|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
We were the ones to ask that question. It was more along the lines of "we had three serious questions, let's throw another one in for fun." We figured since it's anti-matter, it would have anti-weight, and therefore would make the robot lighter. I don't agree with FIRST's interpretation of the rules as apply antimatter wouldn't be a chemical change (where you switch around which atoms make up a component) but instead an atomic change (where you destroy entire atoms).
For those actually interested, there is a possiblity that anti-matter would "fall up" (ie, have antigravity). Physicists however find it unlikely. To date, they haven't been able to create enough of the stuff to actually measure whether or not it would fall up or down. Matt |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| How much planning goes into your robot? | Jnadke | General Forum | 41 | 29-01-2006 21:29 |
| serious problem found - robot controller resets when jarred! | KenWittlief | Electrical | 23 | 19-03-2003 13:30 |
| WASH Palm scouting at the Championship | Mike Soukup | Scouting | 2 | 19-04-2002 15:14 |
| Pneumatics pump allowed on robot? | bigqueue | Pneumatics | 5 | 06-01-2002 12:30 |
| about how Drive Train push the robot... shouldn't the force accelerate the robot? | Ken Leung | Technical Discussion | 12 | 26-11-2001 09:39 |