I’ll start off by noting that papers on the arxiv aren’t published, they are generally preprints of papers that the author intends to publish in a journal elsewhere. (Sometimes this doesn’t happen and the arxiv is as far as they get).

The arxiv does have some rules to get a paper posted but they are only intended to prevent spam and complete gibberish.

arXiv requires you be endorsed/recognized as a member of the scientific community with like a college email or written recommendation by someone already known.

This is true - though just having a college/university email address is enough to meet the requirement.

Then whenever I look at the papers on arxiv they always look a very specific way I cant get with libreoffice writer. Theres apparently a whole bunch of rules on formatting and font and style and this and that.

As others have said papers on the arxiv are generally written using Latex, a typesetting language. The formatting comes automatically. It has a bit of a learning curve but it’s not too bad, and there are plenty of examples out there. Figuring out how to get something done in latex is something that LLMs are generally good at too (I don’t recommend their use in general, but solving specific formatting issues is helpful with them).

It’s overwhelming and kind of scary.

Welcome to the world of publishing and sharing your ideas! I wouldn’t get too hung up on formatting your paper yet - that’s generally the last step before publishing anyway. I second the other recommendation to try to get feedback from someone in academia who has the relevant expertise. If you’re concerned about your ideas being stolen, you can try to have your current paper saved somewhere with a time stamp.

Honestly though if you wind up emailing it to someone, then you have the sent email as proof. Getting caught stealing someone else’s work generally would be career ending for a professor, and it would be pretty easy for you to prove and file a formal complaint with their institution.

The hardest part is going to be getting someone to take the time to read what you prepared. Focus on having a short and descriptive abstract, and maybe a slightly longer summary of the paper. Then have what you’ve already written, without trying to reformat it.

Good luck!

Antimatter interacts with regular matter in more ways than just annihilation. Annihilation just happens to be a process that’s uniquely available to antiparticles and has a high probability of occurring. This is because antiparticles have both opposite electric charges to standard particles and opposite color charge, so annihilation between particle/anti particle pairs conserves these quantities.

It’s unlikely that there’s an anti-matter equivalent of dark matter. If there was, we’d expect to see annihilation radiation, such as the 511 keV photons emitted when positron+electron pairs annihilate.

Yep. In fact there’s a process called inverse Compton scattering that essentially works this way. In ordinary Compton scattering, a photon scatters off a stationary electron and typically leaves with less energy (since the electron gets a kinetic kick). In inverse Compton scattering, a photon collides with a moving electron which can cause the photon to gain energy.

One application of this is to produce gamma-ray beams. You take a beam of light (often from a laser) and collide it head on with a beam of relativistic electrons traveling in the opposite direction. In the electron rest frame, the photon has gamma-ray energy, while in the lab frame it might only be visible light. The back-scattered photon can then be boosted to the gamma regime in the lab frame, and now you’ve got a gamma-ray beam.

Neutron stars are the most compact form of matter that we know about; they’re even denser than the nucleus of an atom.

Neutrons, protons and electrons are fermions, meaning they must obey the Pauli exclusion principle. No two neutrons (or protons or electrons) can be in the same quantum mechanical state. If you take ordinary star matter (plasma made of dissociated protons and electrons) and squeeze it, eventually the electrons will nearly overlap in their states. You’d have two electrons with nearly the same energy, spin and location. They cannot overlap though, so this creates a repulsive force that prevents the matter from further compression; this is called the electron degeneracy pressure.

If the compressive force overcomes this pressure, then the electrons can capture on the protons to form neutrons. Neutrons and protons also have degeneracy pressures, but they can be packed much more densely than electrons. This is because their wavelength is shorter. The wavelength of a massive particle is inversely proportional to its mass, and protons and electrons are about 2000 times the mass of electrons. So compressed ordinary matter will inevitably become pure neutrons, simply because this is the most compact form.

A pure electron or pure proton star wouldn’t be as compact because both are charged particles so there would be Coulomb repulsion (this isn’t an issue in ordinary matter since the number of electrons and protons is roughly equal). You’d also need to somehow separate the electrons from the protons, and this isn’t a process that would naturally occur in a collapsing star.

The Milwaukee Protocol is a treatment plan that is essentially a more advanced version of what you’re asking. The patient is put in a medically induced coma and then given antivirals and IV fluids, which avoids the issue of hydrophobia.

It got a lot of press because one person survived on it (a big deal given that rabies is a death sentence once symptoms appear) but this success hasn’t been reproduced with other patients. A paper on the protocol has a remarkably blunt title: Critical Appraisal of the Milwaukee Protocol for Rabies: This Failed Approach Should Be Abandoned.