Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Evidence For Antimatter Anomaly Mounts

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the nature-of-things dept.

Science 147

sciencehabit writes "The big bang created a lot of matter—along with the same amount of antimatter, which wiped out everything and brought the universe to an untimely end. That's what accepted theoretical physics tell us—though things clearly didn't work out that way. Now, results from a U.S. particle smasher are providing new evidence for a subtle difference in the properties of matter and antimatter that may explain how the early universe survived."

cancel ×

147 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The universe ended? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201347)

Why didn't anyone tell me? Why am I still here?

Re:The universe ended? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201387)

Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure.

Re:The universe ended? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201419)

Go rub sand on an envelope republishit.

feeding the troll (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201675)

Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure.

Still better than Bush the lesser.

And that senile old coot McCain.
And that dingbat barbie Palin

And that hatemonger Santorum.
And that privileged robber baron Romny
And that sleazy old lardass Gingrinch.
And that bug-crazy old coot Paul.
And cmdr grab-ass Cain
And batshit barbie #2 Bachmann
And Bush jr - lite, Perry.
And that blowhard Trump.
Jon Huntsman is the only one that didn't make me throw up a little in my mouth, so the Republicans had to dismiss him early.


Maybe the Republicans should find some candidates that aren't reprehensible wastes of skin.

Re:feeding the troll (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201985)

And that dingbat barbie Palin
And cmdr grab-ass Cain
And batshit barbie #2 Bachmann

Liberals love blacks and women as long as they stay on the planation / in the kitchen, respectively. If a strong-minded woman or minority arises as a leader on the right, liberals do everything in their power to destroy them by any means.
There's nothing wrong with Cain that's not even more wrong with Bill Clinton (don't get me wrong, they're both undeserving of public trust if half of the alleged sexual harrassment is true). And in many ways Palin was more qualified than Obama in 2008 in executive experience, and certainly gave a better account of herself in public speeches without a teleprompter. I realize you're having fun feeding the troll (as am I), but the "bats**t barbie" thing is offensive, sexist, unfair and largely untrue, just like many (most?) liberal criticisms of Palin.

Re:feeding the troll (-1, Troll)

Dutchmaan (442553) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202063)

but the "bats**t barbie" thing is offensive, sexist, unfair and largely untrue, just like many (most?) liberal criticisms of Palin.

If you read this post, it gives you autism!

Re:feeding the troll (-1, Troll)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202929)

but the "bats**t barbie" thing is offensive, sexist, unfair and largely untrue, just like many (most?) liberal criticisms of Palin.

If you read this post, it gives you autism!

178 characters, or 148 characters not counting whitespace.

Re:feeding the troll (-1, Offtopic)

lgw (121541) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202241)

Your overall point may be valid, but that doesn't change the fact that:

Palin is an attantion whore more than anything else.
Cain clearly ha sno concept of how to deal with a scandal.
Bachmann really was crazy (or thouroughly bought by the competing vaccine vendor she had ties with - either way).

I'd put up with the like of Romney, or Perry, or even Newt, to stop the systematic looting of the treasury, but oh man the choices suck. The lack of thought leadership on the right right now is striking. No one is explaining the reasoning behind conservative ideas right now at the national level, neither candidate nor pundit, and bizarre strawmen are ever-more confused with actual conservative beliefs.

Re:feeding the troll (-1, Offtopic)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202313)

" to stop the systematic looting of the treasury"
Pro Tip: anyone whose says that doesn't actual understand large economic, nor to they understand the underpinning math of SS.

Re:feeding the troll (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39203059)

So you prefer "systematic destruction of the wealth of all Americans by funneling an excessive amount of printed money to worthless bailouts of corporations with the best lobbyists," then?

The only math behind SS was the calculation to leave it as a separate line item on paychecks and somehow dupe the American people into thinking that a government organization could be fiscally responsible for it.

Re:feeding the troll (-1, Troll)

lgw (121541) | more than 2 years ago | (#39203127)

What does SS have to do with it? We've handed an insane amount of money straight from taxpayers to corporations to "bail out" banks &c, starting towards the end of Bush's tenure and ramping up considerably during the start of Obama's.

SS is a slow burn - I don't like the way it works (my plan instead makes everyone wealthy), but with enough immigration we could keep the scheme going for quite some time. Medicare is a fast burn - the unfunded liability is actually greater than all the wealth in America - but still slow compared to the, well, outright looting that's been going on.

