What Science now calls “Anti-Matter” is just Matter with a reversed polarity of the Proton and Electron. When they come together they eliminate each other in a burst of energy. Energy which is just another form of Matter. It did not become Energy and Anti-Energy.

When REAL Anti-Matter comes in contact with Matter (Assuming the same mass on both sides) they eliminate each other with the release of NOTHING. Both Matter and Anti-Matter ceases to exist. Gone Bye Bye.

Energy or Matter (which is a form of energy) can not be created or destroyed, OR so it is ASSUMED.

The Truth is: Matter (Energy) can not be created without an equal amount of REAL Anti-Matter being formed. Matter can not be destroyed without an equal amount of REAL Anti-Matter being destroyed.

E=MC square only applies to Matter. Not to REAL Anti-Matter.

Absolute Zero is the dividing line between Matter and REAL Anti-Matter. Matter which is a form of heat. REAL Anti-Matter which is a form of cold.

Space is seen as 3 degrees above Absolute Zero. Assumed to have gotten the 3 degrees from the heat of the Big Bang. Absolute Zero as -459 degrees Fahrenheit

One ton of Matter at 70 degrees Fahrenheit (529 degrees above Absolute Zero) would be equal to 529 tons of REAL Anti-Matter at one degree below Absolute Zero. or equal to One ton at -988 degrees Fahrenheit.

Science has gotten close to Absolute Zero. within about a thousandth of a degree. But could not go colder. The problem is, they may have succeeded. Not knowing it. Like a Compressor on a air conditioner. Separating hot from cold.

Had their temperature gotten below Absolute Zero, Both Matter and REAL Anti-Matter would have been produced. The Matter would have always registered ABOVE Absolute Zero, and the REAL Anti-matter would not have been able to be measured.

BUT, If enough REAL Anti-Matter can be produced in a lab. Then get rid of the Matter that was created with it. Then the REAL Anti-Matter consuming Energy waves with NOTHING as a result, till the REAL Anti-Matter has all been consumed. will show it does exist.

Before the Big Bang. Long before it. using General Relativity. Time and Space as a Fabric, Time moving would have caused the then Space at Absolute Zero to have tiny microscopic variations of pressure. Producing Matter and REAL Anti-Matter.

What does the General Relativity theory look like at Quantum levels? Very Turbulent? The Time and Space Fabric jumping around. And it would just get worst as more Matter and REAL Anti-Matter was produced.

Ken

So what would you call an atom where the proton has a negative charge, and the electrons have a positive one? Considering that 'matter' is the opposite, it would correctly be dubbed 'anti-matter'.

How could this 'real' anti matter have any mass at all? mass is part of being matter, which is a side effect of the energy contained in it.
to further prove my point: If this is the case, as you so plainly state in your opinion, there is no possible way for your theory to have any ground at all, your anti matter is incapable of having mass.
70 degrees farenheit is actually 311 degrees kelvin.
-988 degrees farenheit is so far below absolute zero its laughable.
Click Here to find out exactly what absloute zero is, aparently you dont know.
Just to humor you, how is it that your 'anti-matter' would weigh less at -988 degrees F., than it would at -460 degrees? (espcially since it cant possibly have mass)
do you have any evidence at all to support this? or any other claim you have made?
How would it be possible to create real matter at below absolute zero? If its the only thing that can be measured, then what you're saying is absolute zero dosent exist, which it does. And of corse the 'anti-matter' would not have been able to be measured, it dosent exist.
Funny thing there, energy cannot be created, therefore matter cannot be created. I highly doubt if below absolute zero temps. were attained, that matter would suddenly pop out of it. I'd like to see a link of any scientific value supporting this idea.
The theory of general relativity does not cover quantum theory. The grand unified theory, which has not come into existence as of yet, would be the only way to tie the two together.

*edit- And another thing, if your "REAL" anti-matter can only exist in below absolute zero temps., and real actual matter can only be 'registered' at above absolute zero, how would the two ever come into contact?

your theory is so full of holes that its incomprehensible. It makes absolutely no sense at all whatsoever.

UniversalAbsurdity.

I would call an Atom with a Negative Proton and a Positive electron (easy way to describe the particle, Not an accurate one) just what it is. A reversed polarity Atom. A state of Mattter which can be all transformed into Energy.

