Violation of Cosmological Fundamental Matter-Antimatter Quantum Particle Symmetry Upon the Genesis of the Universe May Have Been Mathematically Compelled and Inevitable, Click-on link The matter-antimatter asymmetry problem | CERN (home.cern)
"First moments:
Elementary particles were created and destroyed by the ultimate particle accelerator in the first moments of the universe. There was matter and there was antimatter. When they met, they annihilated each other and created light. Click-on link map.gsfc.nasa.gov › universe › uni_life"
Joe: "Then why is there still matter, the matter that makes up the universe and us?"
Pauline: "Yeh, and if matter is still here, why isn't there still antimatter too? What happened to all of the antimatter? Where did it go?"
Charles: "I think some of the matter may have been cosmologically regurgitated and the antimatter, except a residue of it, may have been cosmologically metabolized."
Preface
E = mc2 (in longhand, E = mc^2 according to the 10-20-2023 lecture on E = mc2 of noted physicist Sean Carroll, Ford Distinguished Lecture - 2023 - YouTube, which is the source of my revision of my prior mathematical understanding herein of this equation as wrongly meaning E = m x c2 rather than properly meaning, according to him, E = mc x mc) is operative in all of the above but is prohibited in cosmological nature and its physics in the literal, abstract mathematics of: mass x 186,282 mps (miles per second)^2, the same as (mass x 186,282 mps) x (mass x 186,282 mps) = > 34,700,983,524 mps. since the value of mass here is unknown) because literal, abstract mc^2 or c2 exceeds the speed of light, 186,282 mps, which so far is the scientifically observed speed limit of the motion of anything [physical] and for everything in the universe except for space itself, and, because, so far to our physics, nothing has been observed and proven to exceed the speed of light or, apart from light, equal the speed of light. However, light, a photon or beam of photons, moving at the speed of light and mutually explosively, or destructively, collided with other light, another photon or beam of photons, moving at the speed of light, also operates and behaves according to the law or equation of E = mc^2 in applied particle collision physics and it too, but empirically, would mathematically be mc x mc, or mc^2, in which the mathematical operation x, or multiplied by, means collided with or by, and would produce the same, in actuality, conversion to energy or matter, or both, result of itself, light, as literal, abstract mathematical c2 and mc^2 theoretically should or could. A beam of >34,700,983,524 photons (representing the literal variable and unknown value of mass x speed of light multiplied by the same variable and unknown value of mass x speed of light in miles per second, mps, or mass x speed of light, squared, in mps), or more photons, collided destructively with another such beam or a particular body of mass or similarly populated beam of other, non-photon quantum particles or atoms, might produce a similar or same result. Or even a beam of non-light particles compensatorily numbering 186,282 or more particles in mimicking in the count of particles the miles per second of travel of light that is collided with a moderately populated beam of light or one populated with 186,282 light quanta traveling at light speed, 186,282 mps, together approximating a speed of light square in a collision transaction, also might produce a similar result. All of the math related to light using mps can be revised using kps, kilometers per second.
The idea of the multiplication operation sign of "x" as meaning "collided with or by" in quantum-mechanics particle collision physics was conceived by the author when, some unremembered by him relatively recent number of years ago, approximately in 2016 or 2017, or before, he was reading online news reports on the first, to his understanding then, photon-to-photon collision experiment, conducted by a British photonics institute or laboratory, that surprisingly, to the experimenters, produced quantum particles, and possibly quantum debris -- that is, matter, Scientists discover how to turn light into matter after 80-year quest | Imperial News | Imperial College London, Matter will be created from light within a year, claim scientists | Particle physics | The Guardian. It and its results, based on his continued reading on this subject, have since been replicated at particle collider labs all about the world. The experiment explained, to the thinking of the author, how physicist Albert Einstein's equation E = mc^2 and its reverse, Albert Einstein's equation M = L/c2, in which L is E, the energy quantity or value, could nevertheless accord with the speed-of-light speed limit of the universe and be experimentally and empirically true, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITyBkCK74HQ&t=49s. The experiment initially implied to him, and, upon his further reflection on it, was a factual demonstration to him, that light traveling at the speed of light x (destructively collided [together] with or by) other light traveling at the speed of light = energy, or matter, or both, in which energy is convertible to matter, and, alternately, matter is convertible to energy, and that in this scenario light was simultaneously both m (mass) and c (the speed of light), in which m alternatively could be a wave-state, particle-state or particle-wave-state [of light] photon or set of photons. When this writing applies E = mc2 to photons or light, it mathematically treats mass and the speed of light as being the combined same entity and dynamic but with its magnitude dependent on the wavelength type, or ratio of the wavelength types, and the number of photons in a beam of two or more photons and the density of photons in the beam of light, in which the photon quasi-mass and density of a beam of light can be scaled but in which the speed of all rays and beams of light would remain constant or not exceed the speed limit of the speed of light. Here is a click-on hyperlink to the most recent news, in 2023, on photon-collided-with-photon matter creation, For the first time scientists observe the creation of matter from light (rightnes.xyz), For the first time scientists observe the creation of matter from light (thesci-universe.com), whose headline is inaccurate but not the method described in the article for producing the photon-to-photon collision for the matter creation -- diligently research for yourself online or via the periodical guide at a library for news articles on the topic of "particle accelerator or collider collision/s together of light particles that create/s matter" to confirm that matter created from photon-to-photon collisions is not new, CERN's Large Hadron Collider Creates Matter From Light – Berkeley Lab News Center (lbl.gov), Making Matter from Collisions of Light | Department of Energy, Out Of Pure Light, Physicists Create Particles Of Matter -- ScienceDaily.
In the matter of the particle collision mathematics of the following narrative proposing an explanation for how and why matter credibly might ultimately survive in significant measure and violate the cosmological initial conditions of primordial matter and antimatter symmetry and their mutual collision and annihilation event and process, the mathematical multiplication sign "x" figuratively and empirically means "collided [together] with or by" and the numerical left and right terms of the "x" operation, as, for example, in the case of light speed of light collided with or by light at light speed, 186,282 mps x 186,282 mps, herein empirically refer or translate to the collision of mutually clashing light particle-waves, or colliding two-way particles or waves, or beams of them, at such electromagnetic momentum-energy force or power, or some other, alternative but universal energy force or power, across all forms of matter and their particles, of which traveling light particle-waves, particles or waves would possess the most, also scientifically justified by the relevant scientific finding cited of mathematician Emilie du Chatelet, December 17, 1706 to September 10, 1749, in the online video tutorial on E = mc2 of E = mc2 - Yahoo Video Search Results. The template for this concept applied to non-light quantum particles in collision is "Electrical charge sign of and coupled to a particle or particle beam at its speed (mps or kps) x the electrical charge sign of and coupled to another particle or particle beam at its speed (mps or kps) = collision output in quanta and positive, negative or neutral electrical charge or charges of the quanta, or quantum particles, and/or energy state." A simplified example could be, +proton particle beam A@114,000 mps x +proton particle beam B@114,000 mps = collision output of +?quanta and energy state. This example and template could be made an elaborate or comprehensive profiling of each of the quantum-particle-type terms of the collision by making it: +proton particle or particle beam (baseline or situational: ? spin, ? mass, ? temperature, ??? name and charge symbols of quarks, ? collision particle count of term) A-term@baseline + accelerated speed subtotal-A in ? mps or kps x +proton particle or particle beam (baseline or situational: ? spin, ? mass, ? temperature, ??? name and charge symbols of quarks, ? collision particle count of term) B-term@baseline + accelerated speed subtotal-B in ? mps or kps = collision output of +?quanta and energy state. However, in either or any example, the left-versus-the-right term/s electrical-charge-status (either positive, negative or neutral) species of the particles or particle beams of the collision may selectively be different or the same, as may be their quantities.
For now and near the end of this narrative, the mps, kps, or any other nomenclature for the distance of travel of a quantum particle, particle-wave or wave per second is treated as "u," or universal, units of momentum energy and force corresponding in power to the mps (rate of miles per second of travel speed) or kps (rate of kilometers per second of travel speed), etc., for all matter and antimatter and their particles and the impacts of their collisions with one another, while recognizing but not figuring in the contribution of the magnitude of their masses in the impacts of those collisions. However, the magnitude of the masses of particular quanta of nature's catalog of quantum particles and particle-waves or waves may be naturally and automatically subsumed in the mps or kps, etc., maximal momentum capabilities of those particular types or species of quanta and their collision matter and/or energy outputs.
The herein nomenclature of "collided [together] with or by," represented by the mathematical operation x-sign, might also commonly (but not always or consistently across all combinations of quantum particle species collisions) refer to or mean empirically (the way collision particle physics in its results works) the average of the sum of the left and right terms of the "x" mathematical operation when that average is used to replace both of the prior, original left and right terms of the x (the multiplication sign representing "collided with or by" matter or light quanta) operation and when the then collided with or by mathematical operation is transacted for the two averaged terms and produces a result that is thereby the average squared in the math and in nature as expressed in the collision output, approximating or consistent with the equation E = mc^2 or its reverse. However, the collisions and their math would hypothetically be at lower speed and energy impacts and mutual or interactive quantum pulverization, vaporization, nebulization and/or quanta formation results on or of the collided particles or beams of matter or antimatter when both or one of the terms of the collided with or by multiplication of matter or antimatter, separately taking into account the types, masses and quantities of their quantum particles, is not or are not light particles. The terms multiplied, or as an average squared, would represent the natural baseline plus the collider-accelerated speed of the collision rendezvous types and masses of the particle sets being collided. Their averaging hypothetically would be applicable when both of the opposing either two-way particle, wave or particle-wave masses in a [directed] collision are sufficient in magnitude to mutually quantumly fragment, pulverize, vaporize or transform each other upon impact, and not so much or at all when one set or side of the opposing masses is insufficient in the magnitude of its mass to fully pulverize, vaporize or transform the other set or side with the critically higher magnitude of mass in a quantum-particle collider lab collision.
It was not surprising to the author that a light beam or particle traveling at the speed of light and collided together with another beam or particle of light also traveling at the speed of light would produce matter from their mutually blasted apart EM particle-wave entity-set makeup because, to his thinking, although light particles, waves and particle-waves, photons, have neither mass nor electrical charge, yet in their individually being a simultaneous bosonic duality of a particle and wave, occupying, and coexisting in, the same space at the same time, that can bias in saliency to either the wave state or particle state, as a photon or beam of them, in either the particle-wave duality state or its particle versus wave saliency state, light could or would nevertheless be in the least EM-basis virtual or quasi matter as a particle, as well as EM energy in the wave state, and could and would (1.) as a particle, or beam of them, behave like or identically to matter, and, (2.) like energy in its wave state, respectively, in a light-to-light, at light speed, mutual collision blast when so mutually blown apart or destroyed as two-way particle-to-particle or two-way separate wave-to-wave or two-way separate particle-wave-to-particle-wave entity structures of light. Given that light, or photons, in mutual collisions and consequential explosions is/are stopped upon their such impact and disembodiment, or disintegration, as photons, it/they would upon such stopping or decelerating contact and impact have incurred mass, in which mass is the degree or measure of the resistance of a body or object in motion or at rest to the change of its momentum or state of rest by a change force of momentum or a state of rest. (There could be a possible brief but collapsed subluminal acceleration of the quantum debris of such a collision for non-light particle or wave states of matter and warping or transformation of light upon such, for it, impossible superluminal acceleration of light yet superluminal acceleration force and pressure applied to it.) This hypothetically would be calculated to happen in a (1.) light-particle structure against a light-particle-structure collision of EM, with EM being their existential content and essence, or (2.) a/n [oscillating] light-wave structure to light-wave structure of EM collision, or (3.) a duality light particle-wave structure to light particle-wave structure of EM collision. In the (1.) light particle-to-particle mutual collision scenario, hypotheically, virtual or quasi particle matter would mutually collide at the speed of light squared in the sense that two opposing quantities of particle state light, as individuals or en masse, would collide and convert their so-to-say mutual vaporized particle entity structure EM to fundamental energy, (2.) while in that for light waves, in which the EM wave state of light figuratively could be thought of as something like a membrane or tissue envelope of indeed EM energy, hypothetically, light waves too would mutually collide at the speed of light squared in the sense that two opposing quantities of wave state light, as individuals or en masse, would collide and convert their so-to-say mutual disintegrated entity structure of EM energy to fundamental particle and debris matter or quanta, and (3.) in that for duality light paricle-waves, in which the EM duality particle-wave state of light would mutually collide at the speed of light squared in the sense that two opposing quantities of particle-wave state light, as individuals or en masse, hypothetically, would collide and convert their so-to-say mutually disintegrated and vaporized duality paricle-wave entity structure of EM quasi-matter and elemental energy to fundamental both energy and particle and debris matter or quanta. Wavelength particles (species) of the particular spectra of light collided within their own species and against other species might creatively carry collision outputs of matter and energy further, such as in cases of gamma-ray photons x gamma-ray photons, of individuals or en masse, or gamma-ray photons x x-ray photons, individuals or en masse, or gamma-ray photons x infrared photons, etc., collisions, such as into bizarre, novel forms of matter and energy.
In their undergoing acceleration or deceleration, including their disembodiment, from a collision, the photons would have incurred the equivalent thereupon of push or pull gravity, which is the equivalent of mass. Their thereupon possibly fractured, dispersed, nebulized or mutated, etc., EM entity state of light also might incur negative and positive electrical charges for the light entity structures in collision at that point in time and/or for their debris, which might include the formation of new, non-light quantum particles, particularly ones formed from the collision of light particles-to-light particles versus light waves-to-light waves having consistently or primarily between them, in a ratio regard in outcomes, either a negative versus a positive charge and for those formed from a light particle-wave to light particle-wave collision having consistently or primarily, in a ratio regard in outcomes, an overt neutral charge.* (If p x p = + charge, then w x w = - charge; or if p x p = - charge, then w x w = + charge; therefore, fundamental p u w = + u -, or neutral or net zero charge -- symbol key: x means collided with or by, p means light particle, w means light wave, u means in union or unity with, p u w means bosonic space-time simultaneous union of the particle and wave light structures of and in a photon (light particle-wave simultaneity, duality state). In reality, there could also commonly be non-light particle creations from collisions between light particles and light waves together, light particles and light particle-waves together, light waves and light particle-waves together, and light particles, light waves and light particle-waves together, etc., in any number of numeral configurations per light structure type with another or other light structure type or types, with them having electrical charges or a charge status too but herein unhypothesized charges or a charge status.).
*In the mathematical behavior of physics, a neutral charge status for quantum particles, primarily with a mass, with the possible exception of light or light quanta, with no mass, might not translate to zero in its collision-related action-reaction or action-reaction-interaction charge dynamics and outcomes and effects between two sets of collided neutral-charge-status particles, or even a neutral-charge-status set and charged set of particles, as they are in cosmological nature associated with such behaviorally exceptional and extreme cosmological phenomena as neutron stars, pulsars, magnetars, black holes, quasars, blazars and neutrinos (nicknamed ghost particles, which are nearly the smallest of the quantum particles and a quantum particle type that can pass through, as though quantum tunnel through, almost anything, but not black holes and possibly not the other said varieties of neutron stars, whereas massless light cannot pass through many things or stuff nor nearly as much as can neutrinos). In view of this related background, speculatively, neutron particle or beam collisions with the various species of neutrino particles or beams, on a species type basis, as well as collisions with each of the neutral charge composite and quark particle species with their own and with each of the other species may have very interesting results.
Mutual light x light, or light squared, collisions and blasts in the light-quanta state and era of the universe following the primordial matter-antimatter symmetry mutual annihilation micro-era event would be the likely source of the creation of the new regime of quantum particles, such as of new-era quarks (which make up neutrons, the main and most consequential, especially collectively, neutral charge status quantum particle), but maybe or maybe not quarks' partner gluon particles, too, constituting the nuclear strong force and being the nuclear strong force carriers, the binding partners of quarks, and antiquarks, which always occur as bonded, by gluons, inseparable multiples of particles in nature. Gluons may have survived the primorial matter-antimatter annihilation micro-era and event in bosonic union with the other three fundamental forces and force carriers of nature, the nuclear weak, EM and gravity of the primordial 4-fundamental-forces unity. In addition to quarks, the described newly formed light state and era of the universe, inclusive of the three entity-structural states of its light, of particle, wave and particle-wave states, and their, for each, light spectrum oscillating wavelength spectra of photons and their interrelated collisions with one another and collisions with non-light particles [and waves] of matter, putatively likely would have created or re-created as its fundamental matter particles those of electrons and its other first-generation leptons, that in themselves in their collisions, reactions and interaction with and among themselves likely created other quantum particles with a charge or neutral charge status, with regard to the latter, particles such as neutrons (which are composed of 3 quarks of interacting charge statuses summing to a net zero charge status) and neutrinos.
Articles specifically on the subject of particle accelerator collisions of neutrons with each other that the author researched the week of 08-14-2023 to 08-20-2023 for him to read online, on the Google, Yahoo and Bing search engines, were nonexistent, although he found two brief statements, the second of which said to the effect that when neutrons collide they result in a scattering process, and the first, which was on neutrons and antineutrons, said in effect that they occur in pairs but because they both have a net neutral state of charge among their underlying, constituent quarks, they do not attract to one another and do not mutually annihilate, and that, instead, in collisions of them, they result in a scattering process and produce a Higgs boson as well as other quantum particles. The author copied the latter statement, that had a science informational reference source, and pasted it to a backup copy of this writing in his offline writing files; however, it was not retained on the backup copy and disappeared from the internet and could not be found in follow-up searches on it on any of the three stated search engines. If it is correct, that latter statement would strongly imply that neutrons, composed of two down quarks and one up quark, likely survived the primordial matter-antimatter mutual annihilation micro-era and event of the big-bang stage of the universe and that they and their mutual collision scattering production of other quantum particles persisted and were present and active in the subsequent light-creation, pervaded and ruled new era of the late stage of the big bang or the earliest post-big-bang stage of the universe. It would also imply that possibly all or most other initially existing quark-based neutral-charge-state quantum particles persisted and were active in the light era and that collisions of and among them, neutrons and light quanta shared a role in the re-creation of the other particles of matter, of the 3 different states of electrical charge, of the new light-dominated era of the universe.
A significantly regular, perhaps low, rate of incidence of disruption of the mutual annihilations of matter-antimatter oppositely-charged species particle pairs could have occurred, for non-light species of quantum particles, before they could have annihilated, if the micro-time for their annihilations to transact were slower, and therefore longer, than the distance rate, or speed, of transit of light particles and other or all of the species of quantum particles permeating the tiny space-time singularity of the initial or early stage of the big-bang genesis of the universe, in which the matter-antimatter oppositely-charged particle pairs, matter-antimatter uncharged or neutral-charge-status particle pairs and wavelength spectra particles of light circumstantially, by whole-environment mass-scale happenstance, would probably have pervasively bombarded and collided with one another. The random effect of this potential occurrence of disruption of matter-antimatter oppositely-charged quantum particle-species pair mutual annihilations could also have been another source of the later matter-versus-antimatter asymmetry of the post-light-particle dominated era of the universe, re-creating the matter of the universe, and ultimately for the survival of matter over antimatter in composing our universe. (Light was opaque at that stage of the universe and with the re-creation of matter, or matter genera, from scalar mixed-up collisions of light particles, waves and particle-waves then, possibly according to collision-resulting charge status interactional dynamics, light may have had a major bias for producing matter over antimatter, which is somewhat experimentally testable.)
