Problem: The asymmetrical genesis problem concerns why the universe should have an abundance of matter over antimatter. Purpose: This paper shows how the baryogenesis and leptogenesis asymmetries may both be resolved. Approach: Design methods were used to develop a conceptual mechanics for the remanufacturing processes that transform particles in the decay processes. This was based on the structures for the photon, electron, antielectron, proton and antineutrino as previously identified as logical necessities for the beta decay process, and represented as a non-local hidden-variable design with discrete fields. Findings: The solution is given in terms of a mechanics that defines the transformation of discrete field structures in particles. The genesis problem is shown to be solvable. The mechanics describes pair production of an electron and antielectron from two initial photons, and subsequent remanufacture of the antielectron into a proton. It is predicted that two antineutrinos would be emitted, which are testable and falsifiable. The theory identifies that the role of the antineutrinos is to remove the antimatter handed field structures. The original electron and proton may bond to form a simple hydrogen atom, or combine via electron capture to form a neutron and hence heavier nuclides. The subsequent preponderance of the matter pathways in the genesis production sequence is also addressed and is explained as domain warfare between the matter and antimatter species. Originality: The concept of remanufacture of antielectrons into protons, with emission of antineutrinos, is novel. Extensions of the theory explain the nuclides. Consequently the theory explains from pair production up to nuclear structure, which is also original.
A deep foundational question is why the universe should have an abundance of matter over antimatter. This is the asymmetrical baryogenesis problem. The energy at genesis should have created equal amounts of matter and antimatter, which should be subsequently annihilated. While it is not impossible that there might be parts of the universe that consist of antimatter, and thereby balance the matter, neither is there any evidence that this is the case [
At present neither the Standard Model, quantum mechanics (QM), nor supersymmetry, can satisfactorily explain baryogenesis [
A characteristic of many of these theories is that they are particle-centric: they formulate the problem in terms of a new particle being required to carry each new interaction. This approach has several difficulties. It is not easy to empirically validate the existence of the particles. Smaller particles require the construction of higher energy, and hence larger, colliders. Even with existing colliders, the empirical evidence for certain particles, especially those of super-symmetry, is lacking where it might be expected to be evident. And the unreactivity of the neutrino particles, which feature in many of the theories, makes them intrinsically difficult to observe. Also, there is no single strong candidate solution to have emerged from the particle perspective, only many contenders. So there is no obvious ontological convergence towards a solution, other than a predominance of neutrino-based solutions.
Recent developments have suggested that the physics at the next deeper foundational level can be described by permitting particles to have internal functionality including the emission of discrete fields. A specific solution is the Cordus theory [
The purpose of this paper was to use this new foundational physics to attempt a solution to the problem of asymmetrical genesis of matter. This is worth attempting for several reasons. First, that existing theories have fared poorly and it is therefore worth looking more widely for solutions. Second, the Cordus theory has separately shown the feasibility of explaining the table of nuclides (stability behaviour H to Ne) [
This new theory purports to provide a solution based on physical realism, using finer-scale (covert) structures. This is similar to a hidden variable solution with discrete fields. Any concept based on hidden-variables will be challenged, and therefore a brief justification is provided as to why this approach should be considered scientifically sound. It is generally known that the Bell type inequalities [
Superficially, the Cordus theory might appear to be contrary to quantum mechanics. Actually that is unfounded, since the theory accommodates QM. It merely conceptualises a deeper physical mechanics where the stochastic nature of QM emerges at a coarser level. The conjectural starting point of the Cordus theory is speculative, but that hardly makes it inadmissible. It is true that the theory is unorthodox, but all theories have their speculative foundations, especially when they are young. The Cordus theory makes its starting premises explicit, and documents its assumptions in a series of lemmas. It achieves a strong internal logical consistency.
A further justification for seeking solutions wherever they may be found is the theoretical work showing that quantum mechanics is incapable of any further refinement [
The Cordus theory [
A systems engineering design method was used for the overall theoretical development. The systems part of the method ensures that the sub-theories are logically consistent with each other, and the design part involves taking the functional requirements (observed physics) and inferring the requisite attributes (internal mechanics of the phenomenon).