Anti-Matter would be the Opposite of Matter. Because Energy is an Excited from of Matter, Energy would not exist in that form below Absolute Zero. REAL Anti-Matter which is created with an equal amount of matter or Energy at Absolute Zero between them would have Mass. It could only have Mass in a Solid state, As there is no excited state below Absolute Zero.

The Math I used, the ton of Matter at 70 Degrees Fahrenheit was just a balance for a ton at -988 degrees Fahrenheit. or the temperature difference on the opposite side of Absolute Zero.

Absolute Zero being -459 degrees Fahrenheit. Add 70 and matter at 70 Degrees Fahrenheit is 529 degrees above Absolute Zero. The same mass or a ton would then have to be 529 degrees colder then Absolute Zero or a ton at -988 degrees Fahrenheit. Absolute Zero being -459 degrees, add the 529 and it comes out -988. The Math is correct.

Because we do not need to be REAL Anti-Matter that cold, I used MORE REAL Anti-Matter at a closer to Absolute Zero to balance the Matter above Absolute Zero.

70 Degrees Fahrenheit is very low. Room Temperature. Matter within the Suns reach a lot hotter, and getting -988 degrees Fahrenheit is nothing to what would be needed to balance out the Mass and Energy level of a Sun.


When you asked if I have evidence to support this, Are you referring to Science getting down to about a thousandth of a degree above Absolute Zero? For this is what Science has done. The Search engines on the internet can show who and where.

As far as speaking of what REAL Anti-Matter is, and it being able to be produced with an equal amount of Matter at the same time. That is a Theory. But it is a Theory that is possible.

For if Energy (Matter) can neither be created nor destroyed. How could it exist? “It always was” is not sufficient.

My Theory shows how Matter can come into existence from Nothing. But not without REAL Anti-Matter coming in also.

And one of the real questions in Physics is “Why is the Something? Or how does Matter exist?”

Your Matter and what is called Anti-Matter could not have come into existence, because when joined, they release Energy which is just Matter changing form.

The Reason the REAL Anti-Matter can not be measured is that WE Are on Matter’s side of Absolute Zero. We use forms of Matter to test temperature. The REAL Anti-Matter would eliminate the energy as part of the REAL Anti-matter was consumed, releasing Nothing as a result.

It is only in seeing Matter or Energy destroyed leaving nothing, which shows the REAL Anti-Matter existed there.

Energy not being able to be created was part of the Theory I showed, It is not able to be created UNLESS an Equal amount of REAL Anti-Matter was created with it. Outer Space as we see it, Just Space then was at Absolute Zero. All of it. The creation of Matter and REAL Anti-Matter was possible. Time and Space existed, Absolute Zero existed, and NOTHING existed.

General Relativity covers Time and Space. Likened to a Fabric. A Fabric which indents when Matter is in contact with it. This bending of time and space is in proportion to the Amount of Mass of the object.

Time and Space also exist at Quantum levels. Except the Mass as tiny particles move, many at the Speed of light. Very light particles orbit around much heavier particles. Same as our Solar System. But we do not want to use Math and say that even a Sub-Atomic particle has an effect on time and space at Quantum levels.

How many square feet of Time Space Fabric exists at Quantum level?

NOW, For the “Incomprehensible”, To Whom? Did anyone consider E=MC square before Eienstein showed it? Was it accepted immediately?

If you can not understand this, Sit back and watch to see if others also can not see. This Theory I wrote on is days old. But it answers a question that had been around for thousands of years. And still has no other explination.

Ken

UniversalAbsurdity

Here is the Web Site I found them getting close to Absolute Zero. They actually got some Atoms a few Billionths of a Degree above Absolute Zero.

http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/bec/temperature.html

Also you can list Absolute Zero by three different scales. I used Fahrenheit.

Water boils at 212 degrees, Water freezes at 32 degrees, Absolute Zero is -459 degrees Fahrenheit.

Celcius or Kelvin could have been used, I chose the one most would know as far as in the United States. Kelvin with Absolute Zero at 0 degrees would have been easier. Absolute Zero is when all heat is gone. Temperature is a measure of heat. It is when an Atom stops all movement.

That is why I said there is no Energy in REAL Anti-Matter, for there is no Movement below Absolute Zero.

