If we assume, contrary to the traditional belief of physicists, that (1) a neutron is a bound system of proton + electron + anti-neutrino and (2) an atomic nucleus contains anti-neutrons instead of neutrons and (3) nuclear decay is caused by (rare) reactions of the form anti-neutron + neutrino (coming from the sun) --> neutron + anti-neutrino which takes place 'inside' the nucleus, and (4) the nucleus ejects the neutron and the anti-neutrino and thereby deacays, then one comes to the conclusion that the mystery of a huge matter-antimatter asymmetry does not exist at all, BECAUSE in heavy nuclei the number of protons is roughly equal to the number of anti-neutrons, and therefore, in an atom with a heavy nucleus the number of protons is roughly equal to the number of anti-protons and to the number of electrons and to the number of positrons. So the idea of a huge asymmetry between matter and antimatter would not be a real mystery, but a consequence of an inaccurate model of the structure of matter.
I find it a bit difficult to follow your lead from 1) to 2) but a decade ago I had basically the same thought as you :
That there is as much matter as antimatter in the universe - inside our atoms.
I thought for every electron there is the equivalence of a positron in a proton whilst neutrons and protons contain quarks in a similar fashion .
In an "absorbed" fashion so we have no annihilation .
After all all might once have been created from super high energy free EM waves .
I feel that's the way it must be . Like i feel that the fabric of reality has to be its own change - in a sense that all there is is patterns of change and waves that interact . Freaky - yes - but what is the alternative ? A God-like first turtle ?
See also the abstract of
Research HYPOTRON THEORY
which is an attempt to setup a 'quark-like' theory that, in contrast to the standard model, allows to consider the neutron as a compound system proton+electron+antineutrino, and to consider nuclear decay to be caused by the reaction antineutron+neutrino-->neutron+antineutrino, and to predict approximately the valley of stable nuclei by means of a minimum principle concerning a charge-like quantity, called 'supercharge'.
http://www.qp-research.de/qpr/kdsr/bulletin/900_HypotronTheory/KDSR_HypotronTheory_PRESENTATIONS/KDSR-PRS-HT-ValleyStableNuclei/
The idea behind (2) and (3) can be illustrated by this example of a process in the macroscopic world:
Imagine a larva from which a butterfly emerges as a result of a transformation process in the larva. Once this has happened, of course we will not assume that the butterfly in its full glory has been in the larva all along.
It is similar with a neutron emitted from an atomic nucleus. When the emission occurs, it does not necessarily mean that the neutron was part of the nucleus all along. It is more likely that the neutron is the result of a transformation process in the nucleus and is then emitted from the nucleus because a nucleus does not tolerate neutrons as its constituents.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Entomology
- Resistance