Reconsidering Matter/Anti-Matter Annihilation

[Michael Netzer]

Considering the overall behavior of the particle system, I'm wondering whether others might also agree that the case for matter/antimatter annihilation cannot be considered as open and shut as we presently assume.

Why should a positron and electron annihilate each other? What additional destructive force could cause the presumed annihilation... or at least the particles' decay to pure energy?

What if the positron and electron bind together instead, as they should, and as any two oppositely charged particles do? If so, and because they're of equal mass and charge, they would rather absorb each others' charge equally and thus render themselves undetectable. At least by our current capability to detect particles.

H2 molecules are barely detected in space (but we now know they exist in abundance) because their assembly and equal opposite charges of their components render them undetectable to us. Why shouldn't a positron and electron behave the same?

There is nothing especially destructive or powerful enough about a positron to cause it to annihilate an electron. It is simply a positively charged electron, nothing else.

 

[russ_watters]

Welcome to PF!

I don't mean to sound rude, but you do know that what you are suggesting is wrongly hypothesized is actually observed to happen, right? So, where are you going with this?

 

[Michael Netzer]

Thank you! Nothing rude at all about your question.

In nature, we observe that a photon of specific energy strikes the nucleus of an atom (or perhaps something else?). A positron and electron suddenly emerge out of nowhere and are quickly attracted together in a frenzied dual orbital dance, within a nano second. Then they disappear, ejecting a double gamma ray emission, each traveling in an opposite direction to the other. That is the extent of what we actually observe, to my best knowledge.

We then hypothesize that the photon, which was equal in energy to the mass of a positron and electron combined, has actually acquired its mass from striking the presumed atom nucleus. In essence, we assume that the photon itself transformed into the dual particles. We further assume that when they disappear, the particles annihilate. Or their mass is annihilated, leaving us with the original photon, now divided into two gamma ray packets of opposite charges, causing them to travel in opposing directions.

I have not yet found a phenomenon of similar implications. Even with our most powerful accelerators, we are not yet able to convert a photon to a particle with mass. We can cause the decay of particles into energy in accelerators - but if we could do what that small photon did, then we could effectively produce new matter from energy. It's simply curious, and raises a question: How does such a small photon, with such a small expenditure of energy from an atom nucleus, produce a particle with mass? And if that is the case, why can we not duplicate such a low-energy process?

The question I raise is whether it's possible that the mass-particles, electron and positron, do not actually annihilate. If so, they could still be there but are undetectable to us. Such a possibility can open additional venues to what might be occurring.

The original photon strikes one of these coupled invisible pairs, causing them to disassemble. So they appear suddenly as if out of nowhere. The energy of the photon is absorbed into them, causing the ultra-fast angular momentum dance around each other as they seek to bind. When they do bind, the momentum is suddenly stopped and the particles' opposite forces causes their spin to stop. Now they're perfectly bound together because they're of equal charge and mass. They absorb each others' charge, rendering them invisible. Their sudden halt of momentum sends the extra photon out of the pair, now in two parts, each according to the charge of the particle it resided in.

I'm perfectly aware that if this were the case, there'd be little to no certainty of it based on what we observe empirically in pair production. But the same would then apply to the currently prevailing theory of annihilation.

I'm exploring a potential veracity of it as a probable structure for Dark Matter, among other possibilities.

 

[ZapperZ]

You are "exploring" something based on faulty assumptions which has not been verified by experiments.

1. e-p annihilation has been verified NUMEROUS times. This is supported not only via a very strong theoretical foundation, but also via a lot of experiments. It is SO well-know, we use it in medical diagnosis! See PET scans!

2. I have no idea where you got the notion that "... Even with our most powerful accelerators, we are not yet able to convert a photon to a particle with mass..." e-p generation via pair production is so well-established, it is not even funny.

3. A lot of what you are saying are hand-waving arguments. You have provided no quantitative arguments. For example, if all you think happen between an e and p is a capture, then calculate whether such a capture can actually emit the gamma photons in the energy range that we frequently detect when these two "meet". The quantitative aspect of your "exploration" is severely lacking.

4. Did you read the PF Rules before you make these posts?

Zz.

 

[Dale]

I'm wondering whether others might also agree that the case for matter/antimatter annihilation cannot be considered as open and shut as we presently assume.

It is pretty open and shut. Antimatter is manufactured across the globe on a daily basis and used routinely to make medical diagnoses by the photons produced from annihilation. It is so reliable and predictable that it can commercially generated as needed with consistent known behavior.

Every PET study is an experiment confirming the annihilation of electrons and positrons, the experimental evidence is overwhelming. Of course, that is not the only experimental evidence. But it is well established experimentally.

This forum does not discuss personal speculation. Thread closed