The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Why is the universe asymmetrical  (Read 28866 times)

lyner

  • Guest
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #25 on: 15/11/2008 15:32:18 »
I don't really want to be part of the 'angels on a pinhead' discussion but I would point out, DrB, that you can have both positive and negative curvature. This will, when driving a car, for instance, 'push you' left or right in your seat, depending on the curvature of the road.
 

Online yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12000
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #26 on: 15/11/2008 17:07:27 »
not necessarily DB, draw a circle, everything inside that circle we call 'our' universe.
Now spray it lightly with our NEW waterproof improved formula 'AntiGravity 2008'.
Harken and quail as this circle just opens up and then close itself but now symmetrically turned around.
Before you start arguing about 2D contra 3D i just want to point out that this new cosmological model of mine is thought to happen in an infinite plan of small planes in 2D.
(And yes, by using times arrow inside those planes, superimposed on each other, you could almost swear to that it was 3D (+ time))
QED!
« Last Edit: 15/11/2008 17:11:45 by yor_on »
 

lyner

  • Guest
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #27 on: 15/11/2008 17:10:38 »
Interesting until we got to the "QED" bit;)
 

Online yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12000
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #28 on: 15/11/2008 17:14:32 »
?
It's latin..

(Isn't it?)
And I'm pretty sure it means, I came, I saw, I suggested?
Or something to that matter?
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #29 on: 15/11/2008 17:33:56 »
Hi, All

I like this simple explanation

In the early 1970s Kobayashi and Maskawa put forward an explanation of why the P symmetry and the C symmetry together should break down. In so doing, they took up some early ideas by the eminent Russian physicist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Andrei Sakharov to predict that the tiny imbalance in the mirror and charge symmetries could allow the amount of matter in the universe to exceed the amount of antimatter.

Whenever a proton meets an antiproton there is an explosion, Sakharov claimed, a mutual annihilation. If there were a "billion antiprotons" and a "billion and one protons", only that one extra proton would survive the destruction. Only the tiny surplus of matter over antimatter is what is around today. So you could say that the existence of ordinary stars, our planet, and ourselves, is due to nature's preference for matter. And this in turn depends crucially on the tiny asymmetry at the heart of

Of course if the reverse happened the universe would be a asymmetrical antimatter universe (Alan's comment)

 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #30 on: 15/11/2008 18:01:31 »
Just another thought about anti-gravity...

If anti-gravity acts as a repulsive force, will this have the opposite effect to time dilation?  That is, the rate of time is highest for an infinitely distant observer where the gravitational field is infinitely small and this could be considered to be the base-line rate of time.  The actual rate of time in the universe will always be lower than the base-line rate of time because the gravitational field everywhere in the observable universe is greater than infinitely small.  However, if anti-gravity increases the rate of time, then as one approached an anti-matter black hole, time would pass more quickly and you'd start getting some very weird energy results.

I knew there was something bugging me about that and it's just clicked.

Gravitational time dilation is due to the curvature of spacetime. The greater the curvature, the greater the dilation. Gravity produces that curvature. So antigravity would produce anticurvature. And what is anti-curvature? It's flat. In flat spacetime there is no time dilation.

HA... get out of that 1!


Umm...  I would get out of that by saying that anti-curvature is not the same as flatness, which is zero curvature ;D

In mathematical terms, you're claiming that the anti-value of any +ve number is zero, are you not?
 

lyner

  • Guest
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #31 on: 15/11/2008 18:51:14 »
?
It's latin..

(Isn't it?)
And I'm pretty sure it means, I came, I saw, I suggested?
Or something to that matter?
It's just that QED (Quod erat demonstrandum) means 'Which was to be proved / demonstrated' and nothing was proved.
 

Online yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12000
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #32 on: 15/11/2008 19:23:45 »

Come on, it will grow on you SC.
I had all the difficult words spelled right, right?
And I was just preparing it for that EU-grant...

Not that I care though.
I have many more fine ideas where that came from?
I hope??

