PDA

View Full Version : Where Went the Anti matter?



pranab
2010-Aug-30, 12:42 PM
Antimatter is now extremely rare in our observable universe, but at one time antimatter comprised half the Universe. According to cosmologists, when the Universe began in Palnk’s moment of Big bang it was smaller than an atom, hotter than our Sun is, and perfectly in balanced form — like a 50-50 mixture of matter and antimatter. Then, just one second after the start of the big bang, the antimatter surprisingly disappeared. What happened to it all is still a big question before physicists?
Some Scientists may have a pretty good idea of where the antimatter went: it annihilated almost all of the matter in the early Universe-they say. The bit that remained went on to form all the material stuff in the Universe today, including the atoms found in cells in your body. Among the most pressing questions that now need to be answered is why some of that primordial matter survived and made possible everything in the cosmos, including life itself.
This is probably one of the hardest topics to be answered on many of the agendas of CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, near Geneva from the Large Hadron Collider[LHC] experiment, where smashing beams of protons flows to produce the highest energy collisions produced in 27 Km (16.9-mile)tunnel of EarthA giant circular tunnel, with several loops, stretches for 27km under the land between France and Switzerland. LHC is a device that demands to be described in superlatives — it’s the world’s biggest piece of scientific apparatus, using particle beams circulating in the world’s biggest fridge tunnel and has its results processed by the world’s most powerful super computer technology.
During every seconds of its operation, the LHC top scientists may find hundreds of subatomic particles smash-ups in space-time smaller than a pinhead. Every collision generates a spray of hundreds of particles and antiparticles, many of them will be monitored by huge detectors (the largest would only just fit inside Westminster Abbey). In this way LHC scientists can today simulate the conditions in the Universe a billionth of a second after its birth, The BIG Bang, when antimatter was almost as common as matter. The upshot is that CERN scientists so will soon be able to study antimatter in detail, shedding light on its behavior and on its possible medical applications, such as the treatment of cancer if any. Scientists could have detected anti-matter particles, known as geo-neutrinos, emitted during nuclear reactions first time [2] into the interior of the Earth, to a depth of up to thousands of kilometers. Geo-neutrinos, which have almost no mass and no electrical charge, are emitted when radioactive elements in the Earth’s mantle decay into more stable substances. The decay of elements such as uranium and thorium are thought to contribute more than 50 per cent of the heat generated inside the planet, but the exact fraction is unknown. Measuring the number of geo-neutrinos emitted, and their energies, could help determine the proportions of different radioactive substances in the Earth’s mantle and the amount of heat energy they contribute
The opening of existence of antiparticle was first time written in 1931 by the famously English physicist Paul Dirac, who first conceived it. His publication was purely a theoretical speculation and discussion so far known before us, based on his faith in his mathematically beautiful equation for the electron, widely known before world as the Dirac equation. There was then no experimental evidence that this new kind of subatomic particle actually existed. After three years of poring over his equation, he further wrote that it made sense only if there existed another particle with exactly the same mass as the electron has, but however with the opposite electrical charge ,at least theoretically. No one had ever seen then such a particle but Paul Dirac was not surprised as his theory predicted that the instant a particle comes into contact with its antiparticle, the two must annihilate each other and produce a burst of high-energy light. He nonetheless named this product of his imagination the anti-electron and proposed that antiprotons — antiparticles of protons — should also exist. For Dirac’s colleagues, these ideas were much for laughing and to be taken seriously in scientific community.
But later Paul Dirac was proved to be absolutely right. In August 1932, the American physicist and Mathematician Carl Anderson observed a particle with the same mass as the electron but with the opposite charge among the cosmic rays raining down on the skies of Pasadena in California. He was then unaware of Dirac’s prediction and it took several months for physicists to put two and two together to conclude that Anderson had been the first to detect the anti-electron, later dubbed the positron (the antiproton took another 23 years to find). From the modern perspective, it took human beings a million years after our species evolved to detect the first evidence of antimatter, which had been around in the Universe for 13.7 billion years. Paul Dirac was rewarded for his boldness in December 1933 with the honor of becoming the youngest theoretician to be awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics co sharing with Anderson.
Soon it was clear that Dirac’s concept was much wider than he first thought — every fundamental particle of matter has a corresponding antiparticle. But antimatter presented a huge challenge for experimental proof. In order to study it in detail, it’s not good enough to study cosmic rays — for one thing, that no one knows when they will arrive on Earth. Rather, experimenters have to resort to brute force: they smash together subatomic particles, such as protons, and siphon off any antiparticles produced. They then store them, ready for experimenters to study.

This turns out be the Devil’s own job: the total mass of all the antimatter produced every year globally by all the particle accelerators is only about ten billionths of a gram. The amount sounds more impressive when put in terms of the number of antiparticles produced annually: roughly a hundred thousand billion. Not bad when you consider that in the year after Anderson detected the first anti-electron the number of them observed in the entire world was four.
Dirac’s image of every antiparticle as being in some sense the opposite of its corresponding particle survived until 1964, when two American experimenters demonstrated that, in some special circumstances, there is an extremely slight asymmetry between matter and antimatter. This provided the current explanation of why matter predominated in the early Universe — soon after the beginning of time, the decay of some of the formed particles led to a surfeit of matter over antimatter of one part more per billion. On that smidgin, the existence of everything in our Universe depended. It’s that fundamental: without that broken symmetry, neither you nor I nor anything else would exist[1]. In 1967, Andrei Sakharov (the Nobel prize winner1975) pointed explained that CP violation is the cause of such an asymmetry in the universe .In shakarov’s CP violation theory & spontaneous symmetry breaking theory, the quark becomes an anti-quark while the anti-quark becomes a quark[dancing Quarks], thus transforming the kaon[combination of a quark and an anti quark? possible?] into its anti kaon. In this way the kaon particle flips between itself and its anti-self. But if the right conditions are met, the symmetry between matter and antimatter will be broken. Nambu , Kobayashi and Maskawa’s(Nobelprize winner of 2008 in Physics)[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2008/phyadv08.pdf theory The Nobel Prize in Physics 2008 - Scientific Background] also indicated that it should be possible to study a major violation of symmetry in B-meson particles. It is known that neutral βs meson (β-anti quark &s anti quark) spontaneously transform into its antimatter particles. The current theory of particle physics states that βs meson oscillates very quickly. As a result of their oscillation an very difficult to detect what happens to antimatter. on the properties of subatomic particles βs meson(βsubs) suggest that particles oscillates between matter and antimatter in one of In the first few moments of the Universe, the anti-B-mesons might have decayed differently than their regular matter counterparts. By the time all the annihilations were complete, there was still enough matter left over to give us all the stars, planets and galaxies we see today. nature’s fastest rapid free process more than 17 trillion times per second.
So how did our universe survived of matter is a big puzzle.
Yet theoreticians have a serious problem. They don’t understand the extent of symmetry-breaking between matter and antimatter particles and so cannot understand the amount of matter in the Universe[3]. The Standard Model, which gives an excellent account of all nature’s fundamental particles and forces (except gravity), accounts for some of the symmetry-breaking, but not all of it[3]. The Model, based on quantum theory and Einstein’s Special Theory, urgently needs a steer from nature so that theoreticians can do a better job of setting out the patterns in the Universe’s underlying fabric. It is the job of the experimenters to ask the right questions of nature, ones that yield the most telling information about the pattern
References
1] Graham Farmelo Part of the Alpha experiment in the AD (Antiproton Decelerator) Hall at CERN Times Online 6th may2010


2] Hannah Devlin, Laura Margottini Geo-neutrino anti-matter found by scientists at Borexino detector Times Online march 15th 2010

