Is CP Violation the Key to Understanding Matter and Antimatter Domination?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ndung200790
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cp violation
ndung200790
Messages
519
Reaction score
0
Please teach me whether it is true or not,that the domination of particles vs antiparticles is caused by the CP violation in nature?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is still being researched on, i.e. it is an active research area. So no one can tell you if it is true or not. It is ONE possible explanation.

Zz.
 
I've heard CP violation used so much for this, that I had no idea there were other explanations. Can someone point the way to other possible explanations? I'm curious to read up on some.
 
JustinLevy said:
I've heard CP violation used so much for this, that I had no idea there were other explanations. Can someone point the way to other possible explanations? I'm curious to read up on some.

Read this:

http://physics.aps.org/articles/v3/69

especially on the mentioning of the "Sakharov three conditions" for baryon asymmetry.

Zz.
 
I've heard of the Sakharov conditions before, but they require CP violation in order to be an explanation for the current dominance of particles over anti-particles.

Maybe I misunderstood your original comment or maybe I wasn't clear in my follow up, but is there a possible explanation for the abundance of particles vs antiparticles that doesn't require CP violation?
 
One pure guess is that the universe started out (big bang) with an excess of matter.
 

Thread 'Toponium Discovered'

Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
View full post »

Thread 'Dirac-Delta from Normalization of Continuous Eigenfunctions'

I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
View full post »

Similar threads

I What is the meaning of 'CP violation' in the Cronin and Fitch experiment?
Replies
10
Views
2K
I How Does CP Violation Relate to Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry in the Universe?
Replies
1
Views
2K
I T2K sees ~3 sigma evidence for neutrino CP violation
Replies
23
Views
5K
B Evidence for CP violation in the baryon sector
Replies
2
Views
2K
A Understanding that QCD is not CP invariant
Replies
38
Views
5K
I CP transformation, charge conjugation and antimatter
Replies
4
Views
2K
Understanding Chi-Squared Plots & CP Violation Ranges
Replies
3
Views
2K
Can CP violation in kaon decays explain the dominance of matter over antimatter?
Replies
1
Views
3K
Link between CP violation and supersymmetry?
Replies
4
Views
2K
CP Violation in Neutral Kaon Decays
Replies
1
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top