 Vol.3, No.1, 42-47 (2011) Natural Science http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ns.2011.31005 Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS Recent interests on positron (+ e), positronium (Ps) and antihydrogen (H) Hasi Ray1,2 1Department of Science, National Institute of Technical Teachers’ Training and Research (NITTTR), Salt Lake City, Kolkata, India 2Positron Laboratory, Department of Physics & Astronomy, UCR, Riverside, California, USA; hasi_ray@yahoo.com Received 21 August 2010;revised 25 September 2010; accepted 28 September 2010. ABSTRACT A brief survey is made to highlight the recent interests in positron, positronium and antimat- ter physics. Positron is the first antiparticle observed which was predicted by Dirac. Posi- tronium is itself its antiparticle and bi-posi- tronium molecule is recently observed in labo- ratory which was predicted by Wheeler in 1946. The simplest antiatom i.e. antihydrogen is ob- served in the laboratory and the process to achieve the stable confinement of antihydrogen within the trap are in progress to test the stan- dard model. Keywords: Positron; Positronium; Antihydrogen; Dipositronium; Antimatter; Bose-Einstein Condensation; Standard Model 1. INTRODUCTION Dirac was awarded the Nobel prize in Physics in 1933 by the Royal Academy of Sciences for developing the basic new ideas of physics, namely his theory of wave mechanics leading upto his relativistic theory of elec- trons (1928) and holes (1930). Before appearance of Schrodinger’s theory, Heisenberg brought out his fa- mous quantum mechanics starting from quite different stand points and viewed his problem from the very be- ginning with such a broad angle that it took care of sys- tems of electrons, atoms, and molecules. Schrodinger thought that it should be possible to find a wave equation for the motions executed by the electrons which would define these waves in the same way as the wave equation which determined the propagation of light. Although Heisenberg’s and Schrodinger’s theories had different starting points and were developed by the use of differ- ent processes of thought, they produced the same results for problems treated by both theories. Dirac has set up a wave mechanics which starts from the most general conditions. He imposed the condition that the postulate of relativity theory has to be fulfilled. Dirac divided the initial wave equation into two simpler ones, each pro- viding solutions independently. It later appeared that one of the solution systems required the existence of positive electrons having the same mass and charge as the known negative electrons. This initially posed considerable dif- ficulty for Dirac’s theory [1], since positively charged particles were known only in the form of the heavy atom nucleus. This difficulty which at first opposed the theory has later become a brilliant confimation of its validity. The existence of the spin of electrons and its qualities are a consequence of this theory. In 1913, Bohr had ex- pressed the idea that Planck's constant should be taken as the determining factor for movements within the atom, as well as, for emission and absorption of light waves. Bohr assumed, after Rutherford, that an atom consists of an inner, heavy, positively charged core, around which negative, light electrons circulate in closed paths, held to the nucleus by Coulomb attraction. Robert Oppenheimer pointed out that an electron and its hole would be able to annihilate each other, releasing energy on the order of the electron’s rest energy in the form of energetic pho- tons; if holes were protons, stable atoms would not exist. Hermann Weyl also noted that a hole should act as though it has the same mass as an electron, whereas the proton is about two thousand times heavier. The issue was finally resolved in 1932 when the positron (e ) was discovered by Carl Anderson [2], with all the physical properties predicted for the Dirac hole. The Nobel prize for Physics in 1936 was awarded by V. F. Hess (1/2) for his discovery of cosmic radiation and C. D. Anderson (1/2) for his discovery of the posi- tron. The year 1895 was a turning-point in the history of physics: Rontgen discovered X-rays and this was rapidly followed by Becquerel’s discovery of radioactive radia- tion, and by the discovery of the negative electron by J. J. Thomson (1897) - one of the fundamental elements of atomic structure. Becquerel demonstrated that the radia- tion emitted by uranium shared certain characteristics with X-rays but, unlike X-rays, could be deflected by a
