Why the Universe is expanding
The baryon asymmetry problem in physics refers to the apparent fact that there is an imbalance in baryonic matter and antibaryonic matter in the universe. Neither the standard model of particle physics, nor the theory of general relativity provides an obvious explanation for why this should be so; and it is a natural assumption that the universe be neutral with all conserved charges. The Big Bang should have produced equal amounts of matter and antimatter, as such; there should have been total cancellation of both. In other words, protons should have cancelled with antiprotons, electrons with antielectrons (positrons), neutrons with antineutrons, and so on for all elementary particles. This would have resulted in a sea of photons in the universe with no matter. Since this is evidently not the case, after the Big Bang, some physical laws must have acted and are still acting differently for matter and antimatter. There are competing hypotheses to explain the matter-antimatter imbalance that resulted in baryogenesis, but there is as yet no one consensus theory to explain the phenomenon. If the baryon asymmetry existed at the time of the big bang, this asymmetry must exist today. So when virtual particles are created out of nothing not all of them annihilate with their opposite partner. So there is a constant increase in negatively charged particle going on throughout the universe as they are born as virtual particles from the void. It is this constantly increasing negative electrostatic charge that drives the expansion of the universe as like charges repel each other. Cheers: Axil On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote: > ** > Well, we believe the Universe is expanding because of Red Shift. And we > presume that the expansion is accelerating because objects we presume to be > farther have higher red shifts. > > But, there appears to be a big flaw in the interpretation that Red Shift > equates to expansion. Recent discovery of "Quantized Red Shifts" seems to > invalidate Hubble Red Shift as expansion hypothesis. Why would Red Shifts > be quantized? Shouldn't it be uniform if Red Shift is an manifestation of > an expansion movement? > > Anyways, I think it may be time to seriously question the Big > Bang/Expanding Universe paradigm. That way, we don't have to come up with > Pixie Dust explanations such as Dark Matter or Dark Energy. > > > Jojo > > >
