1
$\begingroup$

Matter and anti-matter are asymmetric. Why are protons and electrons symmetric?

Would we still have galaxies and stars if there were a strong overall charge?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It is very much possible that we do not have an answer to this, currently. $\endgroup$ – Curious Fish Jan 31 at 4:15
  • $\begingroup$ This is because of charge conservation. Common lore says that the early universe was dominated by an inflaton, so net electric charge is 0, and since it is conserved and the only known stable charged particles are electrons and protons, whose charges are opposite, their number must coincide. $\endgroup$ – user178876 Jan 31 at 4:57
1
$\begingroup$

Matter and anti-matter are asymmetric. Why are protons and electrons symmetric?

To start with when observing nature and modeling it mathematically one has to use the input of observations axiomatically, i.e. the mathematical model has to describe the data.

The antimatter of the electron is the positron. An asymmetry in the number of positive and negative numbers would have been observed experimentally. The elementary particle model we have that fits most data , the standard model of particle physics, posits this symmetry axiomatically by baryon number conservation and lepton number conservation. There has not been a falsification of this model, except at a small level, with CP violation which is not enough to describe the matter asymmetry observed.

So the answer is: because that is what we have observed and our mathematical model fits the data and predicts successfully new set ups.

Would we still have galaxies and stars if there were a strong overall charge?

Strong charges can happen in the laboratory, but at a cosmological level one would have to develop a model of hadronisation which is the way the quark gluon plasma conglomerates turn into galaxies and stars. A different model than the standard model would be needed as the charge of quarks is an ingredient to the generation of hadrons, and an asymmetry in charges would leave free quarks which cannot exist after symmetry breaking. At the moment, extrapolating the standard model up to the times of baryogenesis works fine with all the existing observations, and there is no need to introduce complexities.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.