Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

scurvydog-uldum t1_iu8450k wrote

hol up.

if neutrons have a neutral charge and antineutrons also have a neutral charge...

what's anti about it?

7

Xaxafrad t1_iu84ot1 wrote

Their quark composition. An up and two downs, vs an anti-up and two anti-downs. In both cases, their fractional electric charges cancel out.

13

AirborneRodent t1_iu850s6 wrote

You have to go smaller. A neutron is made of an up quark (+2/3 charge) and two down quarks (-1/3 charge each). An antineutron is made of an up antiquark (-2/3 charge) and two down antiquarks (+1/3 charge each).

Even though they both sum to zero charge, they're still opposite. And they still annihilate each other if they come in contact.

12

onewobblywheel t1_iu8z5d1 wrote

Get ready for a mind-blow...

Physicist Richard Feynman successfully modeled antimatter as ordinary matter that moves backwards through time.

A lot of modern physicists disagree, but Feynman is considered the closest thing to a new Einstein as there is (other than, potentially, Hawkins.)

Look up the X and Y axes of Feynman Diagrams (space and time) and the direction of the particles they model.

5

svladcjelli42 t1_iu9p3s6 wrote

It is now generally accepted that Feynman is correct about that, in the sense that reversing charge and parity is indistinguishable from reversing direction in time. It's one or the other, but there isn't really a difference.

4

AkshuallyGuy t1_iu936x5 wrote

>Physicist Richard Feynman successfully modeled antimatter as ordinary matter that moves backwards through time.

Hmm, what if I just changed the signs on everything...

1