What do we know about Baryogenesis?

pdyxs

I'm part of a games studio who is currently building a game about high energy particle physics (essentially you control a quark and have to try not to get annihilated by anti-quarks), and we're thinking of setting it just after the Big Bang.

One idea we've been toying with is that you're essentially playing out the conflict between particles and antiparticles, and that you possibly play in a part in baryogenesis (the process that allowed the quarks to 'win').

As far as I can tell, baryogenesis is still pretty vague. We know that there's CP asymmetry between particles and antiparticles due to the Weak Force, and that this could lead to the imbalance, but from what I've read, the CP violation isn't really enough to cause the imbalance observed.

If this is the case, it's a really nice juicy mystery that we could approach in the game. If not, I'm hoping we can utilise whatever else is out there.

So my question is: what else, if anything, has been found out about baryogenesis?

mfb

I see negative effects on the physics knowledge of players.

That would require the own annihilation, as every other process involving particle changes. A very common process in the early universe anyway.

It happened, and it requires high energy. And, well... some other stuff.
As usual, Wikipedia gives an introduction.

Chronos

Actually, our knowledge of baryogenesis is rather advanced compared to other areas of cosmology. Much of this knowledge was contributed by particle physicists and has good experimental support. We have predicted primordial abundances of the elements with great accuracy. There remain a few quibbles over the relative abundance of some of the heavier elements [e.g., deuterium, lithium], but, the predictions are generally very good. We also have extensive knowledge of the energies required to produce most of the fundamental particles.

mfb

@Chronos: Baryogenesis happened before the formation of nuclei via fusion. The second process is well understood, the first one is not (at least not as good as other processes).