Reason for matter rather than antimatter?

In summary, the conversation discussed the creation of particle/antiparticle pairs at the end of the inflation period and the possibility of one member of the pair traveling backwards in time, which could explain why we only see particles in the universe. However, this idea was deemed incorrect as it goes against current observations and is based on personal speculation. The conversation also touched on the vacuum energy density and its role in energy measurement. Overall, the topic remains open to further research and discussion.
  • #1
jcap
170
12
At the end of the inflation period (if it occurred) the potential energy of the inflaton field decays into particle/antiparticle pairs.

When a particle/antiparticle pair is created each component of the total 4-momentum of the pair is zero. This must include the time component as well as the spatial components.

Thus one member of the pair travels forwards in time (the particle with positive time-momentum/energy) and the other travels backwards in time (the antiparticle with negative time-momentum/energy).

As we are made of particles going forwards in time could this be the reason why we only see particles in the universe?
 
Last edited:
  • Skeptical
Likes Motore
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
When a particle/antiparticle pair is created each component of the total 4-momentum of the pair is zero.
That's not correct. The production needs at least twice the mass of the particles as energy, that is larger than zero.
Thus one member of the pair travels forwards in time (the particle with positive time-momentum/energy) and the other travels backwards in time (the antiparticle with negative time-momentum/energy).
Even if the above would be right that wouldn't be correct either. It would mean some particles have negative energy, which is not what we observe.
jcap said:
As we are made of particles going forwards in time could this be the reason why we only see particles in the universe?
No.
 
  • #3
Using cosmological measurements the vacuum energy density is estimated to have an energy scale of ##T=(\rho_{vac})^{1/4}=10^{-3}## eV.

But as far as we know it could have had an energy scale in excess of ##1.02## MeV in which case pairs of electrons could be created spontaneously out of the vacuum.

I know that the vacuum energy density is constant but for the sake of argument assume that somehow in the distant past the vacuum had an effective local energy scale of ##T=1.02## MeV.

Now as far as I understand it the vacuum energy scale can be taken to be the zero-point of energy measurement.

Thus one could say that in the distant past electron pairs were created spontaneously out of zero energy.

In that case one electron has positive energy/time-momentum and travels forwards in time whereas the other electron has negative energy/time-momentum and travels backwards in time.

This would explain why, at the present time, we only see positive-energy primordial electrons and not negative-energy primordial electrons (positive-energy primordial positrons).

Would this make sense?
 
Last edited:
  • Skeptical
Likes Motore
  • #4
jcap said:
At the end of the inflation period (if it occurred) the potential energy of the inflaton field decays into particle/antiparticle pairs.

When a particle/antiparticle pair is created each component of the total 4-momentum of the pair is zero. This must include the time component as well as the spatial components.

Thus one member of the pair travels forwards in time (the particle with positive time-momentum/energy) and the other travels backwards in time (the antiparticle with negative time-momentum/energy).

As we are made of particles going forwards in time could this be the reason why we only see particles in the universe?
If we were made from antimatter, then we would refer to matter as antimatter. It's all about perspective
 
  • #5
jcap said:
as far as I understand it the vacuum energy scale can be taken to be the zero-point of energy measurement

No, it can't, not in this context.

jcap said:
Would this make sense?

No. It's personal speculation. Personal speculation is not allowed at PF. Thread closed.
 

FAQ: Reason for matter rather than antimatter?

What is the reason for the existence of matter rather than antimatter?

The reason for the existence of matter rather than antimatter is still a mystery in the field of physics. According to the Big Bang theory, equal amounts of matter and antimatter were created in the early universe. However, as the universe expanded and cooled, the matter and antimatter particles collided and annihilated each other, leaving behind a small amount of matter that makes up our present-day universe. The exact reason for this imbalance is still unknown and is an active area of research.

How do scientists study the reason for matter rather than antimatter?

Scientists study the reason for matter rather than antimatter through experiments and observations in particle accelerators, such as the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). These experiments involve colliding particles at high energies to recreate the conditions of the early universe and study the behavior of matter and antimatter. Additionally, scientists also study the properties of particles and their interactions through theoretical models and simulations.

Could there be a parallel universe made up of antimatter?

It is possible that there could be a parallel universe made up of antimatter. In fact, some theories suggest that there could be multiple universes with different physical laws and compositions. However, there is currently no concrete evidence to support the existence of a parallel universe made up of antimatter.

Can matter and antimatter coexist?

No, matter and antimatter cannot coexist in large quantities. When matter and antimatter particles come into contact, they annihilate each other, releasing a huge amount of energy. This is why the existence of matter in our universe is a mystery, as it suggests that there must have been some mechanism that caused the matter and antimatter to separate and prevent them from annihilating each other completely.

What implications does the existence of matter rather than antimatter have on the universe?

The existence of matter rather than antimatter has significant implications on the universe. If matter and antimatter were created in equal amounts during the Big Bang, the universe would have been annihilated in a matter of seconds. The fact that matter exists in our universe has allowed for the formation of stars, galaxies, and ultimately, life. Understanding the reason for this imbalance can also provide insights into the fundamental laws of physics and the origin of the universe.

Similar threads

B Matter-antimatter asymmetry - a simple explanation?
Replies
12
Views
2K
B Why do we assume the big bang created matter/antimatter?
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Unraveling the Mystery of Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry in the Early Universe
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Q re early universe matter-antimatter annihilation
Replies
8
Views
2K
Could this be an explanation why there is more matter than antimatter?
Replies
16
Views
4K
Why is there more matter than antimatter at this point?
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Effect of Dark Matter on fast moving bodies
Replies
10
Views
1K
Is the Total Energy of the Universe Really Zero?
Replies
16
Views
2K
I Relationship between negative mass, energy and antimatter
Replies
10
Views
2K
B Is CP Symmetry Violation the Key to Explaining Matter-Antimatter Imbalance?
Replies
5
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top