3] Symmetry or Breaking the symmetry- what was the laws of nature- Thread’s author By Pranab at BAD Astronomy &Universe Today on 29th oct 2008 at www.bautforum.com
4] Why matter is more then antimatter in the Universe?-Our Theory Thread’s author By Pranab at BAD Astronomy &Universe Today on 29th oct 2008 at www.bautforum.com



Authors_:
*Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya-Bsc(cal), Msc(JU), 7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 Parganas(north) Kol-110,West Bengal, India**Professor Pranab kumar Bhattacharya- MD(cal) FIC Path(Ind), Professor of Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 a AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India*Mr.Ritwik Bhattacharya B.com(cal), Somayak Bhattacharya MBA 7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 parganas(north) ,Kolkata-110,WestBengal, India**Miss Upasana Bhattacharya-daughter of Prof.PK Bhattacharya*** Mrs. Dalia Mukherjee BA(hons) Cal, Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north) West Bengal, India*** Miss Aindrila Mukherjee-Student ,Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north), West Bengal, India**** Dr. Avisnata Das Pennsylvania State University Milton S Hershey college of Medicine, USA; Mrs. Chandrani Dutta Bsc(zoology) Dr. Ram Naryan Das, MD(cal) , Demonstrator. Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 a AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India,**** Dr. Tarun Biswas MBBS(cal) Demonstrator,Pathology, IPGME&R, Kolkata-20,Dr. Hriday Ranjan Das MD(cal), DTM&H(cal), Dept of Nephrology, IPGME&R, 244a AJC Bose Road

Nereid
2010-Aug-30, 01:46 PM
Antimatter is now extremely rare in our observable universe, but at one time antimatter comprised half the Universe. According to cosmologists, when the Universe began in Palnk’s moment of Big bang it was smaller than an atom, hotter than our Sun is, and perfectly in balanced form — like a 50-50 mixture of matter and antimatter. Then, just one second after the start of the big bang, the antimatter surprisingly disappeared. What happened to it all is still a big question before physicists?
Some Scientists may have a pretty good idea of where the antimatter went: it annihilated almost all of the matter in the early Universe-they say. The bit that remained went on to form all the material stuff in the Universe today, including the atoms found in cells in your body. Among the most pressing questions that now need to be answered is why some of that primordial matter survived and made possible everything in the cosmos, including life itself.
This is probably one of the hardest topics to be answered on many of the agendas of CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, near Geneva from the Large Hadron Collider[LHC] experiment, where smashing beams of protons flows to produce the highest energy collisions produced in 27 Km (16.9-mile)tunnel of EarthA giant circular tunnel, with several loops, stretches for 27km under the land between France and Switzerland. LHC is a device that demands to be described in superlatives — it’s the world’s biggest piece of scientific apparatus, using particle beams circulating in the world’s biggest fridge tunnel and has its results processed by the world’s most powerful super computer technology.
During every seconds of its operation, the LHC top scientists may find hundreds of subatomic particles smash-ups in space-time smaller than a pinhead. Every collision generates a spray of hundreds of particles and antiparticles, many of them will be monitored by huge detectors (the largest would only just fit inside Westminster Abbey). In this way LHC scientists can today simulate the conditions in the Universe a billionth of a second after its birth, The BIG Bang, when antimatter was almost as common as matter. The upshot is that CERN scientists so will soon be able to study antimatter in detail, shedding light on its behavior and on its possible medical applications, such as the treatment of cancer if any. Scientists could have detected anti-matter particles, known as geo-neutrinos, emitted during nuclear reactions first time [2] into the interior of the Earth, to a depth of up to thousands of kilometers. Geo-neutrinos, which have almost no mass and no electrical charge, are emitted when radioactive elements in the Earth’s mantle decay into more stable substances. The decay of elements such as uranium and thorium are thought to contribute more than 50 per cent of the heat generated inside the planet, but the exact fraction is unknown. Measuring the number of geo-neutrinos emitted, and their energies, could help determine the proportions of different radioactive substances in the Earth’s mantle and the amount of heat energy they contribute
The opening of existence of antiparticle was first time written in 1931 by the famously English physicist Paul Dirac, who first conceived it. His publication was purely a theoretical speculation and discussion so far known before us, based on his faith in his mathematically beautiful equation for the electron, widely known before world as the Dirac equation. There was then no experimental evidence that this new kind of subatomic particle actually existed. After three years of poring over his equation, he further wrote that it made sense only if there existed another particle with exactly the same mass as the electron has, but however with the opposite electrical charge ,at least theoretically. No one had ever seen then such a particle but Paul Dirac was not surprised as his theory predicted that the instant a particle comes into contact with its antiparticle, the two must annihilate each other and produce a burst of high-energy light. He nonetheless named this product of his imagination the anti-electron and proposed that antiprotons — antiparticles of protons — should also exist. For Dirac’s colleagues, these ideas were much for laughing and to be taken seriously in scientific community.
But later Paul Dirac was proved to be absolutely right. In August 1932, the American physicist and Mathematician Carl Anderson observed a particle with the same mass as the electron but with the opposite charge among the cosmic rays raining down on the skies of Pasadena in California. He was then unaware of Dirac’s prediction and it took several months for physicists to put two and two together to conclude that Anderson had been the first to detect the anti-electron, later dubbed the positron (the antiproton took another 23 years to find). From the modern perspective, it took human beings a million years after our species evolved to detect the first evidence of antimatter, which had been around in the Universe for 13.7 billion years. Paul Dirac was rewarded for his boldness in December 1933 with the honor of becoming the youngest theoretician to be awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics co sharing with Anderson.
Soon it was clear that Dirac’s concept was much wider than he first thought — every fundamental particle of matter has a corresponding antiparticle. But antimatter presented a huge challenge for experimental proof. In order to study it in detail, it’s not good enough to study cosmic rays — for one thing, that no one knows when they will arrive on Earth. Rather, experimenters have to resort to brute force: they smash together subatomic particles, such as protons, and siphon off any antiparticles produced. They then store them, ready for experimenters to study.

This turns out be the Devil’s own job: the total mass of all the antimatter produced every year globally by all the particle accelerators is only about ten billionths of a gram. The amount sounds more impressive when put in terms of the number of antiparticles produced annually: roughly a hundred thousand billion. Not bad when you consider that in the year after Anderson detected the first anti-electron the number of them observed in the entire world was four.
Dirac’s image of every antiparticle as being in some sense the opposite of its corresponding particle survived until 1964, when two American experimenters demonstrated that, in some special circumstances, there is an extremely slight asymmetry between matter and antimatter. This provided the current explanation of why matter predominated in the early Universe — soon after the beginning of time, the decay of some of the formed particles led to a surfeit of matter over antimatter of one part more per billion. On that smidgin, the existence of everything in our Universe depended. It’s that fundamental: without that broken symmetry, neither you nor I nor anything else would exist[1]. In 1967, Andrei Sakharov (the Nobel prize winner1975) pointed explained that CP violation is the cause of such an asymmetry in the universe .In shakarov’s CP violation theory & spontaneous symmetry breaking theory, the quark becomes an anti-quark while the anti-quark becomes a quark[dancing Quarks], thus transforming the kaon[combination of a quark and an anti quark? possible?] into its anti kaon. In this way the kaon particle flips between itself and its anti-self. But if the right conditions are met, the symmetry between matter and antimatter will be broken. Nambu , Kobayashi and Maskawa’s(Nobelprize winner of 2008 in Physics)[http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2008/phyadv08.pdf theory The Nobel Prize in Physics 2008 - Scientific Background] also indicated that it should be possible to study a major violation of symmetry in B-meson particles. It is known that neutral βs meson (β-anti quark &s anti quark) spontaneously transform into its antimatter particles. The current theory of particle physics states that βs meson oscillates very quickly. As a result of their oscillation an very difficult to detect what happens to antimatter. on the properties of subatomic particles βs meson(βsubs) suggest that particles oscillates between matter and antimatter in one of In the first few moments of the Universe, the anti-B-mesons might have decayed differently than their regular matter counterparts. By the time all the annihilations were complete, there was still enough matter left over to give us all the stars, planets and galaxies we see today. nature’s fastest rapid free process more than 17 trillion times per second.
So how did our universe survived of matter is a big puzzle.
Yet theoreticians have a serious problem. They don’t understand the extent of symmetry-breaking between matter and antimatter particles and so cannot understand the amount of matter in the Universe[3]. The Standard Model, which gives an excellent account of all nature’s fundamental particles and forces (except gravity), accounts for some of the symmetry-breaking, but not all of it[3]. The Model, based on quantum theory and Einstein’s Special Theory, urgently needs a steer from nature so that theoreticians can do a better job of setting out the patterns in the Universe’s underlying fabric. It is the job of the experimenters to ask the right questions of nature, ones that yield the most telling information about the pattern
References
1] Graham Farmelo Part of the Alpha experiment in the AD (Antiproton Decelerator) Hall at CERN Times Online 6th may2010