The discrete field model of the Cordus theory, specifically its HED mechanics (explained below) [
The core postulate of the Cordus theory is that all particles are one dimensional structures of finite length, and from their two ends emit discrete forces that travel down flux lines in three orthogonal directions (hence hyperfine emission directions, or HEDs). This combination of internal structure and external discrete field structures is called a particule. A larger theory has been developed by systematic and logical development of the implications of the conjectured structures. This has been used to explain wave-particle duality, unification, nuclides (H to Ne), and time [
The asymmetry problem is part of a larger genesis process. It is generally accepted that the genesis process starts with pair-production converting a photon pair into an electron and antielectron. Separate work has shown that the Cordus theory is able to describe how pair-production occurs at the fundamental level [
The input and outputs of the pair-production process is summarised in
The transformation from one type of particule to another, evident in the pair-production process, involves the reconfiguration of the patterns of discrete forces. These processes are described by a HED mechanics.
The Cordus theory is mostly a conceptual theory, nonetheless a formalism exists for representing the discrete force arrangements of particules and predicting how those discrete forces may be remanufactured to create different particules. This is termed the HED mechanics.
The HED mechanics is a set of rules for the manipulation of discrete forces. These rules arise naturally from a core principle that a particule is defined by the pattern of discrete forces it emits, and therefore changes to the discrete forces cause the particule to change its nature. The pattern of discrete forces is represented in HED notation, which simply indicates the number of discrete forces in each of three orthogonal spatial directions
1) The HED mechanics require the discrete forces to be conserved, rearranged, or even transformed, during transmutation and decay processes. Thus all discrete forces have to be accounted for, though they can be changed into other types as the annihilation theory shows.
2) The HED mechanics allow a charge- and hand-neutral complex of discrete forces to be added to any parti-
cule. This neutral complex comprises
energy. It is analogous to QM’s idea of a vacuum fluctuation. Note that neither a single discrete force (say)
3) The structure
The application of HED mechanics to a particule, or assembly of particules, is best understood as a remanufacturing process. The discrete forces are permitted to change to other axes (HEDs), and separate/combine into other groupings, and thereby redefine the identity of the particule. The HED mechanics does for this theory what Feynman diagrams do for 0-D points, the main difference being that the latter does not track the discrete fields.
In the conventional narrative of physics, the asymmetrical baryogenesis problem is formulated as a need to bias the pair production process into the electron branch as opposed to the antielectron. However, here we make a conceptual departure by reformulating the problem as the need to dispose of the un-wanted matter-antimatter species after it is created, and remanufacture the antielectron into something different. If the anti-matter hand of the antielectron can be stripped out, then a matter-dominated universe would arise. The question is how the antimatter hand might be removed, and what the antielectron might change into.
A core proposition of the Cordus theory is that matter and antimatter are differentiated by hand, and that hand corresponds to the sequence of emission of the discrete forces [
The Cordus theory also proposes that any particule is defined by its discrete force arrangements. This means that if some process rearranges the discrete forces, then that also changes the identity of the particule. Again, the
beta decays are a typical example, e.g. where the proton is converted into a neutron. It is also possible to convert one type of discrete force into another, as is shown in the Cordus theory for pair production [
Now, the asymmetrical genesis problem has been rephrased as a need to change the species hand of the antielectron, and the neutrino has been identified as having the ability to remove handedness. Is it possible that the neutrino species are involved in remanufacturing the antielectron? If so, what method is there to predict how such a process works, and what its by-products would be? The HED mechanics answers these questions, and identifies a specific route whereby the antielectron may convert into a proton. The HED mechanics makes the specific prediction that the waste antimatter hand is discarded in two output antineutrinos. This is significant: being able to predict the process a priori and with a high-degree of specificity cannot be done with QM or Feynman diagrams.
A number of options were explored using the HED mechanics. At this point we have discovered only one production route that solves the genesis problem. The explanation follows.
Start with pair production, where the electron
Note the use of underscore to denote antimatter species, superscript for negative charge, and subscript for positive. Now add discrete forces: the energy equivalent of an additional two photons in the form of another
electron-antielectron bolus
cuum fluctuation effect or photons (the theory is not specific on this point). These structures are justified in prior work [
Now bring the discrete force pairs (arrows) into the antielectron and expand them to create a transitional structure O:
Note the branching assumption that it is the antielectron that transforms, not the electron―we explain why later. Intermediate structures like this are unstable since they have discrete forces of mixed hand (matter-anti- matter) and are unbalanced, other examples being the W and Z bosons [
By observation of the antineutrino structure
However this is not quite done, because other work [
Note that the implicit part is
To sum up, the Cordus theory for genesis proposes that eight photons (possibly nine depending on the identity of the z) are remanufactured into an electron, a proton, and two antineutrinos. This prediction may be testable and falsifiable. The overall process, including the initial pair production, is shown in
However, there is still a question that must be addressed, which is why the production processes were biased to remanufacture the antielectron rather than the electron.
