The Search for Antimatter

Like SciShow? Want to help support us, and also get things to put on your walls, cover your torso and hold your liquids?
Tardigrade Poster: vid.io/xom
SciShow Mug: vid.io/xoa
SciShow Shirt: vid.io/xog
--
If you don't have any idea what antimatter is, you don't have to feel bad - the brightest minds in the world have only recently begun to understand what it is and how it works. Hank gives us the run down on what we know about antimatter, and what we're still trying to figure out.
/ scishow
/ scishow
/ scishow
References
newscenter.lbl.gov/feature-sto...
www.deepscience.org/contents/u...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dir...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Day...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gua... [credit TUBS]

[@scottfranco1962]

The moral here is keep your pasta and anti-pasta separate or you will blow up the Italian restaurant.

[@eternal8song]

*slow clap*

[@SproingBoing]

*Clapping speed increases*

[@eternal8song]

no one likes a pedant

[@Vatsyayana87]

lol that is great

[@StiffToshi]

Never Forghetti, Mom's Spaghetti.

[@Spacecookie-]

"Why aren't you excited about it?" "Well it doesn't really matter."

[@Shadybitz]

Anti-Protons should be called Negatrons. cos it sounds way cooler.

[@devanshraizadavaid3197]

Shady Bitz I read your comment and imagined a lot of "Niggatron" jokes...

[@deludedmarxist]

I thought that too! You should check out a song called Negatron by Voivod.

[@chitranshds]

Negatrons , not trying to be racist or something but that sounds like black transformers haha , coming to think about it i think i just discovered idea for next transformers

[@ButtBrothersPresent]

Chitz your do sound... very... VERY... racist. maybe nigatons would sound correct. regardles, you didnt. transformers already transceneded equilateral balance. if you introduced "black" transformers you'd essentially be telling the world that only mechanics are black. introducing a "new transformer" is, by definition, racist.

[@SymphonyZach]

Black transformers shooting other transformers... Seems quite hood like

[@nottuska1732]

But then there's the ultimate plot twist: WE are the Antimatter, and what we consider the Antimatter is truly the normal matter!

[@amartinez97]

+Lukas Suphke BUt I believe we consider matter as normal because it makes up most of the universe. WHat ever dark matter/dark energy is made of could change this definition though.

[@samseidel9917]

+Not Tuska I guess it's all relative...

[@terryqu4822]

Ha sike antimatter is just dark matter.

[@aadirave]

probably

[@BKScience812]

I'm pretty sure if the universe was made of anti-matter instead of matter, we wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Matter would annihilate with antimatter just as violently, so in that universe antimatter is matter and matter is antimatter.

[@jakkob5488]

So, apparently a banana can produce 1 positron every 75 minutes. Why don't we just use a shitload of bananas and make energy that way?

[@BvousBrainSystems]

+Soulless Jack || Let's say that bananas take about 4 days to rot; that's 96 hours, which are 5760 minutes; if we divide 5760 by 75, that means that each banana, within its life time, will generate 78 positrons. I don't think a positron is really significant, so you would need a lot of bananas, at which point the logistics become a nightmare, it's a huge waste of edible bananas, and the cost will probably be more expensive than conventional sources of energy. And yes, I know that your idea was a joke.

[@jakkob5488]

BvousBrainSystems Do you know that you are also fun at parties? Even nerd parties?

[@BvousBrainSystems]

+Soulless Jack || Joke's on you, I don't go to parties :)

[@jakkob5488]

BvousBrainSystems Same. ='3

[@lau4893]

+Soulless Jack give the bitches science, bitches love science

[@Cruiser052]

Help me! I've been clicking related SciShow videos for hours!

[@The_GuyWhoNeverUploadsAnything]

Quickly destroy your mouse. Then you wont be able to click.

[@MaxTax_]

Cruiser052 3 years later..Hi! Are you still clicking?

[@andrewaswang]

You don't need to, autoplay will drain your remaining lifespan. :D

[@datengineer2174]

Dont worry, thats normal

[@123legosandletsplays]

My favorwrite flavour of neutrino is chocolate.

