|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 3:27 pm
if Matter and Antimatter combine to annihilate each other and create energy couldn't we make matter and Antimatter out of energy? Is matter just another part of energy or vice versa?
please explain
Can we theoretically make Matter out of Energy?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 4:23 pm
According to the theory of relativity, yes, it can. According to the formula : E=mc^2, the energy generated by a certain mass, is equal to the amount of mass lost by the speed of light squared. I see no reason this couldn't be changed with simple algebra to m=E/(c^2). Meaning that the amount of mass produced is equal to the amount of energy used, divided by the speed of light squared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 4:53 pm
Indeed we can, and particle accelerators routinely do this. Dirac's prediction of the positron was first verified by Carl Anderson, who observed that cosmic rays sometimes generated positively charged particles whose track length in cloud chamber with lead plate was an order of magnitude greater than that of protons, the smallest positively-charged particle known at the time. Later on, experiments with alpha particle/beryllium scattering was shown to produce positrons without cosmic rays.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 4:53 pm
there is already a thread about this...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 7:29 pm
ZigguratII According to the theory of relativity, yes, it can. According to the formula : E=mc^2, the energy generated by a certain mass, is equal to the amount of mass lost by the speed of light squared. I see no reason this couldn't be changed with simple algebra to m=E/(c^2). Meaning that the amount of mass produced is equal to the amount of energy used, divided by the speed of light squared. isn't that also how the atom bomb works??? We're splitting an atom to make it lose matter, which becomes energy. At least thats my understanding of it..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 8:07 pm
ZigguratII According to the theory of relativity, yes, it can. According to the formula : E=mc^2, the energy generated by a certain mass, is equal to the amount of mass lost by the speed of light squared. I see no reason this couldn't be changed with simple algebra to m=E/(c^2). Meaning that the amount of mass produced is equal to the amount of energy used, divided by the speed of light squared. I am not sure if that is the same when antimatter and matter collide. Can we make matter out of energy was the bigger question(sorry horrible at saying wwhat I want to)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 8:09 pm
yoyoman1_7 ZigguratII According to the theory of relativity, yes, it can. According to the formula : E=mc^2, the energy generated by a certain mass, is equal to the amount of mass lost by the speed of light squared. I see no reason this couldn't be changed with simple algebra to m=E/(c^2). Meaning that the amount of mass produced is equal to the amount of energy used, divided by the speed of light squared. isn't that also how the atom bomb works??? We're splitting an atom to make it lose matter, which becomes energy. At least thats my understanding of it.. You split an atom by adding neutrons not by giving it antimatter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 31, 2006 8:58 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:49 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:23 am
germanboyno2 I thought photons have mass sweatdrop Get rid of that thought, as it is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:49 pm
VorpalNeko germanboyno2 I thought photons have mass sweatdrop Get rid of that thought, as it is incorrect. so since photons don't have mass... how do we measure their momentum?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 2:43 pm
We messure there momentum as c the speed of light.
If they had mass, there momentum wouldnt be the terminal velocity of matter-energy in this universe. Due to the principals of general relitivity ^_^.
Plus the resonance patern for string photons is one of no mass.
One could posiby even say that the mas-less-ness of photons is what makes there wave particle duality so redaly observed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 3:01 am
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2006 2:27 pm
VorpalNeko germanboyno2 I thought photons have mass sweatdrop Get rid of that thought, as it is incorrect. I thought they had a rest mass of 0 but when moving they have a very minute mass
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2006 8:01 pm
germanboyno2 VorpalNeko germanboyno2 I thought photons have mass sweatdrop Get rid of that thought, as it is incorrect. I thought they had a rest mass of 0 but when moving they have a very minute mass Not considering the fact that it is rather pointless to talk about the rest mass of a photon, anything with rest-mass 0 would have mass 0 in all frames, as observed mass is proportional to rest-mass. Furthermore, since photons always move at the speed of light, according to STR if they had positive mass in any frame then they would have infinite energy, as their energy at the speed of light is proportional to their mass divided by 0. And no, they're not allowed to have infinitesimal mass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
