Does Antimatter Create Anti-Gravity?
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 01. 2024
- Learn More About 80,000 Hours at: www.80000hours.org/spacetime
PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to:to.pbs.org/DonateSPACE
Sign Up on Patreon to get access to the Space Time Discord!
/ pbsspacetime
From hoverboards to flying cars to cloud cities, anti-gravity is a staple of science fiction and our dream of a less Earth-bound future. But in the real universe gravity appears to be a purely attractive force. Feels like its main MO is keeping us stuck to the surface of this lonely rock. But maybe if we science hard enough we can remove the fiction from science fiction. For the sake of our flying cars we should at least try. And for many years, physicists have wondered whether a certain well-known exotic material may experience gravitational repulsion from the Earth. That material is antimatter, and physicists at CERN have just completed a very long and very difficult experiment to answer a seemingly simple question: does antimatter fall down, or does it fall up?
Check out the Space Time Merch Store
www.pbsspacetime.com/shop
Sign up for the mailing list to get episode notifications and hear special announcements!
mailchi.mp/1a6eb8f2717d/space...
Search the Entire Space Time Library Here: search.pbsspacetime.com/
Hosted by Matt O'Dowd
Written by Christopher Pollack & Matt O'Dowd
Post Production by Leonardo Scholzer, Yago Ballarini & Stephanie Faria
Directed by Andrew Kornhaber
Associate Producer: Bahar Gholipour
Executive Producers: Eric Brown & Andrew Kornhaber
Executive in Charge for PBS: Maribel Lopez
Director of Programming for PBS: Gabrielle Ewing
Assistant Director of Programming for PBS: John Campbell
Spacetime is a production of Kornhaber Brown for PBS Digital Studios.
This program is produced by Kornhaber Brown, which is solely responsible for its content.
© 2023 PBS. All rights reserved.
End Credits Music by J.R.S. Schattenberg: / multidroideka
Space Time Was Made Possible In Part By:
Big Bang Sponsors
John Sronce
Bryce Fort
Peter Barrett
David Neumann
Alexander Tamas
Morgan Hough
Juan Benet
Vinnie Falco
Mark Rosenthal
Quasar Sponsors
Glenn Sugden
Alex Kern
Ethan Cohen
Stephen Wilcox
Mark Heising
Hypernova Sponsors
Stephen Spidle
Chris Webb
David Giltinan
Ivari Tölp
Zachary Wilson
Kenneth See
Gregory Forfa
drollere
Bradley Voorhees
Scott Gorlick
Paul Stehr-Green
Ben Delo
Scott Gray
Антон Кочков
Robert Ilardi
John R. Slavik
Donal Botkin
Edmund Fokschaner
chuck zegar
Jordan Young
Matthew Pabst
Daniel Muzquiz
Gamma Ray Burst Sponsors
Max Paladino
Robert DeChellis
Tomaz Lovsin
Anthony Leon
Billy Holland
Leonardo Schulthais Senna
Lori Ferris
Dennis Van Hoof
Koen Wilde
Nicolas Katsantonis
Massimiliano Pala
Thomas Nielson
Joe Pavlovic
Justin Lloyd
Chuck Lukaszewski
Andrea Galvagni
Jerry Thomas
Nikhil Sharma
John Anderson
Bradley Ulis
Craig Falls
Kane Holbrook
Ross Story
teng guo
Harsh Khandhadia
Michael Lev
Terje Vold
James Trimmier
comboy
Jeremy Soller
Paul Wood
Joe Moreira
Kent Durham
jim bartosh
Ramon Nogueira
John H. Austin, Jr.
Diana S Poljar
Faraz Khan
Almog Cohen
Daniel Jennings
Russ Creech
Jeremy Reed
David Johnston
Michael Barton
Isaac Suttell
Oliver Flanagan
Bleys Goodson
Mark Delagasse
Mark Daniel Cohen
Shane Calimlim
Tybie Fitzhugh
Eric Kiebler
Craig Stonaha
Frederic Simon
John Robinson
Jim Hudson
Alex Gan
David Barnholdt
John Funai
Adrien Molyneux
Bradley Jenkins
Amy Hickman
Vlad Shipulin
Cody Brumfield
Thomas Dougherty
King Zeckendorff
Dan Warren
Joseph Salomone
Patrick Sutton
Julien Dubois
I would love to see an episode on how Anti-matter is actually made. What's the process, what are the materials, what reactions have to happen, and why it actually works.
They generate antiprotons by smashing protons together at CERN. They are captured and cooled down, and then they just combine them with positrons collected from radioactive decay to form antihydrogen.
If you want antimatter buy a banana.
High energy particle collisions (in particle accelerators) produce matter and antimatter in equal proportions, then it's a matter of collecting and confining the antimatter.
