We develop a structural theory of flavour in which family multiplicity, mixing, and CP violation are not dynamically generated phenomena but residual traces of a post-collapse regime in which continuum physics preserves only highly constrained structural information from an underlying discrete organization. In this setting, flavour multiplicity emerges as persistent structural separation between coherent sectors. Families are replicas of a single structural carrier, and mixing is the unique continuum representation of this residual multiplicity. Structural constraints on irreducibility, non-iterability, and arithmetic stability under coarse-graining lead to finite multiplicity and identify three families as the simplest robust configuration. CP violation arises generically as a global structural obstruction required to represent hierarchical multiplicity in the continuum. Rather than being produced by dynamics, it reflects the minimal surviving imprint of irreducible multi-sector organization. The framework replaces dynamical flavour mechanisms with principles of structural selection and survivability, providing a unified interpretation of multiplicity, mixing, and CP violation and opening a path toward a microscopic foundation within Quantum Ultrametric Rigidity. Author’s Note This work continues a path that began with QUR and took clearer form in DQ and p-DQ.Here that path reaches a region where the structural perspective encounters one of the most resistant domains of contemporary physics: flavour multiplicity and CP violation. For me, this paper represents a first exploration of a territory where the map is still incomplete — in the classical sense of hic sunt leones. The aim is not to offer a complete account of flavour, but to probe its structural limits, to test the reach of the post-collapse viewpoint, and to understand what may persist when the continuum attempts to represent an underlying discrete organization. The analysis is therefore intentionally exploratory. Some arguments may appear tentative, some perspectives provisional. This is part of the nature of the terrain itself. For this reason, I would especially invite the reader to turn — independently of the technical development of the paper — to Addendum X. There the broader horizon of the present work is expressed more openly: the relation between CP violation, informational compression, and temporal orientation, and the sense in which the limits of representation may themselves become a source of physical structure. The Addendum is not required for the technical results, but it reveals the motivation and direction of the exploration. “Se quest’opera punta verso un muro, indica soprattutto ciò che sta oltre.”
Gianfranco Tosato (Tue,) studied this question.