Could the universe have been made up of a single elementary particle?

This realization may be due to a lack of understanding of the field. A lot of the things in the problem are actually the basic common sense of particle physics.

Current theories suggest that they can transform into each other, and experimental facts have shown that they can transform into each other, which was discovered decades ago.

For example, there are three generations of quarks, a total of 6 flavors: u, d, c, s, t, b, under electromagnetic interaction and strong interaction, the taste of quarks is constant, but under weak interaction, the taste of quarks can be changed, that is to say, quarks can be converted into each other.

The various reactions in the following examples are all facts, you can check the pdg:particle data group yourself

For example, the taste of a quark undergoes a decay transformation: d ( barc) to k ( bars) + pi (u bar).

Leptons have three generations, a total of 6 flavors: e, u, mu, u, tau, u, and they can also be converted to each other, for example: mu + u to e + u

Quarks and leptons can also be converted to each other, e.g. the collision of positive and negative electrons produces a meson: e + e to j psi (c bar).

The bosons that transmit interactions are: gamma, z, w, photons Of course, they can react with various quarks and leptons, and various reactions are often accompanied by photons.

Weakly interacting propagators and leptons are converted, e.g. z to e +e

Weakly interacting propagators with quark transformations, e.g.: w to d (c bar) + gamma

2.Are there particles more fundamental than quarks, leptons, and bosons?

Current experiments have not found quarks, leptons, and bosons to have deeper structures.

The Standard Model of particle physics holds that they are the most basic particles, and that there are no more elementary particles.

But maybe you've also heard of string theory, some theorists think that quarks, leptons, and bosons are actually made of "strings", maybe I'm not right, should I say that the vibrations of "strings" constitute different particles? I don't know much about string theory, and there is no experimental evidence for even supersymmetry theory, let alone string theory, and it takes too much energy to verify them.

In fact, when I was studying particle physics, I saw an example: there are 12 kinds of quarks and leptons now, which is too complicated, and it is okay to think that quarks and leptons can be composed of two more basic particles. These two can be a (charge of -1 3), b (charge of 0), then:

For example, the component of u quark can be thought of as bar bar bar, the component of electron can be aaa, and all quarks and leptons can be combined with a and b like this. Then we don't need twelve flavors, we only need two flavors. You can mix whatever you want, just have fun.

However, this is not useful, so the combination is meaningless, and experiments have not found that quarks and leptons have deep structures.

Maybe there will be other discoveries when the energy is high in the future? <>

To use concrete examples, human knowledge of the world is equivalent to a circle, with existing knowledge inside the circle and unknown outside the circle. The mission of us PhDs and researchers is to hold high the steel knife of empiricist science on the borders of the circle, and to constantly expand the size of our circle. But science is helpless against the unknown beyond the circle.

At this point, the question of speculation about knowledge outside the circle can only be left to the philosopher. The question of the origin particles that the subject is curious about has long been far beyond the boundaries of science (the most advanced theory in physics today is the Standard Model, in which there are dozens of elementary particles, and no one can explain the mass, charge and color charge of these particles), and can only be solved by philosophy.

In fact, the subject's question has a clear discussion in philosophy, which is briefly introduced here, and if you are interested, you can buy a book on the philosophy of science and read it yourself:

1.Reductionism, i.e., the existence of a theory of all things (or particles) that itself can explain the entire universe through change. Albert Einstein was a staunch reductionist.

2.The opposite of reductionism is the idea that many things in the world can indeed be reduced to a few theories (particles), but that there is no single fundamental theory (or particles) that can explain everything. Feynman has expressed support for this theory.

3.Holism refers to the idea that everything in the world is an organic whole, and if you want to simplify, you must omit details.

4.Modern agnosticism refers to the fact that no matter whether the theory of everything exists or not, human beings can never prove or falsify its existence, let alone understand it. The vast majority of Chinese are agnostic cynics by nature.

To put it bluntly, the subject's question is a philosophical question that is not conclusive at all, and all I can do is to list these ideas in front of your eyes, and you yourself through reading and speculation, to choose one as your belief. Only your own choice is your answer. <>

A negative electron that is moving forward in time is the same as a positron that is retrograde in time, and antimatter is nothing more than a positive matter that is moving backwards in time, that is, moving from the future to the past. The annihilation of antimatter and positive matter is essentially a sudden U-turn of positive matter on the timeline and turns into antimatter while returning to the past.

Feynman's antimatter hypothesis: from the moment the universe was bigger, the entire universe would have had only one electron. The vast space of the whole universe, countless stars and matter, in fact, are just doppelgangers of this one electron in different time and space.

It starts from the big **, advances forward on the timeline until the end of the universe, turns back again, becomes a positron, retrograde in time, and retrograde to the beginning of the birth of the universe. In this way, the cycle continues endlessly, this electron appears at every point on the time axis, appears in every corner of the universe, and in our view of the three-dimensional world, the space is filled with countless electrons, constituting everything in the world. <>

This is a philosophical mathematical hint: adding or subtracting the values of two different problems will multiply and divide or definitely give a whole value; It doesn't matter if it's reductionist or holistic......As long as you find two exact values in this three-numbered formula, the rest is not a problem. Now we have a definite value that is dozens of elementary particles, and then we can find another one or two definite values.

A hint. Quantum can be used as a definite value, assuming that light is positive 1A negative wave is equal to 1 (this one is a bit harder).

But we also have the number and value of atoms and the value of molecules that have become a fact, and I invite mathematicians and philosophers to try ...... togetherI believe that sooner or later it is certain. There is a solution.!

