Scientists solve mystery of how most antimatter in the Milky Way forms

May 22, 2017
Credit: Australian National University

A team of international astrophysicists led by The Australian National University (ANU) has shown how most of the antimatter in the Milky Way forms.

Antimatter is material composed of the antiparticle partners of ordinary matter – when antimatter meets with matter, they quickly annihilate each other to form a burst of energy in the form of gamma-rays.

Scientists have known since the early 1970s that the inner parts of the Milky Way galaxy are a strong source of gamma-rays, indicating the existence of antimatter, but there had been no settled view on where the antimatter came from.

ANU researcher Dr Roland Crocker said the team had shown that the cause was a series of weak supernova explosions over millions of years, each created by the convergence of two which are ultra-compact remnants of no larger than two suns.

"Our research provides new insight into a part of the Milky Way where we find some of the oldest stars in our galaxy," said Dr Crocker from the ANU Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics.

Dr Crocker said the team had ruled out the at the centre of the Milky Way and the still-mysterious dark matter as being the sources of the antimatter.

He said the antimatter came from a system where two white dwarfs form a binary system and collide with each other. The smaller of the binary stars loses mass to the larger star and ends its life as a helium white dwarf, while the larger star ends as a carbon-oxygen white dwarf.

"The binary system is granted one final moment of extreme drama: as the white dwarfs orbit each other, the system loses energy to gravitational waves causing them to spiral closer and closer to each other," Dr Crocker said.

He said once they became too close the carbon-oxygen white dwarf ripped apart the companion star whose helium quickly formed a dense shell covering the bigger star, quickly leading to a thermonuclear supernova that was the source of the .

The research is published in Nature Astronomy.

Explore further: Are there antimatter galaxies?

More information: "Diffuse Galactic Antimatter from Faint Thermonuclear Supernovae in Old Stellar Populations," Roland M. Crocker et al., 2017 May 22, Nature Astronomy, nature.com/articles/doi:10.1038/s41550-017-0135

Related Stories

Are there antimatter galaxies?

June 10, 2016

One of the biggest mysteries in astronomy is the question, where did all the antimatter go? Shortly after the Big Bang, there were almost equal amounts of matter and antimatter. I say almost, because there was a tiny bit ...

Supermassive black holes found in two tiny galaxies

April 17, 2017

Three years ago, a University of Utah-led team discovered that an ultra-compact dwarf galaxy contained a supermassive black hole, then the smallest known galaxy to harbor such a giant black hole. The findings suggested that ...

Star in closest orbit ever seen around black hole

March 13, 2017

Astronomers have found evidence of a star that whips around a likely black hole twice an hour. This could be the tightest orbital dance ever seen by a black hole and a companion star in our own Milky Way galaxy.

Search for stellar survivor of a supernova explosion

March 30, 2017

Astronomers have used the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope to observe the remnant of a supernova explosion in the Large Magellanic Cloud. Beyond just delivering a beautiful image, Hubble may well have traced the surviving ...

Dating the Milky Way's disc

February 20, 2017

When a star like our sun gets to be very old, after another seven billion years or so, it will no longer be able to sustain burning its nuclear fuel. With only about half of its mass remaining, it will shrink to a fraction ...

Image: Hubble Investigates Stellar Shrapnel

August 22, 2016

Several thousand years ago, a star some 160,000 light-years away from us exploded, scattering stellar shrapnel across the sky. The aftermath of this energetic detonation is shown here in this striking image from the NASA/ESA ...

Recommended for you

Fast radio bursts may be firing off every second

September 21, 2017

When fast radio bursts, or FRBs, were first detected in 2001, astronomers had never seen anything like them before. Since then, astronomers have found a couple of dozen FRBs, but they still don't know what causes these rapid ...

Ageing star blows off smoky bubble

September 20, 2017

Astronomers have used ALMA to capture a strikingly beautiful view of a delicate bubble of expelled material around the exotic red star U Antliae. These observations will help astronomers to better understand how stars evolve ...

14 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Hyperfuzzy
1 / 5 (5) May 22, 2017
Antimatter is normal matter with a reversal in orbiters.
antialias_physorg
4.9 / 5 (11) May 22, 2017
Antimatter is normal matter with a reversal in orbiters.

You do certainly have a way of making stuff up...and making it sound as stupid as possible. I'll have to grant you that.
Hyperfuzzy
1 / 5 (5) May 22, 2017
Antimatter is normal matter with a reversal in orbiters.

You do certainly have a way of making stuff up...and making it sound as stupid as possible. I'll have to grant you that.

1. Conservation of charge. 2. A charge exist from it center to infinity, Coulomb. 3. Therefore only a set of diametrical spherical fields that obey all of Maxwell.

Got something else you have no idea of its existence; however, we know charge. Seems most don't ever define its axiomatic structure logically, but nonsensically, saying it has mass. Yeah, I'm making stuff up, assign an experimental constant illogically to an object's bi-polar constituents. Right!

Anti- is a label of a Proton moving like an electron within a cloud chamber. There is no reason to even infer an undefinable anti-. Also, QM is not science!
tmarksur
4.5 / 5 (8) May 22, 2017
" A charge exist from it center to infinity, Coulomb."

So enough internet for me today?

"Also, QM is not science!"

Yep i'm done.