Ken

Just a nitpick. There are actually four scales you could measure temperature on.

E=Mc^2 energy is equal to mass x the speed of light squared. energy is equal to mass if there is no energy, there is no mass, there is no anti matter at below 0 K.

Here is a temperature converter. you were actually using the Rankine scale, the least used of the 5.

untill a grand unified theory is accepted, this question cannot be answered. There is one other theory that i am very familiar with, not a grand unified theory, a big bang theory that can explain the origin of matter. ive posted it a few times, i think i said it best here.


your theory has not sufficently shown anything. the only valid scientific information you have is that science has yet to reach absolute 0 in a labratory. the rest is far fetched at best.

quantum gavity has yet to be discovered. i assume in the context of what you were saying, that quantum gravity is what you were referring to.

a square foot is a square foot, regardless of where you're measuring it.

read the link to my post above. Then tell me there's no other explanation.

I would still like for you to answer my question : " if your "REAL" anti-matter can only exist in below absolute zero temps., and real actual matter can only be 'registered' at above absolute zero, how would the two ever come into contact?"

that question alone disproves your theory. I noticed that you avoided answering it.
the fact that energy ceases to move at absolute zero, would stop any interaction between it and any hypothetical anti matter, thus making it immune to observation. without observation, there is no theory.

I stand corrected. I didn't know there were 5 scales. I've never heard of Réaumur.

Ken,

If I could speculate or philosophize about your idea, I would express it as the infinite becoming finite. For example, if we work back from the CMB to first scattering of photons, then back to hydrogen, then to primordial helium, then individual particles, then to quark matter and acoustic type wave fronts, then EM waves, and forces, to...?

If we could make an anti-matter corollary to the moment when events began, I would think of an universe/anti-universe, each co-existing as an infinitude(paradox ). If they began attraction, or contraction of their 'properties' toward each other, they would reach an impass at each respective absolute zero. There, they would freeze, and the result would be a fracturing and expansion event, to conserve what ever was conserved. So, we would live in a dual universe, essentially.

L/W/B, spacetime, and gravitational force do strange things, like black holes. While black holes are not supposed to wormhole from one universe to another, they do generate anti-particles. While particle accelerators (and black holes) can generate anti-particles, you make a distinction in your theory, calling for something other than electron-positron pairs, etc.

A photon can turn into a particle and an anti-particle (and the outcome depends on the energy of the photon), but if the pair of particles is not close to something else with mass or energy, they disappear. Such as virtual electrons. You mentioned
something related to that.

Absolute entropy, by ony one kind of matter (while protons have almost infinite decay rates, they may eventually decay) does imply an unhinging of all force (which would be ex-parte, and contrary to your dualistic scenario).

Regarding annihilation, conservation of energy and momentum can prevent virtual particles from becoming real. But if a photon does pass close to an atomic nucleus, it can receive enough scattering energy to make the particle-antiparticle pair real. That can happen, in theory, around the event horizon of a black hole, where there are tremendous forces. In that instance, if an anti-particle goes in to the event horizon, and the other escapes, the escape includes the conservation of energy. The lost anti-particle gives its energy to the escaping particle. All this occurs on the extreme perimeter, of course. At the same time, the black hole decreases in mass, by some amount. That evaporates small black holes at the smallest levels, and also reduces black holes at the larger scales.

So, on the atomic and sub-nuclear (quarks) scale, matter and anti-matter are generated, and will cancel each other out. It can take time for something as small as a quark/ anti-quark pair to get close enough for a reaction, and it will go unnoticed. But, perhaps matter/anti-matter production occurs in some stellar events. In the core of a main sequence star, there might be photons which achieve very high energy, and collide with protons, creating 'lasting' hydrogen/anti-hydrogen ( ). That might contribute to production of energy upon their encounter/annihilation and conserved energy/momentum.


I shall stop here. It is time to set my anti-alarm clock (it has a sleep button).

UniversalAbsurdity.

Sorry, But I see you using some bad Math. Eienstein was showing the Relationship of Mass and Energy in Mathematical terms.

The Sum of which could have been all in Energy, all in Solid Mass, or some of both.

If Excited Movement of an Atom or any form or Particle of Matter ceases at Absolute Zero. Then only Matter in Mass state can exist at this Temperature. All Energy would have been reduced to the Mass state of Matter.