Back to the drawing board:)
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #33 on: 15/11/2008 19:33:53 »

yor_on 


Quote
Come on, it will grow on you SC.
I had all the difficult words spelled right, right?
And I was just preparing it for that EU-grant...

Not that I care though.
I have many more fine ideas where that came from?
I hope??

Back to the drawing board:)

What?? Original thinking?
 

Online yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12000
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #34 on: 15/11/2008 20:09:50 »
Wish I knew?
Any way, thanks for your comments:)
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #35 on: 15/11/2008 20:30:19 »
I don't really want to be part of the 'angels on a pinhead' discussion but I would point out, DrB, that you can have both positive and negative curvature.

I am aware of that; but they are both curvatures. They are not anti-curvatures.


Quote
not necessarily DB, draw a circle, everything inside that circle we call 'our' universe.
Now spray it lightly with our NEW waterproof improved formula 'AntiGravity 2008'.
Harken and quail as this circle just opens up and then close itself but now symmetrically turned around.


I can't reply to that yet as I'm not sure what you mean by "just opens up and then close itself but now symmetrically turned around". Do you mean it turns itself inside-out?
 

lyner

  • Guest
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #36 on: 15/11/2008 21:51:59 »
Quote
They are not anti-curvatures.
You would need to define that term- perhaps in the form of differential calculus, to avoid confusion.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #37 on: 16/11/2008 03:34:00 »
Quote
They are not anti-curvatures.
You would need to define that term- perhaps in the form of differential calculus, to avoid confusion.

I don't need to resort to calculus. Anti means "the opposite of". If you want the opposite of a curve you can't just curve the other way as that is still a curve. The only possible opposite of a curve is flat or straight.
 

lyner

  • Guest
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #38 on: 16/11/2008 22:43:27 »
No, that isn't rigorous enough.
Curvature has a SIGN or can be Zero.
You must be discussing something different which you'd need to define and develop to establish its validity.
I suppose you could talk about the distinction between 'closed' or 'symmetrical' curvature (as in a paraboloid) where the signs of the curvature are all the same or 'saddle' types of curvature where the signs are not all the same. These geometrical ideas are used in cosmological models.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #39 on: 17/11/2008 13:15:02 »
No, that isn't rigorous enough.
Curvature has a SIGN or can be Zero.
You must be discussing something different which you'd need to define and develop to establish its validity.
I suppose you could talk about the distinction between 'closed' or 'symmetrical' curvature (as in a paraboloid) where the signs of the curvature are all the same or 'saddle' types of curvature where the signs are not all the same. These geometrical ideas are used in cosmological models.


Is this rigorous enough...

OK, I'll go away and have another think.
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #40 on: 17/11/2008 18:11:52 »
I think I agree with Sophie in that it comes down to the definition of 'anti' and 'opposite' and there are actually several different solutions depending on how you look at it.

The two easiest solutions just depend upon the interpretation of zero.

If I give you a bag of apples, you then have some apples, which would be the opposite of having no apples, but if I give you four apples it would not be the opposite of zero apples because this would also apply to three or five apples, or indeed any number of apples, and we end up with zero being the opposite to every number.  It comes down to how we treat zero.  If zero is treated as a number then the opposite of n cannot be zero, but if zero is treated as the absence of a number then it works.

But another way of looking at the issue is to define exactly what an anti-apple is.  I suspect that most people would probably say that an anti-apple would be an apple made out of anti-matter, but would this really be the opposite of an apple because it would still be an apple, albeit one made out of anti-matter?  An alternative way of defining an anti-apple would be to say that an anti-apple is anything that is not exactly an apple, which could be expressed as

  anti-n = set(infinity) - element(n)

And related to that definition is the one that says an anti-apple is anything that has zero apple-like qualities, but this then needs all qualities that might be regarded as apple-like to be identified.  Mathematically, this is rather like looking at prime numbers.
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #41 on: 18/11/2008 08:42:29 »
Lee

Where would a rotten apple fit into your suggestion?  ;) ;D

An interesting suggestion, however.

