I'm currently working on a Sci-Fi story. Many of the super-materials in my story are composed of "Neo-Matter".

List of Neo-Matter particles: Up-Neotron, Down-Neotron

Neo Matter is essentially like regular matter except with a few unique traits

1: Neo Matter can interact with particles that cannot interact electromagnetically (ie. Neutrons, Neutrinos)

2: all Neo Matter particles have a neutral charge and are their own antiparticle

3: Neo Matter particles have the half life of a neutron.

4: Neotrons are the smallest unit of Neo-Matter and cannot be divided into anything smaller.

5: Neotrons are as big as neutrons.

6: Neotron atoms do NOT contain electrons

My question being... Is it possible to scientifically explain "Neo-Matter" and if not... what can I change to make it scientifically explainable?

Note: If Neo-Matter IS scientifically explainable then could you explain how Neo-Matter Molecules could form?

Note: the ONLY force Neo Matter interacts with is Gravity

http://www.orionsarm.com/xcms.php?r=oaeg-view-article&egart_uid=48630634d2591 If you want an example of something similar here you go.

  • $\begingroup$ Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 9, 2017 at 15:17
  • $\begingroup$ Ack.... this is so.... weird >.>" Your restrictions make your neo-matter basically useless as dark matter. You can't build super materials with it since the "super" part of super-materials depends on lots of different interactions. Since you're restricted to gravity, your neo-stuff would just sit there in space doing nothing at all. $\endgroup$
    – Mermaker
    Commented Jan 10, 2017 at 17:58
  • $\begingroup$ Really, you should really, really improve your physics knowledge before pushing up anything like this. This blew up my suspension of disbelief faster than a Twilight main character. $\endgroup$
    – Mermaker
    Commented Jan 10, 2017 at 17:59
  • $\begingroup$ NO. NEVER BRING UP THAT ABOMINATION OF A BOOK (but I get your point, I will try to brush up on my physics) $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 13, 2017 at 2:05

5 Answers 5


I'm going to run through your list of points and see what happens:

  1. Fine. Has to interact via either gravity, strong or weak
  2. Fine. $0$ charge (no electromagnetic interaction), integer spin (are bosons). Think Higgs Boson, photons, gravitons etc. ('force-carriers').
  3. "Neo Matter particles have the half life of a neutron". "Up Neotrons have a slightly longer half life (by 15 minutes)" (from comments). I'm afraid you've just contradicted yourself. The half-life of a (free) neutron is just over $10$ minutes. The half-life of a particle comes from the possible decays of that particle
  4. Contradicts 3 - if a particle can't decay, then it can't have a half-life (half-life is infinite)
  5. "Big as neutrons" contradicts 4 as 'having size' implies 'consists of other particles'. However, this can be adapted to mean that the Compton wavelength is that of a neutron (change as you wish - $\lambda = \frac{h}{mc}$ ), so by definition, is also the mass of a neutron, which is fine
  6. Have $0$ charge, so fine

Ah. Only interacts via gravity. Including that it is a boson satisfies 1 and 2.

Now, I'm going to say that your best bet is either to change "cannot be divided into anything smaller" into "cannot be divided into other neo-matter particles" (they could perhaps decay into gravitons, although if they have the same mass, they'd have the same half-life) or get rid of statement 3 altogether.

As the only interaction is gravity, placing 2 of these particles really close to each other (with no acceleration) will automatically cause them to come together to 'form' an atom (more like a binary orbiting system) - molecules form by complex arrangements of this - if you've got, say 1000 clumped 'together' (extremely close), then other clumps of smaller (say 10) would 'orbit' and you have a molecule of a sort.


Essentially, the gist is that they're fundamental bosons that only interact by gravity, which is an attractive force. If you want them to be different (they have different names, so have to be different in some way), you could give them different masses, which would also give them different decay times. They could possibly decay into gravitons if the conditions are right.

