No, it's not just time-reversal; it's charge, parity and time reversal. You can't just time-reverse an electron neutrino and obtain an electron anti-neutrino, because the parity will be wrong, and so will the weak isospin charge and lepton number ("lepton charge").
Worse, the symmetries of the Standard Model are pretty complicated, especially when one goes from the local Lorentz or Poincaré symmetries x SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1) to the global continuous symmetries that capture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custodial_symmetry, (particlularly QCD) flavour symmetry, and scale symmetry. There are some further long-range approximate symmetries too, and those get worse with spacetime curvature. These all may have to be accounted for if one is time-reversing a region of the spacetime-filling fields of the Standard Model.
> So where did all our antimatter go?
Good question. Nobody can really tell you right now. Maybe there are galaxy clusters totally dominated by antimatter, maybe the antimatter is in a different Hubble volume, maybe it all annihilated into the cosmic microwave background and other ultra-low-energy relic fields (e.g. the cosmic (anti-)neutrino background) we haven't detected or discovered yet, maybe into primordial black holes, maybe in an extension of the Standard model to extremely high energies there isn't a matter-antimatter balance in the first place. One can write down an enormous number of different theories, and relax knowing that there is presently no evidence to favour or disfavour it, provided it's compatible with the experimental and astrophysical evidence we have today.
(I do like the idea, building on an idea arising from Wheeler's one-electron universe, that anti-electrons (in this case more than one) are screened within pion condensates ("maybe they're hiding in neutrons", vaguely), because that makes the symmetries even crazier, and particle physicists deserve that).
raattgift|1 year ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPT_symmetry
Worse, the symmetries of the Standard Model are pretty complicated, especially when one goes from the local Lorentz or Poincaré symmetries x SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1) to the global continuous symmetries that capture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custodial_symmetry, (particlularly QCD) flavour symmetry, and scale symmetry. There are some further long-range approximate symmetries too, and those get worse with spacetime curvature. These all may have to be accounted for if one is time-reversing a region of the spacetime-filling fields of the Standard Model.
> So where did all our antimatter go?
Good question. Nobody can really tell you right now. Maybe there are galaxy clusters totally dominated by antimatter, maybe the antimatter is in a different Hubble volume, maybe it all annihilated into the cosmic microwave background and other ultra-low-energy relic fields (e.g. the cosmic (anti-)neutrino background) we haven't detected or discovered yet, maybe into primordial black holes, maybe in an extension of the Standard model to extremely high energies there isn't a matter-antimatter balance in the first place. One can write down an enormous number of different theories, and relax knowing that there is presently no evidence to favour or disfavour it, provided it's compatible with the experimental and astrophysical evidence we have today.
(I do like the idea, building on an idea arising from Wheeler's one-electron universe, that anti-electrons (in this case more than one) are screened within pion condensates ("maybe they're hiding in neutrons", vaguely), because that makes the symmetries even crazier, and particle physicists deserve that).