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: "The concept of “fundamental forces” including the strong nuclear force..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Wilhelmus Wilde: "Dear Lorraine, Thank you for the intersting thread you started. You gave..." in FQXi Essay Contest 2016:...

Steven Andresen: "Give nature an energy potential and it will invent a Darwinian circumstance..." in Alternative Models of...

Steven Andresen: "Give nature an energy potential and it will invent a Darwinian circumstance..." in Alternative Models of...

Steven Andresen: "Give nature an energy potential and it will invent a Darwinian circumstance..." in Is the Past Infinite?

Steven Andresen: "Give nature an energy potential and it will invent a Darwinian circumstance..." in Theories of Everything,...

Steve Dufourny: "Hello I liked the link with this space. I consider that space does not..." in Complexity levels and...

Steven Andresen: "Darwinian Universal I'm very pleased with the reviews my essay received,..." in Alternative Models of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Watching the Observers
Accounting for quantum fuzziness could help us measure space and time—and the cosmos—more accurately.

Bohemian Reality: Searching for a Quantum Connection to Consciousness
Is there are sweet spot where artificial intelligence systems could have the maximum amount of consciousness while retaining powerful quantum properties?

Quantum Replicants: Should future androids dream of quantum sheep?
To build the ultimate artificial mimics of real life systems, we may need to use quantum memory.

Painting a QBist Picture of Reality
A radical interpretation of physics makes quantum theory more personal.

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.


FQXi BLOGS
June 29, 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:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.