Re:feeding the troll (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39203667)

Pro Tip: anyone whose says that doesn't actual understand large economic, nor to they understand the underpinning math of SS.

Pro Tip: anyone whose says that doesn't actually understand English.

Re:feeding the troll (-1, Troll)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202737)

Apparently, among other things, you regard the following as being disqualifiers for being president:

  • Having been successful in business and acquired property (BOURGEOISE PIGS!)
  • Being old and large
  • Having a political opinion that differs from yours
  • What?
  • (Not sure how to respond to the sexism here...thought you were against "hatemongering")
  • (Not sure what the criticism is here)

Maybe you should find criticisms that are actually grounded in some kind of substance, rather than in your own bias.

Playing with marbles (2)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201377)

Our universe is just another marble in someone's bag. *sigh*

Re:Playing with marbles (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201403)

As yes, the "Men In Black" theory of the Universe.

To the point: "reality bias?" (1)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201593)

Could be because we use "ordinary" matter to study the phenomena?

Re:To the point: "reality bias?" (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202357)

maybe so, since there is both matter and anti-matter then maybe they need to use quantum-matter...

Re:To the point: "reality bias?" (2)

yotto (590067) | more than 2 years ago | (#39203405)

Could be because we use "ordinary" matter to study the phenomena?

Short answer: No.

Whether or not we are Matter or Antimatter (in which case we'd call that matter, but that's another... ahem... matter altogether) doesn't change the fact that there is a lot more of one of the two types around. Something caused that. What we don't (or do we, now?) know is WHY.

Re:Playing with marbles (0)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201413)

+1 MiB reference.

James Branch Cabell (3, Informative)

Kupfernigk (1190345) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201521)

I rather think J B Cabell preceded MiB. Refer to "The Silver Stallion", if you can find a copy.

Re:Playing with marbles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202245)

I was initially confused why you were referring to binary Megabytes, before I realized it could have meant 'Marble in Bag'. It took me yet another moment to come up with Men in Black.
 
That's probably one of the saddest things that's happened to me this week.

Re:Playing with marbles (3, Informative)

Zandamesh (1689334) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201533)

Our universe is just another marble in someone's bag. *sigh*

Galaxy. It's another galaxy in someone's bag.

Re:Playing with marbles (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201559)

Or pixels on a big screen.

Re:Playing with marbles (1)

RobCull (1658279) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202237)

You Twip!

(I'll be surprised if anyone gets this joke)

Re:Playing with marbles (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39203047)

You Twip!

(I'll be surprised if anyone gets this joke)

I remember my days of working in Visual Basic as a young teen and wondering why it took so much work just to make my application's window resize (in twips, pixels, or anything else!). Then I discovered widget sets like Gtk, Fox, and wxWidgets and got on with writing the real parts of the program. ;)

So the Universe ended... (3, Funny)

neokushan (932374) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201393)

I guess that means I must be in heaven or hell.
Come to think of it, reading the comments on Slashdot does feel a little bit like Purgatory....

4chan reference (1)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201517)

the standard model, allows for a low level of CP violation

Re:So the Universe ended... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202059)

Come to think of it, reading the comments on Slashdot does feel a little bit like Purgatory....

That is, this place is full of no longer working image thumbs, with a set of possibly working links.

Oblig. Bad Car Analogy (4, Funny)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201431)

So then, its like populating the roads with an equal number of Priuses and Lincoln Navigators?

Re:Oblig. Bad Car Analogy (5, Funny)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201605)

Yes. The Navigators, being made by Lincoln would decay at a faster rate than the Priuses made by Toyota.

Therefore eventually there would be more Priuses on the road than Navigators.

Re:Oblig. Bad Car Analogy (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201911)

Best. Car Analogy. evar.

Re:Oblig. Bad Car Analogy (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202329)

Provable wrong.

There are for more 15 year old Lincoln Navigators on the road the Toyota Priuses~

Re:Oblig. Bad Car Analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202453)

But were they populated evenly to start?

Re:Oblig. Bad Car Analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202347)

That assumes that the two types never collide. In a collision, the prius would fair to well against the navigator. The prius would not drive away. The navigator most likely would. IF they are smashing into each other at millions of miles per hour, then no. Both are screwed.

WTF are they studying?? (1, Offtopic)

wbr1 (2538558) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201471)

From TFA:

To witness CP violation.... The accepted theory...allows for a low level of CP violation... So researchers have been trying to find cases in which CP violation is higher.

Oh, never mind it stands for charge-parity. One would have thought they would find a better acronym.

