Antimatter Defined

[lupabuatchannel]

I Really Like The Video From Your Antimatter Defined

[cenedywong]

Your Video Is Very Useful Sharing Antimatter Defined

[evilsmiley321]

@callawaydekluizan

well obviously i dont know as much about antimatter as you do. thinking outside the box as in let you mind run. so i made a couple of guesses and they were wrong god dammit hop off my dick

[Panthur6502]

The second you call anti-matter 'evil', all scientific credibility is lost.

[evilsmiley321]

@LonelyCheeto

antimatter is not a substance. it is theoretically the opposite of an alternate form of matter.

@IamBread18 none of this has been proven since no one has actually been able to study antimatter.

damn guys learn to think outside the box

[LonelyCheeto]

@evilsmiley321 it is a form of matter

[BujoySeth]

@evilsmiley321 none has been proven? anti matter is very true, physicists has created anti matter. in a very small quantity

[callawaydekluizen]

@evilsmiley321 what is this?

antimatter is a substance, it has the opposite charge but the 4 forces work on the same way as they do on matter. Not proven you say? It is predicted in the standardmodel in the late 20's and created ( antihelium atom) in the early 30's. This has little to do with thinking outside the box you just got it wrong...

[Hornetization]

antimatter isnt evil.....

[evilsmiley321]

@restlesspride666

i couldnt really come up with an example. a humans imagination wasnt really a good example. what i meant to say was animater could be what is beyond our universe. and i could be a kind of creation field for matter or other universes. just trying to think outside the box.

[evilsmiley321]

hmm this is just an idea just like the one portrayed in the video

but i was thinking if matter is the physical existence of particles in our universe, wouldn't antimatter be non existence or non physical existence of particles?

such as a humans imagination. And his is quite off topic but if our universe does have an end and is not infinite, wouldn't antimatter be what is beyond our

universe?

[restlesspride666]

@evilsmiley321 how you get from an immaterial existence to imagination and antimatter is beyond me.

[LonelyCheeto]

@evilsmiley321 antimatter is the name for this substance. i doubth the stuff you are talking about is real

[mexicano7771000]

@LonelyCheeto You shouldn't doubt, since us humans have created anti matter. Not that much of it, but very small quantities of it.

[LonelyCheeto]

@mexicano7771000 his definition of it was wrong

[bornovalov]

@LonelyCheeto

That is the most retarded comment I have read today..

[IamBread18]

@evilsmiley321 Antimatter exists, we can create it.

[mdplyr442]

HERES A QUESTION how do we know if we are matter what if we are anti matter hmmmm

[Riggro]

@mdplyr442 it doesn't matter, it's relative to our point of view. We see matter more predominantly than anti-matter, but you can call them whatever you want.

[halo3moder09]

maybe antimatter still exists and just havent hit our matter yet

[blackfireoffire]

@halo3moder09 lol you don't pay attention do you? We have allready discovered anti matter on earth and in space. But its in tiny amounts. We have also created anti matter also.

[xXMrPandaGamerXx]

eggs

[AHMADECOVIC]

i have an irrelevant question

scientists believe that life started due to the big bang

in other words, there was nothing at all before this great explosion

so my question is if there was nothing before the explosion What Exactly exploded??

[The3kinds]

@AHMADECOVIC Actually if this universe exists another one will exist and it probably exploded (big crunch) leaving a small neutral (matter theory) partical the collided with matter and anti matter particales the made a big bang and that big bang has expanded to the universe we have now

[MyHAUZ]

@The3kinds That's not true. If another universe existed before resulting in the universe we have now, when the universes collide, both of the universes would be destroyed. The universe is always expanding so they would collide if two universes existed. The only possibility of another university existing would be in another dimension which couldn't leave a small neutral particle in our universe because its in a different dimension. Not even a wormhole can travel across different dimensions.

[Riggro]

@AHMADECOVIC time shrinks to almost infinite near the big bang, so far with our understanding of time, there was no time before the big bang, therefore there was nothing

[circasurvive777]

this video is so awesome but not true ha this will never be proven

[joexer1]

This was in the early stages of the universe...What would have happened to all of the anti matter now then?

[jb0433628]

@joexer1

Nobody know. The only theory covering that issue is based on nothing.

[WPGS25041941]

Replying to requiempoete: Do physicists know for a fact from Earth laboratory experiments that antimatter and matter do not repel but attract as does matter to matter? In the Hadron Super Collider [HSC], only about 200 molecules of anti-hydrogen lasting 17 minutes were produced to date with an unmeasurable gravitation. Antigravity of anti-matter to matter would readily explain retreating galaxies that accelerate away from us. Dark matter could be just anti-matter. Remember Occam's razor.

[kon007nic]

if antimatter had won , it would be our matter and our matter the antimatter :)

[restlesspride666]

@kon007nic its like its what keeps universe realities separated. :b

[marquista96]

@kon007nic but from our perspective, the opposite to us is antimatter no matter which way you look at it

[HugeWatermellons]

@kon007nic What if it did and we just assumed we were the "normal matter"

[koenigsegg1337]

@kon007nic Doesn't matter....

[RequiemPoete]

Is it just me or does the music playing when you see the antimatter atom first come into frame sound allot like something out of gremlins?

