Space: Why We Exist: Matter Wins Battle Over Antimatter

Find out the latest thinking about our universe.
Post Reply
User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21577
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Space: Why We Exist: Matter Wins Battle Over Antimatter

Post by bystander » Wed May 19, 2010 11:39 am

Why We Exist: Matter Wins Battle Over Antimatter
Space.com - 18 May 2010
The seemingly inescapable fact that matter and antimatter particles destroy each other on contact has long puzzled physicists wondering how life, the universe or anything else can exist at all. But new results from a particle accelerator experiment suggest that matter does seem to win in the end.

The experiment has shown a small — but significant — 1 percent difference between the amount of matter and antimatter produced, which could hint at how our matter-dominated existence came about.

The current theory, known as the Standard Model of particle physics, has predicted some violation of matter-antimatter symmetry, but not enough to explain how our universe arose consisting mostly of matter with barely a trace of antimatter.

But this latest experiment came up with an unbalanced ratio of matter to antimatter that goes beyond the imbalance predicted by the Standard Model. Specifically, physicists discovered a 1 percent difference between pairs of muons and antimuons that arise from the decay of particles known as B mesons.

The results, announced Tuesday, came from analyzing eight years worth of data from the Tevatron collider at the Department of Energy's Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Ill.

"Many of us felt goose bumps when we saw the result," said Stefan Soldner-Rembold, a particle physicist at the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom. "We knew we were seeing something beyond what we have seen before and beyond what current theories can explain."

The Tevatron collider and its bigger cousin, the Large Hadron Collider at CERN in Switzerland, can smash matter and antimatter particles together to create energy, as well as new particles and antiparticles. Otherwise, antiparticles only arise due to extreme events such as nuclear reactions or cosmic rays from dying stars.

Measurements made by the DZero collaboration, a 500-member international group, are still limited by the number of collisions recorded so far. That means physicists will continue to collect data and refine their analysis of the matter-antimatter struggle for dominance.

Researchers came up with their latest finding by performing a so-called blind data analysis, so that they would not bias their analyses based on what they observed. They have submitted their results to the journal Physical Review D.
Evidence for an anomalous like-sign dimuon charge asymmetry

Fermilab scientists find evidence for significant matter-antimatter asymmetry
Fermilab Press Room - 18 May 2010

Fermi's Tevatron finds another bias against antimatter
ars technica > Nobel Intent > 18 May 2010

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 21577
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Antimatter Matters: Fermilab Glimpses 'The Toe of God'

Post by bystander » Mon May 31, 2010 3:16 pm

Antimatter Matters: Fermilab Glimpses 'The Toe of God'
Discovery News - 31 May 2010

Image
Everyone's abuzz these days about the Large Hadron Collider finally being up and running and collecting data like crazy, storing interesting "events" for future analysis. But did you miss the big news coming out of Fermilab last week? It seems that the D-Zero collaboration -- co-discovers of the top quark back in the 1990s -- analyzed data from a bunch of proton-anti-proton collisions and found a slight asymmetry in the number of muons produced compared to anti-muons: about 1% more.

While that might not sound like much, it a hint of greater things to come, should experiments at the LHC confirm these initial results. It's genuine "new physics," since the most likely culprit for this strange asymmetry is a new particle not predicted by the Standard Model (kind of the periodic table of elementary particle physics). Which is why the New York Times article on the result ends with this classic quote from Fermilab's Joe Lykken: "I would not say that this announcement is the equivalent of seeing the face of god, but it might turn out to be the toe of god."

A quick refresher course for those unfamiliar with the conundrum of matter/antimatter asymmetry in our universe. A long time ago, when our universe was still in its earliest birthing throes, matter and antimatter were colliding and annihilating each other out of existence constantly. This process slowed down as our universe gradually cooled, but there should have been equal parts matter and antimatter -- and there weren't. Instead, there were slightly more matter particles than antimatter.
...
Technically, it's known as CP (charge-parity) violation, an effect first proposed by Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov, in which "when the charges and spins of particles are reversed, they should behave slightly differently." This isn't the first glimpse of CP violation in the subatomic realm, but prior observed asymmetries haven't been large enough to explain how our material world could exist.
What’s the matter? Never mind
Bad Astronomy - 21 May 2010
Clifford over at Asymptotia talks a bit about a new discovery that might explain why there is so much matter and so little antimatter in the Universe. This is one of the biggest as-yet unexplained questions in all of science, and this new discovery — covered in the New York Times — may be a key to understanding it.

Matter and antimatter are arbitrarily named; had there been more of what we call antimatter made in the early Universe, we’d be calling antimatter matter and matter antimatter. Confused? Wait until you try to figure out if I’m evil because I have a beard in our matter Universe or if I would be evil if I had no beard in an antimatter one!

Not that it matters.

User avatar
Ann
4725 Å
Posts: 13429
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Space: Why We Exist: Matter Wins Battle Over Antimatter

Post by Ann » Mon May 31, 2010 3:18 pm

I have read a bit of this before, but it is really interesting. Thanks for posting.

Ann
Color Commentator

Post Reply