2] Hannah Devlin, Laura Margottini Geo-neutrino anti-matter found by scientists at Borexino detector Times Online march 15th 2010

3] Symmetry or Breaking the symmetry- what was the laws of nature- Thread’s author By Pranab at BAD Astronomy &Universe Today on 29th oct 2008 at www.bautforum.com
4] Why matter is more then antimatter in the Universe?-Our Theory Thread’s author By Pranab at BAD Astronomy &Universe Today on 29th oct 2008 at www.bautforum.com



Authors_:
*Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya-Bsc(cal), Msc(JU), 7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 Parganas(north) Kol-110,West Bengal, India**Professor Pranab kumar Bhattacharya- MD(cal) FIC Path(Ind), Professor of Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 a AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India*Mr.Ritwik Bhattacharya B.com(cal), Somayak Bhattacharya MBA 7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 parganas(north) ,Kolkata-110,WestBengal, India**Miss Upasana Bhattacharya-daughter of Prof.PK Bhattacharya*** Mrs. Dalia Mukherjee BA(hons) Cal, Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north) West Bengal, India*** Miss Aindrila Mukherjee-Student ,Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north), West Bengal, India**** Dr. Avisnata Das Pennsylvania State University Milton S Hershey college of Medicine, USA; Mrs. Chandrani Dutta Bsc(zoology) Dr. Ram Naryan Das, MD(cal) , Demonstrator. Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 a AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India,**** Dr. Tarun Biswas MBBS(cal) Demonstrator,Pathology, IPGME&R, Kolkata-20,Dr. Hriday Ranjan Das MD(cal), DTM&H(cal), Dept of Nephrology, IPGME&R, 244a AJC Bose Road
Can you please state the ATM idea (or concept, or hypothesis) that you are presenting in this thread?

Please state it as succinctly and clearly as you can.

Thanks in advance.

Jens
2010-Aug-31, 04:58 AM
To be honest, I don't think there is one. I think the OP is merely stating that more work needs to be done to understand the asymmetry between matter and anti-matter. Personally I can't see anyone suggesting that we shouldn't do more experiments to understand the world better. I don't think this is ATM, but can't see where it belongs. It seems a bit heavy for off-topic babbling. . .

pranab
2010-Aug-31, 04:04 PM
Suer I Shall Post Soon "Our concept Where went the Antimatter. Why Matter Survived finally. I Shall also post the Link what Nobel prize winners in physics did thinks as published in www.nobelprize.org . Before this I seek a Discussion in This Forum.

PetersCreek
2010-Aug-31, 04:13 PM
pranab,

The Against The Mainstream forum is not the place to simply discuss your ideas. This is where proponents present their alternative theories, support and defend them, and answer questions about them. Since you are apparently not ready to do so, I am closing this thread. When you are ready to present you theory, report this post to ask that the thread be reopened. In the meantime, please familiarize yourself with our rules and the alternate theory advice linked in my signature line below.

Swift
2010-Sep-08, 01:50 PM
pranab,

Per your request, we have reopened the thread. Your first post should succinctly state what your theory is. You must then follow the rules of this board with regard to ATM, including answering questions put to you, and presenting evidence for your idea. If you do not do this, the thread will be permanently closed.

pranab
2010-Sep-12, 02:19 PM
Why matter is more then antimatter in the Universe? Our Theory-
Why There's More Matter than Antimatter in the Universe
Fraser
09-April-2008 06:28 PM #13

Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum >

And
Why matter is more then antimatter in the Universe?-Our Theory
pranab


Extreme Astronomy in

General Astronomy
The Universe consisted [in its earliest moment of big bang] of large masses of matter and antimatter which was to be organized into Nebulas, galaxies, stars, and planets. According to this view about construction of the universe, the matter and antimatter should co-exist at some early stage in the Big Bang. For it only if the temperature was very high enough it should be possible for nucleons and anti nucleons to rub their shoulders with each other’s. Simple theory suggests that they should after ward annihilate each other’s with production of photons and neutrinos. To account a universe in which matter and anti matter were separated in separate galaxies it is therefore necessary to explain how such a separation could have taken place at very early stage in the development of primeval fire ball?
It is one of the most fundamental questions in cosmology. The question of existence of antimatter in significant quantities in the present universe. in our galaxy! The question of whether antimatter had an equal role with matter in making up galaxies? In a contemporary Para diagram of Grand Unified theories & Gauge Theories (String Theories) these questions are related to the questions of nature of charge, parity variations at high energy. The questions of separating matter and antimatter, proton and antiproton, helium and anti helium. The symmetry between matter and antimatter [ i.e baryon symmetry in the cosmology ] that was once observed at accelerator had forced many scientists and astrophysicist to think that there existed also a similar balance in the universe of matter and antimatter at most early phase of the universe. It is one of the most fundamental questions in cosmology. But we don’t see or don’t find antimatter in our observable universe. Our observable universe is made of matter only. Why? Antimatter always annihilate with matter into radiation as per Dirac. If that was so, then there would not be any matter to make up galaxies, our observable universe. Was the matter and antimatter mixed together? Or another probability was that the matter and antimatter were in two separate compartments? If the later was true, then we must have another Universe. That universe was then made of antimatter.(Authors Theory). However universe consisted of large mass of matter and antimatter- standard Big Bang model says so. On this view, in authors opinion, is that matter and antimatter must co-existed all together at some early stage of Big Bang.? For it ,only when the temperature was high enough, it was possible for nucleons and anti nucleons, quarks and anti quarks to rub their shoulders with each others, and simple theory suggest that these rubbing resulted annihilation with production of photons and neutrinos. H. Alfeven etal ( Alfeven .H – Rev. Mod. Physics Vol37; P652; 1965) did bring out a mechanism which permitted region of matter and antimatter to co-exist together in our galaxy, even without appreciable mixing. Otherwise in early state of universe [when a homogeneous universe] there would have to be also a mechanism for separating matter and antimatter so that galaxies were formed in clusters. Then the big questions remain 1) what was the mechanism for separation of matter and antimatter? 2) Where went the bulk of antimatter? 3) Does the antimatter stars or antimatter galaxies exist and were capable of nuecleosynthesis? Does the antimatter stars or antimatter galaxies at all exists that Mr. Rupak Bhattacharjee suggested in his concept of anti Universe? 5) If at all exists what is the way of communication from our universe made of matter to a Universe made of antimatter? Pranab Kumar- Does the universe contain also anti galaxies- a myth or a reality? Space Light Vol 4 P7-13; 1998). Defining a region of mass MR as a typical unit of matter and antimatter according to the conventional Big Bang model of the universe, there were small excess of baryon particles (~1 in 109) over the anti particles in the early stage of evolution of universe. At that time the thermal energy “KT” exceeded the rest energy mpc2 of baryon particles. It was to the excess amount of KT, for that we see the present existence of matter in the universe. So as the thermal energy dropped bellow mc2, the baryons and anti baryons started annihilated and there leaving just excess of baryons intact. Let us consider a model of universe that was initially filled up with the thermal radiations. Its expansion was described by the scale factor R (t) which behaved approximately like t -1/2 while the temperature varied likeR-1. For the early stage of the universe, the effect of space curvature was negligible. It was known in the history of such a model, the model can be divided in to several periods according to content of thermal radiation. The Hadronic (KT≥100mev), Leptonic (KT≥ 1mev) and Radiative (KT≥300K). Super imposed on division, on evolution of baryons, we have to consider also other periods. The separation period (KT≥350Mev), annihilation period (KT≥25Kev) and coalescence period (T>300K). There was some interest in 1970s regarding the existence of the antimatter in the universe. Stiegman. G in 1969 ( Stiegman. G. – Nature Vol224; P447; 1969) showed that if the space time were filled with equal mixture of matter and antimatter then gamma ray flux that resulted from nucleon and anti nucleon annihilation would be far above the observed limit. But according us, there were much possibilities that matter and antimatter existed quite separately in large regions consisting solely of one characteristic type, perhaps in the form of galaxies and anti galaxies (Bhattacharjee Rupak and Bhattacharya Pranab) separation, one can assume that a process probably existed in the early Big Bang model. This process could however separate matter and antimatter into contiguous regions at some early epoch of Big Bang. We can also assume that the regions remain separated until and after decoupling would prevent collision between them, owing to the effect of radiation. After decoupling, the material contained in several such regions started to collapse and coalesce. The collapse and coalescence led to an annihilation of particles from regions to anti regions. The rate at which coalescence occurred, depended on the scale of density fluctuation. Defining a blob of mass MB, as the largest commonly occurring density fluctuation, existing at decompleing, we know from galaxy forming theory that the minimum mass of the blob was ~107MO jeans mass. It is also well known that any gravitational bound group of blob will eventually undergo collapse. But due to the expansion of the universe, the collapse would not proceed rapidly until the density contracted. The collision cross section for blob contained in such group became very high once collapse set in. So if both matter and antimatter were present in early universe, one must expect a considerable amount of annihilation to occur at the time of collapse. SO There must be a separation period for matter and antimatter. In the separation period the particles and antiparticles [Quarks and anti quarks/ R particles and Anti R particles/ Neutrinos and anti neutrinos/ Gluons and anti gluons] separated spatially as a consequence of their statistical repulsion. This was initially induced by fluctuation (Bhattacharjee Rupak and Bhattacharya Pranab Kumar- Does universe contain antigalaxies – a myth or a reality? – Space Light Vol4; P7-13; 1998). One can compute the size as “δ,” as the individual condensation containing an excess of nucleon and anti- nucleon reached during 10-5 S of the period. The total baryonic number in that period was 1028. Near the end of separation period the universe was filled up with emulsion of nucleons and anti nucleons with a topical size δ=3x10-4c.m. The next came annihilation period. When temperature fell bellow the critical temperature (T) the particles and antiparticles [quarks and anti quarks] started to annihilate. The annihilate process was then controlled by diffusion so that densities D and N (Nucleons) and N-(anti nucleons) satisfy the equation as given below
δΝ/δΤ=DV-2N-αN N-, δN-/δΤ=δV-N-αNN- (Bhattacharjee Rupak). At the end of this period a typical fraction of 10-8 or more nucleon survived. They were still in the form of emulsion with a typical size of 105cm and with a ty. This was however very far from a galactic mass. During annihilation the process first gave birth chiefly to pions and through their decay to high-energy photons, electrons, positrons, and neutrinos successively. The transfer of momentum by photons and electrons produces an annihilation pressure at boundary between matter and antimatter. To find the behavior of matter and antimatter, which were probably in contact through a common boundary, the effect of high-energy photons and leptons was a dominant feature, because these particles exerted a very strong pressure and kept the heating system on. Radiative pressure was very dominant, so that pressure due to heating tended to balance annihilation. With the possible exception of cosmic gumma rays, observation yielded essentially no information on the relative amount of matter and antimatter beyond our solar system. What the observation told us was that matter and antimatter are rarely ,if ever found together.
continued in Next post---

pranab
2010-Sep-12, 02:20 PM
From Previous Post con.......
What was the mechanism that matter and antimatter were then separated?. Consider a gas of proton, antiproton, electron and positron, which is sufficiently diluted and then annihilation can not be neglected there. In general, such a gas will be situated in a magnetic field say “B” , in a Gravitational field say “G” and in a electromagnetic field of flux “F”. Each of the fields will then be assumed static and homogeneous. In particular length scale for variation in “B” must be large enough that particle drifts arising from magnetic in homogenetics are also negligible. The protons and antiprotons will be much more strongly influenced by Gravitational field than by Radiation field. As well as spiraling around the magnetic line of forces the heavy particles will therefore have a drift velocity Vh= mPxgxB/qB2 ,where mP is the proton mass, q is the particle charge,.[Bhattacharjee Rupak & Bhattacharya Pranab Kumar – Does the Universe contain also anti galaxies- a myth or a reality- Space Light; Vol4 P7-13;1998] .Because of their small mass, and larger scattering cross section, the electrons and positrons will feel much weaker Gravitational force due to radiation pressure. It is however to be noted that just electric current through gas does not heavily result in separation of charges, and the opposed drift of matter need not produce an actual matter- antimatter separation. On the other hand, matter and antimatter in an isolated cloud or in extended medium, with an appropriate field configuration should achieve some degree of separations. Because, proton and antiproton, electron and positron fluxes will not be equal in general. There will be some separation of charge leading to an electrical field “ E “ and ExB drift. As ExB drift increases, the heavy particles acquire an inertia which tends to remove the original difference between proton and antiproton and electron and positron fluxes will not be equal in general. There will be some separation of charge leading to an electrical field “ E “ and ExB drift. As ExB drift increases, the heavy particles acquire an inertia which tends to remove the original difference between proton and antiproton and electron and positron fluxes.New York university physics department had isolated a particles that switches back and forth in its anti form spontaneously. Some theories have been then put forth at the antimatter that we have been observing is not the exact opposite of real matter based on hydrogen atom displaying weight. Up until now antimatter was believed only to be created from pure energy as in collision of matter( Gerald Lukaniuk www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t-40211 & highlight=antimatter 6th april2006). It is known that neutral βs meson(β-anti quark &s anti quark) spontaneously transform into its antimatter particles. The current theory of particle physics states that βs meson oscillates very quickly. As a result of their oscillation an very difficult to detect what happens to antimatter. BATAVIA’, illinos, scientist of D.Zero collider deflector collaboration at department of energy,s Fermi national Accelerator laboratory had announced that their data on the properties of subatomic particles βs meson(βsubs) suggest that particles oscillates between matter and antimatter in one of nature’s fastest rapid free process more than 17 trillion times per second. one of the greatest mysteries of the universe is its apparent composition of only matter and not the anti matter. If matter and antimatter were created equally at the time of Big Bang matter and antimatter should have annihilated in to pure energy. In fact in real universe it did not happened. How did our universe of matter survived is a big puzzle. Laboratory evidence made it however possible to observe some form of matter oscillating into antimatter and back. The CP theory states such The CP symmetry- it is the mirror form of matter. It is a measurement of the matter antimatter oscillation of β sub S mesons and it is the first measurement of oscillation of this particular particles. Experiment with beta mesons showed partial violation of CPT invariance. The TRAP experiment found no violates of CPT in cyclotrons frequencies with proton and antiproton level. Shakarov’s CP violation theory[ Nobel prize winner in physics-1975] gives however some clue to what happened to antimatter. According to this theory the antimatter& most the matter would have annihilated. But CP violation means that matter and antimatter did not always behaved in the same way resulting in a one in billions imbalance of ordinary matter. Symmetry is important mathematical concept used in fundamental physics to describe particles property. Antiparticles mirror their related particles by having opposite sign for several properties, particularly the electrical charges. Particle theory expresses this relationship in terms of mathematical operator or mirror designated as”C” which changes the sign of charge and other properties. In this way operating on a particle with the C mirror yield an antiparticle. Another mathematical mirror “P” reverses particle interaction in the space rather like flipping the right handed gloves into left handed, one “P” changes the sign of a property called “Parity” which according to dirac equation is opposite for particle and antiparticles. In a particle interaction the sign for “C” and “P” totaled over the particles involved are same before and after the interaction then C and P are each and to be conserved. Now as it happens C&P are not always conserved and there occurs CP violation. This CP violation also explains lack of antimatter in our universe

