Annihilation of positron and eletron particles

Annihilation of positron and electron is a clear example of the deep
distance between empiric evidence
and the theory about those evidence. Anti-matter is by definition
capable of real distruction if it would be combined with matter. So
how is it possible from this combination the creation of something as
powerful as the Gamma ray.
The problem of modern physics is the gap between experimental data and
theory suitable to explain it.

Note: Both have mass!

Thanks a lot

Dear Skeu:

"Skeu" wrote in message
...
Annihilation of positron and electron is a clear example
of the deep distance between empiric evidence and the
theory about those evidence.

Actually no. Such interactions are well understood and expected.

Anti-matter is by definition capable of real distruction

Funny, in an anti-matter Universe, they'd be saying the same
thing about *you*!

if it would be combined with matter. So how is it
possible from this combination the creation of something
as powerful as the Gamma ray.

Because it is symmetric. A powerful gamma ray can spawn the
creation of matter-antimatter pairs. Do a search for "pair
creation".

The problem of modern physics is the gap between
experimental data and theory suitable to explain it.

No, the problem is, that newsgroups don't have any sort of
entrance examination. So that anybody that knows how to type can
make claims based on their own ignorance. And can never be
challenged / expected to learn.

Note: Both have mass!

A photon does not have mass. A system of particles with a CM
that travels at less than c has mass. The gamma photon has to
encounter a charge before it can create a particle/antiparticle
pair.

David A. Smith

On May 9, 6:04*pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
wrote:

No, the problem is, that newsgroups don't have any sort of
entrance examination. *So that anybody that knows how to type can
make claims based on their own ignorance.

David A. Smith

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like the unscientific claim that MACHOs cannot be a valid dark matter
candidate because they do not fit the biased assumption that the dak
matter "must" be ubiquitous subatomic particles?

RLO

dlzc wrote:
Dear Skeu:
Skeu wrote:
Annihilation of positron and electron is a clear example
of the deep distance between empiric evidence and the
theory about those evidence.

Actually no. Such interactions are well understood and expected.

Anti-matter is by definition capable of real distruction

Funny, in an anti-matter Universe, they'd be saying the same
thing about *you*!

if it would be combined with matter. So how is it
possible from this combination the creation of something
as powerful as the Gamma ray.

Because it is symmetric. A powerful gamma ray can spawn the
creation of matter-antimatter pairs. Do a search for "pair
creation".

Many theories are based on idiotic assumptions that are falsified
immediately by the shear stupidity of the assumptions. Isn't it
blatantly obvious that a gamma ray has no mechanism with which
to make an electron or positron? How can it possibly know what
an electron or positron is? Does it carry some kind of code built
into the frequency that can be physically extracted in stages as
the pair slowly become aware of their existence? How can a dumb
ray be so amazingly clever? And why only electrons and positrons?
Why not the opposite sides of my jam sandwich? The gamma ray
would need to carry some kind of jam sandwich gene for that to
happen, of course.

And why does the creation process stop when the charge on each
has reached the required value even if the ray carries much more
energy than the combined value of the two? I can postulate you
a reason why that is so of course. The creation process is
entirely controlled by the emerging electron and positron as they
become self aware because they are, without doubt, fundamental
forces of nature and the parameters for their development are
set by the laws of nature. They will always end up being exactly
the same as any other electron or positron in the universe. But
I wouldn't be game to tell anyone that because I know I would be
laughed off the planet, even if I had a huge pile of math to
back it up.

The problem of modern physics is the gap between
experimental data and theory suitable to explain it.

No, the problem is, that newsgroups don't have any sort of
entrance examination. So that anybody that knows how to type can
make claims based on their own ignorance. And can never be
challenged / expected to learn.

You probably don't perceive that paragraph as I do.

-----

Max Keon

On 10 Mag, 00:04, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" wrote:
Dear Skeu:

"Skeu" wrote in message

...

Annihilation of positron and electron is a clear example
of the deep distance between empiric evidence and the
theory about those evidence.

Actually no. *Such interactions are well understood and expected.

Anti-matter is by definition capable of real distruction

Funny, in an anti-matter Universe, they'd be saying the same
thing about *you*!

if it would be combined with matter. So how is it
possible from this combination the creation of something
as powerful as the Gamma ray.

Because it is symmetric. *A powerful gamma ray can spawn the
creation of matter-antimatter pairs. *Do a search for "pair
creation".

The problem of modern physics is the gap between
experimental data and theory suitable to explain it.

No, the problem is, that newsgroups don't have any sort of
entrance examination. *So that anybody that knows how to type can
make claims based on their own ignorance. *And can never be
challenged / expected to learn.

Note: Both have mass!

A photon does not have mass. *A system of particles with a CM
that travels at less than c has mass. *The gamma photon has to
encounter a charge before it can create a particle/antiparticle
pair.

David A. Smith

Probably you don't know what "nihil" means. Search a latin dictionary
before claiming for necessity of moderate newsgroup.

On 10 Mag, 00:04, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" wrote:
Dear Skeu:

"Skeu" wrote in message

...

Annihilation of positron and electron is a clear example
of the deep distance between empiric evidence and the
theory about those evidence.

Actually no. *Such interactions are well understood and expected.

Anti-matter is by definition capable of real distruction

Funny, in an anti-matter Universe, they'd be saying the same
thing about *you*!

if it would be combined with matter. So how is it
possible from this combination the creation of something
as powerful as the Gamma ray.

