Anti-Neutrino/Neutrino conversion rate

[hertz vanrental]

Hope that someone out there can help.

Just finished reading a book that stated that the conversion rate of Anti-Neutrino to Neutrino is faster than the conversion rate of Neutrino to anti-Neutrino and, in fact, this applies to other matter/anti-matter particle pairs. This leads to a matter/antimatter particle pair imbalance in favour of the matter particle pair.

When cooling took place during Big Bang and the matter/antimatter particle pair annihilation occured, the matter/anti-matter particle pair imbalance gave rise to matter particle pairs which were not annihilated and which, subsequently, formed the universe that we know today.

Sadly, the book doesn't state the reason for the differences in the matter/anti-matter conversion rates. Probably because the book was written in 2009 and the reason was unknown back then.

Anyone know of any research which would suggest why the asymmetry existed?

I believe that this is also known as the Baryon Asymmetry if this helps.

[Smellyoldgit]

Mr Wiki is firmly in the "no fucking idea" camp.

In physics, the baryon asymmetry problem, also known as the matter asymmetry problem or the matter-antimatter asymmetry problem, is the observed imbalance in baryonic matter (the type of matter experienced in everyday life) and antibaryonic matter in the observable universe. Neither the standard model of particle physics, nor the theory of general relativity provides a known explanation for why this should be so, and it is a natural assumption that the universe be neutral with all conserved charges. The Big Bang should have produced equal amounts of matter and antimatter. Since this does not seem to have been the case, it is likely some physical laws must have acted differently or did not exist for matter and antimatter. Several competing hypotheses exist to explain the imbalance of matter and antimatter that resulted in baryogenesis. However, there is as of yet no consensus theory to explain the phenomenon. As remarked in a 2012 research paper, "The origin of matter remains one of the great mysteries in physics."

I guess this just leaves science with the "soon to be discovered. magic Jesus particle"

[hertz vanrental]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Mr Wiki is firmly in the "no fucking idea" camp.



I guess this just leaves science with the "soon to be discovered. magic Jesus particle"

Yes, I was aware of Mr Wiki's thoughts.

I just thought that there may be someone out there who is aware of some research which was pointing to an answer.

Thanks.

[Hobotronic2037]

I know nothing about this except to comment that I read a book one time that said some string theory surrounding our universe is relies on breaking symmetry to explain itself. Such as the idea that the universe is ten dimensions and it broke into 4 and six. I’m sure you already have heard this. I don’t know what it has to do with anything but thought I’d throw it in there because I, too, find it vexing to hear you say that antiparticles decay faster than their counterpart particles. That’s just fucking weird.

hertz vanrental wrote

Hope that someone out there can help.

Just finished reading a book that stated that the conversion rate of Anti-Neutrino to Neutrino is faster than the conversion rate of Neutrino to anti-Neutrino and, in fact, this applies to other matter/anti-matter particle pairs. This leads to a matter/antimatter particle pair imbalance in favour of the matter particle pair.

When cooling took place during Big Bang and the matter/antimatter particle pair annihilation occured, the matter/anti-matter particle pair imbalance gave rise to matter particle pairs which were not annihilated and which, subsequently, formed the universe that we know today.

Sadly, the book doesn't state the reason for the differences in the matter/anti-matter conversion rates. Probably because the book was written in 2009 and the reason was unknown back then.

Anyone know of any research which would suggest why the asymmetry existed?

I believe that this is also known as the Baryon Asymmetry if this helps.

[hertz vanrental]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

I know nothing about this except to comment that I read a book one time that said some string theory surrounding our universe is relies on breaking symmetry to explain itself. Such as the idea that the universe is ten dimensions and it broke into 4 and six. I’m sure you already have heard this. I don’t know what it has to do with anything but thought I’d throw it in there because I, too, find it vexing to hear you say that antiparticles decay faster than their counterpart particles. That’s just fucking weird.

I think I know where you are coming from. I think I know what you are saying and why you are saying it. Like you though, I'm not sure if this helps except in that it is not unknown for symmetry to be broken even at the most basic string level. Therefore, why shouldn't 'symmetry', albeit a different type of symmetry be broken at a level above strings i.e. particles.

Why should symmetry exist in the first place?

Why should it remain?

Why shouldn't it be broken?

What cause symmetry to remain in place?

What causes symmetry to be broken?

These, and many more questions, will be ........

[Hobotronic2037]

I’m sure that at the end of all this is proof of Jesus.

Bwahahahaha.