The 1%

No, this is not about the 1% who want everything regarding finance and bailouts but rather the 1% difference between matter and antimatter and how it relates to reality, physics and the difference separating failure from success in all endeavors involving competition on planet Earth.

The seemingly inescapable fact that matter and antimatter particles destroy each other on contact has long puzzled physicists wondering how life, the universe or anything else can exist at all. But new results from a particle accelerator experiment suggest that matter does seem to win in the end.

The experiment has shown a small — but significant — 1 percent difference between the amount of matter and antimatter produced, which could hint at how our matter-dominated existence came about.

The current theory, known as the Standard Model of particle physics, has predicted some violation of matter-antimatter symmetry, but not enough to explain how our universe arose consisting mostly of matter with barely a trace of antimatter.

But this latest experiment came up with an unbalanced ratio of matter to antimatter that goes beyond the imbalance predicted by the Standard Model. Specifically, physicists discovered a 1 percent difference between pairs of muons and antimuons that arise from the decay of particles known as B mesons.

What's so interesting about this is how the matter/antimatter equation eerily parallels the razor thin difference between victory and defeat in all things relating to sports, business and nature.

For instance, the difference between Nadal and Djokovic in tennis is minuscule as is the difference between the Giants and Patriots in the Superbowl. In both instances, the degree of separation in terms of success or failure for all parties lies, in most part, not in physicality but rather in headspace and luck. He who is mentally stronger or more astute and has more luck will determine the victor in any contest between two evenly matched and healthy competitors. 

The same  applies to predator/prey relationships whereby a bumper crop of grass will support a larger population of rabbits, which, in turn, will benefit foxes, but at a later date, thus giving rise to constant fluctuation of the populations of the two. 

This constant shifting of fortune on such a grand scale based on such small differences in skill and luck regarding success or failure on any given contest brings up, in indirect fashion, an interesting question. 

What is the survivability rate of any civilization in the multiverse when the civilization in question overwhelms the environment in which it lives, something to consider as we mover further into the future, don't you think?