@@tonywells6990 I see what you did there
This is what you want czcams.com/video/1r6GC0ekyIY/video.html
I like how Matt keeps bringing up hoverboards like it would be totally safe to have something that if it got into a crash would explode with the force of a Tsar Bomb
Heck that's how the current hoverboards work😅
And would have to have enough antimatter in them to cause a neutral buoyancy with the load put on it. AKA the hoverboard would have to have enough antimatter in it to equal the mass of the hoverboard (minus the antimatter) and the person on it to equal the displaced air at the air pressure they are in.
Screw safe. Go be a bridge inspector if you want safe - it's a very important job and apparently what you were born to do. With science it's go big or go home!
A hoverboard using this "antigravity" version of antimatter would need an 80kg docking clamp whever you stop and would cause a 2.5 gigaton (very approximate - I can't calculate secondary effects or fuel lost to space) explosion. The initial devastation would be worse than nuclear because it would spread the antimatter "fuel" until it collided with the right matter counterparts, meaning it would create a wider distribution of destruction. The only upside is that, if it were antigravity, some of it might escape into space. Tsar Bomba could erase the London metro area, this hoverboard could erase England.
A less talked about issue is how would you stop while on s hover board.
It would be funny if this was a 2 second episode with Matt just saying:"Nope"
Followed by a lengthy Rick Astley exposé
Agree
Oh man, they should really do that for April Fools
Dear whoever edits/does music for these,
PLEASE make the outro quieter! I love listening to these before bed and the last 15 seconds are so much louder than the entire episode. THANK YOU!
Sincerely,
An overworked mom who just wants to peacefully learn and fall asleep to science
I also think the outro is not balanced well, it's way too loud comparatively!!
@@revenevan11 agreed!!!
@@Breakemoff2bruh we know you agree, they just rewrote your comment. Both of these comments were nonsense… what’s going on???
@@iwanttwoscoops what do you mean by nonsense? Could you kindly explain what didn’t make sense to you? Thanks “bruh” 😊
100% agree
I deeply appreciate how in the split screen rocket illustration, you had the rocket's background Starfield accelerating at increasing velocity instead of just passing by at a constant velocity, reflecting the fact that the rocket is constantly accelerating.
Great attention to detail!
Well, otherwise it would be pretty misleading.
yet most animations will take the misleading route because it's easier and therefore cheaper@@samtux762
It's all fake. The Earth is Flat.
I just want to ask for a episode on Penning Traps
Also why can't we make these, dump em in the Van Allen belt and then collect them in a Falcon 9 return to earth rocket.
2:58
Thank you for including the confidence level of the result. That makes or breaks this kind of science communication IMHO
He always does
Yeah so important. I remember news of a planet discovered last year with a certain molecule in its atmosphere, I believe dimethyl sulfate, which could only be explained by alien life. Some science channels were shouting from the rooftops we probably found aliens. I later found that the results are very dubious, not even statistically significant.
It is reported wrong though. The paper says " a=(0.75 ± 0.13 (statistical + systematic) ± 0.16 (simulation))g." The video only says ± 0.13. If they wanted to keep things simple they should have added the two in quadrature, getting ± 0.21. It's much less statistically significant than the video claims.
For real, the difference between a proper science channel and just a hype "news" channel.
@@crazedvidmaker Which reinforces the uncertainty.
I was in Cern im 2019 and an old physicist who gave us a tour was really excited and told us young students evrything about that experiment. We were fascinated by the implications and that such a raw hypothesis was tested for. Wether or not it was ever plausible to show antigravity it is still excellent science to test for it.
Well, if CPT symmetry is broken we have to reevaluate everything from General Relativity to the Standard Model of quantum mechanics. What comes of that reevaluation may be entirely new physics that could eventually lead to anti gravity. As someone smarter than me said "Big break thoughs don't start with a eureka moment. They start with someone saying 'Uh... this is odd....'"
@@andersjjensen GR should be fine, but QFT will have issues.
Whether or not it disrupted the status quo, this experiment is such an amazing achievement. To think that one of the most exotic forms of matter is merrily floating around in a magnetic field, in CERN, on Earth, created by humans, its simply amazing.
At 3:56 you remove both masses. Acceleration should be a = MG/r^2, with M being the fixed mass of the object you are being attracted towards.
Came to see if anyone had posted this. Pretty healthy mistake, can't believe it's not more up voted.
Yep, glad someone else spotted it! ;)
No, and that's the whole point. Acceleration of an object is indepedant of its mass. Every object falls at the same rate in vacuum, regardeless of its mass.
You're confusing acceleration with the weight (force) applied to the object, which is indeed proportionnal to its mass (F=Gm/r²). However the acceleration applied to the object is also inversely proprortionnal to its mass (F=ma so a=F/m), which cancels it out.
So in short :
F = ma = Gm/r² so a = (m/m)G/r² = G/r²
@@theslay66F=GMm/r². 😁
r/confidentlyincorrect
One big issue to me with negative gravitational mass for antimatter is that it implies that particles like photons, which _are_ their own antiparticles, must not interact with gravity, even though we've observed that they do. Is this not the absolute deal-breaker I think it is, or do people just like brushing that to the side when talking about this idea?
What a discreet and phenomenal point. And this was just 1 of many issues I had in a long list of obvious reasons this test wasn't even that necessary. Gravity is gravity lol. There was never an indication of having less than 0 mass was possible, because gravity as we know it isn't described as positive or negative (which he also states without seeming to grasp that this is why the experiment was redundant) LOL... They basically tested something that essentially runs contrary to G/R which is a robust theory, you would think that common sense would be to test for unknowns that run parallel to effective theories.
Granted, this was not made clear in the video.
@@Sloppyjoey1 in science you can't rely on presuppositions, you should test everything, even if the result is obvious. and as he mentioned, there is a scenarios where anti-particles could have negative gravitational mass. now that they found the obvious, its time to test the not so obvious, like to see if the CPT symmetry breaks.
You would think that, but remember, gravity affects space-time and not particles directly. If photons are gravitationally neutral, it means clumping a lot of them together wouldn't bend space-time. It does not mean it would negatively affect already-bent spacetime made by positive gravity. Space-time is already bent around clumps of matter, and a neutral particle with neither positive nor negative gravity would just ride along the status quo, instead of adding more gravity or subtracting gravity.
No one really thought we'd find antigravity. The main thing was "can we build a device that could measure it?" and then "let's think of more cool things we can do with this new detector." We haven't done the second bit yet, but every time we build a new type of detector we generally find something interesting. Maybe not in this case since gravity is kinda solved? But then, there's still questions of how gravity and QM could both be true so new detectors are generally good for business.
Love your new look!
Thank you again for including the full equations. I love seeing them. I don’t understand and it is motivating to me to learn.
Just wrote my bachelor's research project on the matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe! very cool to watch this video :)
I just want to say that this channel is one of the biggest helps and inspirations for my studies. You are an excellent, top tier teacher who makes math and physics fun, engaging, and rather easy to comprehend.
I've only been watching this channel since 2020, but thank you.
I am attending college this fall to start my journey into theoretical physics at the age of 34.
It's never to late to learn.
That's amazing! I'm in my final year of my Bsc in theoretical physics and I've really enjoyed it so far. Good luck with your studies :)
@OfTheVoid - That sounds exciting. Be sure to keep that excitement fresh while you wade through the hard parts. I envy you. ^_^
It’s not physics, but I started an engineering degree at 29 and finished my masters at 36. You’ll do great if you are dedicated and serious. Good luck.
Based ❤
I’m in my last year of international relations master’s degree that I started in my late 20s - a bit different, but it is vastly different than my bachelor’s and it’s a bold step for me! Best of luck and hoping to hear of your theories on this channel someday
When Spacetime drops, it's always a good day
A few years ago I had the pleasure of visiting the Antimatter Factory at CERN where they described this experiment to us. It was really fascinating and I'm happy to hear about the results now. One interesting fact I found interesting was, that the were shooting the first antiparticles they generated just straight into a concrete wall just casually standing around in the facility. 😀Nothing spectacular happens, sure, it annihilates with the matter of the concrete and creates 'lots' of energy, but, after all, it's just a single particle.
I know it probably has less energy than one cosmic random ray hitting my DNA while sitting at a park bench.
But it still feels wrong being around and getting "blasted" by a matter-antimatter collision gammaray. No matter how much the energy content is, I either expect to become a superhero... or you know... cancer. XD
@@livinlicious Well, afaik you're not allowed in the Antimatter Factory when they are running experiments. 😀
It'll be a real trip if you ever need a PET scan for some medical testing. (Positron Emission Tomography). They inject you with a fluid containing a radioactive tracer isotope that releases positrons (antimatter!) when it decays.
Also a small fraction of naturally occurring potassium atoms (including in bananas) are radioactive/unstable and also decay by emitting a positron iirc, so bananas are making antimatter too!
It'll be a real trip if you ever need a PET scan for some medical testing. (Positron Emission Tomography). They inject you with a fluid containing a radioactive tracer isotope that releases positrons (antimatter!) when it decays.
Also a small fraction of naturally occurring potassium atoms (including in bananas) are radioactive/unstable and also decay by emitting a positron iirc, so bananas are making antimatter too!
It'll be a real trip if you ever need a PET scan for some medical testing. (Positron Emission Tomography). They inject you with a fluid containing a radioactive tracer isotope that releases positrons (antimatter!) when it decays.
Also a small fraction of naturally occurring potassium atoms (including in bananas) are radioactive/unstable and also decay by emitting a positron iirc, so bananas are making antimatter too!
Congratulations on 3M subs! I like the new logo and the new intro. Btw a youtuber called acollierastro made a video about this topic.
Feel better soon, Matt, and take the time you need to fully recover!
I'm not a regular viewer. Has he been sick?