 H. Ray / Natural Science 3 (2011) 42-47 Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS 4343 magnetic field and therefore must consist of charged particles. The existence of cosmic radiation became manifest during the search for sources of radioactive radiation. The presence of cosmic radiation offered im- portant problems on the formation and destruction of matter. Carl Anderson, in the course of his comprehen- sive studies on the nature and qualities of cosmic radia- tion, succeeded in finding one of the buildingstones of the universe, the positron. Becquerel and Thomson were awarded the Nobel Prizes for physics in 1903 and 1906 respectively for their discoveries. Marie Curie with her husband Pierre Curie, were recognized the Nobel prize in 1901 for their discovery of the radioactive elements radium and polonium. In 1911, Marie Curie (November 7, 1867 to July 4, 1934) was again honored with a Nobel prize, but in chemistry, for successfully isolating pure radium and determining radium’s atomic weight. 2. GENERAL DESCRIPTION 2.1. Positron Positron is the first observed antiparticle e.g. antielec- tron. A Wilson cloud chamber, which is used for detect- ing particles for ionizing radiation, picture taken by Carl D. Anderson in 1931 showed a particle entering from below and passing through a lead plate; the direction of curvature of the path caused by a magnetic field indi- cated that the particle was a positively charged one but with the same mass and other characteristics as an elec- tron. The discovery by Anderson, in 1932, of the crea- tion of pairs of electrons and positrons by electromag- netic radiation, and the subsequent interpretation of this observation, in the light of Dirac's already existing rela- tivistic theory of the spinning electron, initiated a fruitful branch of physics which is now often known under the name of “pair theory”. The state of disturbance of elec- tron-positron field in the neighbourhood of an atomic nucleus is still imperfectly understood. 2.2. Positronium In 1934, S. Mohorovicic [3] theoretically predicted the existence of the bound system of a positron (e ) and an electron (e) which is known today as Positronium (Ps), named by Ruark in 1945 [4]. There are two types of Ps; one is known as para-Ps and the other is ortho-Ps. Para-Ps is a spin singlet state that is in this state of Ps, the spins of positron and electron are antiparallel and it has a life time 125 pico seconds in vacuum. Ortho-Ps is a spin-triplet state, here the spins of positron and elec- tron are parallel and its life time 140 nano seconds in vacuum. Deutsch [5] observed Ps in the laboratory in 1951 in gaseous medium. The distribution of time delays between the emission of a nuclear gamma-ray from the decay of 22 Na and the appearance of an annihilation quantum had been measured for positrons stopping in a large number of gases and gas mixtures. From the direct observation of the continuous gamma-ray spectrum due to the three-quantum annihilation of triplet positronium in nitrogen confirmed the abundant formation of Ps; since due to electron exchange with the gas molecules having an odd number of electrons, such as nitric oxide, the triplet state of Ps converted very rapidly to the singlet state. 2.3. Dipositronium Molecule The e being the antiparticle of electron (e ) and Ps being itself its antiatom and the lightest hydrogen-like exotic element, motivated the growing interest of physi- cists and chemists. Cassidy and Mills [6] showed that when intense positron bursts were inplanted into a thin film of porous silica, dipositronium molecule (2 Ps ) was created on the internal pore surfaces. They found [7] that molecule formation occured much more efficiently than the competing process of spin exchange quenching, ob- serving a reduction in the amount of Ps emitted from an atomically clean Al (1,1,1) surface that depends on the incident positron beam density. If dipositronium is cre- ated, then some Ps that might otherwise have been ther- mally desorbed in the long lived triplet state instead de- cays at the 2 Ps rate of ~ 4 1 ns [8,9]. Since the mole- cule decays predominantly via two gamma rays while the long lived triplet Ps decays via three photons one could in principle, detect 2 Ps using energy selective detectors. The earlier observation of Ps [10] and the recent observation of 2 Ps molecule [6] in the labora- tory, both the composites were predicted by Wheeler [11] in 1946, have paved the way of further multipositronium work and added a new dimension in antiatom physics [12-13]. It is of interest to know the properties of 2 Ps [8]. This molecule has two electrons and two positrons instead of two protons in hydrogen molecule (2 ). All the four constitutents are of equal masses and it is the lightest molecule. The spin magnetic moment of positron in 2 Ps is much more stronger than spin magnetic mo- ment of proton in 2 . Due to very large spin magnetic moment of positron, the hyperfine structure of Ps be- comes comparable to its fine structure. So the spectral behaviours of Ps is expected to be much different from a normal H. Binding energy of dipositronium or 2 Ps is Eb = –0.435 eV [14] while in 2 molecule it is Eb = –4.478 eV. The binding energy of Ps , Eb = –0.3266 eV [10]. Like 2 , 2 Ps molecule exists in an overall singlet state [15].