Edit to answer questions from comments:

The properties are: they have a mass and integer spin (are bosons) and only interact by gravity. This means that the wavefunction of the 'particles' can overlap with no repulsive force, allowing for an atomic 'nucleus' with essentially arbitrary density (depends on the number of up/down neotrons in the nucleus). Outside this, other up/down neotrons (or combinations thereof) will do the quantum version of orbiting this. There's no reason that neotron atoms couldn't be combined with regular atoms as they don't experience repulsive forces, although they'll still have a temperature and so can decay from molecules and atoms back into up/down neotrons. I don't know much about it, but you could potentially get away with using this as dark matter or something similar.

This all also means that the binding energy is given by the gravitational binding energy $\frac{3GM^2}{5R}$ ($M$ is mass of molecule, $m$ is mass of up/down neotron) and intermolecular forces are just that of gravity: $F = \frac{GM_1M_2}{r}$. The interesting bit is that below a critical temperature of $\sim 3.125\frac{\hbar^2}{mk_B}n^{\frac{2}{3}}$ ($n$ is the number of up/down neotrons 'clumped' together), they would (presumably) form a Bose-Einstein Condensate (BEC) that would (presumably) allow us to probe quantum gravity (if only they existed!). As such what happens if a BEC is formed is anyone's guess. Using $M \approx nm$ can be used to give you the approximate amount of energy needed to break apart a neotron molecule (energy required to break apart $\sim$ gravitational binding energy, although it won't be exact as there will be gaps between 'clumps' of particles, which will also be 'orbiting' in some quantum sense of the word, so the actual value will be less than that calculated.)

Interactions: again, the force between a neotron molecule of mass $M_1$ and anything else of mass $M_2$ is $F = \frac{GM_1M_2}{r}$, which is the non electromagnetic interaction. Interactions on the level of quantum field theory (QFT) are completely unknown as it would involve a quantum theory of gravity. However, the world that this exists in could have a quantum theory of gravity (see bit above about BECs), so if you want QFT-level interactions, the best bet would probably to handwave a bit, unless you want to learn string theory or loop quantum gravity or something and use one of those, although decaying into gravitons does seem reasonable to my mind. If you just want classical interactions, then all that matters is $F = \frac{GM_1M_2}{r}$

  • $\begingroup$ this answer is AMAZING! you managed to take my mess of a question and produce a viable answer than explains everything! $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 8, 2017 at 4:41
  • $\begingroup$ quick question? what properties would a Neo Matter atom have? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 8, 2017 at 4:44
  • $\begingroup$ also.. How strong would a Neo Matter Molecule be? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 8, 2017 at 4:55
  • $\begingroup$ and if possible could you explain Neo Matter's ability to interact with particles that don't interact with the electromagnetic force? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 8, 2017 at 16:09
  • $\begingroup$ @AnAspiringAuthor I've edited the question to answer your comments. For some reason, it reminds me of dark matter - it doesn't interact with anything except through gravity (so is even invisible). If you want a molecule to be stronger, move all the components close together (decreasing $R$) and make it as heavy as is reasonable for a molecule $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 8, 2017 at 19:15


Okay so the main issue with having particles that only interact gravitationally is that they won't form complex structures similar to atoms, let alone molecules. These neo-particles would only clump together(with each other and with any other massive particles). Honestly there is no possible method you've given us to use. Their interactions are far too limited. They would actually behave very closely to how dark matter is believed to behave (dark matter btw, is not believed to form any complex structures).

It seems to me as if these neo-particles do interact with a new handwavium force that causes them to bond. If this is not the case, then your answer is no.

You cannot form chemistry with neo-matter(atleast in the way you described it).

  • $\begingroup$ You could introduce a neo-nuclear force which binds them together? $\endgroup$
    – Innovine
    Commented Jan 7, 2017 at 23:22
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah I asked about that. However a neo-nuclear force, wouldn't actually require any explanation. The neo-particles would interact with each other through the neo-nuclear force which just would cause them to bond in complex ways permitting the existance of neo-chemistry. Nobody can explain why this force would behave that way. We don't even know why actual forces behave the way they do. So, basically this is handwaving(which is fine, but you can't expect a scientific explanation for something that just doesn't exist in any way shape or form). $\endgroup$
    – AngelPray
    Commented Jan 7, 2017 at 23:25

Your Neo-Matter is useless.