From the beginning to the end of the universe, there are only four elementary particles. They are: tachyon, photon, space particle, dark matter.

Tachyon: A particle that exceeds the speed of light, with a minimum velocity of the square of photon c, and encounters space particles that will capture a part of the energy and form a photon. When two photons collide, a tachyon is formed.

Photons: The energy released by tachyns is captured and formed by space particles. It is a mixture with a constant velocity, and an increase in velocity will break through the space particles and form tachyons.

Space particle: is a liquid, colorless and odorless, that captures energy and stores it. When the energy reaches a certain level, photons will be formed, and if the energy continues to increase, tachyons will be formed, breaking through the space particles, and then leaving empty space particles. Space particles are indestructible.

Dark matter: It should be a substance without energy that repels light. Because there is no energy property, this matter is separated by light. Dark matter and space particles combine to form the world of consciousness.

These four elementary particles make up the material world, and they are also the four basic substances contained in the universe.

Apparently not. The total energy in the universe is conserved, and there is almost no matter at the beginning, but as the universe expands, the volume increases, and the temperature drops, it gradually has the conditions to form elementary particles, and then atomic nuclei, atoms, and molecules appear in turn, and then macroscopic material structures, stars, galaxies and other substances appear, while at the same time, the radiation energy gradually decreases, and the proportion in the density of the universe gradually decreases to maintain the conservation of total energy.

The universe, as far as modern science has proved, is an infinite and boundless arbitrary space. So, is the total amount of matter in the universe eternal and unchanging? According to personal aspirations:

The total amount of matter in the universe is variable, and the goal is continuous, not to mention far away, taking the earth as an example, the number of human beings, animals and plants is constantly changing. There is also the disappearance and reduction of meteors in the universe, which is enough to prove that the total amount of matter in the universe is not eternal.

Matter does not come into being in a vacuum, nor does it disappear in a vacuum! Mass is not converted into energy, and energy is not converted into mass! Constantly supplying energy to the spaceship, the spacecraft is constantly accelerating, and the energy is converted into the kinetic energy of the spaceship, which conforms to the law of conservation of energy, this energy will not become mass, if it becomes mass and consumed, then the kinetic energy is gone, and the spacecraft will not be able to fly.

Since the speed of expansion of the universe decreases as it expands, the speed of propagation within the universe increases as its density decreases. When the former is smaller than the latter, the balance within the universe no longer needs to shield high-energy molecules. As a result, the universe no longer forms matter as a closed system, and the matter that has been generated will gradually disintegrate and transform into an excited state quantum, that is, photons.

Therefore, on the one hand, once photons are generated, they do not decrease unless they are absorbed by matter, and on the other hand, matter is constantly decreasing and converted into photons, so the total number of photons in the universe is increasing with the expansion of the universe. In this sense, photons are inversely proportional to matter in quantity.

The number of particles in the universe is not constant, elementary particles can be converted into each other, and the mass of the particle is the main characteristic quantity of the particle. According to the gauge theory of particle physics, the mass of all gauge particles is zero, and the gauge invariance is somehow broken, so that quarks, charged leptons, intermediate bosons gain mass. The existing particle mass range is large.

According to the current theory of human science and technology, the number of particles in the universe is constant. For human atoms, everything in the human body is made up of atoms.

Yes, in fact, whether it is the macro or micro world, there will be some principle of conservation of quantity, so it is in a constant state.

Yes, this must be constant, according to the principle of conservation, this is definitely constant and will not change.

No, there are many particles in the universe, and they change all the time.

Of course, the number of particles in the universe is not constant, the total energy in the universe is conserved, and there is almost no matter at first, but as the universe expands, the volume increases, and the temperature drops, and the conditions for the formation of elementary particles gradually become conditional.

Introduction: Some people say that the essence of the universe may be a particle or an atom, and there are all kinds of wonders in the world. "Maybe there's a bigger universe outside of our world, and we don't know that.

Is it possible, then, that the universe itself is a particle? Or is there something else that makes it up? <>

One: So is the universe a living entity?

According to renowned researchers, perhaps the universe itself is a life. But because every life is very different and has large and small components, it can be very small or very large. In the microcosm,The universe has the characteristics that humans have, such as birth, growth, reproduction, and death.

In the world of the universe, there are births and deaths and the human world at every moment, as if it were a law. Therefore, it is also destined if human beings do not examine themselvesDestructionEcosystemThis wrong behavior, then it will also be subjected toThe same retaliation

Two: Is there life in the universe?

UniverseIf there exists, then there must be lifeSince there is life, there will be relative space. Just like the earth, we are born on the earth, and the formation of a life requires certain conditions, but other planets do not have the same living environment as the earth, but due to the lack of equipment, it cannot be accurately determined that there is no life on other planets. Some people also believe that the life that emerges from the universe is the inevitable result of the evolution of the universe, but this also happens to be an accident in the evolution of the universe.

Every species evolves and becomes more powerful as social conditions change. So there is life in the universe. <>

Three: Is the universe itself really a particle?

Some say the universeIt could be just a particleBecause this can explain why the starlight of hundreds of millions of years ago was able to better explain the hydrogen isotopes of the sun through spectral analysis and knowing the composition of colors, and did not go beyond the existing elements of the earth.

It's the same as on Earth. ButThere is no conclusive evidenceIt is not absolutely certain that the universe itself is an example, it may or may not be, and only when there is a certain scientific basis can it be determined whether it is a particle or not.