>entire galaxies
> in our solar system

Okay.

>>1431285

Fuck I was just gonna post that.

oh shit, sorry guys, meant universe, typo there. man i feel like a tit...

>>1431285

Im guessing he means that anti-matter galaxies overlap with our own. thus within our own solar system their may exist bodies from another galaxy, an 'anti-matter' galaxy

>theories that there are entire galaxies in our solar system
I'm loling so hard

Whole thread has been fucked by that one typo xD

How would large quantities of anti-mater behave? Could you have an anti-mater sun and would it give off visible light or would it give off some weird anti-light that destroys anything it touches.

>>1431322
that was my anti-force carrier thing, do you get anti photons?

>>1431322

Anti-hydrogen has been show to exist, but I think opinions are split amoungst physcists on whether anti-matter can form anti-atoms of larger elements.

>>1431314

Regardless, this is wrong, anti-mater is not invisible/intangible, it is made of the same stuff that normal matter is, it just has opposite charge.

>>1431334
why shouldnt it?

>>1431329

No. A photon is its own anti particle.

Anti particles are either

A: Opposite charge same mass

or

B: Opposite respective Quarks

Neither can be true for a photon as it is not made of quarks and has no charge!

>>1431322

There are no anti-photons. The positron transition of an anti-hydrogen and the electron transitions of hydrogen show the same pattern in spectroscopy.

>>1431334
also, i explained this was a typo, i don't think anti matter could be right next to matter, that would be derp.

>>1431341
>>1431341

so if anti matter looks identical to normal matter than some of these galaxies could anti-matter galaxies

>>1431341
so this would make it really hard to detect an anti matter galaxy in the UNIVERSE(sorry felt the need to exagerate that, though i nearly made the same mistake again)? as it would give of exactly the same emission spactra as normal galaxies

>>1431356
fuck. spectra, what the fuck is spactra. i should have slept more recently

>>1431353

you are clearly still not getting it, I refer you to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryon_asymmetry

>>1431353
Naively, yes. However, there's a constant barrage of high energy particles (electrons, alpha particles, etc) that would be impinging on any would-be antimatter galaxies, causing large bursts of gamma radiation as the matter annihilated. This is not observed.

>>1431356

""We cannot rule out the possibility that some antimatter star or galaxy exists somewhere," Share says. "Generally it would look the same as a matter star or galaxy to most of our instruments."

Theory argues that antimatter would behave identical to regular matter gravitationally.

"However, there must be some boundary where antimatter atoms from the antimatter galaxies or stars will come into contact with normal atoms," Share notes. "When that happens a large amount of energy in the form of gamma rays would be produced. To date we have not detected these gamma rays even though there have been very sensitive instruments in space to observe them.""

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/antimatter_sun_030929.html

anti matter has antigravity, so there can't be antimatter galaxies

>>1431341
>same pattern in spectroscopy
Thats crazy . . but I guess it'd be crazier if the pattern was different.

Also OP I don't think there are antimatter galaxies floating around, because if there were, when they happened to come into contact with our matter galaxies, we would see insanely bright flashes of light, and so far such gamma ray bursts are all attributed to normal things, I think

>>1431375
so the original idea is highly unlikely?
Or would the energy releases be masked by the rest of the energy radiating from the galaxy

>>1431384

I think that would be matter with negative mass, which doesn't make so much sense if I'm honest.

>>1431388
Correct, very unlikely. Normal galaxies aren't very bright in gamma rays, so it would be quite obvious if something like this were happening.

>>1431384
on which basis antimatter on earth defies gravity. really?

>>1431384
No. It's only charge what changes. It still has the same gravitational properties as normal matter.

>>1431400
well that's my question answered, thank you anon.
why is /sci/ actually good today? i'm confused...

>>1431384

derp

Anti-matter does not have anti-gravity.

How do we know our sun isn't actually an anti-sun? I'm not saying it is, but if the spectroscopy is the same, and we've never touched it with what we know is normal matter, and it looks the same gravitationally. . what method would we use to know?

>>1431375
>>1431382
>>1431387
>>1431400

If there was any place that an anti-mater galaxy could exist it would be on the farthest edges of the universe. I think the farthest light we can see is 13 billion years old. There could be giant gamma ray bursts which would prove the existence of anti-matter galaxies happening right now on the fringes of the universe but we wouldn't be able to see them for 13 billion years.

>>1431424

We detect regular baryonic radiation from it. Eg alpha particles. Beta particles.

>>1431408
I know, right? Maybe its just synchronicity of the right people being on at the right time. Even though I get so incredibly mad at the typical /sci/, one night like this a month is all I need to keep coming back, it seems

>>1431424
as people have said, gamma emissions as, at least earth is most definitely made of matter, so matter anti matter collisions

>>1431434
hells yeah. anyone have a new question to start in this thread? get ourselves on a roll.

>>1431424

The fact that it is ejecting normal matter all the time, and the fact that we are standing on our planets that were made from the sun, and the fact that shit is flying into all the time and we aren't fried by the gamma rays...

should I go one?

I think what is kind of interesting is the idea of an anti-human.

>>1431466

I'd hit it.

But seriously, do the math. Consider the probability that not only does an anti-matter galaxy exist, but it has just the right anti-sun and anti-planet to allow for the formation of anti-life that uses anti-DNA as a basis, and this anti-DNA goes through the exact same natural selection path that we travelled through for billions of years without even the slightest deviation. That would require anti-comets to kill anti-dinosaurs at just the right time, and anti-ice ages and an anti-africa...pretty fucking unlikely.

>>1431466
this is something we discussed heavily at school. we got nowhere.

>>1431481
dude what are you on

>>1431481
wait, probability says yes to anti matter galaxies, logic and observations say no, probability defies logic?

>>1431446

Ok, big bang is supposedly how the universe was created and it'll eventually repeat itself. All matter in the universe will condense into a single point and then explode. It would be kinda like a super huge black hole. Now time slows down as you get closer and closer to a black hole. If all the entire universe was at a single point like a black hole, then wouldn't the gravitational force be so strong it would stop time? And if time is stopped, even for a nanosecond the entire universe would be stuck in that state for all eternity. Wouldn't that sorta disprove the big bang theory?

Alright, here's something:

What were the characteristics of the energy of the big bang? Was it equal intensity across all wavelengths? What was the highest wavelength? What was the lowest? Is this even a proper question to be asking?

>>1431495

The universe will not undergo the big crunch. We are dying the heat death.

>>1431495
Unfortunately for you, current observational data strongly suggests that the universe, far from condensing back to a single point, will continue to expand at an ever increasing rate.

>>1431495

Time is only stopped when force of gravity is infinite. So it would only be stopped for an infinitely small amount of time.

Mindfuck.

>>1431488
>>1431492

I was discussing the possibility of anti-humans

Who says probability says yes to anti-matter galaxies, if cp-violation theories are correct, then probability says no to them.

>>1431492
Probability of there being antimatter galaxies? Ok, maybe, but probability of that galaxy behaving in a smiliar enough way to our own that humans would develop just as we have on our normal matter planet, is too small. I don't think thats what Anon meant by anti-matter humans, though.

>>1431503
Definitely not a proper question.

>>1431522

Nah not really.

Plus lets not forget, in 5-10 years we will have the technological capability to CREATE an antimatter human! From scratch! He'll just have to kind of float around in a vaccuum with some anti oxygen being fed in so he doesn't destroy us all?

>>1431495

Nice try with you 1960's popular science. The universe will continue expanding until more or less energy is so distributed that nothing can happen. And this is the way the world ends, this is the way the world ends, this is the way the world ends, not with a bang, but a whimper.

>>1431532

Don't forget the anti bacon!

>>1431532

WTF

In 5-10 years we won't even be able to create Anti-deuterium, let alone anti-helium, and no where buttfucking close to anti-humans

>>1431532
0/10

Muslims are the closest thing to anti-humans

>>1431507
>>1431514

How does heat death effect time then? If time slows down in and near a black hole then is the inverse true? If all the matter and energy was perfectly distributed across the infinity of the universe then would time be moving at an infinity faster speed?

But how did all of the energy in the Universe GET into the super compacted state pre big bang?

What would cause a SPECIFIC CERTAIN amount of energy to compact into such a small space?

>>1431595

No, as your movement through spacetime is limited by c.

>>1431595
No. The rate of relative time flow approaches unity, that is, time is flowing at the same rate everywhere. You must realize that time in no objective sense grinds to a halt at the event horizon of a black hole. It only appears this way to an outside observer. To the guy falling through the black hole, for a sufficiently large black hole, he will notice nothing different.

>>1431599

Maybe our universe had no matter n energy to begin with. In another universe a black hole created a rip in space/time and a wormhole opened and dumped all the matter into our universe. Maybe everything in this universe is the by product of something that happened in another universe.

>>1431599
>>1431616

Possibly but pre big bang physics is simply not possible at this stage. Physics break down before you get there, so predicting what happened before it is impossible.

>>1431616
You seriously need to read this:
http://www.amazon.com/First-Three-Minutes-Modern-Universe/dp/0465024378
it must be in most public libraries anyway.

>>1431616

That must have been one hell of a fucking HUGE ass black hole.

A black hole so big that it sucked up an entire universes amount of energy?

>>1431599

That's a pretty big fucking question in physics, and it's theories can't be broken down into everyday terms, and it's math is well beyond our fucking comprehention.

Regardless, it is possible that we can never know for certain. Time breaks down at the big bang, and possible causality. How can you ask what happened before the big bang, if there was no before? mindfuck

>>1431638

Sounds like a big crunch situation to me.

>>1431616
currently there is no evidence for the existence of wormholes anyway

>>1431655

Before the big bang happened, scientist were trying to determine the mass of the higgs boson.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDKo7pTwIwA

So really the ONLY theory that we have where all of the pieces match to our current understanding of the evidence we have is a cyclic Universe?

Without the Universe collapsing after a big bang we have no theory of how the Universe could become collapsed into the pre big bang state.

So Universe expands, Universe contracts over and over?

What is the estimate for the number of times this could have happened previously?

>>1431681

There are loooooads of theories out there. Stuff like string theory where each universe is an 11 dimentional brane and when two universes collide they ripple and create a fuckton of matter and shit.

>>1431681
NO, NO and FUCKING NO. 0/10 for trying to force the troll.
For non-trollers reading this thread, there is ZERO evidence for a cyclic universe.

>>1431528
Why not?

>>1431681

Kind of an oxymoronic question? Even if this WAS the case all information of the previous universe would be wiped out at the singularity phase.

>>1431688
Just because you don't agree with him doesn't mean you have to go all apeshit

>>1431666

wtf is that from? I know those LHC guys were up to no good.

>>1431688
>>1431688

Cyclic Universe answers the Question of HOW the Universe came to a state where all of the matter/energy was compacted into such a small area pre big bang.

Can you provide a BETTER theory?

U MAD?

>>1431703
Lexx, it was a tv show that ran on Sci-fi from 97-02. It's a show about a giant insectoid penis shaped space ship that goes around destroying planets. This was long before the LHC.

>>1431718

It might do, but the evidence of an ever more expanding universe contradicts the theory :/

>>1431718

The universe was placed in a giant syringe by a breed of infinitely large space aliens who like to do universe drugs. The syringe was stopped up though, so when the alien tried to inject it, it just compressed the universe really small.

Sound far fetched? It has the exact same amount of evidence has yours does. The absence of alternative theories doesn't prove one theory. Most scientist are working their way back to the big bang, as that makes more since than sitting around and making shit up that is untestable at the stage, and off limited amounts of data.

>>1431744

Good call on their part then.

>>1431282

>>ANTI-MATTER, NO MATTER!

>>1431752
>>1431752

Yes I understand that the evidence shows that the Big Bang had enough energy to keep expanding forever.

SO again if the Universe is not cycling

Than

What other theories are there based on evidence that would put a certain specific amount of matter/energy into the state of the Universe Pre-Big Bang.

Back to the drawing board.

Cyclic Universe explains everything so beautifully BUT is probably not true due to the evidence of the amount of energy behind the big bangs expansion expanding forever.

Mind full of fuck

>>1431752
Ya, true, but doesn't preclude it, if each iteration of the universe is different from the one before, this configuration might just be the one that breaks the cycle. . . and dooms us to heat death. Be careful what you wish for, I guess.

>>1431804

>>
There are loooooads of theories out there. Stuff like string theory where each universe is an 11 dimentional brane and when two universes collide they ripple and create a fuckton of matter and shit.

>>1431814

Yes but there is literally no evidence, and more than likely there will never be any!

>>1431814
Heat death theory relies on space being infinite. What if it wasn't? What if, just like matter and energy, space is finite and actually curves in on itself. Eventually when heat death occurs the universe will stop expanding because there is no more space for it to expand into. Wouldn't then it start to contract due to tiny gravitational forces?

>>1431804
Two problems with this:

1- The cause of the acceleration that will cause a big rip, or heat death, isn't from the big bang, or at least we don't know that it is. Its from dark energy, and the best explanation I've heard so far is that maybe at huuuuge scales, gravity turns repulsive? But thats not related to the cosmic microwave background radiation energy left over from the big bang.

2- a big crunch would be a massive black hole, right? So even if all the matter underwent fusion to blow everything back apart, the gravity well would be so deep, it wouldn't be able to go anywhere. But again, talking about what goes on in black holes is anyones guess.

Though despite these, I like the cyclical universe concept, because it IS an elegant way of saying how everything got so compacted. Its just simple, and there isn't anything better out there that I've seen.

>>1431847

Well by the time heat death occurs, there is no matter to make any gravity from.

lots of theories
very little, or no, evidence

>entire galaxies in our solar system