What you are describing is essentially an analogue to neutron matter which is only susceptible to gravity and strong interaction.

Which means that the only way to aggregate them together (remember, no electrons) is the strong force which causes them clump directly together. This results in neutron matter density which is 100 000 000 000 000 000 more dense than the densest material on earth.

This means that once some molecules aggregated, they will sinking by gravity. During the sinking they will pass easily through hands, steel, titanium, diamond and osmium. Having no charge and not reacting to electromagnetic interaction they cannot be controlled by the strongest fields either. So once neo-matter is produced, it sinks to the core of the planet were they are produced. Hollowing the planet out (more likely an asteroid) does not help, they will simply oscillate between the production point and the point on the other side of the asteroid, happily ignoring everything you are using to slow them down or binding irrevocably with normal matter neutrons.

So it is useless.

  • $\begingroup$ This is the correct answer! $\endgroup$
    – Mermaker
    Commented Jan 10, 2017 at 18:00

Based on the arguments of Thorsten S., I see only one possible use of Neo-matter: Gravitational ballast.

For example, if they want to build a gravitationally contained stationary fusion reactor (in space, of course), but without using up the mass of a star, they may place a superdense Neo-matter sphere in its core. It won't take lot of volume, but will hold he ministar together against light pressure and heat.

Or they might fire a Neo-matter slug on a planet, forcing it off-orbit, or might even triggering it's gravitational collapse into a more dense, inhabitable equilibrium. (If the Neomass involved is high enough.)

But the manipulation of Neo-matter will be extremly complicated. If it interacts with strong interaction, they may bond it with ordinary, charged particles, to enable its electromagnetic manipulation, otherwise moving it will require to place the Neo-matter on orbit around some ordinary mass, and then slowly toss this mass around. Looks like, the using of Neo-matter would cause more problems, and require more assumptions, than the benefit of it would be.


One unanswered question is why we haven't already seem these particles.

One of the experiments they do with particle accelerators is to smash particles and anti-particles together at high and opposite speeds.

A collision of this sort can produce anything up to the energy supplied, subject to certain conservation laws.

These laws state that electric charge, spin and other quantities must add up to the same numbers before and after the collision. This can include new and currently unknown quantities like "neo-ness"

The point of using particles and anti-particles is that these sums start out as zero, one particle's positive charge is canceled by the other particle's negative charge and so on. This is the very definition of anti-particle.

One can get zero after the collision by producing particles and anti-particles in pairs. And you can do this with any particle and its anti-particle. (The question stated that these particles are their own anti-particles, which mean they definitely have anti-particles)

So, if there exists a particle with the same mass as a neutron, they would pop up regularly in these collisions. And with the long half-life, we would certainly see them before they disappeared. Or rather, since they don't interact much, we would see energy disappearing from the system, much like when the neutrinos were first predicted.

We haven't seen any such particles. It seems very likely that they don't exist.

One possibility is that they are much heavier than neutrons. I don't know the range of these experiments, but they have already discovered the Higgs boson at 133 neutron masses. Your particles would have to be heavier than that.

  • $\begingroup$ Collider experiments can not produce anything without restrictions. Some basic laws, most notably the other conversation principles (charge, impulse, quantum numbers like lepton and barion number) must be followed. If, for example, Neo-number would be an additive quantum number, which have to be conservated too, and Antineo-matter wouldn't exist, no neomatter could be created from matter. (I'm not claiming that neomatter is possible, just, that colliders can't completely rule it out, just like they can't dark matter.) $\endgroup$
    – b.Lorenz
    Commented Jan 10, 2017 at 16:40
  • $\begingroup$ Edited to address @b.Lorenz' comment. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 11, 2017 at 9:54
  • $\begingroup$ The type of the collision does not matter, but since it's explicitly stated in the question, that neo-particles are their own antiparticles, you have right by every type of sufficiently energetic collision. (Just like by photons, which can be created in any quantity.) Should I delete my comment? $\endgroup$
    – b.Lorenz
    Commented Jan 11, 2017 at 11:44

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .