Antimatter Problem Fails Another Test
Protons and antiprotons appear identical according to a new high-accuracy test. The “antimatter problem” is the big bang theory’s need to see a difference.
According to current cosmological theories, our matter-dominated universe came from a slight excess of matter in the big bang caused by some unknown difference between it and antimatter. The rest was annihilated. Cosmologists have been looking for some quirk of normal matter that would make it survive the annihilation. The latest high-precision test did not find any difference between the proton and its antiparticle, the antiproton.
The editors of Nature give this summary of a new paper published this week:
Comparing the fundamental properties of normal-matter particles with their antimatter counterparts tests charge–parity–time (CPT) invariance, which is an important part of the standard model of particle physics. Many properties have been measured to the parts-per-billion level of uncertainty, but the magnetic moment of the antiproton has not. Christian Smorra and colleagues have now done so, and report that it is −2.7928473441 ± 0.0000000042 in units of the nuclear magneton. This is consistent with the magnetic moment of the proton, 2.792847350 ± 0.000000009 in the same units. Assuming CPT invariance, these two values should be the same, except for the difference in sign, so this result provides a more stringent constraint on certain CPT-violating effects.
“CPT-violating effects” euphemistically refers to attempts to account for the predominance of normal matter in the universe. Those attempts now have “a more stringent constraint” on them. In layman’s terms, “At tremendous precision, the proton and antiproton still seem identical” says Science Daily. Clearly, the work was “part of the quest to discover why our Universe is almost only composed of matter.” The result shows that “so-called CPT asymmetry — a key factor in the lack of antimatter — must be very small if it exists at all.”
This new measurement, 350 times more precise than previous measurements, show that the magnetic moments of the proton and antiproton now differ by less than 9 significant figures, says another article on Science Daily. Why does this ‘matter’ (so to speak)? It matters because there is no explanation for the existence of matter.
The search goes on. No difference in protons and antiprotons have yet been found which would help to potentially explain the existence of matter in our universe. However, physicists in the BASE collaboration at the CERN research center have been able to measure the magnetic force of antiprotons with almost unbelievable precision. Nevertheless, the data do not provide any information about how matter formed in the early universe as particles and antiparticles would have had to completely destroy one another. The most recent BASE measurements revealed instead a large overlap between protons and antiprotons, thus confirming the Standard Model of particle physics. Around the world, scientists are using a variety of methods to find some difference, regardless of how small. The matter-antimatter imbalance in the universe is one of the hot topics of modern physics.
A video clip on Bob Enyart’s Big Bang Predictions page shows a physicist from Fermilab admitting that there is no known solution to this puzzle. The creationist answer makes sense: if God designed the universe to be habitable, then He would not design it to go up in flames by creating equal parts of matter and antimatter. Spike Psarris’s Creation Astronomy video, “What You’re Not Being Told About Astronomy” Vol. III, lists the antimatter problem as just one of many major falsified predictions of the big bang theory.
Update 10/27/17: Live Science says that the antimatter problem is so serious with this new measurement, cosmologists are flummoxed. “All of our observations find a complete symmetry between matter and antimatter, which is why the universe should not actually exist,” remarked physicist Christian Smorra from CERN. “An asymmetry must exist here somewhere but we simply do not understand where the difference is.” Apparently Smorra would prefer doubting his own existence to giving up on big bang cosmology.
How long do secularists get to pursue this phantom? How long do they get government funding? If any difference is this stringently constrained, it makes it all the more believable that we live on the teensy part of leftover matter that survived, along with all the stars and galaxies in the vast universe. Why not just accept the observations as a brute fact of nature? The answer: it would mean giving up on the big bang theory, a materialist darling too precious to abandon. It might also suggest that the universe was intended. Since that idea would give aid and comfort to intelligent design advocates, “the search goes on” like a cosmic snipe hunt, endlessly.
It’s already too late for the bangers. Many other aspects of our universe appear finely-tuned for our existence. Even secular materialists accept this. A new book by Geraint Lewis and Luke Barnes explores the growing body of evidence. The book, A Fortunate Universe: Life in a Finely Tuned Cosmos (Cambridge University Press, 2016), examines the evidence and the possible explanations, including the dreaded “God” hypothesis (“the ‘G’ word, pp. 323 ff). They actually give it honest consideration, yet end up offering one more alternative, that we live in a simulation, like the Matrix. Is that better? The evidence for design is clear, so why try to escape the obvious conclusion? The facts are on the creationist side, even in this 21st century era of precision cosmology.*
* It appears that Barnes was influenced by Robin Collins at Messiah College, who explains fine tuning in the Illustra film The Privileged Planet (click link to see excerpt on YouTube).