The Mass state of Matter can exist below Absolute Zero. But an Excited or Energy state can not.

As far as which Scale, I am sure we all understand what is being said as far as Absolute Zero. The point where an Atom ceases to move within itself. It can float in Space, But itself is not energized. The Scales are just different people’s view of the same thing, using different figures for the same events.

I do not care for the Accuracy of any of their Scales, I am only concerned that the point called Absolute Zero is where Heat as we know it ceases. And that point is what I am using as the Dividing ground between Matter, and REAL Anti-Matter.

And that is the Point in Temperature which would have existed in Space, Before any Matter, or REAL Anti-Matter came into Existence.

There are Many questions which can not be answered. There are many accepted ones which can not be answered. Acceptance of a Unified Theory and the Accuracy of a Theory are two different things.

I went to your Big Bang Theory of the Origin of Matter.

How in the World can you have a “ORIGIN of Matter when you already had Matter in the Form of Energy in your equation? Your Equation was really, “How Less Matter forms More Matter”

If Space was already full of Energy, Matter already exists and would not need an Origin.

Matter had to Exist prior to Big Bang. The Theory I show starts with NO Matter, No Energy, No REAL Anti-Matter Just Time and Space. A world at Absolute Zero.

Science is right as far as seeing it is Matter and Anti-Matter which is the key to getting something from nothing that would explode. But only if the Equation of “x Matter + x Anti-Matter = NOTHING would it really be true, then just explaining the Mechanics of dividing the Matter and Anti-Matter to bring them into existence.

Science’s Anti-Matter when it comes in Contact with Matter =Energy. Showing both to be a form of Matter, and that REAL Anti-Matter was not present.

Quantum Gravity or Solar Gravity has yet to really be Discovered, It can only be observed. Exactly what it is? What causes it? We see the effects. We do not see the Whole.

Take apart an Atom. We can see why a Positive and a Negative would attract. Why two Positives would repel. But there are many forces at work in that Atom, Many particles which we do not know why they stay instead of flying off. Why a Neutron behaves the way it does

How does what we now call Anti-Matter and Matter come in contact? Does not Science have a theory that when Matter and Anti-Matter was created. More Matter was created? And that More Matter eliminated most of the Anti-Matter. And what we have left is what we now Observe?

If we could come up with a whole Universe full of Anti-Matter a Distance from our Universe Science would rejoice, and the Search would be ended.

But this is a Theory of HOW Matter and REAL Anti-Matter came to be. Nothing else. It answers one very important question. And it shows the answer that is being used now is not even possible. What is now called Anti-Matter can be seen to be a form of Matter itself. Just different polarity. Protons and Electrons are both Particles of Matter, Just different polarities.

The Theory defines WHAT REAL Anti-Matter is, The Dividing point between Matter and Real Anti-Matter. What the Result is then they combine. Space, Time, and Absolute Zero was all there.

Matter and REAL Anti-Matter do not combine to release a Form of Matter called Energy. They both just cease to exist in any form other then NOTHING.

It is the fact that a lot of Matter and REAL Anti-Matter HAS NOT come in Contact that accounts for our Universe.

Most feel that the Big Bang was an Explosion. REAL Anti-Matter would be much more compact. If they were right next to each other. And Exploding Matter would move easier. From the Center of the mass of Matter. all that going away from the REAL Anti-Matter would speed away. Like a Universe hurling through Space. That going towards the REAL Anti-Matter mass would be Destroyed with an equal amount of REAL Anti-Matter.

Leaving a mass of REAL Anti-Matter behind equal to the Matter which was cast off by the Explosion. If however the REAL Anti-Mass was within, being more dense. Then it would expel all of Matter like an expanding Universe. With it remaining at “Ground ZERO”

We Observe Matter. We Observe Space, Time, Temperature. We Observe an Expanding Universe. So we use Theories. Big Bang is one of them. About 12 Billion years ago? In a universe which has Stars. Some dating 16 to 18 Billion years old? I guess Theories have questions. Even Accepted ones.


Magnetar.

Isn’t every thing you are relating to really a form of Matter? One of the main things I am saying is Anti-Matter is in no way, Anti-Matter. But another form of Matter.