Re:WTF are they studying?? (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201799)

I think CP violation was used by particle physicists long before the term was hijacked and given a different meaning by law enforcement hysteria.

Re:WTF are they studying?? (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201847)

There's another meaning? Google just turns up the physics one, at least for me.

Re:WTF are they studying?? (1)

Zumbs (1241138) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202107)

I get Canadian Pacific Railway Limited and Club Penguin from Google, and I suspect that GP did not refer to either.

Re:WTF are they studying?? (1)

RobCull (1658279) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202355)

Cheese Pizza

Re:WTF are they studying?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202907)

>I get Canadian Pacific Railway Limited and Club Penguin from Google, and I suspect that GP did not refer to either.

Nope. The correct answer is, of course, cerebral paresis.

Re:WTF are they studying?? (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202881)

Well for me, it turns up Canadian pacific [google.com] as the first hit. Not very interesting...

But the second link is www.clubpenguin.com [clubpenguin.com] :

Welcome to Club Penguin, a virtual world for kids guided by an unwavering commitment to safety and creativity.

hummmm... seems there is more about Linux than meets the eye...

Then unmount it (5, Funny)

hhedeshian (1343143) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201473)

sudo umount /dev/anomaly

Re:Then unmount it (5, Funny)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201503)

I prefer recalibrating the deflector dish to deal with antimatter anomolies myself.

Re:Then unmount it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202419)

Why don't you just switch the polarity?

Re:Then unmount it (2)

gorzek (647352) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202447)

But where are you going to find an inverted tachyon pulse generator?!

Re:Then unmount it (1)

Heathren-bert (671356) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202711)

You reverse the polarity of the tachyon pulse generator. Duh.

Re:Then unmount it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202705)

You should just use the antimatter particles to power a strong photon beam!

Oh shit, our ship is gone.

Interesting... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201485)

Lol so the very fact that there is a universe, in which we can contemplate the laws of physics, is itself a phenomenon that the standard models can't yet explain? Nice. Seems like a minor hole :)

Re:Interesting... (5, Insightful)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201525)

And at one point we couldn't even model two point particles interacting in a collission. Just because we don't know how it works today doesn't mean we never will.

Re:Interesting... (4, Funny)

TheCarp (96830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201665)

Is that the physicists equivalent of rubbing two sticks together?

Re:Interesting... (5, Insightful)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201765)

All knowledge begins with "Why does X. I don't know, let's find out."

Re:Interesting... (4, Funny)

TheCarp (96830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201793)

And all humor begins with not taking things too seriously.

Re:Interesting... (3, Funny)

damien_kane (519267) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201995)

And all humor begins with not taking things too seriously.

Not all humor
In direct contrast to your statement, I often find my self laughing at people taking things too seriously.

Re:Interesting... (5, Funny)

Jenka (1295437) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201883)

Followed by "Hey Yall! Watch this!"

Re:Interesting... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202267)

Followed by KABOOM!

Re:Interesting... (2)

renedox (866133) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202601)

Followed by "Hey, that was kinda cool, let's do it again!"

Re:Interesting... (1)

budgenator (254554) | more than 2 years ago | (#39203303)

Or, "Hey, now this is no bullshit but ...."

Re:Interesting... (1)

lennier (44736) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202519)

All knowledge begins with "Why does X. I don't know, let's find out."

And ends with "Oww why is my arm being eaten by a dinosaur which is also on fire?"

Re:Interesting... (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 2 years ago | (#39203701)

All knowledge begins with "Why does X. I don't know, let's find out."

Or with "hmm, if I can figure out how to do this, I can make a metric buttload of money, and get all the babes..."

Re:Interesting... (3, Insightful)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202243)

Lol so the very fact that there is a universe, in which we can contemplate the laws of physics, is itself a phenomenon that the standard models can't yet explain? Nice. Seems like a minor hole :)

The standard model also doesn't explain dark matter, gravity, quantum physics and pile of other things. However, it does explain a lot of things really well, so until we can come up with the Grand Unified Theory of Everything, we're stuck with what we got.

It's like how Newton's equations of motion work extremely well for general everyday human-scale physics, but fail when you go really small or really fast.

Lots of things we understand in physics have limitations, and as long as we observe them, they do hold up.

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39203117)

We're never going to come up with a "Grand Unified Theory of Everything" because anyone that does research in that area is blackballed, ridiculed, etc. Myron Evans comes to mind. Any kids thinking about the problem will be quickly knocked down by their physics teachers. They'll either accept it or lose interest in physics.

