<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_05_163226</id>
	<title>First Creation of Anti-Strange Hypernuclei</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1267807440000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>runagate writes <i>"Brookhaven National Laboratory has created a <a href="http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/03/strange-antiparticles-pop-out-of-rhics-quark-gluon-plasma.ars">heretofore unknown form of matter</a>. The matter we normally encounter, and are composed of, has nuclei of protons and neutrons that contain no strange quarks. It was known that anti-strange matter could exist, and using the Solenoidal Tracker at Brookhaven's RHIC, scientists detected a couple of dozen instances of antihypernuclei. The 'Z' axis of the Periodic Table has already been extended in the positive direction by the discovery of hypernuclei, but this new discovery extends it in the negative direction for this new type of 'strange' antimatter &mdash; which may exist in the core of collapsed stars and may provide insight into why our universe appears to be made almost solely of matter and not antimatter."</i> The Register's coverage reproduces a <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/05/negative\_strangeness/">helpful diagram</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>runagate writes " Brookhaven National Laboratory has created a heretofore unknown form of matter .
The matter we normally encounter , and are composed of , has nuclei of protons and neutrons that contain no strange quarks .
It was known that anti-strange matter could exist , and using the Solenoidal Tracker at Brookhaven 's RHIC , scientists detected a couple of dozen instances of antihypernuclei .
The 'Z ' axis of the Periodic Table has already been extended in the positive direction by the discovery of hypernuclei , but this new discovery extends it in the negative direction for this new type of 'strange ' antimatter    which may exist in the core of collapsed stars and may provide insight into why our universe appears to be made almost solely of matter and not antimatter .
" The Register 's coverage reproduces a helpful diagram .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>runagate writes "Brookhaven National Laboratory has created a heretofore unknown form of matter.
The matter we normally encounter, and are composed of, has nuclei of protons and neutrons that contain no strange quarks.
It was known that anti-strange matter could exist, and using the Solenoidal Tracker at Brookhaven's RHIC, scientists detected a couple of dozen instances of antihypernuclei.
The 'Z' axis of the Periodic Table has already been extended in the positive direction by the discovery of hypernuclei, but this new discovery extends it in the negative direction for this new type of 'strange' antimatter — which may exist in the core of collapsed stars and may provide insight into why our universe appears to be made almost solely of matter and not antimatter.
" The Register's coverage reproduces a helpful diagram.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373422</id>
	<title>Has anyone noticed?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267816260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anyone noticed that every time a mass-media article involving physics is released, there is always an excerpt about how the matter may be in the core of a collapsed star?</p><p>What's up with that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone noticed that every time a mass-media article involving physics is released , there is always an excerpt about how the matter may be in the core of a collapsed star ? What 's up with that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone noticed that every time a mass-media article involving physics is released, there is always an excerpt about how the matter may be in the core of a collapsed star?What's up with that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374948</id>
	<title>2012</title>
	<author>MikeURL</author>
	<datestamp>1267780260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interestingly this is what the pseudo-science of the movie 2012 was loosely based on.  Considering that the movie came out before this discovery that is pretty impressive.  No I'm not saying this is exactly what the movie said was happening but it is eerily similar.  In the movie the crust of the earth is heating because the sun is emitting a new type of neutrino.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestingly this is what the pseudo-science of the movie 2012 was loosely based on .
Considering that the movie came out before this discovery that is pretty impressive .
No I 'm not saying this is exactly what the movie said was happening but it is eerily similar .
In the movie the crust of the earth is heating because the sun is emitting a new type of neutrino .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestingly this is what the pseudo-science of the movie 2012 was loosely based on.
Considering that the movie came out before this discovery that is pretty impressive.
No I'm not saying this is exactly what the movie said was happening but it is eerily similar.
In the movie the crust of the earth is heating because the sun is emitting a new type of neutrino.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373776</id>
	<title>I hope no super-villian gets this</title>
	<author>NotSoHeavyD3</author>
	<datestamp>1267817760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean how will the Sorcerer Supreme combat such a thing?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean how will the Sorcerer Supreme combat such a thing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean how will the Sorcerer Supreme combat such a thing?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373716</id>
	<title>Re:I hate you, Register.</title>
	<author>Hotawa Hawk-eye</author>
	<datestamp>1267817580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not a physicist, but what I got from the article (+ some background for those who have forgotten/never took nuclear physics:)</p><p>* Atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons.  Atomic nuclei contain just protons and neutrons.</p><p>* Protons and neutrons themselves are made up of smaller particles called quarks.</p><p>* In regular matter the protons and neutrons are made up of two different types of quarks, called up and down quarks.</p><p>* Two up quarks + one down make up a proton, one up + two down give you a neutron.</p><p>* If you replace some or all of the up or down quarks with a different type of quark (up -&gt; strange, down -&gt; charm I believe) then you get a new type of subatomic particle.  If you think of the periodic table as being a building, the regular periodic table makes up the ground floor, while atoms using these strange/charm subatomic particles would live on higher floors.</p><p>* If you replace all the up and down quarks with antiup and antidown quarks, you get a new type of subatomic particle (the antiproton or antineutron.)  They live in the other wing of the periodic building.</p><p>* This article reports that researchers have found particles where both the quarks have been replaced by antiquarks and some or all of those antiup/antidown quarks have been replaced by an antistrange quark.  These are in the basement of the periodic building, the first particles discovered there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a physicist , but what I got from the article ( + some background for those who have forgotten/never took nuclear physics : ) * Atoms are made up of protons , neutrons , and electrons .
Atomic nuclei contain just protons and neutrons .
* Protons and neutrons themselves are made up of smaller particles called quarks .
* In regular matter the protons and neutrons are made up of two different types of quarks , called up and down quarks .
* Two up quarks + one down make up a proton , one up + two down give you a neutron .
* If you replace some or all of the up or down quarks with a different type of quark ( up - &gt; strange , down - &gt; charm I believe ) then you get a new type of subatomic particle .
If you think of the periodic table as being a building , the regular periodic table makes up the ground floor , while atoms using these strange/charm subatomic particles would live on higher floors .
* If you replace all the up and down quarks with antiup and antidown quarks , you get a new type of subatomic particle ( the antiproton or antineutron .
) They live in the other wing of the periodic building .
* This article reports that researchers have found particles where both the quarks have been replaced by antiquarks and some or all of those antiup/antidown quarks have been replaced by an antistrange quark .
These are in the basement of the periodic building , the first particles discovered there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a physicist, but what I got from the article (+ some background for those who have forgotten/never took nuclear physics:)* Atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons.
Atomic nuclei contain just protons and neutrons.
* Protons and neutrons themselves are made up of smaller particles called quarks.
* In regular matter the protons and neutrons are made up of two different types of quarks, called up and down quarks.
* Two up quarks + one down make up a proton, one up + two down give you a neutron.
* If you replace some or all of the up or down quarks with a different type of quark (up -&gt; strange, down -&gt; charm I believe) then you get a new type of subatomic particle.
