L
LeTonny
Guest
Ok, bear with me on this one.
Let's go back to the time when the universe was cooling down after the Big Bang just enough to enable the
forming of matter, and antimatter.
So we have this big soup full of energy, matter and antimatter. This soup is continuously (perhaps not lineairly)
cooling down, despite the constant creation and annihilation of these matter and antimatter particles.
Somewhere between the point of starting to form both matter and antimatter and the formation of protons,
neutrons and such, scientists think an imbalance occured. Only an imbalance at this point could explain the
actual existance of all the matter today, but no definitive answer has been thought up for the question what
was the origin of this imbalance.
How about this explanation:
First we have to remember at this point in time after the Big Bang, it is assumed the number of matter and
antimatter are equal. Logically, this leads to the conclusion for every partical there is an antipartical and the pair, upon
colliding will annihilate both of them.
Now suppose the distribution of both matter and antimatter is uniform. (Why wouldn't it? Why would there be
any clustering?) So, we have this big souplike substance, containing uniformly distributed particles matter
and antimatter.
They collide and annihilate eachother. But not all matter and antimatter particals 'find' eachother at the same time.
Now my 2nd assumption kicks in. Gravity between the matterparticles and anti-gravity between the antimatterparticles
is present. Let's assume gravity makes matterparticles move towards eachother. In this process they inevitably will
collide with antimatter, but the odd few particles could survive.
My 3rd assumption would be that where matter has gravity, antimatter has its anti-gravity. But, where gravity makes
matter attract other matter, anti-gravity (being the opposite force) makes antimatterparticles move away from eachother.
Now, combine these assumptions with the reality of that moment. A relatively dense soup of particles annihilating
eachother, but at the same time clustering of matter and declustering of antimatter.
Where in the bulge of the soup, all is annihilated, all is turned into radiation, fleeing in all directions with the
speed of light. On the edges of the soup, tho', antimatter is forcing itself away from the soup, while matter is
fleeing toward eachother. This would, on average, cause the speed of matter to be slightly slower than that of the
antimatter. This would create room between the two kinds of particals, therefor reducing the possibility of creating
matter/antimatter pairs that would annihilate.
Not too many matter and antimatter particles, ofcourse, would walk this way, but not too many need to, when taking into account that only one partical matter in about a billion matter/antimatterpair needs to escape.
Let's go back to the time when the universe was cooling down after the Big Bang just enough to enable the
forming of matter, and antimatter.
So we have this big soup full of energy, matter and antimatter. This soup is continuously (perhaps not lineairly)
cooling down, despite the constant creation and annihilation of these matter and antimatter particles.
Somewhere between the point of starting to form both matter and antimatter and the formation of protons,
neutrons and such, scientists think an imbalance occured. Only an imbalance at this point could explain the
actual existance of all the matter today, but no definitive answer has been thought up for the question what
was the origin of this imbalance.
How about this explanation:
First we have to remember at this point in time after the Big Bang, it is assumed the number of matter and
antimatter are equal. Logically, this leads to the conclusion for every partical there is an antipartical and the pair, upon
colliding will annihilate both of them.
Now suppose the distribution of both matter and antimatter is uniform. (Why wouldn't it? Why would there be
any clustering?) So, we have this big souplike substance, containing uniformly distributed particles matter
and antimatter.
They collide and annihilate eachother. But not all matter and antimatter particals 'find' eachother at the same time.
Now my 2nd assumption kicks in. Gravity between the matterparticles and anti-gravity between the antimatterparticles
is present. Let's assume gravity makes matterparticles move towards eachother. In this process they inevitably will
collide with antimatter, but the odd few particles could survive.
My 3rd assumption would be that where matter has gravity, antimatter has its anti-gravity. But, where gravity makes
matter attract other matter, anti-gravity (being the opposite force) makes antimatterparticles move away from eachother.
Now, combine these assumptions with the reality of that moment. A relatively dense soup of particles annihilating
eachother, but at the same time clustering of matter and declustering of antimatter.
Where in the bulge of the soup, all is annihilated, all is turned into radiation, fleeing in all directions with the
speed of light. On the edges of the soup, tho', antimatter is forcing itself away from the soup, while matter is
fleeing toward eachother. This would, on average, cause the speed of matter to be slightly slower than that of the
antimatter. This would create room between the two kinds of particals, therefor reducing the possibility of creating
matter/antimatter pairs that would annihilate.
Not too many matter and antimatter particles, ofcourse, would walk this way, but not too many need to, when taking into account that only one partical matter in about a billion matter/antimatterpair needs to escape.