@@ThieflyChap 7:16
Fun fact. If a youtube title is a yes/no question, the answer is always "no." This is because the title would be a statement if the answer was yes.
For example, if it had been yes, the title would be "Antimatter Creates Anti-Gravity"
While in this case the answer is presumably “no”, a title could also be a question if it doesn’t reach a conclusive answer
But do anti-questions create positive answers?
@@Zahaqiel Anti-questions should create anti-answers.
is @markshiman5690 a smart person?
It's called Betteridge's law and was first formulated in relation to news article headlines. And while exceptions are very common, it holds true more often than not.
It's incredible how much I learn from this channel.
this is so incredibly cool to me in part because one of the people who worked to perform this experiment is my current physics professor. it feels kind of unreal that im being taught by one of the people spearheading the antimatter research field
they should have taught you that gravity isn't a force it's a happenstance of energy moving through space, so you wouldn't be so awestruck by pseudo scientific nonsense.
Great stuff, thank you for covering this with your trademark incredible production value.
Ah, I must say I have been really waiting for the outcome of this experiment! So thanks a lot for making a video about it.
Oh boy... gonna have to watch this one multiple times to keep up... thanx Dr. Matt!
Ooh! I was at cern last year in November on a shool trip, and an old student from my school was working on this exact project. I got to see the antimatter decelerator and such, being showed around by the reserchers!
Props to exploring the geodesic equation!!! This is what I love about this channel.
I'm not too worried about the flying cars, but this probably means no warp drive.
Warp drives have been shown to be (theoretically) possible without needing negative mass.
@@vibaj16 they aren't even theoretically possible. They are mathematically possible. And since Mathematics is a language constructed by humans to translate observation into digestible information, it can be made to say or suggest, anything. So what you are really saying is "anything is possible". And what that really means is precisely nothing. The fact of the matter is, gravity is not a force. To move matter through space you much push space out of the way. Faster you go the more space needs to move out of your way. There is not enough harvestable energy in the entire solar system to launch humans to the next closest star.
It would be the largest human effort ever undertaken just to send something the size of a paper airplane to our nearest neighboring star. And to do it inside a human lifetime would require more energy than has ever been produced by human activity on Earth.
Warp drive is a fantasy in every way. It can never exist. Gravity itself isn't even a force.
@@ZennExile Sounds like you don't understand the math. This isn't just random application of math, it's math based in our most successful theories of physics.
You need ftl travel, artificial gravity, and extreme energy prowess.
@@vibaj16 statistically speaking, there's a much higher probability of you lacking the reading comprehension as well as the mathematical discipline to question a single syllable of my comment.
No offense intended. The universe doesn't typically allow something so dramatically improbable to happen. Not at least as far as any human has ever observed and recorded.
Antimatter-based antigravity would be the only way we could top the Hindenburg in the field of "sure it's a colossal bomb but it also floats a bit" research.
If we had negative gravity, unless I'm remembering wrong we wouldn't need flying cars, because that's all we need to make wormholes
Thanks for this, I've had people on other science channels ridicule me mentioning this (now defunct) possibility.
I ready a great book on antigravity.
I couldn’t put it down.
Sounds like my book on adhesives.
@@wheyayeman404 Just as a little light reading?
I read a book about building self confidence and had a similar experience
Anti-matter may not have negative gravity, but Negative Matter should. I'd love to see an episode about the possibility of turning negative energy into negative matter.
Also, what's up with dark matter & dark energy? Is there a corresponding anti-dark matter and negative dark energy?
I remember that CERN experiment from years ago, and I remember that at the time the results weren't showing a definitive result. When Matt mentioned it, I instantly get excited at the idea of finding the result, but then I considered that if the result was antimatter going upwards, I would probably have already knew it, because all the generic press would have bombarded us with crazy headlines like "Hoverboard principle demonstrated at CERN" 🤣
Haha, I had the exact same thought process
Was still hoping for a surprise though.
I'm glad to hear that anti matter doesn't produce anti gravity because in my mind an accident in some future city between two cars could cause the city to be destroyed.
well, fortunately for us, a collision between matter and anti-matter cars would simply delete both vehicles. The drivers would retain their momentum, of course, and wind up yeeting into each other at massive speeds, leaving a bloody mess at the site of impact.
if it's just two anti-matter cars, then the collision would look the same as any other
@@channelknightfadran7901 actually the energy released from the annihilation reaction would vaporize both people.
I appreciate the funny imagery but it wouldn't work out that way. Just gonna quote wiki since it's a fundamental fact relating to the conservation of energy, "antimatter and matter collisions result in the entire sum of their mass energy equivalent being released as energy, which is at least two orders of magnitude greater than the energy release of the most efficient fusion weapons (100% vs 0.4-1%)"@@channelknightfadran7901
It would delete both vehicles... And release the mass of the vehicles times c² as radiation energy. 4 tons of cars would turn into 3.595x10^20 Joules. That's like half the energy consumption of all of humanity in a year
It's like how you don't have to worry about setting off nuclear bombs, because when you push the button the bomb is destroyed anyway so nothing to worry about.