If you think of the periodic table as being a building, the regular periodic table makes up the ground floor, while atoms using these strange/charm subatomic particles would live on higher floors.
* If you replace all the up and down quarks with antiup and antidown quarks, you get a new type of subatomic particle (the antiproton or antineutron.
)  They live in the other wing of the periodic building.
* This article reports that researchers have found particles where both the quarks have been replaced by antiquarks and some or all of those antiup/antidown quarks have been replaced by an antistrange quark.
These are in the basement of the periodic building, the first particles discovered there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372812</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372706</id>
	<title>Re:from the register's "helpful diagram":</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1267813020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>so i'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent. i guess that's helpful...</p></div><p>Nah.  Then then they'd call "Anti-Strange Hyypernuclei" something like "Panty-mange wiper pukey pie."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>so i 'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent .
i guess that 's helpful...Nah .
Then then they 'd call " Anti-Strange Hyypernuclei " something like " Panty-mange wiper pukey pie .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so i'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent.
i guess that's helpful...Nah.
Then then they'd call "Anti-Strange Hyypernuclei" something like "Panty-mange wiper pukey pie.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082</id>
	<title>Honest question?</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1267814760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is anti-matter matter?  Could we build stuff out of it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anti-matter matter ?
Could we build stuff out of it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anti-matter matter?
Could we build stuff out of it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31380410</id>
	<title>Re:Negatively strange anti-hypernucleus?</title>
	<author>dotancohen</author>
	<datestamp>1267887660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years, haven't they?</p></div><p> <a href="http://xkcd.com/451/" title="xkcd.com">http://xkcd.com/451/</a> [xkcd.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years , have n't they ?
http : //xkcd.com/451/ [ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years, haven't they?
http://xkcd.com/451/ [xkcd.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375480</id>
	<title>Hopeless</title>
	<author>Pictish Prince</author>
	<datestamp>1267783020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Guardian reporter is hopelessly clueless:<p><div class="quote"><p>But international boffins analysing the RHIC gold-buster results have now discovered a an anti-deuterium nucleus containing an antiproton, an antineutron - and, gobsmackingly - an "anti-strange" quark.</p></div><p>The quark is not <i>in addition</i> to the antiproton &amp; antineutron - it replaces an up or down quark in the antiproton or antineutron.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Guardian reporter is hopelessly clueless : But international boffins analysing the RHIC gold-buster results have now discovered a an anti-deuterium nucleus containing an antiproton , an antineutron - and , gobsmackingly - an " anti-strange " quark.The quark is not in addition to the antiproton &amp; antineutron - it replaces an up or down quark in the antiproton or antineutron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Guardian reporter is hopelessly clueless:But international boffins analysing the RHIC gold-buster results have now discovered a an anti-deuterium nucleus containing an antiproton, an antineutron - and, gobsmackingly - an "anti-strange" quark.The quark is not in addition to the antiproton &amp; antineutron - it replaces an up or down quark in the antiproton or antineutron.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398</id>
	<title>from the register's "helpful diagram":</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267811400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Atomsmash boffins' reverse alchemy bizarro-stuff triumph"</p><p>"Sometimes there is more strangeness than none at all. Or less."</p><p>the article is complete with a "Bootnote"</p><p>so i'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent. i guess that's helpful...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Atomsmash boffins ' reverse alchemy bizarro-stuff triumph " " Sometimes there is more strangeness than none at all .
Or less .
" the article is complete with a " Bootnote " so i 'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent .
i guess that 's helpful.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Atomsmash boffins' reverse alchemy bizarro-stuff triumph""Sometimes there is more strangeness than none at all.
Or less.
"the article is complete with a "Bootnote"so i'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent.
i guess that's helpful...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375586</id>
	<title>Boffins</title>
	<author>vikingpower</author>
	<datestamp>1267783560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am amazed at how The Register is basically a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. with British tongue-in-cheek humoUr added. Almost every paragraph of the Register article manages to mention "boffinry" or "boffin". As is their wont. Congrats, Register.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am amazed at how The Register is basically a / .
with British tongue-in-cheek humoUr added .
Almost every paragraph of the Register article manages to mention " boffinry " or " boffin " .
As is their wont .
Congrats , Register .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am amazed at how The Register is basically a /.
with British tongue-in-cheek humoUr added.
Almost every paragraph of the Register article manages to mention "boffinry" or "boffin".
As is their wont.
Congrats, Register.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372674</id>
	<title>Must I be the one to ...</title>
	<author>gestalt\_n\_pepper</author>
	<datestamp>1267812840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>welcome our new Anti-Strange Hypernucleic over... er, I mean under... I mean inside-out<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... Um. Let me get back to you on that one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>welcome our new Anti-Strange Hypernucleic over... er , I mean under... I mean inside-out .... Um. Let me get back to you on that one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>welcome our new Anti-Strange Hypernucleic over... er, I mean under... I mean inside-out .... Um. Let me get back to you on that one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372428</id>
	<title>so what happens</title>
	<author>rossdee</author>
	<datestamp>1267811520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>when this new form of matter comes in contact with the normal matter that the rest of the universe is made of? Do we get a gigantic explosion (as we would with matter and anti-matter), of do the particles just avoid each other like the plague?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>when this new form of matter comes in contact with the normal matter that the rest of the universe is made of ?
Do we get a gigantic explosion ( as we would with matter and anti-matter ) , of do the particles just avoid each other like the plague ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>when this new form of matter comes in contact with the normal matter that the rest of the universe is made of?
Do we get a gigantic explosion (as we would with matter and anti-matter), of do the particles just avoid each other like the plague?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372650</id>
	<title>Re:from the register's "helpful diagram":</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1267812720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>so i'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent. i guess that's helpful...</p></div><p>Isn't that what it takes to be able to understand Quantum Mechanics? To normal folks, there isn't any difference between Quantum Mechanics and bellybutton lint, both are totally incomprehensible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>so i 'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent .
i guess that 's helpful...Is n't that what it takes to be able to understand Quantum Mechanics ?
To normal folks , there is n't any difference between Quantum Mechanics and bellybutton lint , both are totally incomprehensible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so i'm under the impression of having advanced quantum physics described to me by a drunk with a cockney accent.
i guess that's helpful...Isn't that what it takes to be able to understand Quantum Mechanics?
To normal folks, there isn't any difference between Quantum Mechanics and bellybutton lint, both are totally incomprehensible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31378360</id>
	<title>Re:Negatively strange anti-hypernucleus?</title>
	<author>dissy</author>
	<datestamp>1267806120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Has anything of practical value come out of this?</p></div><p>Wow.  That is quite similar to demanding and expecting a job and average income from a 1 year old child.</p><p>No nothing of practical value has come of something they just discovered a week ago.</p><p>It will however, and I say that with the whole history of technology as proof such breakthroughs provide practical value.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anything of practical value come out of this ? Wow .
