 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11773791
Rah! Rah! Cern. :-D
--
Best Regards,
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 17/11/2010 21:04, Stephen nous fit lire :
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11773791
>
> Rah! Rah! Cern. :-D
>
If my bottle of anti-water is full, am I more thirsty ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17/11/2010 08:04 PM, Stephen wrote:
> Rah! Rah! Cern. :-D
Hang on, I thought...
"Producing antimatter particles like positrons and antiprotons has
become commonplace in the laboratory, but assembling the particles into
antimatter atoms is far more tricky. That was first accomplished by two
groups in 2002."
...yes, I was right. They first created anti-hydrogen years ago.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> On 17/11/2010 08:04 PM, Stephen wrote:
> > Rah! Rah! Cern. :-D
> Hang on, I thought...
> "Producing antimatter particles like positrons and antiprotons has
> become commonplace in the laboratory, but assembling the particles into
> antimatter atoms is far more tricky. That was first accomplished by two
> groups in 2002."
> ...yes, I was right. They first created anti-hydrogen years ago.
Creating it is one thing. Stopping it from being destroyed a nanosecond
later is a much more difficult task.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> On 17/11/2010 08:04 PM, Stephen wrote:
>
>>> Rah! Rah! Cern. :-D
>
>> Hang on, I thought...
>
>> "Producing antimatter particles like positrons and antiprotons has
>> become commonplace in the laboratory, but assembling the particles into
>> antimatter atoms is far more tricky. That was first accomplished by two
>> groups in 2002."
>
>> ...yes, I was right. They first created anti-hydrogen years ago.
>
> Creating it is one thing. Stopping it from being destroyed a nanosecond
> later is a much more difficult task.
Yep. In particular, holding a charged antiproton in place with an electric
field is a bunch easier than holding an uncharged atom in place somehow.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Serving Suggestion:
"Don't serve this any more. It's awful."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/18/2010 9:46 AM, Warp wrote:
> Invisible<voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> On 17/11/2010 08:04 PM, Stephen wrote:
>
>>> Rah! Rah! Cern. :-D
>
>> Hang on, I thought...
>
>> "Producing antimatter particles like positrons and antiprotons has
>> become commonplace in the laboratory, but assembling the particles into
>> antimatter atoms is far more tricky. That was first accomplished by two
>> groups in 2002."
>
>> ...yes, I was right. They first created anti-hydrogen years ago.
>
> Creating it is one thing. Stopping it from being destroyed a nanosecond
> later is a much more difficult task.
>
The actually got it to last a bit longer
.2s if I read correctly :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
