i need details about positron.how it is created and like atom its also a matter and yada yada yada about it?
465903
The positron is the antiparticle or the antimatter counterpart of the electron. The positron has an electric charge of +1, a spin of 1/2, and the same mass as an electron. When a low-energy positron annihilates with an electron, their mass is converted into the kinetic energy of two gamma ray photons (See electron-positron annihilation.).
938332
I think you mean at the atomic level, but still the answer is no.\n\nOne counter example would be positronium. This is when an electron and its anti particle, a positron, "revolve" around each other.  This is very unstable with a half-life of about 10^-7 seconds. \n\nThere are other exotic atoms of this type. Any atom formed by a particle and its anti particle is called an onia.
723349
Neglecting particle/anti-particle annihilation events, it should be about the same.  Just as an beta particle (high energy electron) is going encounter other electrons and scatter off of them (imparting energy to them in the process)  so will the positron.  The only difference is the sign of the deflection: for a single scattering with positions and velocities of the positron and beta particle being the same relative to the scatterer (an electron) the scattering will be in the opposite direction. Averaged over multiple scatterings within a material, this won't matter. \n\nBut, for positron-electron interactions, there is a finite cross section for annihilation to take place, destroying both particles and producing a pair of gamma rays. In general, this cross section is comparable to the classical cross section (which you might think of as the electromagnetic scattering cross section) of an electron, so before many scatterings, the positron will annihilate.  It will therefore not penetrate nearly as far as a beta particle. The gamma rays produced are another story. . . .
410056
ATOM..basic building block\n \n[Gr.,=uncuttable (indivisible)], basic unit of matter; more properly, the smallest unit of a chemical element having the properties of that element.  That is the definition.  Continue to read further; it really gives great detail!!!!!\n\nStructure of the Atom\n\nThe atom consists of a central, positively charged core, the nucleus, and negatively charged particles called electrons that are found in orbits around the nucleus.\n\nThe Nucleus\n\nAlmost the entire mass of the atom is concentrated in the nucleus, which occupies only a tiny fraction of the atom's volume. The nucleus of an atom consists of neutrons and protons, the neutron being an uncharged particle and the proton a positively charged one. Their masses are almost equal. Atoms containing the same number of protons but different numbers of neutrons represent different forms, or isotopes, of the same element.\n\nThe Electrons\n\nSurrounding the nucleus of an atom are its electrons; for a neutral atom, the number of electrons is equal to the atomic number. The outermost electrons of an atom determine its chemical and electrical properties. An atom may combine chemically with another atom in various ways, either by giving up or receiving electrons, thus setting up an electrical attraction between the atoms (see ion), or by sharing one or more pairs of electrons (see chemical bond). Because metals have few outermost electrons and tend to give them up easily, they are good conductors of electricity or heat (see conduction).\n\nThe electrons are often described as revolving about the nucleus as the planets revolve about the sun. This picture, however, is misleading. The quantum theory has shown that all particles in motion also have certain wave properties. For a particle the size of an electron, these properties are of considerable importance. As a result the electrons in an atom cannot be pictured as localized in space, but rather should be viewed as smeared out over the entire orbit so that they form a cloud of charge. The electron clouds around the nucleus represent regions in which the electrons are most likely to be found. The shapes of these clouds can be very complex, in marked contrast to the simple elliptical orbits of planets. Surprisingly, the sizes of all atoms are comparable, in spite of the large differences in the number of electrons they contain.\n\nAtomic Weight and Number\n\nThe atomic number of an atom is simply the number of protons in its nucleus. The atomic weight of an atom is given in most cases by the mass number of the atom, equal to the total number of protons and neutrons combined. An atom may be conveniently symbolized by its chemical symbol with the atomic number and mass number written as subscript and superscript, respectively. For example, the symbol for uranium is U (atomic number 92); the isotopes of uranium with atomic weights 235 and 238 are indicated by 23592U and 23892U.