That is quite similar to demanding and expecting a job and average income from a 1 year old child.No nothing of practical value has come of something they just discovered a week ago.It will however , and I say that with the whole history of technology as proof such breakthroughs provide practical value .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anything of practical value come out of this?Wow.
That is quite similar to demanding and expecting a job and average income from a 1 year old child.No nothing of practical value has come of something they just discovered a week ago.It will however, and I say that with the whole history of technology as proof such breakthroughs provide practical value.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372740</id>
	<title>Re:"Anti-strange"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267813140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You want something that is less strange than normal. Maybe "boring hypernuclei".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You want something that is less strange than normal .
Maybe " boring hypernuclei " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You want something that is less strange than normal.
Maybe "boring hypernuclei".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373358</id>
	<title>Quark, Anti-Strangeness, and Charm</title>
	<author>cromar</author>
	<datestamp>1267816080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugLwXlpJi6o" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugLwXlpJi6o</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = ugLwXlpJi6o [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugLwXlpJi6o [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076</id>
	<title>Re:Honest question?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267819260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is anti-matter matter? Could we build stuff out of it?</p></div><p>Consider:</p><p>
The theoretical macroscopic properties of antimatter are the same as matter.
Interaction with light, gravity, the fundamental forces, entropy would be all the same.
</p><p>
If you had a world made of anti matter, everything should work the same.  </p><p>
All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons (positrons) are positive charge.</p><p>
Anti Protons are negative charge.  </p><p>

From a distance you would not know that world was made of antimatter, since properties would be the same. Electromagnetic wavelengths absorbed / emitted would be the same.  Anti-Sodium would have the same yellow emission line as Sodium.
</p><p>
However we have not observed antimatter besides as particles.  Besides  anti-hydrogen, no other anti-atoms (let alone anti-molecules) have been produced or discovered.
</p><p>
Now building something made of antimatter in a matter world would be quite difficult - close proximity of a positron to an electron and you have  neither particle, just a very energetic photons flying away.  Any particle coming into proximity of its anti-particle results in annihilation (complete conversion of the masses of the particles to energy). </p><p>
Now if Fred meets anti-Fred (ignoring air)  they explode not because  macroscopic Fred sees his anti-self (no matter how many time you watch that Star Trek episode, it's not true) - it is because Fred is made up or protons, neutrons and electrons and anti-Fred is made up of positrons, anti-protons and anti-neutrons and those little guys go boom.
</p><p>
 How to handle such material that you cannot even get near - and "building" something means manipulating atoms, molecules - uncharged?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anti-matter matter ?
Could we build stuff out of it ? Consider : The theoretical macroscopic properties of antimatter are the same as matter .
Interaction with light , gravity , the fundamental forces , entropy would be all the same .
If you had a world made of anti matter , everything should work the same .
All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons ( positrons ) are positive charge .
Anti Protons are negative charge .
From a distance you would not know that world was made of antimatter , since properties would be the same .
Electromagnetic wavelengths absorbed / emitted would be the same .
Anti-Sodium would have the same yellow emission line as Sodium .
However we have not observed antimatter besides as particles .
Besides anti-hydrogen , no other anti-atoms ( let alone anti-molecules ) have been produced or discovered .
Now building something made of antimatter in a matter world would be quite difficult - close proximity of a positron to an electron and you have neither particle , just a very energetic photons flying away .
Any particle coming into proximity of its anti-particle results in annihilation ( complete conversion of the masses of the particles to energy ) .
Now if Fred meets anti-Fred ( ignoring air ) they explode not because macroscopic Fred sees his anti-self ( no matter how many time you watch that Star Trek episode , it 's not true ) - it is because Fred is made up or protons , neutrons and electrons and anti-Fred is made up of positrons , anti-protons and anti-neutrons and those little guys go boom .
How to handle such material that you can not even get near - and " building " something means manipulating atoms , molecules - uncharged ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anti-matter matter?
Could we build stuff out of it?Consider:
The theoretical macroscopic properties of antimatter are the same as matter.
Interaction with light, gravity, the fundamental forces, entropy would be all the same.
If you had a world made of anti matter, everything should work the same.
All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons (positrons) are positive charge.
Anti Protons are negative charge.
From a distance you would not know that world was made of antimatter, since properties would be the same.
Electromagnetic wavelengths absorbed / emitted would be the same.
Anti-Sodium would have the same yellow emission line as Sodium.
However we have not observed antimatter besides as particles.
Besides  anti-hydrogen, no other anti-atoms (let alone anti-molecules) have been produced or discovered.
Now building something made of antimatter in a matter world would be quite difficult - close proximity of a positron to an electron and you have  neither particle, just a very energetic photons flying away.
Any particle coming into proximity of its anti-particle results in annihilation (complete conversion of the masses of the particles to energy).
Now if Fred meets anti-Fred (ignoring air)  they explode not because  macroscopic Fred sees his anti-self (no matter how many time you watch that Star Trek episode, it's not true) - it is because Fred is made up or protons, neutrons and electrons and anti-Fred is made up of positrons, anti-protons and anti-neutrons and those little guys go boom.
How to handle such material that you cannot even get near - and "building" something means manipulating atoms, molecules - uncharged?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372484</id>
	<title>This could be used as a source of limitless energy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267811820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Scientists would only need to figure out how to create a beam of anti-strange hypernuclei and aim it at a target of Steven Wright. IMHO things would get much less funny, but the release of energy would be enormous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Scientists would only need to figure out how to create a beam of anti-strange hypernuclei and aim it at a target of Steven Wright .
IMHO things would get much less funny , but the release of energy would be enormous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Scientists would only need to figure out how to create a beam of anti-strange hypernuclei and aim it at a target of Steven Wright.
IMHO things would get much less funny, but the release of energy would be enormous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374638</id>
	<title>Bottom/Anti-Bottom Hypernuclei?</title>
	<author>argyleman</author>
	<datestamp>1267821960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any particle physicists out there patient enough to answer what is probably an ignorant question?  As I remember, Strange are second generation quarks.  Can third generation Bottom quarks can do the same thing?  Are Bottom/Anti-Bottom Hypernuclei theoretically possible or are the energies involved just to high to allow it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any particle physicists out there patient enough to answer what is probably an ignorant question ?
As I remember , Strange are second generation quarks .
Can third generation Bottom quarks can do the same thing ?
Are Bottom/Anti-Bottom Hypernuclei theoretically possible or are the energies involved just to high to allow it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any particle physicists out there patient enough to answer what is probably an ignorant question?
As I remember, Strange are second generation quarks.
Can third generation Bottom quarks can do the same thing?
Are Bottom/Anti-Bottom Hypernuclei theoretically possible or are the energies involved just to high to allow it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31378080</id>
	<title>Re:so what happens</title>
	<author>WalksOnDirt</author>
	<datestamp>1267803360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A stable nucleus with strange quarks has been theorized.  It is called a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strangelet" title="wikipedia.org">strangelet</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A stable nucleus with strange quarks has been theorized .
