0
What else can I help you with?
Is dark matter related to antimatter in any way?
No, dark matter is entirely different from antimatter. For one, we know a lot about antimatter and have been able to do experiments with it and actually utilize it in some nuclear reactions. Dark matter is a theory to help understand why the universe does not behaive the way we believed it should. Galaxies are showing that they do not have enough mass to have the gravitational effects that they do, so there must be matter somewhere, this is labeled as dark matter.
Is red matter the same as antimatter?
Red matter is not antimatter. The new movie doesn't really explain red matter except from visual clues. It is kept as a fluid, repels itself from matter, highly unstable, and reacts to form a small product dense enough to trap light (i.e. black hole). So I'm not really sure what red matter is supposed to be in a 'real' science context, but I've seen enough Star Trek to know that it is not antimatter, which would have reacted immediately upon touching that needle extractor thing-a-ma-jig. Hope this helps.
Why is it law that matter cannot be created or destroyed?
Matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. This is one of the most self defeating statement you have been teaching to your children. If matter can not be created, "it is not created". That means that matter does not exist. Vise versa, if it exists, it is "created". If it is "created" once it can be "created" again and again. If it is "created", it can be "destroyed" also. If it can be "destroyed" once, it can be "destroyed" again and again. The laws of nature are universal. That means they are never an one time event. So when the hydrogen get combined with oxygen, you get water. From the Uranium you get the lead after the decomposition. The phenomena is universal. It was repeated many times and going to get repeated many times. So you can not say that the matter was created once for all and now it can not be created again. As such the logic is complete here only. Here is an probable explanation. You can create the negative and positive electric charge by rubbing ebonite rod on wool. You can not destroy the negative charge with out the positive charge. Like wise you can not destroy the matter with out antimatter. But you do not find "enough" of antimatter in the universe. You can not find "enough" negative charge on the wool or "enough" of positive charge on the ebonite rod. So this is purely "the hypothesis" and very little but probably "enough" proof is there to support the same. (*) So you can not have the particle of matter, with out the corresponding particle of the antimatter in the space. So both are created at a time and annihilated at a time. This is subjected to the equation of Einstein, that is, E = mc 2. So some of the matter exist as energy and some of the antimatter exist as anti energy. ( You get energy from matter. So it fallows that you get "anti energy" from the anti matter.) So particles of matter and antimatter are created in the space at the same time. (**)(***) Think of the "Big bang". You had dense plasma in the initial thousands of years. Why all the particles of antimatter were not annihilated in that dense plasma? So the particles of matter and antimatter are created in the space around you, albeit in very little quantity, as on today also. It is the property of the space to produce particles and antiparticles, from nothing. That means, you get "equal" "energy" and "anti energy" from nothing. Both get precipitated to particles of matter and anti matter. Particles of matter get attracted to each other and particles of anti matter get attracted to each other due to gravitational force. It fallows that the particles of matter and antimatter will "repel" each other due to "anti gravity" effect. (****) So You have the universe of "matter and energy". It fallows that you have the universe made up of "antimatter and anti energy". They have been "Repelling" to each other due to "anti gravity" effect. So the universe made of antimatter has lost in the space. There may be many such universes made up of matter and anti matter. They may be forced to come closer to each other and annihilate each others. This may happen after events like Big bangs.So in the universe made up of matter, the matter can not be destroyed. As there is no "enough" antimatter to go for annihilation. In the universe made of antimatter, you can not destroy the same. as there is no "enough" of matter to annihilate the same. So you are told and made to believe that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. So the process of formation of matter and antimatter is not one sided. The process of annihilation also go hand in hand, probably.(*) When you collide the electron and positron with great speed, they have enough kinetic energy and kinetic anti energy to give you two gamma rays. ( Logically one of them will be anti gamma ray.) When you collide proton and anti proton with great speed, they have enough kinetic energy and anti energy to give you electrons and positrons. So the matter and anti matter probably completely annihilated.(**) It fallows that you get one electron with every proton. You get one positron with every electron and one anti proton with every proton. That means when you get one pair of electron and proton, you get one pair of positron and anti proton, at the "same" time. You get one neutron with every anti neutron.(***) It fallows that in the universe made of anti matter, you have the same elements made of antimatter. They have the same chemical properties and chemical reactions.(****) The gravitational force is directly proportional the product of the masses and inversely proportional to the square of distance between the masses. It fallows that the "anti gravitational force or the force of repulsion is directly proportional to the product of mass and anti mass ( or matter and antimatter) and inversely proportional to square of distance between them."
How you can destroy the universe?
Destroying the entire universe is extraordinarily difficult. Assuming you're okay with leaving spacetime itself intact, and maybe even letting elementary particles float about, the easiest suggestion I can think of would be to pump up the strength of dark energy. This is the force believed to be responsible for the expansion of the universe. It would also rip apart individual structures within the universe, but it is currently overpowered on 'small' scales by the gravity that holds stars and planets together, the nuclear forces that hold atoms together, and the various forces that hold our bodies together. If one could amplify it enough, it would overcome these forces, and shatter the entire universe. It should be noted, however, that we're still not quite sure what dark energy even is, and as such couldn't even guess at how to amplify it.
