Matter and Antimatter: Reflections
What is antimatter? Where has it all gone?
According to Standard Models, antimatter is defined as "a material composed of the partners to the corresponding particles of ordinary matter."
This means that antimatter has identical masses and half-lives to their ordinary matter "counterparts", but the difference being that they are of opposite charge to ordinary matter.
This is the first clue to what antimatter is. It is of critical importance to recognize that electrical charge is not just some intrinsic characteristic of a system, but rather is an observed phenomenon as a result of a system's relationship to its environment. "Positive charge" is high-pressure relative to its environment, "negative charge" is low-pressure relative to its environment, and neutral charge is in balanced equilibrium relative to its environment. Read more about this here: How Electric Charges are Caused.
Secondly, matter and antimatter are known to be co-created out of "nothing". Importantly "nothing" is not as it is implied. It is the steady-state of the environment rather than actual nothing.
These characteristics are extremely revealing. This tells us that "antiparticles" are the equivalent vacuum particles to what we term normal matter. More massive "antiparticles" are also stronger vacuums and thereby lower in pressure relative to their environments. As a result, an "antiproton" is observed as having a negative charge while a "positron"--an antielectron--is observed as having a positive charge.
The universe is a perfect balance between 0, nothing, and infinity, everything. Vibrations in that balance lead to two particles being created: matter, being composed of a first mass that we see as ordinary matter that radiates like a star because it is composed of particles above the equilibrium; and antimatter, being composed of a second mass of equal mass to the first mass but that functions as a vacuum particle because it is composed of particles below the equilibrium.
These vacuum particles, then, can form entire atoms and systems of vacuum particles that conglomerate like any atoms. And when these low-pressure systems come in contact with high-pressure ordinary matter, they violently react to bring about equilibrium--hence antimatter/matter "annihilation".
However, we are able to control them using magnetic fields, which are literally composed of particles of matter. Thus, the concept of annihilation is a misunderstanding of how these particles interact with their surroundings, as we think of "magnetic fields" as somehow getting around the "touching" of these "antiparticles" with ordinary matter. This is not the case. Instead, magnetic field particles are insufficiently small in mass to induce annihilation because without enough mass to counteract it, the vacuum particle remains.
But, where did they all go?
Just as how atoms tend to group into larger systems such as planets and stars and beyond, so too do antimatter particles. However, when they group they form larger mass vacuum systems. In other words, this is what the vacuum of space is made out of: vacuum particles that interact just like ordinary matter particles.
It's important here to reiterate they are not antiparticles as scientific interpretation labels them. The reason they function as they do is because of their vacuum properties, not because they are as we label them in popular science. The term "antimatter" implies "otherness" when their critical difference is their relative vacuum qualities alone.
As particles of ordinary matter move towards the vacuums of space, they dissolve into smaller particles. This causes these vacuums to be composed of more and more abundance of smaller and smaller infinitesimal particles. As a result, even though we see them as extremely low pressure, they are extremely high pressure on specifically these abundant infinitesimal particles. This causes small particles to be pushed away from the vacuum particles which produces what we call gravity.
But what is really going on? What does this tell us about the universe?
0 Is a Reflection of ∞
The universe is the dance between all that IS and all that ISN'T. Simultaneously, there is both nothing and there is everything. The reflection of zero is infinity.
This reflection, even, exists observably in our universe. This is because antimatter is a reflection of matter. Particles of matter, in our perception, tend towards infinity pressure, composed of larger and larger systems. Particles of antimatter, in our perception, tend towards zero pressure, composed of smaller and smaller systems.
This balance between zero and infinite pressure, where each are mirrors of the other, is also described by yin and yang:
Source
As a result of this, "antimatter" functions opposite to "matter". In other words, if the universe were to be "mirrored", the observed passage of time would be reversed. What is perceived as a vacuum sucking in mass around it and breaking it down into smaller and smaller components would then be seen as a radiant system, combining particles into larger systems and radiating them outward. When time is reversed, what a given observer would see as "high-pressure" becomes "low-pressure" and vice versa. Stars become vacuums and vacuums become stars.
In this way, within our single universe, time is both running backward and forward.
When we look at antimatter, we are glimpsing the reversed arrow of time of the reflected universe. But for an observer composed of that antimatter, they would see time passing as we do while they would see all processes reversed such that our planets, stars, galaxies, and all other "ordinary matter" would function inversely and act as vacuums particles. To them, we would be composed of antimatter, with our time reversed in their perception. This interaction reveals that time goes both forward and backward in the universe.
Additional Information
For more information on how the universe functions, which is important prerequisite knowledge to fully decipher the truth of this relationship, check out The Theory of Everything Link Compilation.
Respectfully,
Steven M. Scully
Really interesting and deep article. There are several issues here that are go one step further even from gravity and I think that it is a good base for more articles and details. Looking forward to seeing more "beyond gravity" posts and discussions.
Thanks! Good to hear from you. Lately, I've been thinking a lot about this. I have come to recognize that gravity is not the end-all-be-all of how the universe functions, but that even it is the result of this pressure variation between vacuums and infinite masses. This brings it more mathematically to the realm of 0=∞, or some variation thereof that indicates the mirror aspect of it. I've been going through calculus again, looking at limits and notice that every time a 0/0 arises, there is the potential to actually interpret this to be ∞/∞, and to interpret both to actually have the real answer of =1. In cases where a limit is approached from both the negative and the positive direction, it is always possible to interpret that they actually converge "half way" between 0 and ∞, i.e. at ∞/2. This is another way of saying they converge where +∞ and -∞ meet. Rather than saying that there is no limit, or doing some math where the value the limit approaches "doesn't count" to extract that point where the function has "no limit", it is possible to say that its limit exists. I believe there is something substantial mathematically in relating 0 and ∞ in this way, or a closely related way, that "closes" math so that it fully encompasses all possibilities rather than being open (approaching infinity in all directions but not "wrapping back around").
It turns what is a plane into, in a way, a sphere where what we normally look at is so flat that it is best understood as a plane but where, in reality, even the x-y plane acts as a three-dimensional sphere when -x and +x connect at ∞ and -y and +y connect at ∞. The labeling of one as "negative" and the other as "positive" is arbitrary in the same way as the labeling of one as "zero" and the other as "infinity" as arbitrary. Both are the other, just looked at from different angles.
There's a lot to it, and math is extremely vast, to test whether or not this "clears things up" when it is fully grasped. But I do believe very strongly that this would make sense and has the potential to change our understanding of what zero and infinity are in terms of actual mathematical equations and their interpretations therein.
Also, this would imply that a perfect balance between 0 and infinity is actually at 1, which is something I am musing. Even its shape is a line indicating balance, just as infinity's shape ∞ is a curve that actually represents what infinity means, by connecting back to electromagnetic fields, and just as the shape of zero 0 suggests a point of origin. When nothing looks at itself, it sees everything.