Antiwords for antimatter

Antiwords for antimatter

Photo by Richard Horvath on Unsplash

Originally published 26 May 1997

Per­haps we are here only for say­ing: House, Bridge, Foun­tain, Gate…,” says the poet Rain­er Maria Rilke.

These are good words, life words, lapped with mem­o­ries of hap­pi­ness and pain. They touch some­thing deep with­in us.

The poet con­tin­ues: “But to say them…oh, to say them more intense­ly than the Things them­selves ever dreamed of being.”

It is the poet­’s task to infuse sim­ple words with grander mean­ing. Sci­en­tists, too, must com­mu­ni­cate their dis­cov­er­ies with the lan­guage of ordi­nary life: Heart, milky, foun­tain, gush.

And so the head­lines a few weeks ago:

Foun­tain of Anti­mat­ter Dis­cov­ered in Milky Way.” (Wash­ing­ton Post)

Milky Way’s Heart Gush­es Anti­mat­ter.” (Sci­ence News)

Anti­mat­ter Found Gush­ing from Milky Way.” (CNN Inter­ac­tive)

Anni­hi­la­tion Foun­tain Found in Milky Way.” (Reuters)

And we respond. The words touch us. “Anti­mat­ter” sug­gests the future, the mys­te­ri­ous, poten­tial­i­ty. “Milky Way” is home, the enclos­ing sky, nour­ish­ment. “Foun­tain” is refresh­ment, rebirth, the Gar­den of Eden.

With­out quite know­ing why, we are excit­ed by the sto­ry. We want to know more. Here is the uni­verse on the grand­est scale, spilling its secrets into our own lives.

In 1927, the Eng­lish physi­cist Paul Dirac, pon­der­ing the equa­tions that gov­ern sub­atom­ic par­ti­cles, pre­dict­ed that every par­ti­cle should have a kind of mir­ror image, or “antipar­ti­cle.”

The elec­tron, with its neg­a­tive charge, should be com­ple­ment­ed by an anti-elec­tron, or positron, alike in every respect except for hav­ing a pos­i­tive charge. The pos­i­tive­ly-charged pro­ton should be com­ple­ment­ed with a neg­a­tive­ly-charged antipro­ton. And so on.

Accord­ing to Dirac, the laws of physics implied that anti­mat­ter should — or could — exist.

If it does exist, then positrons and antipro­tons can form anti­mat­ter atoms. Anti­mat­ter atoms can make antipeo­ple, antiplan­ets, anti­s­tars, antiworlds.

There is just one prob­lem. If mat­ter and anti­mat­ter meet, they will anni­hi­late each oth­er in a burst of pure ener­gy, called gam­ma rays.

Five years after Dirac’s star­tling pre­dic­tion, positrons were pro­duced in the lab­o­ra­to­ry. Today, at high-ener­gy par­ti­cle accel­er­a­tor labs, the pro­duc­tion of anti­mat­ter is com­mon­place. These anti­mat­ter par­ti­cles are born into a world of mat­ter. Imme­di­ate­ly, they meet their mat­ter com­ple­ments and van­ish in a puff of gam­ma energy.

It takes lots of ener­gy to make antipar­ti­cles. They van­ish of their own accord.

As far as astronomers know, the observ­able uni­verse is made almost entire­ly of mat­ter, not anti­mat­ter, and this presents a puzzle.

Mat­ter and anti­mat­ter should have been cre­at­ed in equal amounts in the furi­ous first moments of the Big Bang. But if oth­er parts of the uni­verse were made of anti­mat­ter, we would see a flood of gam­ma radi­a­tion from mutu­al anni­hi­la­tion at the bound­aries where domains of mat­ter and anti­mat­ter meet.

So where is all the anti­mat­ter today?

Physi­cists have long pon­dered the prob­lem, and may have an answer. It seems that just before the uni­verse was a mil­lisec­ond old, mat­ter and anti­mat­ter anni­hi­lat­ed each oth­er in a sweep­ing extinc­tion. But a tiny asym­me­try was built into the uni­verse, so that mat­ter dom­i­nat­ed over anti­mat­ter by one part out of 100 billion.

Why the built-in asym­me­try? In the first 100 bil­lion-bil­lion-bil­lionth of a sec­ond of the uni­verse’s his­to­ry, par­ti­cles called X par­ti­cles and their antipar­ti­cles were cre­at­ed in equal num­bers. These began to decay into oth­er par­ti­cles — quarks and lep­tons (which include elec­trons and positrons).

But the decay rates of Xs and anti-Xs are not equal, for rea­sons that are still not ful­ly under­stood. Equal num­bers of Xs and anti-Xs decayed into unequal num­bers of quarks and anti­quarks, elec­trons and positrons. Quarks and anti­quarks linked up to form pro­tons and antipro­tons. As the uni­verse expand­ed and cooled, a tiny pre­pon­der­ance of mat­ter over anti­mat­ter was frozen in.

When the epoch of anni­hi­la­tion end­ed, only mat­ter remained.

All of this hap­pened before the uni­verse was less than a thou­sandth of a sec­ond old!

And now we dis­cov­er a foun­tain of positrons gush­ing from the cen­ter of the Milky Way Galaxy, 30,000 light-years away. These are cer­tain­ly not anti­mat­ter par­ti­cles left over from the Big Bang; they are being pro­duced in prodi­gious num­bers by some kind of super-ener­getic events tak­ing place at the cen­ter of the galaxy, per­haps mat­ter stream­ing into mas­sive black holes.

The anti­mat­ter positrons are squirt­ed out­wards. They encounter elec­trons. We observe the same gam­ma radi­a­tion that we see on Earth when elec­trons and positrons meet in mutu­al anni­hi­la­tion, an ener­gy 250,000 greater than that of vis­i­ble light.

We observe this ener­gy with a gam­ma-ray tele­scope loft­ed into space from the sur­face of our planet.

We observe. We speak. We couch these colos­sal events in words: “Milky Way’s Heart Gush­es Anti­mat­ter.” We give voice to a uni­verse that is wild and strange beyond our imagining.

A foun­tain of anti­mat­ter par­ti­cles, 3000 light-years tall, spew­ing from the ener­getic cen­ter of the Milky Way galaxy — mys­te­ri­ous, ephemer­al, telling of the beau­ti­ful and ter­ri­ble Cre­ation itself, of forces and pow­ers we may nev­er ful­ly under­stand. How can words com­mu­ni­cate such knowledge?

Heart. Milky. Foun­tain. Gush. “Praise this world to the angel,” says Rilke. “Do not tell him of the untellable… Tell him things.

He will stand astonished.”

Share this Musing: