Matter predominates b/c anti-matter fell into black holes?

In summary, the article discusses the popularized theory of Hawking radiation and its role in explaining the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the universe. However, experts state that this theory is not entirely accurate and there is no guarantee that it is the antimatter that falls into black holes. Additionally, Hawking radiation is too weak to have any significant impact in the current universe. The article also mentions the possibility of matter-antimatter asymmetry in neutrinos and the need for further research on the ratio of neutrinos to antineutrinos in the universe. However, this type of asymmetry does not contribute to the baryonic matter-antimatter asymmetry.
  • #1
swampwiz
571
83
I was reading an article about the great Steven Hawking, and it seems to say that matter & anti-matter can be created in space, but that one of them can fall into a black hole, thus leaving the other around in a higher preponderance, which of course matter is. So it would seem that a good explanation for why there is an imbalance of matter to anti-matter is that the anti-matter fell into black holes.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/03/stephen-hawking-is-still-underrated/555590/
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
That is a highly popularised article and you should not look to learn actual physics from it. In particular, the popularised description of Hawking radiation that is provided is the typical one and Hawking himself said that, while inaccurate, it was the closest analogy he could find that would be understandable by laymen.

However, even within the popularised description, there is no guarantee that it is the anti-particle that "falls into" the black hole. It would be equally likely that it was what we call a particle that does that. Hence, you cannot use Hawking radiation to explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry.
 
  • Like
Likes ohwilleke and QuantumQuest
  • #3
In addition to Hawking radiation having nothing to do with pairs:
- Hawking radiation is completely irrelevant in the current universe. It is too weak to have any impact.
- As far as we know all black holes have at least stellar masses, there Hawking radiation is exclusively made out of photons, gravitons and maybe neutrinos - none of them contribute to the matter/antimatter asymmetry
- Even hypothetical smaller black holes, small enough to have other particles in the Hawking radiation, should radiate matter and antimatter in equal amounts
 
  • #4
mfb said:
- As far as we know all black holes have at least stellar masses, there Hawking radiation is exclusively made out of photons, gravitons and maybe neutrinos - none of them contribute to the matter/antimatter asymmetry.

There can be matter-antimatter asymmetry in neutrinos and one of the more important cosmology measurements which has not yet been made is the ratio of neutrinos to antineutrinos in the universe. It doesn't contribute to baryonic matter/antimatter asymmetry, but that isn't the only possible kind of matter/antimatter asymmetry. In fact, if the number of antineutrinos outnumbers the number of ordinary matter neutrinos by even 1% (and there are hints that it might) then the number of anti-leptons in the universe vastly exceeds the number leptons and non-antimatter baryons in the universe by a substantial amount.
 
  • #5
ohwilleke said:
but that isn't the only possible kind of matter/antimatter asymmetry
I'm sure it is the asymmetry OP was asking about. And it is unlikely that these black holes emit neutrinos at all - one mass eigenstate would have to be exceptionally light compared to the other two.

How could Hawking radiation emit different amounts of neutrinos and antineutrinos, by the way?
 

1. What is the concept of matter and anti-matter?

Matter and anti-matter are two types of particles that have opposite electrical charges and are considered to be mirror images of each other.

2. Why does matter predominate instead of anti-matter?

This is still a mystery in the scientific community, but it is believed that during the early stages of the universe, there was an imbalance in the production of matter and anti-matter. As a result, matter was able to dominate and persist, while anti-matter was depleted.

3. How do black holes play a role in this phenomenon?

Black holes are extremely dense and have a strong gravitational pull. It is believed that when matter and anti-matter come into contact near a black hole, they are pulled towards the black hole and the anti-matter falls in while the matter escapes. This would lead to a further depletion of anti-matter and the dominance of matter.

4. Is there any evidence to support this theory?

There is currently no direct evidence to support this theory, but scientists have observed that black holes emit jets of matter, which could be a result of the conversion of anti-matter into matter near the event horizon.

5. What are the implications of this phenomenon in our understanding of the universe?

If this theory is proven to be true, it would provide insight into why matter dominates the universe and could also help explain the apparent absence of anti-matter in our observable universe. It could also have implications for our understanding of the origin of the universe and the laws of physics.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
738
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
633
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
29
Views
10K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Back
Top