# Matter-antimatter asymetrie

## Recommended Posts

Hi

Where is the antimatter ?

During the Bigbang the energy 'condensed' into matter and antimatter. If we accept the Feynman–Stueckelberg interpretation of antimatter, that antimatter are particle going back in time, then there was nothing before the 'condensation' so the antimatter never encontered matter. Anti matter that was created in that time are going back in time and will never meet matter.

Is it something that was thaught before ?

Thanks

##### Share on other sites

I think this is taking the interpretation too far. The Feynman–Stueckelberg interpretation lead to Feynman diagrams which are a pictorial way of viewing propagators in quantum field theory. You can reverse the direction of the arrow by putting an antiparticle in the place of a particle. This maybe useful, but I am not sure we should really think of particles going backwards in time.

The discrepancy between matter and antimatter is attributed to CP violation in the weak sector of the standard model. For some reason the weak force treats matter and antimatter slightly differently. There is also the open question of if the strong sector really is CP invariant.

##### Share on other sites

Nature please answer questions in accordance to the textbook or concordance teachings. In other words what would be taught in the classrooms. Or with published peer reviewed support

When your answering someone elses questions it is not the time to push personal models.

Now to the OP no one knows what caused the asymmetry between matter and antimatter

More information can be found by googling the term baryogenesis. There may or may not have been a previous stage called leptogenesis.

One of the later Particle physics models feel it may have some bearing on the Higgs instability however there isn't as of yet sufficient evidence to support this claim.

the later model is the SO(10) MSM which is essentially the standard model with the standard model Higgs added. The model is still waiting for sufficient supportive evidence from the various LHC,s CERN included

It should be noted gamma rays etc create antimatter all the time however as there is more matter the antimatter is short lived. However they are not travelling back in time AJB covered that detail.

Here is an article covering antimatter surrounding the Earth

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/08/110810-antimatter-belt-earth-trapped-pamela-space-science/

here is a lengthy review paper on the SO(10) models. There is various sections covering the matter antimatter asymmetry

Edited by Mordred
##### Share on other sites

The discrepancy between matter and antimatter is attributed to CP violation in the weak sector of the standard model.

I thought that it still a theory and that there were no observation of that violation.

The idea of antimatter being matter going back in time is untestable, but can explain some particle process with Feynman diagram, and the matter-antimatter asymetrie. Why should we discard that idea ?

Thanks

##### Share on other sites

The idea of antimatter being matter going back in time is untestable, but can explain some particle process with Feynman diagram, and the matter-antimatter asymetrie. Why should we discard that idea ?

In this process unstable nucleus (proton rich) is emitting positron. Antimatter, antiparticle of electron, with all properties the same as electron, except charge.

Are you expanding your idea also to positrons?

Learn how antiprotons are created in particle accelerators:

$p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow p^+ + p^+ + p^- + p^+$

Relativistic accelerated proton is colliding with proton at rest, and 2 new proton-antiproton particles are created in this process.

Edited by Sensei
##### Share on other sites

I thought that it still a theory and that there were no observation of that violation.

CP violation is observed in the weak sector, but not as far as we know in the strong sector. My understanding is that there is no fundamental reason why we should have CP conservation in the strong sector, but we have not seen any real evidence of violation.

##### Share on other sites

CP violation is observed in the weak sector, but not as far as we know in the strong sector. My understanding is that there is no fundamental reason why we should have CP conservation in the strong sector, but we have not seen any real evidence of violation.

OK Thanks

In this process unstable nucleus (proton rich) is emitting positron. Antimatter, antiparticle of electron, with all properties the same as electron, except charge.

Are you expanding your idea also to positrons?

Learn how antiprotons are created in particle accelerators:

$p^+ + p^+ \rightarrow p^+ + p^+ + p^- + p^+$

Relativistic accelerated proton is colliding with proton at rest, and 2 new proton-antiproton particles are created in this process.

I know that antimatter is observed.

The complete equation for antiproton creation is:

$p^+ + p^+ + 2(m^pc^2)\rightarrow p^+ + p^+ + p^- + p^+$

where $m^p$ is the mass of the proton

Edited by Jacques
##### Share on other sites

I have simple questions for both Sensei and Jacques:
How can happen that “two protons”-- becomes four?

Or how comes that energy 2*(m*C^2) (a very weird concept of how it exist in undefined space, together with many kind of energies that occupy the same undefined space) suddenly shrinks in a very small two portion of space called p and –p.?

Any theoretical clue how it, supposed to happens; any trying experimental work in real science laboratory about its possible mechanism?

##### Share on other sites

Ok Here is something to note. There is a difference between a particles total energy and its rest energy. Total energy is the particles energy at rest. While in motion however the particle has kinetic energy. In particle accelerators the proton is given kinetic energy of a sufficient amount to create the proton and anti proton.

The notation

$e=m_oc^2$ is the particles rest mass or more accurately its inertial mass.

However the particle can also gain kinetic energy.

##### Share on other sites

Sensei
Kramer, you know well it's not "easy question"..

I would run into speculation while trying to answer it.