 H. Ray / Natural Science 3 (2011) 42-47 Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS 44 2.4. Polyelectrons Wheeler added a note [11] regarding the question of stability of large polyelectrons. According to him, if the stability of the system with two positrons and two elec- trons i.e. the 2 Ps molecule is granted, then the next question regarding the stability comes for such four- particle system i.e. 4 Ps [16], when account is taken of the balance between the zero-point kinetic energy of these light masses and the potential energy of van der Waals attraction between them. Soon after the prediction of Wheeler in 1946, Hylleraas and Ore [17] calculated the binding energy of 2 Ps . No further work [18] on larger polyelectrons appeared in literature. We are trying to calculate the binding energy of a system with four positrons and four electrons. It is expected that 4 Ps may have a binding energy, Eb smaller in magnitude than 2 Ps because of placing a second 2 Ps (see Fig- ure 1) inside a 2 Ps (see Figure 2) which may cause a slight reduction in the magnitude of binding energy be- tween the two atoms at the ends of the chain. The sym- bol in figures indicate the electrostatic binding be- tween e and e in Ps . The latest reported binding energies of a few systems are presented in Table 1 for ready informations. 2.5. Bose-Einstein Condensation (BEC) of Ps Another remarkable phenomenon of Ps is the forma- tion of Bose Einstein condensate. The Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) occurs when a macroscopic fraction of an ensemble of particles obeying Bose statistics col- lapses into a single state at low temperatures. In a non-interacting Bose gas confined by the external harmonic potential 22 22 22 =2 ext xyz Vr mwxwywz , the critical temperature for BEC is given by [21] 13 13 =0.94 3 B cB BB N kT N (1) where 13 = Bxyz is the geometric mean of the oscillator frequencies, and m and N are, respec- tively, the particle mass and the number of bosons in the trap. The above result is obtained using local density approximation (LDA), where the temperature of the gas is assumed to be much larger than the spacing between single particle levels: ,, xyz kT . In this case the density of thermal atoms can be written as [] [] [] [] ee ee Figure 1. Di-positronium 2 Ps . [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] eeee eeee Figure 2. 4-positronium 4 Ps Table 1. Latest reported binding energies of a few systems. Name SymbolBinding Energy Name SymbolBinding Energy (eV) (eV) Positronium Ps –6.80 Hydrogen H –13.60 Di-positronium 2 Ps –0.43a Hydrogen 2 –4.48 molecule molecule Positronium-ion Ps –0.33b Hydro- gen-ion –1.05c e Ps ? e ? 4-positronium 4 Ps ? Positronium PsH –1.06d molecule Hydride 3 32 =1 = n B Vr kT extB B B BT n e nr n (2) where 12 =2 B TBB hmkT is the boson thermal wave- length. At =C TT the boson chemical potential takes the critical value ==0 BC , corresponding to the bottom of the external potential, and the density 0 B n in the centre of the trap satisfies the critical condition 3 0=322.61 B BT n holding for a homogene- ous system. Here ‘h’ is Planck’s constant, ‘ k’ is Boltzmann constant and =2h . As the temperature is lowered below Tc the number of particles in the zero momentum state 0 n develops a macroscopic value [22]: 32 0=1 c nn TT (3) is comprised of an ee bound in a hydrogenic orbit. Its mass, 2e m, is extremely light compared to H, an im- portant ingredient [23] for achieving reasonable Bose condensation temperatures. As a purely leptonic, mac- roscopic quantum matter-antimatter system this would be of interest in its own right, it would also represent a milestone on the path to produce an annihilation gamma- ray laser. 2.6. Antihydrogen and Its Spectra In addition, the first confirmed production of cold an- tihydrogen ( ) atoms in a confinement trap [24] in 2002 and the initiative to achieve the stable confinement of neutral atoms within the trap has created a consider- able excitement to both the physicists and chemists. is an ideal system for testing the standard model [25,26]