By the way, are there behavioral differences between black holes with a negative versus a positive versus a neutral charge status and the amplitude of their charges? If there are such differences, are they based on the proportions of the different charges of the masses of their absorption? And, just as there are black holes that form from the extremely gravitationally compressed neutron cores of supermassive imploded, dead stars composed of baryonic matter, might there also be or have been corresponding antimatter-based black holes impervious to destruction during the initial matter-antimatter symmetry mutual annihilation micro-era of the big-bang stage of the universe that as well as might not have been subject to evaporation for hundreds of billions to potentially trillions of years into the future of the subsequent matter-from-light-creation new era of matter of the universe, which is estimated to be approximately 13.77 billion years in age? What would be the effects of a matter and antimatter black hole collision on them and their fabric of space-time environment? Could there be black hole [quantum] entanglement and entanglements? Could the nature and constituents of the matter and antimatter of the primordial matter-antimatter symmetry mutual annihilation micro-era of the universe be different or entirely different from that which followed, that of the current baryonic matter and energy state of the universe?
Conclusion
In sum, the hypothesis derived from the foregoing examination of the applicability in general and the reported science of the operation of E = mc2 following the mutual annihilation event of matter and antimatter and their energy generated conversion to photons, at the big-bang initial stage of the universe, in explanation for the survival of the ontogenously significant remnant matter (in contrast to virtually extinguished antimatter) that constitutes our universe is: (1.) that it was in that aftermath birth source of photons of the incipient, tiny universe that that stage of the universe became densely populated with light particle-waves, light particles and light waves in collision with one another within and across their entity types, or entity structures of light, at light speed, (2.) in which in any collision of these light entity structures with themselves, upon their collision, the collision became a speed-of-light-square collision event (of the involved light entity structures) capable of creating fundamental matter, in the form of electrons, leptons and quarks (which largely have electrical charges, with quarks also having a color charge), as well as of generating (re-producing) and recycling fundamental energy and (3.) that their fundamental matter creations of electrons, leptons and quarks themselves subsequently created successive, together with and in interaction with the ongoing production of matter by light structure collisions, other species of matter in their various combinations of particle collisions with themselves and the entity structures of light. However, this analysis does not in itself explain why the resultant E = mc2 aftermath of the primordial matter-antimatter symmetry mutual annihilation event of the big-bang stage of the universe that created the new light state and era of the universe apparently, if not obviously, created our baryonic matter state of the universe to the exclusion of all but a residue of antimatter. That explanation is the focus of the primary presentation to follow.
In addition, the author proposes that the violation of matter and antimatter symmetry may be mathematically and circumstantially dictated by nature, the state of material existence and its content and fundamental behavior, as explained in the following presentation, and that these dictates, admittedly incomplete and incompletely explanatory, if valid in large part until complete, apply to the behavior of the genera of matter and virtual or quasi matter at the matter-antimatter, elemental light and survival, remnant matter stages of the universe. The following presentation hedges in subscribing to the theory of the complete annihilation of matter and antimatter, which at a minimum had to be electrons and antielectrons (positrons), the other fundamental particle members of the electron-related lepton family of particles, and quarks and antiquarks and their partner strong-force carriers gluons, in their mutual annihilation event at the inception stage of the universe, and it analytically explains why it so hedges. While the author has read physics collision literature that report on contemporary collision experiments of light-on-light and electron-on-electron particle collisions that produce electron and antimatter-positron pairs, indicatively inherently entangled, that mutually annihilate upon contact (which is indirect indicated evidence of the cosmologically primordial matter-antimatter mutual annihilation event), as well as other matter-related material, he has not yet confirmed that high-energy collisions of the 6 different types of quarks and all of the other lepton types of particles, with themselves or with electrons or light particles do the same or produce mutually annihilating [naturally quantumly entangled] pairs of quarks and antiquarks and non-electron leptons and their antimatter counterparts in pairs to the exclusion of their creating other matter [and antimatter species] in collider lab collisions of them.
After the author educated himself in online independent study on quark electric and chromodynamic charges on the evening of 08-06-2023 (click-on link 23.2 Quarks - Physics | OpenStax), he is of the frame of mind that those multiple fractional quark charges, per quark, hidden within the hadron and meson particles they compose, may, when they are thoroughly mathematically understood by him, and if and when they can be reconciled with and integrated into the mathematical model of the particle charge dynamics conveyed in the following presentation, they very well may substantially contribute to completing or complete the herein theoretical model in fully accounting for how the matter of our universe survived in significant part the matter and antimatter symmetry mutual annihilation event of our incipient universe.
Analysis, Math and Theoretical Model of Proposed Explanation
Violation of cosmological fundamental matter-antimatter quantum particle symmetry upon the genesis of the universe may have been mathematically predetermined and inevitable, or in saying this in other words, it may have been or be mathematically and circumstantially inherent. This would be so because the putatively same quantity of positively-versus-negatively oppositely charged particles of the otherwise same, identical species of particles, of matter and antimatter, mathematically would necessarily have resulted in a mathematical net surplus of such positive state matter, referred to simply as matter (or luminous matter or baryonic matter), that would have been the therefrom eventual energy-to-matter consequence and production of the mutual collisions and annihilations of those primordial particles of matter and antimatter, if a mathematically causal algebraic, and magnetic, or maybe also electromagnetic, multiplication model, for resolving the untenable condition of the co-existent state of mutually annihilative matter and antimatter, was then in effect of the mathematical pairing operations of a positive times (multiplied by) a positive equals a positive, a negative times a negative equals a positive, and a negative times a positive equals a negative, rather than the presumed algebraic summation addition-and-subtraction model as then having been in effect of the mathematical pairing operations of a positive plus a positive equals a positive, a negative plus or minus a negative equals a negative, and a negative plus or minus a positive, dependent on the comparative quantities or magnitudes of the two terms of the operation involved, equals either a negative, positive or zero. (However, at the matter-antimatter stage of the universe, all matter-and-antimatter particle counterparts would have been equal in their population counts and would have had the same value except for the kind of their either positive or negative electrical charge, with, ideally, and possibly, though apparently not actually primordially, the positive charge uniform across all matter and the negative charge uniform across all antimatter, and so an algebraic summation addition-subtraction model of a positive minus a positive operation would not be possible as such but could only be and would be identical to a positive plus a negative operation, with both terms of the addition-subtraction having the same value and when transacted together would equal and result in zero.) In a causal symmetrical regime of the parity of mutually colliding and annihilating primordial particles of matter and antimatter, the algebraic multiplication model would allow for the production of a net surplus of positive matter (since 2/3 of all possible operations would have a positive result compared to and against 1/3 of them having a negative result, yielding a net surplus, as the difference between the former and latter results in an algebraic summation of them, of 1/3 of the total of all possible outcomes being a positive quantity), or yielding a net surplus of this fractionally large amount of "positive energy," versus, and in excess of, negative energy, output underlying and giving rise to the net positive matter, actually being the state of the matter of our universe, whereas the algebraic summation addition-subtraction model would result, when involving theoretically, but unrealistically, strictly one-to-one and only matter-antimatter collisions, in zero matter and antimatter but perhaps would result in neutral or absolute vacuum, or vacuum-state, energy (speculatively, perhaps such as a black hole, or one with no charge).
Similar to the hereinabove algebraic multiplication model, in magnetics, negative-to-negative poles repel, positive-to-positive poles repel, and negative-to-positive poles attract, resulting in a net surplus of repulsion force outcomes in all of the (three types of possible) pole pairings between and across any even number of magnets.
Not only do the magnetic polar dynamics of two magnets match algebraic multiplication sign behavior, but so do the results of adding any two even numbers across the infinity of numbers, and the results of adding any two odd numbers across the infinity of numbers, always summing to an even number, as contrasted with the results of adding together any even number and an odd number across the infinity of numbers, always summing to an odd number. For numbers, the set of even numbers can be conceived of as representative of positively charged quantities and negative numbers as representative of negatively charged quantities in an abstract reference. Although the set of sums from the addition of pairs of even numbers as well as pairs of odd numbers are infinite and so too the set of sums of odd-even addition pairs are infinite, theoretically, nevertheless, the set of sums of even-even number addition pairs and odd-odd number addition pairs across infinity, for which each of these infinite sets the sum is always an even number, would be twice as many in their even sums to the set of sums of pairs of odd and even number addition, always yielding an odd number sum. However, when it comes to multiplication, the multiplication of an odd number and even number pair, always yielding an even number product and an odd number and odd number pair, always yielding an odd number product, for this model or concept, it does not conform to the algebraic signed products of negative for the product of the multiplication of two terms that each have different plus or minus sign (multiplication with mixed sign terms), always in algebra being a minus, or negative, sign product, nor for the signed product of the multiplication of two terms with a minus, or negative, sign, always being positive in algebra, unlike with the signed product of the multiplication of two numbers that each have a plus, or positive sign, term always being a plus, or positive, and which does conform to the product of the multiplication of two terms with a positive sign in algebra. Nevertheless, even in this odd number and even number-based, positive-even-number and negative-odd-number set, multiplication model and that of algebra, there are two sets of positive numerical outcome types to one set of negative outcomes. In either model as well as that of the related addition model of even and odd numbers, an attempt can be made to relate their numbers and mathematical operations to physics in themselves, possibly somewhat generalizable to actual energy-matter, spacetime physics, beginning with observing that all numbers have a quantitative magnitude, or the status of no quantity for zero, a prime or composite compositional status, in which 2 is the only prime even number of whole numbers, and an odd or even sequences and set status.
