Is Our Universe Just a Preon in a Larger Cosmic Structure?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ziad1985
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
ziad1985
Messages
244
Reaction score
0
I don't actually know if i should have started this thread in Astrophysics forum or Particle Physics forum.
Anyway here the issue , some theories of our universe say that it may actually be a part of one bigger universe(sub-universe , ...).
One theory of particle physics says that matter maybe consisted of Preons , the actual fundamental material of our world and the subcomponents of quarks and leptons.
Regardless of how strong or weak these 2 points stated above maybe.
what kind of restriction or possibilities i can talk about that our universe maybe a Preon in the bigger universe , and that the Preons in our universe are actually universes of their own ?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Or the preon is our universe causing a connection between the largest object of the universe and the smallest.

If this is coupled with a closed universe then we are contained.

Duane
 
But wouldn't be contained anyway ?
a closed or not ..
 
By definition, the universe is everything (including the sub-, sub-sub- and sub-sub-sub-universes), i.e., it MUST be self-contained. Therefore, the above mentioned Preon particle (representing the smallest possible scale) has to be linked to the entire universe on its largest scale (not going to another universe). This would make the universe self-contained and would automatically implement the Mach principle. There are some indications that such a scheme might actually work pretty well.
 
Last edited:
the above mentioned Preon particle (representing the smallest possible scale) has to be linked to the entire universe on its largest scale (not going to another universe).


A photon is length contracted almost to zero length, and at the same time it is time dilated almost to a stand still, a single particle that is at the same time both smallest and largest on our relative scale.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top