[Widdekind]

I understand, that our universe, at present epoch, is comprised of matter particles, in the following (approximate) ratios:

Now, if our universe began as "pure raw energy", i.e. photons; and if those photons pair-produced matter / antimatter, e.g. ; then matter / antimatter "must" have emerged in equal (equally enormous) quantities.

Then, negatively charged matter , and positively charged anti-matter , "must" have exerted powerful forces onto each other, the only "escape" from which, was charge neutalization, i.e. neutrinos or neutrons.

If "anti-matter" formed more (anti)neutrinos; then "matter" would have formed more neutrons, i.e.

whichever form of matter produced more neutrons would have become the basis, for all modern "baryonic matter" structures; whereas the other form of matter, producing more neutrinos, would have "ghosted out of the action". Er go, whichever form of matter neutronized > neutrino-ized, i.e. "anti-matter" or "anti-anti-matter", all future baryonic structures, including earth & humans, would necessarily have formed from that matter component, i.e. Anthropic Principle "kicks in".

Later, as our universe cooled, the "neutronium plasma" of evidently decayed mostly to (plus more anti-neutrinos), until approximately 7/8 neutrons had produced protons & electrons, which eventually coalesced into neutral H.

[mathematic]

What is your question?<br><br>If it is the title: charge neutrality =&gt; matter anti-matter symmetry, then the answer is no.<br><br>The difference would lie in the decay processes for anti-matter - which could lead to extra electrons, leaving the net charge neutral.<br>

This post has been edited by mathematic: 23 January 2012 - 04:19 AM

[Widdekind]

If, from the Big Bang, N photons were initially generated (having no net charge)...

and those N photons pair produced N fermions, and N anti-fermions (having no net charge)...

then those particles & anti-particles, could have mutually interacted, via random processes, e.g. W-boson exchange, to produce random numbers, of photons (from annihilations); and neutral particles, which would then "opt out" of the intense EM interactions, attracting the other particles to their mutual dooms. And, there are two such ways to "charge neutralize", and "opt out" -- form neutrons (or anti-neutrons), or form neutrinos (anti-neutrinos).

Most matter & antimatter annihilated. But, randomly, there would plausibly have been "a few survivors" on "either side". However, the "side" that produced more neutrons, would necessarily have produced fewer neutrinos, et vice versa. So, perhaps there is no matter / anti-matter asymmetry, i.e. the number of surviving fermions = number of surviving anti-fermions -- even though there is an matter / anti-matter difference, for the former primarily "neutronized", whilst the latter primarily "neutrino-ized" ?

If so, then from "the fires of creation" came a blizzard of blistering photons, and a dusting of neutral particles, namely anti-neutrinos, and neutrons, whose charge neutrality had allowed them to "opt out" of annihilation. The matter neutrons became our baryons, i.e. "the foreground actors", whilst the anti-neutrinos became "background". Is it possible, that our cosmos is replete, with a background of anti-neutrinos ? Would that imply that protons should decay, via anti-neutrino absorption ? But does not observed charge neutrality, imply numerical symmetry between the matter & antimatter, which carry equal & opposite charges ?

[mathematic]

Could be. If you consider electrons anti-matter. Then they balance protons. They already balance as charge.

[DrRocket]

The question as to the mechanism that results in the observed asymmetry in abundance of matter and antimatter is not completely settled. However, it is generally believed that it is the result of the known violation of CP symmetry in quantum field theories.

http://en.wikipedia....ki/CP_violation

[IM Egdall]

mathematic, on 23 January 2012 - 11:40 PM, said:

Could be. If you consider electrons anti-matter. Then they balance protons. They already balance as charge.

This is wrong. For one thing, matter and antimatter have the same mass but opposite charge. But protons are much more massive than electrons -- so they cannot be matter-antimatter pairs.

Positrons have the same mass as electrons and have opposite charge. A positron and electron make up a matter-antimatter pair.

[mathematic]

IM Egdall, on 24 January 2012 - 10:28 PM, said:

This is wrong. For one thing, matter and antimatter have the same mass but opposite charge. But protons are much more massive than electrons -- so they cannot be matter-antimatter pairs.

Positrons have the same mass as electrons and have opposite charge. A positron and electron make up a matter-antimatter pair.

The remainder of the mass could end up as energy (photons) or neutrino-antineutrino pairs. The main difficulty is that we don't know (as Dr. Rocket noted) the mechanism that led to the imbalance between matter and anti-matter.

My assertion is that, after the decay of the anti-matter, the residual charge would end up as electrons.

[Klaynos]

!

Moderator Note

Hi mathematic, please could you not respond to others threads with your own conjecture. This is thread hijacking and against our rules. If you wish to discus something outside mainstream physics please start a thread in speculations. If you do so on this I strongly suspect someone will ask you to propose some mechanism of how this would work.

Please do not reply to this modnote.

[Airbrush]

I don't understand the math above, but I thought the reason we see only matter, and no antimatter, is because shortly after the big bang there was a tiny bit more matter than antimatter. When all the antimatter annihilated an equal amount of matter, there was a tiny bit of matter left over, which is the universe.