Algebraic Magnetic-Pole Dynamics Between the Poles of Two Magnets, Each with a +Charge Pole and -Charge Pole:
+ by + = + (mutual repulsion/push-away force, reactive); - by - = + (mutual repulsion/push-away force, reactive); + by - = - (mutual pull/binding-tethering force, interactive)
Algebraic Summation Addition-Subtraction Difference Result for the Above Magnetic Polar Dynamics:
(In algebraic summation, all positive-sign numbers are added together and, separately from them, all negative-sign numbers are added together, which may be algebraic post-multiplication products, and thereafter the difference between the sum of the positive-sign numbers and the sum of the negative-sign numbers is obtained by subtracting the smaller sum, of either positive-sign or negative-sign numbers, from the larger sum.)
+charge pole paired with +charge pole = + product, mutual push force, creating distance between poles
-charge pole paired with -charge pole = + product, mutual push force, creating distance between poles
+charge pole paired with -charge pole = - product, mutual pull force, collapses distance between poles
Difference: sum of +2 and -1 = + or +1, or ration of +2:-1, or 2/3 = + and 1/3 = -
Algebraic Multiplication Dynamics Involving Any Positive and Negative Number or Quantity (+N, -N)
+ x + = + (positive product); - x - = + (positive product); + x - = - (negative product)
(Alternative but Misfitted Hypothetical Algebraic Summation Addition-Subtraction Mathematics and Dynamics of Magnet Poles:
+charge pole & +charge pole = +charge mutual canceling
- charge pole &/- -charge pole = -charge mutual canceling
+charge pole & -charge pole = ?summed result of either + or - or 0/+ & -, or no effect in, charge mutual canceling [force], dependent on which term is higher or if both are equal in the operation
These alternative mathematics do not match and apply to the polar dynamics of two magnets because they are strictly additive or algebraically additive-subtractive and the third expression of them is subject to a variable, either positive, negative or zero, result, but they may in supplemental part apply to quantum-particle matter and antimatter collision outcome dynamics.)
Motion/momentum, mass, size, charge and spin values or gradients of quantum particles and their quantities involved in the terms of the above operations most probably would be significantly influential on their [collision] results in a reality context and application.
This small and simple body of algebraic mathematical and magnetics rules and dynamics appears to permit the reality of and account for and explain why matter, the matter that makes up all of the structures -- quantum, micro and macro -- of our present universe, has substantially survived the primordial matter-antimatter, of identical quantities and quantum-particle families, mutual annihilation event and process.
However, in view of the fact that species of the ordinary matter of our universe have negative charges and [experimentally found, residue] species of antimatter have positive charges and that both genera of matter have neutral particles, there may be an overall, greater critical property than charge that they share in common that diverges between them, analogous or homologous to positive and negative charge, and that they characteristically differ on, but uniformly, and are distinguished by and that causes them to tend to mutually annihilate upon contact, in addition to and apart from the probable smash-up debris or quantum-particle particulate fallout resulting from the clashing travel speed, mass, spin and charge values of matter and antimatter particles involved in a collision, when the opposite genera matter particles collide together. Chirality (right-chiral versus left-chiral, or -handedness, earmarking normal matter versus antimatter and systematically distinguishing them from one another) and particle spin or an aspect or some aspects of spin come to mind as such a possible uniform distinguishing property between them that may be concurrently mathematically and cause-and-effect consequential between them, matter and antimatter. Chirality would be the simplest solution if it were accompanied by an interactive over-supercharge of some kind with and to, and that was electrical, in whole or part, and positive for all normal matter and negative for all antimatter across, the basic positive, negative and neutral charge statuses of the respective quantum particles of matter and antimatter.
Algebraic Magnetic-Pole Dynamics Between the Poles of Two Magnets, Each with a +Charge Pole and -Charge Pole:
+ by + = + (mutual repulsion/push-away force, reactive); - by - = + (mutual repulsion/push-away force, reactive); + by - = - (mutual pull/binding-tethering force, interactive)
Algebraic Summation Addition-Subtraction Difference Result for the Above Magnetic Polar Dynamics:
(In algebraic summation, all positive-sign numbers are added together and, separately from them, all negative-sign numbers are added together, which may be algebraic post-multiplication products, and thereafter the difference between the sum of the positive-sign numbers and the sum of the negative-sign numbers is obtained by subtracting the smaller sum, of either positive-sign or negative-sign numbers, from the larger sum.)
+charge pole paired with +charge pole = + product, mutual push force, creating distance between poles
-charge pole paired with -charge pole = + product, mutual push force, creating distance between poles
+charge pole paired with -charge pole = - product, mutual pull force, collapses distance between poles
Difference: sum of +2 and -1 = + or +1, or ration of +2:-1, or 2/3 = + and 1/3 = -
Algebraic Multiplication Dynamics Involving Any Positive and Negative Number or Quantity (+N, -N)
+ x + = + (positive product); - x - = + (positive product); + x - = - (negative product)
(Alternative but Misfitted Hypothetical Algebraic Summation Addition-Subtraction Mathematics and Dynamics of Magnet Poles:
+charge pole & +charge pole = +charge mutual canceling
- charge pole &/- -charge pole = -charge mutual canceling
+charge pole & -charge pole = ?summed result of either + or - or 0/+ & -, or no effect in, charge mutual canceling [force], dependent on which term is higher or if both are equal in the operation
These alternative mathematics do not match and apply to the polar dynamics of two magnets because they are strictly additive or algebraically additive-subtractive and the third expression of them is subject to a variable, either positive, negative or zero, result, but they may in supplemental part apply to quantum-particle matter and antimatter collision outcome dynamics.)
Motion/momentum, mass, size, charge and spin values or gradients of quantum particles and their quantities involved in the terms of the above operations most probably would be significantly influential on their [collision] results in a reality context and application.
This small and simple body of algebraic mathematical and magnetics rules and dynamics appears to permit the reality of and account for and explain why matter, the matter that makes up all of the structures -- quantum, micro and macro -- of our present universe, has substantially survived the primordial matter-antimatter, of identical quantities and quantum-particle families, mutual annihilation event and process.
However, in view of the fact that species of the ordinary matter of our universe have negative charges and [experimentally found, residue] species of antimatter have positive charges and that both genera of matter have neutral particles, there may be an overall, greater critical property than charge that they share in common that diverges between them, analogous or homologous to positive and negative charge, and that they characteristically differ on, but uniformly, and are distinguished by and that causes them to tend to mutually annihilate upon contact, in addition to and apart from the probable smash-up debris or quantum-particle particulate fallout resulting from the clashing travel speed, mass, spin and charge values of matter and antimatter particles involved in a collision, when the opposite genera matter particles collide together. Chirality (right-chiral versus left-chiral, or -handedness, earmarking normal matter versus antimatter and systematically distinguishing them from one another) and particle spin or an aspect or some aspects of spin come to mind as such a possible uniform distinguishing property between them that may be concurrently mathematically and cause-and-effect consequential between them, matter and antimatter. Chirality would be the simplest solution if it were accompanied by an interactive over-supercharge of some kind with and to, and that was electrical, in whole or part, and positive for all normal matter and negative for all antimatter across, the basic positive, negative and neutral charge statuses of the respective quantum particles of matter and antimatter.
Violation of chirality symmetry, in comparing real-world versus mirror-world same quantum particle behavior, was found to have been violated in a famous peer-reviewed and confirmed 1956 experiment on parity symmetry violation led by physicist Chien Shiung Wu, labeled the Wu experiment: Chien-Shiung Wu | Particle physicist denied a Nobel prize | New Scientist , Chien-Shiung Wu, the First Lady of Physics - JSTOR Daily , This Month in Physics History (aps.org) , 1956 parity symmetry violation experiment led by Chien Shiung Wu - Yahoo Video Search Results , 1956 parity symmetry violation experiment led by Chien Shiung Wu - Yahoo Video Search Results . The Wu experiment demonstrated a parity violation and difference, or preference, in the nuclear-weak-force decay behavior of the real-world versus mirror-reflection-image same particle tested, the closest thing to quantum particle entanglement and symmetry violation in the behavior of two entangled quantum particles. A subsequent nuclear-weak-force experiment conducted in January of 1957, in the month following Wu's, by physicists Leon Lederman, Richard Garwin and Marcel Weinrich confirmed the results of the Wu experiment that, in an editorial comment of the writer of the concerned article of the following publication "The universe, by a margin of roughly 1 in 10,000 really did prefer left to right," This Month in Physics History (aps.org) . View the brief educational video on this subject, The Wu experiment - Yahoo Image Search Results , that also has a click-on slide-show offering of which one slide summarizes comparatively better, but not completely, the parity, or symmetry, violation findings
of both experiments, being "
" When the language is used in the physics literature that equivalent but oppositely charged matter-antimatter [particles] annihilate when they meet or collide, it may mean that the particles of the involved matter and antimatter, inferentially the fundamental particles electrons and positrons, and quarks and antiquarks, whereof quarks and antiquarks make up composite quantum particles and members of quantum-particle families, obliterate into debris of the contacting or collided mutually annihilated matter-antimatter quantum particles, with the debris substantially resulting directly in photons or producing photons, or both, and maybe resulting likewise in neutrinos, too, plus. That herein hypothetical common-denominator (possibly systematically differentiating charge amplitudes, in some way, or more or something else) but divergent property uniformly distinguishing them, hypothetically could or would be the basis for the applicability of the aforementioned proposed explanatory mathematics and dynamics for the violation by the remnant ordinary matter, of our present state of the universe, of the cosmological fundamental matter-antimatter symmetry following their mutual annihilation event and process at the origin stage of the universe.
