Dear Tianyou Xie,

You ask a fascinating question.  Sadly, regarding the actual genesis of leptons, quarks and hadrons, currently all we can do is to propose and explore mathematical models. The hope of all physicists is that the actual theory used by nature will be "discoverable", and in some sense "testable".

With that said, here are a few thoughts:

When thinking about the genesis of (standard model) particles, one must also wonder about the chiral oscillation of those particles which makes possible their (apparent) interaction with a "Higgs-type" field. What causes this extraordinary interaction (by leptons and quarks) with this primordial condensate of weak hypercharge?

The existence of such an interactive condensate (Higgs field) now seems to be accepted (by many) as a fact of physics. Another apparent fact is that such interaction is modeled very neatly by the Higgs mechanism. However, explaining such {genesis, oscillation, interaction} seems to require something beyond "standard model" assumptions. But as we know, early attempts to reach beyond such standard assumptions have stalled; crude preon theories were discarded, string theories got tangled, and otherwise sensible researchers now appeal to the multiverse, trying to believe that things work the way they do because we live in a happy permutation of possibilities.

Such developments provide motivation to look for more testable models.

One which we currently explore involves invisible, gravity-responding sources (dark mass) arising from a non-homogenous distribution of that condensate of weak hypercharge (Higgs field).

To this condensate of primordial charge we add two simple assumptions. Since almost everything spins, it's a small step (1) to inject angular momentum into this (non-homogenous) distribution of primordial charge, and then (2) to allow for the quantization of this angular momentum.

Which raises the possibility of quantized vortices of (in) this gravitating source.

If we then use such quanta as the primitive particle in a new spin on preon theories (see Don Lincoln's "Inner Life of Quarks" [1]), then follow something like Yershov's scheme [2], we come up with surprising foundations for the standard model of particle physics.

Motivation to explore such ideas comes from the chiral oscillation of Dirac's electron. This flipping between left and right hand states (the phenomenon which makes possible a Higgs-type mechanism) suggests a closer look at the superposition of those Weyl spinors which Dirac used to make his model work.

The idea is that these primitive Weyl spinors link our standard model with phenomena by which energy is bound and quantized. And that these phenomena involve Planck-scale energies and lengths (cf. a Planck-scale version of quark confinement).

Notice that if Dirac's pairs of superposed Weyl spinors are in fact clusters of some ultimatonic, Yershov-type preon (quantum of angular momentum, bound into an invisible gravitating condensate) then some kind of Higgs mechanism would be expected -- polarized clusters of quanta of a condensate, interacting with that condensate. The more structure, the more interaction. The more interaction, the more inertia.

In brief, with Dirac's electron as a superposition of Weyl spinors, and with Weyl spinors as polarized clusters of quanta of bound angular momentum (preons), the interaction of such preons with their Higgs field makes possible the chiral oscillation required by the Higgs mechanism.

Of course, such a re-working of particle genesis has implications.  For example, if the permittivity and permeability of free space were dependent on the distribution of this primordial condensate, we'd need to adjust some assumptions about cosmological redshift.  And if these spinning quantizations (of that condensate) were to be a Planck-scale source of torsion, then Einstein-Cartan theory becomes more interesting.

Thanks for the question!

Nigel

[1] Don Lincoln, "The Inner Life of Quarks",

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-inner-life-of-quarks-extreme-physics-special/

[2] Yershov (2002-2008), 

http://arxiv.org/find/physics/1/au:+Yershov_V/0/1/0/all/0/1

NN

Both C violation as well as CP violation are necessary conditions.

Consider a baryon number violating reaction X --> Y + B, then Γ(X --> Y + B) is the same as Γ(Xbar --> Ybar + Bbar) when C is conserved. Hence C violation is necessary for generation of a baryon asymmetry which is an excess of baryons over antibaryons.

Why CP violation is required? Consider a decay X -->qL qL. Then if CP is conserved, we get, Γ(X --> qL qL) = Γ(Xbar --> qRbar qRbar), therefore,

Γ(X --> qL qL) + Γ(X --> qR qR) =  Γ(Xbar -->qRbar + qRbar) +Γ(Xbar --> qLbar qLbar).

Therefore CP violation is also necessary to generate excess of baryons over antibaryons.

One shouldn't confuse baryogenesis with matter/antimatter asymmetry. Baryogenesis is the formation of baryons-and antibaryons-from quarks and gluons and doesn't have anything to do with CP violation as such.

CP violation is-one-of the conditions required to describe how from baryons and antibaryons one can get an excess of either. 

Leptogenesis doesn't require CP violation either-the asymmetry between leptons and anileptons requires, at least, CP violation. 

Yes, but baryons and anti-baryons cannot be created exactly equally before recombination starts. Then they will completely annihilate each other. We will be left with just CMBR after recombination. At the very primordial epoch (before recombination era) an asymmetry (nb-nbbar)/nphoton approximately 10-10 is required to explain existing cosmological structures; such as galaxies, clusters, filaments, sheets...

Once more: matter/antimatter asymmetry-that can lead to structure formation of matter-is independent of how baryons and antibaryons form. Nor is it true that that only radiation will be left, if spacetime isn't flat.

Any symmetry operator O which commutes with the Hamiltonian and which reverses the sign of Baryonic current J0B as OJ0BO-1= -J0B must correspond to a broken symmetry, otherwise the asymmetry will vanish. As a consequence both C and CP must be broken.

There are other possibilities. The one I refer to most often is the finding of Richard Feynman that antimatter goes backward in time.

Routinely particle pairs are produced mater and antimatter. Over a long time the antimatter components may have drifted backward in time leaving the leptons and baryons we have now with no violations at all.

It is suggesting that there is an antimatter universe receding into the past.

CERN has done research with neutral Kaons finding that there is an asymmetry in the decay rates between the Kaons and Anti Kaons. A number of explanations have been offered. The one I prefer is that the asymmetry can be made symmetrical by introducing a small time displacement to account for the bias of the laboratory forward in time.