In order for it to Truly be Anti-Matter, it would have to cease to exist in any form whatsoever when an equal amount of matter was combined.

Science uses Matter and Anti-Matter as opposites, and they are not. No more then Energy and Matter are opposites. And this is the Theory they use in different ways to show how matter can into existence. But it is Mathematical impossible. 2+3 does not =0. 1 plus -1 does =0. You can not have two forms of REAL MATTER which equals Nothing, and that is what Science is using, and they deceive themselves by naming one of the particles Anti-Matter. It has Both Mass and Energy. Both existing above Absolute Zero in those states.

I am not trying to get rid of a two Universe concept. There may be two. Maybe another explanation. Maybe an Explanation we will never come up with. Only how Matter can come into existence from Nothing. And it involves what I call REAL Anti-Matter.

And for this Theory, AT LEAST the Math comes out. The Elements of Time, Space, and Absolute Zero are there to begin with. I am not starting with Any form of Matter or Energy.

It does not matter how tiny they want to make the Mass which started the Big Bang. Make it a mountain or a mole hill. It still contained all the Matter we see as our Universe, and that is only seeing a small part of what is there.

As if having a very tiny speck of Matter got rid of the fact it’s Atomic weight was beyond our comprehension.

Ken

I quit reading at the point where he said energy is a form of matter.

And I when he ignored the fact that temperature( A.K.A.-Heat) is a form of Magnetism.

I'm way out of my depth here, but I'd still like to ask a question (whether it sounds absurd or not).

If there were such a thing as a true anti-universe existing parallel to the known universe, wouldn't it's flow of time be inverse to our own? I'm not referring to antimatter, but rather, a completely opposite universe.

And could this be explained using relativity?

For example, if we could somehow look into that anti-universe, we would see everything moving backwards in time.

However, if we were to somehow cross over to that parallel universe, we would then perceive time flowing in a forward motion, but see our own universe traveling backwards relative to our new point of view.

Also, would it be possible to design a theoretical model of this idea (the idea being that our Big Crunch would be the anti-universe's Big Bang)?

I realize this is most likely all nonsense, but I thought I'd ask anyway (if anything, it makes a good sci fi story idea).

Not necessairly. Its possible that the flow of time (speed at which time goes by, which we're assuming can vary and go into the negatives because that what I think you're asking) can follow a parabolic equation where x values such as +1 and -1, although inverse, can result in the same y value.

Thanks Stellar. I think I understand.

The best analogy I can come up with right now is the input control of a VCO. The output waveform always flows forward, regardless of how much it's frequency is altered by either a positive or negative voltage.

I know that's not exactly what you meant (since the waveform in my example can't be made to travel in reverse), but it's the best I can do this close to my bedtime.

You obviously dont understand Einstein's equation, or my use of the word "equals" which you interpret as math.
In simple terms, Mass IS Energy. In an excited state or not, you cannot have mass without energy. Einstein's equation shows how you can calculate the amount of energy in any mass. It shows how much energy the mass contains in lumens if you actually add numbers to the equation E=Mc^2. There is no mass in the universe that does not contain energy.
In that regard, you have contradicted yourself several times by stating that your anti matter has no energy.


You said yourself that science has gotten to temperatures to within a thousanth of a degree to reaching absolute zero, at what temperature then would matter be created if absolute zero has to be between matter and your actual matter? .0001 degree?
Speaking of the between you mentioned, how then can matter ever come into contact with your anti matter? Energy ceases to move at absolute zero. what you stated is that your anti matter exists only below 0. how then would it be detected? how would matter ever come into contact with it? energy stops moving, waves stop going, Its ABSOLUTE ZERO there is no movement.

You sure do like to exchange the word energy for matter. Space is a vaccum, it is completely empty and devoid of all matter, yet energy (in the form of energy, as mass tends to be opaque) exists in it. otherwise light would not be able to travel through it. The universe expanding creates energy in the form of tension on the vaccum of space. Instead of dissapating, energy is replaced as the universe expands. This is why there is a uniformity of energy, and what enables us to record light as a constant 186,000 mps. Observation has proven that the expansion is accelerating. This would inevitably cause more tension, as with anything, there must be a breaking point. this is when matter is created from energy. As for the prime mover that started it all, real science is at work trying to find out.
i highly doubt that a state of absolute zero would allow much movement at all to have temperature variations, let alone enough variations to allow for all the matter that is seen (and unseen) in this universe to be created.