[@ashtond.8479]

+billybob jenkins I wike cookeys and cream :DDDDD

[@123legosandletsplays]

Ashton Diermeier surely you mean kweam?

[@ashtond.8479]

Im sawy I spelt it wang

[@123legosandletsplays]

Ashton Diermeier I hate it wen dat happens.

[@ashtond.8479]

yea!!!!!1

[@TheKipsy30]

There is no time to sleep, there is only time to science

[@gut2814]

Oh yeah

[@c0gsthen3rd83]

so in short antimatter plus matter equal boom boom

[@user-kh5tv9rb6y]

Yes. A+

[@ProfessorSyndicateFranklai]

Sadly, not as good as Baldrick's poem on Antimatter. Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom Boom

[@tonchito1449]

I know why we exist... It is to watch scishow KZbin videos

[@blayzeespinoza2467]

Are u on acid too

[@stevedaenginerd]

Thanks for putting this together! About 10 years later, I'm sure there are at least some advancements in this science. Maybe an updated version or an update to this video is warranted? Thanks again for keeping me learning and curious for over a decade! 🤓

[@kowalityjesus]

you guys are SO important. Thank you!!

[@ObjectsInMotion]

I particularly like the theory that Matter and Antimatter WERE created in equal amounts, just that inflation prevented it all from annihilating by creating "pockets" of matter and antimatter. We just happen to be in a matter pocket, go far enough and you'll reach an antimatter pocket, but the vast majority of the universe is actually empty space where they actually did annihilate.

[@EmanuelMay]

I like this theory as well. I know it is fairly easy to measure mass over great distances, but is it possible to measure more forms of energy or the charges of the particles building that observable mass? Do we really know if the galaxy next door isn't composed of anti-matter? I guess we would need to observe more colliding galaxies in the hope of having one consisting of anti-matter and the other one consisting of matter, to be sure.

[@ObjectsInMotion]

Emanuel May Actually, we're fairly confident that the entire observable universe IS made up of normal matter. We've searched and searched but alas, we observe no large-scale antimatter structures anywhere.

[@EmanuelMay]

Anthony Khodanian Well, there is also dark matter. But what I tried to say was: Are we really sure everything is positive matter? I mean scientists aren't even sure how anti-matter would react to our fundamental forces, some even believe it would be repelled by our gravity, thus flying upwards, when normal matter falls down. As far as I know, nobody is 100% sure and we just have a few theories, that may or may not have things in common, but no single theory to explain antimatter completely. All we have are assumptions based on a hypothesis of what we think antimatter would look like. There are a few other theories regarding antimatter and matter distribution in the universe, but they are mostly ignored, because we have quantum mechanics to worry about right now ;) Just to be sure you understand me correctly: I am not saying the major theories are wrong. Not in any way, I personally trust our 'confident' scientists :) I just don't believe we know everything right now and questioning standards is needed for science to progress. You can believe in something and still be critical about it ;)

[@ObjectsInMotion]

1. We are positive that Dark Matter is positive matter and NOT antimatter, it HAS to be *by definition*. 2. "Virtually every modern physicist suspects that antimatter has positive mass and should be affected by gravity just like normal matter" While not proven conclusively, the Standard model, yet to be disproven by any experiment, strongly suggests that antimatter has positive mass. 3. Too much skepticism slows down scientific progress. There is no reason to believe the contrary so why should we? Simply because we *might* be wrong? Now that's just silly.

[@EmanuelMay]

Anthony Khodanian Of course and like I said: I don't believe it myself, it was more of a mind experiment. I just like the idea that there could be more to the universe than we now believe to know. I wasn't saying: Scrap the standard model, let's start from the beginning. I might be a bit biased by an article I read recently about one of the main scientists behind the theory of quantum information. He came up with it around 1975 and nobody would listen to him. It took him around 20 years to get recognised, just because the scientists in the 70s didn't want to think about the possibility of being wrong. Nowadays quantum information is pretty standard and a major component of quantum mechanics. I am not sceptical to every proven theory out there, I just don't like to set everything in stone.