Can an asteroid destroy the earth?
No, an asteroid cannot destroy earth, but a large enough asteroid can have devastating effects on the life on Earth
Is there a large enough quantity of anti-matter to destroy the universe And where is it located?
It seems the Universe consists almost entirely out of matter - that is, there are no significant amounts of antimatter. Why there is more matter than antimatter is an unsolved problem.
How come the universe is made of matter and not antimatter?
That is not currently known. There is a slight assymetry between matter and antimatter, but so far, it seems that this assymetry is not enough to explain why there is only matter, and hardly any antimatter, in the Universe. Without such an assymetry, there wouldn't be either matter or antimatter in the Universe - just radiation. For more information about what is known, and what isn't, check the Wikipedia article on "Baryon asymmetry".
How could it B true that matter and antimatter at start of big bang With little amount of matter left in end winning B enough 2 make up all we see today?
It is not currently known why there is more matter than antimatter. Some assymetries (differences between matter and antimatter) have been found, but they are very slight, and it is not clear how this could have been enough to create the matter we see today.
Why do you live in a universe that is made of matter rather than antimatter?
This is not currently known. There does exist some asymmetry between matter and antimatter - meaning that they are not exact opposites in all aspects - but this asymmetry is not enough to explain why matter exists.
If an antimatter star went supernova near your solar system would it be any different than a regular supernova?
The observable universe is almost entirely matter (as opposed to antimatter) so it's unlikely that a cloud of antimatter large enough to form a star could exist long enough to form a star anywhere near the solar system; it would be annihilated by collisions with neighboring normal matter. Ignoring that, though, yes, there would be differences. The ejecta of an antimatter supernova would be primarily antimatter, meaning that it would annihilate nearby normal matter and give off massive amounts of gamma radiation that would not be seen with a normal matter supernova.
Is dark matter related to antimatter in any way?
No, dark matter is entirely different from antimatter. For one, we know a lot about antimatter and have been able to do experiments with it and actually utilize it in some nuclear reactions. Dark matter is a theory to help understand why the universe does not behaive the way we believed it should. Galaxies are showing that they do not have enough mass to have the gravitational effects that they do, so there must be matter somewhere, this is labeled as dark matter.
Does anti-matter weigh anything?
Antimatter has mass like ordinary matter. When antimatter comes in contact with matter, they annihilate each other while releasing energy, as described by Einstein's equation E=mc^2. So, in that sense, antimatter has weight due to its mass.
Is red matter the same as antimatter?
Red matter is not antimatter. The new movie doesn't really explain red matter except from visual clues. It is kept as a fluid, repels itself from matter, highly unstable, and reacts to form a small product dense enough to trap light (i.e. black hole). So I'm not really sure what red matter is supposed to be in a 'real' science context, but I've seen enough Star Trek to know that it is not antimatter, which would have reacted immediately upon touching that needle extractor thing-a-ma-jig. Hope this helps.
What did Albert Einstein give the world new things to think about?
The theory which mass could be converted to pure energy. Enough energy to destroy the Universe possible. E = mc^2
What will happen if antimatter falls into a star?
The antimatter will annihilate an equal mass of matter in the star and both masses will turn into energy, most likely in the form of gamma rays. Unless you used an enormous amount of antimatter there would be no noticeable change in the star. A large enough amount could blast away the star's outer layers.
What is the most destructive bomb?
tsar bomba was the most destructive ever tested
What is origin of antimatter?
The origin of antimatter on earth today is the Hadron-collider at CERN in Switzerland. There they have a large ring (several kilometers in diameter) that they use to study and discover small, new particles to learn more about how our Universe was created and what happened during the Big Bang. At CERN, they send protons in each direction in the ring with very high speed. They then collide, and then some antimatter is produced from the destroyed protons. The amount of antimatter produced, however, is a very small amount, and it will take millions of years before we get even 1 gram of antimatter! However, in the early Universe, very shortly after the Big Bang, there were extremely high amounts of antimatter. At that time, there were equally amounts of matter and antimatter (roughly 50% of each). There was, however, a small imbalance between them. For every 100 million antiparticles there were, there were 101 million particles. As you probably know, matter and antimatter have opposite charges, spin, color charges etc. If they touch each other, they get annihilated in a shower of pure energy. Albert Einstein figured out that there was much energy in matter, relating to his well known formula E= mc2. That's very high amounts of energy! If you had transformed 1 gram of matter into energy, you would have enough energy to power your house for 1 year. We're talking about lots of energy here! The superpowers used Einstein's formula to create fission bombs (atom bombs), and fusion bombs (hydrogen bombs). These converted only a small amount of matter into energy. If there had existed an antimatter bomb, all of the antimatter would have reacted to matter, thus converting all of the antimatter and the matter that reacted with it to energy. While an atom bomb only has an efficiency of 0,01%, a hydrogen bomb would have an efficiency of 1%. An antimatter bomb would have an efficiency of 100%!
