-
Email An Imagineer
Blog Search
Loading...As reported in the April 27, 2009 NewScientist article "Where is all the antimatter?" one of the more perplexing unanswered questions in modern astrophysics is "Why is there more matter than anti-matter?".
|
The matter with antimatter
Dr. Tara Shears |
The Big Bang theory suggests that matter and antimatter should have been produced in equal quantities. Since collisions between matter and antimatter result in their mutual annihilation there should not be any ordinary matter, and its antimatter equivalent left in the universe. However, it is obvious this did not happen because no galaxies or intergalactic clouds of antimatter have yet been detected that have the ability to offset the observed quantity of matter in the universe. Therefore, it looks as if matter won out over antimatter.
"Why is there more matter that anti-matter in the universe?" can be understood if one views the universe in terms of four *spatial* dimensions instead of four-dimensional space-time as is being done in this blog and the paper The "Shadows" of four spatial dimensions.
The article "The causality of energy" Sept. 27, 2007 showed all forms of energy can be defined in terms of a displacement in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension. Additionally it has been shown it is possible to derive the "quantity" of mass in an object or particle terms of the magnitude of a displacement in a "surface" of that three-dimensional space manifold.
This means particle antiparticle annihilation would be definable in terms of the "upward" displacement in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold associated with an antiparticle "filling in" the equal but oppositely directed "downward" displacement associated with a particle.
The ability of a "surface" of a three-dimensional manifold to move bi-directionally ("upwards" of "downwards") with respect to a four *spatial* dimension allows one to define particle antiparticle annihilation in terms of its geometry. However, this is not possible in terms of the geometry of four-dimensional space-time because time is observed to move only in one direction forward. Therefore it is difficult to define particle antiparticle annihilation in terms of geometry of space-time because it does not allow the "surface" of three-dimensional space to move bi-directionally with respect to it.
As mentioned earlier the article "The causality of energy" showed the mass of a system can be defined in terms of a separation in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.
This indicates one could define the energy of particle antiparticle annihilation in terms of the absolute magnitude of the oppositely directed displacement their masses cause in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold. Therefore, the energy of their annihilation would be equal to the sum of the energy associated with their combined masses.
However, this definition also provides an explanation of the why there is more matter than antimatter in there universe.
As was mentioned earlier, mass can be defined in terms of displacement in a "surface" of a three-dimensional space manifold with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension. Therefore, the mass of a particle would be definable in terms of a "downward" displacement in that "surface" with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension while the mass of an antiparticle in terms of an "upward" displacement in that same surface.
But this indicates on average it would require less energy to form a particle than an antiparticle for the same reason that it takes less energy to fill a bucket with water by pushing it down below the surface of the water than it does by lifting the water into a bucket that is above its surface.
Therefore, there should be more particles than antiparticles left over after the big bang because it would take less energy to maintain the integrity of matter particle than an antimatter particle.
Later Jeff
Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2009
The content of your blog is interesting. Plenty of astrophysics stuff here. I’m quite fascinated although I prefer to do the numbers than read stories. Will be back here again.
Check out my blogs at
http://www.abassterinternational.blogspot.com/
I just updated them with new content.
Wishing you a happy day,
Abas.
Thanks for writing, I truly liked reading your most recent post. I think you should post more often, you obviously have natural ability for blogging!
Hello,
I like this subject. However I respectfully and absolutely do not agree with you to make conclusion based on this statement, “because no galaxies or intergalactic clouds of antimatter have yet been detected that have the ability to offset the observed quantity of matter in the universe. ” I disagree because this is an unknowable assertion. The truth is we possess no method of directly testing the composition of distant galaxies.
The hot new cosmologic model, the Dominium, it is deductively shown that matter and antimatter twins of one another. Antihydrogen has been synthesized by scientists at CERN. If they succeed in mapping antihydrogen’s spectral signature and if that signature perfectly matches common mass-based hydrogen, then it would be near impossible to look up into the Earth’s sky and know with any degree of certainty which galaxy was composed of matter and which antimatter. The antimatter one’s would be organized in a similar fashion as our own, but equivalent antimatter reactions would be going on. For example, four antihydrogen=1 atoms antifuse to form one antihelium=4 and two electrons. In such cases it would be expected that the resulting photons would be exactly the same frequency, wavelength, and speed as photons made in common fuse.
See the whole model as it is unfolded and debated at: http://hypography.com/forums/alternative-theories/18910-the-dominium-model-by-hasanuddin.html And please join in.
Hasanuddin
Correct there is no way we can directly test if galaxies are composed of matter or anti matter. However we can verify all observable ones are made out of same type of matter because they all share a common gravitational property.
However if the gravitational forces of matter and antimatter are repulsive as you suggested at http://hypography.com/forums/alternative-theories/18910-the-dominium-model-by-hasanuddin-2.html (“Test of the Dominium premise that you yourself defined gravitational repulsion between matter and antimatter)
we should see the gravitational effects of this repulsion in the movement of an antimatter galaxies when it interacts with those made up of matter. However all observable galaxies appear to share a common link in a gravitational attractive forces associated with their mass. If they did not it would be detectable by their relative motion with respect to each other. Therefore we can conclud that all observable galaxies are made up of the same type of matter.
Jeff
Excellent site, keep up the good work