[@PandoraDaFoxx]

Plot twist: All the matter we see is actually the antimatter and vice versa.

[@pranjal86able]

I would like to shake hands and congratulate the person who wrote the script for this episode on a fantastic job

[@camsugar5897]

WHY DO I LOVE YOUR VOICE SO MUCH

[@GabeLucario]

1:95 How can something that has a neutral charge even have an antiparticle?

[@ant9944]

GabeLucario every particle has an antiparticle

[@GabeLucario]

snakegamer I was thinking that, but if they have identical properties except charge, what is different between an antineutron and a neutron?

[@ant9944]

GabeLucario the quarks are opposite, and also to be honest, I spent some time thinking about that.

[@ant9944]

Also an antineutron is made of antiquarks.

[@GabeLucario]

snakegamer I guessed that, but we couldn't measure it as all other properties are identical.

[@IkePalmer18]

ohhh mum, mum! i want muon neutrino ice cream!

[@NathanSaurusRex]

I like this conversation. No insults or sarcasm. (: Also very interesting. I wish all youtube conversations were like this.

[@khlu405]

Just noticed how I pay more attention to chemistry rather than physics, this is some interesting stuff, keep up the good work!

[@coolbionicle]

question! How are we so sure that distant galaxies are made of regular matter rather than antimatter if both behave the same way.

[@DrIBeast]

they could be, but they do have some different properties than matter. For example our standard matter elements wouldn't exist in Anti-matter. They be different elements with different properties. at the distant that some galaxies are out it's impossible to tell.

[@nonenope886]

anti matter emits dark energy which repels gravity not allowing galaxies to form

[@Vatsyayana87]

God Satan, Quit spreading this false shit! If your gunna spread your thoughts then do a tiny bit of homework first, or make it clear that you dont know and are guessing...

[@natep276]

So, I've been thinking... If the Big Bang created an equal amount of matter and antimatter, and space is truly infinite, there could be an exact copy of our solar system, down to the tiniest atomic disturbance existing somewhere out there.... wow.

[@natep276]

Thanks, I will. :)

[@400thekiller233]

I don't believe Space is infinite, it can't be, theres no such thing as infinite, Scientists also rejected that the universe or space is infinite and it had no beginning because it broke some nature rules or something

[@brendenpischke6060]

The opposite is actually quite true. Space can't end. If it did, what would be beyond that? Most people just want to believe that space does end because the thought of infinity is actually quite scary. It sends shivers down one's spine thinking of how beyond the cluster of galaxies that make up our universe is just nothingness. Or is it? We don't actually know of anything beyond our universe, but there could be more out there. Just like how there is as many galaxies in the universe as there are stars in a galaxy. There could be as many universes out there as there is galaxies in the universe. But yeah, space can't end. There's just no way.

[@natep276]

Yeah, universe stuff, quantum mechanics, time, and all that is WAY strange.

[@Willgtl]

Brenden Pischke When a physicist says the universe in infinite, they generally do not mean it is literally infinite in extent. According to the Lambda-CDM model and WMAP data, the universe is flat (Within 0.2% IIRC). It is finite. The thing is, for a flat universe, the mass = critical density. So it will expand eternally without collapsing, as well as we know that spacetime expands at a rate greater than c, so: Infinite but not literally. Now it is totally possible the universe is SO large that the we cannot detect the curvature of spacetime (Just like a sphere is flat to a small enough observer). In which case, the universe could be a complex Euclidean shape like an n-torus with positive curvature (Like going around a sphere, you'd always get to the starting point). We know that the totality of the universe is orders of magnitude larger than the observable, so that very well could be the case as well.

[@sorryche2]

I like how you're doing the exact same thing that I'm doing--commenting on a KZbin video--yet I'm the one with no life. I'm trying to figure out what's more impressive: your vibrant social life of your soul-crushing insults. I'm going to go lick my wounds. It hurts so much to be cut down to size by a nobody whose most popular video currently has 1,208 views. You are a true inspiration.

[@imnotmexicanable]

I absolutely love this show

[@ParkerToFetch]

People as smart as hank are so rare. ): It sucks because Id totally marry him.

