Breaking! --- Senior space-time dilation writer, Clara Moskowitz, at Space.com, writes New Spin Revealed on Mysterious Antimatter revealing that Professor Mark Hadley, has advanced a new theory to explain the mysterious imballance of matter and antimatter in the universe.
UPDATE: Please notice that Clara reports galactic spin, where it seems she should say universe spin.
The puzzling prevalence of matter over antimatter in the universe might be related to the bizarre space-time stretching caused by our galaxy's spin, a new study suggests. ...
Though the universe today is almost completely made of matter, scientists don't understand why. The Big Bang that created the cosmos 13.7 billion years ago should have produced equal parts matter and antimatter, which would have annihilated, leaving the universe barren of either. Luckily, it didn't (hence the Earth and the life it supports are here). ...
Physicist Mark Hadley of the University of Warwick in England calculated the effects of the Milky Way's spin on the space-time around it. According to the theory of general relativity, the speed and angular momentum of such a large spinning body twists the space and time around it in a process called frame-dragging.
Because of the mammoth mass of our galaxy, this twisting should have an impact on space-time that is more than a million times stronger than that of Earth's spin, Hadley found.
Here's where this story connects to our previous discussions here of the charge-parity violation, (CP violation) which is the name given to the different decay rates for matter and antimatter, that some here feel strongly about.
UPDATE: Science, who is one of our resident Ph.D., experts in particle physics tells me that Mark Hadley does not mention the "matter/antimatter asymmetry" in his article, and the the following explanation by Clara Moskoswitz is flawed. Please see comments by Science in my article. I will leave this here, as part of the history of the discussion.
These changes to space and time — in particular a stretching of time called time dilation — could in turn affect how particles break down. ...For some time, physicists have measured this asymmetry in decay rates between matter and antimatter, and called the phenomenon charge-parity violation (CP violation). But no one yet has a firm explanation for how the asymmetries came about.
"These [violations] have been measured but never explained," Hadley said in a statement. "This research suggests that the experimental results in our laboratories are a consequence of galactic rotation twisting our local space-time. If that is shown to be correct then nature would be fundamentally symmetric after all."
Hadley thinks that matter and antimatter aren't actually asymmetric at the root of things, but that their differing responses to the changes wrought by galactic rotation simply give this appearance. He says that if the overall big picture of all particles is taken into account, the variation of different levels of time stretching averages out and CP violation disappears.
The data to test this theory may already be available, from the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, in Geneva, and the SLAC particle physics laboratory at Stanford University.
I know from our previous discussion, that several, if not many, Kossacks have been concerned about this mysterious apparent asymmetry in the matter - antimatter balance. Now, it would seem, we are one step closer to resolving this distressing anomaly.
I will publish updates as they become available.
And, I request that everyone make an effort to be civil and respectful in the comments.
3:28 PM PT: FishoutofWater notices that while I talked about universal spin, the article talks about galactic spin, which would not be big or large enough to affect anti-matter in the first seconds of the universe, so I corrected what I believe was an error in the article I linked to.
Science points out a deeper issue with regard to the Clara Moskowitz' explanation of the charge-parity violation and the possible relationship to this new time dilation theory advanced by Physist Mark Hadley. Please see Science's comment, and I will provide a link to Mark Hadley's original paper.