Primordial matter-antimatter collisions inferentially, as a matter of empirical pragmatics, the way matter behaves in both the quantum-mechanics microcosmic domain and the macrocosmic domain of the universe, would have naturally occurred chaotically and randomly, ubiquitously so, between not only matter and antimatter particles but as well between matter and matter particles and between antimatter and antimatter particles, as occur ubiquitously, apparently, in vacuum space between negatively and positively charged virtual particles and in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) quantum particle-beam collision experiments, that possibly have only or both mathematical algebraic multiplication versus only algebraic summation addition-subtraction model transactional results. Within an empirically pragmatic and operative algebraic summation addition-subtraction model, the occurrence of theoretically only linear one-to-one and only matter-antimatter particle collisions is unrealistic, but in it such collisions realistically could abundantly occur nonlinearly and randomly. Crucial to this empirical pragmatism pertaining to the collisions of matter-versus-antimatter quantum particles and their potential differential ratios of annihilations resulting in the net survival of matter is the consideration that for some matter-antimatter quantum particle pairs, the micro-time for their mutual annihilations to transact may vary for the different species of particles, and may be slower for some particle species than the speed of motion or transit than the speed of light particles, of photons, and the baseline speed of other quantum particles all concurrently bombarding one another and that could thereby disrupt the mutual annihilations, at a significant rate or incidence, before they could transact, for non-light species of quantum particles.
BM = Baryonic or Normal Matter, AM = Antimatter, XM = Synergistic Novel/Exotic, Hybrid or Otherly Matter
Algebraic Multiplication Model
+BM by + AM = +(XM)2, -BM by -AM = +(XM)2, +BM by -AM = -(XM)2
+BM by + BM = +(BM)2, -BM by -BM = +(BM)2, +BM by -AM = -(BM)2
+AM by +AM = +(AM)2, -AM by -AM = +(AM)2, +AM by -AM = -(AM)2
Algebraic Summation Addition-Subtraction Model
+BM & + AM = +, -BM & -AM = -, +BM & -AM = contingently, variably either - or + or 0
+BM & + BM = +, -BM & -BM = -, +BM & -AM = contingently, variably either - or + or 0
+AM & +AM = +, -AM & -AM = -, +AM & -AM = contingently, variably either - or + or 0, contingent on the numerical value of each the first and second terms of the addition-subtraction operation
+ & + and - & - BM & AM summation operations hypothetically, in a personal regard, are mutual annihilations and conversions of their quantum debris to photons, possibly neutrinos, and positive versus negative space-time energy convertible to matter or genera of matter, as well as to neutral or vacuum state energy
Again, motion, mass, size, charge and spin values or gradients of quantum particles and their quantities involved in the terms of the above operations most probably would be significantly influential on their results in a reality context and application.
Primordial matter-antimatter collisions inferentially, as a matter of empirical pragmatics, the way matter behaves in both the quantum-mechanics microcosmic domain and the macrocosmic domain of the universe, would have naturally occurred chaotically and randomly, ubiquitously so, between not only matter and antimatter particles but as well between matter and matter particles and between antimatter and antimatter particles, as occur ubiquitously, apparently, in vacuum space between negatively and positively charged virtual particles and in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) quantum particle-beam collision experiments, that possibly have only or both mathematical algebraic multiplication versus only algebraic summation addition-subtraction model transactional results. Within an empirically pragmatic and operative algebraic summation addition-subtraction model, the occurrence of theoretically only linear one-to-one and only matter-antimatter particle collisions is unrealistic, but in it such collisions realistically could abundantly occur nonlinearly and randomly. Crucial to this empirical pragmatism pertaining to the collisions of matter-versus-antimatter quantum particles and their potential differential ratios of annihilations resulting in the net survival of matter is the consideration that for some matter-antimatter quantum particle pairs, the micro-time for their mutual annihilations to transact may vary for the different species of particles, and may be slower for some particle species than the speed of motion or transit than the speed of light particles, of photons, and the baseline speed of other quantum particles all concurrently bombarding one another and that could thereby disrupt the mutual annihilations, at a significant rate or incidence, before they could transact, for non-light species of quantum particles.
BM = Baryonic or Normal Matter, AM = Antimatter, XM = Synergistic Novel/Exotic, Hybrid or Otherly Matter
Algebraic Multiplication Model
+BM by + AM = +(XM)2, -BM by -AM = +(XM)2, +BM by -AM = -(XM)2
+BM by + BM = +(BM)2, -BM by -BM = +(BM)2, +BM by -AM = -(BM)2
+AM by +AM = +(AM)2, -AM by -AM = +(AM)2, +AM by -AM = -(AM)2
Algebraic Summation Addition-Subtraction Model
+BM & + AM = +, -BM & -AM = -, +BM & -AM = contingently, variably either - or + or 0
+BM & + BM = +, -BM & -BM = -, +BM & -AM = contingently, variably either - or + or 0
+AM & +AM = +, -AM & -AM = -, +AM & -AM = contingently, variably either - or + or 0, contingent on the numerical value of each the first and second terms of the addition-subtraction operation
+ & + and - & - BM & AM summation operations hypothetically, in a personal regard, are mutual annihilations and conversions of their quantum debris to photons, possibly neutrinos, and positive versus negative space-time energy convertible to matter or genera of matter, as well as to neutral or vacuum state energy
Again, motion, mass, size, charge and spin values or gradients of quantum particles and their quantities involved in the terms of the above operations most probably would be significantly influential on their results in a reality context and application.
Moreover, for either mathematical model, as with the hadron and lepton, plus, quantum-particle families of current matter, hypothetically at the dawn of time of our universe there would have been corresponding quantum-particle families of matter, but also mirror-equivalent, oppositely charged antimatter families of quantum particles then, permeating and zipping, shooting and streaking all about prodigiously in space-time nearly at or at the speed of light and chaotically and randomly crashing continuously at such speeds, with extreme impact heat, force and/or pressure effects, into their counterparts and non-counterparts of matter and antimatter, between and within the quantum-particle families of matter and antimatter, in a dense, roiling, exploding maelstrom scramble of them within the tiny space-time singularity, or post-singularity, of that stage of the universe, with a variety of theoretically computationally complicating impact outcomes inconsistent with theoretical solely one-to-one matter-and-antimatter particle collisions and mutual annihilations.
Crucial to the empirical pragmatics pertaining to the collisions of matter-versus-antimatter oppositely-charged quantum particle pairs and their potential differential ratios of annihilations resulting in the net survival of matter over antimatter is the consideration that for some of the different matter-antimatter oppositely-charged species of quantum particle pairs, the micro-time for their mutual annihilations to transact may have varied, and may yet vary in physics laboratory study of them. At the relevant initial big-bang singularity stage of the universe, that micro-time for their mutual annihilations to reactively transact may have been slower for some such particle species, or for all of them, than the speed of transit of light particles, of photons, and the baseline speed of transit of other, or all, species of quantum particles, including matter-antimatter neutral-charge-status neutron particle pairs and other such neutral-charge-status species of quantum particle pairs, that do not reactively mutually annihilate as a consequence of their matter-antimatter relationship. Incidentally, in this credibly possible state of affairs for matter and antimatter particles and of them transiting ubiquitously and densely in all directions at extreme speeds, they probably would have been disposed to bombard and collide at extreme speeds with and blast away at or apart one another reactively or interactively, at some percentage scale relative to the total particle population then, in the tiny singularity of the early big-bang stage of the genesis of the universe, and possibly would have created new quanta of more than the light quanta created from the reactive or interactive mutual annihilations of matter-antimatter oppositely-charged same-species quantum particle pairs. Freed, decoupled or demolished members of matter-antimatter particle pairs in this environment would result in particles from these severed relationships colliding with all particle species of their own matter or antimatter and their opposite in matter or antimatter, with a charge or neutral charge status, as well as with all wavelength spectra of light and all of their collision aftermath products across time.
In natue, bunches of each primordial matter particles and antimatter particles, in addition to singles or [entangled] such pairs of these particles, would probably also have occurred, like photons naturally do in beams or streaming arrays currently in outer space, and also probably in many instances, continuously then, would have collided in matter-antimatter, matter-matter and antimatter-antimatter pairings of randomly and irregularly uneven and even particle numbers in, respectively, [separate] matter and antimatter particle bunches or streams. Collisions of bunches or streams of these varieties just as likely and likewise would have occurred with individual particles of matter and particles of antimatter. Whether on a group-to-group or group-to-individual basis, given that quantum particles (for instance, electrons, protons, neutrons, neutrinos, photons, etc.) outside of atoms travel nearly at or at the speed of light, their collisions and mutual blasts too would probably have occurred nearly at or at the speed of light, theoretically in a tiny space-time singularity or post-singularity, and resulted in variable, in the aftermath of the collisions and mutual blasts, cosmological action-reaction and action-reaction-interaction cause-and-effect outputs, dependent on the numerical particle inequalities or equalities and nature (matter, antimatter) of the colliding particle groups with particle groups, or particle groups colliding with individual particles, which might not have always or primarily resulted in mutual annihilations, but, alternatively, often might also have resulted in particle disintergration and decay or breakdown into different or hybrid particles, as well as particle fusions, mutations, accretions and new particle and nature-of-matter and related energy creations, etc.
Cosmologically, the algebraic multiplication model would be both a from matter-antimatter to energy-matter action-reaction and action-reaction-and-interaction output cause-and-effect model and system, whereas the algebraic summation addition-subtraction model questionably would be a from matter-antimatter to neutral/vacuum-state-energy-output cause-and-effect model and system, or nearly one.