So the big question appeared before us What happened to these antimatter?. After the Plank epoch, when the age of the universe was t ≤10-43S and the temperature of the universe was T≥109Gev , we can be sure enough , that the interactions between the matter and the antimatter at their first quark level became unimportant. This was because of that rate for gravitational interaction was much less then the expansion rate of the universe. Although the interactions between matter and antimatter particles kept each of them separately in a thermal equilibrium and thus probably Two world were created. These Two world did not feel each others existence at very microscopic level. During the primordial nucleosynthesis of the early universe, which started 1S after the initial Big Bang moment, the yield of the Big Bang depended on the expansion rate of the Universe. The expansion density PT= P+Ps by R0/R= [(δπGN/3)(P+Ps)]1/2 where P and Ps= density of matter and Antimatter, R= Cosmic scale factors. During this early epoch the universe was radiation dominated with P=g (π2/30)T4 where g counts the effective number of degrees of freedom particles (Rupak Bhattacharjee and Prof. Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya). The temperature of the particle world and that of anti particle world were not the same. The inflation occurred in the two worlds in both the sector but not necessarily simultaneously. The inflation involved was a random event in the nucleation of a bubble or in the formation of a fluctuation region. At the beginning of the inflation the universe was in false vacuum state for both the world. The bubble nucleated for one world, first say for antimatter world. As the bubble grew exponentially in physical size, both the temperature of matter and antimatter decreased exponentially. At this time the ratio of entropy remained constant. When the antiparticle vacuum energy was converted into radiation, the antiparticle temperature raised and entropy decreased. Eventually a bubble of fluctuation region formed for the matter world within the antimatter bubble. During the second phase of inflation, new bubble grew exponentially. When the vacuum energy of ordinary matter world converted into radiation, the temperature of particle world raised to a temperature, which was exponentially larger than the temperature of the antiparticle world. Thus the entropy was reduced further. To an exponentially small value and the matter dominated the visible universe. According to Big Bang model of Universe, there was small excess of matter then antimatter (~1 in 109) in the early stage of evolution, when the thermal energy KT exceeded the rest of energy mpc2. The baryons and anti baryons annihilated and then leaving just excess of baryon intact. From a fit of nucleon-nucleon scattering theory, the evidence of π, η7, ω, ρ, and mesons can divide the nucleon and anti nucleon scattering amplitude. There are bound states of nucleon and anti nucleon pairs, which can be identified with mesons π, ρ, ω, and η7. Such a situation in which some particles appear as bound states and act as agent for Special Forces. Dashen .R (Dashen. R Physics Review-Vol187; P345; 1969) summarized a basic formula relating to Gibb’s potential Ω to it’s value Ω0 for free particles and to collision matrix –
S Ω =Ω0 -KT/2π∫δEc-E/KT trace [clogs (E) ee-∑u1n1]. Analysis of this result drives a phase transition at a temperature of KT of the order of 350 Mev. Above this temperature, nucleon and anti nucleon tended to remain separately from each other’s.

. We do not Know yet exactly what happened to the antimatter. Perhaps the LHC will give us a clue


Refrerence
1] Star Stories and the Nobel Prizes
2] “ Why There's More Matter Than Antimatter in the Universe” Thread at BAD Astronomy and universe today www.bautforum.com thread author Fraser and 7th reply by Gourhead dated 05-April-2008
www.bautforum.com/universe-today-story-comments/72136-why-theres-more-matter-than-antimatter-universe.html - 311k

3] Nambu , Kobayashi and Maskawa’s(Nobelprize winner of 2008 inPhysics) Advance Report http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2008/phyadv08.pdf
4] Why matter is more then antimatter in the Universe?-Our ...theory at Extreme Astronomy Extreme Astronomy > Astronomy > General Astronomy
www.extremeastronomy.com/.../1883-why-matter-is-more-then-antimatter-in-the-universe-our-theory.html

5] Extreme Astronomy > Astronomy > General Astronomy

Symmetry or Breaking the symmetry- what was the laws of nature? Author Pranab
www.bautforum.com/.../80592-Symmetry-or-Breaking-the-symmetry-what-was-the-laws-of-nature
6] Antimatter & Anti universe by pranab
www.bautforum.com/.../41772-antimatter-antiuniverse.html

tusenfem
2010-Sep-12, 03:41 PM
So, if I interpret correctly, your ATM is "the anti-matter disappeared in another universe"?
It would be nice to cut it down a bit and put in some blank lines to improve readability.
You might want to correct Hannes Alfeven into Hannes Alfvén.

inflector
2010-Sep-15, 06:26 PM
I'm interested in your ideas as this is an open area of research for me but your formatting is very hard to read. I strongly suggest putting whitespace between paragraphs as tusenfem suggests and opening with a three or four sentence summary of the idea so the rest of us can decide whether or not your idea is worth spending the additional effort to understand.

pranab
2010-Sep-20, 11:59 AM
I'm interested in your ideas as this is an open area of research for me but your formatting is very hard to read. I strongly suggest putting whitespace between paragraphs as tusenfem suggests and opening with a three or four sentence summary of the idea so the rest of us can decide whether or not your idea is worth spending the additional effort to understand.
Our Proposed Theory
After the Plank epoch, when the age of the universe was t ≤10-43S and the temperature of the universe was T≥109Gev , we can be sure enough , that the interactions between the matter and the antimatter at their first quark level became unimportant. This was because of that rate for gravitational interaction was much less then the expansion rate of the universe. Although the interactions between matter and antimatter particles kept each of them separately in a thermal equilibrium and thus probably Two world were created. These Two world did not feel each others existence at very microscopic level. During the primordial nucleosynthesis of the early universe, which started 1S after the initial Big Bang moment, the yield of the Big Bang depended on the expansion rate of the Universe. The expansion density PT= P+Ps by R0/R= [(δπGN/3)(P+Ps)]1/2 where P and Ps= density of matter and Antimatter, R= Cosmic scale factors. During this early epoch the universe was radiation dominated with P=g (π2/30)T4 where g counts the effective number of degrees of freedom particles (Rupak Bhattacharjee and Prof. Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya). The temperature of the particle world and that of anti particle world were not the same. The inflation occurred in the two worlds in both the sector but not necessarily simultaneously. The inflation involved was a random event in the nucleation of a bubble or in the formation of a fluctuation region. At the beginning of the inflation the universe was in false vacuum state for both the world. The bubble nucleated for one world, first say for antimatter world. As the bubble grew exponentially in physical size, both the temperature of matter and antimatter decreased exponentially. At this time the ratio of entropy remained constant. When the antiparticle vacuum energy was converted into radiation, the antiparticle temperature raised and entropy decreased. Eventually a bubble of fluctuation region formed for the matter world within the antimatter bubble. During the second phase of inflation, new bubble grew exponentially. When the vacuum energy of ordinary matter world converted into radiation, the temperature of particle world raised to a temperature, which was exponentially larger than the temperature of the antiparticle world. Thus the entropy was reduced further. To an exponentially small value and the matter dominated the visible universe.