It is not 2mpc^2 but more, see article here
------ Thanks Sensei , for the recommended article.
But it didn’t go further than the statement of wise man ( E=M0*C^2.) which has discovered this law --- a century ago. Nevertheless reading this article, it gave me satisfaction that unity of electric charge is unbreakable, but didn’t give a clue how they are obtained? .
Another thing: about conservation of baryon number: Why exist this law?
I know that it is not an easy question, and if I asked, it was only by curiosity, to know what new about “why” and “how”. And if not exists “ peer reviews”, at least any speculation about this fundamental conundrum, of mass –energy transformations.
Maybe are moderators, with higher quotes (please don’t take this for offence), that can illuminate me and, if you allow, you too, about this cardinal issue.
Nevertheless (if there isn’t any satisfactory explanation) I would like “the run in to speculation” as layman, from you, or from everybody else, about this thread, (because we are in a cite of speculations).
I would like to read something new, even thought nonsense, creasy, or stupid, motivated so from some bodies that try to castrate the free expressions of thought and ideas.
I think It is about the resemblance and diversity of particles “bosons” and the particles of mater ----anti mater. Do you think that may exists any link between them?

Mordred
Ok Here is something to note. There is a difference between a particles total energy and its rest energy. Total energy is the particles energy at rest. While in motion however the particle has kinetic energy. In particle accelerators the proton is given kinetic energy of a sufficient amount to create the proton and anti proton.

The notation

is the particles rest mass or more accurately its inertial mass.

However the particle can also gain kinetic energy.
----- How transmitted the energy from one body to another?
Is it in form of particles or is it spread in undefined space?
Do mater and antimatter particles constitute it?

##### Share on other sites

Think of a particle accelerator. Magnets propel the particle to higher speeds and thus higher kinetic energy as well as higher mass. It's important to remember there is more than one type of mass. Any particle can have a greater mass than its rest mass. Another example is blueshift sa due to a gravity well.

The increase in momentum is an increase in kinetic energy.

Doesn't matter why or how the particle gains in either frequency or momentum. The same principle applied

##### Share on other sites

Think of a particle accelerator. Magnets propel the particle to higher speeds and thus higher kinetic energy as well as higher mass. It's important to remember there is more than one type of mass. Any particle can have a greater mass than its rest mass. Another example is blueshift sa due to a gravity well.

The increase in momentum is an increase in kinetic energy.
Doesn't matter why or how the particle gains in either frequency or momentum. The same principle applied

----- Eh….no! Magnet --- propel particles, in the same way that gun --- propel bullet. Only idiots may think that cause of propelling a bullet is gun. It is energy of powder.
So please live aside those cheap explanation.
If you want to give any explanation of how the energy from electro-stance can transformed in -p and +p, go forward. Show how the photon of energy (or “field of energy” if you hate “particles concept of energy”), going transformed in different kind of photon, ---- transformed, in the end, in a “mass of 1.67*10^-27 kg.”
I admit, is something new for me: “blueshift and gravity well”. Can you please elaborate, for me, more widely. Maybe I can grasp your idea.
As for Doesn't matter why or how, I think you are wrong. I think they are the most important question in every thing.

##### Share on other sites

Kramer, you know well it's not "easy question"..

I would run into speculation while trying to answer it.

It is not 2mpc^2 but more, see article here

http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/particle_creation.html

Thanks for the link. But would it be correct if it was a collision between two proton beam , instead of a proton beam hitting stationnary proton ?

I have simple questions for both Sensei and Jacques:

How can happen that “two protons”-- becomes four?

Or how comes that energy 2*(m*C^2) (a very weird concept of how it exist in undefined space, together with many kind of energies that occupy the same undefined space) suddenly shrinks in a very small two portion of space called p and –p.?

Any theoretical clue how it, supposed to happens; any trying experimental work in real science laboratory about its possible mechanism?

Very hard to explain how it is happenning, specialy for proton antiproton because they are composed of 3 quarks. I can speculate that there is an intermediate state where the is some gamma ray of hight energy.

We can try to simplify the question with electron-positron creation by a gamma of 1.1Mev.

But we don't know how it is happening to. I can speculate some self-interaction of the magnetic and electric field of the gamma photo to create 2 loops . One for the positive phase of the photon and the other one for the negative phase...

I don"t know if I remember well but I read that a 1.1Mev will not spontanously transform in the electron-positron pair. The photon need to pass by a heavy nucleus...

##### Share on other sites

Nevertheless (if there isn’t any satisfactory explanation) I would like “the run in to speculation” as layman, from you, or from everybody else, about this thread, (because we are in a cite of speculations).

!

Moderator Note

Yes, we are in speculations, but this is not your thread. If you have further questions that are tangential to the OP, or wish to engage in your own speculative explanation, START A NEW THREAD.

This has been explained to you before. I don't think it's a difficult concept, nor an action that's difficult to implement.

Don't respond to this modnote.

##### Share on other sites

Thanks for the link. But would it be correct if it was a collision between two proton beam , instead of a proton beam hitting stationnary proton ?

Two accelerated proton beams is much harder to perform experiment, than having stationary protons in chamber, and single beam of protons.

We need to see, detect, "catch" these newly made particles, and keep them in magnetic traps (so they won't annihilate) for further experiments..

Very hard to explain how it is happenning, specialy for proton antiproton because they are composed of 3 quarks.

It's even harder to describe annihilation process of proton-antiproton. Their acceleration also matters. Accelerated antiprotons colliding with stationary protons will produce something else than stationary antiprotons with stationary protons.

For stationary proton and stationary antiproton annihilation is as below:

##### Share on other sites

In the case of charge for neutral particles the antimatter has the same quarks configuration but opposite charge on the quarks. Color charge.

Even charged particles the antiparticle is based on its opposite color charge.

Take for example proton 2 up and 1 down quarks. The anti proton is 2 anti up and 1 anti down quarks. The electron is elementary and has no substructure so it's anti is opposite electromagnetic charge. The positron.

Gravity has nothing to do with matter antimatter.

## Create an account

Register a new account

×

• #### Activity

×
• Create New...