Same topic as Acollierastro's video.
Makes sense, since both are reviewing the same paper
Yeah Angela did a great job
Absolutely fantastic video, as always!
I always find a video at the best time, that lil intro is the bid too😂
This was a wonderful episode. I was wondering what the effect would have on time dilation if the experiment had succeeded in showing antimatter had antigravity properties?
It's still acceleration, the effect would be identical to gravity.
Time would speed up.
LOVE THE NEW INTRO!
I love that my main questions were answered in this video eventually!
Nostalgic and amazing channel mat thank you
I also don't see how a negative mass particle breaks the conservation of energy or momentum in classical physics. If you place a +1 kg ball and a -1 kg ball 1 meter apart, initially comoving, then in that reference frame, they start with 0 kinetic energy and 0 momentum. As the +1 kg mass accelerates away from the -1 kg mass, the -1 kg mass accelerates after it at the same rate, with the displacement staying constant. Now the +1 kg mass has some momentum p, and the -1 kg mass has the momentum -p--even though it's going in the same direction, its mass is negative, so momentum and velocity point in opposite directions. p + (-p) = 0, so momentum is conserved. Similarly, the +1 kg particle has some kinetic energy T = 0.5 kg v², and the -1 kg particle has the opposite energy -T = (-0.5 kg) v^2, so the total kinetic energy in the system is T + (-T) = 0. And the gravitational potential energy hasn't changed, because they are still 1 meter apart and their masses haven't changed. So everything is conserved.
I think its because they would accelerate past the speed of light. As one's mass approaches infinity, the other would approach negative infinity to maintain the reference frame, then you end up with particles pushing around spacetime at ftl speeds.
@@xBrokenMirror2010x The proper acceleration is constant and not extreme, so nothing weird should be going on. In any given reference frame, they will both approach the speed of light asymptotically, which is fine. There are things moving past us really fast.
Mentioning CPT there reminds me that I really want to see a video about the interaction of the T in CPT, and time being a result of the universe starting in a low entropy state
Hey Dr. I remember watching your videos in my late teens and again came to you ❤❤. Still the same magic 🤩
My flying car model featured in PBS Space Time intro, a cosmic acheivement!
The ending of this video is devastating. I wrote a multi novel series of books based on the idea of anti matter anti gravity tech. I wrote 50 bajillion words in about 12 minutes riding off the high of inspiration of you just describing the possibility of anti matter anti gravity tech. only for it to come crashing down around me. WHY DOES THIS KEEP HAPPENING!?!
Just call it something else
just say it's in a different universe:) different universe different physics
...then the character wakes up!
(just kidding)
@ardag1439 kidding? I think you're cooking something up here. So now that it's been established that the anti matter anti gravity tech was a dream. Should we ask if it was prophecy? 🤔 Does the dreamer or prophet now have a devine obligation to create the anti matter anti gravity tech? These are important questions.
You're close. Maybe not anti-matter but if we ever found exotic matter that contains negative mass, you could both create a hyper drive and it would also be "anti-gravity". In other words, if you kept folding space in front of you (or the top of the craft) to keep you in one point in space it would keep you afloat as long as it's actively folding space to remain in that point.
Favorite channel ❤
Fantastic vid as always
Excellent episode from the space time team and Matt as always. But did I miss something? There hasn't been a comment response lately and I have been wondering why? I loved those 😢
I don’t have hard information and it could be just that they’re busy and falling behind on them as they do from time to time, but iirc they did a comment response livestream a little while back where they caught up on comment responses for several videos and it apparently tanked their algorithm standing (and thus views) for the next several videos to the point where they addressed it at the end of some videos, so they might have gotten gun shy about doing any comment responses.
Man the algo is getting dumber all the time. I guess that's why a lot of channels have a second channel for stuff like that. @@aparadoxicalone
Hmm but without CPT violation, why would the universe treat antimatter differently? What could be the mechanism behind it? 🤔
An ethereal anti-current underlying the universe. They should try the experiment at night to see if the results change.
...for all we really know, if there was a Big Bang it could have resulted in two exact-opposite timelines expanding from their origin. In one dominating worldline, almost everything is our matter. And in the other worldline almost everything is what we call antimatter.
But this is unlikely because antimatter's charge components are coupled to normal matter's physics. That's where these experiments in time reversal and antigravity keep coming from. CPT reversal sounds great, normal matter can produce antiparticles during radioactive decay, great. But the binary values take us back to quantum physics. Somehow across the entire universe there seems to be an infinitely small one-dimensional axis and everything is either going up or down. 3D movement does not matter, everything is either going up or down at the speed of light. And the movement is looped or perhaps oscillating. So when matter and antimatter find each other, they release all of that bound inertial energy as photon pairs traveling in opposite directions.