pranab
2010-Sep-25, 07:08 AM
See the Comment of Dr. Enrico Fermi[ he must not be original Enrico Fermi as Enrico Fermi N.L died in 1954 ] but he is a ph.D from cornell university in physics in his face book
Enrico Fermi _""Thanks for the link and the invitation to participate in the discussion. Unfortunately, cosmology is not my specialty and so any opinions I have would be rather speculative. Your two universe (regular matter and anti-matter) theory seems ...reasonable, especially in light of the big bang perhaps being caused by two brane-universes colliding. However, imo the best way to flush out alternative theories is by submitting a paper for publication in an appropriate physics journal where it will be subjected to rigorous peer review by other experts in the area. Endless debating between non-experts on an internet blog achieves little, I believe."
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000808215666

Niladri
2010-Oct-01, 03:49 PM
I strongly (very strongly actually) suggest that you should stop this. This is misleading people who know nothing about physics. If you think you can come up with some brilliant theory or go against mainstream physics, you should atleast complete a graduate level course and a PhD in mainstream physics. From your posts it is very clear you know absolutely nothing about physics (and please, it is Planck's not Palnk's!). It takes atleast 10 years of very very hard work (if you are intelligent enough!)and serious study of physics before you can even make a comment, let alone formulating a new theory!
Initially, your posts were like casual fun to read. But gradually it became too much to digest and I had to register in this stupid community and make a comment! You have the right to take time out of your 'busy' schedule and write whatever you like, but you have no right to mislead the non-experts.
It takes decades of very very serious research by some of the most brilliant minds to come up with useful theories. Also, I must appreciate the time and effort you invested to come up with these jokes! Next time just mention, 'do not take it seriously', and keep writing these brilliant theories, because we really enjoy it!

PetersCreek
2010-Oct-01, 05:50 PM
Niladri,

Welcome to the BAUT forums. As frustrated as you may be, our rules call for politeness. Please take some time to read those rules, linked in my signature below, and make your future posts in accordance with them.

Niladri
2010-Oct-03, 12:42 AM
Peter,

I have referred to:
1. the physics knowledge of the person (zero in this case).
2. to his 'theories' as jokes.

I have not attacked him personally, but simply disparaged his 'theories' and 'knowledge.' He is of course free to type whatever he feels, but I think being a responsible person, at some point you should be careful of what you write. You do not cite facebook articles in science!
At first glance it appears to be a harmless discussion, but if you see carefully, the author seems to be well placed practitioner of science. So, it shocks all of us as to how irresponsible can one be to go ahead and publish all these non-sense which they call their wonderful thoeries! From the hard work you put in your own field to become well placed in your career (as he is), can you not see it takes years of serious (and not coffee table) studies to achieve mastery over a particular field? Notice time and again Planck is typed as Plank (in one case Palnk!) which shows he clearly cannot even spell it properly. I think in today's world where information is so easily accessible and can be taken seriously by non-experts, you should be more careful about what you write.
Please note: I am not launching any personal attacks, but simply criticizing the irresponsible and shocking behaviour on display here.

Thanks and regards,
Niladri.

pzkpfw
2010-Oct-03, 04:00 AM
Arguing moderation in thread is also off-topic. Please do read the rules. Your post was impolite in multiple ways.

tusenfem
2010-Oct-03, 11:10 AM
Peter,

I have referred to:
1. the physics knowledge of the person (zero in this case).
2. to his 'theories' as jokes.

I have not attacked him personally, but simply disparaged his 'theories' and 'knowledge.' He is of course free to type whatever he feels, but I think being a responsible person, at some point you should be careful of what you write. You do not cite facebook articles in science!
At first glance it appears to be a harmless discussion, but if you see carefully, the author seems to be well placed practitioner of science. So, it shocks all of us as to how irresponsible can one be to go ahead and publish all these non-sense which they call their wonderful thoeries! From the hard work you put in your own field to become well placed in your career (as he is), can you not see it takes years of serious (and not coffee table) studies to achieve mastery over a particular field? Notice time and again Planck is typed as Plank (in one case Palnk!) which shows he clearly cannot even spell it properly. I think in today's world where information is so easily accessible and can be taken seriously by non-experts, you should be more careful about what you write.
Please note: I am not launching any personal attacks, but simply criticizing the irresponsible and shocking behaviour on display here.

Thanks and regards,
Niladri.

Then, prithee, why not come up with real arguments, and show where the errors in pranab's ideas are?

Niladri
2010-Oct-03, 01:39 PM
Absolutely no error in Pranab's ideas! It was my error to post here! Enjoy doing cutting edge physics. Good luck!

inflector
2010-Oct-03, 07:55 PM
After all that you don't want to point out the "irresponsible and shocking behavior" in specifics? I mean, is pointing out the spelling typos the worst specific criticism you can make?

Seriously?

pranab
2010-Oct-05, 03:55 PM
For Niladri
You can see the link where I published it as Comments in blog post of
Ethan Siegel who is a theoretical astrophysicist & who currently teaches at Lewis & Clark College in Portland, and for your information I am a professor in pathology in prestigious Institute of post Graduate Medical Education & research Kolkata W.B Possess MD degree of CU, with plenty Numbers of fellowship and I do possess 16 articles published at Nature as comments Six articles in Science insider of AAAS, besides plenty in BMJ, Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine, JCP JAMA etc with plenty Citation Reference. I have publication in theoretical physics in Science News of American Society for Science in Nature, in science Insider
one can find my publications of articles in Google search/ Google scholar Search with Key words" Professor Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya"
http://http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2010/03/the_greatest_story_ever_told_-_4.php

amazeofdeath
2010-Oct-05, 04:10 PM
Interesting, does now an MD degree include studies in cosmology and theoretical physics?

In any case, could you recap the theory in a few (let's say 5 or so) sentences, like was asked earlier? Could you also recap how your theory is different from the current view based on parity violations?

pranab
2010-Oct-06, 12:14 PM
Interesting, does now an MD degree include studies in cosmology and theoretical physics?

In any case, could you recap the theory in a few (let's say 5 or so) sentences, like was asked earlier? Could you also recap how your theory is different from the current view based on parity violations?