Afterthought research and findings:
On 07-24-2023, I happened to view online an illustration on the collision of an electron struck at 3 different speeds -- high, mid and low speed -- by a quark. An electron has a small fraction of the mass of the lowest-mass quark. Not the type of quark, its mass, its electrical charge status nor its color charge were stated in the illustration. Nor were they stated, as applicable, for the illustration's collided quark and electron. It showed that at high speed the collision produced three quarks, a violet, blue and green quark. At a mid-speed collision, it showed as the result a spherical dark-gray cloud of debris densely speckled with the same colors and white, compared to, at a low-speed collision, a spherical cloud of white and secondarily light-gray debris around the fringes without any [other] colors.
These energy levels of collision for the quark-to-electron collisions appear to work analogously to theoretical flash baking, at which at the highest workable temperature a fully baked loaf of bread is produced (fully differentiated from its base dough state into a finished product), at mid temperature the loaf is hot, undercooked and mushy (semi-differentiated from its base dough state and a midway, unfinished product) and at low temperature it is hot but almost wholly doughy (little differentiated from its base dough state). For the 3-quark production state and outcome the mathematics may have been (electron mass + quark mass)/2 = average mass, to -average mass (representative of the collision transactionally adjusted electron mass) x (collided by) ?charge average mass (representative of the collision transactionally adjusted quark mass) = quantity of ?charge mass translatable to number of quarks and leftover debris not sufficient for translation to a complete electron.
I was inspired by the illustration to ask two questions. The first question asked whether a collider experiment had been conducted on the collision of electron-to-election beams with the results of the experiment published? I could find no articles or scientific reports online clearly or specifically on electron-to-electron, or beams of them, collision experiments, but I found many articles and reports on collision experiments between electrons and a host of other quantum particles and types of atoms.
My other question asked whether in a collision of two electrons or electron beams, at high speed, the collision would produce the electron's positively-charged mirror-image counterpart antimatter positron particle, or positrons, since according to the herein algebraic multiplication model on electrical-charge, negative-and/versus positive charge, dynamics and interaction outcomes between charged quantum particles, of which an electron is a negatively charged quantum particle, in the mathematical operation of a negative (electron) multiplied by (representing a collision) a negative (electron) equals a positive (- by - = +, antimatter electron-opposite positron), a positron, or multiple of them, should be produced in the high-speed collision between them if the predictive algebraic multiplication model is correct. Incidentally, antimatter is reported to be the most valuable material there is.
The best I could do in getting an answer, and not speculation or opinion, on the results of an electron-to-electron, or a beam of them, collision was to get the following unsubstantiated and scientific-source unreferenced statements as an answer:
1 of 2 answers on and from Quora
Profile photo for ChatGPT
ChatGPT ·
AI bot
BETA
When two electron beams collide at relativistic speeds, they produce high-energy photons, also known as gamma rays. This process is known as Bremsstrahlung radiation. Additionally, the collision can also produce electron-positron pairs, whi
Continue reading
Profile photo for Brian Bi
Brian Bi
majored in physicsAuthor has 4.6K answers and 52.6M answer views 6y
"“Relativistic” is not very precise. An electron can be relativistic when it’s travelling at 50% of the speed of light, but nothing interesting will happen; some electrons will collide and scatter off each other, and this process is accompanied by the production of bremsstrahlung radiation.
If the energies are extremely high, more interesting things can happen. Above approximately 87% of the speed of light, where �≈2 , there is enough kinetic energy to produce an electron-positron pair. More possibilities exist at higher energies. The Large Electron–Positron Collider
, for example, could produce the W and Z bosons, which are over 100,000 times more massive than the electron. A collision is also not limited to producing one or two new particles."
2 of 2 answers on and from Quora
Profile photo for ChatGPT
ChatGPT ·
AI bot
BETA
An AI bot writing helpful answers
What happens when two electron beams collide at relativistic speeds?
Profile photo for ChatGPT
ChatGPT
"When two electron beams collide at relativistic speeds, they produce high-energy photons, also known as gamma rays. This process is known as Bremsstrahlung radiation. Additionally, the collision can also produce electron-positron pairs, which are subatomic particles with the same mass as electrons but with opposite charge. These pairs can then go on to produce more gamma rays through a process known as pair production. This type of collision is typically studied in particle accelerators like the Large Hadron Collider."
If these answers are true and correct, then high-energy collider and collision quantum particle physics can produce antimatter, at a minimum, in the form of positrons and the positron lepton family of particles, at will, when it collides, at high speed, electron-to-electron particle beams.
In gist, this potential circumstance could have thereby disrupted the mutual annihilations of matter-antimatter oppositely-charged quantum particle pairs, at a significantly regular, perhaps low, rate of incidence, before the mutual annihilations could have transacted, for non-light species of quantum particle pairs. It also could have been randomly likewise disruptive if the speed of transit of many or all species of quantum particles were faster than the micro-time for their matter-antimatter oppositely-charged particle-pair mutual annihilations to transact. In any event, all particles would have been subject to light particle hits, of which concentrated, highly dense, beams of light particles, particularly certain wavelength spectra of them, like such beams of high-energy gamma-ray or x-ray wavelengths, may have been impactful and disruptive of the mutual annihilations of the matter-antimatter pair/s at some rate of occurrence.
In natue, bunches of each primordial matter particles and antimatter particles, in addition to singles or [entangled] such pairs of these particles, would probably also have occurred, like photons naturally do in beams or streaming arrays currently in outer space, and also probably in many instances, continuously then, would have collided in matter-antimatter, matter-matter and antimatter-antimatter pairings of randomly and irregularly uneven and even particle numbers in, respectively, [separate] matter and antimatter particle bunches or streams. Collisions of bunches or streams of these varieties just as likely and likewise would have occurred with individual particles of matter and particles of antimatter. Whether on a group-to-group or group-to-individual basis, given that quantum particles (for instance, electrons, protons, neutrons, neutrinos, photons, etc.) outside of atoms travel nearly at or at the speed of light, their collisions and mutual blasts too would probably have occurred nearly at or at the speed of light, theoretically in a tiny space-time singularity or post-singularity, and resulted in variable, in the aftermath of the collisions and mutual blasts, cosmological action-reaction and action-reaction-interaction cause-and-effect outputs, dependent on the numerical particle inequalities or equalities and nature (matter, antimatter) of the colliding particle groups with particle groups, or particle groups colliding with individual particles, which might not have always or primarily resulted in mutual annihilations, but, alternatively, often might also have resulted in particle disintergration and decay or breakdown into different or hybrid particles, as well as particle fusions, mutations, accretions and new particle and nature-of-matter and related energy creations, etc.
Cosmologically, the algebraic multiplication model would be both a from matter-antimatter to energy-matter action-reaction and action-reaction-and-interaction output cause-and-effect model and system, whereas the algebraic summation addition-subtraction model questionably would be a from matter-antimatter to neutral/vacuum-state-energy-output cause-and-effect model and system, or nearly one.
Afterthought research and findings:
On 07-24-2023, I happened to view online an illustration on the collision of an electron struck at 3 different speeds -- high, mid and low speed -- by a quark. An electron has a small fraction of the mass of the lowest-mass quark. Not the type of quark, its mass, its electrical charge status nor its color charge were stated in the illustration. Nor were they stated, as applicable, for the illustration's collided quark and electron. It showed that at high speed the collision produced three quarks, a violet, blue and green quark. At a mid-speed collision, it showed as the result a spherical dark-gray cloud of debris densely speckled with the same colors and white, compared to, at a low-speed collision, a spherical cloud of white and secondarily light-gray debris around the fringes without any [other] colors.
These energy levels of collision for the quark-to-electron collisions appear to work analogously to theoretical flash baking, at which at the highest workable temperature a fully baked loaf of bread is produced (fully differentiated from its base dough state into a finished product), at mid temperature the loaf is hot, undercooked and mushy (semi-differentiated from its base dough state and a midway, unfinished product) and at low temperature it is hot but almost wholly doughy (little differentiated from its base dough state). For the 3-quark production state and outcome the mathematics may have been (electron mass + quark mass)/2 = average mass, to -average mass (representative of the collision transactionally adjusted electron mass) x (collided by) ?charge average mass (representative of the collision transactionally adjusted quark mass) = quantity of ?charge mass translatable to number of quarks and leftover debris not sufficient for translation to a complete electron.
I was inspired by the illustration to ask two questions. The first question asked whether a collider experiment had been conducted on the collision of electron-to-election beams with the results of the experiment published? I could find no articles or scientific reports online clearly or specifically on electron-to-electron, or beams of them, collision experiments, but I found many articles and reports on collision experiments between electrons and a host of other quantum particles and types of atoms.
My other question asked whether in a collision of two electrons or electron beams, at high speed, the collision would produce the electron's positively-charged mirror-image counterpart antimatter positron particle, or positrons, since according to the herein algebraic multiplication model on electrical-charge, negative-and/versus positive charge, dynamics and interaction outcomes between charged quantum particles, of which an electron is a negatively charged quantum particle, in the mathematical operation of a negative (electron) multiplied by (representing a collision) a negative (electron) equals a positive (- by - = +, antimatter electron-opposite positron), a positron, or multiple of them, should be produced in the high-speed collision between them if the predictive algebraic multiplication model is correct. Incidentally, antimatter is reported to be the most valuable material there is.
The best I could do in getting an answer, and not speculation or opinion, on the results of an electron-to-electron, or a beam of them, collision was to get the following unsubstantiated and scientific-source unreferenced statements as an answer:
1 of 2 answers on and from Quora
Profile photo for ChatGPT
ChatGPT ·
AI bot
BETA
When two electron beams collide at relativistic speeds, they produce high-energy photons, also known as gamma rays. This process is known as Bremsstrahlung radiation. Additionally, the collision can also produce electron-positron pairs, whi
Continue reading
Profile photo for Brian Bi
Brian Bi
majored in physicsAuthor has 4.6K answers and 52.6M answer views 6y
"“Relativistic” is not very precise. An electron can be relativistic when it’s travelling at 50% of the speed of light, but nothing interesting will happen; some electrons will collide and scatter off each other, and this process is accompanied by the production of bremsstrahlung radiation.
