Conference noted::sf

    
    This really isn't what you're looking for, but at least in
    semiconductors, there ARE "nega-electrons". We call them "holes".
    They behave exactly like electrons but with the signs reversed.
    a force that pushes an electron in direction x will push a hole
    in direction -x. (that force is Electro-Motive Force, of course,
    expressed in units of Volts) Holes moving in one direction generate
    the same magnetic field as electrons moving in the opposite direction.
    And so-on. When an electron meets a hole, they are both anihilated,
    *with no release of energy*, as in the matter-antimatter encounter.
    
    Of course all this takes place in a material, not in free space.
    but the same kind of anihilation might take place.
    Using the rubber sheet picture of space, negative mass would pull
    the sheet upward instead of pushing downward like ordinary matter.
    Now superimpose them, they'd cancel to a flat sheet. But they would
    still be seperable. The problem would be matching the masses *exactly*
    any residual would keep you from moving at light-speed.
    
    anyway, there's a start, much more to come I'm sure.
    
    sm

    My roommate and I once speculated extensively on negative mass.
    I came to some of the following conclusions:            
    
    I.
    A net-massless body cannot be accelerated without falling apart.
    If you push on it, the positive half of the mass tries to follow
    the push but the negative half of the mass tries to move toward
    the push.  Result: the body either stays put or falls apart.  But
    it makes a great marker buoy.
    
    II.
    A net-massless body can't be moved by external force (see above)
    but it can move under its own power in an apparently "reactionless"
    way.  Suppose you have equal and opposite masses linked by a massless
    rubber band:
    
    			[-] ~~~ [+]
    
    You wind up the rubber band, so it pulls in on both masses.  I'll
    use "=>" for forces and "->" for velocities.  The result is:
    
    			 =>     <=
    			[-] ~~~ [+]
    			 <-     <-
    
    The whole system goes sailing off to the left without exerting force
    on the surrounding environment or expelling mass.  It looks like
    a gross violation of the third law of motion, not to mention
    conservation of momentum and energy, but it is none of those things.
    
    The equal and opposite forces are present, diagrammed in the top
    line.  Momentum and kinetic energy are conserved -- they were zero
    before the rubber band was wound up and they are still zero because
    the negative mass has negative kinetic energy and its momentum vector
    points in the direction opposite to its velocity vector.
    
    III.
    You can't pass the speed of light this way.  Any given force exerted
    by the rubber band results in a constant acceleration for the system.
    But constant in the system's reference frame.  Such acceleration
    will approach the speed of light asymptotically but never pass it.
    The greater the force in the rubber band, the faster the system
    approaches c, but it never passes it.
    
    IV.
    Negative mass would be highly charged.  Consider the nega-electron
    and nega-proton mentioned in .0.  They have opposite charges, so
    they exert attractive forces on each other.  Being negative masses,
    that means THEY MOVE AWAY FROM EACH OTHER.  On the other hand, a
    nega-proton and a nega-positron, being of the same charge, repel
    each other and thus MOVE TOWARD EACH OTHER.  They will form an atom
    of, uh, hydrogen with a charge of +2 and no negative charges at
    all.
    
    I don't know how the nuclear interactions would work with negative
    masses.  It might result in no negative-mass atoms but hydrogen
    being possible.  If the other atoms ARE possible, negative mass
    would condense into a very strange world indeed, divided into negative
    and positive charge zones (as some people think our universe may
    be divided into matter and anti-matter zones).  Planets would orbit
    suns and hold their atmosphere by electrical attraction, er, repulsion,
    which is millions of times stronger than gravity.  Negative suns
    would, of course, give off negative-energy radiations, "black light"
    that would darken and cool any normal matter it hit.  I suppose
    that positive and negative mass, coming into contact, would simply
    cancel, leaving nothing, not even radiation.  This makes building
    that levitation system difficult...
    
    Earl Wajenberg

        Tachyons.  "imaginary mass" particles which cannot go at
        or slower than the speed of light... as you add energy they
        slow (approaching the speed of light just as tardyons do
        when adding energy), and as energy is removed they accelerate.
        
        Tachyons have been used a lot in sf, but have been seriously
        investigated by science, and I recall several reports that
        researchers had actually detected their presence (though
        I have no way of knowing if this is actually true).
        
        A college friend and I had a great tachyon discussion one
        boring evening... we postulated a tachyon flashlight, emitting
        a single tachyon of 0 energy, which would illuminate the
        entire universe by virtue of that single particle moving
        at infinite velocity and therefore being everywhere at once...
        
        Of course, I also used to while away long bus rides in high
        school by discussing the fueling of school busses alternately
        with "gas" and "anti-gas" such that the combustion of "gas"
        would produce "anti-gas" and vice-versa...  not to mention
        how many space ships I designed in grade school... :-)
        
        	/dave

    Re .2:
    
    > I.
    > A net-massless body cannot be accelerated without falling apart.
    > If you push on it, the positive half of the mass tries to follow
    > the push but the negative half of the mass tries to move toward
    > the push.  Result: the body either stays put or falls apart.  But
    > it makes a great marker buoy.
    