No. MD degree stands for[Doctor of Medicine] is Doctoral degree of Calcutta University in Medicine and allied sciences and it is the highest form of degree in Pathology all over the India. The syllebus of MD did never include either theoretical physics or cosmolology or physics. However there remains no bar for a Doctoral level teacher /ora practising pathologist /ora physicians/or a surgeon/ ora gyneacologists to study in depth the subjects like physics/mathematics or the theoretical physics- if he/orshe finds interest in it as i myself think when he/she studied it in Higher school level. Still here in West Bengal, India in MBBS/ B.Tech course entry ponit is through a Joint entrance examination and Most brilliant students for MBBS course are selected those who ranks in first 1500 only. Post Graduate diploma entrance examination is further tough for those who complete internship after MBBS. and then for MD degree entrance examination is toughest one to get chance. MD final examination is toughest one to pass. So those who completes MD degree probably has enough and enough intellegence to study by self otherany dam subjects if he/she wishes and continues. In my educational carrier, from my junior school age, I remained always topper in my class , in the state -in my school leaving board examination [Higher secondary] and in university all undergraduate, diploma & Post Graduate/ doctoral level exam in my years with university 9 gold medals and 43 college certificates of merit .I became interested in cosmolgy &theorretical physics with my brothers[ Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya ]who is also a graduate Bsc [CU] and Msc[JU] in mathematics of course for some definite reasons and so and I had to study extensive Physics/cosmology in depth since 1993, including articles published in world's top impact factor journals on physics & theoretical physics. For last 17 years I have probably acquired whatever a very little knowledge on cosmology may not be enough for you.
I explained probably in very short, what I wanted to tell in our theory and how it differs from current CP violation theory of A. Sakarov I hope that positive critism of our idea should come if you have as an external peer, before i send our idea to a journal of theoretical physics. It is my practice always to have opinion of peers regarding any of my idea/theory before sending them for vigerous peer review in any journal be it cosmolgy/medicine/pathology/ theoretical physics

Cougar
2010-Oct-06, 01:23 PM
Too many words, Pranab!

This is about as far as I got:


Then, just one second after the start of the big bang, the antimatter surprisingly disappeared. What happened to it all is still a big question before physicists?

This is not what physicists question. The antimatter did not "surprisingly disappear." Physicists know exactly what happened to it. It interacted with the matter, resulting in photons. The question is, Why isn't our Universe composed entirely of photons? (since matter and antimatter always seem to be generated together, equally). Well, obviously there was/is some slight asymmetry in there somewhere. We observe about a billion photons per baryon in the Universe. That's how slight the asymmetry is.

korjik
2010-Oct-06, 06:04 PM
Too many words, Pranab!

This is about as far as I got:



This is not what physicists question. The antimatter did not "surprisingly disappear." Physicists know exactly what happened to it. It interacted with the matter, resulting in photons. The question is, Why isn't our Universe composed entirely of photons? (since matter and antimatter always seem to be generated together, equally). Well, obviously there was/is some slight asymmetry in there somewhere. We observe about a billion photons per baryon in the Universe. That's how slight the asymmetry is.

Isnt even 'Why isn't our Universe composed entirely of photons?' also aswered? I thought that Weak force did enough CP violation to allow the seen amount of matter.

Shaula
2010-Oct-06, 09:48 PM
Isnt even 'Why isn't our Universe composed entirely of photons?' also aswered? I thought that Weak force did enough CP violation to allow the seen amount of matter.
AFAIK the effects observed with the first two generations of quarks are not enough but evidence is building that the effect is larger in the third generation. I've not seen any references that say it has been shown to be enough yet though. I'd guess, however, that we need to better understand how this effect would manifest as the forces unified.

korjik
2010-Oct-06, 09:53 PM
AFAIK the effects observed with the first two generations of quarks are not enough but evidence is building that the effect is larger in the third generation. I've not seen any references that say it has been shown to be enough yet though. I'd guess, however, that we need to better understand how this effect would manifest as the forces unified.

yeah, thats right. Thanks

Cougar
2010-Oct-07, 02:27 AM
I thought that Weak force did enough CP violation to allow the seen amount of matter.

That's where some asymmetry has been found, but so far not near enough. An excellent account of the search for it at the accelerator labs by a veteran experimentalist, Helen Quinn, is her well titled book, The Mystery of the Missing Antimatter (2007).

amazeofdeath
2010-Oct-07, 12:35 PM
pranab, can you show how your postulated separation process between matter and antimatter can work in a mixture of matter, antimatter, and energy (photons)? You seem to claim that the separation comes from momentum transfer from the particles to electrons (why not positrons, too?) and photons, and vice versa. How can this process be spatially asymmetric between matter and antimatter? Can you show that the process is strong enough to overcome Coulombic attraction between the two types of particles? How does photon-photon pair production sit in this?

pranab
2010-Oct-08, 12:00 PM
I hope every one questions will statisfy with advance report on Nobel prize -2008 on Broken symmetry and antimatter by Royal Swedish Academyhttp://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2008/phyadv08.pdf
in the Link

PetersCreek
2010-Oct-08, 02:11 PM
No, you may not answer questions simply by posting a link. You must provided specific answers to questions...here, in this forum. Links are for references.

Strange
2010-Oct-08, 02:18 PM
I hope every one questions will statisfy with advance report on Nobel prize -2008 on Broken symmetry and antimatter by Royal Swedish Academyhttp://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2008/phyadv08.pdf
in the Link

Does this mean you are abandoning your theory (whatver it is) in favor of the mainstream?