If the energies are extremely high, more interesting things can happen. Above approximately 87% of the speed of light, where �≈2 , there is enough kinetic energy to produce an electron-positron pair. More possibilities exist at higher energies. The Large Electron–Positron Collider
, for example, could produce the W and Z bosons, which are over 100,000 times more massive than the electron. A collision is also not limited to producing one or two new particles."
2 of 2 answers on and from Quora
Profile photo for ChatGPT
ChatGPT ·
AI bot
BETA
An AI bot writing helpful answers
What happens when two electron beams collide at relativistic speeds?
Profile photo for ChatGPT
ChatGPT
"When two electron beams collide at relativistic speeds, they produce high-energy photons, also known as gamma rays. This process is known as Bremsstrahlung radiation. Additionally, the collision can also produce electron-positron pairs, which are subatomic particles with the same mass as electrons but with opposite charge. These pairs can then go on to produce more gamma rays through a process known as pair production. This type of collision is typically studied in particle accelerators like the Large Hadron Collider."
If these answers are true and correct, then high-energy collider and collision quantum particle physics can produce antimatter, at a minimum, in the form of positrons and the positron lepton family of particles, at will, when it collides, at high speed, electron-to-electron particle beams.
Miscellaneous:
ALPHA experiment at CERN observes the influence of gravity on antimatter | CERN (home.cern)
Published in news reports of 09-27-2023, also Einstein right again: Antimatter falls “down” due to gravity like ordinary matter | Ars Technica. These articles report, incidentally so, that CERN does indeed have an antimatter factory, a generator or manufacturing system, and has created and produced antihydrogen atoms. Like hydrogen atoms for normal matter, antihydrogen atoms are the foundational, first type and generation as well as precursor atoms of all other types or species of atoms, though for antimatter atoms.
Published in news reports of 09-27-2023, also Einstein right again: Antimatter falls “down” due to gravity like ordinary matter | Ars Technica. These articles report, incidentally so, that CERN does indeed have an antimatter factory, a generator or manufacturing system, and has created and produced antihydrogen atoms. Like hydrogen atoms for normal matter, antihydrogen atoms are the foundational, first type and generation as well as precursor atoms of all other types or species of atoms, though for antimatter atoms.
The ability of these particle collider physics via an antimatter factory to manufacture antimatter, antihydrogen atoms (consisting of antimatter positrons, quarks, gluons and protons) is consistent with the proposal in the hereinabove theory that the collision times of pervasively colliding light quanta (particle-state, wave-state and particle-wave-state photons or light) traveling at the speed of light and primordial fundamental particles, such as electrons and quarks and their gluons, traveling nearly at the speed of light in the supremely tiny, dense and intense big-bang singularity of the universe, or those of later colliding light quanta and their therefrom created particles of matter and the subsequent collisions of the latter, including their collisions with light quanta, and their creations of other particles and composite particles of other matter in the post-big-bang initially or primarily [opaque] light quanta microsphere state of the universe, could have ongoingly in either of these states of the incipient universe, at least at a modest bandwidth of percentage rates, exceeded, or may in current laboratory experiments exceed, in speed the mutual annihilation time of naturally occurring or laboratory-produced matter-antimatter same particle species pairs and variably have disrupted, or disrupt, those types of automatic mutual annihilations within such a bandwidth of percentage rates of speed. Contact between thereby mutually disrupted and spatially displaced members of matter-antimatter same-species particle pairs would by such happenstance be prevented, which would prevent them from quantum-nature-predisposed mutual annihilation and subject the freed members of the pairs on a cosmic scale to collisions with other particle species of matter and antimatter as well as with light quanta. In order for CERN to have factory-created antihydrogen atoms, it would have had to have displaced, or separated, by a superspeed disruptive technical means the members of naturally occurring or laboratory-produced, still co-occurring, matter-and-antimatter same-species particle pairs from one another before the micro-time of their mutual contact and annihilation could have transacted, which would have then had allowed CERN to have collected and stored in isolation the antimatter particles in its antimatter factory system for manufacture of antihydrogen atoms. Since CERN can manufacture quantum antimatter particles and atoms in its antimatter quantum particle factory, it should be able to collide light quanta and normal matter quantum particles of different particle species at low, mid, high and extremely high energy magnitudes with them, as well as collide different antimatter particle species with one another at like energy magnitudes, and determine, know and catalog and index the energy and matter type outcomes of these collisions.
Footnote
Until 10-20-2023, where, in this comment, n means number and E means the exponent power of a number or set of numbers, I always thought and believed that E=mc2 translated in longhand to E = m x c2, as I was taught that nnE meant E was the exponent of the n it was adjacent or attached to and if it were not to be treated as such but was to be applied to nn, then the operation would be (nn)E and that nnE was interchangeable with n(n)E, with the transaction of (n)E to occur first in this context. I viewed an online audio-video lecture by a noted physicist on 10-20-2023 who distinctly, if not emphatically also, explicated that E = mc2 [in longhand] means E = mc x mc. The online cover page for his lecture showed this equation to be E = mc^2 -- the same as E = (mc)2 -- rather than E = mc2. I checked online for which was correct and saw that his was clarified as correct very most of the time, but in the tutorials that explained this equation, I did not hear it explained his way; however, it was verbally explained in them and not straightforwardly mathematically. I had to re-write an informal science narrative I had previously used this equation in because of this new information and am feeling shaky about it. My brother, who took all of the advanced math classes in HS, approved my understanding of the equation prior to my use of it in a previous, different informal science narrative I published online as a blog.
Supplement
Corrected and Updated
Physics of the Day, 11-27-2023
Yesterday I viewed an audio-video of a prominent physicist lecturing that in the early quantum time of the big-bang inception of the universe a symmetry of matter and antimatter particle pairs mutually collided, annihilated each other and created light, with a rare rate of exception. That rate of exception of escape from the mutual pair collisions and annihilations (proven to be the case in quantum particle collider lab experiments showing that matter-antimatter particles do occur in pairs and mutually collide and annihilate automatically as outputs from peak high-energy collisions and the destruction of various quantum particles) was an incidence of (circa) one in a million of the matter-antimatter particle pairs, which he said was the source of the matter of the universe and why the universe is not a universe of pure light, electromagnetic fields and light spectra (the spectrum of particle-wave photons). The conclusion, not the history and not necessarily the statistical exceptions, of his assertion, per se, must be wrong because the escaped particles from the said or any rate of failed matter and antimatter collisions and the therefrom failed mutual annihilations would necessarily have been the survival of each individual matter and antimatter particles situationally per failure event and cumulatively, for them all, in equal quantities, which means we should have an atomic-molecular universe founded equally on both mutually exclusionary matter and antimatter, or separate parallel universes, requiring first that matter and antimatter polarize and segregate rather than mutually annihilate upon contact, of one as well as the other form or genus of overall matter. However, our material, atomic-molecular universe consists of and was and is founded on matter quantum particles, with the exception that there are rare instances of antimatter quarks, in which quarks are the building blocks of the protons and neutrons making up the nuclei of atoms (atomic nuclei without which there could be no atoms, periodic elements, molecules and chemistry of any matter-based kind), and the CERN high-energy quantum particle collider facility (or LHC laboratory) can factory produce, preserve and store antimatter particles and maybe likewise experimentally collide them to observe and catalog what their cause-and-effect actions-reactions do or produce from individual-on-individual, beam-on-beam, or beam-on-individual, collisions of same or different particle species of them and matter particles.
The best explanation for violation of the matter and antimatter symmetry that resulted in our universe of matter (dominated by matter) and residue quantum antimatter, is the mathematical algebraic one, in which overall matter, including both matter and antimatter, is chiral, being cosmologically and categorically right- or left-handed, but with each of the two chiralities having an equal but opposite overriding positive or negative electrical, or such unknown other, supercharge, a matter versus antimatter genus supercharge, to and in addition to the electrical charge status of individual particles of matter versus antimatter. Extant matter and antimatter (physics-laboratory produced) have both positively and negatively charged particles and neutral-charge-status particles (particle subcharges in the contexts of hypothetical opposite chiral supercharges characterizing and distinguishing all matter from all antimatter) and the charges of corresponding matter and antimatter particles are opposite. I am uncertain and curious about what happens when neutral-charge-status corresponding matter and antimatter particles, such as neutrons and neutrinos, collide at peak high energies.
The mathematical, algebraic explanation dictates that, as a matter of mathematical compulsion and mathematical-physics circumstantially inherent predetermination, that violation of matter-antimatter symmetry pairs of mutually colliding and annihilating particles, produced by the extreme energy event of the extreme force state of the burgeoning, supremely dense and intense, tiny or very small singularity space of the big bang inception of the universe, right-handed chirality positively supercharged matter would mathematically naturally survive over left-handed chirality negatively supercharged antimatter in the therein mad-scramble, maelstrom and hell storm chaos of ubiquitously colliding matter-antimatter particle pairs. This is so because, in statistical reality, empirically mathematically, with that tiny-and-dense extreme-pressure space permeated with such high momentum particle pairs of matter and antimatter, some of the pairs would occasionally, ongoingly so, naturally collide, and in their being and streaking ubiquitously so close to one another, also ongoingly, collisions between the pairs, as well as with light spectra particles (created from the then mutual collisions and annihilations of the primordial matter-antimatter pairs), including high-energy light spectra such as x-ray and gamma-ray particles and beams, would occur at collision speeds that would disrupt, break up, pairs before they could transact their member-particle mutual collisions and annihilations and at an average rate determined by the volume size, temperature and pressure of the primordial quantum space of the incipient universe and the quantity, density, and speeds of the collisional matter-antimatter particle pairs, light spectra, and freed and free-flying individual matter and antimatter particles in that space. In the subsequent collisions of these, so to say, thereby consequently created ions of right-chirality matter and left-chirality antimatter, the final net effect and outcome would be:
positive matter x positive matter collisions = matter, positive matter x negative antimatter = antimatter, negative antimatter x negative antimatter = matter, summing to 2/3 matter + 1/3 antimatter, netting 2/3 matter - 1/3 antimatter = bottom-line net result 1/3 matter.