[WPGS25041941]

A cosmological question never yet asked is: If gravitationally, matter attracts matter and suppose for the sake of argument that antimatter attracts antimatter then does matter repel antimatter? If this is the case, then could all of the antimatter in the universe have been repelled to such a distance from us over the thirteen thousand million years from the time of the big bang as to be beyond observability? Could this account for the apparent absence of antimatter in our universe?

[RequiemPoete]

@WPGS25041941 - No Antimatter is the exact same thing as regular matter except -electrical charges - are different. Antimatter is affected by gravity the same as regular matter. Anti-particles would still be gravitationally attracted to regular matter. What you're thinking of is called -exotic matter- or -dark energy- Things that physics hint at that may exist that would be the -anti gravitational force - i.e. the more of it there is, the more reppelent it is.

[fulely]

I believe that Antimatter has a step more energy to it then Matter. It has more energy and leaves our dimensional world or level and builds that separation in dimensions. If it were equal to matter it would stay here but be seen differently.

[parabelic]

THERE IS NO TRUE MATTER VS ANTIMATTER CONCEPT.MATTER IS ALREADY THE MATTER WITHINWITHIN OPPSITES:THERE IS ONLY THE SHAPE AND THE DIRECTIONS; AND SO THE RULER!

OF THE DIRECTIONS IS A DIRECTOR AND OF THE MEASURES A RULER RULING RULERS AND MEASURES.RELATIVITY IS DUE TO THE RULING PRESET UPON SPACE.

SPACE IS IN-WITHIN THE SUPER CORD AND OPPOSITES ARE WITHIN IT.

DUE TO THE RULER THERE IS RELATIVITY, VARIETY IN UNIVERSALITY AND DIFFERENT CONCEPTS OF TIME AND ITS OBVIOUS MEASUREMENT AND FLOW

[CACBCCCU]

Dirac's theory predicted anti-electrons but not quarks, antiquarks, or the strong force. Quarks in a nucleon are attracted together by opposite charges and supposedly by gravity, and by the strong force but only under separation effort, otherwise the strong force is supposedly repulsive, maintaining quark distinctness. Seems to be plenty of room in unification for +2/3e quarks to mostly have a negative gravitational charge and -1/3e quarks to mostly have a positive gravitational charge.

[CACBCCCU]

If one wants a particle that acts exactly like an electron going backward in time as it goes forward in time, then by Gauss's law the electric flux direction must reversed, reversing the charge; the spin also must be reversed, e.g. spin-up is clockwise and spin-down is ccw. This next bit seems to be more unconventional, but if the electron would've been dragged toward a neutron star by its mass, the time-backward-acting electron must be repelled, and I'd suggest this is how positrons must act.

[CACBCCCU]

If electrons and positrons have the same mass then it seems gravity could break up the creation-annihilation cycle (circle), as it seems to me opposite masses are required to complete the circle in strong gravity. Seems opposite masses are also required to explain why not much cosmological antimatter is seen, if large equal amounts of both were once generated and one decides the antimatter seems to be missing, not annihilated. Also seems my views on this subject are not conventional, so ymmv.

[CACBCCCU]

If an electron is created together with its antimatter particle twin, the positron, the two particles will have opposite charge and opposite spin. In the presence of a strong EM field both of these opposite properties will bring the two full-circle and into annihilation. If adding a strong gravitational field to the picture, then it seems to me it calls for opposite "mass charges" operating in a similar way. Whether a massive BH is required to interrupt the circle seems an interesting question.

[Palafury]

@bubblemonster3 During the big bang, the proportion of 'Normal matter' to 'Anti-Matter' was the same. However as you know, that in a void, it's filled with mysterious energies. ( the the normal anti matter appears, then disappears, as the Anti-Matter hits is, I think it's around every 1 out of 1 billion collisions, an excess of 1 'normal matter' is left behind, and everything in the universe right now, is merely the debrey /aftermath of the big bang.

[TheSavvyWavvy]

I was just watching a video that said that when antimatter and matter come together, they destroy each other.... so, if for every piece of matter, there is antimatter, how have they not destroyed each other yet? and how is the universe still existing???? Am I just not understanding this.....?

[amaniacwithacar]

@TheSavvyWavvy this is one of the greatest misteries of the universe. why did we not just anihalate as soon as the universe was made? there are two main prodictions. one more matter was made than antimatter or more antimatter and matter were made than originaly predicted and some matter clumped togethe and did not collide with any antimatter making our original predictions of the univers tiny compared to what they really are.

[bubblemonster3]

@TheSavvyWavvy

one other thing is that there was a random card

pretty much something that would turn into eiter one

and it favored matter by like 13 percent than to antimatter

[mdma4life]

@TheSavvyWavvy

One of the biggest physics questions right now is why there is a disproportionate amount of matter to antimatter, and no one knows why.

I have NO idea what bubblemonser3 is talking about, especially the 13% bit, unless he's the only physicist on the planet that knows, in which case you should fill the rest of us in, otherwise he's just a crack smoking kiddy :)

[thegreeenbeast]

@TheSavvyWavvy

intresting question: the scene of mutual destruction already happened shortly after the big bang...

however, for every 1 000 000 000 000 antimatter atoms there was 1 000 000 000 001 normal matter atoms.

so everything that was left was that 0,00000000001% normal matter

[BadTouchUltraRapist]

whoa