What are the underlying structures of multiple primal entities?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Growler
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Multiple
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of primal entity types in the universe, questioning whether multiple primal entities imply a more fundamental structure leading to a single most primitive entity. It highlights the evolution of scientific understanding regarding matter, referencing atoms and quarks as examples of entities that were once considered fundamental but have since been shown to have underlying structures. The conversation also touches on the unification of fundamental forces at high energy levels, suggesting that these forces could represent primary entities from which all matter originates. However, the thread was deemed too philosophical for the forum, prompting a recommendation for participants to engage in a more technical discussion about fundamental particles and forces in a designated physics forum.
Growler
Messages
5
Reaction score
2
If there exists more than one primal entity type, must not then those entities have underlying structure indicating more primitive entities, and does this not lead us to the logical conclusion that there must be a single most primitive entity which composes all that is the universe?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is a 'primal entity type'?
 
an atom is an entity, at one time it was considered to be the smallest division of matter, but of course via the raisin cookie, Neils Bohr, and the standard model, more primitive entities were proposed to exist. There are multiple quarks in the standard model... if 2 quarks differ in their properties, mustn't they have underlying structure?
 
Well, those primary entities would be the four fundamental forces, from which the entire universe - including all matter - sprung.
We know that, at sufficiently high energy, three of those forces were unified, and we're working on the fourth.
 
Growler said:
If there exists more than one primal entity type, must not then those entities have underlying structure indicating more primitive entities, and does this not lead us to the logical conclusion that there must be a single most primitive entity which composes all that is the universe?
This is a bit philosophical, which we don't allow at PF. If you would like to start a technical discussion (at the B=Basic level) about fundamental particles, please read the following links and also do some Google searching for mainstream technical articles about fundamental particles and forces (the reference links at the end of the Wikipedia articles are also a good place to start). Then start a new thread in the technical Physics forums with links to your reading and ask the specific questions that you have about that reading. That would be a good thread start at the B level.

This thread in the General Discussion forum is now closed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_particles

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes PeroK
To some degree, this thread is inspired by PF user erobz's thread "Why do we spend so much time learning grammar in the public school system?" That's why I made a title to this thread that paralleled the title of erobz's thread. I totally disagree with erobz. I created this thread because the curriculum of grammar at Universities is a totally distinct topic from the topic of the curriculum of grammar in public schools. I have noticed that the English grammar of many ( perhaps most)...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
341
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K