 H. Ray / Natural Science 3 (2011) 42-47 Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS 4545 prediction of the symmetry between matter and antimat- ter. According to this model, systems made up of anti- matter should behave identically to those composed of matter. Just as a hydrogen atom ( ) consists of an electron orbiting a proton, an antihydrogen atom ( ) consists of a positron orbiting an antiproton. The guess- ing is that the sprectrum of looks exactly like that of . After all, the emission spectrum of H is due to an excited electron jumping from the excited energy level down to a lower level(s): presumably the positron in has the same separation of energy levels. Any difference between the emission spectrum in and would be a new indication. The use of laser spectroscopy to measure and compare the electronic structures of to that of normal (e.g. antiatom and atom) is a new and an interesting area [27]. According to Dirac’s theory, antimatter particles should have the same mass, but opposite charge as their matter equivalents e.g. the simplest antimatter of elec- tron is positron. Antimatter is naturally formed during the radioactive decay of some elements. However, such naturally occurring antimatter is too little to be able to produce significant collection of the system. They are quasi stationary system i.e. their life time is very short ( pico seconds) - this period of time proves inade- quate for collection and experimentation. This had led to the need for further research and study on how to pro- duce large amounts of antimatter under controlled condi- tions. 3. GENERAL PROSPECTS 3.1. High Temeperature BEC The spin polarized atomic hydrogen H (i.e. both the proton and electron have the down spins) or H (i.e. both the proton and electron have the up spins) is ex- pected to form no molecule and it will remain a gas (in the atomic state) down to zero temperature. At densities 16 3 10ncm the system is weakly interacting and will Bose condense at temperatures of roughly 10–2 K. Al- though a gas of H or H is a good approximation to an ideal Bose system, workers have been unable to achieve high enough densities or low enough tempera- tures to observe its Bose condensation [22]. The exciton gas produced by pumping an insulator like Cu2O with a short laser pulse is also a promising candidate. This sys- tem is in many ways very analogous to the positronium system we discuss here. A collection of the spin polar- ized ortho Ps (Ps i.e. both the positron and electron have the down spins or Ps i.e. both the positron and electron have the up spins) seems to be viable in the laboratory to achieve high temperature BEC. The critical temperature Tc for BEC of ideal bosons of mass m and density n is given by 23 2 =2 2.61 cB Thmkn . Hence the small mass of Ps at a very low density, 12 3 =10ncm should facilitate BEC by leading to a large 2 T10 c K. 3.2. The Standard Model Antimatter can be used to sensitively test the theoreti- cal underpinnings of the standard model. Essential to the quantum field theory governing interactions of funda- mental particles is the so-called CPT theorem, which involves discrete symmetries. The CPT theorem requires that the laws of physics be invariant under the following operation: all particles are replaced by their antiparticle counterparts (charge conjugation), all spatial coordinates are reflected about the origin (parity), and the flow of time is reversed (time reversal). The CPT theorem has important implications for antimatter, including the mass equivalence of particle and antiparticle. The precision tests of CPT invariance using antimatter include the electron/positron mass ratio and the pro- ton/antiproton mass ratio. An ideal system for more pre- cise studies of the CPT theorem is the antihydrogen atom. The CPT theorem requires that hydrogen and an- tihydrogen have the same spectrum. Since hydrogen is one of the best understood and most precisely studied systems in all of physics, it is natural to try to compare the spectra of hydrogen and antihydrogen. 3.3. The Weak Equivalence Principle Another reason why is worth studying is its po- tential to test the weak equivalance principle (WEP) of Einstein’s general relativity, which requires the gravita- tional acceleration of a falling body be independent of its composition. This has been tested rigorously for differ- ent objects of matter, but tests of antimatter and direct comparison of a matter object and its antimatter equiva- lent, such as protons and antiprotons, have proved very difficult, mainly due to the difficulty of shielding for even very small electromagnetic fields. This is necessary since the elctromagnetic force is much stronger than gravity. , on the other hand, is thought to be stable and neutral and tests using this should thus be enabled at much higher accuracy. Slow neutral suitable for a free fall measurement, is currently being proposed by Walz and Hänsch; the laboratory of CEA/Sacley, France [28] is presently engaged in producing the slow neutral needed for this experiment. They have proposed the use of ion in order to collect ultra cold [29]. For this a dense Ps target is necessary to follow up: p + Ps + e which is followed by + Ps + e . This ion could be cooled to μK temperatures (i.e. m/s velocities). The excess positron can be laser detached in order to recover neutral .
