Universe shouldn’t exist, CERN physicists conclude - Sensationalist Headlines

[quote] One of the great mysteries of modern physics is [URL="https://cosmosmagazine.com/physics/the-mystery-of-the-missing-antimatter"]why antimatter did not destroy the universe[/URL] at the beginning of time. To explain it, physicists suppose there must be some difference between matter and antimatter – apart from electric charge. Whatever that difference is, it’s not in their magnetism, it seems. Physicists at CERN in Switzerland have made the most precise measurement ever of the magnetic moment of an anti-proton – a number that measures how a particle reacts to magnetic force – and found it to be exactly the same as that of the proton but with opposite sign. The [URL="https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v550/n7676/full/nature24048.html"]work is described in [/URL][I][URL="https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v550/n7676/full/nature24048.html"]Nature[/URL][/I]. [/quote] [URL="https://cosmosmagazine.com/physics/universe-shouldn-t-exist-cern-physicists-conclude"]full article here[/URL]

Universe shouldn't exist [I]according to the magnetism-related theory we had on matter-antimatter nonparity that turned out not to be valid[/I], CERN physicists conclude. Science-story titles should be required to not be clickbait in my opinion. Not that this was OP's fault, that's the Cosmos Magazine title for the story.

maybe a mod could edit the title? I see OvB down there, he's a resident science-man. at least it's not another "FTL might be possible!!!... wait, nah" article I guess. Is it just me, or does CERN so far seem to be especially apt to helping us understand the early universe? Also, the most interesting part of this article is right at the very end: [quote] The next hotly anticipated experiment is over at ALPHA, where CERN scientists are studying the effect of gravity of antimatter – trying to answer the question of whether antimatter might fall ‘up’. [/quote] uh, what?

[QUOTE=paindoc;52823982]uh, what?[/QUOTE] I think it might mean antimatter is gravitationally repelled by matter (and possibly also by other antimatter)?

[QUOTE=paindoc;52823982]maybe a mod could edit the title? I see OvB down there, he's a resident science-man. at least it's not another "FTL might be possible!!!... wait, nah" article I guess. [/QUOTE] Yeah, I agree. I was trying to think of a good thread title but admittedly I just got lazy.

It seems pretty clear that the title is in jest, and that the actual findings are in the subheading. It's a pretty common thing for Cosmos to do.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;52824092]It seems pretty clear that the title is in jest, and that the actual findings are in the subheading. It's a pretty common thing for Cosmos to do.[/QUOTE] Didn't stop one IGN editor from hastily proclaiming that Elon Musk might be right about the world being a simulation.

[QUOTE=CyclonatorZ;52824190]Didn't stop one IGN editor from hastily proclaiming that Elon Musk might be right about the world being a simulation.[/QUOTE] Yeah, it's IGN, what else would you expect?

[QUOTE=paindoc;52823982]maybe a mod could edit the title? I see OvB down there, he's a resident science-man. at least it's not another "FTL might be possible!!!... wait, nah" article I guess. Is it just me, or does CERN so far seem to be especially apt to helping us understand the early universe? Also, the most interesting part of this article is right at the very end: uh, what?[/QUOTE] They are apt because the LHC was designed with the explicit purpose of high energy particle collisions. The higher the energy, the more it mimics the chaotic state of the early universe.

Neat, I remember reading about the attempt to measure the magnetic moment of antiprotons a while back, good to finally hear the results. Blows my mind that they managed to store a bunch of antiprotons for over a year. From a related article: [quote]“Given that we have not observed any antiproton disappearance yet,” says Christian Smorra, a research fellow on the BASE collaboration, “we can say that there are less than three matter particles left per cubic centimetre.”[/quote] That's less than the density of the solar wind at 1 AU.

well... this is easy enough to disprove. nice to see we are wrong about somethimg in particle physics for a change

[QUOTE=latin_geek;52824092]It seems pretty clear that the title is in jest, and that the actual findings are in the subheading. It's a pretty common thing for Cosmos to do.[/QUOTE] I can understand making that title to be cheeky but when the subject is something like antimatter, which is entirely alien to most people, it has more than minimal potential to be harmful rather than helpful.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52823928]Universe shouldn't exist [I]according to the magnetism-related theory we had on matter-antimatter nonparity that turned out not to be valid[/I], CERN physicists conclude. Science-story titles should be required to not be clickbait in my opinion. Not that this was OP's fault, that's the Cosmos Magazine title for the story.[/QUOTE] This comic will never stop being relevant. [img]http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20090830.gif[/img]

