Why are we made of matter and not antimatter?
Ethan Siegel
342

Here is the correct answer.

There is only one Nature regardless of whether our ability is able to come up with a unified all-encompassing theory or not. But, based on this simple fact, we can come up the criteria on the final theory. Thus, the final theory must encompass, at least, three parts.

P1, giving rise to THIS physical universe (including all laws of physics),

P2, giving rise to Life of this universe (including the mechanisms for the topmost life expressions, intelligence and consciousness),

P3, unifying the physics universe with the math universe (that is, math is not just tools for physics but is the source for giving rise to all physics laws).

Can your idea (or the entire mainstream physics) remotely meet these three part criteria? Of course not. Yet, denouncing your idea solely basing on your failure is not fair to you, or to anyone else. I must show the RIGHT answer in order to gain the right to denounce any idea.

I have showed the calculation of Planck CMB data (see https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/dark-energydark-mass-the-silent-truth/ ). In that calculation, the underlying physics is that ‘anti-matter’ did not go anywhere; and it together with the 2nd and 3rd generation of matter play the role as dark mass. And this is based on the PHYSICS that the space-time ‘point’ is not a geometrical point but is quantized, as a house which houses all 48 fields of the SM particles (see https://medium.com/@Tienzen/quantum-gravity-mystery-no-more-1d1bf39ad255#.1puu5dfj0 ).

Now, I am giving the outlines for all three parts.

Part one: the topmost expressions for life are ‘intelligence and consciousness’.

Intelligence: the ability of processing information.

Consciousness: the ability of distinguishing self from others.

For intelligence:

The necessary condition: having a counting device (abacus, Turing computer or counting strews)

The sufficient condition: a mechanism to distinguish objects.

For Consciousness:

The necessary condition: a mechanism to distinguish self from others.

The sufficient condition: a counting device to process the distinguishing task.

So, the PHYSICS must carry or generate a counting device AND a mechanism to distinguish objects.

Part two, unifying math universe with the physics universe. Yet, physics universe is totally different from the math universe on, at least, two points.

Point one, physics universe is a finitude while the math universe has two infinities (countable and uncountable).

Point two, physics universe has no ‘nothingness (true zero)’. The Cosmological Constant is the best non-zero zero in this physics universe, with at least 120 zero behind the decimal point but might still have a non-zero digit at that. See, http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/09/04/philosophy-science-and-expertise/comment-page-4/#comment-7549 .

With these two points, there must be two ways to unify the math and physics.

Way one, the top-out: most physics system can be described with a (some) formal system which obeys the Godel theorems; and this Godel process goes ad infinitum. In order to terminate this Godel ad infinitum, a top-out process must be in PHYSICS, to rein in both infinities.

Way two, bottom-out: ‘Why is there something rather than Nothing?’ Everything of this physics universe is something, not nothing. In fact, both infinities of math must be concretized into a physical objects which are the bases for giving rise to this physics universe. This bottom-out process reduce something to nothing, and it is in fact the creation process.

Now, physics must carry or generate processes which stops the Godel ad infinitum process and to produce something from nothing.

With the above criteria (generating intelligence/consciousness and unifying math/physics), the validity of a FINAL theory can be examined.

I have designed a Nature with a BASE as ‘nothingness’. But, what is ‘nothingness’? If there is any point (meaning) in the nothingness, is it still nothing? No, I will not argue about this question. For Nature, ‘nothingness’ is defined with two points.

Point one, it is ‘timelessness’.

Point two, it is ‘immutable’.

Yes, there are two points, but it is Nature’s ‘nothingness’, and ALL (physics, life and math) arose from it.

The essence of Nature is ‘nothingness’, and it must remain as ‘nothingness’. The only way to do this while the arrow of time is an observed fact is by having four (4) time-dimensions (+t, -t, +it, -it). That is, for every +t (the observed arrow of time), its cross-section at (+t) is in fact ‘timelessness’ {cancelled out by the other three dimensions (-t, +it, -it), see the detail at http://www.prequark.org/pq07.htm )}.

At every +t (the observed arrow of time), its cross-section is in fact timelessness. (+/-it, the imaginary time)

With this timelessness, it gives rise to 48 fermion particles, see http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/48-exact-number-for-number-of.html .

Another key feature of this ‘timelessness-equation’ is encompassing three key numbers (64, 48, and 24) which are the base for calculating nature constants (see http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/alpha-fine-structure-constant-mystery.html ).

Furthermore, these 48 fermions are described as G-strings, then,

One, both proton and neutron are seeds for Turing computer (see http://www.prequark.org/Biolife.htm ).

Two, this ‘timelessness-equation’ demands that Generations (of fermions) must be color charge (see, Muon decay, http://www.prequark.org/pq11.htm ). That is, fermions form a 7-code system (red, yellow, blue, white, G1, G2, G3), which is a mechanism of identifying (or distinguishing) all entities (in this universe).

With these two, the physics is now the base for giving rise to intelligence and consciousness.

Yet, in addition to be ‘timelessness’, ‘nothingness’ of Nature is also about the immutability. What is immutability? Immutability can never be changed by any mutable force and acts. Thus, any mutable acts are allowed by the immutability. However, the utmost mutable act (the Ghost-rascal, http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2014/02/ghost-rascal-conjecture-and-ultimate.html ) again produce the 48 fermions. Also, see http://tienzen.livejournal.com/1026.html .

