Is there any kind of anti-matter "problem"?

[HomesliceMMA]

I watched a youtube pop-sci program the other day where the host kept talking about there being some anti-matter "problem". Sabine Hossenfelder, Lee Smolin, and at least one other kept trying to tell him there was no problem, but he never seemed to grasp what they were saying.

The alleged "problem" is that if the universe started with an equal amount of matter and anti-matter, it should have all annihiliated, leaving only photons/energy, and no matter. Yet we are here, so obviously there was no such complete annihilation.

The experts main point was that there is no problem at because we don't know the initial conditions, and it could simply be that the initial conditions were such that there was more matter than anti-matter, leaving a bit of matter left over after he annihilation, what we see today.

That makes complete sense to me. Does anyone see a "problem" here? I mean, the fact that there might have been more matter than anti-matter immediately before/at the big bang is not nearly as surprising to me as the fact that there should have been anything at all, either that it came into being out of nothing or that it was there forever. Once you get past the latter "big pills", the fact that what is there was more matter than anti-matter - who cares about that lol?

Thanks!

 

[PeterDonis]

I watched a youtube pop-sci program the other day

This is not a valid basis for PF discussion. You need to look at textbooks or peer-reviewed papers. The scientists you mentioned have published plenty of such on this topic. If you can find such a reference, you can start a new thread based on it.

This thread is closed.