Asymmetric Matter/Anti-matter Reactions

[Neckromacr]

I suppose my first thread should be a problem I've been looking for the longest, and found a minimal of information on.

 

First a little background, I've been writing Sci-Fi for years, but recently I want to make sure the content featured is plausible. While Matter/Anti-matter reactions have been a popular trope of Sci-fi for years there's always some "black magic" involved to make it work, in such anything in it I find suspect.

 

In a pure M/AM reaction I know it is a pure release of energy, but what happens when it's two different elements of matter and anti-matter contacting. Do the similar components eradicate one another but leave behind the matter "leftovers" as it were, or would it be a complete change pure energy? Or if the number of matter atoms highly out number the anti-matter, lets say 1 to 100, what doesn't get eradicated immediately cause the surviving atoms to go into a highly energized state?

 

In the stories I write I envision a reactor that produces not only a very high level of energy, but also a high energy plasma. The energy going towards running the ship, while the plasma is used for Newtonian propulsion. As such the reaction can be "leaned out" when the need for electrical generation is needed, but no or less need for plasma for propulsion is needed.

 

So please tell me how far base I am, or if it seems plausible and how.

[mathematic]

Matter - antimatter reaction is always between particle and its anti-particle producing gamma rays. Any other matter might interact with these gamma rays.

[Neckromacr]

Thank you, but do we know what would happen in the asymmetric matter reaction. Like if an anti-hydrogen atom encountered an iron atom? Would it just be another gamma burst or would there be something left over?

[ACG52]

Like if an anti-hydrogen atom encountered an iron atom?

 

I would imagine that the hydrogen positron would annihilate an electron, the antiproton would annihilate a proton, and the iron atom would disintergrate into it's remaining components.

Edited June 28, 2012 by ACG52

[Ophiolite]

This link may be of help:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/kg9u6444509967r6/

[Pymander]

Why did the "big bang theory" not drop into the "black hole" discovery. Now an accelerating universe requires quite another look. Matter and antimatter repel. (Einstin did not live to see the discovery of the antiproton (negatron), and the positron alone was little clue to the gravitational dipole. But this being the case (or they would not separate where they can be created, in intergalactic space), our symmetry lacks this: an antiphoton (currently misconstrued in function from its invention for beta rays energies) is misnamed the neutrino. These only interact with matter gravitationally, in the opposite direction to photons, and are the elusive dark energy, which radiates from "black holes". So also the antigalactic clusters are the "dark matter". And so antigalaxies have "white holes". And the photon, and its antiparticle, are also recycled in an eternal universe (since creation, we can not reach the present since infinity BC). That's pretty symmetric, 100%. We need another look, in this light, at Hoag's Object, Barred Galaxies and those with active cores emmitting gamma rays, and Gamma Ray Bursts themselves, for better explanations, or any at all. Also, with essentially three fundumental (stable) particles and their antiparticles, another look at beta radiation is in order, our galactic core being an antigamma ray source involved in radioactivity, again by photon antiphoton anihilation (or rather materialisation).

 

We need to consider therefore that mass is positive or negative relative to the energy (light or dark) in the equation for the limiting density, where frequency becomes zero, at the black or white hole boundaries, f = f_0(1 - Gm/rc^2). Where light energy frequency becomes zero (relative to an observer), dark energy doubles. I believe that the general relativity equivalence of gravitational mass and inrtial forces is a direct result of the behaviour of fluxes of both light and dark energy, maintaining the universal account books, so to speak. Another attraction of this theory is that the law of conservation of mass/energy does not ever break down, and the universe is, since time, eternal. However, we lose the dismissal of Cronos, who is once again essential.

 

Concerning materialistic science, I don't think He was ever legitimately dismissed. Like "Total Recall" or "The Matrix" suggest, indistinguishable theories are essentially identical. "God does not play dice, and science can not prove or disprove that the senses are a psychic phenomenon. Equivalently, the universe may not have an existence independent of the observer." I paraphrase Albert Einstein, and am sure such insights as these had much to do with his revelations. We are just electric force. E = mc^2.

[ACG52]

Matter and antimatter repel

 

No, they don't.

 

I tried to parse the rest of your post, but it is word salad, and I couldn't seperate out the different veggies.

 

Tasted a little stale though.

[Moontanman]

Why did the "big bang theory" not drop into the "black hole" discovery. Now an accelerating universe requires quite another look. Matter and antimatter repel. (Einstin did not live to see the discovery of the antiproton (negatron), and the positron alone was little clue to the gravitational dipole. But this being the case (or they would not separate where they can be created, in intergalactic space), our symmetry lacks this: an antiphoton (currently misconstrued in function from its invention for beta rays energies) is misnamed the neutrino. These only interact with matter gravitationally, in the opposite direction to photons, and are the elusive dark energy, which radiates from "black holes". So also the antigalactic clusters are the "dark matter". And so antigalaxies have "white holes". And the photon, and its antiparticle, are also recycled in an eternal universe (since creation, we can not reach the present since infinity BC). That's pretty symmetric, 100%. We need another look, in this light, at Hoag's Object, Barred Galaxies and those with active cores emmitting gamma rays, and Gamma Ray Bursts themselves, for better explanations, or any at all. Also, with essentially three fundumental (stable) particles and their antiparticles, another look at beta radiation is in order, our galactic core being an antigamma ray source involved in radioactivity, again by photon antiphoton anihilation (or rather materialisation).

 

We need to consider therefore that mass is positive or negative relative to the energy (light or dark) in the equation for the limiting density, where frequency becomes zero, at the black or white hole boundaries, f = f_0(1 - Gm/rc^2). Where light energy frequency becomes zero (relative to an observer), dark energy doubles. I believe that the general relativity equivalence of gravitational mass and inrtial forces is a direct result of the behaviour of fluxes of both light and dark energy, maintaining the universal account books, so to speak. Another attraction of this theory is that the law of conservation of mass/energy does not ever break down, and the universe is, since time, eternal. However, we lose the dismissal of Cronos, who is once again essential.

 

Concerning materialistic science, I don't think He was ever legitimately dismissed. Like "Total Recall" or "The Matrix" suggest, indistinguishable theories are essentially identical. "God does not play dice, and science can not prove or disprove that the senses are a psychic phenomenon. Equivalently, the universe may not have an existence independent of the observer." I paraphrase Albert Einstein, and am sure such insights as these had much to do with his revelations. We are just electric force. E = mc^2.

 

 

negatron?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negatron

[Greg H.]

negatron?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negatron

 

Isn't that Megatron's little brother?

[Pymander]

No, they don't.

 

I tried to parse the rest of your post, but it is word salad, and I couldn't seperate out the different veggies.

 

Tasted a little stale though.

 

 

Give it time to digest, grasshopper.

[ACG52]

Give it time to digest, grasshopper.

 

 

It has. I had to take Imodium.