**Abstract and Introduction**

Identified matter-antimatter asymmetry mechanisms have indicated that predominance of matter over antimatter results from ongoing processes in the present [1], not from events in the distant past in the early universe. With space-time quantization in binary mechanics (BM) [2], quantum mechanics (QM) time-development operators with infinitesimal increments in position or time were no longer applicable mathematically. Hence, four

**bit operations**-- unconditional (U), scalar (S), vector (V) and strong (F), were defined based on relativistic Dirac spinor equations. Since results depend on bit operations order [3], a major research objective is to determine the one and only physically correct bit operations order. The present research question was: which bit operation orders favor matter creation in present real-time? This study found that

**VSUF, SVUF and SUVF orders produce matter creation**(Figs. 1 and 2) and eliminated the USVF, UVSF and VUSF orders based on this criterion.

**Fig. 1: Matter Creation: Electrons**

Legend: 1-state bit density: probability a bit locus is in 1-state. Exp: expected based on random distribution of 1-state bits. SUVF, SVUF, VSUF: bit operations order. Red arrows: absolute maximum temperature (maximum S + V counts).

**Methods and Results**

The Binary Mechanics Lab Simulator (BMLS) [4] simulated a 64x64x64 spot volume [5] with Box mode and Expt. 2, using methods described previously [6] with several differences. First, recent BMLS versions' random seeding of 1-state bits apply the seeding probably (BMLS bit density parameter) for each bit locus, rather than the less random previous method applied for each spot containing six loci. Second, the initial bit density was 0.002, smaller than previously, providing increased density resolution. In Expt. 2, bit density of the simulated volume was gradually increased by the initial density parameter (0.002) with each BMLS Tick until density reached a maximum value of 1.000 after about 2000 Ticks. The experiment was repeated for each of the six bit operation orders with the strong operation (F) last.

The BMLS particle threshold was 2 (the default BMLS T parameter), indicating an operational definition of a particle where a count required at least two (2 or 3) of the three mite (M) bits in a spot to be in the 1-state for one-spot particles such as the electron (e-L in output file, Table 1 in [2]). A proton count required that all three right-handed down (d) quark spots each met the foregoing particle count criterion (EdR in output file).

A new application (expected.exe) in the BMLS download used the binomial distribution to calculate the expected counts for electrons and protons (Exp in Figs. 1 and 2 respectively) expressed as proportion of maximum possible counts. Since each spot cube [5] can represent only one electron and one proton, the maximum possible counts equal the number of spot cubes in the simulation (N = 32768). Hence, the electron (e-L) and proton (EdR) counts in the output files divided by 32768 may be compared with the expected (Exp) proportions.

Eight and only eight elementary particles (Table 1 in [2]) have been defined based on BM postulates. These consist of four matter particles (electron e-L and three right-handed d quarks -- red, green, blue) and their antimatter particles (positron e+R and three left-handed d quarks -- anti-red, anti-green, anti-blue).

In each BMLS Tick in Expt. 2, the observed electron and proton proportions reflect the previous history of applied bit operation cycles (the four bit operations in each Tick) and the new random seeding of gradually added 1-state bits. Fig. 1 shows that only three permutations of bit operations order produced matter creation indicated by electron proportions above the expected values. The other bit operation orders (not shown) all displayed electron proportions below expected values based on random distribution alone.

The electron proportions display several changes in slope at what might be critical bit density levels. For all three bit operation orders that created matter, the last major slope change in particle proportions above the 0.80 level appears to precede the bit density at absolute maximum temperature (red arrows in Fig. 1).

**Fig. 2: Matter Creation: Protons**

Legend: 1-state bit density: probability a bit locus is in 1-state. Exp: expected based on random distribution of 1-state bits. SUVF, SVUF, VSUF: bit operations order. Red arrows: absolute maximum temperature (maximum S + V counts).

Fig. 2 shows that the same three bit operation orders produced proton matter creation. The VSUF and SVUF orders produced the clearest results and perhaps similar to the electron data, the absolute maximum temperatures were located on the bit density scale just above the last major slope change in the proton (dR) proportion curves.

The SUVF bit operations order produced proton matter creation at bit densities less than 0.49 and proton antimatter creation at higher bit densities.

**Fig. 3: Matter Creation: Protons Detail**

Legend: 1-state bit density: probability a bit locus is in 1-state. Exp: expected based on random distribution of 1-state bits. SUVF, SVUF, VSUF: bit operations order.

Fig. 3 shows detail from Fig. 2 of the vacuum energy density range near 0.13 at which proton/nucleon creation was observed with the present particle threshold (BMLS T = 2). Above 0.14 vacuum energy density, the SUVF bit operations order appeared to be superior in proton matter creation.

