I promised long ago that I would talk about something very exotic, antiparticles. And is that you will remember (and if not, to me anyway) that day I put beatings talking about the colors and flavors of fermions, those “things” (particles) that forms the neutrons, protons …
Antiparticles is a malignant property (if, like Dr. Evil) nature being the same elementary particles tell you about the other day unless the load is reversed. That is, if we all know what it is and we know that an electron has a negative charge, there is an anti electron that is, positively charged. But also about fundamental particles, an up quark has its anti quark up (the up is the spin).
And when I say the same, it’s the same the same, same spin, same mass but opposite charge.
The only one for now not known whether anti particle exists is the Higgs boson although it is thought that its antiparticle is “the same” with what we have a very interesting duality, if true. Good and also the photon, which is not known anti photon. Let that for now there are only 2 particles that have no anti particles.
Now if you remember the subject of flavors and colors that I said were mass fermions (with load) and bosons they were the strength (weak, strong). Of “things with mass” no anti particle, but force, no. That is, there are no anti bosons.
And in this last lie again, but better remember and then take the exceptions rather than the reverse. There is a boson that has anti boson, the W boson, the weak force.
Why is this happening?. Well no idea, and that’s the beauty of science, they learn.
And how they were discovered?. If you remember (which I doubt) when you speak of fermions, the discovery always comes first mathematician, ie formulas that tell us that something is there. When, with relativity was thought that things could go very very fast (at relativistic speeds, which is called) with respect to other reference systems, they realized that the equations loosened negative energies (I do not remember who, sorry).
Nothing happens to have negative energy, that energy is lost, but not all can continually lose because, for example in an atom, the electron would fall on the core and … does not happen.
The friend Dirac (another physical) via equations (so we understand) came to the conclusion that there were energy levels in atoms, but of negative energy. That is, not if you shall know but electrons “jump” in their orbits power energy, because it found that there is the same but with negative energy which means that if you pass on one side (electrons) must have something to do otherwise in the opposite (anti electrons).
The “real” show was about 1930 (I forget the exact year) with the cloud chamber. The experiment consisted of a box full of gas (at a certain temperature) through which is passed a current (electrons) and subjected to a magnetic field (thought to see if magnetic fields changed the orientation of electrons and quantum) these leave a trail in the gas. Well, it was that left two totally opposite stelae.
Contrails, obviously, one is an electron, but the other ?, as an anti electron (positron, come on, let’s call them by name).
So far so good and understandable, there are particles and antiparticles whims of nature. So why we not see antiparticles floating around?.
Well, that is one of the mysteries that go around looking. It is believed that after the big bang, is for whatever reason (more matter than antimatter was created, for example) were destroying each other until the matter was that I win.
What would have happened, if so, if he wins the antimatter ?. Absolutely nothing except physical terms that you and I would be made of antimatter, nothing new. Antimatter has the same properties as the material and is subject to the same physical laws unless the charge is contrary.