I've recently seen that space is or could be a quantum vacuum full of particles like matter and anti-matter appearing and possibly colliding causing in theory the same effects that dark energy has. My question is could Dark energy or dark matter be a left over waste product of matter/anti-matter collisions?
[Physics] Could anti-matter collisions be or make dark matter
antimatterdark-energydark-matter
Related Solutions
The temperature 2.73 K is not calculated, it is measured. The cosmic microwave background (CMB) has the properties of a blackbody radiation at the temperature 2.73 K. It is based just on the measurement of CMB, no calculation of dark matter or dark energy is involved.
Temperature does not simply depend on mass or gravity. Temperature is a quantity which in a lot of situations is difficult to define. For example a black hole can be extremely massive and have huge gravity, but the black body radiation from such a black hole is extremely cold. If there is nothing falling into the black hole, there won't be any other radiation.
The dark energy particles (if dark energy is made up of particles) do not interact electromagnetically or strongly (and maybe not even weakly), so they play virtually no role in our discussions about what we call "temperature of the universe".
We know basically nothing about dark energy, so it also is not included in our definition of temperature.
I want to start by clarifying what M-theory is, in relation to string theory, just so the context of my answer will be understood. These days, "string theory" encompasses five ten-dimensional superstring theories, the 11-dimensional M-theory of membranes, 26-dimensional bosonic string theory, "supercritical strings" in more than 10 dimensions, and other topics too. But the first six theories are the core of string theory as physics, and they have a lot of interrelations. In certain limits, the strings of one theory become equivalent to the strings of another theory. For a while, it was thought that M-theory would provide a unified description more fundamental than the five superstring theories, but for now, it's just another corner of the web of interrelations.
The next thing to clarify is that to apply string theory as a description of the world, you need to be even more specific than picking one of the six theories. You might choose to work with "heterotic E8xE8 strings", but then you'll still need to choose which ten-dimensional space-time those strings inhabit. Generally that's a matter of choosing a six-dimensional "Calabi-Yau manifold" as the shape of the six spatial dimensions that we don't see. Your model of the world might be E8xE8 string theory on M^4 x CY6, where M^4 is four-dimensional space-time, and CY6 is the specific Calabi-Yau space.
So having clarified a little how string theory is used as a physical theory... String theory models of physics, including those from its M-theory corner, are definitely meant to include dark matter and dark energy. But it doesn't usually work the way you suggest. In the vast majority of such models, dark matter is just another type of matter in this universe, and dark energy is vacuum energy, from quantum fluctuations in empty space.
The closest I can come to your prescription is as follows. There is a branch of M-theory called heterotic M-theory, in which the 11-dimensional space-time is bounded by two 10-dimensional spaces. It's like a sandwich, the two 10-dimensional spaces are the slices of bread, and the eleventh dimension is the thickness of the sandwich. These two spaces on the boundary are like two literally parallel universes, each with its own internal matter and forces. But they can interact gravitationally, because gravity can cross the eleventh dimension.
So in principle, one could have a model where the stars and galaxies of the visible universe exist in one of those boundary spaces, and the "dark matter" is matter in the other space, which because of shared gravity, has gathered around the places over there, corresponding to the galaxies over here. Accounting for dark energy as a gravitational interaction between the two spaces is harder, but it does seem to be a standard hope in the ekpyrotic model of bouncing universes, that the accelerated expansion which is attributed to dark energy, can be obtained in such a way.
Best Answer
A "left over waste product" is matter, too, and it must be composed of something, of some particles allowed by the laws of physics. So labeling something as "waste" doesn't really answer any question about the identity of dark matter.
Moreover, most of antimatter has annihilated with the ordinary matter into photons. In fact, any product of the annihilation must be sufficiently neutral and in this sense similar to photons. Established science as we know it only allows photons and (much less likely to be created) gravitons as the final products of annihilation. But of course that Beyond the Standard Model theories of physics do allow new particles, like neutralinos, and they may be produced in pairs by annihilation of matter with antimatter, too. In fact, it's a part of the most standard theories of dark matter that these particles, matter, and antimatter used to be in equilibrium once and all the possible reactions were occurring at a nonzero rate.
Photons cannot be dark matter. Dark matter must be sufficiently massive to "sit" in the halos of galaxies. Photons always move by the speed of light and escape so they're no good for the explanation of the structure of galaxies. Even massive but very light particles such as neutrinos are known to be bad as an explanation of "most of dark matter" because they're still too fast (too "hot"). Most of dark matter seems to be "cold dark matter" – the particles are heavy enough so that they still move by speeds much slower than the speed of light.
I noticed that you used the term "waste product of collisions" rather than "the product of annihilation". Elastic collisions don't create any other "waste products", by definition. Inelastic collisions may produce additional particles one might call "waste products" but again, it tends to be photons or similarly neutral particles, so nothing is really changed by this change of "annihilation" to "collision".