\n\nDevelopment of Atomic Theory\n\nEarly Atomic Theory\n\nThe atomic theory, which holds that matter is composed of tiny, indivisible particles in constant motion, was proposed in the 5th cent. by the Greek philosophers Leucippus and Democritus and was adopted by the Roman Lucretius. However, Aristotle did not accept the theory, and it was ignored for many centuries. Interest in the atomic theory was revived during the 18th cent. following work on the nature and behavior of gases (see gas laws).\n\nFrom Dalton to the Periodic Table\n\nModern atomic theory begins with the work of John Dalton, published in 1808. He held that all the atoms of an element are of exactly the same size and weight (see atomic weight) and are in these two respects unlike the atoms of any other element. He stated that atoms of the elements unite chemically in simple numerical ratios to form compounds. The best evidence for his theory was the experimentally verified law of simple multiple proportions, which gives a relation between the weights of two elements th
1001442
This is an interesting question, for which I can't claim to know the answer, but I'm going to take a guess anyway. \n\nThe crucial qualifier in your question is that matter and anti-matter cannot interact in your example. Otherwise, your matter person would be instantly annihilated. But since you eliminated the possibility, the answer is that you would feel gravity just the same as in a matter universe.\n\nHere's why. Anti-matter is still composed of the same materials as matter,  just with opposite charges (i.e.--electrons are positive, protons are negative). Presuming that your "anti-gravity" is not repulsive by nature (otherwise your world couldn't exist) then it's effects on the "matter" in your body would be the same as for the anti-matter because your anti-gravity would have no mechanism by which to distinguish between your electrons and its positrons, etc.
470230
Many people have, in every single nuclear reaction, whether in power plants or detonated nuclear weapons. Nuclear binding energy is generated by mass converted to energy which holds nucleons together. In nuclear reactions differences in binding energy between the reactants and products in atoms is released as light, thought not necessarily visible light.\n\nLight is also produced in particle-antiparticle annihialition. If an electron and positron collide, they annihialate each other and release 2 photon's of equal energy and momentum as the 2 original particles.\n\nIt is also possible to create particle-antiparticle pairs from photons fired into strong magnetic fields.
514089
A positron is a part of magnetic resonance and is detected during an MRI scan. Because cancer cells have a different rate of positron emmission than healthy cells, it will show up on the MRI.
85005
All matter is made up of atoms. God put atoms together to make everything.
1026932
Atoms are in turn made of electrons, neutrons and protons, magnetism holds them together:  Electrons carry a positive charge, protons have a negative charge, and neutrons are...neutral.  Electrons orbit protons and neutrons the way Earth orbits the sun.  The theory expands to quarks, and even smaller unit.  Read up on it!\n\nOrigin so far is explained in the Big Bang theory. \n\nScience doesn't have all the answers yet, but thats why people become scientists, so many fascinating mysteries to figure out.
72779
A molecule is made up of atoms.
634206
particle physics is all about sub-atomic particles, looking for new particles and fundamental particles if we can find them. Also looking to find the theory of everthing stuff.\n\natomic or nuclear physics is all about atoms, radioactive decay, nuclear stability.\n\n\nparticle physics > atomic physics in my opinion :)
112808
i used to work at a particle physics research lab.  our everyday operation was to take matter and antimatter and smash them together at extremely high energies; to do this required storing some antimatter.  \n\nwe did this using a specialized type of particle accelerator called a "storage ring" which is essentially a big circular tube, under vacuum, with a bunch of magnets to guide the positrons (the antimatter counterpart to electrons) around the circular ring.  as they went around at the speed of light, they'd lose some energy so we'd have to re-accelerate them at every turn.  but that's essentially it.  here's some pages to learn more about storage rings:\n\nhttp://www.lns.cornell.edu/public/lab-info/ring.html\nhttp://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/experiments/bfactory.html\n\nat any given time we stored about 10^13 positrons, which is actually a considerable amount.\n\nif you don't need to keep them at high energy, you can use a form of magnetic confinement, which basically works on the same principle as the storage ring.  often this is called a "magnetic bottle" or by its real name, the "penning trap":\n\nhttp://www.physik.uni-mainz.de/werth/g_fak/penning.htm\nhttp://www.aip.org/png/html/penning.htm\n\ncheers!
326942
Positron.  Same mass as electron but +1e charge.  And it is never refered to as an "anti electron".  Its name is positron.  Thats just as silly as calling it "positive electron".
