.

>>9157122
K

>>9157122
K

File: ogre_magi_vert.jpg (20KB, 235x272px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 235x272px

>>9157122
o k

>>9157196
T H U N K

File: activating almonds.webm (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>9157122

>>9157122
Maybe so, but how do we prove it?

>>9157347
Isn't it just another way of interpreting known physics? It's little different than turn every world map upside down. Sure, it's weird, but it doesn't change geography.

>>9157122
doesn't explain the energy released by the annihilation

>>9157252
what is the physics behind this? why almond go up from down?

>>9157993
Almond are float

File: annihilation.png (8KB, 895x568px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 895x568px

>>9157122
This.

>>9157991
Uhm yeah it does haven't you seen those tire tracks in back to the future and how cold the car gets when it jumped through time. It all fucking makes sense now...

>>9157252
That really activated my almonds.

>>9157991
Conservation of temporal momentum?

>>9158055
>conservation of temporal momentum
Well first you're going to explain what temporal momentum even means and then you're going to need to explain why it must be conserved.
After that, find some way to explain how the electron actually goes about changing directions in time when the collision (or turning point in this model) takes place in a vacuum with no external influences. By all rights the positron should not have existed at all in this scenario.

>>9158125
If you look at time as just another dimension on a graph then something should has to keep going forward in time, else the electron isn't really bouncing off of anything.

>>9158149
but regular momentum is defined in relation to time. What is temporal momentum defined in relation to, distance? and if so, that would mean that the speed at which the collision happened to begin with would directly affect the energy released, which it doesn't. In fact the energy released is always equivalent to the mass of the matter being annihilated.

>>9158163
>the speed would effect the energy released, but it doesn't.
Well, it does. The mass of the particles increases as they approach the speed of light. That's a simple matter of conservation of energy. Not that I'm certain that is relevant to the ideal that annihilation is electrons reflecting back in time.

>>9158125
>why it must be conserved
That's simple. There's a temporal symmetry where it doesn't matter at which time point the interaction occurs. By Noether's Theorem this results in the conservation of temporal momentum.

>>9158515
*idea

>>9157998
>>9157122
So if a positron-electron pair form out of a gamma ray and then subsequently annihilate themselves shortly thereafter then it's just one particle going in circles forever across a small patch of space-time?

>>9157122
arrow of time, bud. there is no evidence to suggest antimatter organizes counter to how entropy suggests it would

>>9160157
Entropy reverses when heading back in time. Everything going backwards in time tends to narrow in on a certain state.

>>9160188
>entropy reverses
this doesn't make any sense.
what do you think entropy is?

>>9160190
An accurate definition was implied by saying the opposite of entropy was narrowing in on a certain state.

>>9160197
That implied definition being something along the lines of systems over time tend towards states with a lot of possible orientations and not much difference between them, like a room full of air throughout as opposed to all the air being concentrated on one side of the room.

>>9160197
>>9160188
oh yeah doy, that makes sense.
but still, there isn't any evidence to suggest this happens

>>9157347
>>9160215
Simple. We just need to demonstrate that there exist at any one moment an equal amount of matter and antimatter.

...wait a moment.

>>9160295
Would that be necessary? If time were thought of as just another spatial dimension then it would be analogous to the net movement of all the particles in the universe being to the right, which isn't impossible.

>>9157122
So what does that mean for photons? They don't have antimattter equivalents. are they time neutral in this regard?