Monday, January 28, 2019

The Anti-Universe

This paper discusses what I think, in broad outlines, particularly the portion in bold, although not necessarily the specifics, is the most likely explanation of the baryon asymmetry of the universe, although it may never be possible to prove (I blogged a 2017 paper on the same theme previously). See previous discussion of the concept here and here and here and here and here and here. I don't think, however, that it is necessary to inject right handed neutrinos or dark matter into this mix. 

Sabine Hossenfelder mentions and discusses this paper in a recent post.

The Big Bang, CPT, and neutrino dark matter

We investigate the idea that the universe before the Big Bang is the CPT reflection of the universe after the bang, so that the state of the universe does {\it not} spontaneously violate CPT. The universe before the bang and the universe after the bang may be viewed as a universe/anti-universe pair, created from nothing. The early universe is radiation dominated and inflationary energy is not required. We show how CPT selects a preferred vacuum state for quantum fields on such a cosmological spacetime. This, in turn, leads to a new view of the cosmological matter/anti-matter asymmetry, and a novel and economical explanation of the dark matter abundance. If we assume that the matter fields in the universe are described by the standard model of particle physics (including right-handed neutrinos), it is natural for one of the heavy neutrinos to be stable, and we show that in order to match the observed dark matter density, its mass must be 4.8×108 GeV. We also obtain further predictions, including: (i) that the three light neutrinos are majorana; (ii) that the lightest of these is exactly massless; and (iii) that there are no primordial, long-wavelength gravitational waves.
Comments:43 pages
Subjects:High Energy Physics - Phenomenology (hep-ph); Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.CO); General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc); High Energy Physics - Theory (hep-th)
Cite as:arXiv:1803.08930 [hep-ph]
(or arXiv:1803.08930v1 [hep-ph] for this version)


neo said...

where's the Anti-Universe

andrew said...

Before the regular universe in time (i.e. before the Big Bang).

Graham Dungworth said...

Boyle et al (2018) above place this anti-universe coeval with the beginning of our universe, the so called Big Bang, paired with our matter universe and but not necessarily subsequent evolution. Currently, it would lie not just beyond our R=c*t horizon, where galaxies are observed now, but where they were say >12 billion lightyear. Sabine Hossenfelder mentions that this anti-universe is part of an alleged multiverse, beyond our scientific reach, at least observable reach, if scientific at all.

A main intention of Boyle et al is to restore parity to the universe. We live in a kack handed universe, I'm left handed too. Thus we observe left handed neutrinos and right handed antineutrinos, a left handed electon and right handed anti-electron(right handed positron). The mathematical equations(eg. Dirac) recognise the say right handed electron but it is not observed and assumed not to exist. As such it is regarded as a non physical electron, as is a left handed anti electron (positron).
This antiuniverse in the limit t goes to zero ie. the creation instant (Fred Hoyle would shake in the hereafter, my apologies Fred),
restores parity for the pair universes as a whole, not that it can be experimentally tested, but also requires no inflaton field, all is created out of nothing, overall div*E=0. It suffers from the same problems as inherent in the Big Bang scenario. In this beginning, all the SM rest mass particles are present and the extremel low baryon/photon ratio problem remains unsolved. It is a matter/ anti matter dominated universe , in each of the pair electrons and positrons exist, protons and ant-protons exist in equal abundances. At temperatures >>10^12 Kelvin their k*T kinetic energies are highly relativistic, hence these particles (48, some would like more as supersyms) behave as radiant energies. As these universes expand and cool the mass particles annihilate, almost totally so as the measured so called fossil radiation (the cmb radiation so called fossil photons 2.725 Kelvin). Only one particle survives in our universe, a one in ca. 10 billion chance survivor per baryon (that's essentially a left handed proton and blissfully a left handed electron to exactly balance conservation of electric charge; a left handed neutron etc). The counterpart antiuniverse has opposite parity and the pair together, and coeval at all times sinc,e restore parity (parity regained indeed with no loss of Eden to those heavenly muses to might inspire these tails of our existence in both worlds, with my own right handed ant-self blogging away some 45 billion light year distant).(at least 12)
Without Guth et als inflation field, the old problems and paradoxes remain. Why is the thermal cmb radiation profile so uniform from opposite poles of the sky? Peebles and Weinberg recognised this problem, so did Fred, but all attempts to thermalise the radiation field have failed.

Graham Dungworth said...

Hoyle realised that Helium could be generated in stars but problems arose with Deuterium and Lithium. Steady State theories died, largely a result of the cmb radition Planck/Wiens distribution of photon energies.
Future development of creation theories are dependent upon empirical measurements of neutrino rest masses that Marni Sheppeard and myself have discussed on this blog and elsewhere .

There is a rare phenomenum that occurs in the vast abyss of cosmological distance and thus time, at a time so remote that this(these) event(s), although regarded as very rare now were considered (from conventional theories)to be very common, and indeed the first low metal abundance stars( >250 - 300 solar mass (2*10^30 kg)) to evolve were characterised by very short lifetimes until they collapsed to form neutron stars or /black holes with outer accretion discs with empirically observed remnant Hydrogen/Helium atmospheres/ envelopes. Tyler et al 2001

present a detailed treatment of such pair instability hypernovae- photon disintegration phenomena.

Our own Sol was formed from much higher metallic abundances from several former supernoval remnants. Tyler et al also discuss the massive 300 solar mass early types that were essentially metal free. All stars with element masses beyond He are regarded as as metallics to the chagrin of all chemists since Lavoisier, who lost his head as a consequence.

and peruse the lowermost figure for metal free abundances, for those types that "retain" a H/He envelope. By retain, in conventional thought, one presumes this is ancestral H/He formed when the universe was seconds in age. The anti-argument would apply also, not in a former time or negative or imaginary time but coeval with our own evolution in the here and now, but not scientifically causally related to.

Graham Dungworth said...

There are other conceived anti universal theories or hypotheses if you prefer the "non fingo atque wisne scire noncredam" alternatives. Thus, The Cerne scientist Dragan Hadjukovic recently promoted cyclic universes , alternating with black holes and anti- black holes but not causally linked nor coeval in time, but where matter black hole and anti black holes anti gravitate, antigravitating universes that restore parity but still conforming to the old big bang lambda cdm toy models.
Where English suffers from useage of only one conditional, Spanish three but rarely used, not including Jo Magueiro, and Latin six!it is no surprise that multiverses are common amongst English speakers.

Rather than suffer a lengthy heat death a god forsaken lot in conventional models where matter in our universe or antimatter in the created pair universe are ripped apart after 10^100 year(yawn).

Dragan revealed that neutrino evaporation at the event horizon, by gravitational polarisation of the vacuum energy, was much more effective than the Hawking evaporation rate for electron positron annihilation. Whole black holes and anti counterparts in our own universe could evaporate a whole galaxy in the timeframe of ~10^10 year, based upon neutrino masses of eV, rather than the predicted normal hierarchy Dirac masses of ca. 1 m eV upwards to 60 m eV. that Marni and myself "preach". Should Brexitogenesis prevail I'll stick to Augustine's Latin vulgate and cry Sol Invictus.

These pair instability >300 solar mass hypernovae are worthy of empirical study. Hoyle, Dirac and others, recently Martin Rees' conversion to religion , in their ruminations on the study of cosmolgy's big numbers, were struck by the big number 10^22, tiny when compared with >10^2300 muliverses, exponentiating almost annually .

Graham Dungworth said...

A neutrino matter/antimatter collapsor of 2*10^54 kg, via charged lepton pair instability, would lead to coeval matter /antimatter bary genesis in a neutrino "star" bario of 200-300 solar mass. In the last second of barygenesis Tyler et al these known stars may shed up to 50% of their mass, as recorded by the remnant matter that is blown away, a composition of universal H/He and trace D and Li components but with no metallics eg. Ni, Co . In this new analogy the black hole is of the anti type with the event horizon separarating a white hole where we reside and our antimatter counterparts, where our anti universe resides.

Poor hope then for anti sentient beings (right handed los seres divinos) existing at densities of 10^38 kg/m cubed, a special Augustinian place in anti- heaven at 10^12 Kelvin .

Maybe this event, throughout our history, has happened 10^22 fold (numerator 2*10^54 kg). Consequently, in every galaxy such anti black holes still exist , subject to Hadjukovic type left handed neutrino evaporation, and our galactic masses are therefore under estimated two fold (No-negative mass doesn't exist; only as the square of an imaginary negative mass in the wavefunction that is squared to give the probability). Parity may thus be restored at the ~300 mass stellar level in our Universe, admittedly in present day rare cases of photodisintigration pair instability >250 solar mass stars.

This can be tested empirically by analysis of these hypermassive stellar remnants.

Finally, The Brannen/ Koide predicted neutrino mass 0.00117eV, is a predicted mass, subject to experimental verification some 9.5 year ago, subsequent to Marni and my blogs in a terminated Galaxy Zoo forum . Neither Koide nor Carl Brannen have commented upon these applications to astronomy or cosmolgy. Those former extant archived posts from Marni from 2010 prior to October 29th, have been recently criminally deleted within the last few months!Former members are unable to modify or delete or add to these posts; an inside job perhaps.

So, as to where antimatter doth reside Neo? It could be all around us in ancient population III stars whose anti holes reside in the halos of galaxies.