Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Hasanuddin: on 6/11/09 at 18:25pm UTC, wrote For the most part this was a pretty standard representation of standard...

atomiton1: on 2/2/09 at 3:15am UTC, wrote I thought about it, and I found out why he might think like that. When...

atomiton1: on 2/1/09 at 3:42am UTC, wrote 1- in order for his theory to be true. Matter would have to have been there...

atomiton1: on 2/1/09 at 0:22am UTC, wrote What kind of idiot would think that their is more than one universe. And...

Eric S.: on 1/10/09 at 3:56am UTC, wrote "given that baryon symmetry evidently can break, as ours did, aren’t the...

William Orem: on 10/10/08 at 18:57pm UTC, wrote Congratulations all around this week to Yoichiro Nambu, Makoto Kobayashi...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Steven Andresen: "James Have a look over these two diagrams. I drew these up quite a while..." in Alternative Models of...

Steven Andresen: "James I've just returned home from a long day of surfing, so dont have the..." in Alternative Models of...

Georgina Woodward: "Pentcho, though the speed of the source will affect the spatial..." in 2016: The Physics Year in...

Pentcho Valev: "What Was The Worst Mistake Ever Made In Theoretical Physics? My reply in..." in 2016: The Physics Year in...

Lorraine Ford: "This is my comment on H Chris Ransford’s essay “Where the Question..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Ted Erikson: "Is anyone aware of a geometric model or mechanism for "panpsychism"? In..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

micheal le: "thuốc bổ thận là bệnh hiếm gặp ở nam giới, tuy nhiên..." in New Podcast: A MICROSCOPE...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Anonymous, If anybody wishes to know more about me, they are welcome..." in Riding the Rogue Quantum...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality


The Spacetime Revolutionary
Carlo Rovelli describes how black holes may transition to "white holes," according to loop quantum gravity, a radical rewrite of fundamental physics.

Riding the Rogue Quantum Waves
Could giant sea swells help explain how the macroscopic world emerges from the quantum microworld? (Image credit: MIT News)

Rescuing Reality
A "retrocausal" rewrite of physics, in which influences from the future can affect the past, could solve some quantum quandaries—saving Einstein's view of reality along the way.

Untangling Quantum Causation
Figuring out if A causes B should help to write the rulebook for quantum physics.


FQXi BLOGS
January 22, 2017

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Antimatter Universe [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Blogger William Orem wrote on Oct. 10, 2008 @ 18:57 GMT


Congratulations all around this week to Yoichiro Nambu, Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa, who share in the Nobel Prize for their paradigm-shattering work into such foundational issues as QCD, strings, and the question of why anything exists.

That last one is a blunt way of describing the way theoretical physics comes at the mysterious imbalance between...

view entire post


this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Eric S. wrote on Jan. 10, 2009 @ 03:56 GMT
"given that baryon symmetry evidently can break, as ours did, aren’t the chances of a perfectly symmetrical outcome vanishingly small, given the design space of possible universes?" -- Well said, and I'd never thought of it this way before. I wonder if there are other elements of the anthropic "fine tuning" argument that are susceptible to the same kind of treatment?

I haven't read Dan Brown's novel, but the notion that god is the most efficient explosion possible seems rather refreshing.

report post as inappropriate


atomiton1 wrote on Feb. 1, 2009 @ 00:22 GMT
What kind of idiot would think that their is more than one universe. And which idiot said there's such a thing as anti matter. I can tell you right now that there are no such things as protons and newtrons (I can prove it). Although electrons and positrons do exist. Heck I can even tell you that the modern model of the atom is false. I'll give you a few problems for his theory (on next blog).

report post as inappropriate


atomiton1 wrote on Feb. 1, 2009 @ 03:42 GMT
1- in order for his theory to be true. Matter would have to have been there before the creation of the universe.2- it explains no accurate details about space phenomilies such as black holes, gravity, and such.3-almost all matter has the same properties small/big. Almost all as in, there are different types of atoms, and it really doesn't get any smaller that, unless you count the matter by itself.To ask question email at: atomiton1@yahoo.com

report post as inappropriate


atomiton1 wrote on Feb. 2, 2009 @ 03:15 GMT
I thought about it, and I found out why he might think like that. When gamma rays hits an atom the atom speeds up to point where it expands. No matter would be created though.

report post as inappropriate


Hasanuddin wrote on Jun. 11, 2009 @ 18:25 GMT
For the most part this was a pretty standard representation of standard theory. The problem was that there was only one possible route discribed. However, at the same time, in the author's musings, aspects of the scappy modern Dominium lens were alluded to. For instance, the author mused about, "antimatter creatures living in an antimatter universe ... Cosmic rays from anti-supernovae colliding with our anti-atmosphere would spit out bits of actual matter, short-lived protons and alpha particles and whatnot."

The author's musing is very close to the Dominium's actual conclusions of antimatter galaxies, not universe, while we happen to live in a matter-based one.

The new model is compatible with all established data and/or observation. Come see the new model as it is unfolded at http://hypography.com/forums/alternative-theories/18910-the-
dominium-model-by-hasanuddin.html

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:

And select the letter between 'T' and 'V':


Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.