, or at least by any known or experimental methods. You have to stop the stuff from colliding with the walls of the container. You can do that with very strong electromagnetic fields, but that requires supercooled magnets at a temperature barely a degree above absolute zero. That in turn requires machinery the size of a large office block, not to mention the liquid helium and a huge electrical supply. And that will only hold a few atoms of antimatter. You may as well keep your nukes.

 

Not only this, but they also created so little of it there wouldn't be enough to cause any noticeable sort of explosion. They made about 40 or so atoms in total, which wouldn't even heat a small couple of coffee if it reacted, let alone destroy the Vatican.

They made a little over 10 million particles. ~10m annihilated and they trapped 38 I think.

[Will H]

It's physically impossible to get back more, or even equal energy, no matter how good we get at it. First law of thermodynamics; the energy you put in to create the particles would equal the energy you get out from annihilation. Also, you'll always lose some energy during the process of trying to get the energy into a usable form from the annihilation, probably in the form of heat. On the other hand, it's stores energy with 100% efficiency, which is still pretty funky.

Thinking that the trick isn't getting back more or equal energy as much as it is getting usable energy from something new, or from an old thing in a new way. Probably not going to come from this but would still be interesting if it develops along that kind of path.

 

Out of curiosity, while we get energy out of both atoms, we only have to 'create' the antimatter, right? Might be interesting to see if we could use antimatter as a more efficient* way of disposing of matter we don't need or can't use.

 

* More efficient than burying it or dumping it in the ocean

 

Actually, that's a really good idea. If you can create a constant stream of antimatter, and then send it into the waste matter, it would annihilate it and convert it into photons and heat (feel free to attach a generator to reduce the cost of the matter-antimatter generation). Then, if we can trap the produced matter particles, slow them down enough to bind with each other, it would be possible to form fuel for nuclear fusion. Deuterium or Helium-3 sound like good candidates. You'll also release energy doing so, feel free to generate electricity from that too.

 

...there's probably a reason that you can't do this, but if the technology's refined enough, it sounds like it could work.

[Bier]

Scientists are trying to look for a subtle difference that antimatter has that made so much of it disappear without taking nearly all of the matter from the universe with it.

Actually almost all matter were destroyed I think. There were still enough matter left to create the universe as we know it.

 

And destroying garbage with antimatter seems like an extreme waste of energy since most energy would probably be lost. Sending it into space would probably be a better idea, and that's a really stupid idea.