In the Planck CMB data calculation (derivation), the fields (mass-land) of anti-particles play the role as dark mass; that is, the anti-matter does not go anywhere. With this quark-language (G-string), one (+)string is not enough to make ‘matter’, as it needs a (–)string too. That is, the matter/anti-matter is not divided with one knife cut but is entangled, see http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2013/12/baryongenesis-master-key-of-all.html .

Now, I have given the correct answer for this baryongenesis issue.

I have showed that the ‘Nothingness’ is the source of THIS universe. The ‘Nothingness’ is the fundamental, this physics universe is the emergent, and this is not a philosophical contemplation but has exact description and mechanisms.

The expressions of ‘Nothingness’: timelessness and immutability

The mechanism to express the timelessness: with 4-time-dimensions (+t, -t, +it, -it), while the (+t, the arrow of time) is sense-observable: with these 4-time-dimensions, it is ‘timelessness’ at EVERY ‘t’ point ( +/- it, the imaginary time).

The manifestation of this timelessness: the rising of 48 fermions and dark energy.

The mechanism to express the ‘immutability’: the Ghost-rascal process, that is, no amount of mutable attack (planed or random) can disturb the immutability.

The manifestation of this immutability: the rising of 48 fermions, as the UTMOST mutable attack is the rising of 48 fermions.

That is, both the timelessness and the immutability are converged to the CREATION of THIS universe. Yet, these mechanisms clearly show the detailed procedures for giving rise to THIS universe.

Furthermore, the above does not only derive all laws of Nature, I have showed the way of unifying physics, life and math. I have discussed the issues of {timelessness/immutability, nothingness/zero, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?’ the emerging of Quantum Principle, and about intelligence/consciousness} at many blogs. They are available via the following links.

About timelessness and immutability:

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/10/31/mark-english-on-philosophy-science-and-expertise-a-naive-reply/comment-page-1/#comment-9284 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/10/31/mark-english-on-philosophy-science-and-expertise-a-naive-reply/comment-page-2/#comment-9316 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/10/31/mark-english-on-philosophy-science-and-expertise-a-naive-reply/comment-page-2/#comment-9356 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/do-atheists-reject-the-wrong-kind-of-god-not-likely/comment-page-2/#comment-10065 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/do-atheists-reject-the-wrong-kind-of-god-not-likely/comment-page-3/#comment-10092 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/12/11/its-american-atheists-billboards-time-again/comment-page-2/#comment-10265 ,

https://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/02/13/lee-smolin-and-the-status-of-modern-physics/comment-page-1/#comment-11974 ,

https://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/the-nature-of-the-past-hypothesis/comment-page-1/#comment-12921 ,

https://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/03/24/the-singular-universe-and-the-reality-of-time/comment-page-2/#comment-12995 ,

https://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/03/27/abstract-explanations-in-science/comment-page-1/#comment-13033 ,

About ‘why is there something rather than nothing?’

http://tienzen.livejournal.com/1323.html ,

http://selfawarepatterns.com/2014/08/20/why-is-there-something-rather-than-nothing-why-would-there-be-nothing/comment-page-1/#comment-5605 ,

About zero

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/11/24/infinities-in-literature-and-mathematics/comment-page-1/#comment-9771 ,

https://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/reductionism-emergence-and-burden-of-proof-part-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-11016 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/p-zombies-are-inconceivable-with-notes-on-the-idea-of-metaphysical-possibility/comment-page-1/#comment-5683 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/08/19/scientism-yippee-or-boo-sucks-part-ii/comment-page-2/#comment-6250 ,

About the emerging of Quantum Principle

http://tienzen.livejournal.com/973.html ,

http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/09/quantum-algebra-and-axiomatic-physics.html ,

http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/08/quantum-behavior-vs-cellular-automaton.html ,

http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2013/01/welcome-to-camp-of-truth-nobel-laureate.html ,

http://tienzen.livejournal.com/584.html ,

About intelligence/consciousness

http://selfawarepatterns.com/2014/07/16/david-chalmers-how-do-you-explain-consciousness/comment-page-1/#comment-5407 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/04/25/plato-and-the-proper-explanation-of-our-actions/comment-page-1/#comment-1245 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/05/22/my-philosophy-so-far-part-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-2412 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/05/22/my-philosophy-so-far-part-ii/comment-page-2/#comment-2432 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/07/24/clarifying-sam-harriss-clarification/comment-page-1/#comment-5122 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/p-zombies-are-inconceivable-with-notes-on-the-idea-of-metaphysical-possibility/comment-page-1/#comment-5587 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/08/21/defending-scientism-mathematics-is-a-part-of-science/comment-page-1/#comment-6532 ,

https://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/03/17/free-to-universalize-or-bound-by-culture-multicultural-and-public-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-12841 ,

https://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2015/03/27/abstract-explanations-in-science/comment-page-1/#comment-13033 ,

http://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/09/16/what-can-evolutionary-biology-learn-from-creationists/comment-page-3/#comment-8347 ,

Universe lock, (1/Alpha): see http://prebabel.blogspot.com/2012/04/alpha-fine-structure-constant-mystery.html

Universe bookkeeping, Cosmological Constant: see https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2016/04/24/entropy-quantum-gravity-cosmology-constant/