The generation of antiparticles is possible today, and even now an experiment is under construction where the force of gravity on antiprotons will be measured exactly. Physicists predict, through the mathematics of current theory, that the force of gravity will actually be greater than on normal matter. But they make this prediction without even professing to know what gravity is.
Let's take another look at this. Granted that electricity is an electron interaction, antielectricity would be a positron interaction, and electrons and positrons would attract and positrons would repel each other just like electrons. Even granted that magnetism is a result of a bipolar charge in motion, the result of antimagnetism on antimatter would be the same as magnetism on normal matter.
As an aside, there are a bunch of scientists that have been out looking for a "magnetic monopole" for decades. It seems to me they're as likely to find that as to find a stick with one end.
Now we come to gravity. We know that gravity is proportional to mass. We also know that mass is preportional to atomic number, and that boils down to the quantity of protons and neutrons in the nucleus. As neutrons are made of protons and electrons, and we may eliminate the electrons from gravitic theory (anyone ever hear of an electron star?), this leaves the proton as the sole responsible particle.
Antigravity, therefore, would have the same effect on antimatter as gravity does on normal matter. But what effect would antigravity have on normal matter? The results aren't in yet, but following the examples of other forces and oppositely charged particles, it would follow that what goes up may not come back down. Perhaps this discovery will get things off the ground a little faster.
Before subatomic particles are discussed, an implication of the above theory must be taken into consideration regarding the method of transfer for atomic charge and forces.
Atomic particles, being EM waves, would follow the physical laws of magnetic field intensity and field line influence. This puts the influence of the atom wave to infinity. Whereas it is true that a single atom exhibits virtually zero influence beyond its own electron wavelength, this phenomena changes with a very large group of atoms into situations where these can exert infleuence over increasingly larger distances. This is expecially so with the addition of the influence of outside energy forces such as in the subjects of electricity and magnetism.
In 1926 it was asked, what medium conveyed the EM electron waves? The medium is the EM force itself, and likewise the individual particle waves can act as a carrier to convey other EM forces across their fields of influence. So the conveyance of forces need not be directly by quantum energy wave packets such as photons and mesons.
As far as electrical energy, the photon has been described as the only particle capable of transferring electric charge, and as it transfers only negative charge, and as this is its form, the photon then can be seen to be the source of negative charge in normal matter.
Consider that magnetism and gravity alike may be transmitted between objects in space in the same manner as electrical voltage. The hotter an electron cathode becomes, the more EM energy is emitted in the form of heat and light. Finally the level of EM energy present in the interaction becomes so great that a current of electrons can visibly be seen to move from cathode to anode. In smaller reactions the force is still there, though in smaller amounts.
Gravity, as a proton-proton interaction, could be viewed as being the electricity of the nucleus. True, electricity is a very fluid and volatile substance, and there are differences in this analogy. First, the solidity of the nucleons is a thousand times greater. Second, nucleons are not as volatile as electrons. Thus gravity is more stable as a force, but that is not to say it can not be created in a similar manner to electric current!
Perhaps the force of gravity is carried by the proton-photon, the neutrino. Or perhaps there is another particle which carries gravity and magnetism as the high frequency counterpart of the electro-magnetic photon: a gravi-magnetic neutrino.
Finally, to identify particles capable of transferring positron and antiproton charges and forces, all that is needed is to redraw the field components with correct polarity and frequency and chart the new field patterns.
The question may arise such as, what is positive and negative spin? There is no evidence for this in the standing wave version of these particles, but there is plenty of evidence for what this is when the particle is converted to a moving EM wave.
As each particle is a standing wave, it has a moving wave counterpart. The x- ray is the moving counterpart of the electron. The "cosmic" ray is the moving counterpart of the proton as these high energy rays have a wavelength matching that of the proton.
Electromagnetic waves have a very definite structure. It can be seen that as it travels the wavefront follows a corkscrew path, or helix, as the electric and magnetic fields alternate one quarter cycle (90o or _/4) out of phase. It can also be seen that the helix moves in a clockwise direction toward the direction of motion. Every EM wave in the normal matter universe exhibits this same phenomena. This is caused by the fact that the electric component of the wave and the magnetic component of the wave act at right angles to each other and so are 90o out of phase. Charted in three dimensions, this field phase relationship results in the helix path for a moving particle. For a stationary particle, this creates the spin basis of the magnetic field structure.
