Quote Originally Posted by mojo
My only critique is that IF the universe started as an idealized point mass (not even sure how absurd that is), then the notion that it was rotating is absurd. A thing with no measurable length dimension cannot be said to be rotating in any meaningful way.
I suppose it could be rotating at infinity rps. Meaningful? Well no, not to us, but I'm thinking of an ice skater spinning and stretching her arms out... as the universe expands, the rotation slows... during the EW epoch, the universe was tiny, but not a singularity... rotation can be meaningful in this world, and therefore so too can intertial forces. Before then, who knows? I expect the universe to be rotating faster and faster as we go closer and closer to the big bang. That is, of course, assuming that the torus model, which I particularly like, is incorrect. In this model, the big bang is merely the centre of the universe, which is already rotating. Expansion is merely motion through the geometry of the universe, driven by outward pressure from the central singularity, and accelerated by inertial forces, which we call dark energy. I like this model more than the problematic ever-expanding model.

Which is true, but doesn't address, "Why, of all the stuff that's left, is there ANY matter, and not just energy?"
Did you not like the answer "probability"? I have another potential solution... initial conditions of matter vs antimatter were an odd number. If one particle of matter survives, along with all the energy that's left over, then we still have an interaction. There is a universe. Perhaps the universe as we know it "grew" from one solitary matter particle.

idk, but in a truly random world, it seems statistically unlikely that with such large numbers of particles, there would be an exact match. So perhaps the probability answer is the easiest to digest.