It is called a strangelet [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A stable nucleus with strange quarks has been theorized.
It is called a strangelet [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373160</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372908</id>
	<title>Re:"Anti-strange"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267813980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Wouldn't an Anti-Strange Hypernuclei just be a Normal Hypernuclei?</p></div><p>No.</p><p>"Strange", in this context, means "having the attribute of positive strangeness", which means that these hypernuclei are composed of at least one nucleon which, in turn, is composed of at least one strange quark (as opoosed to "ordinary" up and down quarks).</p><p>Thus, "anti-strange" means "having the attribute of negative strangeness", which stands for all the ablove blah-blah, but with "strange anti-quark" inserted instead of "strange quark".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't an Anti-Strange Hypernuclei just be a Normal Hypernuclei ? No .
" Strange " , in this context , means " having the attribute of positive strangeness " , which means that these hypernuclei are composed of at least one nucleon which , in turn , is composed of at least one strange quark ( as opoosed to " ordinary " up and down quarks ) .Thus , " anti-strange " means " having the attribute of negative strangeness " , which stands for all the ablove blah-blah , but with " strange anti-quark " inserted instead of " strange quark " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't an Anti-Strange Hypernuclei just be a Normal Hypernuclei?No.
"Strange", in this context, means "having the attribute of positive strangeness", which means that these hypernuclei are composed of at least one nucleon which, in turn, is composed of at least one strange quark (as opoosed to "ordinary" up and down quarks).Thus, "anti-strange" means "having the attribute of negative strangeness", which stands for all the ablove blah-blah, but with "strange anti-quark" inserted instead of "strange quark".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376044</id>
	<title>no surprise</title>
	<author>Khashishi</author>
	<datestamp>1267786200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Essentially, after you get by all the silly nomenclature, (negative strangeness hypernuclei? are you serious?), all it is is confirming what we already knew. For any matter particle, there is a corresponding antimatter particle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Essentially , after you get by all the silly nomenclature , ( negative strangeness hypernuclei ?
are you serious ?
) , all it is is confirming what we already knew .
For any matter particle , there is a corresponding antimatter particle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Essentially, after you get by all the silly nomenclature, (negative strangeness hypernuclei?
are you serious?
), all it is is confirming what we already knew.
For any matter particle, there is a corresponding antimatter particle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372396</id>
	<title>*** Sigh ***</title>
	<author>abbynormal brain</author>
	<datestamp>1267811400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Quote: "Hypernuclei bring a third dimension into play, based on the strangeness quantum number of the nucleus, thus allowing the territory of antinuclei with nonzero strangeness."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Just when I thought I was starting to get it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-\</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quote : " Hypernuclei bring a third dimension into play , based on the strangeness quantum number of the nucleus , thus allowing the territory of antinuclei with nonzero strangeness .
" ... Just when I thought I was starting to get it ... : - \</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quote: "Hypernuclei bring a third dimension into play, based on the strangeness quantum number of the nucleus, thus allowing the territory of antinuclei with nonzero strangeness.
" ... Just when I thought I was starting to get it ... :-\
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373564</id>
	<title>Re:MY GOD! Do you know what this means?!</title>
	<author>Icaarus</author>
	<datestamp>1267816920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373578</id>
	<title>Re:*** Sigh ***</title>
	<author>greenguy</author>
	<datestamp>1267817040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Three dimensional? Anti- this and that? A bit hyper? Fairly strange?</p><p>Sounds like they've discovered my friends.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Three dimensional ?
Anti- this and that ?
A bit hyper ?
Fairly strange ? Sounds like they 've discovered my friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Three dimensional?
Anti- this and that?
A bit hyper?
Fairly strange?Sounds like they've discovered my friends.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372726</id>
	<title>Re:so what happens</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1267813080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's all good, but the major discovery here is actually anti-hypernucleons made with anti-strange quarks.  So yeah, they will annihilate on contact with normal matter just like non-strange anti-matter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's all good , but the major discovery here is actually anti-hypernucleons made with anti-strange quarks .
So yeah , they will annihilate on contact with normal matter just like non-strange anti-matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's all good, but the major discovery here is actually anti-hypernucleons made with anti-strange quarks.
So yeah, they will annihilate on contact with normal matter just like non-strange anti-matter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372416</id>
	<title>Huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267811460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All I wanted to know was how to make some pie...</htmltext>
<tokenext>All I wanted to know was how to make some pie.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I wanted to know was how to make some pie...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372842</id>
	<title>Misleading summary</title>
	<author>MikTheUser</author>
	<datestamp>1267813680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hypernuclei with negative strangeness haven't been "created for the first time". They've been produced in RHIC collisions for as long as they've been running (with sufficient energy), and it's only now that we've been able to see them.</p><p>That, however, is quite the accomplishment, as relativistic heavy ions collisions are so complex that we're hardly begun to understand what happens in them. Think a two-hundred-truck collision at 1,000 mph, and you're interested in what screw came from which truck and how the drivers' shoes were tied.</p><p><i>[No truck drivers were hurt in the writing of this comment!]</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hypernuclei with negative strangeness have n't been " created for the first time " .
They 've been produced in RHIC collisions for as long as they 've been running ( with sufficient energy ) , and it 's only now that we 've been able to see them.That , however , is quite the accomplishment , as relativistic heavy ions collisions are so complex that we 're hardly begun to understand what happens in them .
Think a two-hundred-truck collision at 1,000 mph , and you 're interested in what screw came from which truck and how the drivers ' shoes were tied .
[ No truck drivers were hurt in the writing of this comment !
]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hypernuclei with negative strangeness haven't been "created for the first time".
They've been produced in RHIC collisions for as long as they've been running (with sufficient energy), and it's only now that we've been able to see them.That, however, is quite the accomplishment, as relativistic heavy ions collisions are so complex that we're hardly begun to understand what happens in them.
Think a two-hundred-truck collision at 1,000 mph, and you're interested in what screw came from which truck and how the drivers' shoes were tied.
[No truck drivers were hurt in the writing of this comment!
]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376224</id>
	<title>Re:Honest question?</title>
	<author>Fëanáro</author>
	<datestamp>1267787280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The theoretical macroscopic properties of antimatter are the same as matter. Interaction with light, gravity, the fundamental forces, entropy would be all the same.</p><p>If you had a world made of anti matter, everything should work the same.</p></div></blockquote><p>Well, almost. There is a slight asymmetry between normal matter and antimatter in relation to the weak force, so you could at least tell the difference by carefull observation.<br>Or these small differences might result in vast changes in the world.</p><p>see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP\_violation" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP\_violation</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The theoretical macroscopic properties of antimatter are the same as matter .
Interaction with light , gravity , the fundamental forces , entropy would be all the same.If you had a world made of anti matter , everything should work the same.Well , almost .
