Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Big Bang matter/antimatter      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 1
Big Bang matter/antimatterPage 1 of 2    (1, 2)
Something for those a little more familiar with the physics than I:

Given that the universe created slightly more matter than anti-matter and that, in the earliest periods of the universe after the big bang, the matter and antimatter destroyed each other, what happened to the energy of that interaction?
 thinker55
Joined: 7/30/2007
Msg: 2
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 9/8/2011 6:54:32 PM
Im not versed in physics all that much but...If the interreaction of matter and anti-matter destroyed each other, then why is there matter today.. maybe the energy that resulted from this process became dark matter..? just asking..
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 3
view profile
History
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 9/8/2011 8:21:43 PM
No physicist here, either, but I do believe that an astrophysicist would state that anti matter decays somewhat faster than matter, resulting in an abundance of matter over anti matter.

imo, simply another "whatever works for you".
 chrono1985
Joined: 11/20/2004
Msg: 4
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 9/8/2011 11:30:04 PM
E=MC^2. This is an equation stating the conversion ratio for matter-energy, and this is not unidirectional. A supernova for example creates a lot of matter that doesn't form under any other conditions known, that matter wasn't present in the star itself, it came into being from all the energy being expelled under extremely chaotic conditions.

There are other considerations however. The early universe would have been much too hot and active for energy to condense into matter, maybe certain plasmas could form under those conditions. The conditions would have been too intense for matter as we know it for a long time.

Think about how we generate energy from most fuels. We apply heat and lots of it. Causes the fuel to go into more and more free states until the only thing remaining is energy and carbon, but if you apply even more heat even the carbon will break down into energy. It's a lot more complicated to go the other way (energy to matter), all of the useful forms of matter are actually very complex structures of smaller forms of matter.

It's not like the stuff just came out at the start of the universe, more like it came in phases to get to the point where it is today.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 5
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 9/9/2011 12:29:16 PM
Matter-antimatter anihilations produce (at least one) another particle-antiparticle pair, consitent with conserving energy, momentum and whatever other quantum numbers are relevant. However, some particles, like photons are their own antiparticles. Since photons are massless, they can always be produced. An e+/e- collision, for example could only produce a muon-antimuon pair if the there is enough kinetic enrgy in the collision to make up for the muon being much heavier than the electron. Eventually, the anihilation of lots of matter and antimatter is going to leave a lot of gamma rays. However, since the universe would have been very dense at that time and not transparent to radiation, the photons would have just gone into the kinetic energy of the left over matter.

The energy… photons or light from this period is observed today as the CMB!

The cmb consists of the photons that corresponded to the blackbody temperature of the matter in the universe at the time the universe was cool enough to form hydrogen atoms and the density was low enough for the universe to be transparent to light.

No physicist here, either, but I do believe that an astrophysicist would state that anti matter decays somewhat faster than matter, resulting in an abundance of matter over anti matter.

That's the only know way to obtain a matter antimatter asymmetry, so that assumption is present in the question.
 PragmaticDoc
Joined: 8/4/2009
Msg: 6
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 9/9/2011 12:38:09 PM
Thats exactly what the discovery channel said, That Anti-matter decays and has a much shorter life than matter. I take everything with a huge grain of salt from the boob tube, nice to see that maybe they got at least one statement right.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 7
idiots follow me
Posted: 9/9/2011 2:06:06 PM

Considering the theory states that it appeared out of nothing... from nowhere and with no cause, maybe the real question should be... where did all this energy come from for it to vanish in the first place?


No, that's not what the theory states.

Possible "preconditions" to the big bang, if there were any, are unknown. It's called cosmogenesis. Big bang refers to the period following cosmogenesis.

How you characterize it, that's a common creationist claim.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 8
idiots follow me
Posted: 9/9/2011 7:04:23 PM

Big bang IS creationist!


Continuously repeating the same claim doesn't make it so.


Cosmogenesis IS creationist... look it up


Refer to my first comment.


Ask an astrophysicist at nasa


Interesting where you chose to cut off that quote. Here, let me help:


Some astronomers, who are religious, argue that the big bang theory confirms the existence of God and the basic elements of the creation story as told in the Bible. First came light, then the heavens, then the Earth ...

However, many other scientists do not. Scientists, like people in most any profession, have a vast diversity of religious beliefs. Some of us attend houses of worship, others do not. Some of us consider ourselves very religious, others consider ourselves staunch atheists. Just because we study astronomy does not mean we have any more agreement as to the ``why'' questions than anyone else.

On the other hand, it is safe to say that as scientists we can agree on an approach to learning about nature and the universe. This approach is one of using observations to test theories. And when a theory has been tested as much as the big bang theory, with each test reconfirming its validity, then we believe that it likely true -- at least more true than those theories which have failed the observational tests.


Intellectual honest sucks, don't it!? I see why you might avoid it.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 9
idiots follow me
Posted: 9/10/2011 3:35:25 PM
So have you worked out where the energy went yet?


Have you?


Seeing as I posed this question in a thread not so long ago where you seemed to have had all the answers then, I find that you now asking the same question here a little incredulous!


And I care why?


I still never got a satisfactory answer though, how is ‘space’ taking this energy?


Given that you've give absolutely no observationally verifiable means by which this could even be remotely considered a legitimate interpretation, the rest of your posts are meaningless.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 10
idiots follow me
Posted: 9/11/2011 6:31:27 AM
Nothing beats repeating what someone says in a more convoluted way!

Not only did I not repeat what you said, what you said was wrong.

I still never got a satisfactory answer though, how is ‘space’ taking this energy?

You've gotten the answer to this question in numerous other threads. You just don't get it.

So you don’t think it is the stretching of space

Space doesn't ``stretch.'' The spacetime expands to become larger. This is also off topic in this tread. Go back and re-read the numerous other threads you've hijacked with this question and read the answers that have already been given to you.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 11
idiots follow me
Posted: 9/11/2011 8:28:59 AM
So, and like I mentioned in previous posts that it is matter distributed throughout the universe that is causing energy to be lost through inelastic scattering of the light and not as previously thought a phenomena that has never been observed.


Ah ha!! I specific claim! And, because you're such an intelligent and intellectually honest person, you have specific observational evidence to back up your claim.

Yeah, I'll wait.


Why should you care? Well like I said is seems a bit incredulous that when I posed the same question about the big bang theory and where did this energy go, you had all the answers, yet here we are with you now asking the same question? Just find it mildly amusing that’s all.


Sounded more like posturing to me. Can't wait for you to provide that specific observational evidence.
 TheDarkerStorm
Joined: 1/1/2011
Msg: 12
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 9/11/2011 4:54:59 PM
From what I've learned, it all got turned into energy as photons.
 Hibernian1960
Joined: 9/13/2008
Msg: 13
view profile
History
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 9/12/2011 6:48:04 PM
http://sanfordundergroundlaboratoryathomestake.org/
index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=288
:grant-to-design-neutrino-detector&catid=24:other&Itemid=58

Got something to do with it, deep dark secrets, right?

So deep dark lab...

Thanks for an interesting thread, guys.
 chrono1985
Joined: 11/20/2004
Msg: 14
idiots follow me
Posted: 9/28/2011 2:39:33 PM
Ok, I had a long post typed up that was crazy informative but just reiterating the stuff you seem to be ignoring, so I'm lead to believe it's a misunderstanding.

What exactly are you referring to as energy? I know it sounds like a basic question, but well energy is a pretty broad term that has both low and high level definitions.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 15
idiots follow me
Posted: 9/28/2011 2:51:15 PM

What exactly are you referring to as energy? I know it sounds like a basic question, but well energy is a pretty broad term that has both low and high level definitions.


To whom is your question addressed?
 Drakens1
Joined: 7/25/2007
Msg: 16
view profile
History
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 10/2/2011 12:55:16 PM
These are fundamental unsolved questions of science. What was there before the big bang, why is there more antimatter than matter. No one knows yet.

Standard theory says there should be equal amounts of matter and antimatter in the universe, why that isn't true is a mystery. There is some unknown asymmetry yet to be discovered.

As for what happens to the energy from the annihilation, it either creates gamma rays as photons or other anti-particle pairs. In the early universe, after the initial quark-guon plasma cooled down enough for hadrons and leptons to form, along with their anti-particle counterparts, the resulting annihilations formed photons. The photons bounced around and interacted with the protons and leptons still around until the universe cooled enough to allow the protons to bind with neutral particles to form atoms. In this state they could no longer interact with the photons readily and this allowed the photons to roam freely. Since theory states that photons are fundamental particles ,they never decay, so these same photons are still zipping around out there, but since the universe has expanded they are now weaker and less energetic, since the same photons now fill up a much larger space. This makes up what we call the cosmic microwave background. It was maybe a little oversimplified, but that's basically the gist of it.
 Osirus33
Joined: 10/13/2011
Msg: 17
Big Bang matter/antimatter
Posted: 10/30/2011 9:03:51 AM
Lol well boys........ I suggest you brief yourselves on SUPERSTRING THEORY...... But there's more!!! MUCH MUCH MORE! IF you only knew :)
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Big Bang matter/antimatter