- #1
picass
- 5
- 0
If after the big-bang, anti mass would have had the upperhand,
would the universe, as we can observe, it have another aspect ?
would the universe, as we can observe, it have another aspect ?
picass said:If after the big-bang, anti mass would have had the upperhand,
would the universe, as we can observe, it have another aspect ?
russ_watters said:If anti-matter were more abundant than matter, we'd call anti-matter matter and matter anti-matter.
Electrica said:You have a good point but if one takes into consideration that the accumulation of matter increases mass which increases gravity... anti-matter should have gravity of it's own kind (not-anti gravity). I believe that the two masses would gravitate away from each other. Anti-gravity is using real matter mass and gravity as the basis, not anti-matter mass and gravity. It's a possibility, otherwise you'd have matter and anti-matter colliding all of the time and there would be plenty of signs. Here's one thing... when anti-matter and matter collide... they destroy each other... where does that energy go? Equally in each form of energy and anti-energy? Either way you'd see this energy in some form from heat to radio and even microwaves. Interesting stuff either way. :)
Electrica said:Again you're just counting what is seen. Visible matter accounts for about 5% of the matter in the universe, as the universe is still expanding and they've also concluded that it will continue to do so (and not contract). There are only new guesses as to what the other 95% is (dark matter, etc). When we can only explain +/- 5% of the matter in the universe then I'd say there's a whole lot more work to be done on the subject and new ideas should be welcomed.
As far as anti-energy, there is a lot of work being done on over-unity energy production and that energy must come from somewhere. If it's not in a form that is detectable prior to its being obtained, (as detractors like to say) as if from thin air, then it states that the energy is being converted from a previously unconsidered (invisible) source. But I'm sure that you have a completely logical and text-book answer for that one.
Chronos said:Springerlink is a crackpot friendly site intended to entertain, not inform.
Phrak said:The tags "matter" and "antimatter" are naming conventions.
Phrak said:The point I'm attempting to make, here, is that the right question regarding observed particle species imbalance has not been well asked. Better answers come from better questions. What is the correct question?
twofish-quant said:They really aren't. "Matter" is left-handed interacting while "anti-matter" is right-handed interacting
Why are there more left-handed interacting particles in the world than right-handed ones?
Andrei Sakharov came up with three conditions that have to be followed if this is to happen. see.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryogenesis
Not true. You forgot a=F/m.Not true?
i have listened dat anti mass had discovered in laboratoryinflector said:twofish-quant, is this left-hand and right-hand matter related to the way that parity is violated?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parity_(physics)#Parity_violation
Or were you referring to something different?
The Big Bang theory is a scientific model that explains the origin of the universe. It proposes that the universe began as a singularity, a point of infinite density and temperature, and has been expanding and cooling ever since.
Anti-mass, also known as antimatter, is the opposite of normal matter. It is made up of particles with the same mass as their matter counterparts, but with opposite charge. When matter and antimatter come into contact, they annihilate each other, releasing a large amount of energy.
If anti-mass had the upper hand after the Big Bang, it is likely that the universe would have developed very differently. Instead of matter dominating, there would be equal amounts of matter and antimatter. As matter and antimatter annihilated each other, the universe would be filled with intense energy and radiation, making it unlikely for planets and galaxies to form.
It is highly unlikely that life as we know it could exist in a universe dominated by anti-mass. However, it is possible that alternative forms of life could evolve in such a universe. These life forms would have to be composed of antimatter and have different biochemical processes than our own.
Currently, there is no evidence to suggest that anti-mass had the upper hand after the Big Bang. In fact, the existence of our universe as we know it suggests that matter dominated in the early stages of the universe. However, ongoing research and experiments are being conducted to further understand the role of anti-mass in the universe.