So what you're saying is there is a singularity of your anti matter that is responsible for the universe expanding. Why then is it accelerating? in the history of astronomy and cosmology there has never been a recorded temperature of below 1 degree kelvin in the whole observable universe so it could not possibly be that your anti matter is present and pushing galaxies apart.

Obviously you are not familar with currently accepted big bang theories, if you thought what i had posted was one of them. If you had read and understood the theory that i had posted, you would know that it allows for a forever expanding universe, the age of stars has no bearing on it. there is no 'when it started' its quite elegantly an explanation of how energy is created and how it then turns into mass. It clears up problems with currently accepted theories, as well as explain alot more.

Untill you can come up with an explanation as to how zero degrees actually forms matter, all you're doing is talking. there is nothing to back it up, there is no way for it to be observed. Its nothing but possible material for a science fiction novel.

UniversalAbsurdity.

This is just going back and forth. We see differently. You have a Expanding Universe in your equation. You have Energy already existing in your equation. You have Light needing to pass through Energy in your equation.

I took Space, Time, and a temperature of Absolute Zero. No Matter in any form. Not in Energy, not in Mass. And put forth a Theory on how they could come into existence, and what would have needed to also come into existence, which is REAL Anti-matter which would be Matter in the Solid form, not energized in any way, and it would have to be at Below Absolute Zero temperature. In direct proportions on both sides.

Ken

The question would be ...Where does antimatter go when matter is created?
Where does it balance out?

Gmac.

REAL Anti-Matter would not show up, where it is. Because it would not release any Energy which is what we detect. No light, No Radio waves. It would be the Same as the “Dark Matter” which Science is looking for. Science believes it is there in some form, But undetectable so far.

Space can be endless in all directions beyond our Universe. Our imagination allows us to travel from one edge of our Universe to the other in a second, But an Endless Universe could not be traveled to any edge with an eternity of seconds. The ends could never be reached, they do not exist.

We assumed our Universe was just our Galaxy at one time. But now we know there are Billions of others galaxies, There can just as easy be Billions of Universes. Maybe even clusters of matter beyond what we have imagined so far.

If Time and Space is capable of creating Matter along with REAL Anti-Matter. For time and space also would be endless. Time going in a different directions would not seem likely. Another Universe going backwards to ours might be. But it would be no different then two people standing back to back, and both walk off in different directions.

Ken

Right, I haven't read this all. But what your talking about is merely quantum mechanics.
Anti-matter, whether you call it real or not is still anti-matter by the scientific community. Indeed there is a polar opposite of the proton and the electron... and even the neutron. I remember covering this in high school. So what I was trying to figure out what kinda point were you trying to make? Just that anti-matter is labelled wrong? It's called anti matter because it's matter opposed to its own existence. Hence anti, being opposed to something, where that something is matter. The only things I can see that are a problem here is that for one, anti-matter indeed has mass. It's just that the mass is so unbelieveably small and nearly impossible to measure (and some believe negative). And your sorta right on the E=mc^2 thing because mass can not go into the negative in that equation... So yeah, another thing is that you said there will be a burst of energy if say... example... a anti-neurtino and a neutrino meet. Nope, as far as I can remember there would be no energy released. It's sorta the equivalent of two identical waves hitting each other, they would just phase out or go right through. So yeah, interesting stuff, but it's common knowledge in my opinion. Just to let you know, there are equations out there that can calculate the energies or masses even if they are in the negative. Man, most people already know Einstein's theory of relativity was only a start, there are alot more crazier equations that seem to get the job done.
Good theory though, if you thought it all up yourself I give you props. Check out Stephen Hawking on this kinda stuff, he has some good theories on blackholes, anti-matter and dark matter. Einstein's theory should only apply to certain things, but we gotta remember his theory is only relative, meaning its still subject to comparrison and what not. So yeah. You got me thinking again anyway.

The Lan.

I checked out about the Anti-Neutrino. But the web site I went to said they have found that the Anti-Neutrino disappeared then REAppeared or changed so it could be seen.

http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archiv...nd-results.html

If it were true and there was nothing after the two met, then it would be an explination to where Matter came from.

