3 ms·

Thought experiment: maybe we are made of antimatter and we’ve been using the wrong words all this time.

defrost 3y ago
The question is better phrased as "why is there such a large imbalance between two symmetry types?". A parallel similar but different disparity is left handed V. right handed sugars with mirror chirality. The answer, on Earth, wrt organic life, is that any tiny initial imbalance in sugar types way back when was doomed to be amplified as the dominant type was replicated forward. It's not so clear what happened in this universe to cause a matter | anti-matter imbalance. Perhaps any of the multiverses that had a perfect balance self destructed and had no remaining intelligent life remaining to ponder why it no longer existed .. and all the remaining universes had an imbalance of one type or the other . . .
- gregjor 3y ago
  Well you missed the sarcasm and my point. The terms “matter” and “antimatter” are human designations. We’re made of matter because we say so.
  - defrost 3y ago
    > Well you missed the sarcasm and my point. Poor assumption on your part. > The terms ... This is just a trite, banal, ankle deep quip hardly worth typing though. Where's the sarcasm?
- 6R1M0R4CL3 3y ago
  there is absolutely NOTHING in current science that proves or demonstrates that the universe started with the same amount of matter and anti-matter. because we can do experiments in accelerators showing there is matter and anti-matter does not imply, nor prove, that the universe started with an equal amount of matter and anti-matter. the universe could have started with ONLY matter. and we can find matter and anti-matter throught experiments... the problem is we have people all around, including dumb scientists, asking themselves "why, why the universe did lose all its antimatter at the start" when there is no proof nor demonstration any anti-matter would have to be present at the start.

The question is better phrased as "why is there such a large imbalance between two symmetry types?". A parallel similar but different disparity is left handed V. right handed sugars with mirror chirality. The answer, on Earth, wrt organic life, is that any tiny initial imbalance in sugar types way back when was doomed to be amplified as the dominant type was replicated forward. It's not so clear what happened in this universe to cause a matter | anti-matter imbalance. Perhaps any of the multiverses that had a perfect balance self destructed and had no remaining intelligent life remaining to ponder why it no longer existed .. and all the remaining universes had an imbalance of one type or the other . . .

gregjor 3y ago
Well you missed the sarcasm and my point. The terms “matter” and “antimatter” are human designations. We’re made of matter because we say so.
- defrost 3y ago
  > Well you missed the sarcasm and my point. Poor assumption on your part. > The terms ... This is just a trite, banal, ankle deep quip hardly worth typing though. Where's the sarcasm?
6R1M0R4CL3 3y ago
there is absolutely NOTHING in current science that proves or demonstrates that the universe started with the same amount of matter and anti-matter. because we can do experiments in accelerators showing there is matter and anti-matter does not imply, nor prove, that the universe started with an equal amount of matter and anti-matter. the universe could have started with ONLY matter. and we can find matter and anti-matter throught experiments... the problem is we have people all around, including dumb scientists, asking themselves "why, why the universe did lose all its antimatter at the start" when there is no proof nor demonstration any anti-matter would have to be present at the start.