And you can consider yourself completely fucked if your "Grand Unified Theory of Everything" allows for phenomenon that is currently not allowed by the standard model. What's the point in even developing a Grand Unified Theory of Everything if the only phenomenon we will accept is what is currently well-known?

Re:Interesting... (4, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202301)

Lol so the very fact that there is a universe, in which we can contemplate the laws of physics, is itself a phenomenon that the standard models can't yet explain? Nice. Seems like a minor hole :)

Hell .. I don't even think there is an understanding as to what gravity is. And thats a lot less existential than "existence/non-existence"

Indeed (5, Funny)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201527)

Under the highest magnification of our latest scanning tunneling microscopes, new images of these anti particles reveal that they sport tiny goatees.

Re:Indeed (5, Funny)

rla3rd (596810) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201543)

Had me scared... I first read this as tiny goatses.

Re:Indeed (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202165)

"If you gaze into the abyss the abyss gazes into you."

Re:Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202857)

Is that them quantum tunnels I've heard so much about?

Re:Indeed (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#39203011)

No, the "hole" charge carriers [wikipedia.org] in a semiconductor are not really antiparticles...

I've always wanted an Antimatter Anomaly Mount (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201539)

I'm going back to WoW.

Anomaly you say? (2)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201549)

It should be possible to detect these anomalies by throwing bolts at them and observing the reaction. If you don't have a bolt, the older tool used was a rock covered in a handkerchief with a string tied to it.

mod 0p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201569)

you join 7oEday!

Obligatory : -5, Seditious (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201591)

Will the early Universe run Linux ? If not Linux, Unix? If not Unix, Windows? You get the picture. And so on and so forth.

Yours In Belarus,
K. Trout, C.I.O.

P.S. Jeb Bush For Prezeedent !!!

42? (0)

PatPending (953482) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201697)

As long as 42 remains the answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything, I'm okay with it.

Re:42? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201941)

It is 41.99999999999999999997 in the Antimatter universe.

Re:42? (3, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202069)

Or on an Intel P5 Pentium.

Re:42? (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202007)

It's 43 on Leap Day.

Opposite direction (1)

reasterling (1942300) | more than 2 years ago | (#39201943)

I am not a physicist, but couldn't the antimater simply be thrown backwards into what we would call the past.

Re:Opposite direction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202233)

I am not a physicist, but couldn't the antimater simply be thrown backwards into what we would call the past.

Physics doesn't really differentiate directions in time (oversimplification alert). However, just like if I throw a ball "into the future" as you put it, it still exists before I throw it. So if anti-mater was thrown into the past, the question would still be, why did it stop existing at some point? Matter (energy really) isn't created or destroy and that rule applies no matter which way you point time's arrow.

Re:Opposite direction (2)

Muad'Dave (255648) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202393)

Read this [wikipedia.org]

Re:Opposite direction (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202657)

I am not a physicist, but couldn't the antimater simply be thrown backwards into what we would call the past.

No, this has never been observed on antimatter. It behaves normal in time. You're confusing antimatter (existing: we can and do create antimatter) with tachions (hypothetical or Science-Fiction).

Summary goes a bit too far... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39201969)

The research is certainly interesting and important (at least to physicists), but it demonstrates CP violation only in certain relatively rare particles, the neutral D mesons. CP violation has been known to exist for a while (in K and B mesons), so that really is not that ground breaking. On the other hand, as far as I know, these effects are far too small to account for the matter/antimatter imbalance in the universe and additional mechanisms are required.

Re:Summary goes a bit too far... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202513)

If you read TFA, the news is that the amount of violation being measured is on the order of 0.8%, which is higher than the Standard Model predicts there should be.

That itself is actually pretty news worthy. If it is enough to explain imbalance without additional mechanisms, even better. I'm not sure if we are at that point yet.

Fermilab (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202039)

Wow, Fermilab is in the process of being shut-down and they're still producing bleeding edge physics.
I wonder why our politcos just didn't outsource our research labs to China. Oh, wait...

Did they check? (0)

Panaflex (13191) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202089)

They should check the damn cables... the antimatter timer is off by 60 picoseconds again.

Not to be an ass, but (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202321)

Did'ja check those cables first?

It would be weird (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202407)

It would be very weird if all the matter and all the antimatter that was created just got all those matter and antimatter particles close enough to destroy themselves. I think it's not a surprise at all, there definitely were clumps of matter that never saw a single antimatter particles, and the opposite should be true, so some matter and antimatter got in a fight and some didn't. I actually wonder if there are galaxies or at least star systems that are completely made of antimatter and have very little matter there?