You know science very well man. Will you teach me?
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (8) May 22, 2017
Got something else you have no idea of its existence; however, we know charge. Seems most don't ever define its axiomatic structure logically, but nonsensically, saying it has mass. Yeah, I'm making stuff up, assign an experimental constant illogically to an object's bi-polar constituents. Right!

Erm...whut? Care to rephrase that into english? And then preferrable reread and re-edit it until it makes some kind of sense (correct syntax, and then some kind of semantics). You're really just posting garbled messes, you are aware of that? Please tell me you're not so stupid as to be unaware of that.

(Oh, BTW: I'm pretty sure 'diametrical field' does not mean what you think it means)
stezlaf
5 / 5 (3) May 23, 2017
"Science": You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
nikola_milovic_378
not rated yet May 23, 2017
Antimatter does not exist in the universe. There is only the annihilation of an electron-positron (pair) of which is formed gluon (energy "liquid" state of matter. Proton and antiporoton not matter and antimatter, because a proton is composed of 3kg particles and positron, antiproton, instead of a positron has the electron. When the collisions occur 6 quarks and gluons 7. From that create new particles and releases large amounts of energy. that's what science is seen as dark matter or energy, it is a condition ether of which science knows virtually nothing.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) May 23, 2017
Antimatter does not exist in the universe. There is only the annihilation of an electron-positron (pair) of which is formed gluon (energy "liquid" state of matter. Proton and antiporoton not matter and antimatter, because a proton is composed of 3kg particles and positron, antiproton, instead of a positron has the electron. When the collisions occur 6 quarks and gluons 7. From that create new particles and releases large amounts of energy. that's what science is seen as dark matter or energy, it is a condition ether of which science knows virtually nothing.

This is from HF's European cousin....
Hyperfuzzy
not rated yet May 23, 2017
[q
This is from HF's European cousin....

Please, pardon any linguistic error, I simply state that all that exist is charge. I infer this logically that mass is a constant of proportionality among aggregates of charge pairs. I also see charge as not particulate, since that would require a source; therefore, the field is it! I say diametrical as in mirror image. I know, need a proof! I start with we exist and charge exist, definitely!

Hyperfuzzy
not rated yet May 23, 2017
[q
This is from HF's European cousin....


Please, pardon any linguistic error, I simply state that all that exist is charge. I infer this logically that mass is a constant of proportionality among aggregates of charge pairs. I also see charge as not particulate, since that would require a source; therefore, the field is it! I say diametrical as in mirror image. I know, need a proof! I start with we exist and charge exist, definitely!


I know this does not exist for those who believe in magic.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (2) May 23, 2017
Please, pardon any linguistic error, I simply state that all that exist is charge. I infer this logically that mass is a constant of proportionality among aggregates of charge pairs. I also see charge as not particulate, since that would require a source; therefore, the field is it! I say diametrical as in mirror image. I know, need a proof! I start with we exist and charge exist, definitely!
I know this does not exist for those who believe in magic.

I get your "diametric spheres". I'm just not seeing proper applicability in that those "fields" have varying densities from the center out. This implies that any other "diametric spheres" have to be varied in some manner, as well. Not to mention they need to be changing those variables to stay balanced...
Ergo - NOT mirror image...
No "magic" is apparent if you truly understand the engineering/mechanic of an observed thing.
And.... How do you define charge?
Lastly, I was quoting Nikola_M, not you...
Hyperfuzzy
not rated yet May 24, 2017
... And.... How do you define charge?
Lastly, I was quoting Nikola_M, not you...

I'm an EE I know charge, the mystery is how this ever formed, a sea of "opposite" charges, note diametrical also means opposite. Our isomorphism with mathematics and theory is not the actuality. It's manner to define what we see.

Note that these opposite field centers may overlap, oscillate about each other, fly away. Anyway, I just saying know what you are talking about. There is no such thing as gravity waves. Einstein is simply wrong! the velocity of light is the original_wavelenght/measured_period; but, note this is only a wrinkle of the field. Please, I'm only here to enlighten, not teach you fundamentals. I assume all know fundamentals, I'm simply applying clarity.
nikola_milovic_378
not rated yet May 27, 2017
Most theories related to the assessment of the organization of the universe, they contaminate our consciousness that directs us to understand and learn the true causes of the phenomenon in the universe. From all this false and meaningless in science, it is obvious that no one wants, nor must admit that in the universe there is a spiritual entity who is Creator of all that science to this day does not know and ignores the existence of the Creator (which is God). Many scientists are mirages caused confusion awareness of these "smart" who intend to declare themselves the creators of some "true" theory, which are only some stupid and stupefying attempts to specify other observers on "thin ice" to grasp the truth.
Hyperfuzzy
not rated yet May 27, 2017
grasp the truth.

Like I said , know what you are talking about. God was before money, Ancient Egypt, provider of all. How else could one build the pyramids? Just because we can think, does not make our thinking logical. Rely upon simple Truth. Modern Physics as well as modern society is bogus. You were sold a bill of goods worth absolutely nothing. Money has no value. As far as Einstein and QM, I'm amazed at man's stupidity and stubbornness. We can't even heal the sick without trying to capitalize, or destroy the air and ocean for $'s of no value.

Now we create lies to tell the uninformed and keep it all away from the people. We give a Nobel, surplus of destruction, dynamite with a group that will believe anything.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.