Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #648102 > unrolled thread

Where is the antimatter?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Where is the antimatter? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-31 19:53 -0700
    Re: Where is the antimatter? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-09-01 05:11 +0000
      Re: Where is the antimatter? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 02:51 -0700
        Re: Where is the antimatter? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-09-01 11:57 +0000
          Re: Where is the antimatter? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 07:28 -0700
            Re: Where is the antimatter? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 08:52 -0700
              Re: Where is the antimatter? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 09:21 -0700
                Re: Where is the antimatter? Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 11:22 -0700
                Re: Where is the antimatter? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 14:48 -0500
            Re: Where is the antimatter? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-09-01 16:43 +0000
            Re: Where is the antimatter? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 14:47 -0500
          Re: Where is the antimatter? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 14:36 -0500
      Re: Where is the antimatter? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 10:18 -0700
        Re: Where is the antimatter? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-09-01 10:58 -0700
    Re: Where is the antimatter? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-09-01 12:48 -0700
    Re: Where is the antimatter? Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-09-01 18:07 -0500
      Re: Where is the antimatter? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-09-02 16:08 -0700
        Re: Where is the antimatter? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-09-02 16:21 -0700
          Re: Where is the antimatter? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-09-02 16:41 -0700
          Re: Where is the antimatter? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-09-03 04:39 +0000
        Re: Where is the antimatter? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-09-03 00:01 +0000
          Re: Where is the antimatter? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-09-02 17:19 -0700
            Re: Where is the antimatter? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-09-03 00:28 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#648102 — Where is the antimatter?

 Antimatter is Above us and below us. But OUR level in the Universal Fractal is MATTER.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#648103

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

> Antimatter is Above us and below us. But OUR level in the Universal 
>Fractal is MATTER.

No, John.  As Odd stated, stuff like that is faith, not science. You
may believe that but you cannot give any reason _why_ you believe that.
That's faith, not science, and I still don't understand why you hang
out in a science group posting your (bizarre) matters of faith, while
rejecting science.

Also, what you call "antimatter" isn't what science calls antimatter.
Real antimatter isn't on any other "level", a positron is the same mass
as an electron, an antiproton the same mass as a proton.  You are taking
standard words and using your own personal definitions.  In other words,
what you write is just word salad, or gibberish.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648111

MM
"Real antimatter isn't on any other "level", a positron is the same mass.."
Where is the antimatter, then?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648120

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>MM
>"Real antimatter isn't on any other "level", a positron is the same mass.."
>Where is the antimatter, then?

That's one of the big unanswered questions of physics.  Matter and 
antimatter are so much alike in many ways, or exactly the opposite in
others (such as charge).  If the universe started out as pure energy
you'd think it would be 50-50 matter-antimatter now. But it's almost all
matter. Why?

It appears the particle physics people may be on to something.  We don't
yet know the answer, but I can pretty much guarantee it doesn't involve
retarded precessing spinny things, arms of spiral galaxies or fractals.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648126

MM
Too bad, because Universal Fractal is demonstrably half and half

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648135

On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 10:28:08 AM UTC-4, john wrote:
> MM
> Too bad, because Universal Fractal is demonstrably half and half

Just because an idea looks pretty does not make it true.
(and a reminder I too long ago looked at the fractal universe
concept, but as you look deeper it just doesn't work out.)

Ed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648137

ed
"e it true. 
(and a reminder I too long ago looked at the fractal universe 
concept, but as you look deeper it just doesn't work out.) 
"
Elucidate

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648155

On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:21:12 PM UTC-4, john wrote:
> ed
> "e it true. 
> (and a reminder I too long ago looked at the fractal universe 
> concept, but as you look deeper it just doesn't work out.) 
> "
> Elucidate

The key problem I saw was that the scaling does not match.
IOW, every comparison was arbitrary, not predictive at all.

Ed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648164

On 9/1/17 11:21 AM, john wrote:
> ed
> "e it true.
> (and a reminder I too long ago looked at the fractal universe
> concept, but as you look deeper it just doesn't work out.)
> "
> Elucidate
> 

Remember now, in what follows in this discussion, that in science what 
matters is not how many observations an idea is consistent with, but how 
many observations it is NOT consistent with.

-- 
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648138

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>MM
>Too bad, because Universal Fractal is demonstrably half and half

"Demonstrably"? Which falsifiable experiment demonstrates this?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648163

On 9/1/17 9:28 AM, john wrote:
> MM
> Too bad, because Universal Fractal is demonstrably half and half
> 

No, John, it is imaginably half and half.
Demonstration means not just repeating what you think is true, but 
SHOWING that what you think is true really is true.

I'll reiterate that just inventing some worldview does not translate 
into proving that the world adheres to your worldview. Imagination is 
distinct from reality that way.

-- 
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648161

On 9/1/17 6:57 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> MM
>> "Real antimatter isn't on any other "level", a positron is the same mass.."
>> Where is the antimatter, then?
> 
> That's one of the big unanswered questions of physics.  Matter and
> antimatter are so much alike in many ways, or exactly the opposite in
> others (such as charge).  If the universe started out as pure energy
> you'd think it would be 50-50 matter-antimatter now. But it's almost all
> matter. Why?
> 
> It appears the particle physics people may be on to something.  We don't
> yet know the answer, but I can pretty much guarantee it doesn't involve
> retarded precessing spinny things, arms of spiral galaxies or fractals.
> 

CP violation, observed now pretty consistently across the quark and 
lepton sectors, accounts for the IMBALANCE of matter and antimatter in 
the observed universe. The antimatter that is present in today's 
universe is in the same playing field as regular matter.

