There are rather no doubts that there is more matter than antimatter in our Universe, it is usually assumed that it was created during short baryogenesis (violating baryon number conservation) period of Big Bang.
This asymmetry is used as motivation to search for a fundamental difference between matter and anti-mater, e.g. violating CPT. I wanted to ask why it couldn't be explained by symmetric rules? For example:
In presence of baryon it is a bit more likely for "genesis" of baryon than anti-baryon.
In presence of anti-baryon it is a bit more likely for "genesis" of anti-baryon than baryon.
would lead to statistical symmetry breaking: the more (anti)matter there is, the more (anti)matter will be created - initial tiny random imbalance would be statistically amplified, through annihilation leading to final domination of one of them.
Analogously for life using D-sugars instead of L-sugars: during the origins, the more one type of sugars there was in the environment, the easier life of ancestors using this type of sugar - initial random imbalance should be statistically amplified to total domination.
Do we really need some fundamental asymmetry between matter and anti-matter to explain abundance of matter?