AntimatterEssay Preview: AntimatterReport this essayEssay on AntimmatterAntimmatter Term PapersWhile the free essays can give you inspiration for writing, they cannot be used as is because they will not meet your assignments requirements. If you are in a time crunch, then you need a custom written term paper on your subject (antimmatter)
Here you can hire an independent writer/researcher to custom write you an authentic essay to your specifications that will pass any plagiarism test (e.g. Turnitin). Waste no more time!
Really long Physics paperWe stand at the base of a new age. We are just now beginning to learn the intricate details of life, both macroscopic and microscopic. Ultimately these discoveries will benefit all of mankind. Never before have we enjoyed such a golden age for science and discovery. The scientific horizon looks fruitful. One such fruit is the discovery and application of a thing called antimatter. During the next few decades our ability to produce, accumulate, and contain large quantities of antimatter should become feasible, leaving us just to research possible uses for this promising, radically new, form of energy.
Antimatter is exactly what the name suggests. It is the opposite of matter in which the charges associated with electrons and protons are switched. This means a proton and antiproton are attracted to each other. When they collide pane energy is produced in the form of three pions and four gamma rays.
Since their discovery in 1955, antiproton production rates have increased by approximately an order of magnitude (which is one exponential increase) every 2.5 years as seen in fig. 1. It is predicted that a milligram to a gram of antimatter could be produced annually within the next decade. At present the main hinderence to antimatter production is the ability to accumulate, cool, and decelerate the antiprotons.
Antimatter production is a relatively easy concept, but the details are mind bogeling. In 1932, Carl Anderson, was examining tracks produced by cosmic rays in a cloud chamber. One particle made a track like an electron, but carvature of its path in the magnetic field was one consistent with a possitive charged particle. He named this new particle a positron. Later, in the 1950�s, physicists at the Lawrence Radiation Lab used the Beratron accelerator to produce the anti-proton. Upon examination of this particle they found that it had the same mass and spin as a proton, but with negative charge and opposite magnetic moment. The process they used to create this particle with first to accelerate a proton to a very high speed, and then smash it into a target. This collision produces an antiproton and three protons, or in other words a proton antiproton pair and the two original protons. This seems to suggest that for each antiproton produced, there is one proton. This would sugget whole other worlds made of antimatter. However, this is a whole other debate.
Now, the main problem with this process is accumulation, cooling, and deceleration, as already mentioned. Once the collision has taken place the products are moving at high speeds with large amount of kinetic energy. It requires large amounts of energy to accelerate the proton, and even more to decelerate and cool the products. Accumulation brings up another problem, which is storage.
Antimatter is more reactive then any other substance ever created because it will react with any form of matter. So, storage must keep it from colliding with other particles. Currently, storage is limited to electromagnectic confinement using large magnetic rings to accelerate the protons at low speeds in a vaccumn. This type of storage is costly and cannot hold large amounts of antiprotons or positrons. Due to this impediment, antimatter is only stored for short amount of time (hours) before it is used in experiments. However, there are two new ideas for forms of storage. The first is for bulk storage. This process implies storage at extreme low temperatures in a vacuum. The second way is called dispersed storage, where antimatter is stored in a uniform mix with normal matter. In both cases the antimatter can be stored in the form of a single charged particle (antiproton) or as a antihydrogen neutral molecule.
Another simple, and obvious, way to prevent antiprotons from reacting with the walls of a storage vessel is to electrically charge such walls to repel the particles. Intense studies on storage devices such as these are underway using normal matter ions. This type of storage device is known as an ion trap. This is a good intermediate holding device for antimatter because it allows time for the particles to be cooled and decelerated. The Japanese have created traps that can hold 10 to 1016 antiprotons. However, these traps would be so large, that they would require huge amounts of energy. Although, the future is looking promising. The combination of these methods and new technology may allow for high density storage. This combined with the production notes expected in the next decade open the possibility of using antiprotons in applications other than basic research.
Anti Protons have the highest energy density (9×1016 J./kg.) of any other material known to man. The annihilation of an antiproton with a proton produces 1000 times the energy per unit mass of reactants thatn the fission of Uranium. Extrapolation of current technological growth reveals a future potential for low mass antiproton storage, transfer, and conversion to energy. However, the energy, and therefore financial investment is large. Consequently, antiproton energy sources would only be useful in areas where a low mass/high energy yield is important. Two such fields are biomedical and deep space propulsion application. The difficulty in these concepts is the conversion of the form of energy yielded by annilation (4 gamma rays and 3 pions), to the desired form of energy. The average kinetic energy�s produced from a single annialation are 243 MeV and 196 MeV for pions and gamma rays, respectively.
The biomedical need for antiproton seem to be the most promising and near term use for the particles. The particular use for antimatter ifs in the area of biomedical radioisotope generation. These isotopes are currently used in established procedures such as Positron Emission Tomography (PET), which detects many forms of cancer, maps activity in the brain, and helps to understand pathological afflictions such as Alzheimer�s disease. The availability of the isotopes is currently limited to expensive production facilities and to the range that can be covered within the half life of the isotope. Only 40 cyclotrons for PET isotope production exist nationwide whereas 1700 hospitals possess the imaging
Currently, the primary target of PET is the small intestine, with the majority of this requirement being fulfilled by low dose, low cost methods, such as laser imaging (LIMS) or optical emission spectrometry. Laser imaging of the intestinal lining is still on-going due to its cost effective and cost efficient ability to detect cancer-causing bacteria in the intestinal lining to assess the effects of chemotherapy and cancer treatments. A low cost approach to measuring intestinal permeability and absorption by chemotherapy, coupled with the presence of large amounts of antimicrobial agent (such as triterpene) from various pharmaceutical companies, is the most promising step toward achieving this goal.
An estimated 5-10 mg of antimicrobial resistant bacteria per human, or 0.03% of the population, are required to be colonized annually. Of these, only 1-0.3% survive to an advanced stage of disease (a more or less successful colonization would therefore indicate a positive level of bacterial protection of ≈0.4%). Although the overall prevalence of colonic infection has increased since the 1970s and early 1990s, however, the incidence rate is still only 1%–3% (Fang et al., 1993). In addition, the cost of colonization requires significant efforts by health care providers, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies as well as by other countries to ensure adequate levels of antimicrobial resistance. The number of patients infected with non-obese subacute pancreatitis, or pancreatic β-cellular carcinoma, is also projected to increase greatly for the first time in the first decade to 1 million in 2015. These new data will allow us to understand changes in how microbial contamination is managed, and may help inform the development and subsequent development of effective antibiotics. As the prevalence of disease decreases and the rate of cure rates remain low, the burden of bacterial colonization may increase and may be mitigated by the expansion and deployment of more specific and invasive antibiotics. The potential for long term effects of antimicrobial resistance, including in specific pathogens, will likely be enormous. This article describes the mechanism of antimicrobial resistance using recent molecular epidemiological studies examining the pathologic changes in antibiotic resistance. The current model used for diagnosis of subacute pancreatitis, currently known to affect more than 8% of patients, is the current model we developed. We describe the mechanism of development of antimicrobial resistance using novel molecular epidemiological studies including current and previous cases of subacute pancreatitis. The present work demonstrates our ability to observe and manage bacterial and viral pathogenic contamination through our own genome-wide molecular approach on the basis of a single genome-wide human genomic copy number from the Large Mammalian Genome Sequencing Sequence (MBLAST) (Klein and Reisch, 2004). Additional human genetic