Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Why does matter, not antimatter, dominate our universe? Physicists don’t know.

arroba Email

It looks as if a choice was made when it could have gone either way, and we don’t know how or why:

The first part to the puzzle is recognizing that this really is an existential problem. The Universe really is made of matter and not antimatter, and this is not a problem that’s going to go away. It isn’t the case that some parts of the distant Universe are made of antimatter and the Universe is really matter-antimatter symmetric; it isn’t plausible that the matter we see is due to a random, pro-matter (and anti-antimatter) fluctuation in the early Universe; it isn’t a problem that disappears if we hypothesize an equal-and-opposite antimatter Universe as a counterpart to our own.

Whenever and wherever antimatter and matter meet in the Universe, there’s a fantastic outburst of energy due to particle-antiparticle annihilation, and we don’t see that anywhere on large scales.Ethan Siegel, “No, Physicists Still Don’t Know Why Matter (And Not Antimatter) Dominates Our Universe” at Forbes

Recently, theoretical physicist Ethan Siegel crossed our screen while making clear why, in his view, a multiverse MUST exist. If we know so little about the actual universe that we can’t answer the title question, what sense does it make to insist that there must be an infinity of universes?

Here’s a thought: Most such people probably can’t help it. Their need to discredit something is likely greater than their need to know anything.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

See also: Physicists: New Approach To Antimatter Offers Promising Results

Clue about antimatter: Does it depend on how neutrinos behave vs. antineutrinos?

Improved precision in matter-antimatter difference does not resolve mystery


Experiments on antimatter are now possible?

Someone mentioned 'flavors,' but the essence of matter-anti-matter has to do with spontaneous symmetry breaking and the "massive" W bosons and the neutral Z meson. The chirality (handedness) is "left-handed" and not both "left" and "right-handed." Why this choice? Well, these are the "laws" of nature, i.e. the Standard Model, and whatever (Whoever) is responsible for the Laws of Nature is also responsible for this "left-handedness." Physicists don't like the arbitrariness involved here nor with the arbitrariness of the "constants of nature" (so-called 'fine-tuning') and desperately want to find a true cause of these "choices"; otherwise, it looks like the work of a Creator. [Heaven forbid!!] But, back to "flavors," why are there three flavors of electrons and neutrinos? How does one even begin to answer such a question? One is--and I believe permenantly so, left simply accepting that "this is just the way things are." Anathema to scientists. PaV
OT: Could the Site Administrator solve this problem for me: every two to three days, even when my browser has not been closed, I have to log back into UD. This has been going on for 7 years. I'm a bit tired of it. Can something be done? PaV
V@1, almost like natural selection for matter. :) Brother Brian
Note that the labels "matter" and "anti-matter" are entirely arbitrary, and it is just as logical to say that we live in an anti-matter universe and that matter is vanishingly rare. But, yeah. Someone decided that the Universe would be constructed using only the one flavor of particles, and so it was. Of course any high percentage (10%+) of anti-matter would have resolved itself rather early on (i.e., IMMEDIATELY after the Big Bang because all matter was so close together). So perhaps what we see now is the universe after the matter-anti-matter sorted itself out. vmahuna

Leave a Reply