Source: http://www.technolog...og/arxiv/26709/
These guys now say they've trapped 309 antihydrogen atoms for up to 1000 seconds. That's an increase in trapping time of four orders of magnitude, comparable to what's possible with good old ordinary matter.

The news is significant because it makes possible a new set of experiments that should answer some important questions.

Most important of these is whether ordinary gravity attracts or repels antimatter. In other words, does antihydrogen fall up or down?
[/quote]
The realization that we don't know whether antimatter would fall up or down was my Holy Shit moment of the day. So there are understandable basic questions open in physics after all...

Who wants to bet on the answer?

As kdmiller3 pointed out, you've mixed up two concepts... The concept of antimatter and that of exotic matter. Antimatter differentiates "only" in charge from it's matter twin... Their spin is actually the same, which is the reason why they can annihilate when they meet their matter counterpart, but to keep it simple... It's the difference in charge which enables annihilation, crossing into photons in the case of electron-positron contact, which is the simplest to digest. That's the "magic" of antimatter.

What you are referring to is exotic matter, a theoretical construct which allows for cute, but unobserved (and highly hypothetical) matter which has wild properties like negative mass or negative energy density... But when you start diverging in such theories, consider the "story" of the aether which had all sorts of magical properties, only to be shot down by Einstein. But also, it's worth noting that the aether, although incorrect is a great example how even the incorrect theories can point us in the right direction. That's the awesome self-optimization of science, willingness to see and rectify our mistakes and proceed onwards into new intellectual victories. Anyways, to keep it short, when you shove negative mass into relativistic equations, you get some nifty results which imply the possibility of wormholes. Still highly theoretical and very sketchy.

But when you start diverging in such theories, consider the "story" of the aether which had all sorts of magical properties, only to be shot down by Einstein.

And to be 'resurrected' in the form of vacuum energy. Sometimes a wild idea may have some truth to it, but in a completely different way than originally thought.

Anyway, I think the article linked by the OP shows some symptoms of, let's call it 'popular creative journalism'. I was very surprised that it mentioned possible gravitational repulsion, which antimatter does most certainly not exhibit. Of course, as expected, the original CERN paper does not mention gravitational repulsion in any way. The main idea, apart from the obvious analysis of long term trapping, is to cool down the antimatter to a level where observations about the validity of the charge, parity and time reversal symmetries can be made.

The long term storage of significant amounts of antihydrogen should soon settle the question of whether antimatter falls up or down[/quote]That's just so sad. So, so sad.

Here's a better one to play with, though: An antiparticle is essentially the same as a normal particle moving backwards in time.

The long term storage of significant amounts of antihydrogen should soon settle the question of whether antimatter falls up or down

That's just so sad. So, so sad.

Here's a better one to play with, though: An antiparticle is essentially the same as a normal particle moving backwards in time.
[/quote]

That one originated with Feynman, right? It's funny actually, Feynman spent most of his life "making fun" of pure mathematicians (the story about oranges was particularly amusing)... And here he used the same idealistic mathematics which allow for physically untestable (technically and sensibly) situations by negating the variable of time and finding his dear antiparticles, in essence the same as their "normal" counterparts going "backwards in time". It's fun to think about it, but there's no way to test such a concept. But generally speaking, I loved Feynman's way of portraying physics, communicating his ideas... Such a brilliant man.

I find it exhilarating that there are actually quite a few people on GameDev who are actually genuinely interested in physics and a lot of other fields in depth. My experience with a lot of people was that they only learned the superficial stuff, while rendering; the basics of linear algebra, lacking the true understanding necessary for... Intellectual pleasure, at least. But understanding of such concepts surely affects everything. The need to understand must keep you guys up at night, too. Always just a little bit more to learn and comprehend about the Universe we inhabit before getting a little bit of shuteye.

I must say, I'm impressed!