[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry

Ok, maybe I am being a bit optimistic, but this is the stuff of science fiction. "By corralling clouds of antimatter particles in a cylindrical chamber laced with detectors and electric and magnetic fields, the physicists assembled anti-hydrogen atoms, the looking glass equivalent of hydrogen, the most simple atom in nature. Whereas hydrogen consists of a positively charged proton circled by a negatively charged electron, in anti-hydrogen the proton's counterpart, a negatively charged anti-proton, is circled by an anti-electron, otherwise known as a positron. They then observed the flashes of energy when the new anti-hydrogen atoms annihilated themselves in collisions with ordinary matter in the walls of the chamber."

We should ban this research immediately. Consider the nightmare if someone produces an anti-Ed. :lol:

<ducking>

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry

Ok, maybe I am being a bit optimistic, but this is the stuff of science fiction. "By corralling clouds of antimatter particles in a cylindrical chamber laced with detectors and electric and magnetic fields, the physicists assembled anti-hydrogen atoms, the looking glass equivalent of hydrogen, the most simple atom in nature. Whereas hydrogen consists of a positively charged proton circled by a negatively charged electron, in anti-hydrogen the proton's counterpart, a negatively charged anti-proton, is circled by an anti-electron, otherwise known as a positron. They then observed the flashes of energy when the new anti-hydrogen atoms annihilated themselves in collisions with ordinary matter in the walls of the chamber."

We should ban this research immediately. Consider the nightmare if someone produces an anti-Ed. :lol:

<ducking>

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Originally Posted by Bandersnatch

Alas...the "magnetic containment field" was one of Star Trek's booboos. Anti hydrogen, like all atoms, has a neutral charge. Now, if you just leave it as a soup of anti protons, now we're talkin'!

Why did Star Trek get it wrong? They used "anti-matter", but I don't recall them ever saying it was anti-hydrogen (or anything else). Anti-protons and positrons are considered anti-matter, I think (although "matter" is pushing it).

Also, didn't the Tokamak nuclear fusion experiments rely on a "magnetic bottle"? I suppose that if they were just fusing protons into hydrogen nucleii, that would make sense.

Steve

[Ed Hansberry]

Originally Posted by Pony99CA

We should ban this research immediately. Consider the nightmare if someone produces an anti-Ed. :lol:

Bizarro Ed.

Isn't it amazing you can tie just about any thread to a Seinfeld episide?

[Robotbeat]

Actually, over five years ago I heard that they made the first anti-hydrogen atoms. This isn't going to be a boundless energy source, but it is a very dense one, though. In fact, it is about twice as efficient of an energy source than is usually considered possible, since it annhilates both the matter and the anti-matter. Such an energy source would be good for making nano-probes into suicide bombers for the military. (That's a good idea... Oh great... I opened a can of worms...)

Such an energy source would also be useful for interstellar travel, since you generally want to take the fuel with you, the less fuel you take the better. Of course, this is at least two hundred years in the future (that is extremely optimistic, if you look at how much energy it would take to fuel interstellar travel). More likely, however, an easier way to travel to other planetary systems will be discovered/developed (that's my opinion, anyways). Personally, I don't think that any idea that we think is probable right now will be what we will use for such a purpose. Like fusion power. 200 years ago, no one would have thought that such an immensely powerful weapon (one that has the ability to kill most of the people on earth in a few hours and make the place unlivable--keep in mind that this is the absolute worst possible case and would not be likely to happen even in the event of an all-out nuclear war) could be made from the power inside of the atom, which then was hardly more than a fantasy dreamed up by some Greek philosopher/theorist (what was his name?).

[Underwater Mike]

:idea:

I have a theory that the iPAQ -- by either design or happenstance -- is actually a poorly performing antimatter collection and storage device. The containment field inside the iPAQ must leak, causing a dribble of antimatter to flow randomly throughout the device, annihilating whatever components it contacts.

That would explain why I've had to use my Carepaq six times for totally unrelated failures!