The purpose of the experiment to test CPT. If antimatter falls up, CPT is proven to fail. In that case, we should instead be asking what the mechanism for the rest of the standard model is if CPT fails.
@@UnitaryV If gravity is opposite but time is also opposite then it would still fall downward in our frame of reference. It seems like such a convenient thing...
We do have flying cars, they're called helicopters 😁
thank you for breaking my cpt brain for over 6 years. watched all the videos. just amazing how complex simple things might be ... love this cannel
Great and educational video as always!!
Even though it breaks my brain lol 😂
I had always thought that antimatter wouldn't "fall up" considering we know its mass to be the same as the regular counterpart... But seeing a glimpse that there is a different interaction there is such a wonderfully cool idea.
Antimatter does NOT fall up, this is experimentally proven. This video is fringe woo woo.
The thing is that gravity affects space-time curvature, not other particles. If anti-matter has negative gravity, you'd need a lot of it to see any effect, especially on Earth, as it would still fall "down" because space-time has already bent space-time downwards, and its World Lines will lean towards the center of gravity.
A city-block sized clump of anti-matter is where we'd start really seeing wacky stuff if space-time negatively affects gravity. The particles would all shoot away from each other instead of clumping. It would of course still orbit planets, stars, etc, because those things have already bent space time positively.
antimatter does NOT have negative gravity. We've tested this.@@WestAirAviation . The video is bunk.
@@sarcasticstartrek7719 i don't think you watched the video
@@vibaj16 I don't need to. The answer is "no" and that was experimentally proven decades ago. There is no debate to be had, there is "theory" that says otherwise. The entire video is clickbait and can be answered with "other than charge, antimatter is identical to matter. Gravity behaves the same way with both."
Spending 10 minutes rambling about this or that is beside the point and only lends people to think there is a "mystery" to be solved when there is not.
It's clickbait for idiots.
Your reporting of the error bar is wrong. The paper says " a=(0.75 ± 0.13 (statistical + systematic) ± 0.16 (simulation))g." Not sure why you put the ± 0.13 in the video but not the ± 0.16. If you wanted to keep things simple and only have one error bar, you should have added the two in quadrature, getting ± 0.21. This mistake drastically overestimates the statistical significance of the difference. It's not that it's less than 3 sigma, it's barely more than 1 sigma, and it can even be below 1 sigma if you think those different kinds of errors should be added linearly.
I think alot of people who watch these videos are at my intelligence and I have no clue what you just said or how it's relevant.
Thanks for another great show, it's food for the Brain, looking forward to another year of wonderful learning, thanks again. PEACE AND LOVE TO EVERYONE ❤❤.
Hey team, thanks for the amazing effort that goes into these videos, I sleep to them a lot and something about Matt's voice is so calming, lets me relive my youth in a way, of watching Professor Brian Cox's BBC produced documentaries about space, always had a deep fascination and love the fact it's all here, free to consume.
I was hoping that it would explain the cosmic voids!
E=mc^2 with a negative mass makes for a negative energy, which always makes me very sceptical
Well the full equation is E^2 = M^2C^4 + p^2c^2 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy%E2%80%93momentum_relation ) so the negatives can cancel. But I too doubt we're getting negative mass.
4:43
>That last part means positive and negative mass would chase each other, accelerating at a constant rate forever. That breaks conservation of momentum and energy...
I don't think it does. Negative mass would also mean negative momentum (or rather, a momentum vector pointing in the opposition direction compared to a positive mass moving at the same velocity) and negative energy, which would cancel out the positive momentum and energy.
Love your videos. make complex physics simple enough to understand.
Does Hawking radiation has anything to do to (sub)particles that are repelled by gravity ?, thus anti-gravity ?
...Okay, but if antimatter did wind up proving to fall up, would that mean imaginary matter falls sideways?
it actually falls through time🤓
It would repeat itself I think
It falls into higher dimensions
That's the thing, imaginary mass, also known as exotic matter I think is what will "fall up"
@@doremysheep7864 Based on what? Do you have an imaginary mass object?
If space curves in toward matter and away from antimatter at the same rate per mass, instead of falling up, wouldn't it only partially cancel, because only some of the antimatter's repulsion points 'down' and the other directions of the repulsion are just 'pushing' up or to the side? Say... about 25% cancelled?
In the experiment done it had particles with positive gravitational mass. E.g. positive energy particles. But all other aspects of the particle is anti-matter.
Looks like Mass is just Mass and both treat Space-Time in the same way. That is great news.
Love the new intro and background
While I already knew the response, this was a most excellent detailed yet consolidated answer.
The amount of antimatter a hover board would need is rediculously scary.
"we made a hoverboard"
"But what did it cost?"
"100 trillion dollars in exotic matter, a containment field that requires the energy needs of a small town and also if for any reason the power goes out or you crash, humanity will be limited to one side of the planet briefly."