Because it is symmetric. *A powerful gamma ray can spawn the
creation of matter-antimatter pairs. *Do a search for "pair
creation".

The problem of modern physics is the gap between
experimental data and theory suitable to explain it.

No, the problem is, that newsgroups don't have any sort of
entrance examination. *So that anybody that knows how to type can
make claims based on their own ignorance. *And can never be
challenged / expected to learn.

Note: Both have mass!

A photon does not have mass. *A system of particles with a CM
that travels at less than c has mass. *The gamma photon has to
encounter a charge before it can create a particle/antiparticle
pair.

David A. Smith

Photon is supposed to have no REST MASS cause no one can
imagine a PHOTON at rest.
So before you claim your statement try to be more precise.
The actual theory are not definitive.
But I'm sure that empirical results overcome theory!

Dear jesko:

On May 10, 1:43*am, jesko wrote:
....
Photon is supposed to have no REST MASS cause
no one can imagine a PHOTON at rest.

No, we can now that we have been able to slow them to a snail's pace
in a Bose-Einstein condensate.

So before you claim your statement try to be more
precise. The actual theory are not definitive.

The theory expresses explicitly, as a result of other well tested
results, the photon has identically zero rest mass. Essentially, you
can have a non-zero photon rest mass, or conservation of momentum, but
not both.

But I'm sure that empirical results overcome theory!

Results are that a non-zero rest mass cannot be proven, but that its
rest mass is many orders of magnitude less than its energy.

David A. Smith

dlzc wrote:
On May 10, 1:43 am, jesko wrote:
...
Photon is supposed to have no REST MASS cause
no one can imagine a PHOTON at rest.

No, we can now that we have been able to slow them to a snail's pace
in a Bose-Einstein condensate.

These Bose-Einstein condensates are fascinating things. In another
thread, I mentioned that it looks like these mixtures are going to be
the next step up beyond chemistry, for making complex particles once the
universe cools down to a few thousandths of a degree above absolute
zero. Can you do BE condensates out of dissimilar atoms? So far, I've
only seen them doing these things with bunch of atoms of the same type
(eg. hydrogen).

How exactly does the BE condensates slow down light? It takes millions
of years for a photon to come out of the core of the Sun, for example,
but that's because it gets emitted, absorbed, re-emitted, etc. Is this
how it works inside a BE condensate too?

Yousuf Khan

On 11 Mag, 16:35, dlzc wrote:
Dear jesko:

On May 10, 1:43*am, jesko wrote:
...

Photon is supposed to have no REST MASS cause
no one can imagine a PHOTON at rest.

No, we can now that we have been able to slow them to a snail's pace
in a Bose-Einstein condensate.

"Them" stands for bosons and photons are bosons.
But new experiments demonstrate that massless-mass particles
interactions
are not the case. Cause energy levels are not as expected.
I repeat that experiments overcome theory.



So before you claim your statement try to be more
precise. *The actual theory are not definitive.

The theory expresses explicitly, as a result of other well tested
results, the photon has identically zero rest mass. *Essentially, you
can have a non-zero photon rest mass, or conservation of momentum, but
not both.

But I'm sure that empirical results overcome theory!

Results are that a non-zero rest mass cannot be proven, but that its
rest mass is many orders of magnitude less than its energy.

mass and energy are only different way to explain the same phenomena.
Sun is not only the disk but light also!




David A. Smith

On May 9, 10:20*pm, "Max Keon" wrote:
dlzc wrote:
Dear Skeu:
Skeu wrote:
Annihilation of positron and electron is a clear example
of the deep distance between empiric evidence and the
theory about those evidence.

Actually no. *Such interactions are well understood and expected.
Anti-matter is by definition capable of real distruction

Funny, in an anti-matter Universe, they'd be saying the same
thing about *you*!
if it would be combined with matter. So how is it
possible from this combination the creation of something
as powerful as the Gamma ray.

Because it is symmetric. *A powerful gamma ray can spawn the
creation of matter-antimatter pairs. *Do a search for "pair
creation".

Many theories are based on idiotic assumptions that are falsified
immediately by the shear stupidity of the assumptions. Isn't it
blatantly obvious that a gamma ray has no mechanism with which
to make an electron or positron? How can it possibly know what
an electron or positron is? Does it carry some kind of code built
into the frequency that can be physically extracted in stages as
the pair slowly become aware of their existence? How can a dumb
ray be so amazingly clever? And why only electrons and positrons?
Why not the opposite sides of my jam sandwich? The gamma ray
would need to carry some kind of jam sandwich gene for that to
happen, of course.

And why does the creation process stop when the charge on each
has reached the required value even if the ray carries much more
energy than the combined value of the two? I can postulate you
a reason why that is so of course. The creation process is
entirely controlled by the emerging electron and positron as they
become self aware because they are, without doubt, fundamental
forces of nature and the parameters for their development are
set by the laws of nature. They will always end up being exactly
the same as any other electron or positron in the universe. But
I wouldn't be game to tell anyone that because I know I would be
laughed off the planet, even if I had a huge pile of math to
back it up.

The problem of modern physics is the gap between
experimental data and theory suitable to explain it.

No, the problem is, that newsgroups don't have any sort of
entrance examination. *So that anybody that knows how to type can
make claims based on their own ignorance. *And can never be
challenged / expected to learn.

You probably don't perceive that paragraph as I do.

-----

Max Keon

How many Cooper pairs of electrons or positrons might coexist within
the IGM per cubic second (2.7e25 m3)?

~ BG