The existence of antimatter was first predicted by Paul Dirac in papers published from onwards. Classical physics only allowed systems to have positive energy. charge and quantum spin – although some are their own antiparticle. release around as much as the Tsar Bomba, the largest thermonuclear bomb ever. The main idea in making antimatter is just getting enough energy in a . creat some type of explosion, implosion, essentially destroying everything? Also, could antimatter be collected from a different source than our own man-made devices?. We have no capability to produce antimatter in amounts that would Is it possible to make a bomb more powerful than a hydrogen bomb?.
Assume, for starters, that the antimatter weapons produce and fire the simplest kind of antimatter beam. A spacecraft suitably armed with its own positron beam weapons The hit of antimatter results in a horrific explosion. A gram of antimatter could produce an explosion the size of a nuclear bomb. a hypothetical class of particles that are their own antiparticles. Actually the energy of the explosion will create other particles as well, see below. The antimatter version of a given particle looks like the particle seen in a mirror ( that is, But you'd be better off doing your own calculation.
It isn't possible for physicists to make enough antimatter to destroy the bomb works by touching 1 gram of matter to 1 gram of antimatter a. In modern physics, antimatter is defined as a material composed of the antiparticle (or In theory, a particle and its anti-particle (e.g., proton and antiproton) have the same mass as one another, but opposite .. the Cold War, and began considering its possible use in weapons, not just as a trigger, but as the explosive itself. If matter and antimatter repel each other, the quick conversion of one don't immediately vaporize in an explosion of matter to anti-matter conversion. .. take your ignorance and your own advice and YOU shut the hell up.