Although it is unlikely that this packet of energy is in the shape of a spiral, this is only the shape that represents the field fluctuations in its path. The photon maintains a steady profile spinning with a right hand thread in its direction of motion as its fields maintain its existence.
In anti-matter particles, the phase relationship is reversed. Thus in anti- matter particles the magnetic fields are reversed and in anti-matter atoms the magnetic field orientation is reversed as well.
Electric charge has been described above as a property of spin, but the concept of spin is not descriptive enough. Even if it is only spin, the next question becomes, what is spinning? Assuming these particles are made of energy and are indivisible, it can be postulated that the one basic property of energy is pure motion. Based on this, electric charge would be, more exactly, a property of motion. More specifically, a property of spin path, this path being unique and non-symmetrical for each energy level provided for by the Pauli exclusion principle.
We could even go so far as to say that the natural orientation of the universe is a right hand thread. Consequently, an antimatter universe would consist not only of anti-matter and anti-gravity, but also anti-light and anti-radio waves and anti-magnetism with a left hand thread.
It could be concluded from this that light and radio experiments to produce EM waves with a "left hand thread" should be easily created.
It may have been noticed that the only particles that have not yet been discussed are subatomic particles. These are particles which are smaller than atomic particles. They include all other particles than those discussed.
All subatomic particles have lifetimes measured in the millionths or billionths of a second, and this says everything about them. These particles are not true entities, but merely smashed remnants of the real thing.
Subatomic particles occur only as by-products of atomic reactions. Of course they follow specific laws of motion and energy and so fall into recognizable sizes and patterns, but their lifetimes are so short that they hardly seem to deserve much notice at all. And considering that the particles they come from are actually energy waves, their composition reveals little more than we already know.
Up until the 20th century waves were defined wholly and only as a disturbance propagated through a medium. That meant that a wave was not something solid which was moving from one point to another, it was a force that was transmitted by a mechanical motion of particles pushing each other along. That is, a pressure wave, transmitted through something solid. It was simple. Ocean waves travelled through water. Sound waves travelled through air and water.
When it was discovered that light was a wave that could travel through a vacuum where there was no medium of transmission, no explanation was at hand. At least not until 1905 when Einstein came up with Special Relativity. This was an explanation of how EM waves could exist by themselves without a medium of transmission.
However, it was stated in Relativity theory that charged particles could not travel faster than the speed of the EM propagation without gaining infinite strength in its own forces.
Notice that nowhere does anyone question the nature of the speed of light. The question is, why does light travel as the speed of light? Why is 3 x 10 8 meters per second the top speed for an EM wave in a vacuum? How does a photon know how fast it is going? It has no ability to perceive, it has no speedometer, there should be no limiting factor.
The answer is that there is a limiting factor. It is stated that there is no medium of transmission for EM force, but that is false. The medium is the EM forces themselves. I will explain.
There is nowhere in space that is completely devoid of light or heat. No matter what the location is in this universe, there is some point of heat or light affecting it, and so there are EM waves.
Photons are stated as being both particles and waves, and they are both. The wave nature of the photon has been shown. It has proven to be a travelling wave packet, or you could say particle as even though it is not completely solid, its location is space is small and limited.
Or is it? How is it that when we are as far as 15 billion light years away from some galaxies that we can still see them, although very dimly, through telescopes? Is it possible for any body of energy to radiate enough particles of light to cover such an incredibly huge sphere of the universe 15 billion light years in radius? I doubt it.
Just as when waves are made in the water, so it appears that light waves are made in the electromagnetic sea of space. Smaller wavelengths create ripples within larger wavelengths, and because their range extends from infinitesimal to cosmic, these ripples expand out in all directions as far as they can go in the same manner as water waves. The universe is filled with EM radiation. You could even go so far as to say that light defines the boundaries of the universe.
This is the point. The speed of light through the medium of light itself has the limitation assigned by Einstein. The resistance of light itself is what slows light down to speed. But when placed in a vacuum devoid of any radiation of any kind, who is to say how fast light would go?
And so who is to say that, given sufficient energy, matter itself could not reach any speed at all? The problem becomes not one of outwitting Einstein's theories, but one of energy production and electromagnetic "aerodynamics".