Why do we see much more matter than anti-matter?
Here is a hypothesis as to the answer to this question. It is so radical that I hesitate to publish it. But is fits the data of our studies of anti-matter so well that I feel I must put it out there. I would be very interested in learning about experiments that could prove it wrong, so I challenge all of you to prove it wrong. Figure 1 shows how this would manifest.
We know that for anti-matter particles, time runs backwards from our point of view. Therefore, when the universe started at the big bang, anti-matter traveled backwards in time. So the anti-matter that was formed immediately started traveling backwards in time. Only at time zero was there any opportunity for anti-matter and matter to annihilate. That explosion of annihilation could have been the energy source for the big bang. After time zero, any matter that was left went forward in time, and the remaining anti-matter went backwards in time, so there is no longer any opportunity for annihilation. There is no need for there being a difference between matter and anti-matter.
There should be a whole universe of anti-matter happening backwards in time from our point of view. So, this means that it is in the past of the universe we know, and so it is what happened before the big bang.
We have been looking for the reason that there seems to be so much more matter than anti-matter in the universe. We have been looking for CP symmetry violations, slight differences in the behavior of Beauty Quarks, neutrino-less beta decay, and many other possible causes. But the realization that for anti-matter, time goes backwards makes all those other possible answers mute.