Posted: Apr 24, 2013 3:27 pm
No, no, that's not what I'm saying at all! On the contrary: people have been looking, and nothing indicating regions composed of antimatter has been observed.
The fact remains that it is a puzzle as to why almost all we seem to see is matter, because experimentally we see that matter and anti-matter are always created in exactly equal quantities. That suggests that, either that didn't apply at the Big Bang, or it did apply, but all the anti-matter is somewhere else: perhaps outside the observable universe.
My point, such as it was, about that first second and the differing regions referred to the fact that we would have had to have significant inhomogeneity in the material filling the universe in that first second, and it is hard to see why that material wouldn't have been, on the contrary, rather uniform.
it remains a puzzle.
The fact remains that it is a puzzle as to why almost all we seem to see is matter, because experimentally we see that matter and anti-matter are always created in exactly equal quantities. That suggests that, either that didn't apply at the Big Bang, or it did apply, but all the anti-matter is somewhere else: perhaps outside the observable universe.
My point, such as it was, about that first second and the differing regions referred to the fact that we would have had to have significant inhomogeneity in the material filling the universe in that first second, and it is hard to see why that material wouldn't have been, on the contrary, rather uniform.
it remains a puzzle.