The theories of the rise and the development of the universe deal only with the matter, or matter-energy as we know it from our solar system, which the Earth and all life on it consists of. A different form of the matter is less considered or it is lost in the beginnings of the universe formation, as in the case of the Big Bang theory.
The material world, in which we live, in its substance of structural being is characterized as symmetrical in its physical expressions. It provokes the idea that if the material world is a universe entity which is symmetrical, then we can try to suppose that the symmetry is the characteristics of the universe. If we go further in our thoughts we can say that the given material entity is symmetrical to another, maybe the antimatter entity. And considering this symmetry let us suppose that the matter and the antimatter are in balance in the universe, and that there is a non-annihilating penetration between these entities The current opinion on the interaction of the matter and the antimatter , however, admits only the complete annihilation.
We know that the basic characteristics of the matter is gravitation. Then the basic characteristics of the antimatter should be antigravitation, which is logically the attraction between antimaterial objects.
Let us give an example of the symmetry of poles: We have a set of positive charges and a set of negative ones next to it. The charges inside the given sets repel each other but those two sets of charges attract each other. Analogically, we can have a set of material objects and a set of antimaterial ones. The points inside sets attract one another, so for the reasons of symmetry the two sets of the matter forms should repel each other.
Every theory must be supported by some direct or at least indirect evidence. Let us take an electron and put a question: Why was not there a collision between the electron and the nucleus of the atom although there were at least two good reasons for it - mutual gravitation and the attraction of electric charges negatively charged /negatively charged electron and positively charged atomic nucleus/? (The inside of neutron stars is probably a known exception. Their atomic nuclei are so dense because of their immense gravitation that the displaced electrons are then forced to collide with atomic nuclei through the annihilation of their charges.)
However, in extreme physical conditions the electron "jumps" like when we throw a tennis ball to a variously curved corridor, or even "stops" and demonstrates a corpuscule.
It seems that the electron is probably an antimaterial particle and for the given reasons it does not collide with the material nucleus of the atom. Laboratory apparatuses recorded particles which were identified as positrons (positrons are antielectrons). That raises a question. Why did the positrons get to the terrestrial apparatuses leaving a "long-lasting" interactive track there when on their way they should have collided with the electrons of the atomic nuclei of the matter in the space?
It seems that positrons are probably material particles and for the mentioned reasons they do not collide with the given antimaterial electrons. We can add to the two previous arguments that if there are reasons for a collision - it will happen, as the physical phenomena shows.
The observations of the spiral galaxies similar to ours showed that the central part of the galaxy with the radius of 10 thousand light years rotates around the galactic axis like a quasi-solid body. This quasi-solid body behaves as if it "obeyed" the kinematic equation of the solid body rotation, and did not "respect" Kepler's laws of the material bodies rotation round the gravitation centre, as it is in our solar system.
The behaviour of the central part of the galaxy evokes the impression that this star system is "reinforced by invisible bars" and forms a quasi-solid complex. What in the universe can create such a state among star objects?
It seems that apart from the interactive forces there should be the repulsive forces in action. That provokes the idea that there could be a "mixture" of material and antimaterial star objects. This "mixture" flows to the spiral branches which diverge, in some places even dramatically. This should be improbable when only one "gravitational" component is present. Such a situlation is well seen at the pictures of those spiral galaxies which we can observe from the direction of their rotation axis.
In the end it is appropriate to say that we would not have to talk of another form of the matter as of the antimatter in the current conception of this word, but as of the matter which is symmetrical to our matter, as if supposed existence is relevant. Also, we should find an appropriate name for it. As a voluntary captive of the beauty and the symmetry of the laws of the nature I composed this study because the one-matter asymmetrical universe seems to be a sad exception to me and the mutual "cannibalism" of the matter forms seems unnatural in its development.