[@sonjayor964]

Why the universe preffers matter over antimatter...

[@kwask]

For all practical purposes, an oscillation is a vibration. In this he is talking about how the different neutrinos have different oscillations, so that means that they have different vibrating frequencies.

[@SkyDeity4]

This video does a good job of explaining what antimatter is and how it's being used. Dark matter is a as of yet undiscovered form of matter that either doesn't interact via electromagnetism or only interacts very weakly. It's the most popular hypothesis for the difference between the mass we measure by the motion of stars and galaxies and the mass of the matter we can see.

[@JustinHallPlus]

What if the antimatter we see is an overlap of our distant future universe and the current one, and when particles collide they become a part of the next big bang? Maybe our perception of time relative to each particle is so different due to general relativistic effects that we see them today, but they actually have reached thermal death, and that's why annihilation occurs? Just kidding, I made all that bullshit up.

[@MsSonyfan]

You're confusing antimatter with dark matter, those two are different

[@JustinHallPlus]

MsSonyfan N M I was actually trying to make fun of all the people coming up with silly theories in the comment section, but I guess being facetious doesn't translate well in typed text.

[@MsSonyfan]

Okay... yeah

[@lemongrenade6135]

Could life be made of antimatter?

[@YourHomieJC]

Yes

[@tacticalnuke3805]

+Colin Scott Yes it could. The only problem is how long it will last in this universe filled with matter and the effects it made to the matter around it because if it touches matter it will blow everything up. 1 kg of antimatter is approximately 44 megatons of yield.

[@Vatsyayana87]

No, life is made of what it is, we call it matter. If it were oppositely charged matter "antimatter" it would be the normal and we would just call it matter

[@luxemkingII]

To understand the difference between the two you have to understand the concept of spin: Spin is a type of 0 dimension angular momentum (in a first approximation, because particles like electrons or protons have 3 Dimensions). Two particles of opposite spin have the same propreties, but in a magnetic field they arent energetically equivalent. If you project the spin onto the direction of momentum, you get the helicity. Neutrinos have left handed- and anti-neutrinos have right handed helicity.

[@hubes69]

Say you have two waves of the same frequency, if the peaks and troughs of the waves are in perfect symmetry, then they are in phase. If one of the waves is shifted out of sync with the other, then you would call it out of phase. The interaction between the waves is very different in both situations, for example if the peaks of one wave match the troughs of the other wave, then destructive interference will occur. They can reinforce or weaken each other.

[@gottalikeit2010]

none of this really antimatters

[@wallacejordan2093]

If an anti-electron is called a positron, why isn't an anti-proton called a "negaton"? Or, why isn't an anti-electron just called an "antielectron"? Y U no consistent? Broc head hurt from think...

[@TheJadeFist]

They dont' want people to confuse negatrons with megatron.

[@JustinHallPlus]

It's because that wouldn't be consistent. Just compare the words: elec-tron, posi-tron. pro-ton... There's not a real link between the prefixes. con-ton would make sense, or anti-ton. If you ask me the convention used today is already inconsistent. elecTRON neuTRON proTON... Shouldn't it be proTRON?

[@TheJadeFist]

way to take the fun out of it

[@TheSocialIrony]

if positrons are positrons, shouldn't electrons being negatrons?

[@TheBlackgaurd]

TheSocialIrony If Toast toasts toasts, then dont toasters toast toasts toaster toasters?

[@NickiRusin]

That's not the point, I meant to show that charge isn't the only thing that makes anti-particles different from, well, "normal" ones. And I'm fully aware of differences between neutrons and neutrinos. I compared them because they both don't have any charge, but have an antiparticle.

[@duckdudette]

For those of you who are interested the other way in which antimatter is different to normal matter is a property called spin (which is again exactly opposite). Spin is a measure of a particles angular momentum but unlike angular momentum in macroscopic objects like footballs or planets, spin is not effected by the amount of energy the particle has but is instead constant while it remains that type of particle.

[@TheChaz72]

Here is the answer to the universe God created it and he created us to serve him.

[@lcmiracle]

BS, it's clearly 42

[@BadMadChicken]

lcmiracle 42=God created it and he creaded us to serve him.

[@lcmiracle]

BadMadChicken You suck at math bro

[@Caligula138]

lcmiracle HAHAHA!

[@BadMadChicken]

lcmiracle and you throw around 42 even tho you dont understand it.

[@erinmurphy6993]

In other words it's more complicated than you suggest in the video, and you might want to make a longer video that goes over the history of anti-matter and cosmological theory.

[@amandam8623]

All these names for the particles sound like robot names. Like "Oh hey, Positron, what's up?!" I like it.

[@terrylewis4160]

wow... just blew my mind... maybe I should watch it again

[@luxemkingII]

A neutron is not necessarily formed by fusion of a proton and an electron, this is just a type of radioactive decay. The difference between an anti-neutron and a neutron lies within its constituents, the quarks: The neutron is made of one up quark (charge +2/3) and two down quarks (charge -1/3), whereas the anti-neutron is made up of one up anti-quark and two down anti-quarks. Ronald Weasley's question was about the neutrino, which isn't that easy to answer (see my comment in resp. to weasley)

[@atnjon]

maybe each anti-particle is specifically "attached" in a sense to its counterpart in the universe and there is a anticopy of everything in the universe, but exist at different places in the universe so they never meet in order to annihilate each other

[@bryanlee630]

Humans are still researching that, as it is a subatomic particle. But neutrons are also electrically neutral and have anti-neutrons by the fact that neutrons are made up of 3 subatomic particles (quarks) each with fractional charges: -1/3, -1/3, and +2/3, giving it an overall charge of 0. Conversely, the anti-neutron has quarks with fractional charges of +1/3, +1/3, and -2/3, with an overall charge of 0 on the opposite end of the "spectrum".

[@edensinyourpants]

Now my field of study is biology, so all this could be wrong but here is what i understand the situation to be: A neutron is basically formed by the fusion of a proton and electron, negating the charge and slightly increasing the mass of the particle. an antimatter neutron would be the same, but using a positron and an antiproton instead. although they are both neutral, their constituent parts are equal and opposite, and as such they are still opposites to each other and can destroy each other.

[@wmrustycox]

Thank you for that flavorful bit of knowledge. It was very tasty. Tasty knowledge. That's something you can sink your teeth into. I think I'll have a byte.

[@xseth1]

Finally! Someone who can talk about this reasonably.

[@santaclare99]

So very confuzing.... I love it

[@oinonenr]

Just been curious. Usually the exsample, how matter and antimatter interact eachother is that, we have two particles wich are mirror images (opposite charges) from themselfs and annihilating themselfs. Like Hank showed positron and electron. When they interact energy just changed form to two photons. Let's play with the idea that we have matter and antimatter which have different masses, like one Lead atom, and Anti-Helium atom. What is the outcome with these two, when they interact? Is there just punch of new particles forming from matter? Or is the heavier lead becoming something else, like Mercury? Because of the atomicweights of lead:82 and Helium:2. 82-2=Mercury:80.

[@xseth1]

I personally think that when the big bang happened, matter and antimatter started annihilating, and pushed away from each other. This ultimately cased one half of the universe to be purely matter, and the other half to be purely antimatter.

[@xseth1]

One possible explanation for the universe being made of matter would be the universe being sectioned off. The idea is that after the big bang, matter and antimatter began annihilating, pushing stuff around. Over time, the matter that didn't touch any antimatter and the antimatter that didn't touch any matter would separate out, leaving two distinct 'halves.'

[@nasca999]

Every video I watch leaves me more confused, but I can't stop watching

[@NeilRichins]

Brilliant Video! Have you seen the project to findout if antimatter falls up or down? If antimatter falls up it might explain why we see more matter than antimatter.

[@rogerdotlee]

Here's one that I'd love to see answered: If anti-matter is matter with the opposite charge, is there an anti-neutron? And if neutrinos have no charge, how can they have an anti-particle? There should be no anti-neutrinos. Further, if there ARE neutrinos and anti-neutrinos, how can we tell the difference between the two? Is there more going on than simply electromagnetic charge?

[@TheNewsDepot]

Perhaps the vast majority of matter and antimatter did annihilate in the early universe and the leftover matter that was, just by chance, not near enough antimatter to annihilate, clumped together to make our galaxy and others as well. And left over antimatter that, also just by chance, was not near enough matter to annihilate formed antimatter galaxies and that is the universe we can see. Likewise, the protons left after an annihilation may not be completely massless. And the infamous Darkmatter we experience are the remains of the vast majority of the cosmos that was annihilated in the early stages of the birth of the universe.

[@dsenti]

The neutron is neutral, but its constituent quarks (up and down) aren't. So the individual quarks can cancel each other out if a neutron meets an antineutron. As for the antineutrino, it has opposite chirality; contact with a neutrino should produce a Z boson, but it's recently gotten more complicated. Since neutrinos now have mass, they may be indistinguishable from antineutrinos. It's quantum mechanics. Don't think too hard on it or your head will explode.

[@ThePotatoman7]

good questions and good answers do not show up enough on youtube.

[@vedhansarvesh9527]

You guys should do a video on strange matter

[@MrPop2213]

Well played

[@devinhogan4472]

well theoretically i believe that it would be possible seeing as what happens with annihilation is that the two particles convert all of their mass into energy which would be a lot of energy assuming we had a way to harness it and conduct the reaction in large enough amounts

[@222Randomness222]

His speed adds to the mind stunning effect.

[@duckdudette]

You could be considered right... kind of. Paul Dirac (mentioned in the video) suggested that there is actually a field of electrons or positrons that goes throughout the universe and depending on which one you choose (it shouldn't technically matter from what I understand) the other particle only exists as a gap in that field. Like in electricity when you can think there is positive charge moving around the circuit even though it's actually electrons moving from one atom in the wire to another.

[@hatfieldrick]

If the Universe were, for all practical purposes, infinite in extent or at least vastly larger than the light-speed horizon, then random statistical variation could produce quite large areas with more matter or antimatter. Only in the areas where the two were balanced would substance be completely annihilated, leaving widely separated patches of matter or antimatter -- but not both -- between them. So we could simply be living in an area where matter predominated. Somewhere beyond the light horizon, there could be similar patches of antimatter.

[@Calledtogaming]

Is it wrong that every-time he says "flavor", in regards to nuclear reactors, I picture a guy licking radioactive materials just to see what they taste like? Lol.

[@josepuello4392]

you guys rock

[@Riogmar]

"absorb" doesn't mean destroy but take in. And as Samuel already said. The photon rises an electron in an atom and that change can be measured electronically.

[@tristanmasis]

So if I taste a Banana flavored Neutrino at a certain time I will be tasting an Apple Neutrino, and then a Strawberry Neutrino and so on? XD

[@PretzelViper]

smarter question is why focus on how fast they fire and catalyticaly respond to sudden change of particle distribution when the real question to understanding and more over possibly harnessing antimatter sooner would be what causes the reaction between the particles and how to safely harness those materials while channeling the by product towards a safe environment for storage or use. i think i worded that correctly.

[@Beer_Dad1975]

Yes, it is true that laboratories produce antimatter every day, and also occurs in nature during certain types of radioactive decay. I did not say anything about dark matter, which as I clearly stated in my post, "we just don't know for sure yet". You seem to be confused about what is antimatter (matter with opposite charge to "ordinary matter") and dark matter (matter with unusual properties such as weak interaction that we have not observed in the laboratory yet)

[@KrisWingfield]

Hey Hank. Nice choice of wardrobe when educating the audience on "matter's alter ego". I would have swapped you with John, but that would have been far less subtle. lol

[@superpartes4990]

Great video but I have still some questions: What is the difference between neutrons and antineutrons (since they both have no charge) and what is the exact reason for the annihilation that occurs only when matter and antimatter meet?

