The preprint develops a hypothesis linking baryon asymmetry to lattice structures, suggesting a new testing program.
The observed Universe contains far more matter than antimatter, commonly summarized by the baryon-to-photon ratio η_B ~ 6×10⁻¹⁰. This preprint develops a working hypothesis organized by an “ε‑lattice,” where a single small parameter ε ≡ √(m_μ/m_τ) ≈ 0.24385 supports approximate integer‑power relations q ≈ C εⁿ with order‑one coefficients. A central empirical claim is a “flavor determinant bridge” for the conserved baryon yield Y_B ≡ n_B/s at electroweak scales: Y_B ≈ K_B · D_d(μ), with D_d(μ) ≡ (y_d y_s y_b)/y_t³ and K_B = O(1). This relation is presented as a hypothesis plus falsifiable test program, supported by reproducible calculations, null tests, and structured monomial scans intended to constrain (or refute) spurion choices. New in v0.45 This version advances the program from an empirical bridge to a concrete mechanism class: Winding‑Enhanced Determinant‑Weighted Spontaneous Baryogenesis (WE‑DWSB): a CP‑odd rolling background supplies the sign of the asymmetry, while the CP‑even determinant sets the magnitude. Lattice‑anchored sphaleron tracking diagnostics and a dynamical efficiency factor κ_dyn, producing a timing/turn‑on constraint for electroweak‑epoch bias generation. ε‑valuation lattice extensions including charged leptons and a modular‑nome interpretation consistent with a single complex parameter τ = τ₁ + iτ₂ (|q| ≡ e-2π τ₂ ≈ ε). This deposit is a hypothesis + test program (not a validated baryogenesis theory). Reproducibility Unzip the release bundle and run: python code/reproduce_results.py This regenerates the headline ε‑lattice numbers, bridge checks, scans, plots, and a runlog. What’s inside paper/manuscript.pdf and paper/manuscript.md code/reproduce_results.py (Python) + data/inputs.json runlog + figures (generated) CITATION.cff and license files
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ricardo Maldonado (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: