Recently, a very compelling and mind-boggling theory was presented in a paper published in the journal Physical Review of Letters, aiming to preserve something called CPT symmetry, a rule of physics.
The trio of Canadian physicists who published the paper say that they believe the Big Bang thought to have created our universe did more than just create what we see around us: it also managed to create an actual second “anti-universe,” extending backwards in time like a mirror image of the universe we’re in right now.
The Canadian physicists say this theory could explain the presence of dark matter and why we can’t seem to figure it out.
They say according to this theory in physics, CPT symmetry, before the Big Bang in some anti-universe, time ran backwards and everything in the universe was composed of antimatter, rather than matter. Pretty difficult to comprehend, isn’t it.
A news release about the new theory was released, and it explains that this would mean the universe as we know it is chock full of “very massive sterile neutrinos,” which could manage to explain the existence of dark matter, a strange material we know very little about that is thought to compose much of our universe.
A neutrino is considered a fermion, an elementary particle with half-integer spin), that can only interact through weak subatomic force and gravity. Neutrinos are extremely tiny in mass, and not much information is known, but initial cosmological observations are said to imply that the sum of three masses, of neutrino, has to be less than one millionth the mass of one electron.
So a neutrino is essentially thought to be a third of a millionth the mass of one electron, the tiny, tiny part of an atom that of course revolves around the nucleus of protons and neutrons.
Neutrinos are electrically neutral and they don’t participate in strong interaction, like leptons. It gets a little complicated, but Wikipedia will tell you:
“For each neutrino, there also exists a corresponding antiparticle, called an antineutrino, which also has half-integer spin and no electric charge. They are distinguished from the neutrinos by having opposite signs of lepton number and chirality.”
The researchers admit however, many details of the theory still need to be investigated, there’s a lot of ground to be covered. However, the study’s co-author Neil Turok, of Ontario, Canada’s Perimetery Institute for Theoretical Physics stated in an interview that this is an extremely strong theory, because it is only reliant on concretely known fields and particles, instead of relying on the assumption that new ones are to be discovered in the future.
“There is this frame of mind that you explain a new phenomenon by inventing a new particle or field,” he said. “I think that may turn out to be misguided.”
It certainly is honest of him to explain that it seems unnecessary to discover a new phenomenon or detail of physics, and then name it some special, not even that distinctive name. That seems to have been a pattern.