CERN Physicists Find Key Piece of the Matter-Antimatter Puzzle
Now, we might be one step closer to explaining why there's an imbalance between matter and antimatter, an unsolved mystery in physics formally known as the charge-parity (CP) violation, or CP asymmetry. In a paper published today in Nature, researchers at the Large Hadron Collider beauty (LHCb) Collaboration at CERN, Switzerland, report the first experimental verification of the CP violation in the decay of baryons—fundamental particles that make up most matter in the observable universe. The results were announced earlier this year at the Rencontres de Moriond conference.
'Until recently, CP violation had only been clearly observed in mesons [or] particles made of a quark and an antiquark,' explained Xueting Yang, LHC physicist and study lead author, in an email to Gizmodo. 'This result shows that baryons—which are made of three quarks like protons and neutrons—can also violate CP symmetry.'
While a significant first step, the new finding still falls short of observing baryon asymmetry, which refers to that paradox of there being more matter than antimatter in the universe today. What Yang's team observed specifically was an instance of CP violation in baryon decay, or the slight difference in behavior between a baryon and its antimatter counterpart as the particle breaks down into smaller particles.
'Well, it's a small part of a much bigger puzzle—but you know, every part matters,' Sean Carroll, a theoretical physicist at Johns Hopkins University who wasn't involved in the new work, told Gizmodo in a video call. 'It's intrinsically interesting when you find a phenomenon that has never been observed before, but…maybe it will teach us something about why there are more baryons than anti-baryons in the universe.'
For the study, Yang's team took around nine years of data from observing the decay of almost one trillion beauty-lambda (Λb) baryons, the heavyweight cousin-particle of protons and neutrons. In about a mere trillionth of a second, beauty-lambda baryons and their antimatter counterparts break down into smaller parts, requiring the technical prowess of something as big as the LHC to capture.
From the data, the researchers sifted through the different interactions to pick out the ones of interest to them, namely the decay behavior of beauty-lambda baryons and their antimatter counterparts. 'If CP symmetry were true, you'd have exactly the same rate for these interactions,' Carroll explained. 'But it is violated, so you get slightly different rates.'
That rate was about 2.5%, a small but statistically significant difference—at least, enough for the team to start brainstorming ideas for how they'd like to build on this result.
'Studying how baryons are formed, how they interact, and how they decay is essential to understanding the fundamental forces of nature,' Yang said. 'This observation marks just the beginning. To answer why [the universe contains] more matter than antimatter, we need more sources of CP violation than the current [Standard Model of particle physics].'
The Standard Model—the theory that describes particle behavior with chilling accuracy—is both the magnum opus and the punching bag of particle physics. It explains everything so ludicrously well, while missing some huge chunks of known physical phenomena, such as gravity or dark matter, to name a few. And so, when the LHC came along, physicists expected it to achieve great things—which it did, and continues to do. But as with all great physics discoveries, it's a holy grail that'll take some more time to realize.
'We were, to be honest, a little bit disappointed that the Large Hadron Collider hasn't found any physics beyond the Standard Model,' Carroll said. 'But I think it's super important to keep looking. The LHC is a beautiful machine that has done amazing work—and yet, it hasn't quite taken us to the promised land. So it's another reminder that there are really big questions out there, and one way or the other we, as the human race, should be doing our best to answer them.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Concerned About Aluminum in Vaccines? Here's What the Research Shows
Real-world data from 1.2 million children offers strong reassurance. If you've ever paused at a vaccine ingredient list or felt confused while reading a vaccine insert, you're not alone. One ingredient that often sparks questions is aluminum, specifically aluminum salts used in some vaccines to help the immune system respond more effectively. But does the aluminum in vaccines pose a real risk to children's health? A new study out of Denmark, which tracked more than 1.2 million children over 24 years, offers strong reassurance: aluminum exposure from routine childhood vaccines was not linked to higher rates of autism, ADHD, asthma, or autoimmune disease. What is aluminum doing in vaccines? Aluminum salts aren't preservatives. They're adjuvants, something that helps certain vaccines work better by boosting the immune response. They've been used safely in childhood vaccines for decades. A real-world study with real-world relevance The concern about aluminum in vaccines isn't new. It's been used safely for decades in many non-live vaccines, like DTaP and Hib, to help the immune system respond better. The amount a child gets can vary a bit depending on which brand and version of a vaccine is used. That natural variation is actually what made this study possible. Researchers followed over 1.2 million children, tracking how much aluminum each child received from vaccines by age 2 (ranging from 0 to 4.5 mg