Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!news.szaf.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: Ernest Major <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Neutrality of matter; matter/anti-matter Re: origin of biological
 chirality?
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2024 10:34:20 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 73
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <vac9er$1baj7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v9rai1$22tkd$1@dont-email.me>
 <9u94cjl2fv6heurev0aa1mqmcrslj3evv6@4ax.com>
 <66c6e5b3$0$3692$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <vabnrr$195bi$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: {$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="41061"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KeAUJcnZ5FV1jdw32hXD4Oq16Hg=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vabnrr$195bi$1@dont-email.me>
	FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,SPF_HELO_NONE,
	SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
	smtp.eternal-september.org
Bytes: 6057

On 24/08/2024 05:34, Pro Plyd wrote:
> J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 18 Aug 2024 00:08:49 +0100, the following appeared
>>> in talk.origins, posted by Ernest Major
>>> <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk>:
>>>
>>>> A study has found that lipid membranes can be selectively permeable to
>>>> one or the other sugar or amino acid enantiomer. The study used 
>>>> membrane
>>>> models inspired by the membranes of modern organisms, so is not 
>>>> directly
>>>> relevant to abiogenesis. However it still raises the possibility that
>>>> membrane selectivity was the source of chirality in biological
>>>> molecules. One possible issue is does this effect require chiral
>>>> membrane lipids; if so it only move the question of the origin of
>>>> chirality from sugars and amino acids to lipids.
>>>>
>>> ISTM that this is similar to the "matter/antimatter"
>>> imbalance; neither is inherently more "natural" than the
>>> other, but one became more prevalent. And IIRC, the m/am
>>> imbalance is now assumed to be a matter of chance in the
>>> original ratio. I could; of course, be mistaken in that;
>>> it's been years since I followed it even casually.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.04.23.590732v2.full.pdf
>>
>> It isn't. The left-handed molecules can be converted into right-handed
>> ones, and vica versa, by taking them apart and reassembling them.
>> For matter/antimatter there is no such possibility.
>> Disassembling doesn't help,
>> because you cannot turn antiquarks into quarks.
>> Biological chirality is a triviality,
>> the matter/antimatter imbalance is a deep problem.
>> Where has all that antimatter gone?
> 
> Well, sorta agree with the analogy if one only
> is considering the ratio. But also agree with the
> observation about matter/anti-matter not being
> able to be turned into their opposites. Just
> happened to come across the following, another
> mystery of sorts...
> 
> https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/particle-physics/a-remarkable-conspiracy-why-is-matter-neutral-physicist-frank-close-explores-the-mystery-in-a-new-book
> July 28, 2024
> 
> Since the discovery of the proton and the
> electron in the 20th century, a mystery
> persists at the core of the atom: Despite
> belonging to completely different particle
> families and being radically different in
> size, the charges of these two particles
> completely balance each other out — enabling
> a universe where gravity dominates. But why?
> ...

Charge conservation is a consequence of "the global gauge invariance of 
the electromagnetic field". From the existence of beta decay it can be 
deduced that the charges on the proton and positron are the same (unless 
you're willing to postulate that neutrinos are charged). From the 
existence of electron-positron annihilation it can be deduced that the 
charges on the electron and positron are equal in magnitude (unless 
you're willing to postulate that photons are charged). From this we can 
conclude that the charges on protons and electrons balance each other out.

So we are left to rephrase the question as "why are there equal numbers 
of protons and electrons?" (Other charged particles decay to protons and 
electrons (and photons and neutrinos) reasonably quickly.

-- 
alias Ernest Major