 H. Ray / Natural Science 3 (2011) 42-47 Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS 46 3.4. Technological Application Whenever antimatter collides with its equivalent mat- ter, they will annihilate each other. This collision and annihilation will release large amounts of energy be- cause in the process, the mass of both particle and anti- particle will be converted into pure energy - usually in the form of high-energy photons (known as gamma rays). The energy be released from such a collision (according to Einstein’s equation, ‘2 =Emc’) could be used to gen- erate electricity using advanced technology and equip- ment. 3.5. Present Research Status Intensive studies are currently being undertaken by numerous institutions regarding the behavior and appli- cation of the antimatter. CERN’s unique new antimatter factory, the Antiproton Decelerator (AD) has begun de- livering antiprotons to experiments. These experiments will study antimatter in depth to determine if there is a difference between it and ordinary matter. Any differ- ence between antimatter and matter would be extremely interesting since it is not yet understood why the uni- verse is made mostly of matter. Physicists believe that the Big Bang created equal amounts of antimatter and matter [30], which would then have annihilated, leaving nothing. The great mystery is why there was enough matter left over to from the universe. Two experiments, ATHENA [31] and ATRAP [32], aim to add positrons - anti-electrons - to the caged antiprotons to make atoms of antihydrogen. A third, ASACUSA [33], traps the an- tiprotons in a cage conveniently provided by nature the helium atom. The goal of all three is a detailed compari- son of matter and antimatter leading to an understanding of why nature has a preference for matter over antimat- ter. 4. CONCLUSION As technology advances through the years, better and cheaper ways of producing significant amounts of anti- matter are expected to be developed and antimatter may become a good source of renewable and sustainable en- ergy. This is not yet possible today, but in the future, this might be a significant possibility. 5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Author is thankful to Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics (SINP), Kolkata for providing the facilities to prepare the manuscript and grateful to Prof. Bichitra Ganguly (SINP) for her active helpful sug- gestions to improve it. Author is thankful to SERC, DST, Govt. of India for the project funding Ref. No. SR/WOSA/PS-13/2009 and Prof. Anuradha De (NITTTR) for her kind mentorship. REFERENCES [1] Dirac, P.A.M. (1928) The quantum theory of the electron, Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 117, 610-624. doi:10.1098/rspa.1928.0023 [2] Anderson, C.D. (1933) The positive electron, Physical Review A, 43, 491-494. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.43.491 [3] Mohorovicic, S. (1934) Moglichkeit neuer elements und ihre bedeutung fur die astrophysik. Astronomische Nachrichten, 253, 93-108. doi:10.1002/asna.19342530402 [4] Ruark, A.E. (1945) Positronium. Physical Review, Letter to the Editor, 68, p. 278. [5] Deutsch, M. (1951) Evidence for the formation of Posi- tronium in gases. Physical Review, 82. [6] Cassidy, D.B. and Mills, A.P.Jr. (2007) The production of molecular positronium. Nature Letters, 449 195-197. doi:10.1038/nature06094 [7] Cassidy, D.B., Deng, S.H.M. and Mills, A.P.Jr. (2007) Evidence of positronium molecule formation at a metal surface. Physical Review A, 76, 1-6. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.76.062511 [8] Schrader, D.M. (2004) Symmetry of dipositronium Ps2. Physical Review Letters, 92, 043401(1-4). [9] Bubin, S. and Adamowicz, L. (2006) Nonrelativistic variational calculations of the positronium molecule and the positronium hydride, Physical Review A, 74 052502(1-5). [10] Mills, A.P.Jr. (1981) Observation of the positronium negative ion. Physical Review Letters, 46 717-720. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.46.717 [11] Wheeler, J.A. (1946) Polyelectrons. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 48, 219-238. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1946.tb31764.x [12] Hijmans, T.W. (2002) Particle physics: Cold antihydro- gen. Nature, 419, 439-440. doi:10.1038/419439a [13] Barbara, G.L. (2003) Second CERN group produces cold atoms of antihydrogen. Physics Today, 14-16. [14] Usukura, J., Varga, K. and Suzuki, Y. (1998) Signature of the existence of positronium molecule. Physics Review A, 58, 1918-1931. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.58.1918 [15] Ho, Y.K. (1986) Binding energy of positronium mole- cule. Physical Review A, 33, 3584-3587. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.33.3584 [16] Mills, A.P.Jr. (UCR 2010) private communication . [17] Hylleraas, E.A. and Ore, A. (1947) Binding energy of positronium molecule. Physical Review, 71, 493-496. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.71.493 [18] Mezei, Zs., Mitroy, J., Lovas, R.G. and Varga, K. (2001) Properties of some five-particle systems. Physical Re- view A, 64, 032501(1-10). [19] Rienzi, J.D. and Drachman, R.J. (2002) Resonances in positronium hydride. Physical Review A, 65, 032721(1-7). [20] Frolov, A.M. and Smith, V.H.Jr. (1997) Bound-state properties, positron annihilation rates and hyperfine structure. Physical Review A, 55, 2662-2673. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.55.2662 [21] Albus, A.P., Giorgini, S., Illuminati, F. and Viverit, L.