There is a slight asymmetry between normal matter and antimatter in relation to the weak force , so you could at least tell the difference by carefull observation.Or these small differences might result in vast changes in the world.see http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP \ _violation [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The theoretical macroscopic properties of antimatter are the same as matter.
Interaction with light, gravity, the fundamental forces, entropy would be all the same.If you had a world made of anti matter, everything should work the same.Well, almost.
There is a slight asymmetry between normal matter and antimatter in relation to the weak force, so you could at least tell the difference by carefull observation.Or these small differences might result in vast changes in the world.see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP\_violation [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372636</id>
	<title>MY GOD! Do you know what this means?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267812660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, seriously, I'm asking.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , seriously , I 'm asking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, seriously, I'm asking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373016</id>
	<title>Slightly better article</title>
	<author>hadhad69</author>
	<datestamp>1267814460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.world-science.net/othernews/100304\_antimatter.htm" title="world-science.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.world-science.net/othernews/100304\_antimatter.htm</a> [world-science.net]

Mind boggling stuff.

I still don't understand why this accounts for where the 'missing' mass of the universe is. Am I right in saying that the likelihood of this 'Anti-stuff' existing in the quark-gluon plasma in the ultra high pressures of quasars etc is as likley as 'normal' matter and thats where the lost mass is?</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.world-science.net/othernews/100304 \ _antimatter.htm [ world-science.net ] Mind boggling stuff .
I still do n't understand why this accounts for where the 'missing ' mass of the universe is .
Am I right in saying that the likelihood of this 'Anti-stuff ' existing in the quark-gluon plasma in the ultra high pressures of quasars etc is as likley as 'normal ' matter and thats where the lost mass is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.world-science.net/othernews/100304\_antimatter.htm [world-science.net]

Mind boggling stuff.
I still don't understand why this accounts for where the 'missing' mass of the universe is.
Am I right in saying that the likelihood of this 'Anti-stuff' existing in the quark-gluon plasma in the ultra high pressures of quasars etc is as likley as 'normal' matter and thats where the lost mass is?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372812</id>
	<title>I hate you, Register.</title>
	<author>Bahumat</author>
	<datestamp>1267813440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I swear to god I'm going to write a script for my browser that blocks loading any page with the word "boffin" in it.</p><p>Anywhere I can get a SERIOUS interpretation of this event that isn't busy self-fellating over how gigglingly clever it's own writers are?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I swear to god I 'm going to write a script for my browser that blocks loading any page with the word " boffin " in it.Anywhere I can get a SERIOUS interpretation of this event that is n't busy self-fellating over how gigglingly clever it 's own writers are ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I swear to god I'm going to write a script for my browser that blocks loading any page with the word "boffin" in it.Anywhere I can get a SERIOUS interpretation of this event that isn't busy self-fellating over how gigglingly clever it's own writers are?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373306</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading summary</title>
	<author>CODiNE</author>
	<datestamp>1267815900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>:)</p><p>Thanks for the Road Warrior flashback.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>: ) Thanks for the Road Warrior flashback .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>:)Thanks for the Road Warrior flashback.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372592</id>
	<title>I've always wondered...</title>
	<author>calibre-not-output</author>
	<datestamp>1267812360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...why is it called a "strange" quark anyways?<br> <br>This is slightly off-topic, but from all the names they could have given the damn thing, why give it a bizarre name like that? As if particle physics weren't confusing already...</htmltext>
<tokenext>...why is it called a " strange " quark anyways ?
This is slightly off-topic , but from all the names they could have given the damn thing , why give it a bizarre name like that ?
As if particle physics were n't confusing already.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...why is it called a "strange" quark anyways?
This is slightly off-topic, but from all the names they could have given the damn thing, why give it a bizarre name like that?
As if particle physics weren't confusing already...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372384</id>
	<title>Quote that made my day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267811280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Blasting a pair of high-energy gold nuclei into each other as is their wont, RHIC boffins found they had created something very odd indeed."</p><p>I'm guessing that with a name like "negatively strange antihypernucleic antimatter", Star Trek et al. will be all over this. Countdown until the term appears in sci-fi shows...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Blasting a pair of high-energy gold nuclei into each other as is their wont , RHIC boffins found they had created something very odd indeed .
" I 'm guessing that with a name like " negatively strange antihypernucleic antimatter " , Star Trek et al .
will be all over this .
Countdown until the term appears in sci-fi shows.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Blasting a pair of high-energy gold nuclei into each other as is their wont, RHIC boffins found they had created something very odd indeed.
"I'm guessing that with a name like "negatively strange antihypernucleic antimatter", Star Trek et al.
will be all over this.
Countdown until the term appears in sci-fi shows...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372782</id>
	<title>OK Slashdot, time to get honest...</title>
	<author>wiredog</author>
	<datestamp>1267813320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This story is <i>really</i> a marketing gimmick for the new Alice in Wonderland movie that opened today, isn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This story is really a marketing gimmick for the new Alice in Wonderland movie that opened today , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This story is really a marketing gimmick for the new Alice in Wonderland movie that opened today, isn't it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372828</id>
	<title>What's really strange about all of this</title>
	<author>JamesP</author>
	<datestamp>1267813560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is how not having strange quarks is the strange issue...</p><p>Hum.. strange</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is how not having strange quarks is the strange issue...Hum.. strange</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is how not having strange quarks is the strange issue...Hum.. strange</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373108</id>
	<title>Actually heavy water is not just like light water</title>
	<author>Viol8</author>
	<datestamp>1267814940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Never mind its nuclear differences its:</p><p>Heavier<br>Different hydrogen bond strength (which causes toxicity in biological systems in large doses)<br>Completely transparent to visible light spectrum - light water is slightly blue due to red end absorbtion<br>Different melting/freezing points<br>Heavy water ice will sink if put in normal water</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Never mind its nuclear differences its : HeavierDifferent hydrogen bond strength ( which causes toxicity in biological systems in large doses ) Completely transparent to visible light spectrum - light water is slightly blue due to red end absorbtionDifferent melting/freezing pointsHeavy water ice will sink if put in normal water</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never mind its nuclear differences its:HeavierDifferent hydrogen bond strength (which causes toxicity in biological systems in large doses)Completely transparent to visible light spectrum - light water is slightly blue due to red end absorbtionDifferent melting/freezing pointsHeavy water ice will sink if put in normal water</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373630</id>
	<title>Re:*** Sigh ***</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267817280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can we has eezo nao?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can we has eezo nao ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can we has eezo nao?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372952</id>
	<title>Negatively strange anti-hypernucleus?</title>
	<author>glwtta</author>
	<datestamp>1267814160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years, haven't they?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years , have n't they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years, haven't they?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372830</id>
	<title>Re:"Anti-strange"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267813560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anti-Strange implies opposition, not just "absence of".  A Republican Hypernuclei, perhaps.  Better yet, maybe a Hyperconservative Nukyali.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anti-Strange implies opposition , not just " absence of " .
