|
|
Post by 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖒𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖈𝖑𝖊 on Aug 14, 2017 0:14:21 GMT
Yes, Anti-ions will be repelled of the electron cloud of the fullerene. Anti-helium is a good candidate for its negative charge of two. 1 mol of Buckyballs has 720g of mass. And one mol of helium has 4g of mass. A ratio of 180. Resulting in a energy density of 500TJ/kg (Considering an efficiency of 50%. It would be 1,4 times Stronger than the most Energy dense (reallistic) Fusion fuel D-He3.) I am not so sure... By that logic a regular container (eg. metal) would be able to store antimatter as long as the antimatter is ionized and not substantially hotter than the container. well the amount of force acting on individual atoms of anticarbon from the buckyballs would be orders of magnitude more powerful then the forces acting on a large chunk of it |
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Aug 14, 2017 21:04:59 GMT
A fullerene molecule, and any carbon atom in it, is electrostatically neutral. I don't see why an anti-ion would be repelled. If the (negative) anti-ion pierces the electron cloud of any carbon atom (which it can, since it is not overall repelled), it would then be attracted to its nucleus, since a portion of the neutralizing cloud is behind it. So no, encapsulating antimatter in a normal-matter fullerene should not work. A dodecaborate ion (B 12H 122-) might work due to its charge, but I still doubt it. You'd probably need to keep it right near absolute zero and avoid jostling it too much.  |
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Aug 14, 2017 23:48:06 GMT
Hasn't it been proven that no passive that no passive trap can be stable?
At best they are metastable, meaning that they have a half-life. And if one fails, how do you make sure that it doesn't chain reaction the neighbours?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 15, 2017 9:15:07 GMT
A fullerene molecule, and any carbon atom in it, is electrostatically neutral. I don't see why an anti-ion would be repelled. If the (negative) anti-ion pierces the electron cloud of any carbon atom (which it can, since it is not overall repelled), it would then be attracted to its nucleus, since a portion of the neutralizing cloud is behind it. So no, encapsulating antimatter in a normal-matter fullerene should not work. A dodecaborate ion (B 12H 122-) might work due to its charge, but I still doubt it. You'd probably need to keep it right near absolute zero and avoid jostling it too much. Don't C60 Fullerenes tend to pick up some extra electrons? Guess I mixed some things up. Dodecaborane shouldn't work either for the reason listed in my other post. |
|
|
|
Post by Kerr on Aug 15, 2017 9:26:08 GMT
Hasn't it been proven that no passive that no passive trap can be stable? At best they are metastable, meaning that they have a half-life. And if one fails, how do you make sure that it doesn't chain reaction the neighbours? Earnshaw's theorem states that "a collection of point charges cannot be maintained in a stable stationary equilibrium configuration solely by the electrostatic interaction of the charges." Also the wavefunction of the antinucleus should overlap with carbon atoms even outside it's kinetic potential. There is no way to keep it from a chain reaction, the activation energy millions to billion times lower than the annihilation energy of a single annihilation. The question is how long the half life is, I've heard predictipons ranging from nanosecond to years up to exceeding the heat death of the universe. |
|
|
|
Post by n2maniac on Aug 20, 2017 8:47:56 GMT
Suppose it was meta-stable so long as nothing set it off. I would be concerned of a single cosmic ray setting it off.
|
|