The first question you have to ask yourself is, "why do I think that 
there's a problem? Why do I think that the quantities of matter and 
antimatter in the universe should be equal?"

Possible answers in a John Sefton mind:
"Because it would be prettier if it were so?"
"Because I believe there is a law of balance and equality in the 
universe. Why I believe this, I can't say."
"Because I want to believe that there is an unseen, untapped, vast pool 
of antimatter somewhere that would solve our environmental and health 
problems forever."

I notice that I asked John to try to present a compelling argument for 
the statement that "Everything must have structure", and that he has 
gone studiously mute on that subject, deciding to change the topic.

In other words, John is happy to trot out the elements of his faith, and 
he will call all those who don't share his faith blind sheep. But ask 
him to try to convince you anything about his faith, and his only answer 
is "You'll be lost if you don't." Sounds like a Baptist.

-- 
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648140

On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 10:11:31 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Antimatter is Above us and below us. But OUR level in the Universal 
> >Fractal is MATTER.
> 
> No, John.  As Odd stated, stuff like that is faith, not science. You
> may believe that but you cannot give any reason _why_ you believe that.
> That's faith, not science, and I still don't understand why you hang
> out in a science group posting your (bizarre) matters of faith, while
> rejecting science.
> 
> Also, what you call "antimatter" isn't what science calls antimatter.
> Real antimatter isn't on any other "level", a positron is the same mass
> as an electron, an antiproton the same mass as a proton.  You are taking
> standard words and using your own personal definitions.  In other words,
> what you write is just word salad, or gibberish.

We are witnessing the universe in accelerating expansion adding greatly to the force of gravity,and calling it missing matter(anti-matter) is only looking and thinking in the wrong direction. Watch out Nobel thinking here by Treb + Bert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648154

"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> repeated
Glazier's Gutter-physics and his Idiotic Glazierola to
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com>, 
with Bert insisting "how clever Einstein is" which gives rise for 
the <http://tinyurl.com/Tears-for-Einsteins-Misery>, but
>
<http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-REAL-intent> and sole 
purpose  to post is for SwineBert to find well meaning fools, 
whom he can goad into responding & educate him, the 4th
grade drop out Cretin Glazier, so that Glazier can do this 
<http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg>,
to them and proof that Glazier is a Face Shitter & 
<http://tinyurl.com/The-Chosen-Graveyard-Vandal>
whose MO is exampled in the above links and can be seen 
in each one of the following links about him being...
>
_____  Glazier, the Turd-man of Anaheim ________
<http://tinyurl.com/SwineBert-s-WRONG-Predictions>
<http://tinyurl.com/Loudmouth-Glazier-8Feb2017>,
<http://tinyurl.com/The-Chosen-Graveyard-Vandal>.
<http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg>,
<http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-Undertaker>
<http://tinyurl.com/Jew-Swine-Glazier-cries>
<http://tinyurl.com/Herbert-Glazier-s-Reprieve>
<http://tinyurl.com/Blog-of-2-fecal-kikes-Mar2017>

3.5)------------------------------------------------------------- 
 " 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648165

On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 7:53:42 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> Antimatter is Above us and below us. But OUR level in the Universal Fractal is MATTER.


Antimatter particles come out of the Sun all the time.

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648216

On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 19:53:36 -0700 (PDT), john <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Antimatter is Above us and below us. But OUR level in the Universal Fractal is MATTER.

No, it isn't.  Antimatter is largely gone.

The present notion that a slight but noticeable CP violation caused the
creation of an excess of one sort over the other, and the tiny amount of
real matter remaining in this universe is that very excess, after most
of the rest annihilated itself.

Interestingly, that same CP violation gives us a way of defining right
and left, should we need some sort of inviolable standard similar to
that of counting wavelengths of cesium emission to define the second.

That said, if you want to blame someone for the almost complete absence
of antimatter, you can pick on me.  As Starmaker may recall, it was I
who killed the dinosaurs.

-- 
Goat

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648404

On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 4:07:24 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 19:53:36 -0700 (PDT), john <johnsefton288@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Antimatter is Above us and below us. But OUR level in the Universal Fractal is MATTER.
> 
> No, it isn't.  Antimatter is largely gone.
> 
> The present notion that a slight but noticeable CP violation caused the
> creation of an excess of one sort over the other, and the tiny amount of
> real matter remaining in this universe is that very excess, after most
> of the rest annihilated itself.


But a pretty far fetched assertion, don't you think?

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648407

AA
"...after most 
> of the rest annihilated itself. 


But a pretty far fetched assertion, don't you think? 

Double-A "

Like most of present day cosmology/physics.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648411

On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 4:21:53 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> AA
> "...after most 
> > of the rest annihilated itself. 
> 
> 
> But a pretty far fetched assertion, don't you think? 
> 
> Double-A "
> 
> Like most of present day cosmology/physics.


True.  They are playing to the audience.

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#648439

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>But a pretty far fetched assertion, don't you think? 

Just not as far fetched of an assertion as precessing galaxies and fractal
universes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web