The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Why is the universe asymmetrical  (Read 28860 times)

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #50 on: 18/11/2008 21:59:16 »
syhprum 

Thanks for the link, but a huge amount of antimatter would be needed for an intersteller antimatter spaceship.

A sugar cube size antimatter matter device could could produce enough energy to supply a city of significant size for a period of a month or so, but this is just from memory and is just an example of the huge potential of antimatter energy
 

Offline chrisdsn

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #51 on: 25/11/2008 05:14:20 »
It's a little complicated: Anti-matter certainly exists, and for every type of
particle there is a corresponding anti-particle. For many years it was thought
that particles acted just like anti-particles, thus leading to the puzzle of why
we seem to see mostly matter. In the early 60's it was discovered -- at around
the same time -- that both charge conjugation symmetry ( particles are equivalent to
anti-particles ) and parity symmetry ( our world and mirror image world look the same)
are not respected. However, for a few more years it was though that the combined symmetry
(CP) was respected. I this were true then for every particle you would have
an anti-particle of opposite parity, so still we would expect equal amounts of matter
and anti-matter.

In the late 60's Cronin and Fitch (who won the Nobel prize in 1980 for this) discovered
that CP was not conserved when studying the decay/oscillation of a kaon to an anti-kaon.
Such CP-violation is now part of the Standard Model of particle physics. Within the
standard model this CP-violation is controlled by a single parameter. The aforementioned
attempts to study CP-violation on the b-meson system are not an attempt to discover
CP-violation (been there, done that), but to get another extraction of this parameter.
If it agrees with that from the kaon system (does so far), then the Standard Model
looks good, it if differs (let's hope) then we have a handle to move beyond the
standard model. 

That being said: The Standard Model does lead to matter/anti-matter asymmetry,
but, as observed, this effect comes entirely from the weak force and
is *tiny*; certainly not enough to naively explain the asymmetry we see.
However, this asymmetry could have been seeded in the early universe where
the rules are very different than we see now. For example, there are several
theories that use the fact that QCD (so the strong, not the weak force) can
break CP to explain this; while we see no evidence that this happens in
our experiments, this is an effect that should grow with energy. As such, it
might have been strong enough in the early universe to account for the
matter/anti-matter asymmetry, while still being weak enough at the
energies our current experiments probe that we couldn't measure it.
 

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 119
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #52 on: 25/11/2008 13:32:57 »
Interesting summary Chris.
A couple of questions:
1) Presumably what we are looking for is a very tiny parity breaking in chromodynamics at very high energies, which would have allowed a small amount of the original anti-matter to decay? This would have produced a slight imbalance which, after matter-antimatter annihilation, would account for the observable 'matter only' universe. Is that the gist?
2) Is the LHC likely to produce energies sufficient to observe this parity breaking?
 

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 #53 on: 25/11/2008 16:53:42 »
Apparently the initial assymetry would have needed to be no greater than 1:1 billion.
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #54 on: 29/12/2008 00:41:18 »
Greetings


The universe is asymmetrical in that of it consists almost completely of normal mass, matter and energy. "This is lucky for us" as Symmetrical universe of equal amounts of matter and antimatter would have resulted in a universe of pure energy of Gama rays, no planets, stars, galaxies, just radiant energy.

The big bang theory suggests that equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have been created at this event. But this did not happen

Why??

Alan


It was only a second exactly after big bang that the universe began flooding with particles - and after 300 million years, a multitude of stars exploded, forming the planets and new stars, creating the superspiral galaxies we can observe to this day. However, a problem arises - it is 'the' quintessential paradox concerning the creation of matter.

   Planets, stars, even entire galaxies should not even be here! When ordinary matter came out of spacetime, an equal amount of 'antimatter' should have formed in proportion. Antimatter is the mirror image of ordinary matter, but with opposite properties in their electrical charge. Because of this unique difference, whenever antimatter comes into contact with ordinary matter, the annihilate each other in a catastrophic burst of energy (the kind of energy or gamma rays everything originated from) - they would explode, strangely enough, with twice as much energy as the particles contained.

   When an antiparticle comes into contact with a normal particle they produce two deadly photons. The reason why two photons are the result is that for antiparticles have no net momentum, while a single photon will always have momentum. Conservation laws thus say that two photons must be created with zero-net momentum.

   Paul A. M. Dirac discovered the existence of antimatter, purely by mathematical reasoning. He found that whenever a particle pops into existence, let's say, by simply adding enough energy into the vacuum of space, it will force the virtual particle to be real and as it emerges into real space, it leaves behind a hole - this too is a particle - its antipartner. He got a Nobel Prize for his discovery...

   Thus when all matter and antimatter formed, they should have eliminated each other, leaving behind a universe with nothing but a brilliant glow of gamma radiation. Yet, reality proves this is not the case. Truth is, we haven't got a substantial amount of antimatter in our universe. However, it is thought there will be entire 'antigalaxies', with 'antistars' and 'antiplanets' that have never came into contact with normal matter.

   There is undeniably more matter than antimatter - but this seems like a contradictory statement, especially when both types of matter had to be created in equal proportion. No one is sure how this can be possible - however, some physicists say that the excess matter survived annihilation because their antipartners are not their complete opposites. This was first discovered in the 1964 by physicists James Cronin and Val Vitch, who won a Nobel Prize on the work done on the particle called the 'Kaon.'

   Physicists now believe that the Kaon lives longer than the 'Antikaon.' This differential life expectancy might answer why there appears to be a lot more matter than antimatter; hence, disturbances in what we call symmetrical fundamental interactions may answer to why there is more of the good stuff, than the antistuff :)
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #55 on: 02/01/2009 11:45:09 »
It's a little complicated: Anti-matter certainly exists, and for every type of
particle there is a corresponding anti-particle. For many years it was thought
that particles acted just like anti-particles, thus leading to the puzzle of why
we seem to see mostly matter. In the early 60's it was discovered -- at around
the same time -- that both charge conjugation symmetry ( particles are equivalent to
anti-particles ) and parity symmetry ( our world and mirror image world look the same)
are not respected. However, for a few more years it was though that the combined symmetry
(CP) was respected. I this were true then for every particle you would have
an anti-particle of opposite parity, so still we would expect equal amounts of matter
and anti-matter.

In the late 60's Cronin and Fitch (who won the Nobel prize in 1980 for this) discovered
that CP was not conserved when studying the decay/oscillation of a kaon to an anti-kaon.
Such CP-violation is now part of the Standard Model of particle physics. Within the
standard model this CP-violation is controlled by a single parameter. The aforementioned
attempts to study CP-violation on the b-meson system are not an attempt to discover
CP-violation (been there, done that), but to get another extraction of this parameter.
If it agrees with that from the kaon system (does so far), then the Standard Model
looks good, it if differs (let's hope) then we have a handle to move beyond the
standard model. 

That being said: The Standard Model does lead to matter/anti-matter asymmetry,
but, as observed, this effect comes entirely from the weak force and
is *tiny*; certainly not enough to naively explain the asymmetry we see.
However, this asymmetry could have been seeded in the early universe where
the rules are very different than we see now. For example, there are several
theories that use the fact that QCD (so the strong, not the weak force) can
break CP to explain this; while we see no evidence that this happens in
our experiments, this is an effect that should grow with energy. As such, it
might have been strong enough in the early universe to account for the
matter/anti-matter asymmetry, while still being weak enough at the
energies our current experiments probe that we couldn't measure it.


Chrisdsn I read your explanation again but got stuck on this
"Within the standard model this CP-violation is controlled by a single parameter.
The aforementioned attempts to study CP-violation on the b-meson system are not an attempt to discover
CP-violation (been there, done that), but to get another extraction of this parameter. "

I thought that those CP-violations was something not foreseen in the standard model?
Also I would like to say thanks for a very nice explanation, otherwise;)
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #56 on: 02/01/2009 11:57:47 »
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!



Rather nice DB:)

If we looked at time from the 'side' of mass for a moment.
And said that 'mass' is what creates our 'space' and ?
Time too?

And that acceleration also creates the 'effect' of mass.
:)

We would have mass and acceleration?
Wouldn't we.

but why acceleration? as in this 'game', 'mass' is what would create what we see as space and time.
Acceleration would then be something happening inside our 'protected area'.
Created by that 'mass'.

Hey, it's you 'winding me up' here:)

« Last Edit: 02/01/2009 12:01:51 by yor_on »
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #57 on: 02/01/2009 12:02:47 »
You know Guys,
I started this thread and maybe (don't retract back in horror an disbelief) it is because God made it that way

Alan
 

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 #58 on: 02/01/2009 12:03:56 »
You know Guys,
I started this thread and maybe (don't retract back in horror an disbelief) it is because God made it that way

Alan

Well why did he make it so dangerous?
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #59 on: 02/01/2009 12:12:19 »
God is a child on an ant hill with a magnifying glass
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #60 on: 02/01/2009 12:14:12 »
Awh it's like walking that line.
You know:)

At the Circus..

'Gravity'
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #61 on: 02/01/2009 12:45:44 »
Doctor Beaver,

Quote
Well why did he make it so dangerous?

Well maybe for fun , like bungee jumping, , he has us all in a glass container, and manipulates us. We are just an experiment and it his way of getting his equivalent of an adrenaline high.

We go hunting , why not he.  ;)  ???  ;D

Could I do a better job?, yes I would make a universe of never ending peace. But heck that would be boooooring

Alan
 

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 #62 on: 02/01/2009 12:55:14 »
So you're suggesting God is an adrenaline junkie? That would please the Pope!
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Why is the universe asymmetrical
« Reply #62 on: 02/01/2009 12:55:14 »

 

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