[@Jisto11]

+Super Partes For the antineutron, while it may be neutral still, the quarks that make it up are anti-quarks of what are found in the regular neutron. It is for this reason that an antiproton can annihilate with a neutron (or vice versa) as well, as they're made up of the same quarks as a proton, just with different numbers of each quark. Matter and Antimatter annihilate because annihilating gives off energy. When they come together and create photons, they release energy, and in the end, that is what they want to do most. Atoms and sub-atomic particles don't like energy. That is why you'll always hear about the path of least resistance. Whatever takes the least energy wins, and giving energy away means less energy than staying together. Re-reading your second question, if you were asking "Why do antiparticles annihilate particles, but regular ones dont?" then the answer is simple math. An antiparticle is a negative particle. if you have 2 protons, then it's 1+1=2. If you have a proton and an antiproton, then it's 1+(-1)=0.

[@superpartes4990]

+Jisto11 Thank you for the explanations ^^

[@josielynn6369]

The reaction got me completely befuddled. You earned a like!

[@hubes69]

Yeah, I think I didn't put my point across very coherently. I'm trying to draw some sort of correlation to the abundance of matter over anti-matter with the existence and effects of dark matter. I'm aware of both concepts and understand that we detect anti-matter. I was just throwing in an idea that maybe the missing anti-matter has disassociated with the matter it leaves behind, bringing in quantum to explain the wave functions of it being out of phase as a means for this to happen.

[@comicbstudios]

and just in case you dont believe we have found it this is from wikipedia "Recent (as of January 2011) research by the American Astronomical Society has discovered antimatter (positrons) originating above thunderstorm clouds" also "Positrons were reported in November 2008 to have been generated by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in larger numbers than by any previous synthetic process" so we can create them. for that to happen they must exist.

[@comicbstudios]

just in case you dont like my explanation this is taken from the dictionary "Noun Molecules formed by atoms consisting of antiprotons, antineutrons, and positrons. " that is anti matter dark matter is defined as "Noun (in some cosmological theories) Nonluminous material that is postulated to exist in space and that could take any of several forms..." they are two seperate things you are getting them confused

[@crazemgt91]

That's not entirely fair. Everybody is receptive to different forms of teaching. It's not hard to see why he would prefer Hank's style of teaching. He uses visuals to supplement his lessons, and he keeps an upbeat and light tone to most of his lessons.

[@Beer_Dad1975]

E (in joules) = mass (in kilograms) times C (in meters per second) squared... So 1 gram = 0.001KG = 0.001 time 299,792,458 squared = 89875517873681764 joules - of course this ignores a whole bunch of factors but close enough. 10KG of TNT is about 41840000000 joules, so the MAM reaction produces about 200,000 times more energy than 10KG of TNT, which is still chicken feed compared to a nuclear weapon - but then a thermonuclear devise may have a kilo or more of fissionable material alone.

[@Omnifference]

Neutrinos may, in fact, be their own antiparticle (which would make them so called "Majorana fermions"). There are several ongoing searches to try to test this. Ultimately the definition of antimatter is not as simple as charge reversal and other quantum numbers are reversed. Relevant to this is that an antineutrino would have the opposite lepton number (=(#leptons)-(#antileptons)). This may seem like it's just a matter of definition but particle reactions, like chemical ones, must be balanced.

[@aizaz1234]

I find this odd as it means one of two things 1. Every science teacher you have ever had is terrible or 2. Your interest is related to the medium it is presented in. If the second is true then that is something very common and worth looking into.

[@squeezemyparticiple]

Here you go!

[@JessicaAtreides37]

The word ''search in the video implies looking for. The same old ''search'' we've been using since Saxon times, ''looking for'' does not denote amounts or location...in fact if you have either of those pieces of information you have a new word, ''find'' which is [kinda] the exact juxtaposed opposite of ''search''.

[@artrosis56]

everything is science, what are you talking about? what has to do that a priest did? he was a priest, but he was smart and kept an opend mind for science, and that's something to be proud of

[@Guru_1092]

Wait, you stated that photons are massless, but photons have both energy and momentum, so doesn't that mean that they do have mass, albeit so insignificant that it is *practically* massless? Or does it not have any mass whatsoever, and Einstein's mass-energy equivalence is just weird and doesn't feel like cooperating? Can someone explain this to me?

