Why do we assume the big bang created matter/antimatter?

In summary, the conversation discusses the idea that pure energy may not create matter/antimatter pairs, but instead entangled matter/matter-wave pairs. This leads to the concept of duality, where the matter-wave and the observed particle are two separate entities. The possibility of matter waves having mass is also mentioned in relation to dark matter. There is also another theory that suggests the matter wave partner is not connected and exists in a quantum realm of dark matter. The conversation ends with a reminder that science is based on observation and hypotheses that can be tested, and further research is suggested to understand the limitations of the proposed idea.
  • #1
physical
5
0
TL;DR Summary
Is antimatter a thing?
What if pure energy doesn't create matter/antimatter pairs, but entangled matter/matter-wave pairs?
Duality is then literally two separate entities. When something becomes observed, the matter-wave becomes one with the particle it "represents".
I'd say that would give a galaxy the extra mass dark matter is claiming to give. And we could say this is why matter waves have mass.
I'm not sure if it means everything is twice as heavy as it should be or not.

There is the other idea that the matter wave partner is not connected in any way and just gets dumped in a sea of matter waves in the quantum realm (a fog of dark matter).

Again, why do we assume the big bang created matter/antimatter?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
Reread what you wrote there are quite a lot of problems which are so obvious at a glance it is clear you don't understand enough physics or history to understand why this "antimatter replacement" absurd. Since this site focuses on giving the knowledge to help users understand why their question is not an answerable one.

As a not so subtle hint science is based off observation and hypotheses to explain those observations leading to testable predictions. Eventually those hypotheses can build into a comprehensive theory.A quick bit of research would quickly reveal an answer to your question Look into positrons, cloud chambers and PET (Positron Electron Telmography) scans to understand the basic principals of why your idea can't be an accurate model for reality.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn and PeroK
  • #3
OP has left the building for a while. This thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn, Motore, phinds and 2 others

FAQ: Why do we assume the big bang created matter/antimatter?

Why do we assume the big bang created matter and antimatter?

The assumption that the big bang created matter and antimatter comes from the observation that the universe is made up of mostly matter, with very little antimatter. This suggests that at the beginning of the universe, there was an equal amount of matter and antimatter, but as the universe expanded and cooled, matter and antimatter annihilated each other, leaving behind the excess matter we see today.

What evidence supports the idea that the big bang created matter and antimatter?

One of the main pieces of evidence for the big bang theory is the cosmic microwave background radiation, which is leftover radiation from the early stages of the universe. This radiation is consistent with the idea that the universe was once extremely hot and dense, as predicted by the big bang theory. Additionally, experiments at the Large Hadron Collider have confirmed that matter and antimatter behave in the same way, further supporting the idea that they were created in equal amounts during the big bang.

Could there be other explanations for the creation of matter and antimatter besides the big bang?

While the big bang theory is the most widely accepted explanation for the creation of matter and antimatter, there are other theories that have been proposed. For example, some theories suggest that matter and antimatter were created through a process called baryogenesis, which occurred after the big bang. However, these theories are still being studied and do not have as much evidence to support them as the big bang theory.

Is it possible that the big bang did not create equal amounts of matter and antimatter?

While the big bang theory predicts that matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts, it is possible that this was not the case. Some scientists have proposed that there may have been a slight asymmetry in the creation of matter and antimatter, which could explain why there is more matter than antimatter in the universe today. However, more research is needed to confirm this possibility.

How does the creation of matter and antimatter during the big bang relate to the formation of galaxies and stars?

The creation of matter and antimatter during the big bang is directly related to the formation of galaxies and stars. As matter and antimatter annihilated each other, the energy released helped to drive the expansion of the universe. As the universe cooled, the remaining matter began to clump together, eventually forming galaxies and stars. Without the initial creation of matter and antimatter during the big bang, the universe would not have been able to form the structures we see today.

Similar threads

B Big Bang Question -- How was the first matter formed?
2
Replies
69
Views
5K
B Matter-antimatter asymmetry - a simple explanation?
Replies
12
Views
2K
I Shouldn't the Big bang be physically impossible?
Replies
25
Views
3K
Big Bang vs Antimatter: Exploring the Mystery
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
B Dark Energy & Matter: Exploring the Big Bang
Replies
7
Views
2K
B What if we weren't the only Big Bang
Replies
3
Views
1K
B Did the Big Bang create space and time?
Replies
9
Views
3K
Why not an equal amount of matter and antimatter in the universe?
Replies
15
Views
4K
What Form Did Matter and Antimatter Take During Annihilation After the Big Bang?
Replies
5
Views
2K
B Do we still live in a Big Bang Singularity?
Replies
14
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top