It was already known that things aren't working the way they should according to our theories, they're just trying to figure out [I]why[/I] it is that way. Our laws of physics are accurate and comprehensive, but not absolute. Things like dark energy or black holes break our laws of physics, but they obviously exist, or at least appear to exist based on our observations. Dark matter and dark energy are theorized because there are areas of the universe that are not acting in accordance to our known laws of gravity, and black holes are interesting because there is a point where the gravitational pull appears to be infinite, which isn't supposed to be possible without infinite matter, which is also not supposed to be possible let alone balled up in one place.

For some reason. This reminds me of the character Ford from Westworld. In how he viewed human evolution and evolution in general as a series of mistakes that eventually lead to us. Guess everything in the universe or the multiverse is just a constant series of "Mistakes" aka shit happens.

Waiting for a string theorist to jump forward and declare their 23-dimensional wiggly ribbons explain this..

[QUOTE=Bradyns;52825758]Waiting for a string theorist to jump forward and declare their 23-dimensional wiggly ribbons explain this..[/QUOTE] "guys, just add more dimensions and it fixes the problem!" But na seriously, if we can disprove the standard model of particle physics, that'd be great since its stubbornly kept working

I'm more excited about the fact that we were able to contain anti matter for a little more than a year. Think of the shit we could pull with something like an anti-battery at every cornershop!

[QUOTE=Shirt.;52825975]I'm more excited about the fact that we were able to contain anti matter for a little more than a year. Think of the shit we could pull with something like an anti-battery at every cornershop![/QUOTE] I think you have missed quite a few headlines in the past century then. Anti-matter isn't new, it has been confirmed for ages. To put this into perspective, this result is about the properties of anti-matter. I don't think they would put the discovery of anti-matter on the same paper as properties of anti-matter that took years to document. "Anti-matter has no discernable difference in magnetic moments other than opposite spin compared to it's normal matter counterpart OH AND BTW ANTIMATTER EXISTS" would make a pretty shit abstract.

[QUOTE=James xX;52826788]I think you have missed quite a few headlines in the past century then. Anti-matter isn't new, it has been confirmed for ages. To put this into perspective, this result is about the properties of anti-matter. I don't think they would put the discovery of anti-matter on the same paper as properties of anti-matter that took years to document. "Anti-matter has no discernable difference in magnetic moments other than opposite spin compared to it's normal matter counterpart OH AND BTW ANTIMATTER EXISTS" would make a pretty shit abstract.[/QUOTE] He didn't say he was excited about anti-matter existing he said he was excited about how long we can now contain it.

[QUOTE=paindoc;52823982]uh, what?[/QUOTE] This is actually my bet. This paper outlines how inflation theory, dark matter, and dark energy could all be described by antimatter having a negative gravitational sign. [url]https://indico.cern.ch/event/361413/contributions/1776293/attachments/1135100/1623933/WAG_2015_UCL_Hajduk.pdf[/url] The one consequence is that the universe is cyclical.

With stupid articles like this it's no wonder there are so many anti-science people in the US.

[QUOTE=Helix Snake;52824071](and possibly also by other antimatter)?[/QUOTE] Nah. It just means that like things can be magnetically positive or negative, all antimatter is gravitationally negative while all matter is positive. Antimatter would still attract antimatter.

[QUOTE=Sableye;52825863]"guys, just add more dimensions and it fixes the problem!"[/QUOTE] Nobody is just "adding dimensions" to fix a problem. A consistency requirement in the theory itself tells you precisely how many dimensions are needed. Namely, the bosonic string spectrum is only Lorentz invariant in one dimensionality: 26. It's kind of a toy model of string theory. For superstrings, which are more realistic, it's 10. M-theory has an extra dimension for 11 total. It's not really a string theory at all, but it contains all the superstring theories as particular limits. Regardless, I doubt string theory really has anything to say on the subject. It probably needs a Standard Model first.