Antimatter Universe

Hi everyone ! Our universe has antimatter partner on the other side of the Big Bang, say physicists https://physicsworld.com/a/our-universe-has-antimatter-partner-on-the-other-side-of-the-big-bang-say-physicists/.

Is it possible in Ur opinion ?

1 Like

It is interesting to consider. I have a problem with the premise and the way it is described . . . and that is more or less illustrated by the graphic in the article:

Wouldn’t expanding from a “point” (a dot) occur in every direction, not only two, thereby “fissioning” (for want of a term) in every direction into a fractal universe? Same for contracting into a point being a process of fractal timelines from from every direction “fusing”.
It’s the ol’ 3rd law at play . . . for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction . . . but is there any way around it? Mary G.

since there is no actual, existing, physical “timeline” in nature, i feel these physicsworld dot com articles are just full of general-relativistic mental diarrhea. that is the opinion, ofc :sunglasses:

1 Like

It makes sense to me. After all, isn’t the teaching of the :tao: that in the beginning the oneness was cleaved into duality? And where did all that anti-matter go anyway?

1 Like

I understand the thought MrVedicAi, lol. However there is extreme pressure from explosion (e.g. big bang in outward direction if that hapens) and extreme pressure inward with implosion (e.g. contraction of universe if that happens). So every bit of mass of any type that was the result of the big bang would be propelled outward, spinning, and there must have been a lot of fusion to start which created protons then hydrogen . . . I see that as “fractal” more or less simply in respect of moving outward from an unmeasurable small space to an immeasurably large space - or moving inward when it is implosion.

I am still a proponent of an oscillating universe that reaches equilibrium at the furthest expanse and at singularity - the equilibrium being timeless but also an immeasurable instant.