Minimum big bangs and spontaneous break of symmetry
Pair forming one understands by the mini big bang of particles at the
collision of two real particles under high pair forming energies today. One
thinks to be able thus particularly to prove that particle pairs have arisen at
the hypothetical big bang from a coincidental energy concentration. Particle
pairs pass a quantitative and qualitative balance of the properties on however
without mirror symmetry (this is caused to their inner erection which must be
capable of the annihilation). Declaring the mass watched today in the surplus
against antimatter, one conceived a coincidental breaking of the balance.
Spontaneously, it should have resulted for more particles as antiparticles at
the decays. One likes to quote a proof of this. This is the decay of the K°
Every stupid person immediately sees, that in the counter particles are more
in the end. Every fox calculates the whole problem with me once again. First, we
should remember, that a particle pair, if it is meeting, it is destroyed
(annihilated) to photons (to energy of light). Then it doesn't exist practically
any more. Instead of its mass the energy exists purely now. Let's see as foxes,
what will stay for it in counter and in denominator:
In counter: The minus pion splits into minus muon and into antimuon
neutrino. The minus muon splits into an electron, a muon neutrino and an
antielectron neutrino. Red connection lines show, which particles are there at
last and how they give a pair together, which is completely annihilating. What
does in counter stay? Nothing does!
Does something stay in denominator? Just, no, it does not!
Is there any meaning to compare a balance of zero with a balance of zero? No,
it is not!
Spontaneous break of symmetry does not exist! (p. 525/526 of my
Such a kind of model is pure nonsense!
Consequently, in the end super brain physicists have known that. They
found a genious idea. The first Genialität was to construct a symmetric
wolrd in result of the big bang but watching a total asymmetric world. Now
they must research until the end of their days why symmetry got
"accidentally" an asymmetry. This is a super trading idea! By
the way, they think, neutrinos perhaps would be their own anti particle
states. Then antineutrinos would not be real antis, but just neutrinos
which had changed their property "accidentally". Because the
present gegenation of physicists does not know protonneutrinos like me,
she cannot explain changing of neutrinos while their flight than with such
a nonsens as the equality of antis and koinos. Whit it the whole system
was dammaged. Why, you would ask, are there real protons and antiprotons?
The answers would be: "Accidentally!" They aren't real, too.
Higgs-particles would explain the mass.
But I give you a prognos:
There are wether Higgs-particles but equality of neutrinos and
antineutrinos! If my prognos woud be right, the model of a symmetric start
in "big bang" had to be denied. Realtity was: From the beginning
there was an asymmetry in universe!