This theory starts with the production of an electron-antielectron pair, after which the antielectron is remanufactured. By why the antielectron? Why were electrons not remanufactured to antiprotons, as in
instead? While the HED mechanics solves the problems of how the asymmetry arises, and where the antimatter has gone to, there is a deeper question: what switched the production process to the matter route? We anticipate this may be answered in terms of warfare between the matter-antimatter species. Under this scenario, both production processes were initially at work. We imagine an initial extraordinarily energetic photon-pair colliding and producing an electron and antielectron, which then radiated further energetic photons. However, these photons would not have been able to propagate away, since there was no fabric [
With both streams of the remanufacturing process active, electrons and protons would have been created, alongside antielectrons and antiprotons. Any mixing across the species would have further annihilated back to photons. Those photons in turn were available to feed back into the production processes again, providing they were still energetic enough. Once some matter and antimatter particules had formed they would produce handed discrete forces and propagate those out, producing a fabric [
In this scenario, domains of matter and antimatter formed, being multiple separate volumes of space where one of the hands dominated. Generally we would expect that these domains would be geometrically symmetrical with respect to each other. There would have been a stage of domain warfare as the domains aggregated, broke up, and forcibly converted parts of opposing domains. Perhaps the geometric symmetry broke down, so that the matter and antimatter domains were not the exact mirror images of each other. There are several possibilities for how the geometric asymmetry might arise: external perturbation from outside the universe; a random event in an increasingly large and disorderly system, i.e. a consequence of growing complexity; a natural oscillating dominance between the two species that was frozen in as the system expanded and cooled, i.e. the proto-universe was flipping between matter and antimatter dominated states initially. This last idea of frozen domain warfare is our currently preferred model.
Continuing this scenario, the matter fabric obtained the edge in supremacy, and grew that to dominate the emerging cosmos. This fabric then controlled which branch the subsequent remanufacturing process took, and thus antielectrons were converted to protons, rather than electrons to antiprotons. Thus the proto-universe became dominated by matter, rather than antimatter. The cascade of formation-annihilation would have produced neutrino-species, and expelled them outward, thereby creating the fabric. A cloud of photons would have followed, thus reducing the energy available for genesis. Eventually the genesis photon cloud would be too cool and lacking in density, and the formation of matter would abruptly cease.
According to this theory, the outward expansion of the universe has reduced the fabric density, to the point where the density in the current epoch is insufficient to convert antielectrons into protons. So the antielectrons from the pair production process are allowed to exist at this stage, whereas in the early universe they would have been converted to protons.
Looking at the equation
What this means is that the proton could unravel back into a positron and photons, with the right kind of inducement by antineutrinos. This prediction may be testable and falsifiable. This result also implies that proton decay would not be fundamentally random, but rather a result of a specific coincidence of antineutrinos. A HED analysis suggests that presupplying the proton with two neutrinos has no effect, i.e. the manufacturing processes are highly asymmetrical. Another possible process is direct decay of the proton:
Thus the proton may spontaneously decay into an antielectron, two neutrinos, and two photons. Decay in the Cordus theory is thought to be initiated by perturbation from the discrete forces of the fabric. In which case the spontaneous proton decay would appear to require a strong antimatter fabric (see next section) to initiate the process. This fabric no longer exists, and hence the proton may be relatively stable against this remanufacturing process, in our universe.
The genesis production sequence, as predicted by the Cordus theory, is shown in
field structures of the photon, i.e. the evanescent field, and explain within one logically consistent theory how these are manufactured into the matter nuclides.
This genesis process is therefore conceptually simple: two initial photons are converted into an electron and an antielectron. These radiate photons. The antielectron receives more photons, the field structures of which are used to form a larger structure that re-assembles into a proton and two antineutrinos. The antimatter hand of the antielectron is carried away by the antineutrinos. The remanufacture process initially had two balanced work- streams, converting antielectrons into protons, and electrons into antiprotons. However the process was biased into the matter production stream, perhaps because the two process streams oscillated in their dominance and this was frozen-in as the system cooled.
