Science Says We Shouldn't Exist...
Nature abhors imbalance. For every ying, there must be a yang. For every day, there must be a night. For every heads, there must be a tails.
And, for every particle, there must be an antiparticle. But the thing is that in physics, when two opposingly charged particles meet, they cancel each other out. That means, according to the laws of physics as we understand them, when the Big Bang happened, there should have been an equal amount of particles and antiparticles created. But that also means they should have collided and cancelled each other out, like a galatic math problem of adding a -1 and a +1, leaving us with a big, fat zero.
However, that didn't happen. We have proof too... just take a look at the mirror and you'll be gazing into the eyes of the proof.
So, what happened? The simple answer is, not even the best minds don't know. Yet. However, I'm sure that as more study is done and we learn more of how our universe works, some clever mind will come up with an explanation that checks all the right boxes.
Until then, its fun to read about the work that goes on. Read more HERE about why, according to science, we shouldn't really be here.
[Image source: Pixabay]
The only assumption we make when we make comments as such is when we are sure that whatever we've known or is documented in literature is a 100% truth. Paradox is, the only way that the former thought came to my mind is from the experience that I've had or learnt from others' experinces. They themselves might form a very small segment of reality in totality (which again is from what I know or have experienced). I know it sounds crazy but, c'mon worth something to give a thought to.