pranab
2010-Oct-11, 11:34 AM
It is a very well known fact that matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts in the Big Bang but somehow the antimatter disappeared resulting in the Universe, and everything in it, including ourselves, being made of the remaining matter .One of the greatest mysteries of the universe is its apparent composition of only matter, and not by antimatter. Why? As we accept it that matter and antimatter were created equally at the time of the Big Bang, matter and antimatter should have annihilated into pure energy if they were in mixed in a single compartment [the universal rule is that a particle and its antimatter particle annihilate whenever they meet: they disappear and their kinetic plus rest-mass energy is converted into other particles (E = mc2). For example, when an electron and a positron annihilate at rest, two gamma rays, each with energy 511 keV, are produced. These gamma rays go off in opposite directions because both energy and momentum must be conserved. ] but probably not only to photon but also neutrinos as “couger” told in his post no #23. Clearly, this did not however happen. Why not happened? Was it due to that particle oscillated between matter and antimatter as a dancing quark? [when we take the most elementary form of particle is quarks] and as a phenomenon of “Broken symmetry”? In 1967, late Prof. Andrei Sakharov (the Nobel prize winner in peace-1975) pointed and explained however that CP violation was the cause of such an asymmetry in the universe .In shakarov’s CP violation theory & later spontaneous symmetry breaking theory, the quark becomes automatically an anti-quark while the anti-quark becomes a quark [dancing Quarks], thus transforming the kaon [combination of a quark and an anti quark? possible without going to annihilation –an universal theory ?] into its anti kaon. In this way the kaon particle flips between itself and its anti-self. But if the right conditions are met, the symmetry between matter and antimatter will be broken. Nambu , Kobayashi and Maskawa’s (Nobel prize winner of 2008 in Physics) also indicated that it should be possible to study a major violation of symmetry in B-meson particles. It is known that neutral βs meson (β-anti quark &s quark . Please note it is not β -quark and its antiparticle anti β-quark particle but rather strange quark) spontaneously transform into its antimatter particles. The current theory of particle physics states that βs meson oscillates very quickly. As a result of their very rapid oscillation it is very difficult to detect what really happens to antimatter. On the properties of subatomic particles βs meson(β-anti quark &s quark) suggest that particles oscillated between matter and antimatter . In the first few moments of the Universe, the anti-B-mesons might have decayed differently than their regular matter counterparts [Particle and antiparticle mixing]. The annihilation of matter and antimatter was then not a universal event; annihilation occurred only when a particular particle met its corresponding antiparticle, and both disappeared in a single apartment of particle and antiparticle mixing. But how a sub2atomic particle will definitly identify or know its only antiparticle? Unless the law is universal one for every particle and antiparticle! Or there must be some mechanism that β quark will identify only its antiβ quark. By the time all the annihilations were complete, there was still enough matter left over to give us all the stars, planets and galaxies we see today. How possible in a mixing compartment? In BATAVIA, Illinois—Scientists of the” D Zero collider detector collaboration” at the department of Energy’s, Enrico Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory announced in 2006 that their data on the properties of a subatomic particle, the ** meson (β-anti quark & s quark), in 22nd march 2006, suggested as I told in above paragraphs that the particles can oscillate between matter and antimatter in one of nature’s fastest rapid-fire processes—more than 17 trillion times per second [dancing particle]. Their findings may affect the current view of matter-antimatter asymmetry, and might also offer a first glimpse of the contributions of new physics, such as super symmetry. The D Zero result,[ internationally accepted ] suggested however a preferred oscillation frequency between 17 and 21 times per picosecond (please mind it is trillionth of a second), was described in a paper which was submitted to the journal, in Physical Review Letters- I went through. The result, a measure of the oscillation or “mixing” frequency of the particle, had however a confidence Interval [CI] level of bellow 90 percent, and so it does not probably qualify/fit as a valid experimental result according myself, though published in physical review letters-a top impact factor journal in Higher physics.*All over world, in top impact factor Bio- medical indexed journals at least, editors/ peer-reviewers had agreed that in a valid experiment when confidence interval[CI] is more then 95 percent at least and claims of a break through theory must have a confidence Interval [CI] level of 99.99995 percent, indicating a 99.99995 percent chance that the result can be reproduced any where in any lab in world following similar situation and similar material methods used. For Physics journal the same rules probably applies. The data for the D Zero result were culled from one inverse femtobarn of total collision data, or more than one billion events from Fermilab’s Tevatron particle accelerator -- a milestone capitalizing on the significant luminosity improvements in the Tevatron. The D Zero result at Fermilab should obtain a result with much greater precision than the D Zero result published to prove switch from matter to antimatter and back, that is the curious subatomic world where particles can spontaneously turn into their own antiparticles and back as per Late Prof. A Sakarav.N.L . The current theory of matter suggests that ** mesons (β-anti quark &s quark) oscillate very much faster than Bd mesons (anti-bottom quark plus a down quark); and consequently, their oscillations are very difficult to detect in laboratory. Almost all ** mesons turn into anti-mesons in a fraction of a trillionth of a second [how to detect that and possible at all in a single compartment?]. Measuring the frequency of oscillation is of utmost importance, since a deviation from predictions could point to some unexpected new force or interaction lurking around the corner. Again the D-meson probably must interact with "virtual particles," which through quantum fluctuations pop into existence for a brief moment before disappearing again. Their momentary existence was enough to spark the D-meson's transformation into an anti-D-meson[3]. It is no doubt fact that PEP-II accelerator complex at SLAC, also known as the B Factory, allowed the BaBar collaboration to study not only B-mesons but also several other types of particles including the D-mesons. A flurry of particles in a variety of combinations is produced when electrons and positrons collide at high energy in the PEP-II collider facility. One of the most elusive results of this flurry is the transformation of one particle into its anti-particle in a process physicist’s call it "mixing." Neutral K-mesons, observed more than 50 years ago, were the first elementary particles to demonstrate this phenomenon. About 20 years ago, scientists observed mixing with the B-meson. Now, for the first time, the BaBar experimenters had seen the D-meson transform into its anti-particle, and vice versa [2] To switch from matter to antimatter, the D-meson must interact with many other "virtual particles," which through quantum fluctuations pop into existence for a brief moment before disappearing again. Their momentary existence is enough to spark the D-meson's transformation into an anti-D-meson. But the BaBar detector cannot directly saw these virtual particles[2]. More over, Neutrinos particle should have anti-neutrinos. Neutrinos, the charge less particles that course through our body every moment by the billion, should essentially behave the same way as their anti-particle, the anti-neutrino. But two experiments [The Mini Boo NE results ] presented at major neutrino conference in Athens, Greece-2010 june evidenced that, maybe, the cousins might behave quite differently. The difference could be new evidence that an expected symmetry in neutrinos is not conserved. And that in turn would provide physicists with another mechanism for explaining the prevalence of matter over anti-matter in the Universe [1]. Experiments have so far shown that, by itself, CP violation in quarks from flavor mixing in the Standard Model is probably not the sole source of the matter-antimatter asymmetry observed in the universe. However current knowledge of CP violation is incomplete and insufficient by many orders of magnitude to account for the primordial matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe


Is other dimension or dark matter and a zero mass particle responsible-?

Did a zero mass particle must existed at the energy of the Terascale to keep the universe and everything in it from flying apart at the speed of light. The particle that gave mass is however Higgs particle. It is rather Higgs boson, that gave all particles their mass.
According to our present understanding, the Higgs particle itself should have a mass a trillion times beyond the Tera scale. Although the Higgs gives mass to Terascale particles, its own mass should be much, much greater. Why does the Higgs have a mass at the Terascale? Theories of super symmetry and extra dimensions, for example, predict new particles that are close relatives of the Higgs. Some of these particles will be difficult to detect or identify at the LHC, and difficult to distinguish from the Higgs itself. For example, theory says that Higgs particles are matter particles, but in most respects the Higgs behaves more like a new force than like a particle. How can this be? In truth, the Higgs is neither the matter nor force Higgs is just different .Without this Higgs field, all matter would crumble; atoms would fly apart at the speed of light. But problem is So far, no one has ever seen the Higgs field.
Physicists suspect the existence of many Higgs-like particles: If many Higgs-like particles exist, they should interact with each other. They are Higgs-like cousins. The dominance of matter over antimatter in the universe remains a mystery. The family of Higgs particles may have deep connections with this question. In the instant after the Big Bang, physicists believe that the universe was too hot for the Higgs to do its job of dispensing mass. A short time later, the universe cooled enough for the Higgs to go to work. In the subatomic world, forces can also transform one kind of elementary particle into another. These transmutations suggest that the particles that makeup matter are related in fundamental but mysterious ways. One possibility is that there was only one kind of matter particle at the time of the Big Bang, which then took on many seemingly different forms as the universe cooled down. This will mean that the 45 different kinds of matter particles that are known today are really the same particle in different guises
What appear to be missing are a stronger source for this matter-antimatter imbalance and some additional interactions, such as interactions of the Higgs with other Higgs-like particles.


.




References
1] Experiments find "weird" differences between neutrinos and anti-neutrinos*-*Posted by Eric Hand on June 14, 2010 at the great beyond .Nature.com
2] Neil Calder New Form of Matter-antimatter Transformation Observed for the First Time Interactions News Wire #14-07
13 March 2007* http://www.interactions.org Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, http://www.slac.stanford.edu/ - BaBar Collaboration, http://www-public.slac.stanford.edu/babar/
3] Mike Perricone, What Happened to the Antimatter? Fermilab’s DZero Experiment Finds Clues in Quick-Change Meson Interactions News Wire #24-06
22 March 2006 http://www.interactions.orgSource: Fermila Content: Press Release Date Issued: 22 March 2006

*

tusenfem
2010-Oct-11, 12:58 PM
Can you please cut your text into smaller paragraphs? This is hurting my eyes and brain, and most likely other people's too.
A carpet text like this is just unreadable.

tusenfem
2010-Oct-11, 01:00 PM
It is a very well known fact that matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts in the Big Bang but somehow the antimatter disappeared resulting in the Universe, and everything in it, including ourselves, being made of the remaining matter .One of the greatest mysteries of the universe is its apparent composition of only matter, and not by antimatter. Why? As we accept it that matter and antimatter were created equally at the time of the Big Bang, matter and antimatter should have annihilated into pure energy if they were in mixed in a single compartment
*

I think this "greatest mystery" was explained rather well on the previous page.

inflector
2010-Oct-11, 02:40 PM
I concur about the smaller paragraphs. I want to read what you are saying but I just can' do it. Too easy to lose my place in the giant sea of text.

Jim
2010-Oct-11, 04:29 PM
This thread was originally opened August 30 and closed after a day to give the OP time to gather his thoughts. It was reopened at his request September 8. As such, it has passed the 30 days allowed for ATM presentations. Thread closed.