iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Scientists Claim Breakthrough In Antimatter Hunt

FRANK JORDANS   11/18/10 04:39 PM ET   AP

Antimatter

GENEVA — Scientists may have been able to capture elusive atoms of antimatter, but don't expect that to lead to interstellar rocket engines or powerful bombs anytime soon – if ever.

Even as they announced the important advance in studying antimatter, they emphasized that science fiction uses of the stuff – like propelling the starship Enterprise in "Star Trek" or fueling a bomb in Dan Brown's book "Angels and Demons" – remain in the realm of the imagination.

International physicists at the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, said they had overcome a basic problem in studying atoms of antimatter. While such atoms have been created routinely in the lab for years, they tend to disappear so fast that scientists don't have a chance to study them.

But in a report published online by the journal Nature, the scientists said they'd been able to trap individual atoms and keep them around for a bit more than one-tenth of a second.

To a particle physicist, that's a pretty long time.

"For us it's a big breakthrough because it means we can take the next step, which is to try to compare matter and antimatter," the team's spokesman, American scientist Jeffrey Hangst, told The Associated Press on Thursday

Hangst and his colleagues, who included scientists from Britain, Brazil, Canada, Israel and the United States, trapped 38 anti-hydrogen atoms individually. Hangst says that since the experiments they reported in Nature, they've been able to hold on to the atoms even longer.

"Unfortunately I can't tell you how long, because we haven't published the number yet," Hangst told the AP. "But I can tell you that it's much, much longer than a tenth of a second. Within human comprehension on a real clock."

Studying such trapped atoms could help answer basic questions in physics, like why antimatter has disappeared from the natural universe while ordinary matter abounds in the stars, planets and galaxies. Theorists say both must have been created in equal amounts in the Big Bang.

Two teams had been competing to trap anti-hydrogen atoms at CERN, the world's largest physics lab best known for its $10 billion smasher, the Large Hadron Collider. The collider, built deep under the Swiss-French border, wasn't used for this experiment.

Hangst's team beat a rival group led by Harvard physicist Gerald Gabrielse, who nevertheless welcomed the result.

"The atoms that were trapped were not yet trapped very long and in a very usable number, but one has to crawl before you sprint," he told the AP.

To trap the anti-atoms inside an electromagnetic field and to stop them from annihilating ordinary atoms, researchers had to create anti-hydrogen at temperatures less than a half-degree above absolute zero.

Hangst played down speculation that antimatter might someday be harnessed as a source of energy or to create a powerful weapon like in "Angels and Demons."

"It would take longer than the age of the universe to make one gram of antimatter," he said, calling the process "a losing proposition because it takes much more energy to make antimatter than you get out of it."

___

AP Science Writer Malcolm Ritter contributed to this story from New York.

___

Online:

Nature: http://www.nature.com

Background on antimatter: http://press.web.cern.ch/livefromcern/antimatter/

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

GENEVA — Scientists may have been able to capture elusive atoms of antimatter, but don't expect that to lead to interstellar rocket engines or powerful bombs anytime soon – if ever. Even ...
GENEVA — Scientists may have been able to capture elusive atoms of antimatter, but don't expect that to lead to interstellar rocket engines or powerful bombs anytime soon – if ever. Even ...
Filed by Bianca Bosker  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,348
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (29 total)
06:55 AM on 12/29/2010
It's a great breakthrough. There will always be evil ways to harness energy for destructive purposes. So we just stop exploring alternatives? Stop studying and advancing? No. Although many years down the line - think of the many positive implications of such a powerful element of energy. Clean and efficient power plants and transportation to name a few!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KriTiKiT
Says"play nice"
05:00 PM on 11/19/2010
RUBBERMAID!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:45 PM on 11/19/2010
Oh God PLEASE don't. All we need: A new powerful technology that no one anticipates the consequences of, to be given to the military-industrial complex... and its use governed by moronic politicians who don't even believe in evolution, climate change, etc. It's use is going to be to find new ways to kill and dominate people. Who else do you imagine is going to be using this?

