1

New Theories / Re: Is Dark matter really the byproduct of matter and antimatter?

« on: 26/03/2016 05:42:34 »

Anti matter - matter reaction are theorized to completely annihilate.

If you collide an electron with a positron they annihilate producing two photons. When a neutron and an antineutron collide they don't produce only photons.

  It's believed to be one of the most efficient mass-entergy conversion.

For a process to be efficient the process must perform or function in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort. However since we're talking about energy your comment doesn't apply to matter/antimatter reactions.

  Its used in this fashion in very limited set of circumstances, because anti-matter production and containment are both very difficult to manage, given it's inherit natural reaction with anything not anit-matter.

Annihilation between matter and antimatter is not very different than any other nuclear  reaction. It's only when matter and it's anti-particle annihilate do they do annihilate each other.

Basically antimatter is mass that has had it's spin reversed to that of matter.

There's more to it than that. The anti-particle to a specific particle also has opposite charge if one of then particle's is charged. Since the antiparticle of a particle of charge q and baryonic number B has charge -q and baryon number -B, it must have also a third isospin component -t_z, where t_z, is the isospin z-component of the corresponding particle.

Dark matter is thought to be a by-product produced of supernova and hypernova events.

I think you have that wrong. See arxiv dot org slash abs slash astro-ph slash 0411454

Black holes are also essentially dark matter, but they have so much highly localized gravity, that the math about them bends and breaks coherence too.

Before I say anything on this comment, what does coherence mean in this context?

Nova episodes are the most violently explosive, densely packed regions of mass, believed to exist outside of the remaining black hole, at the time of the nova event, which is when and where dark matter is primarily produced.

May I inquire to wheat your source is for this comment please? Thank you.

Gravity on the other hand is more of a one way operator.  Given enough gravity, gravity beats electromagnetism, which produces star light, heavier atoms and black holes, when they battle (so to speak).

If you have matter which produces tension then the effect will be gravitational repulsion. Also under certain distribution of matter which has tension in such as a large field then you will float or accelerate away from the field.                         

Now we've tried smashing atoms together.  They produce the most energy when we smash anti-matter and matter together, so atom smashers usually resort to this experiment.

The amount of energy released from matter/antimatter annihilate changes form. It doesn't produce energy since energy is conserved.

2

Famous Scientists, Doctors and Inventors / Re: Did Einstein steal HA Lorentz's idea?

« on: 26/03/2016 04:35:32 »

I'm a big fan of Albert Einstein, so I just wanted to clear the air about this. It is true that Lorentz, a Nobel Prize winner, published the equations of relative motion a year before Einstein. These equations still bear his name. Einstein's original contribution (E=mc^2)is actually derived by simply substituting the speed of light (c)into a Newtonian equation: E=mv^2.  So why does Einstein get all the credit? I think I know the answer, but I want to hear from others.

No. Einstein never stole anything. For details of the history behind it please see:
See: www dot newenglandphysics dot org slash common_misconceptions slash einstein_did_not_plagiarize dot htm

E = mv^2 is not a Newtonian expression. The energy, E, in Newtonian mechanics that you have in mind is kinetic energy and changes only with speed whereas in relativity it's the total energy which equals the sum of rest energy + kinetic energy. etc.