In physics, based on the empirical, historical cosmological record, positive matter x negative antimatter = zero-charge, that is, E = MC^2 output in electromagnetic energy particles of light, of one photon or more for one-on-one primordial particle collisions, possibly of matter and antimatter each quarks and electrons, or multiple photons or beams of them from multiple-on-multiple primordial matter-antimatter particle collisions. The extant matter and physics-laboratory-produced antimatter might be more complex and not the same in type or types as those at the inception singularity or post-singularity stage of the universe. There are now for both forms of overall matter, hadron-baryon and lepton families, and more, of quantum particles, whereas the fundamental particles are electrons and quarks and quarks' binding gluons, as quarks do not occur solo, and possibly also the Higgs boson. The others are cosmologically evolutionary emergent and derivative. Possibly, the primordial quarks have also morphed into the now family of 6 or 7 quarks, with the proposed most recently discovered quark being the "beauty" quark. I am also curious about what the results are or would be of quark-on-quark, electron-on-electron and quark-on-electron collisions for matter-matter, antimatter-antimatter and matter-antimatter particles and particle beams in physics high-energy particle colliders. I am as curious about same arrangements of Higgs particle collisions.
Mathematician Emilie Du Chatelet, long before physicist Albert Einstein'sequation E = MC^2 and apart from the inspirations of this famous equation, those of physicist Isaac Newton's equation F = MA (acceleration) and physicist Max Plank's equation E = hf, similar to his, missing Einstein's "^2" (acceleration or frequency squared), conducted an experiment, published and documented in the history of notable physics as well as has been taught in physics education, at least in Europe, that showed that the energy output of a descended or accelerated object or mass impact was the square of its velocity or mass and velocity (or acceleration or force of descent squared). She was a contemporary of Isaac Newton who challenged him. Had he intellectually engaged with her, as she invited him to do, quite possibly his said equation would have been F = MA^2, or even E = MC^2, or both. I'm sure that Einstein perfected the equations of his inspirational physics predecessors from having read mathematician Emilie Du Chatelet's physics-gravity experiment.
https://www.aip.org/history-programs/physics-history/teaching-guides/gravity-emilie-du-chatelet
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/emilie-du-chatelet/
Physics of the Day, 11-27-2023
Yesterday I viewed an audio-video of a prominent physicist lecturing that in the early quantum time of the big-bang inception of the universe a symmetry of matter and antimatter particle pairs mutually collided, annihilated each other and created light, with a rare rate of exception. That rate of exception of escape from the mutual pair collisions and annihilations (proven to be the case in quantum particle collider lab experiments showing that matter-antimatter particles do occur in pairs and mutually collide and annihilate automatically as outputs from peak high-energy collisions and the destruction of various quantum particles) was an incidence of (circa) one in a million of the matter-antimatter particle pairs, which he said was the source of the matter of the universe and why the universe is not a universe of pure light, electromagnetic fields and light spectra (the spectrum of particle-wave photons). The conclusion, not the history and not necessarily the statistical exceptions, of his assertion, per se, must be wrong because the escaped particles from the said or any rate of failed matter and antimatter collisions and the therefrom failed mutual annihilations would necessarily have been the survival of each individual matter and antimatter particles situationally per failure event and cumulatively, for them all, in equal quantities, which means we should have an atomic-molecular universe founded equally on both mutually exclusionary matter and antimatter, or separate parallel universes, requiring first that matter and antimatter polarize and segregate rather than mutually annihilate upon contact, of one as well as the other form or genus of overall matter. However, our material, atomic-molecular universe consists of and was and is founded on matter quantum particles, with the exception that there are rare instances of antimatter quarks, in which quarks are the building blocks of the protons and neutrons making up the nuclei of atoms (atomic nuclei without which there could be no atoms, periodic elements, molecules and chemistry of any matter-based kind), and the CERN high-energy quantum particle collider facility (or LHC laboratory) can factory produce, preserve and store antimatter particles and maybe likewise experimentally collide them to observe and catalog what their cause-and-effect actions-reactions do or produce from individual-on-individual, beam-on-beam, or beam-on-individual, collisions of same or different particle species of them and matter particles.
The best explanation for violation of the matter and antimatter symmetry that resulted in our universe of matter (dominated by matter) and residue quantum antimatter, is the mathematical algebraic one, in which overall matter, including both matter and antimatter, is chiral, being cosmologically and categorically right- or left-handed, but with each of the two chiralities having an equal but opposite overriding positive or negative electrical, or such unknown other, supercharge, a matter versus antimatter genus supercharge, to and in addition to the electrical charge status of individual particles of matter versus antimatter. Extant matter and antimatter (physics-laboratory produced) have both positively and negatively charged particles and neutral-charge-status particles (particle subcharges in the contexts of hypothetical opposite chiral supercharges characterizing and distinguishing all matter from all antimatter) and the charges of corresponding matter and antimatter particles are opposite. I am uncertain and curious about what happens when neutral-charge-status corresponding matter and antimatter particles, such as neutrons and neutrinos, collide at peak high energies.
The mathematical, algebraic explanation dictates that, as a matter of mathematical compulsion and mathematical-physics circumstantially inherent predetermination, that violation of matter-antimatter symmetry pairs of mutually colliding and annihilating particles, produced by the extreme energy event of the extreme force state of the burgeoning, supremely dense and intense, tiny or very small singularity space of the big bang inception of the universe, right-handed chirality positively supercharged matter would mathematically naturally survive over left-handed chirality negatively supercharged antimatter in the therein mad-scramble, maelstrom and hell storm chaos of ubiquitously colliding matter-antimatter particle pairs. This is so because, in statistical reality, empirically mathematically, with that tiny-and-dense extreme-pressure space permeated with such high momentum particle pairs of matter and antimatter, some of the pairs would occasionally, ongoingly so, naturally collide, and in their being and streaking ubiquitously so close to one another, also ongoingly, collisions between the pairs, as well as with light spectra particles (created from the then mutual collisions and annihilations of the primordial matter-antimatter pairs), including high-energy light spectra such as x-ray and gamma-ray particles and beams, would occur at collision speeds that would disrupt, break up, pairs before they could transact their member-particle mutual collisions and annihilations and at an average rate determined by the volume size, temperature and pressure of the primordial quantum space of the incipient universe and the quantity, density, and speeds of the collisional matter-antimatter particle pairs, light spectra, and freed and free-flying individual matter and antimatter particles in that space. In the subsequent collisions of these, so to say, thereby consequently created ions of right-chirality matter and left-chirality antimatter, the final net effect and outcome would be:
positive matter x positive matter collisions = matter, positive matter x negative antimatter = antimatter, negative antimatter x negative antimatter = matter, summing to 2/3 matter + 1/3 antimatter, netting 2/3 matter - 1/3 antimatter = bottom-line net result 1/3 matter.
In physics, based on the empirical, historical cosmological record, positive matter x negative antimatter = zero-charge, that is, E = MC^2 output in electromagnetic energy particles of light, of one photon or more for one-on-one primordial particle collisions, possibly of matter and antimatter each quarks and electrons, or multiple photons or beams of them from multiple-on-multiple primordial matter-antimatter particle collisions. The extant matter and physics-laboratory-produced antimatter might be more complex and not the same in type or types as those at the inception singularity or post-singularity stage of the universe. There are now for both forms of overall matter, hadron-baryon and lepton families, and more, of quantum particles, whereas the fundamental particles are electrons and quarks and quarks' binding gluons, as quarks do not occur solo, and possibly also the Higgs boson. The others are cosmologically evolutionary emergent and derivative. Possibly, the primordial quarks have also morphed into the now family of 6 or 7 quarks, with the proposed most recently discovered quark being the "beauty" quark. I am also curious about what the results are or would be of quark-on-quark, electron-on-electron and quark-on-electron collisions for matter-matter, antimatter-antimatter and matter-antimatter particles and particle beams in physics high-energy particle colliders. I am as curious about same arrangements of Higgs particle collisions.
Mathematician Emilie Du Chatelet, long before physicist Albert Einstein'sequation E = MC^2 and apart from the inspirations of this famous equation, those of physicist Isaac Newton's equation F = MA (acceleration) and physicist Max Plank's equation E = hf, similar to his, missing Einstein's "^2" (acceleration or frequency squared), conducted an experiment, published and documented in the history of notable physics as well as has been taught in physics education, at least in Europe, that showed that the energy output of a descended or accelerated object or mass impact was the square of its velocity or mass and velocity (or acceleration or force of descent squared). She was a contemporary of Isaac Newton who challenged him. Had he intellectually engaged with her, as she invited him to do, quite possibly his said equation would have been F = MA^2, or even E = MC^2, or both. I'm sure that Einstein perfected the equations of his inspirational physics predecessors from having read mathematician Emilie Du Chatelet's physics-gravity experiment.
https://www.aip.org/history-programs/physics-history/teaching-guides/gravity-emilie-du-chatelet
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/emilie-du-chatelet/