Alan
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #42 on: 18/11/2008 08:54:27 »
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20040703232813data_trunc_sys.shtml

4 August 2004
Dramatic Assymetrical Matter, Antimatter Decay Observed
by Kate Melville
Physicists believe that when the universe began, matter and antimatter were present in equal amounts. But all observations indicate that the universe is made only of matter, so one of the big questions that physicists want to answer is "what happened to the antimatter?"

Physicists conducting the BaBar (B and B-Bar) experiment at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) yesterday announced exciting new results demonstrating a dramatic difference in the behavior of matter and antimatter. The results have been submitted to the Physical Review Letters journal.
SLAC's PEP-II accelerator collides electrons and their antimatter counterparts, positrons, to produce an abundance of exotic heavy particle and anti-particle pairs known as B and anti-B mesons. These rare forms of matter and antimatter are short-lived, decaying in turn to other lighter subatomic particles, such as kaons and pions.

"If there were no difference between matter and antimatter, both the B meson and the anti-B meson would exhibit exactly the same pattern of decays. However, our new measurement shows an example of a large difference in decay rates instead," said BaBar spokesman Marcello Giorgi.

By sifting through the decays of more than 200 million pairs of B and anti-B mesons, BaBar experimenters have discovered striking matter-antimatter asymmetry. "We found 910 examples of the B meson decaying to a kaon and a pion, but only 696 examples for the anti-B mesons," Giorgi said.

While BaBar and other experiments have observed matter-antimatter asymmetries before, this is the first instance in B decays of a difference obtained by simply counting up the number of matter and antimatter decays, a phenomenon known as direct charge parity (CP) violation. "We have observed a clear, strong signal for asymmetrical behavior of matter and antimatter resulting from the direct CP violation mechanism," said James Olsen, one of the leaders of the analysis.

The new observation of a 13 percent preference for the B meson over the anti-B meson dwarfs a similar effect observed in kaons at only a tiny rate of 4 parts in a million. "The effect we have measured with B mesons is roughly 100,000 times stronger than for kaons," Olsen said. "The pattern of different types of matter-antimatter asymmetries is starting to come together into a coherent picture."

Physicists speculate that subtle differences between the behavior of matter and antimatter must be responsible for the matter-antimatter imbalance that developed in our universe. But current knowledge of these differences is incomplete and insufficient to account for the observed matter domination. CP violation is one of the three conditions outlined by Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov to account for the observed imbalance of matter and antimatter in the universe.

"The new measurement is very much a result of the outstanding performance of SLAC's PEP-II accelerator and the efficiency of the BABAR detector," Giorgi said. "The accelerator is now operating at 3 times its design performance and BaBar is able to record about 98 percent of collisions."
"The observation of the direct CP violation effect in B decays is a significant step forward in assembling the pieces of the puzzle of matter versus antimatter," said SLAC Director Jonathan Dorfan.


 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #43 on: 18/11/2008 09:04:59 »
Here is another view on the topic



A weird but serious solution for the Schrdingers Cat paradox

To be objective as possible to describe this new solution as clear as possible about double anti-universes at a distance (CPT symmetric) idea, related to my solution on Schrdingers Cat paradox, I use here the Wikipedia description of: three phenomena:

In the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, a system stops being a superposition of states and becomes either one or the other when an observation or measurement takes place. This experiment makes apparent the fact that the nature of measurement, or observation, is not well defined in this interpretation.
Broadly stated, a quantum superposition is the combination of all the possible states of a system (at least two, for example, the possible positions of a subatomic particle). The Copenhagen interpretation implies that the superposition only undergoes collapse into a definite state at the exact moment of quantum measurement

Schrdinger''s cat is a thought experiment, often described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrdinger in 1935. It illustrates what he saw as the problem of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics being applied to everyday objects. The thought experiment presents a cat that might be alive or dead, depending on an earlier random event. In the course of developing this experiment, he coined the term Verschrnkung (entanglement).