@@GhostofJamesMadison lol
@@GhostofJamesMadison LOL.
Scooped by acolierastro again!
Hope you're feeling better and back at 100% very soon, Matt
"If we Science hard enough..." Love this expression!! Starting now, I will strive to Science harder than I've ever Scienced before!
Wait, Matt was ill while recording this? I thought he sounded slightly different.
Get well soon!
Wouldn't this cause all anti-matter to almost instanteously end up on the expanding universe's outermost point as it grew? Kind of making the edge of the universe purely anti-matter and destructive of any matter that approaches the boundary.
Maybe thats why we cant see any of it in obsservable universe
Here be dragons!
There is (probably) no edge to the universe. The edge of the observable universe is only as far as we can see, not what actually exists.
No, the video talks about.. not exactly this, but it does talk about a property that means this wouldn't happen. If anti-matter had negative gravitational mass, it would still attract to other anti-matter. It would be repelled by _regular_ matter yes, but it's far more likely we'd have something like antimatter galaxies and stars and planets in one region of the universe, but that anti-matter region is constantly repelled away from our matter filled region of the universe and vice-versa.
@@overestimatedforesight The "Edge" of our specific observable universe is the event horizon. Our "reality" is a 3 dimensional hologram emanating from the FLAT, 2 dimensional event horizon internally towards the 1 dimensional "singularity". All information is encoded on the surface.
Research true and false vacuum, virtual particles, and matter creation through high energy photon interactions.
I figured that it's gonna fall down, or you'd have revealed it right away :p but as you said, it's just as interesting to see that antimatter is treated differently by gravity if it's true. It's always cool to see anomalies pop up, especially those we didn't expect
Still curious to know how a tiny particle would act in a gravitational field near a massive body made of antimatter. In case of possible negative curvature of the space time, i wonder whether or not such massive body can even coalesce?
The ability to artificially control gravity is like the holy grail of future tech. It's amazing to imagine all that we could do with that. Thank you for another interesting video!
God be with you out there everybody. ✝️ :)
I swear the true fabric of reality was revealed to me in a dream but then I immediately forgot it when I woke up
It's linen.
@@Zahaqiel idk bro it felt more like a weird smooth denim
HG Wells wrote a book about flying to the moon with a ship made of a materiak that blocks gravity. It has lots of windows so you can open one that points to the moon and then simply fall to the moon. To get back, you simply open one on the opposite side. Of course you'd have to fiddle around with it to break your fall. If I remember correctly :)
It's called cavorite. And, if it existed, it would be a perpetual motion machine.
3:55 I feel like there's a mistake here. There were two masses and one disappeared without any reason. Only one should disappear, which is the mass of the object being studied.
Even without seeing that, the formula given in the video doesn't make sense since it would mean acceleration is independent of the attractor's mass.
The correct formula should then be : a = Gm/r^2
With m the mass of the object attracting the object being studied
Man the people in the comments with their "No. Move on." comments really don't get what a sense of wonder and science are about. Understanding the reason as to why things are not doing something is equally important.
Standard answer tests and short attention spans really did a number on people.
It's more that there will be people who only read the title or only watch a few minutes, and having the title be an open ended question misleads them into thinking the question is still unsolved or, at worst, makes them think that the wrong answer is the case
Or we already know what the answer is and think that this is a clickbaity video because of the obvious answer
Anti-matter has been generated before, and it doesn't fall up. Thats the end of the story.
There's a huge difference between a sense of wonder and possessing ignorance in quantities
The energy of antimatter E=mc^2 is *POSITIVE.* That is, it causes the same curvature as normal matter.
But, what if the m is negative tho
@@anonymhous8875its impossible to have negative mass in our universe
@@anonymhous8875 It's the inertial mass that is always positive.
@@LeonardoSaobyait's not disallowed (in an analogous way to the way anti-matter wasn't disallowed) but it might have made the vacuum of space unstable if it existed
@@LeonardoSaobyaBut really, what is mass if not the equivalent of energy? Sure, particles will have intrinsic mass, but we also know that the "mass" of hydrogen is more than the sum of mass of its components. If those principles hold true, what is stopping some interaction within an unknown quantum field (quantum gravity maybe?) that can result in negative "mass"/energy?
Not related to this video per se, but I’ve always been curious about the time dilation effects of particles moving near light speed (like in particle accelerators) combining with extreme gravitation fields (like near a black hole). Maybe a cool video idea?
14:26 Wow this is an extremely intriguing phenomena but also an exciting breakthrough. If there is a change in gravitational acceleration with more number of anti-hydrogen atoms over time, the overall density of such particles might result in a different curvature of space from regular matter. Thanks Matt.
3 sigma though... Maybe it's just the experimental setup.
This is such a good example of what science is about.
The is NO REASON to imagine Antimatter experiences Anti-gravity and no one thought it would or did. BUT! We didn't KNOW. And we DO know that Gravity is wEiRd so...good thing to test! Because if it DIDN'T behave how we imagine, then we would really have learned something.