    Just take the net-massless body and try to pull it apart or push it
    together.  That is, you might push the positive mass portion right and
    the negative mass portion left.  A net-massless body which has a front
    half of negative mass and a back half of positive mass will move
    forward in an atmosphere because the air pressure is pushing it
    together.  Strap yourself on the back, add a little negative mass at
    the front to compensate, point it upward, and it will make a nice
    "rocket", lifting you out of the atmosphere and then continuing on at
    an almost constant velocity (until you tighten the rubber band to
    accelerate or use your spring to decelerate).
    
    > III.
    > You can't pass the speed of light this way.  Any given force exerted
    > by the rubber band results in a constant acceleration for the system.
    > But constant in the system's reference frame.  Such acceleration
    > will approach the speed of light asymptotically but never pass it.
    > The greater the force in the rubber band, the faster the system
    > approaches c, but it never passes it.
    
    But you are massless when riding in a +/- ship.  Don't massless
    things HAVE to travel at the speed of light?  (Interesting question:
    Where is the center of mass of a +/- object?)
    
    
    				-- edp

    Nice point about the automatic movement through an atmosphere.
    
    The problem with traveling at the speed of light, as I saw it, was
    that no individual component was massless, even though the net mass
    of the system was zero.  I don't think a net-mass of zero could
    be said to have a center of mass (where's the center of mass of
    a vacuum?), so you might define THAT as traveling at the speed of 
    light, if it made the math come out even.                     
    
    Earl Wajenberg

    	Could those "negative suns" Earl referrred to be what makes
    up so much of the mass in the Universe that we cannot see, because
    they radiate only cool black light?!  
    
    	Is the Milky Way Galaxy and every other galaxy full of "black"
    stars surrounded with icy planets invisible to our eyes?
    
    	Larry
    

    Hidden negative masses is an interesting idea, but they couldn't
    very well be the missing mass the astronomers are looking for --
    that's a positive mass.  If the negative suns were out there, it
    would be very interestin in itself, but it would mean the astronomers
    would have to find even more missing positive mass.
    
    Negative matter, as explained in .2, would gather into huge lumps
    of a single charge.  This should cause noticable effects on the
    positive mass nearby, though I'm not sure what.
    
    Earl Wajenberg

Re: .2 and .7

    
    >Negative matter, as explained in .2, would gather into huge lumps
    >of a single charge.  This should cause noticable effects on the
    >positive mass nearby, though I'm not sure what.
    
    Sorry, Earl, but I don't buy theory that negative matter will form
    clumps of single charge.  If you look at the equation for gravitation,
    
	     G * m * M
	F = -----------
		  2
		d

    If M and m are negative, you still get a positive gravitational
    attraction!

    Besides, since electrostatic repulsion is so much stronger that gravity,
    the nega-proton nega-positron system that you postulated in .2 would
    fall apart just as quickly and a proton/positron system.

Re: .1

    I think that semiconductor holes have many of the properties of nega-matter
    because the quantity governing the attraction (namely charge) has the
    bipolar quality that this note is postulating for mass.  Perhaps by
    extending the analogy, more light can be shed on the nega-matter question.


    Here's an interesting situation:

    Suppose you have a nega-proton and a normal electron (ie. hybrid-gen)
    What would its properties be?  I'd like to see what other people think
    before I reply with what I think some of the properties will be.

	Thanks,

	 /~~'\
	W o o k
	(  ^  )	    "Flying a hybrid-gen-filled blimp!"
	 \`-'/
	  \_/

    Re .8: 

    > If M and m are negative, you still get a positive gravitational
    > attraction!
    > 
    > Besides, since electrostatic repulsion is so much stronger that gravity,
    > the nega-proton nega-positron system that you postulated in .2 would
    > fall apart just as quickly and a proton/positron system.

    As you point out, electromagnetic forces are greater than
    gravitational, so they dominate the situation.  What you have missed is
    that two negative matter particles with like charges tend to move
    toward each other, and unlike charges move away.  This tends to clump
    matter into large objects of particles with the same charge. 


				-- edp

Re: .9

    >gravitational, so they dominate the situation.  What you have missed is
    >that two negative matter particles with like charges tend to move
    >toward each other, and unlike charges move away.  This tends to clump

    Wait a minute.  When I say negative matter, I only mean that mass is
    negative.  Charge and everything else remains unchanged.

    I believe the force equation for electro-statics is as follows:

		k * Q * q
	F =  -	---------
		     2
		    r

    For a nega-proton and a nega-positron, Q and q are still +1 each.
    Where does mass come into the picture?  I guess I'm confused!

	   ?

	 /~~'\
	W O O K
	(  ^  )
	 \ - /
	  \_/

Substitute ma for F, and you'll see that the acceleration becomes negative.
The charge move towards each other instead of away.
/jlr

    Re .10:
    
    To expand upon .11, the electric fields and charges produce the same
    forces upon negative mass as upon regular mass.  But the acceleration
    of an object due to a force depends on the mass of the object.  For a
    negative mass, pushing the object away tends to make it move closer.
    
    
    				-- edp 

>    To expand upon .11, the electric fields and charges produce the same
>    forces upon negative mass as upon regular mass.  But the acceleration
>    of an object due to a force depends on the mass of the object.  For a
>    negative mass, pushing the object away tends to make it move closer.
    
And since the force due to the charges increases as they move closer, the
acceleration increases  (thus velocity increases exponentially)
I wonder what happens when they hit - fusion power ??