A Republican Hypernuclei , perhaps .
Better yet , maybe a Hyperconservative Nukyali .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anti-Strange implies opposition, not just "absence of".
A Republican Hypernuclei, perhaps.
Better yet, maybe a Hyperconservative Nukyali.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373206</id>
	<title>Re:so what happens</title>
	<author>srealm</author>
	<datestamp>1267815360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ahhhh<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p><p>Thanks, I needed a geekgasm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ahhhh ....Thanks , I needed a geekgasm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ahhhh ....Thanks, I needed a geekgasm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375636</id>
	<title>Re:Honest question?</title>
	<author>sdpuppy</author>
	<datestamp>1267783920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons (positrons) are positive charge.

Except all your diodes and batteries would have to be put in backwards.</p></div><p>Ha ha.  But just in case someone has a "whoosh" moment to your post,  converting to antimatter nothing changes - the polarity of batteries would be reversed as well - "flow" of electricity would be caused by movements of positrons rather than electrons.
</p><p>
Diodes would not have to be reversed, since the polarity of holes and charge carriers would be reversed as well.
</p><p>
Everything on the macroscopic to microscopic level would be the same - until something comes in contact with matter and the party's over.</p><p>
(Although -  there is one rare particle decay that occurs with matter but works differently with anti-matter.  Need to look up that Feyman lecture...)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons ( positrons ) are positive charge .
Except all your diodes and batteries would have to be put in backwards.Ha ha .
But just in case someone has a " whoosh " moment to your post , converting to antimatter nothing changes - the polarity of batteries would be reversed as well - " flow " of electricity would be caused by movements of positrons rather than electrons .
Diodes would not have to be reversed , since the polarity of holes and charge carriers would be reversed as well .
Everything on the macroscopic to microscopic level would be the same - until something comes in contact with matter and the party 's over .
( Although - there is one rare particle decay that occurs with matter but works differently with anti-matter .
Need to look up that Feyman lecture... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons (positrons) are positive charge.
Except all your diodes and batteries would have to be put in backwards.Ha ha.
But just in case someone has a "whoosh" moment to your post,  converting to antimatter nothing changes - the polarity of batteries would be reversed as well - "flow" of electricity would be caused by movements of positrons rather than electrons.
Diodes would not have to be reversed, since the polarity of holes and charge carriers would be reversed as well.
Everything on the macroscopic to microscopic level would be the same - until something comes in contact with matter and the party's over.
(Although -  there is one rare particle decay that occurs with matter but works differently with anti-matter.
Need to look up that Feyman lecture...)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374676</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375080</id>
	<title>Nothing like an article written in Olde English</title>
	<author>Slutticus</author>
	<datestamp>1267780860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wont?
Boffins?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wont ?
Boffins ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wont?
Boffins?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596</id>
	<title>"Anti-strange"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267812420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wouldn't an Anti-Strange Hypernuclei just be a Normal Hypernuclei?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't an Anti-Strange Hypernuclei just be a Normal Hypernuclei ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't an Anti-Strange Hypernuclei just be a Normal Hypernuclei?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373228</id>
	<title>Mythbusters Episode!</title>
	<author>wiredog</author>
	<datestamp>1267815420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't they do that once?  Or was that the cement mixed one?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't they do that once ?
Or was that the cement mixed one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't they do that once?
Or was that the cement mixed one?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373478</id>
	<title>Re:"Anti-strange"?</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1267816560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Probably thats why is a new kind of matter: don't matter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably thats why is a new kind of matter : do n't matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably thats why is a new kind of matter: don't matter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374676</id>
	<title>Re:Honest question?</title>
	<author>mbstone</author>
	<datestamp>1267822140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If you had a world made of anti matter, everything should work the same.</i></p><p><i>All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons (positrons) are positive charge.</i></p><p>Except all your diodes and batteries would have to be put in backwards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you had a world made of anti matter , everything should work the same.All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons ( positrons ) are positive charge.Except all your diodes and batteries would have to be put in backwards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you had a world made of anti matter, everything should work the same.All electrical charges would be reversed - anti electrons (positrons) are positive charge.Except all your diodes and batteries would have to be put in backwards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374886</id>
	<title>Re:Has anyone noticed?</title>
	<author>MikTheUser</author>
	<datestamp>1267779960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's simple, really: We know about most of the matter that is common around here, which is matter that exists under the conditions that we have here.</p><p>Now, when we go ahead and try to create hitherto unknown forms of matter, we create extreme conditions not normally encountered around us. A way to do this that we understand fairly well is to create extreme pressures and extreme temperatures, as in RHIC collisions.</p><p>As it happens, those are the conditions inside collapsed stars, so when we discover new forms of matter this way, it's likely that it exist there, as well.</p><p> <i>Your friendly neighborhood hopefully-soon-to-be astrophysicist</i> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's simple , really : We know about most of the matter that is common around here , which is matter that exists under the conditions that we have here.Now , when we go ahead and try to create hitherto unknown forms of matter , we create extreme conditions not normally encountered around us .
A way to do this that we understand fairly well is to create extreme pressures and extreme temperatures , as in RHIC collisions.As it happens , those are the conditions inside collapsed stars , so when we discover new forms of matter this way , it 's likely that it exist there , as well .
Your friendly neighborhood hopefully-soon-to-be astrophysicist</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's simple, really: We know about most of the matter that is common around here, which is matter that exists under the conditions that we have here.Now, when we go ahead and try to create hitherto unknown forms of matter, we create extreme conditions not normally encountered around us.
A way to do this that we understand fairly well is to create extreme pressures and extreme temperatures, as in RHIC collisions.As it happens, those are the conditions inside collapsed stars, so when we discover new forms of matter this way, it's likely that it exist there, as well.
Your friendly neighborhood hopefully-soon-to-be astrophysicist </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373930</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading summary</title>
	<author>stillnotelf</author>
	<datestamp>1267818660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's not the only error in the summary - it also says the 'Z' axis is extended, which is wrong.  Z is number of protons.  They meant the 'S' axis (for strangeness) has now been extended in the negative direction.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not the only error in the summary - it also says the 'Z ' axis is extended , which is wrong .
Z is number of protons .
They meant the 'S ' axis ( for strangeness ) has now been extended in the negative direction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not the only error in the summary - it also says the 'Z' axis is extended, which is wrong.
Z is number of protons.
They meant the 'S' axis (for strangeness) has now been extended in the negative direction.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31380374</id>
	<title>Re:I hate you, Register.</title>
	<author>dotancohen</author>
	<datestamp>1267887420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A building analogy?!? Is that where one might park his car analogy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A building analogy ? ! ?
Is that where one might park his car analogy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A building analogy?!?
