1
$\begingroup$

Question implies all, why is that? Why we exist even after equally creation of matter and anti-matter, any possible exception?

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Nobody knows. Perhaps you could rephrase your question? To something like - are there any proposed ideas or mechanisms that might lead to... ? $\endgroup$ – ProfRob Dec 1 '18 at 17:33
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah, I meant to that. $\endgroup$ – Rahul Singh Dec 1 '18 at 17:37
  • $\begingroup$ Why do you think there was equal creation of matter and anti-matter? The accepted theories do not require this. $\endgroup$ – Rory Alsop Dec 1 '18 at 23:02
  • $\begingroup$ Here is a link to a recent Physics.SE question on this topic. $\endgroup$ – PM 2Ring Dec 2 '18 at 0:21
  • $\begingroup$ The correct answer is that the origin of matter is currently an unsolved problem, possibly the greatest unsolved problem in physics/cosmology. Science doesn't know the answer to your question (for now). There's nothing wrong with "we don't know (for now)" in science. $\endgroup$ – David Hammen Dec 4 '18 at 8:36
-3
$\begingroup$

I presume you're asking about the mystery of the missing antimatter. This features extensively in the popular and scientific media. For example the CERN webpage on the matter-antimatter asymmetry problem is fairly typical. It says the Big Bang should have created equal amounts of matter and antimatter, but everything we see today is made almost entirely of matter. It goes on to say “something must have happened to tip the balance. One of the greatest challenges in physics is to figure out what happened to the antimatter”.

I think it's something of a "clickbait" mystery I'm afraid, to try to curry favour with the paying public. Why do I think that? Because there’s baryon asymmetry, where we see lots of protons but hardly any antiprotons, and there’s also lepton asymmetry where we see lots of electrons but hardly any positrons. And they match. Take a look at positronium. It’s “a system consisting of an electron and its anti-particle, a positron, bound together into an exotic atom”. The electron is matter, and the positron is antimatter. Positronium however is neither matter nor antimatter. It’s both. It’s an exotic atom. Now see page 314 of photon and electron collisions with atoms and molecules edited by Philip Burke and Charles Joachain. It says “the positronium atom thus created is in essence a very light hydrogen atom”. So positronium is both matter and antimatter, and it’s like light hydrogen.

The clear inference from that is hydrogen is also a combination of matter and antimatter. We say the electron is matter, and the proton too. But why? Surely since the proton is more like the positron than the electron, we ought to say the proton is the antimatter. Like this:

enter image description here

That would mean antimatter is a lot more common than people say. The proton mass is 1836 times the electron mass. Which would mean that weight for weight, 99.95% of everything around you is made of antimatter. Where’s all the antimatter gone? Nowhere. Because it’s hiding in plain sight. Because truth be told and by and large, you are made of it.

$\endgroup$
8
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Since the answer has been accepted, I'll add my explanation for the downvote: This answer is mostly incorrect. Claiming that the electron should be called antimatter doesn't fix baryon or lepton asymmetry. This is a personal theory, not science. $\endgroup$ – HDE 226868 Dec 3 '18 at 14:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Right. This is a somehow inspiring answer that doesn't answer the question about what/how an asymmetry is seen. And @HDE 226868★ $\endgroup$ – Alchimista Dec 3 '18 at 14:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JohnDuffield I have no idea what you mean by that quote. A proton and an electron are not the same thing as a positron and an electron. They're completely different - different masses, constituent particles, baryon/lepton number, etc. $\endgroup$ – HDE 226868 Dec 3 '18 at 17:58
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JohnDuffield Positronium has been nicknamed "Light Hydrogen" due to it vaguely sharing some similar traits. However, the reality is that any particle-antiparticle pair (an Onium) is not just a light version of a traditional atom. Your answer is simply not correct. $\endgroup$ – Arkenstein XII Dec 3 '18 at 19:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JohnDuffield I was not suggesting that there is anything vague about the physics. In fact, the physics is quite clear. A Positron, like an Electron, is a lepton. It has the same mass as an electron, but has the opposite (+) charge, a trait it shares with a Proton. Protons, on the other hand, are baryons, and are composed of quarks and are orders of magnitude more massive. The only property that is shared between a Positron and a Proton is the charge. This is not enough to claim that they are more alike than a Positron and an Electron are, when the later clearly share vastly more traits. $\endgroup$ – Arkenstein XII Dec 3 '18 at 22:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.