882242
Beta decay is a type of radioactive decay in which a beta particle (an electron or a positron) is emitted. In the case of electron emission, it is referred to as "beta minus" (β−), while in the case of a positron emission as "beta plus" (β+).\n\nCheck out the first link (Colorado) for a very basic explanation.  The Wikipedia entry is very confusing.
894559
Anti-matter is one of the best bridges between theoretical and applied physics. In theory it was thought it could exist, so we looked for it and found it, then we we able to make it in the lab and it was the same as we found in nature, though very rare. Anti-matter is made the same way ordinary matter is made, with protons, electrons and neutrons; the main difference being each anti-particle has the OPPOSITE charge of its ordinary matter counterpart. So an atom of anti-hydrogen is made of one negatively charged anti-proton and one positively charged anti-electron. As for neutrons that have no charge, they can be distinguished by their opposite spin. The basic reaction is that when a particle of matter contacts a particle of anti-matter, they are mutually annihilated in an almost complete matter to energy conversion. That's where that E=mc2 comes into play  One of the more interesting topics for discussion is that if we assume the original Big Bang created equal amounts of matter and anti-matter, which would satisfy conservationism, then where is all the anti-matter? Are there whole galaxys made of antimatter?  Is that where the new galaxies are formed? As for practical applications, a controlled, large scale matter / antimatter reaction would be an enormous source of energy. maybe enough to power a starship.
988938
Matter (116 Elements known so far) (94 of them found elsewhere in the universe, to date) and anti-matter (the same elements but with anti-protons in the nucleus and positrons instead of electrons circling around the nucleus),\n\nWhat are these Elements called?\n\nIn 1959 Tom Lehrer sang the following ditty to a Harvard audience (to the tune of Gilbert and Sullivan's I am the Very Model of a Modern Major General)\n\n``There's antimony, arsenic, aluminum, selenium, \nAnd hydrogen and oxygen and nitrogen and rhenium \nAnd nickel, neodymium, neptunium, germanium, \nAnd iron, americium, ruthenium, uranium, \nEuropium, zirconium, lutetium, vanadium \nAnd lanthanum and osmium and astatine and radium \nAnd gold, protactinium and indium and gallium (inhale) \nAnd iodine and thorium and thulium and thallium. \n\n``There's yttrium, ytterbium, actinium, rubidium \nAnd boron, gadolinium, niobium, iridium \nAnd strontium and silicon and silver and samarium, \nAnd bismuth, bromine, lithium, beryllium and barium.  \n\n``There's holmium and helium and hafnium and erbium \nAnd phosphorous and francium and fluorine and terbium \nAnd manganese and mercury, molybdinum, magnesium, \nDysprosium and scandium and cerium and cesium \nAnd lead, praseodymium, and platinum, plutonium, \nPaladium, promethium, potassium, polonium, and \nTantalum, technetium, titanium, tellurium, (inhale) \nAnd cadmium and calcium and chromium and curium. \n\n``There's sulfur, californium and fermium, berkelium \nAnd also mendelevium, einsteinium and nobelium \nAnd argon, krypton, neon, radon, xenon, zinc and rhodium \nAnd chlorine, carbon, cobalt, copper, \nTungsten, tin and sodium. \n\n``These are the only ones of which the news has come to Harvard, \nAnd there may be many others but they haven't been discovered.'' \n\n(a few of the 116 eg Seaborgium were discovered after 1959 and are therefore not in the song)\n\nFor a Flash animation of the song go to \nhttp://www.privatehand.com/flash/elements.html
80973
They are real particles.  They really exist.  The two types are mesons and baryons.  Mesons are made of one quark and an anti-quark.  Solid matter we touch in every day life is made up of atoms made of protons, neutrons, and electrons.  Protons and neutrons are two kinds of hadrons called baryons, made up from the same particles (quarks) that make up mesons, except protons and neutrons are made up of 3 quarks.  Unlike protons and neutrons, mesons are unstable, so they quickly decay.  But they can be produced and studied in particle colliders, such as the Tevatron at Fermilab, and other big colliders at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Collider (SLAC), and at Cornell.  Have a look at the following websites for more info:\n\nhttp://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/theory/hadrons.html\nhttp://www.fnal.gov\nhttp://www.slac.stanford.edu