[@hiworld213]

at 3:15 you know they could just place the neutrino/antineutrino detector on the other side of the earth and it would still be receiving neutrino/antineutrino

[@Turretian]

I was just wondering the same thing :) I think the law that was supposed to be mentioned is the Law of conservation of energy, not mass, since (if I was taught right) annihilation turns mass/matter into energy. So, when a particle and an anti-particle hit each other, the mass form the two particles would "turn" into energy, and that energy would go on to form fotons. Mass wouldn't be conserved, not in the form of massat least ;)

[@zekeisafreak]

can you make a space-cable-way to help with increasing mass issues in acceleration and deceleration in the effort to go really fast or far?

[@SmalltimeTopgun]

Yeah that makes sense now. Thanks Man!

[@MrEnKaye]

Lightspeed Ghosts: excellent song/band name.

[@ToasteeCrunch]

also another fun fact, in order to preserve said anti-matter a magnetic field is used to suspend it in a vacuum

[@sidoney101]

Mass and energy are interchangeable but a 'massless' particle like a photon can travel at the speed of light while something that has mass cannot. To say something is massless might be a bit misleading as energy and mass are interchangeable. To the best of my understanding you could say a massless particle does not interact with the Higgs Boson particle and can therefore travel at the speed of light.

[@octogon123]

Hank is a beautiful human being.

[@Geekyandproudofit]

I have a question to ask you. What would happen, theoretically, given a perfectly reflecting spherical mirror, if you flooded a space with so many photons that a collision between photons occurs and it is impossible for them to move apart from each other because they are immediately next to other photons in every direction? (I guess this might be a photon equivalent of being under pressure?) I hope I've made my question clear...

[@lamassu8479]

+sciShow just out of curiosity since there are antimatter engines and this might sound a little stupid but kind of like antimatter, is there any studies whatsoever on lets say an anti vacuum, in other words to pull instead of push? when people want to fly first thought is propulsion like antimatter. what about investing in anti vacuum since space is almost a perfect vacuum.

[@israelredden]

Atra Awaysho It sounds to me that what you're describing with anti-vacuum would "the opposite of a vacuum", where instead of removing matter from a container/space it would pull more matter into a space. Again, from your description, this sounds a lot like compression (filling a space with matter and forcing that matter into a smaller space) which only works really well for gases and is used as part of the process in internal combustion engines. Could you provide a further explanation of what you meant by anti-vacuum that would be dissimilar to compression?

[@cyrocya1]

What you were talking about with the Chinese anti-neutrino laboratory, are they not doing the same thing as the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory? how does detecting anti-neutrinos differ from standard ones?

[@astrainvictum9638]

That leads into an entirely different subject. But basically comes down to general relativity dealing with the speed of a photon. In order for something to travel at a certain speed, it's mass is converted into energy. When it comes to photons moving at "light speed" their mass is converted into an indefinite amount of energy causing to them to travel indefinitely as well. But in order to have an indefinite amount of energy you need an infinite amount of mass.

[@HellHound60248]

It's like wars, one side thinks they're the good guys and the other thinks the same, while thinking the opposin team is the bad guys.

[@DFLaval]

Does this mean that the neutrino experiment in Sudbury, ON, Canada is obsolete or does it look at the neutrino in a different way. Thanks

[@Reavenator]

It's possible that some galaxies are made of antimatter, even ones we've seen, assuming that antimatter creates and reflects light like normal matter.

[@8214623618]

If you don't like probability so much, name something you know with absolute certainty. There are actual photos taken of antiparticles, while interstellar currents powering the sun come on crudely drawn diagrams, so want to explain why you would choose to believe the electric universe? Antimatter has been discovered. The word "search" in the video's title means searching for large collections of antimatter in space. It's like we know oil exists, but we can still search for it.

[@caseykoons]

Nothing can destroy matter, but matter can be transformed into energy through nuclear fission and fusion. The energy of a certain Mass is roughly that mass multiplied by the speed of light squared, so, a lot.

[@QuantumCraziness]

Nice shirt Hank! Lookin boss.