Perhaps I will show my ignorance in the realm of physics here, but a few weeks ago I was mulling the idea of quantum entanglement over in my mind, and I had an

Perhaps I will show my ignorance in the realm of physics here, but a few weeks ago I was mulling the idea of quantum entanglement over in my mind, and I had an interesting idea that I have yet to bounce off anyone, so perhaps someone could correct any layperson inadequacies. Quantum entanglement in summary is that two or more particles are such that their quantum state relates them to each other, correct? In the big bang, all matter existed at a single point in "time", but we are confused about why there is more matter than anti-matter, correct? Would it be at all possible that perhaps at the big bang or prior, the universe was more balanced in it's symmetry or perhaps even anti-matter existed in greater quantities than matter, but at some point there was (again, forgive my lack of physics knowledge) some sort of a collapse or antimatter blackhole which generated the big bang, and as antimatter collapsed in on itself and was spewed out the other side it became matter, with a side effect of quantum entanglement (since the matter (previously anti-matter) had existed at the same point in time (or some groups of matter had at least)). Now here is the key part, what if anti-matter isn't the opposite of matter, but it is indeed the preferred state of matter (eg, matter seeks to become anti-matter) but the only way that it can do so is to mass together until it becomes a black hole and collapses back into the anti-matter universe? (which would explain the lack of anti-matter where masses of matter exist) Crazy lunatic layperson hypotheses: 1) Matter can become anti-matter and vice versa. 2) There is a natural tendency for balance in the universe. 3) Black holes are where matter goes to become antimatter. 4) White holes are anti-matter becoming matter 5) Gravity and many other observable effects are side effects of this process.