Perfectly symmetrical Big Bang? (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202457)

I have not read TFA (sue me). However in this and in many other physics questions, I often wonder if they're over-thinking the problem.

So, Big Bang goes off sending some amount of matter and anti-matter flying off in all directions. The matter and anti-matter in close proximity to each other annihilate each other. Some matter or anti-matter will be left in pockets locally assuming inequal amounts of each landed in proximity to each other.

Why even bother to postulate unequal amounts of each were created when the leftovers of each are just on the other side of the Universe from each other and can't possibly interact with each other at that distance? Wouldn't it be simpler to assume they were equal amounts, but what's left can't possibly interact?

Re:Perfectly symmetrical Big Bang? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202591)

Why even bother to postulate unequal amounts of each were created when the leftovers of each are just on the other side of the Universe from each other and can't possibly interact with each other at that distance? Wouldn't it be simpler to assume they were equal amounts, but what's left can't possibly interact?

Good thinking, but physicists have come up with all of these easy ideas before. The reason you can't explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry this way is that matter and antimatter would flow across the boundaries between the matter and antimatter domains of the universe and constantly interact, producing gamma rays with particular energies. These would be visible from all the way across the universe. So unless you can figure out how to clear all the antimatter from the visible universe (putting antimatter domains outside the observable volume), this idea doesn't work. Clearing antimatter from the observable universe but not the entire universe seems like it would require even weirder new physics than just clearing it from everywhere.

Question to physicists (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202489)

How do we know that there is an imbalance of matter and antimatter? Perhaps this is only the case locally in the observable universe? Is it at all possible that in the whole of the universe there is in fact no imbalance, and for some reason matter and antimatter formed "pockets" where one dominates the other, and we're just observing one of these pockets?

Sci-Fi nails another one! Michael McCollum's Maker (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202585)

Wow! So Michael McCollum got it right in the Makers series [scifi-az.com] where the difference between matter and anti-matter ends up being a primary plot point... which I won't spoil, but maybe these researchers should peak ahead to the last chapter of the second book, Procyon's Promise, to see what the answer is ;-)

Re:Sci-Fi nails another one! Michael McCollum's Ma (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202679)

Well, if you have enough monkeys banging on enough typewriters...

Re:Sci-Fi nails another one! Michael McCollum's Ma (1)

MCRocker (461060) | more than 2 years ago | (#39203769)

Actually, there's an error with my post (accidentally AC)... McCollum got the idea from Feynman. Basically that antimatter is just regular matter going backwards in time from the big crunch. So, not a glorious case of Sci-Fi presaging science, but a case of Sci-Fi rehashing interesting science.

They keep talking about 5-sigma... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202631)

Obviously they don't work in my company, where every employee needs to go to 6-sigma training.
Then again, I doubt my company could even come close to building a huge particle accelerator... most managers couldn't find their way out of a paper bag, despite all their '6-sigma' training. :-P

Sci-Fi nails another one! Michael McCollum's Maker (1)

MCRocker (461060) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202639)

Wow! So Michael McCollum got it right in the Makers series [scifi-az.com] where the difference between matter and anti-matter ends up being a primary plot point... which I won't spoil, but maybe these researchers should peak ahead to the last chapter of the second book, Procyon's Promise, to see what the answer is ;-)

Sorry for accidental duplicate AC post.

Peak Antimatter - An Ecological Disaster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39202775)

Isn't it obvious why there's so little anti-matter? Aliens burned it all up to in their warp drives!

Stupid (4, Informative)

wzzzzrd (886091) | more than 2 years ago | (#39202951)

That's what accepted theoretical physics tell us

Your knowledge is approximately 20 years old.

Yours sincerely,
Nal Lerpil,
Accepted Theoretical Physicist

Re:Stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39203423)

Yeah, I thought this was old news. Relatively speaking. I thought it was floated a couple of years ago.
I could be wrong as I am not an accepted theoretical physicist, just a layman who feeds on the scraps of science news....

How our universe was created (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39203223)

Some people in some other dimension got curious about matter and antimatter in their universe, and built a huge particle accelerator to smash atoms together, and after working out a bunch of bugs and chasing a bunch anomalies, they collided the wrong two particles.

Evidence For Antimatter Anomaly Mounts (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#39203641)

They've found antimatter anomaly saddles, bridles and bits?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>