Scientists finally admit the universe shouldn't exist

I’ve been saying it since the first time the Patriots won the Super Bowl. Most of the Democrats I know have been saying it since November 8th of last year. And now some of the world’s leading scientists are finally admitting it. The universe shouldn’t even exist.

The latest Crazytown theory coming from the world of particle physics is that the Big Bang should have produced the same amount of matter and anti-matter. And all of it should have been almost immediately destroyed. And yet… here we are. So what gives? A report from the Independent explains why scientists have been left scratching their heads.

The most elite scientists in the world are still struggling to find why exactly our universe didn’t destroy itself as soon as it came into existence. That’s what science says should have happened – but it clearly hasn’t, since you’re here reading this, as far as we know.

At the beginning of the universe, according to the standard model, there equal amounts of matter and anti-matter. The trouble with that is that they would each have annihilated each other, leaving none of the matter that surrounds us today.

Researchers have been frantically looking for some difference between matter and anti-matter that could explain why the universe is still around. But they have tried a range of different possibilities – that they have different mass, electric charge, or something else – but have found no difference.

That huge particle collider at CERN hasn’t produced much in terms of explaining all the wonders we were promised such as actual God Particles, but apparently they have been producing an admirable amount of anti-matter for study which they capture in some sort of magnetic field. (If, by “an admirable amount” you mean one anti-proton at a time.) This has allowed them to somehow determine that matter and anti-matter are exactly the same while being the complete opposite of each other. And if the Big Bang produced the same amount of each, it should have all been destroyed.

As always, I have an alternate theory. Once science gets vastly beyond the scale that we humans experience the world in, either fantastically larger or smaller, we seem to be guessing a lot and some of the rules we accept at “normal” scales cease to apply. The basic laws we take for granted, including gravity, tend to break down or act in strange ways. Particles turn into waves and vice versa.

So just possibly, things don’t work quite the way our current theories would have you believe. Maybe we’re completely off base. Heck, we still don’t even know how gravity works and can’t say much about it beyond that it’s a property of mass. And if these more recent theories about dark matter turn out to be true (still under debate) then we don’t even know that much because gravity doesn’t affect dark matter.

While we’re on the subject, at what point did we communally decide to accept these theories about what happened at the moment of the Big Bang? You astrophysicists don’t know that. You’re making guesses until you find one that your current formulas and models can’t immediately discount. Meanwhile, there are a couple of others which, frankly, are every bit as good as yours in terms of being proven.

First, this could all just be a huge computer simulation. Things don’t work the way you think they should because that’s not how the simulation was programmed or the programmer was just sloppy.

Or, second, maybe… Somebody … built this entire thing from scratch and there was no Big Bang. And that … Somebody… didn’t read any of your books and isn’t following your rules. Just something to consider.

Or maybe we’re all living on a single atom inside the fingernail of a giant. Huh… maybe I should give that legalized pot thing a second look.