 H. Ray / Natural Science 3 (2011) 42-47 Copyright © 2011 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS 4747 (2002) Critical temperature of Bose-Einstein condensa- tion in trapped atomic Bose-Fermi mixtures. Journal of Physics B Letters, 35, L511-L519. [22] Platzman, P.M. and Mills, A.P.Jr. (1994) Possibilities of Bose condensation of positronium. Physics Review B, 49, 454-458. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.49.454 [23] Adhikari, S.K. (2002) Positronium-positronium interac- tion: Resonance, scattering length, and Bose-Einstein condensation. Physics Letters A, 294, 308-313. doi:10.1016/S0375-9601(02)00128-7 [24] Amoretti, M., Amsler, C., Bonomi, G., Bouchta, A., Bowe, P., Carraro, C., Cesar, C.L., Charlton, M., Collier M.J.T., Doser, M., Filippini, V., Fine, K.S., Fontana, A., Fujiwara, M.C., Funakoshi, R., Genova, P., Hangst, J.S., Hayano, R.S., Holzscheiter, M.H., Jrgensen, L.V., Lagomarsino, V., Landua, R., Lindelf, D., Lodi, R.E., Macr, M., Madsen, N., Manuzio, G., Marchesotti, M., Montagna, P., Pruys, H., Regenfus, C., Riedler, P., Rochet, J., Rotondi, A., Rouleau, G., Testera, G., Variola, A., Watson, T.L. and van der Werf, D.P. (2002) Produc- tion and detection of cold antihydrogen atoms. Nature Letters, 419, 456-459. doi:10.1038/nature01096 [25] Blaha, S. (2007) The origin of the standard model: The genesis of four quark and lepton species, parity violation, the electroweak sector, color su(3), three visible G; Pin- gree-hill Publishing, Auburn. [26] Wikipedia Foundation, “The free encyclopedia” Internet Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model. [27] Walz, J., Fendel, P., Herrmann, M., König, M., Pahl, A., Pittner, H., Schatz, B. and Hänsch, T.W. (2003) Towards laser spectroscopy of antihydrogen. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, 36, p. 649. doi:10.1088/0953-4075/36/3/321 [28] Walz, J. and Hänsch, T. (2004) A proposal to measure antimatter gravity using Ultracold Antihydrogen atoms: Fundamental physics on the ISS. General Relativity and Gravitation, 36, 561-570. doi:10.1023/B:GERG.0000010730.93408.87 [29] Patrice, P., Laszlo, L., Jean-Michel, R., Valentin, B., Michael, C., Aline, C., Olivier, D., Pierre, D., Tomoko, M., Nicilas, R. and Yves, S. (2009) A mini linac based positron source. Physica Status Solidi C, 6, 2462-2464. doi:10.1002/pssc.200982123 [30] Karen, C.F. (2002) The big bang theory: What it is, where it came from, and why it works; John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. [31] Alberto, R., University of Pavia, Italy, “Spokesperson” Internet Available: http://www.cern.ch/athena/. [32] Gerald Gabrielse, Physics Department, Harvard Univer- sity, “Spokesperson and Coordinator” Internet Available: http://hussle.harvard.edu/~atrap/ [33] Ryugo S.H., University of Tokyo, “Spokesperson” Internet Available: http://asacusa.web.cern.ch/ASACUSA/
|