It would make sense to me that it would go slower and not flip
If gravity is caused by time dilation, which is caused by matter bending space, I would expect for the antigravity substance you would need enough to bend space all the way back.
I just had a hunch @4:55 could negative mass be dark energy? Which led me to a theory called Dark Photons (Douglas Snyder). Fascinating read! Could you include this next time you cover relevant topics? It seems you haven't covered this theory.
Perhaps the reason why the experiment didn’t create a floating antigravity is that gravity is created thru the interaction between our wave and an mirror wave. So when we created our antigravity particle there was an equal and opposite antigravity particle created that pulled in the particle thus making it fall. I believe the existence of negative numbers sort of proves the possible existence of this negative wave.
Given how when an electron and a positron produce photons, and given how photons are affected by gravity in the way that GR predicts, I would expect Anti-Matter to fall exactly like ordinary matter.
3:59 there is something wrong in your equationsm
Correct, the right side should be multiplied by the other mass
Question: I have seen a video from Anton Petrov recently discussing the elements inside stars and I have seen the video about Protostars just from H and He.
My question is what seeds a starformation after a supernova, but also if stars can collapse into black holes, whats the estimated mass of the universe already Eaten by black holes?
I really appreciate the sponsorship by 80k hours. Thank you for turning me on to that!
You often talk about these cool and spectacular theories of quantum gravity, but when are you creating an episode on asymptotically safe gravity? Sabine Hossenfelder made an episode about it and some predictions it made for the mass of the higgs boson, but she didn't go into detail and there are very few popular-scientific sources on the subject. It would be greatly appreciated if you could ve one of them!
Could anti-time particles be the key to flying cars?
Instead of falling down in positive time, it’s falling up in negative time.
I wish Matt speedy recovery. Why do we have to reverse time when dealing with anti matter? I can understand reversing the charge, mirror left-right though...
14:31 Since most of the mass of a hadron is from the quarks' binding energy, could it be that only the quarks' _rest_ mass is negative?
Also, is it possible that 'like' gravitational charges attract while opposite charges repel? i.e. negative and positive mass mutually repel, but two negative masses attract.
Science harder, bro 😂
How to science softy?
@@resiliencewithinYou lay down with science. Rub its shoulders and wisper sweet nothing into it ears. Science is love, science is life.
Science is flat
@@gladlawson61science can’t be flat because science is hollow
@@oberonpanopticonJust like most of the space in an atom, science's love for us is mostly empty and hollow. We long to embrace her in her entirety, but we always fall short in the end. What a cruel and tragic story.
Is it appropriate to ask "What's the anti-matter" if someone is walking around feeling great?
Hadn't noticed the logo. Pretty cool
I think there is a fallacy to the experiment done: Anti-protons may react differently to earth's gravitational compared to normal protons. When you let anti-hydrogen "fall" in the tube, the positrons may get affected more so by the gravitational field due to their positive charge even though they have "smaller" mass. This difference may result in the anti-hydrogen being observed to be falling in the gravitational field. I think the experiment should include only anti-protons, or at least anti-helium atoms or anti-alpha particles to definitively reach a solid conclusion on this matter. Also, there should be a parallel "control" experiment involving normal hydrogen similarly confined in a magnetic field to see if it "falls" the same way. Without the control, there can be no comparison.
Without reading the paper, I am going to assume that there is a control experiment as you describe, because as a reviewer this is the first thing I would want to see. The fact that they reference the result to normal hydrogen suggests it was done in this way.
The charge of a positron or an electron will not affect their interaction with gravity. Electric charge is the charge for electromagnetism, and mass for gravity. It would be much bigger news if those two things bleed into each other.
The reason why this is done on atoms is because they are electrically neutral and so have only limited interactions with the EM field. If you did it with charge particles, then the interaction with even a tiny stray EM field would swamp the interaction with gravity. That was the you on earth affecting the feather on the moon analogy. It would be cool to do this with larger atoms though, although I am not sure how easy they are to create. Not easy is my guess.
@@stevendaly4640 i think it is your assumption that charges don't interact with gravity. Even Einstein said that spacetime curves in presence of large EM fields. That is the basis of GR. So, yes, EM fields do create gravity, but not vice-versa. Static E-fields represent the potential of energy if movement of the field or a charge within the field occurs. Moving E-fields therefore constitute energy. What is the value of the electron's E-field as you approach its center?
Furthermore, how do you confine neutral anti-matter atoms in an EM field? You can't. The confinement itself will ionize the atoms, negating their neutrality.
Heavier anti-matter atoms would theoritically require anti-neutrons, and so far as i know, none have been created.
First
PBS spacetime is an inspiration of human excellence that unites minds across the globe. Astonishing channel 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
It's an excellent presentation
After how many years, in the video SpaceTime has a new intro animation! Very nice!