If antimatter exists why can't we see it on our Earth?
Our eyes don't exist
cool fidget spinners
>>8972785
Bullshit, we have seen antimatter on earth. Like literally seen it:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/12/first-observation-of-antimatters-spectrum-looks-like-regular-matter/
It took lasers and some really sensistive photodetectors, but yeah, we can fucking see it
>>8972806
Matter + Antimatter = 0 = Explosion
The matter is still here, our Earth is still here, why?
>>8972819
Because they didn't make enough antimatter to destroy the earth.
>>8972858
1 gram of antimatter + 1 gram of matter = Tsar Bomba
Earth + Anti Earth = 0 = Explosion
Our Earth is still here, why?
>>8972874
Oh I don't know, maybe because they only used ~25,000 antihydrogen atoms? Which is nowhere near enough to blow up anything.
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v541/n7638/full/nature21040.html
A Tsar bomba's not going to destroy the earth.
>>8972880
Where is the anti-Earth?
>>8972785
It looks exactly like regular matter. Half the stars in the sky could be antimatter for all we know
>>8972890
Nowhere. All the antimatter made by the universe in the beginning hit all the regular matter and only a little regular matter was left.
And if some region of the universe were made of antimatter, it wouldn't look the least bit different anyway.
>>8972905
>explore some isolated planetary system on the edge of the galaxy
>oh it happens to be anti -- boom
>tfw this will never happen in your life time
Shouldn't antimatter accelerate away from the earth at 9.81m/s^2?
>>8972785
its use is routine, brainlet
>>8973153
Antimatter still has normal mass. You want negative mass for a positive interaction with gravity like that, which is not a property of antimatter.
>>8973174
"Antimatter"...pfft.....more like "anti normal charge"
>>8973178
dumb gorilla poster
>>8973153
the entire reason we don't see it is because it's accelerating away, dumb gorilla poster
what if the andromeda galaxy is all antimatter and it collides with us, the milky way, which is all matter
>>8973460
Would it...... matter?
>>8973471
It would be more of a spectacle until we die I would assume
On a related note, if Andromeda collided with milky way like this, how long would it take for us to feel the consequences? (I suppose there isn't a way to estimate a collision speed?)
>>8973478
We probably wouldn't notice - well, aside from the astronomers and various stargazers.
Galaxies are mostly empty space. The merger of the two galaxies (and eventually, all the blue shifted galaxies), isn't going to be particularly catastrophic for the occupants.
Unless it gives birth to a quasar in the core, as then we're all going to be irradiated to hell. Last I heard there was some debate as to whether even a galaxy made of the entire local group would be sufficient for that - don't think we really know enough about quasar formation to be sure one way or the other.
>>8973487
How fast would we die if we were ejected from the solar system to emptiness as a result of some collision?
>>8973487
I think this image would be alot brighter and not as linear
>>8973499
Pretty fast... But the point is, it's extremely unlikely to happen. There's a whole lotta empty space between those stars.
>>8973509
I dunno man it's pretty dense in the middle, even if we aren't directly hit, I feel like some rubble or something should hit us
>>8972890
In Africa.
>>8973513
Most of the matter tends to be concentrated pretty close to those stars, and even there shit is sparse as fuck. You could draw lines as thick as the Earth, millions of light years long, radiate them in a random direction, every second, for millions of years, and never hit anything but the sun or the moon. It *looks* pretty dense, but even at the dead center, outside of the Sagittarius-A black hole, it really isn't, as even in the core there's usually light years between stars that aren't already paired up.
http://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsystem.html
There's just not much matter in the universe, and most of what there is, is congealed in very tight spaces.
>>8973513
We won't be here... In a billion years the sun's gonna be so hot that'll have converted all our oceans into steam, and in five billion years, when this collision is due to happen, it'll be a red giant and have reduced the planet to slag, if not have completely absorbed it.
Somewhere in between there I suppose Mars might be a nice place to live - if not for very long, relatively speaking.
>>8973499
The planet's surface would become uninhabitable rather quickly, but the core would take a very very long time to cool off. Humanity could likely survive underground or underwater for several thousand years. Dunno about millions of years cuz who knows if humanity will survive that long even if we keep our sun
>>8972785
It's science fiction
>>8973128
Someone wrote a short science fiction story about that
Astronaut discovers a seemingly inhabitable planet, but realizes it is anti-matter and he cannot land.
>>8973487
are we really going to become a shitty elliptical galaxy? lame
>>8972785
Because muonic particle pair decay is matter biased.
>>8972874
you think they just had barrels of antimatter sitting in a warehouse somewhere?
>>8976573
Are you drunk?
Obviously it's stored in antibarrels in an antiwarehouse
>>8976580
if my car were made of antimatter, would I have to put freeze in the radiator?
Is Australia made out of antimatter?
>>8976634
no, it is made out of spiders.
>>8976634
No, it's normal matter, except all the spins are opposite
>>8976616
nope. antiheat.
>>8973499
Not at all until our sun stops supporting the earth, which it probably will have by the time the collision is complete.
>>8972806
How did they know that they generated anti hydrogen