total). Then, they followed up through age 5, and for some age 8, to see whether aluminum exposure was linked to (50 different conditions): Autoimmune disorders like type 1 diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, and celiac disease Allergic conditions like asthma and eczema Neurodevelopmental diagnoses like autism and ADHD So, what did they find? Even when kids received more aluminum, their rates of these conditions didn't go up. In fact, kids who received more aluminum had slightly lower rates of some diagnoses, like autism and ADHD. That doesn't mean aluminum protects against anything. It just that it's not harmful at the levels used in childhood vaccines. And here's a key point: for many of the outcomes studied, the data was strong enough to rule out even small or moderate increases in risk. What about concerns or limitations? Some people will likely still have concerns about the study, and it's worth being transparent about the questions that come up, even when the data is strong. No study is perfect or 100% generalizable. Here's what critics might argue, and some thoughts on rationale. It's not a randomized controlled trial (RCT). True, it's an observational study, not the 'gold standard' for proving causality. But an RCT would mean intentionally withholding vaccines from children, which would be unethical. This study used naturally occurring differences in vaccine aluminum exposure, which is the next best, and most ethical, option. Some confounders might have been missed. Always a possibility. But, the study controlled for a lot: income, preterm birth, birthweight, maternal conditions, and more. But no study can control for everything. Still, the patterns were consistent across subgroups and time periods, which helps strengthen confidence in the results. Diagnoses came from health registries, not medical record review. That's true, but Denmark's health registries are considered high quality, and any misdiagnoses or under-reporting would likely be spread evenly across all groups, meaning it wouldn't skew the results. Denmark isn't the U.S. That's fair. But both countries vaccinate against the same diseases, using many of the same vaccine components, just with slightly different schedules and formulations. The underlying science and biologic principles are the same. What this study actually adds This study doesn't tell us that aluminum is good. It doesn't claim to end the conversation forever. But here's what it does offer: Reassurance grounded in data, not dismissal. Parents have asked smart questions for years. This isn't about 'just trust us,' it's about finally having large-scale, high-quality data to help answer those questions with clarity and care. Real-world relevance. This isn't a theoretical model or a lab experiment. It's 1.2 million real children, followed over 24 years, across a variety of vaccine exposures, and the results were consistent. Stronger evidence than ever before. While past studies raised concerns based on small samples or extreme exposures, this one helps fill a major gap: what happens when kids get routine aluminum-containing vaccines, as recommended, in actual pediatric care settings? The answer: no increased risk for autism, ADHD, allergies, or autoimmune conditions. Here's what's key to understand: This is exactly why large, real-world cohort studies, like the new Danish one, matter so much. They track actual vaccine use, actual outcomes, and actual kids. Bottom line And maybe most importantly? This keeps the focus where it belongs: informed, compassionate decision-making. Not panic. Not pressure. Not shame. If you've ever paused at a vaccine ingredient list, wondered about aluminum, or felt caught between headlines and your instincts, this study is for you. It doesn't shut the door on questions. But it opens the door wider for answers that are actually backed by evidence. Looking for more details on the study, concerns about past research, and how aluminum in vaccines differs from other exposures? You'll find it all in this PedsDocTalk Newsletter.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Low Danube waters bring huge mayfly swarms in Budapest
STORY: :: Mayflies swarm the river Danube earlier than usual and in greater numbers :: Budapest, Hungary :: July 23, 2025 :: Gyorgy Kriska, Associate Professor, Eotvos Lorand University 'Since 2012 we have seen huge swarming in those years when the water levels are quite low. We think it is because the sun lights the riverbed more and the algae can breed more and that way the larvae find more food.' :: Researchers put up special blue lights to guide the mayflies, which get confused by city lights :: July 26, 2025 'What our lights are doing is that they keep them here, they don't let them fly above so they keep swarming around the lights, and often a swirl of insects form around the lights, which reaches the surface of the water and they splash into the water. Where the mayflies reach the water they place their eggs there. What we can achieve is that they stay in place over the water and the next generation is saved. They cannot go further up but at least their offspring survive.' :: Mayflies, a protected species in Hungary, live for less than a day after they hatch Hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions, of mayflies engage in a frantic rush to mate and reproduce before they perish within just a few hours. Mayflies live for less than a day after they hatch, and their abundance is closely connected to the health of the Danube. Danube mayflies usually start swarming in August, but this year it began in mid-July, and is expected to last for weeks. Danube mayflies, a protected species, did not swarm for about four decades as the river was too polluted. They returned in 2012 when the Danube became cleaner due to the construction of wastewater treating plants, he added. As mayflies swarm upriver after mating, they can be confused by city lights or the shadows of bridges, causing them to crash on the riverbank instead of laying their eggs in the water. To help them as much as possible, Hungarian researchers installed special blue lights on two bridges. Solve the daily Crossword
