This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Baryon asymmetry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Yuri Katsuki in a Cardigan.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 15:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Wow, talking about a huge big white elephant in cosmology. Apparently every single physicist has completely forgotten that antimatter is matter with the time direction in the negative. Dirac's solution inverts the time direction. That means that antimatter travels back in time. Of course there is no antimatter in a forward-timed-universe, unless specifically created by high energy phenomena (i.e., you have to put some effort in it). In fact, 99,9999% (the part after the comma isn't really relevant) of all physicists seems to forget that we exist not in a three- or four-dimensional universe, but in a 3.5 dimensional universe, if conceding time is the highest dimension. We have free choice of movement (or interaction) in three dimensions, yet no choice in the fourth, unless by high-energy laboratory experiments. It is truly ridiculous to see college-educated people invoking string-theory (which actually implies that much of current state three-dimensional physics cannot be understood unless, mathematically, one dimension is added in abstracto to make more sense) without actually realizing the true state of particles, and then adding up to 20+ dimensions mathematically because they can't make heads or tails of it. Pathetic, really. Crusty007 ( talk) 00:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Well if matter and antimatter were both being created and annihilating and there was even a slight preponderance of matter over time that got amplified. A Slight preponderance of matter that can't yet be demonstrated experimentally would be sufficient, I think. Proxima Centauri ( talk) 11:37, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
It appears that the asymmetry may have been replicated at Fermilab: A New Clue to Explain Existence. The universe is getting more bizarre all the time.— RJH ( talk) 16:12, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
It is not true that matter would have been completely cancelled by anti matter, Since matter + anti matter <=> photon goes both ways. The baryon to photon ratio would just be about 9 orders of magnitude smaller than it is now. Though I recall the calculation was not completely trivial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.72.121.51 ( talk) 20:03, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
According to relativity, the Space-time interval from one point in space time to another that's x, y, and z, light seconds away from it in perpendicular directions and t seconds into the future is √t2 - x2 - y2 - z2 seconds. Thus, the set of all points in space time that have a 1 second Space-time interval from the big bang is a uniform infinte 3 dimensional hyperbolic space and an observer near the edge of the universe does not observe themself as being at the edge of the universe but instead observes themself as being in the centre of a much younger universe. Since the set of all points in space-time that have a space time interval of 13 billion years from the big bang is an infinitely big uniform hyperbolic space, it has an equal amount of matter and anti-matter. Even so, localized regions can be almost completely regular matter or almost completely anti-matter. The reason is that nothing is perfect and the slight drifting of matter and anti-matter causes some regions to have only barely more matter then antimatter and vice versa but later on, in such a region, almost all of that matter and antimatter annihilates each other to have which ever there was more of exist in a much smaller amount than before. Even unobservably large regions of the universe that initially had barely more matter than antimatter could have almost all of the matter and antimatter in that region annihilate each other until there's only matter left at a much smaller quantity. There could easily be another point in space time that to us is much further into the future really close to the edge of the universe but in the frame of reference of that point is in the centre of the universe only 13 billion years after the big bang and that point might be surrounded by the same amount of antimatter up to an unonservably large distance with practically no matter at all. Most of the annihilation occured in the very early universe so the photons from the annihilation got really heavily redshifted into the microwave background radiation by the expansion of the universe. Blackbombchu ( talk) 02:44, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
It seems to be saying there's no experimental evidence for CP-violation. That's not right. It's well established that the weak nuclear force violates CP-symmetry. The 1980 Nobel Prize in Physics was given for this discovery. Maybe it's correct to say that the known sources of CP-violation aren't enough to account for the Baryon asymmetry? Or that there's no evidence for CP-violation except in the weak force? - Tim314 ( talk) 12:34, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
After calculating the CBR photon density, the next sentence is "Therefore, the asymmetry parameter η, as defined above, is not the "good" parameter" - Where does this conclusion come from? There is nothing to indicate what led to it 192.31.106.35 ( talk) 18:07, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Can someone please put in the current estimate(s) of or limit(s) on the baryon asymmetry parameter(s)? With references please. The article only gives the values of nγ and s. Also it appears to be a carbon-copy of what's in Baryogenesis#Baryon_asymmetry_parameter, these articles should be merged. -- Jasondet ( talk) 05:58, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
The article states: "Regions of the universe where antimatter dominates... The density of matter in intergalactic space is reasonably well established at about one atom per cubic meter. Assuming this is a typical density near a boundary..."
I don't see that as a reasonable assumption, because surely matter-antimatter anihalation would reduce the density, would it not? MathewMunro ( talk) 01:56, 19 April 2020 (UTC)