(Probably Stupid) Physics Question (That's Probably Been Asked Before)

[Nephew Twiddleton]

So-

Warning I'm a bit wired because I drank a bunch of coffee to get my biology report done and it's almost 2 am, but this has to do with the Big Bang and the asymmetry of matter and antimatter. The question of what happens before it is irrelevant because there's no before but could it work out that the other side of the Big Bang is the antimatter Big Bang, doing the same thing that our universe is but, from our perspective, backwards in time and never the twain shall meet? Here's a stupid graphic I'm about to make to illustrate my point:



Such that, it's not a Big Crunch on the other side, it just happens to be a roughly identical universe expanding in the other direction through time from our perspective. It's still not really before because the Big Bang is more of a pinching off point. Chegolas' thread and tiredness got me thinking about it. I don't know, I feel like I can't quite get the idea out correctly. It's probably wrong anyway.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Alright, so now that I've gotten some sleep and I can string the thought together, consider a three dimensional graph where the Big Bang is the origin. Our universe is branching out along the x, y and z axes, all with positive values, with time basically being the slope. The universe's antimatter counterpart would all be doing the same but with negative values, and time being the slope running in the opposite direction. This is just a way to picture it, where the absolute values are the same. So both universes are the same age, but twice as long apart, because that's just the distance between them.

[LMNO]

So, you're saying there's antimatter that is running in negative time, in some inaccessible part of the universe, because matter and antimatter exploded in different spacetime directions?

So, what's with the antimatter that's in the universe we can perceive?

And, uh, how do you go about testing this?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Good point. When we create antimatter we see an equal amount of matter. As far as testing I couldn't figure that out. How do you experimentally test any universe other than this?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

So, you're saying there's antimatter that is running in negative time, in some inaccessible part of the universe, because matter and antimatter exploded in different spacetime directions?

So, what's with the antimatter that's in the universe we can perceive?

And, uh, how do you go about testing this?

Leaky seals.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I'm just saying, the whole thing is way shoddier than it looks.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

So, you're saying there's antimatter that is running in negative time, in some inaccessible part of the universe, because matter and antimatter exploded in different spacetime directions?

So, what's with the antimatter that's in the universe we can perceive?

And, uh, how do you go about testing this?

Leaky seals.

That's kinda what I was thinking about at first too, but we get both in this universe when we create them. I think. Wait, do we?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

So, you're saying there's antimatter that is running in negative time, in some inaccessible part of the universe, because matter and antimatter exploded in different spacetime directions?

So, what's with the antimatter that's in the universe we can perceive?

And, uh, how do you go about testing this?

Leaky seals.

That's kinda what I was thinking about at first too, but we get both in this universe when we create them. I think. Wait, do we?

You have to, I think.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

So, you're saying there's antimatter that is running in negative time, in some inaccessible part of the universe, because matter and antimatter exploded in different spacetime directions?

So, what's with the antimatter that's in the universe we can perceive?

And, uh, how do you go about testing this?

Leaky seals.

That's kinda what I was thinking about at first too, but we get both in this universe when we create them. I think. Wait, do we?

You have to, I think.

Probably. Stupid question.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Bump.

[hooplala]

It makes sense to me, but as LMNO said... how do you test it?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

No idea, I just remembered about the thread when I read the article.

[hooplala]

Is there a word for untestable hypotheses?

And the first person who answers "dildos" gets a knuckle sandwich.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Theoretical physics?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Is there a word for untestable hypotheses?

And the first person who answers "dildos" gets a knuckle sandwich.

Musing?