Medscape
4 hours ago
- Medscape
What to Know About Infusion Therapies in Parkinson's Disease
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Indu Subramanian, MD: Hi, everyone. This is Dr Indu Subramanian, from UCLA. I'm excited to have you join us at Medscape today. I'm delighted to have my friend and close collaborator, Professor Ray Chaudhuri, join us from Europe. He's a professor of neurology at King's College London and King's College Dubai. He's a groundbreaking clinician who's really changed the field of movement disorders and Parkinson's. He's introduced us to many novel therapies over the years and set the stage for nonmotor Parkinson's disease. It's been a pleasure to learn from him over the years. I'm excited to have him teach us about the many options in the infusion therapy world. Welcome, Ray. K. Ray Chaudhuri, MD, DSc: Hi, Indu. Thank you for having me. Infusion Therapies Subramanian: One of the things that we wanted to talk about today was infusion therapies, including subcutaneous foslevodopa/foscarbidopa. There's also been, as you know, a longstanding history that you've had exposure to of apomorphine pumps, Duopa pumps, and the patch. Chaudhuri: Infusion therapies have been a mainstay, shall we say, underpinned advanced therapies for Parkinson's for a long time. In fact, originally it was developed in the 1970s, but commercially, I think the first sighting of infusion therapy in Parkinson's, certainly in Europe and in the UK, came in the 90s with apomorphine: apomorphine infusion and injection. I understand apomorphine injection is available, and apomorphine infusion has recently been made available in the US. The subcutaneous field developed into infusion of levodopa, and there are two forms. The first one, commercially available now in many countries in the world, is the foslevodopa/foscarbidopa preparation, which is an approved drug of levodopa and carbidopa. When infused with this very small Vyafuser pump, it immediately gets converted to levodopa and carbidopa in the skin and is then absorbed and provides continuous nerve stimulations over 24 hours. Another form, is the NeuroDerm product, which is levodopa infusion with carbidopa, not foslevodopa/foscarbidopa. That's infused with a different pump system with two syringes, but that's not yet commercially available. The one that's commercially available is foslevodopa/foscarbidopa, and there is an accumulated experience of over 67,000 patients in the world now with the use of this product. It is novel in the sense that it's the first time ever levodopa has been made available to be given in a subcutaneous infusion format. It was previously available as intrajejunal levodopa with levodopa/carbidopa, Duodopa or Duopa. Now, it's available subcutaneously, and the great advantage is that it's much less invasive. It doesn't require a surgery, which you needed with the Duodopa. Third, it is probably the only treatment option at the moment that really effectively gives you a 24-h treatment option, so it gives you treatment option during the day and through the night. The other additional advantage of this very sophisticated pump is that it allows you to do the setting high and low. For instance, you can set the dosing at a high level during the day, depending on the patient's requirements, and then cut the dose down at night about 30%, which is your normal dopaminergic neurotransmission as it occurs during the sleep-wake cycle. It has great advantages also over the early morning OFF periods, which many other therapies do not really affect, because they're usually effective for only 14 hours. You don't get that cover all through the early morning periods when the patients are often OFF. They wake up with severe, dystonic pain, difficulty turning in bed or passing urine, urgency, and even depression or other nonmotor fluctuations that might occur. All of that seems to be helped by the use of foslevodopa/foscarbidopa. Infusion vs DBS Subramanian: Sleep is so important in our patients. I think we've really under-recognized that. You've been doing a large amount of work and even put a whole collection of articles together on sleep. It's just pretty amazing how little we have to offer patients in the sleep realm, and it can affect, presumably, cognition, daytime symptoms of motor and nonmotor issues, and quality of life both for the patient and their caregivers who are also not getting sleep. In the landscape currently of infusion therapy and deep brain stimulation (DBS), you have DBS available in the UK as well as other parts of Europe, along with these infusion therapies. You've had these infusion therapies for much longer than we've had in the United States, for example. Can you tell me a little bit about the decision algorithm if you have a patient in front of you, what type of patients do you send to DBS? Chaudhuri: Great question. Before I go into the DBS option, I think you mentioned a really important part, which is sleep. I think sleep is often under-recognized. It's part of this dashboard of