Quantum entanglement is a quantum mechanical phenomenon in which the quantum states of two or more objects are linked together so that one object can no longer be adequately described without full mention of its counterpart  even though the individual objects may be spatially separated. This interconnection leads to correlations between observable physical properties of remote systems. For example, quantum mechanics holds that states such as spin are indeterminate until such time as some physical intervention is made to measure the spin of the object in question.

My proposal for Schrdinger''s Cat is not that the Cat remains in a superposition of states before somebody is looking into the box, but the universe itself is constantly ,"looking" by entanglement of anti-copy particles located at a long distance away from each other.

This is very hard to understand, not because the Big bang and the universe should be fully symmetrical, but  we have to introduce the idea that there is a TIMELESS information exchange between these copy particles.
Secondly it is very hard to accept the idea that WE HUMANS ARE NOT UNIQUE AND HAVE TO CONQUER CONTINUOUSLY by entanglement WITH OUR COPY EGOS living inside an other universe far away, .

See also:
http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2006/03/max-tegmark-john-cramer-and-aphorisms.html
http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2007/03/backreaction-lee-smolins-trouble-with.html
http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2007/02/contents.html
 

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3345
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #44 on: 18/11/2008 09:33:23 »
Alan McDougall  The 9:04 copy posting on shrodingers cat looks seriously nutty and following my earlier comments about cut andpaste postings on other topics I am reporting you to the moderators.
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #45 on: 18/11/2008 10:23:40 »
no comment did you not see the links below??????????????? the post open your eyes

And this comment nutty be it may was from a friend of mine from another forum and here is the link and dialogue

Hello Alan McDougall

JAaronNicholson has posted to the Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated board that you requested notification on. Regarding the subject - Why I disagree with  static eternal universe.

The thing about entropy that I see is that only things that have first been built up in some way can be in a position were they can then fall apart or back to the energy level that they started at.  Things can only return to a previously less structured or less hot state after having been artificially or by "divine-design" first been built up or structured or caused into existence from neutral raw elements and raw energies. 

There is a flow back and forth--in one direction, perhaps by design--in the other direction maybe not by any particular design, just a relaxing of the original "intent" and the sand castle is washed back to a flat surface by the ocean''s incoming tide.

I have to go with no Big Bang, also.  "Deaths and births" whether of humans or stars or galaxies are taking a myopic view of nature.  You have to step way back and see where the beginnings came from and where the endings are going onto to, in order to see the whole picture which is just endlessly cyclical. 

I know that this is equally difficult to put our frail human minds around, but this is a much more satisfying choice for me than that of a single shot of everything coming into existence out of a point and becoming all of this.  That is just never going to work for me.

Aaron

You can view the posting at http://metaresearch.org/msgboard/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1255


« Last Edit: 18/11/2008 10:28:34 by Alan McDougall »
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #46 on: 18/11/2008 18:56:59 »
The BaBar experiment results are very interesting indeed, but isn't that degree of asymmetry way too high to fit the observed state of the universe?
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #47 on: 18/11/2008 19:15:57 »
LeeE


Quote
The BaBar experiment results are very interesting indeed, but isn't that degree of asymmetry way too high to fit the observed state of the universe?

Yes there is a great deal of interesting work being done there,I think with the huge LHC tool maybe they can plunge into this mystery .

Somewhere in the attic of my mind I remember a suggestion, that an antiuniverse could have been formed at the big bang event and the matter universe separated from the antimatter universe by antigravity, which would perhaps act as gravity in this other reality, if it exists

Alan

Alan
 

Offline syhprum

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3822
  • Thanked: 19 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #48 on: 18/11/2008 20:21:56 »
Has the matter ever been resolved as to how antimatter responds to the gravitational force generated by matter.
to put it succinctly do they fall up or down ?
 

Offline syhprum

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3822
  • Thanked: 19 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #49 on: 18/11/2008 21:06:44 »
A new way to produce antimatter has been developed,

http://www.physorg.com/news146160767.html

Perhaps the antimatter drive space ship might just be possible !
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #49 on: 18/11/2008 21:06:44 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums