black holes and matter-antimatter imbalance

[BurntSnow]

I stumbled today upon an article where it was said that a black hole created out of matter would be no different from one made by antimatter. And it got me thinking. As far as I know, scientists are still wondering what caused that fact that although at the beginning of the universe matter and antimatter was 50/50, what we observe in the universe is mostly matter and not anti-matter. Maybe antimatter has some characteristics (unknown to me, perhaps known to you) that would cause it to be more prone to creating black holes, and the matter/antimatter imbalance could be explained by the fact that the missing part of antimatter contributed to creation of black holes. And even if the very nature of antimatter does not cause any such "preference", maybe there are othere explanations to why black holes would "use up" more antimatter.

 

Just an idea though, I wouldn't be surprised if someone had it before me, but quick google search returned nothing on the topic, so I thought that maybe I might provide some food for thought to somebody.

 

Would anyone care to comment on that idea? Or point me in direction of some reading on that topic?

 

 

[swansont]

Any characteristics that would make antimatter more prone to forming black holes is unknown to everyone else, too. So far, at least.

[A Tripolation]

Any characteristics that would make antimatter more prone to forming black holes is unknown to everyone else, too. So far, at least.

 

Is it a plausible possibility though? Would that "fact" correctly account for the imbalance that we see? Or would it work in concert with other things?

[BurntSnow]

oops, sorry for using the word "fact" when speaking about antimatter contributing to black holes... what I meant was definitely "idea".

 

BTW: today I also ran into this article:

 

http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMKTX2MDAF_index_0.html

 

and wondered it is a coincidence that this antimatter cloud is in the central region of our galaxy, where a supermassive black hole is supposed to be it the very center.

 

of course these two things can be (and very probably are) totally unrelated, but since there is no final answer in case of both those issues, I thought that there is some room for speculation that someone might find useful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[swansont]

Is it a plausible possibility though? Would that "fact" correctly account for the imbalance that we see? Or would it work in concert with other things?

 

It's worth investigation, if only to confirm the nature of antimatter. One would have to come up with a mechanism and thoroughly investigate the implications.

[ajb]

I am wondering if there were some "non-democracy" between matter and antimatter in gravity what this would say about the CPT theorem and local Lorentz symmetry? Maybe a more pressing issue is what about the weak equivalence principle?

 

The study of antihydrogen is motivated by such questions.

 

I think finding some difference would be very surprising and very interesting.

Edited November 19, 2010 by ajb

[Arch2008]

The anti-matter clouds in the article are actually opposing jets produced by overflow from the accretion disk pouring in to the black hole. More matter is trying to cross the event horizon than is physically possible, so the “run off” particles get accelerated to near light speed by the magnetic field of the BH and this creates anti-matter particles.

Anti-matter is like matter, except that its charge is totally opposite. Since certain BH’s have a magnetic charge, anti-matter may be attracted to BH’s more so than matter. However, the current theory is that a tiny number of anti-matter particles eventually decay into matter particles in what I believe is called charge-parity violation. However, we really just don’t know for sure.

[steevey]

I stumbled today upon an article where it was said that a black hole created out of matter would be no different from one made by antimatter. And it got me thinking. As far as I know, scientists are still wondering what caused that fact that although at the beginning of the universe matter and antimatter was 50/50, what we observe in the universe is mostly matter and not anti-matter. Maybe antimatter has some characteristics (unknown to me, perhaps known to you) that would cause it to be more prone to creating black holes, and the matter/antimatter imbalance could be explained by the fact that the missing part of antimatter contributed to creation of black holes. And even if the very nature of antimatter does not cause any such "preference", maybe there are othere explanations to why black holes would "use up" more antimatter.

 

Just an idea though, I wouldn't be surprised if someone had it before me, but quick google search returned nothing on the topic, so I thought that maybe I might provide some food for thought to somebody.

 

Would anyone care to comment on that idea? Or point me in direction of some reading on that topic?

 

 

 

How do they know there was 50/50 for both types of matter? If there was, then the universe shouldn't exist.

But, assuming it's true and that the universe still for some weird reason existed despite that specific thing, it shouldn't matter at the level of a black hole, since electric charge really, really doesn't matter anymore. Once things got fused enough to and past the point of a neutron star, it's matter would be neutral, and after that, the matter's charge wouldn't have any reason to change.

[IM Egdall]

Physicists theorize that there must have been a very slight excess of matter over antimatter immediately after the big bang. Based on rough estimates of the number of photons in the microwave background and the number of protons and neutrons in the universe today, scientists estimate that for every billion antiparticles, there must have been a billion plus one ordinary particles, leaving a single particle per billion to survive after annihilation. This single surviving ordinary particle per billion is what makes up our universe today. The reason for this asymmetry is a subject of ongoing research.

 

Some physicists attribute the existence of slightly more matter than antimatter in the very early universe to a slight asymmetry discovered by analyzing the properties of subatomic particles. This so-called Charge-Parity (CP) violation was found in the decay of neutral kaons by James Cronin and Val Fitch, then of Princeton University in 1964. Neutral kaons are made up of a down quark and an anti-strange quark; or the reverse, a strange quark and anti-down quark. (Ref:: Michio Kaku, Physics of the Impossible, p. 192.)

 

However, the current Standard Model of quantum mechanics fails to fully predict the matter-antimatter results we see in today’s universe. There are only two ways to break CP symmetry per the Standard Model. The first is the so-called Quantum Chromodynamics (strong force) Lagrangian. It has not been found experimentally, and leads to no CP violation or one that is much, much too large. The second theoretical way to violate CP symmetry involves the weak force. It has been found experimentally (in the neutral kaon and B meson experiments discussed above). But here the theory accounts for only a small portion of the CP violation we see; “sufficient (only) for a net mass of normal matter equivalent to a single galaxy in the known universe”. (Ref: Wikepedia.org)

 

I don't see what this has to do with black holes; but maybe its possible.

Edited November 23, 2010 by I ME

[mph2020]

Of course a little more matter than anti-matter exists in our universe.

 

Dark matter is actually the result of 're-assembling' our out of balance 3rd dimensional matter into a perfect form or zero state.

 

This process is achieved at a black hole's event horizon. Inside which is not a singularity, but a entire field of dark matter.

 

Black holes spewed the 3d matter out in the first place, as existing 3d matter was dispersed from a central explosion with additional 3d matter torn from its nested existence at zero-state (i.e space-time had a hole torn in it).

 

Extremely fast rotation at the time of hole formation is evidenced by the spiral nature of most galaxies and the correlation of galaxy mass to black hole size.

 

If you ponder it enough, this also explains the expansion of the universe in that the re-assimilation of matter at the event hoizon should propel a black hole and its entire galaxy through space (the galaxy following massive gravitational pull of black hole). There must be a reaction due to the re-assembly of dark matter. The spin of a black hole, along with its gravity, keeps a galaxy intact as it interacts with other massive bodies. Thus, the universe will appear to expand.

 

There only needs to be one anti-matter rich universe (i.e 5th dimension) to keep me satisfied. All other theories are way too complex and unnecessary. Faster than light particles also exist, but must traverse both dimensions (at a particular frequency, or they would wreak havoc).

 

In this theory, the universe(s) are always in a state of constant flux. If they calm down over time, I suspect the number of large black holes would diminish until just a few very large events would re-create a universe as we know it (big bang anyone).

 

Every time a new discovery is made with respect to black holes, it seems (to me) to support this line of thought.

 

This would also preclude the existence of 'dark matter' galaxies in our universe, since we do not interact with dark matter (it is everywhere that matter or antimatter is not).

 

Maybe these proposed 'dark matter' galaxies are just areas in our overlapping domain that lack matter and antimatter (due to forces that created a black-hole and antimatter galaxy in the 5th dimension). The result should still be a black hole at the center of a 'dark matter' galaxy which propels it through our dimension (evidence only by a moving hole itself...with no apparent galaxy around it).

Gravity disruption would usually be in the shape of an invisible spiral galaxy around these holes, not just a perfect halo of gravity-warping due to the mass of the rogue black hole.

 

There is also the implication that:

1) black holes are directional

2) our 3d matter can not exist for long in the 5th dimension, and would probably be decaying near an anti-black hole (just like anti-matter does in out universe... right?)

3) time is present in both dimensions (or they would get out of sync and nothing could be observed)

 

Is this whack or what?

Humor me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[csmyth3025]

...Dark matter is actually the result of 're-assembling' our out of balance 3rd dimensional matter into a perfect form or zero state.

 

This process is achieved at a black hole's event horizon. Inside which is not a singularity, but a entire field of dark matter.

 

Black holes spewed the 3d matter out in the first place, as existing 3d matter was dispersed from a central explosion with additional 3d matter torn from its nested existence at zero-state (i.e space-time had a hole torn in it).

 

Extremely fast rotation at the time of hole formation is evidenced by the spiral nature of most galaxies and the correlation of galaxy mass to black hole size.

 

If you ponder it enough, this also explains the expansion of the universe in that the re-assimilation of matter at the event horizon should propel a black hole and its entire galaxy through space (the galaxy following massive gravitational pull of black hole). There must be a reaction due to the re-assembly of dark matter. The spin of a black hole, along with its gravity, keeps a galaxy intact...

 

Is this whack or what?

Humor me.

Whatever it is, it's not mainstream science.

 

Chris