Parkinson's, which we introduced, and we should be recommending at least 6-8 h of sleep per day because of the activation of the glymphatic system and potential effect on amyloid clearance. Any treatment option like foslevodopa/foscarbidopa, which is helping this early morning OFF period — and we've shown that in two long-term studies— actually helps with sleep, because it cuts down the fragmentation of sleep in early morning and, therefore, helps you have a good quality of sleep, which will then indirectly affect the issues around cognition and so on. That sort of study will need to be done in the future, but it's an enormously new development and a great advantage of this 24-h therapy. In relation to an algorithm, in addition to DBS and apomorphine, now we have foslevodopa/foscarbidopa, levodopa infusion into the jejunum with Duopa, but also LECIG gel, which is levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone infusion. That's also available in some countries in Europe. In terms of when, ideally, you would choose DBS, my algorithm would suggest the age parameter. Most centers would operate up to 70 years of age. After 70, it becomes a little bit tricky. It depends on the local surgeon's preference and the patient's condition. If you look at people below age 70, if they have clear dyskinesia as the dominant problem or pharmacoresistant tremors, in that situation, I would go with DBS first. That seems to be very effective and a quick fix. Now, the data would also suggest patients must be given an option of subcutaneous therapy. Some patients might want to try the subcutaneous option first, which also works for dyskinesia, and specifically works very well for early morning OFF and sleep. They may say: What if I try that first, and if that doesn't work, I can still have DBS? Over the age of 70, at this moment in time, foslevodopa/foscarbidopa infusion would probably be the first choice, given that apomorphine has dopamine agonist side effect issues, such as somnolence, postural hypertension, and the potential for impulse control disorder. I would think most people would go with the levodopa-based option, but there are, of course, situations where you might want to use apomorphine. If somebody's very profoundly depressed or is very anhedonic or apathetic, you might want to try apomorphine first because of it's antagonist effect, which helps with apathy and depression. Below the age of 70, if a patient has dominant problems with bad dyskinesia, troublesome dyskinesia, diphasic dyskinesia, ballistic dyskinesia, along with pharmacoresistant tremor, probably DBS is the first option. Such a patient should also be given the option of subcutaneous therapy, and they might actually choose subcutaneous levodopa or foslevodopa/foscarbidopa first because it also has antidyskinetic action after an initial period when the dyskinesias might be there. After a few weeks, there's a delayed effect, the dyskinesias tend to go down. If that doesn't work or if the patient develops skin issues or neuropsychiatric problems, DBS can still be an option. Over the age of 70, however, we would probably go for a subcutaneous option first. The majority of patients will probably choose levodopa, but apomorphine remains a potential option if the patient's severely depressed or apathetic. You want to give apomorphine and agonist properties a little try first. Skin Side Effects Subramanian: You mentioned skin issues. Could you describe those a little bit? Chaudhuri: With any subcutaneous anti-parkinsonian treatment, skin problems become an issue with chronic therapy. It was an issue with apomorphine. Apomorphine causes nodules and you have to be aware of that and take action so that you don't get these nodules or reduce the frequency. With foslevodopa/foscarbidopa, the situation is a little bit different because of the pH issue and possibly because there's some skin intolerance with levodopa. We had recently suggested that there are asymptomatic skin problems and symptomatic skin problems. Among the symptomatic skin problems, you can get redness or a little bit of inflammation around the area. Very rarely, that might develop into cellulitis. That's what we must prevent. You can take preventive actions. For instance, you can use a low pH soap water wash. You can change the needles daily. You can keep the skin area very clean. At the first sign of any inflammation or infection, use a combination of antibiotics and perhaps some steroids as well. These are potential steps you can take, but that's something to remember. I think with good management, it should not be a major issue. The other side effect problem that you might get is neuropsychiatric problems. We have noticed this, and it might be related to the overnight infusion. What one might have to do is cut down the dose of the overnight infusion — and in very selected, rare cases — even stop the nighttime infusions for a few days and then restart it. That tends to sort the problem out. In some cases, you might need to use a drug such as quetiapine. When you're selecting a patient, therefore, it's important to screen for this or keep in mind the use of nighttime infusion and the prospect of any psychosis issues. Subramanian: That makes sense. Preventing hallucinations by not infusing as much medicine or no medicine overnight could be an option. This type of therapy gives you some flexibility there, which sounds great. I think this has been really edifying to me. I love learning from you. Thank you so much for joining us in your busy day there. We appreciate viewers out there on Medscape joining us as well.