Is that where one might park his car analogy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373716</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375550</id>
	<title>anti-strange matter?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267783380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AHHH, you must mean familiar matter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AHHH , you must mean familiar matter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AHHH, you must mean familiar matter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373814</id>
	<title>Re:from the register's "helpful diagram":</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267818000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Atomsmash boffins</p></div><p>Make Atom Angry...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...AtomSmash!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Atomsmash boffinsMake Atom Angry... ...AtomSmash !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Atomsmash boffinsMake Atom Angry... ...AtomSmash!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560</id>
	<title>Re:so what happens</title>
	<author>Entropius</author>
	<datestamp>1267812180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.</p><p>Strange quarks behave just like down quarks (which are one of the two constituents of protons and neutrons). The only difference is that they have a higher mass.</p><p>Y'know how heavy water is just like light water, except one of the hydrogens is replaced with a deuterium atom? This stuff is similar, except one of the down quarks is swapped with a strange.</p><p>Unlike deuterium, though, these lambda baryons are unstable, because the strange quark is unstable. They can decay by the weak interaction (the same thing responsible for beta decay) into an up quark and a couple of leptons (electrons and neutrinos). The amount of time that weak decays take is very long compared to the time-scales involved in quark physics, but it's still very short compared to a second.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No.Strange quarks behave just like down quarks ( which are one of the two constituents of protons and neutrons ) .
The only difference is that they have a higher mass.Y'know how heavy water is just like light water , except one of the hydrogens is replaced with a deuterium atom ?
This stuff is similar , except one of the down quarks is swapped with a strange.Unlike deuterium , though , these lambda baryons are unstable , because the strange quark is unstable .
They can decay by the weak interaction ( the same thing responsible for beta decay ) into an up quark and a couple of leptons ( electrons and neutrinos ) .
The amount of time that weak decays take is very long compared to the time-scales involved in quark physics , but it 's still very short compared to a second .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.Strange quarks behave just like down quarks (which are one of the two constituents of protons and neutrons).
The only difference is that they have a higher mass.Y'know how heavy water is just like light water, except one of the hydrogens is replaced with a deuterium atom?
This stuff is similar, except one of the down quarks is swapped with a strange.Unlike deuterium, though, these lambda baryons are unstable, because the strange quark is unstable.
They can decay by the weak interaction (the same thing responsible for beta decay) into an up quark and a couple of leptons (electrons and neutrinos).
The amount of time that weak decays take is very long compared to the time-scales involved in quark physics, but it's still very short compared to a second.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376442</id>
	<title>Newtonian physics is underfunded!</title>
	<author>Dr. Evil</author>
	<datestamp>1267788600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All the funding goes towards supporting quantum physics and other derivatives of round earth theories!  The Roundies are corrupting the government and controlling your mind!  I can find dozens of economists, statisticians and marine biologiests who'll support me on this!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All the funding goes towards supporting quantum physics and other derivatives of round earth theories !
The Roundies are corrupting the government and controlling your mind !
I can find dozens of economists , statisticians and marine biologiests who 'll support me on this !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All the funding goes towards supporting quantum physics and other derivatives of round earth theories!
The Roundies are corrupting the government and controlling your mind!
I can find dozens of economists, statisticians and marine biologiests who'll support me on this!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372754</id>
	<title>It helps if you read Lewis Carroll.</title>
	<author>wiredog</author>
	<datestamp>1267813200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Preferably while tripping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Preferably while tripping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Preferably while tripping.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376456</id>
	<title>Re:I hate you, Register.</title>
	<author>jeff4747</author>
	<datestamp>1267788720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry.  This is Slashdot so your building analogy is just too confusing.  Perhaps if you used a car analogy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry .
This is Slashdot so your building analogy is just too confusing .
Perhaps if you used a car analogy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry.
This is Slashdot so your building analogy is just too confusing.
Perhaps if you used a car analogy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373716</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31377242</id>
	<title>Re:Honest question?</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1267794660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; Is anti-matter matter?<br><br>No, but matter isn't anti-matter either.<br><br>&gt; Could we build stuff out of it?<br><br>Sure, if by "stuff" you mean "the occasional short-lived antihydrogen nucleus".</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Is anti-matter matter ? No , but matter is n't anti-matter either. &gt; Could we build stuff out of it ? Sure , if by " stuff " you mean " the occasional short-lived antihydrogen nucleus " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Is anti-matter matter?No, but matter isn't anti-matter either.&gt; Could we build stuff out of it?Sure, if by "stuff" you mean "the occasional short-lived antihydrogen nucleus".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375410</id>
	<title>Re:Honest question?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267782600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it's like the electrical system of any British car then? Except it doesn't have to ground directly back to the battery (the bain of all vehicle British with short circuits!)...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it 's like the electrical system of any British car then ?
Except it does n't have to ground directly back to the battery ( the bain of all vehicle British with short circuits !
) .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it's like the electrical system of any British car then?
Except it doesn't have to ground directly back to the battery (the bain of all vehicle British with short circuits!
)...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373952</id>
	<title>Re:I hate you, Register.</title>
	<author>HiThere</author>
	<datestamp>1267818840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Something predicted by theory, but never seen before, has now been seen.</p><p>Current practical significance:  None, unless you are a quantum mechanic.</p><p>Current theoretical significance:  Chalk up another one that our theory got pretty much right.  Now we need to check the detailed predictions against what we measured.</p><p>This was all there to be read in the Register article, but the story was being presented in a humorous way.  (But not, I think, demeaning.  The article did poke a bit of fun as the way quarks are named...but the names are rather silly, even if there are reasonable historical reasons.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something predicted by theory , but never seen before , has now been seen.Current practical significance : None , unless you are a quantum mechanic.Current theoretical significance : Chalk up another one that our theory got pretty much right .
Now we need to check the detailed predictions against what we measured.This was all there to be read in the Register article , but the story was being presented in a humorous way .
( But not , I think , demeaning .
The article did poke a bit of fun as the way quarks are named...but the names are rather silly , even if there are reasonable historical reasons .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something predicted by theory, but never seen before, has now been seen.Current practical significance:  None, unless you are a quantum mechanic.Current theoretical significance:  Chalk up another one that our theory got pretty much right.
Now we need to check the detailed predictions against what we measured.This was all there to be read in the Register article, but the story was being presented in a humorous way.
(But not, I think, demeaning.
The article did poke a bit of fun as the way quarks are named...but the names are rather silly, even if there are reasonable historical reasons.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372812</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376856</id>
	<title>WOW!</title>
	<author>elnyka</author>
	<datestamp>1267791240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have no fucking clue what all of this means, but I still find it fascinating! Ohhh, uber-cool particle thingies! Shiniiieee!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no fucking clue what all of this means , but I still find it fascinating !
Ohhh , uber-cool particle thingies !
Shiniiieee !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no fucking clue what all of this means, but I still find it fascinating!
Ohhh, uber-cool particle thingies!
Shiniiieee!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373160</id>
	<title>Re:so what happens</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267815180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>What would be interesting is if there was some combination of nucleons which would make the particle with the strange quark stable.
<p>
For example, the half life of a free neutron is 10 minutes decay via the weak interaction, but when in a nucleus of appropriate configuration (any stable elements) it is stable.