**Discussion**

*Full Quantization Bonuses?*

**Partial quantum mechanics**is known as "quantum mechanics" in legacy physics and

**full quantum mechanics**is known as "binary mechanics" [7]. In partial QM, complementary variables such as position and momentum cannot be known using measurements simultaneously. However, without contradicting this measurement issue, a recent report suggests that the BM

**bit function**representation of the system state may in fact contain exact information on position and momentum at any arbitrary time [8]. Does the BM bit function contain more information than its partial quantization predecessor -- the QM wave function?

A similar question might be raised regarding the BM bit operations, which were based on a pair of relativistic Dirac spinor equations of opposite handedness. The present report indicates that three orders of bit operations for time-evolution of the system state act to organize random 1-state bits of energy into matter particles (Figs. 1 and 2). But a "creation operator" was not explicitly considered as such in the BM postulates defining the bit operations [2]. Do the bit operations do more as a sort of emergent property than might be expected from the basis used in their original definition? In the present data, increased proportions of matter particles can only occur at the expense of energy loss from antimatter particles. So, yes, for three bit operations orders, the time-development laws of BM contributed to matter-antimatter asymmetry in real-time in the present.

*Bit Operations Order.*For BM to account fully for all physical phenomena, (1) the system state information in the bit function must be complete, (2) the four bit operations defining exact time-development must be correct and complete, and (3) the one and only physically correct bit operations order must be identified. This report may have eliminated three of the six possible permutations of bit operations order, with the strong (F) operation always last in an application cycle (BMLS Tick). The USVF, UVSF and VUSF orders may be eliminated with the assumption that the one correct order must at least maintain the representation of matter particles at proportions produced by random distribution of total 1-state bit energy (Exp in Figs. 1 and 2). In fact, the VSUF, SVUF and SUVF orders not only maintained matter particle representation, but increased it at the expense of antimatter particle representation, perhaps further accounting for matter-antimatter asymmetry [1].

The present results are consistent with the findings that (1) the USVF, UVSF and VUSF bit operation orders produced slower light speeds [9] and (2) the VUSF order failed to show gravity-like effects [Keene, unpublished data].

Finally, SUVF was the only operations order showing matter creation at lower bit densities and anti-matter creation at higher bit densities.

The SUVF bit operations order appeared to be superior in proton matter creation near its threshold in the 0.11 to 0.14 range. A more rigorous estimate of exact vacuum threshold remains to be done. However, the present data is consistent with previous work [10]. Below this particle threshold, perfect vacuum may have a 1-state bit density of 0.10 and is clearly not "empty space". At and above proton particle threshold as presently defined begins a partial vacuum range. It may not be pure coincidence that light speed drops to zero in this same perfect vacuum energy density range [11].

*Meanwhile, Back in the 20th Century.*Legacy, 20th century, partial quantization research projects still exist 16 years into this 21st century. A previous report [12] described how one may "go back to the past for a moment much as an anthropologist might presently visit a less advanced tribe to observe their superstitions. In a mind experiment, draw a vertical line in Fig. 1, say, somewhere between 0.3 and 0.4 maximum bit density to depict the latest efforts at facilities like CERN. The boosted LHC energy beams will see things along this vertical line of energy density -- a primitive, keyhole look at the big picture... in this 21st century, as the Standard Model is upgraded with quantized space, time and energy 'installed', nuclear physics is becoming essentially a book-keeping exercise, releasing vast intellectual talent and resources in the physics community to address more fundamental questions in science." For example, finding the correct bit operations order is such a fundamental research objective with high scientific merit.

The particle proportion slope changes around mid-range bit density for the VSUF and SVUF operation orders may raise fundamental questions. Do the slope changes represent phase transitions, say, between ordinary matter and plasma? If these particle proportion slope changes do represent phase changes, their proximity to absolute maximum temperature may be noteworthy. And what is absolute maximum temperature in degrees Kelvin? Is absolute maximum temperature required for plasma creation?

**References**

[1] Keene, J. J. "Matter-antimatter asymmetry mechanism" J. Bin. Mech. October, 2014.

[2] Keene, J. J. "Binary mechanics" J. Bin. Mech. July, 2010.

[3] Keene, J. J. "Bit operations order" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2011.

[4] Keene, J. J. "BML simulator interface" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2016.

[5] Keene, J. J. "Physical interpretation of binary mechanical space" J. Bin. Mech. February, 2011.

[6] Keene, J. J. "Absolute maximum temperature" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.

[7] Keene, J. J. "Quantization asymmetry" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2016.

[8] Keene, J. J. "Particle motion representation" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2016.

[9] Keene, J. J. "Light speed amendment" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2015.

[10] Keene, J. J. "Vacuum thresholds" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.

[11] Keene, J. J. "Light speed at zero Kelvin" J. Bin. Mech. January, 2016.

[12] Keene, J. J. "Elementary particle energies" J. Bin. Mech. April, 2015.

© 2016 James J Keene