"Still in the realm of fantasty?" 100 years ago, people were RIDING HORSES around the the overwhelmingly predominant mode of transportation--35 years later we had the atom bomb. Things tend not to "remain in the realm of fantasy", when there is a potential for profit or power.
10:01 AM on 11/21/2010
I wouldn't worry about it. It is intrinsically incredibly difficult to make and hold antimatter in bulk, so difficult that it'll probably never be practical. Not only that, but it requires a HUGE amount of energy to make any antimatter -- and the processes for making it are almost comically inefficient (bazillions of watts of power to run CERN, and then all they get for it are a few measly atoms). Furthermore, we already have unbelievably powerful bombs -- present-day nuclear weapons are actually made less powerful than they could be, so even the crazy nuclear war-gamers don't think we need bigger ones.
04:17 PM on 11/19/2010
How much did tax payers, through govt. grants pay for that study? I'm sure it was too much. Send the monies to Haitti.
10:02 AM on 11/21/2010
Well, they were mostly Europeans, for one thing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ryan81
04:02 PM on 11/19/2010
Wouldn't a better use of time be finding a cure for cancer or vaccine for HIV? Come on Science!
04:22 PM on 11/19/2010
That's what biologists are for. This is what physicists are for.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OC4Obama4Pres
01:24 PM on 11/20/2010
Not a smart question. Back to school with you.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Tom Joad
"While there is a lower class, I am in it "
01:35 PM on 11/19/2010
True story: A few years ago, I saw a guy standing on the side of a country road and I thought he needed help, so I stopped to see what was going on. He had a very large timber rattlesnake pinned to the ground with a stick. My first question was 'Now whattya gonna do with it?'

...I ask these physicists the same question...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spottery2k
11:54 AM on 11/19/2010
I've always found the contrast between matter and anti-matter puzzling. By anti-anything we usually mean its opposite, but isn't the opposite of matter space, since that is what matter occupies? Well, not exactly. It turns out, as Einstein emphasized in the preface to the 15th edition on Relativity, that objects do not 'occupy' space. Instead, they are "spatially extended." Why, whatever does this mean? Well, Einstein's breakthrough was fundamentally conceptual and would not have been possible without the emergence of non-euclidean geometry, since it is also possible to have 'holes' in space. In short, all objects and their properties are mental objects first and foremost. Language is the technology of understanding. Anti-matter is thus an inappropriate term, since it has all the properties of matter, except spin. Space cannot have even spin. It is more appropriate to say that any two identical particles of opposite spin will convert the sum of their mass into pure energy, but it is misleading to say that one is matter and the other is the opposite of matter. I suspect the reason for the misleading label is simply because of the prevalence of one kind of spin and the absence of the other.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mynamesyow
Scientist, Gonzo, Champion of the Poor
12:18 PM on 11/19/2010
No the reason for the mis-labeling is b/c these labels were applied nearly a century ago before all the complexities of nuances and sub-atomic particles were known and thus Scientists of that age were merely reaching for quickly and easily relate-able tags that were meant to a language used between other scientists not for the general public, as is the case w science now, especially in genomics
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amleth
big fan of humanity - very often disappointed
03:09 PM on 11/19/2010
This is a really excellent post. You could profit writing such explanations for the general public, if you do not already.

"Language is the technology of understanding . . . "

What a great sentence. I studied Korzybski's General Semantics in grad school and he could not have said it better himself.

". . . all objects and their properties are mental objects first and foremost . . . "

To get a second sentence that defines and lights up experience thus in one short post is nothing short of amazing.

Notwithstanding the post from mynameisnow, we do tend to name what we can experience or prove, and not so much all that we have no evidence of. We could at least expect that the name has lasted because of its apparent apt expression.

You are enthusiastically fanned and faved, and I hope to see more from you in these science threads.

Peace to the peaceful, confound the wicked.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spottery2k
02:51 PM on 11/22/2010
Thank you for that comment. You are fanned and faved as well ;-)
10:46 AM on 11/19/2010
This is intriguing, but just remember that a *gram* of anti-hydrogen contains 6.02x10^23 atoms. 38 is a looong way (and a lot of money) to go before having any appreciable quantities of the stuff.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mynamesyow
Scientist, Gonzo, Champion of the Poor
12:18 PM on 11/19/2010
you mean a "mol"
12:47 PM on 11/19/2010
And for atomic hydrogen, 1 gram is (about) one mole.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mynamesyow
Scientist, Gonzo, Champion of the Poor
12:50 PM on 11/19/2010
is "about"...which is why 1 mol = Avagadro's number EXACTLY
photo
Rude Monk
No God can stop a hungry man
10:32 AM on 11/19/2010
There are no such things as "black holes","dark matter","multiverse"-all fantasy.
If you want to know the truth you can start by reading early thirties works by german scientists or today's work by russian and brazilian scientists.
Forget all contemporary "studies" written by anglophile scientists (or commonwealth)-they are a sham front,financed by the elite (Bank of London and New York).
There is no difference between these official "scientists" and yesterday's stage performers at country fairs.Just look at the convoluted language they're using and the fantastic terms they're forced to come up with.
No offense was meant to the independent researchers (non corporate supported) and to the original thinkers.
03:26 PM on 11/19/2010
What specific scientists do you advocate as having the "real" answers, and to what ends is the "sham front" scientists maintain "black holes","dark matter", etc.?

I ask out of genuine curiosity, and also because your claims make you sound genuinely crazy without further elaboration.
05:00 PM on 11/19/2010
You can't possibly be serious.
10:02 AM on 11/19/2010
I wonder if people in the anti matter universe are trying to create and capture matter.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mynamesyow
Scientist, Gonzo, Champion of the Poor
12:19 PM on 11/19/2010
LOL!
12:34 PM on 11/19/2010
Hehe. Indeed...
08:57 AM on 11/19/2010
We're losing the anti-matter containment fields! We have to eject the core!
photo
JWerner
Beware Macduff; beware the thane of Fife!
10:08 AM on 11/20/2010
If we eject the core, we'll lose power to our phasers and targeting systems! The Borg would board the ship and assimilate us!

*insert brilliant solution here*
05:43 PM on 11/20/2010
Yay :)
05:33 AM on 11/19/2010
Like the idea "Within human comprehension on a real clock"
01:22 AM on 11/19/2010
So did we all get sucked into a black hole then?...i guess not.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mynamesyow
Scientist, Gonzo, Champion of the Poor
12:19 PM on 11/19/2010
'or maybe we did, maybe we did....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
montemalone
oenophile, aquarist, francophone, radical moderate
01:30 PM on 11/19/2010
'splains Palin
photo
HenHouse
WhoWhatWhyWhereWhenHow and how much?
12:23 AM on 11/19/2010
GOP-matter; we always theorized there were actually GOP ideas, we had glimpses of them in previous research but we have finally been able to capture and hold one for a microsecond and are hoping to find more and hold them for longer periods before they vanish out of existence.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mynamesyow
Scientist, Gonzo, Champion of the Poor
12:20 PM on 11/19/2010
HAHA Lol, Fanned and faved. brilliant!
12:38 PM on 11/19/2010
Complete nonsense but pretty dang funny! Haha! Nice one :)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:07 AM on 11/19/2010
The real beauty of science lies in the fact that the existence of antiparticles and antimatter was PREDICTED by a theory (Quantum Mechanics).

In this particular case, it was Paul Dirac who re-derived the Schroedinger Equation using (the then recently developed) Relativistic Dynamics. Using this equation, he predicted the existence of antielectrons (or, positrons, which the name now used for "positive electrons"). Physical existence of positrons was confirmed four years later. Subsequently, others found physical evidence of antiprotons and antineutrons, and then of ant-atoms (antimatter).

This is one way to test a scientific theory - make predictions, and then test if the predictions are valid and accurate, by conducting physical experiments.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:50 AM on 11/19/2010
Of the few responses I have read here, this is by far the most intelligent and thoughtful.  The rest try to throw in some politics which is the very thing that has damaged climate science.
03:29 PM on 11/19/2010
Indeed. I like to come into the HP's tech articles and guess how many posts down I'll have to read before encountering some brilliant comedic gem, like "Something something Palin!" or "More like the GOP, blah blah!".

The answer is usually 1.