</p><p>
Would would the properties of a atom containing a strange particle be like?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What would be interesting is if there was some combination of nucleons which would make the particle with the strange quark stable .
For example , the half life of a free neutron is 10 minutes decay via the weak interaction , but when in a nucleus of appropriate configuration ( any stable elements ) it is stable .
Would would the properties of a atom containing a strange particle be like ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What would be interesting is if there was some combination of nucleons which would make the particle with the strange quark stable.
For example, the half life of a free neutron is 10 minutes decay via the weak interaction, but when in a nucleus of appropriate configuration (any stable elements) it is stable.
Would would the properties of a atom containing a strange particle be like?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372458</id>
	<title>Make 'em at home</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267811700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hear you can make those at home just by microwaving a metal jiffy pop container.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear you can make those at home just by microwaving a metal jiffy pop container .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear you can make those at home just by microwaving a metal jiffy pop container.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372556</id>
	<title>RHIC as copy editor....</title>
	<author>fahrbot-bot</author>
	<datestamp>1267812120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Atomsmash boffins' reverse alchemy bizarro-stuff triumph.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I like The Register, but it seems all their article (sub)titles are generated in the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven as well...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Atomsmash boffins ' reverse alchemy bizarro-stuff triumph .
I like The Register , but it seems all their article ( sub ) titles are generated in the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven as well.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Atomsmash boffins' reverse alchemy bizarro-stuff triumph.
I like The Register, but it seems all their article (sub)titles are generated in the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven as well...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372628</id>
	<title>Kind of neat, but no new physics here</title>
	<author>Entropius</author>
	<datestamp>1267812660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've known for quite a while that this sort of thing is possible. All quarks have the exact same strong interactions, after all. This is like strontium displacing calcium in bones -- it's got the same valence structure, it has similar properties, and it's no surprise that it happens.</p><p>RHIC is a nifty machine for a lot of reasons. It provides an experimental counterpart to lattice QCD calculations of the equation of state of the quark-gluon plasma, which is the natural state of the universe at very high temperatures. But "OMG! An antistrange wound up in a bound state!" isn't why this machine is worthwhile, even if it does give El Reg something funny to write about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've known for quite a while that this sort of thing is possible .
All quarks have the exact same strong interactions , after all .
This is like strontium displacing calcium in bones -- it 's got the same valence structure , it has similar properties , and it 's no surprise that it happens.RHIC is a nifty machine for a lot of reasons .
It provides an experimental counterpart to lattice QCD calculations of the equation of state of the quark-gluon plasma , which is the natural state of the universe at very high temperatures .
But " OMG !
An antistrange wound up in a bound state !
" is n't why this machine is worthwhile , even if it does give El Reg something funny to write about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've known for quite a while that this sort of thing is possible.
All quarks have the exact same strong interactions, after all.
This is like strontium displacing calcium in bones -- it's got the same valence structure, it has similar properties, and it's no surprise that it happens.RHIC is a nifty machine for a lot of reasons.
It provides an experimental counterpart to lattice QCD calculations of the equation of state of the quark-gluon plasma, which is the natural state of the universe at very high temperatures.
But "OMG!
An antistrange wound up in a bound state!
" isn't why this machine is worthwhile, even if it does give El Reg something funny to write about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375966</id>
	<title>Re:Honest question?</title>
	<author>IICV</author>
	<datestamp>1267785600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>From a distance you would not know that world was made of antimatter, since properties would be the same. Electromagnetic wavelengths absorbed / emitted would be the same. Anti-Sodium would have the same yellow emission line as Sodium.</p></div></blockquote><p>Although I believe this is true, we are pretty sure that the observable universe contains a lot of matter and almost no anti-matter. Unfortunately I can't seem to find anything on how we tell them apart at the moment; it's probably something more exotic than emissions spectra - I would assume that anti-matter generates different EM radiation or something due to its different charge characteristics, but I don't know.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From a distance you would not know that world was made of antimatter , since properties would be the same .
Electromagnetic wavelengths absorbed / emitted would be the same .
Anti-Sodium would have the same yellow emission line as Sodium.Although I believe this is true , we are pretty sure that the observable universe contains a lot of matter and almost no anti-matter .
Unfortunately I ca n't seem to find anything on how we tell them apart at the moment ; it 's probably something more exotic than emissions spectra - I would assume that anti-matter generates different EM radiation or something due to its different charge characteristics , but I do n't know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a distance you would not know that world was made of antimatter, since properties would be the same.
Electromagnetic wavelengths absorbed / emitted would be the same.
Anti-Sodium would have the same yellow emission line as Sodium.Although I believe this is true, we are pretty sure that the observable universe contains a lot of matter and almost no anti-matter.
Unfortunately I can't seem to find anything on how we tell them apart at the moment; it's probably something more exotic than emissions spectra - I would assume that anti-matter generates different EM radiation or something due to its different charge characteristics, but I don't know.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374574</id>
	<title>Re:Negatively strange anti-hypernucleus?</title>
	<author>htdrifter</author>
	<datestamp>1267821600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years, haven't they?</p></div><p>I wonder about that too.<br>The tools of the trade are incredible.  They are also very expensive.<br>Has anything of practical value come out of this?<br>What's the return on this investment?<br>In our current economic mess, can we afford it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years , have n't they ? I wonder about that too.The tools of the trade are incredible .
They are also very expensive.Has anything of practical value come out of this ? What 's the return on this investment ? In our current economic mess , can we afford it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Particle physicists have basically been fucking with us for years, haven't they?I wonder about that too.The tools of the trade are incredible.
They are also very expensive.Has anything of practical value come out of this?What's the return on this investment?In our current economic mess, can we afford it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372490</id>
	<title>is this to be called unobtainium or bureaucracium?</title>
	<author>swschrad</author>
	<datestamp>1267811880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have, of course, discovered and documented both at work.  prior art does exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have , of course , discovered and documented both at work .
prior art does exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have, of course, discovered and documented both at work.
prior art does exist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372376</id>
	<title>heh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267811220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can follow stuff like this, but every time I hear it, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treknobabble" title="wikipedia.org">Treknobabble comes to mind.</a> [wikipedia.org]  Strange quarks, you say!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can follow stuff like this , but every time I hear it , Treknobabble comes to mind .
[ wikipedia.org ] Strange quarks , you say !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can follow stuff like this, but every time I hear it, Treknobabble comes to mind.
[wikipedia.org]  Strange quarks, you say!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31378360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31380410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31377242
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31380374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373108
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372726
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31378080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_163226_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373716
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31380374
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373578
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372484
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373564
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374574
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31378360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31380410
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372376
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31377242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374076
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31376224
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374676
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375636
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375410
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31375966
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372416
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372560
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373206
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373108
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373160
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31378080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372726
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31374886
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31372674
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_163226.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_163226.31373776
</commentlist>
</conversation>
