@b4c50e1b Oh thanks! I better understand the issue now 😊

As a non-physicist, it can be difficult to evaluate the certainty associated to a model, and I did not realise that I was probably using one outside the validitity of its assumptions. I guess that the huge amount of energy involved could have hinted that maybe things are more complicated than I imagined 😊 

 @b4c50e1b May I ask something that bugs me out?

From what I heard, an antimatter blackhole is just a regular blackhole. So could we use a ridiculous amount of energy to create a lot of pairs of matter/antimatter particles, then somehow bundle the antimatter into a blackhole, and get its energy back as Hawking radiation and keep going? This seems to me like a ridiculously complicated thing to do, but at the end we would have converted energy into matter without having leftover antimatter: could something like that have happen after the Big Bang, leading to more of matter than antimatter?

(It's probably a very naive question: I imagine that I'm not getting something right there.)