REAL Anti-Matter and Matter must eliminate each other, Leaving Nothing to be used in an Equation for where Matter came from.

My point was just as the Start would have been Space, Time, at Absolute Zero. And Matter (Mass and Energy together) can all be converted to Energy. And that Energy has to be Above Absolute Zero. REAL Anti-Matter has to exist Below Absolute Zero in a MASS type form, But not being able to convert to Energy.

More like -E=Mc^2 below Absolute Zero. Or how much Energy from the Above Absolute Zero side, would be absorbed by REAL Anti-Matter, Eliminating both from existance.

Ken
Ken

Yeah, I sorta see your point. You do realize that absolute zero is merely hypothetical? We have no idea what happens at absolute zero. But from what many theories say, once you hit absolute zero atoms, along with their particles stop moving. Meaning the one thing that doesn't make sense is how your theory states that if an anti-neutrino and a neutrino were to collide in absolute zero... nothing. They can't move. If you were to collide them together using some kinda instrument I'm guessing they would become innert and non-reactive. Another point here is that it's nearly and practically impossible to have two equal amounts of matter and anti-matter, there will always be a fluctuation, and therefore always a left over due to the reaction. All in all, I suggest you look up some string theory neophysics, and check into energy and anti-matter. They got some theories that work... there is no negative E=Mc^2 equation. So yeah. Check it out.

The Lan

My Theory does not contain ANTI-Neutrinos as a form of REAL Anti-Matter. But like what science calls Anti-Matter it also is labeled wrong, They are different forms of matter, that is why when they collide, Energy is released. As they are both forms of Energy.

It is not that an Atom or Particle can not move at Absolute Zero. But and Atom or Particle has No Energized state, or the Electrons do not move around the Protons. An Atom can fly through space without having any Energy with it. It can collide, But then Mass might convert to Energy depending on the Collision.

If a Mass particle collided with REAL Anti-matter which is Below Absolute Zero (the Temperature of the REAL Anti-Matter) Any Energy the mass particle has around it would be Absorbed, Any Mass which converted to Energy would be absorbed. And an Equal amount of REAL Anti-matter would cease to exist with the Energy it took in.


I am going to add a second Theory.

The REAL Anti-Matter which is a cold mass below Absolute Zero. Capable of Absorbing Energy till an Equal amount of REAL Anti-Matter has been converted back to Nothing along with the energy that was absorbed.

The REAL Anti-Matter can not Absorb Mass particles. Only the Energy around them. The Mass particle would have to be converted to Energy E=Mc^2 to be absorbed and both cease to exist. REAL Anti-Matter which is below Absolute Zero would be more -E=Mc^2 or the amount of Energy it could absorb from above Absolute Zero before both cease to exist in any form.

This REAL Anti-Matter can be found within the Nuclei of the Atom. It would be undetectable as far as it emits no form of Energy or wave. And any Energy used to try to detect it would be absorbed and less REAL Anti-Matter would exist there after, But emitting nothing.

It is the REAL Anti-Matter within the Nuclei which Bonds or Freezes the Proton to itself, Or Multiple protons to itself. The Protons (Proton) acting like a candy coating. Surrounding the REAL Anti-Matter. Closing off all access to the REAL Anti-Matter from the Energy which exists outside the Protons, But not within, where the REAL Anti-Matter is.

It is this REAL Anti-Matter which absorbed all Energy from the inside of the Protons (Proton) and nullified the effect of the Protons repelling each other. Forming a Bonding of the Atom Nuclei together. The Amount of REAL Anti-Matter within the Nuclei might have an effect on the Amount of Protons it can bond. Or the Size of the Atom.

I am just using the Protons in Example. Any Particle in the Mass state would be effected if it can close off the Energy from getting to the REAL Anti-Matter.

Because the REAL Anti-Matter would be Below Absolute Zero. The Mass attached to it would also be very cold, Maybe at Absolute Zero itself. The Energy then as heat would be attracted to the Nuclei, Trying to be absorbed by the Protons, which it can not. So would surround the Nuclei.

We would be measuring the Heat of the Energy around the Nuclei of the Atom, not getting the real Temperature of the Nuclei itself.

Ken