The original electron and proton combine to form a simple hydrogen atom. The antineutrinos have almost no reactivity with matter, so they simply escape the scene. This is fortunate as the model predicts that antineutrinos can denature a proton. The antineutrinos produced at the original genesis of the universe will now mostly be at the outer edge of the universe, having got into motion before the massy particules. Finally, note that production paths for the neutron are already known in the β decays. There is also a Cordus theory that anticipates how these processes work at the level of discrete forces [
Taken together, the Cordus theory offers a complete set of forward production processes for electron, proton, and neutron, through to the nuclides. The remanufacturing processes for matter are shown in
The significance is that we do not need to worry about the asymmetry of baryogenesis. Where has all the antimatter gone? Hiding in plain sight, having been remanufactured into the matter baryons themselves.2 This is also a parsimonious solution as not only does it explain asymmetrical baryogenesis, but asymmetrical leptogenesis is automatically taken care of too, since the antielectron is consumed in the process.
This work makes several novel contributions of a conceptual nature. The first is the identification of a process for remanufacturing an energetic antielectron into a proton and two antineutrinos. The idea itself is a novel contribution, which has not previously been fielded. Another novel contribution is the HED mechanics, with which it has been possible to determine a plausible set of remanufacture mechanics. A third contribution is the identification of the functionality of the neutrino-species. They are found to remove matter-antimatter species hand, and therefore have a crucial role in the genesis production sequence. While neutrinos have featured in other baryogenesis scenarios, they have not had any role like this. In addition, the proposed production process itself is detailed, and the inputs and outputs are predicted, which makes it potentially testable and falsifiable.
A fifth contribution is that this process accounts for both asymmetrical baryogenesis as well as leptogenesis. This is a parsimonious solution: by comparison other theories need additional mechanisms for the two asymmetries. A sixth contribution is the identification of frozen domain warfare being a possible deeper mechanism for the asymmetry. This is a conceptually simple and efficient explanation, and obviates the need for elaborate mechanisms or coincidences. A seventh contribution is identification of the conditions under which the proton may decay. While the idea of proton decay is not new, the prediction that it is susceptible to impact by two antineutrinos is a novel contribution and one that also may be tested and falsified.
Another novel contribution is the breadth of the theory. It explains the whole process from the mass-energy equivalence of pair production, through to the preponderance of matter over antimatter at genesis, and onward to nucleosynthesis of the nuclides and their decay processes. All these process can be represented in part by other theories, but not in an integrated solution for the whole process.
The implications, if this theory is correct, is that the matter-antimatter asymmetry of genesis is explainable as the remanufacture of the antielectron into the proton. Importantly, this does not require any new particles or new forces, unlike most of the competing theories. All it requires is a plausible set of assumptions in a covert-structure design. Another implication of this theory is that the asymmetries in the baryogenesis and leptogenesis processes are conjoined. This is in contrast to the conventional perspective that treats them as independent.
The corollary is that the Cordus theory is shown to be capable of profoundly novel solutions for both fundamental physics and cosmology. It is relevant to note that the Cordus theory has achieved not only a solution for asymmetrical genesis, as shown here, but also a comprehensive and logically consistent set of explanations for a wide variety of physical phenomena, including wave-particle duality, unification of forces, annihilation, decay, the nuclides (H to Ne), among many other phenomena. All those are ontologically problematic for conventional physics. If the theory is true, then a radical revision is necessary in foundational physics, the deeper reality is deterministic after all [
Taken together with other developments, the Cordus theory offers a complete set of forward production processes from the energy of the evanescent field of the photon [
While the theory has high coherence (internal validity), and provides an excellent fit to empirical data (e.g. for the nuclides [
What has been achieved here is a novel alternative conceptual theory for the asymmetry of matter over antimatter in the universe. The development started with the basic Cordus proposition that particles are not 0-D points but have a distinct internal structure with two ends and discrete external fields. This leads to a theory for electron-antielectron pair-production, showing how the structures of the photon can be reassembled into an electron and antielectron [
To answer the question identified at the outset: why is there more matter than antimatter in the universe? Our answer is that the initial genesis process converted energy into equal quantities of matter and antimatter, in the form of electrons and antielectrons (positrons). It is proposed that a second process converted the antielectrons into the protons, and the waste antimatter component was carried off by antineutrinos. Therefore according to this interpretation, the apparent asymmetry of baryogenesis is because the antimatter is hiding in plain sight, having been remanufactured into the matter baryons themselves.
All authors contributed to the creation of the underlying concept, development of the ideas, and editing of the paper. DP created the drawings.
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this article. The research was conducted without personal financial benefit from any third party funding body, nor did any such body influence the execution of the work.