Pamela's findings have one meaning - trust the scientific process, be patient and we will find out whether it is antimatter or positrons emitted from pulsars
Pamela (Payload for Antimatter/Matter Exploration and Light-nuclei Astrophysics) space telescope scientists have published initial results, ending months of speculation about the first direct detection of antimatter.
In fact, the team of scientists had to publish the data before they had final results because other scientists were pirating and stealing data from the team. "We wanted to provide our final results to the scientific community, once we finished the data analysis," said Mirko Boazio, a member of the Pamela team. "Due to the fact that we used preliminary data that we published at the conference, we felt that this was a necessary step - if only because it provides a good point of reference that puts the total cooperation of Pamela team members in the right place, which will be available to the entire scientific community." This is not the way Pamela's team members wanted to present the results.
in promotional advertising in arXiv They write that Pamela discovered more positrons with energy above 10GeV than the amount that can be explained by known physics. This excess seems to correspond to the predictions according to which the positrons are produced through the ionization of matter and antimatter particles in their encounter.
According to the researchers, this may be the only indirect evidence of antimatter particle ionization, but they added that there may be other explanations, such as that positrons with energy at these levels can be produced among nearby pulsars. The team of scientists states that it is necessary to collect more data and carry out additional analysis work so that it is possible to differentiate between the signature of positrons originating from antimatter ionization and the signature of positrons from pulsars.
So far, two studies have been published that were based on photographs of transparencies where the initial information was given at a scientific conference held by Pamela's team.
10 תגובות
Thank you Aryeh for your answer.
I found the article originally in the paper edition (Hebrew) and then I continued my search on the Internet (I was not under the impression that science is the Epoch Times' strong point).
There are articles here and there that treat Aegina with disdain, but there are also some that do not:
http://www.svpvril.com/ighina/magatom.html
Cantoni to say whether it's all nonsense or not, he left a number of interesting devices behind.
I'd love to hear more opinions
to B5
Regarding your question about the inventions of Pier Luigi Aegina, as published in the Epoch Times in the link you provided.
I'll go ahead and say that I read the Hebrew edition of Epoch Times in hard copy regularly and science is not their forte, to say the least.
I picked up the latest issue of Epoch Times in Hebrew (November 6-12) - you can get it free in these places, mainly in Tel Aviv. I read there the Hebrew translation of the article you mentioned about Aegina - in my somewhat educated opinion - it's all nonsense (what's more, there's a mention of Wilhelm Reich there).
to Ilan
In addition to your words, they did not want to publish because of the contradictions between what is written there and the Christian and Jewish tradition.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Even in the publication of the Qumran scrolls, there were those who ran forward (with a partial publication), but made a mistake along the way.
that's how it is.
to "A.B.N."
If you understand the news that was published, you will understand that you did not understand at all.
I recommend you access the full article:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0810/0810.4995v1.pdf
There you will take a look at page 13 diagram 4.
However, there is a problem with the translation.
Wherever the original news about dark matter is concerned - appears in the translation "anti-matter" or "matter and anti-matter".
Also, it's a shame that the section mentioning the Phoenix was not translated as well, to give added validity to the title that also talks about scientific ethics and not just about science.
The translation of the article is accurate
And I also agree with A. Ben Ner
to "little brother"
If you read the news that appears in "Universe Today"
It will be argued that my father's translation is quite accurate.
At the same time, it seems to me that, the meaning here is that the energetic positrons, it is possible that they are created as a result of the annihilation of the dark matter particles, among themselves, or rather between them and between matter and antimatter particles, as worded in the translation.
The wording in the article is:
"This excess seems to match what dark matter particles would produce if they were annihilating each other at the center of the galaxy"
A somewhat unrelated question, but since all those who know Han and physics usually respond here...
Anyone have anything smart (and grounded) to say about the inventions of Pier Luigi Igna?
Link to an article published about him in Epoch Times - first time I read about him:
http://en.epochtimes.com/n2/science-technology/ighina-marconi-reich-cloudbuster-maurizio-costanzo-magnetic-field-oscillator-4905.html
Thanks
My father without this (the response) and without this (the article),
It seems to me that you missed the news a bit: a positron is the antimatter of an electron, in the event of a meeting between matter and antimatter an ion is formed, an ion is the transformation of matter and antimatter into pure energy that is emitted in the form of particularly energetic photons.
Pamela's team claims that this is not what they observed, hence they tap into "different" physics and point to the involvement of "dark matter" in the process. Which can explain the "other" physics.
: )