This file as pdf
here

 

 

 


Antimatter — Anti- "Matter"


Antimatter:

Anti-matter - in a general sense - can with this dimension model be interpreted as one of the two complementary structures on each level where matter is gradually defined.

  • From a general - E to E as = - mc2 in relation to + E to E as + mc2
  • FA-force and FM-force in relation to FG and FE-forces (or vice versa).
  • Vacant Space in relation to Mass.
  • Antimatter as positrons - in relation to electrons.
  • Also then on a secondary level: Electrons in our matter in relation to protons..

Dirac's "hole theory" is since long ago a fundamental part of physics (in this model fully adopted of course), and in later days also the kind of energy and force of Vacant Space. Generally the anti-matter could appear as (-)-energies relative to matter as (+)-energy, as "quanta" or factors with opposite signs, of more or less particularized character.
This view on "antimatter" or anti-"matter" seems in most (?) cases carried through today by physicists. (Cf. quarks baptized"up-" and "down"-quarks.)

Arguments for not imagining separate worlds of anti-matter:

When many thinkers in physics have wanted to believe in worlds of anti-matter in cosmos, it could be a false conclusion from mathematics building on symmetry-concepts, which have a limited validity.

Primary we have that the starting point in this dimension model in a 5th d-degree, polarized in center and anticenter, already implies an asymmetry. If two material worlds should arise in opposite space quadrants of a coordinate system so to say, which world should get the center (the rose on the tart)?

As written in the chapter about matter, one can take the concept of "strangeness" from elementary-particle physics and interpret it as center-displacement through a dimension or level chain.
   We can in that case guess that matter is matter just in force of its "strangeness", in force of its center displacement and relative one-way direction.

(If we should imagine a white square divided by a straight line, we have two "mirror worlds". If we then make a little inward bend of the line into one of the two fields, we get an irregularity, a "matrix-relation", and no mirror worlds with the line as a mirror.

By making two inward bends on the line, in opposite directions, we get a "matrix-relation" in "real time", or two mirror worlds with a mutual phase displacement. (One turned through a 3rd dimension in that case). (Which we perhaps have? The bends seen as a "jumping" center, as in waves with maxima and minima (tangent +/- infinity). But separated worlds in cosmos of "maxima and minima" become a nonsense.)


Anti-matter then should be seen as built-in everywhere in our world, - in the same way as "the infinity" or "the eternity" as 00-pole is built-in.
   It should be possible to find it both inside and outside matter and it should constitute another relation between outwards and inwards directions.
- In level step 4 →3, the field level, fields with opposite sign to those underlying matter gets the role of anti-matter, as outward acceleration is a counterforce to gravitation.
- In level step 3 →2 then we can see the vacant space as the real so called anti-matter, negative protons for instance.
- Later, in level step 2 →1, we should identify proton and electron as each other's anti-matter (antiparticles) - among several anti-relations created with the growing complexity. So, according to Gamow, is the energy of the electron in an atom, if its kinetic energy is included, about the same as that of the proton.


Another argument against separate anti-matter worlds could possibly be formulated like this:
   If we have as starting point an Entirety of all potential energy which could be designated E0 or E = +/- mc2, and imagine this energy transformed into matter and anti-matter, this should need to occur in different parts of Universe from the start or in that way that the opposite masses flew apart of some reason, so that they couldn´t annihilate one another. - But this presupposes either that there already exists a "space" which could denote "in different quarters", or a kinetic energy to use for the flying apart.
   In short, there wouldn´t remain enough of he potential energy to create space and vacant space between the parts of matter, to kinetic energy for motions of material particles and celestial bodies.
   Furthermore, the thought of "flying apart" totally disagrees with the view on complementary energy forms - and with the postulates in this model that inwards and outwards are the fundamental opposites as far as directions concerns.

Doesn't´t "anti-matter" exist just in all courses of events between masses of our matter - as processes, as free energy, as surroundings? (Like cell plasma in relation to cell nuclei, as environment in relation to individuals.) Compare that the motion dimension chain is counterdirected that of the structures, according to the basic postulates here.   
   In the last d-degree 0/00 of Motions, creating relative Distances and Time, one could test the aspect of seeing these physical concepts as representing each other's "anti-matter".
(This suggested without more preciseness here.)


Then we can note the fact that there are found antiparticles in our world, as antiprotons and positrons. Produced and/or verified. They exist for example as occasionally created positron-electron pairs. That is not to be wondered at: now we have something to relate to: the matter. And something to extract from: the "vacant space" and the mathematics.


If we should imagine that conditions for greater quantities of material anti-matter existed in our universe, in an ordinary sense, it should perhaps be in passages or bands between our galaxies, along "force borders" between them; antiparticles there could eventually form networks of motion directions, in principal parallel with the surface of each celestial body where somebody could be standing waiting for them?
   These bands or passages could then resemble the field-free regions between two magnetic north-poles, directed towards each other, and the anti-matter particles would get very curved and bewildered ramifications or tunnels to find their way through. (Not very likely.)


Celestial bodies as branch rudiments in tree trunks


More easy to accept - and more in accordance with views of today - and of the model here - would be the thought that Vacant Space and its energies is continuously created by a constantly progressive annihilation between complementary forces and quanta... (!), and therefore that the cosmic space is so big!

Compare - on one level - the propagation of light waves.

(In that case it would have similarities with the "discrimination" in the nervous system, where inhibition signals from the brain (as minus 1/2),
for example in the auditory sense, annihilates or puts out reactions on certain higher / lower tone frequencies from hearing cells surrounding
a certain group of receptors, whose frequencies then is accentuated, as central, as centers.)

*

 


 


Menu Bar:

If layers on menu bar don't function on your computer,
click here for the selected links!

To the background model

= HOME

Files in Physics:

Added notes 2014:

x1. Macrocosm:
Gravity waves, Dark matter etc.

x2. Quantum Mechanics:
Entanglement, Probabilities etc.

x3. Englert's - Higg's theory, Higgs boson and
a view on the Standard Model

Files Index to Temperature
in one documen, pdf, 128 pages

Files Quantum Physics to the end
in one document, pdf, 106 pages

 

To Survey:
Web site content,
more in detail here

Latest updated
2017-01-09


Contact:
u5d

© Åsa Wohlin:
Universe in 5 dimensions - as a model of Zero.
A conceptual structure suggested for interpretations in different sciences.
Free to distribute if the source is mentioned.
Texts are mostly extractions from a booklet series, made publicly available in year 2000.