In the universe matter is in incessant motion. But on earth, for the ordinary observer everything seems to be at rest, unless it is moved by something. In the pre-scientific era the earth was the center of the universe. The moon and the sun seemed to be moving around it. Now it is known that our globe whirls around the sun and spins about its own axis.
It is also common knowledge that beyond what seems to be solid matter is incessant motion of particles down to the subatomic realm. The celestial bodies are also in continuous motion in vast expanse of the cosmos. In the universe everything is in ceaseless motion. The inquiring mind is forced to ponder about the processes that create relatively solid states of matter from its perpetually moving components. What is the fundamental cause of this dynamic universe? This is a great puzzle could be resolved by the hypothetical existence of ‘Primordial particles.’ P particles are presumed to be the ultimate constituents of all matter, the entire universe, in all of its manifestations.
Physicists, first among them was Einstein, have been searching for the final indivisible end-constituent of matter. They have been trying to unify the two main branches of physics; Einstein’s theory of General Relativity, particularly Gravitational force, with Quantum Mechanics and its latest branch, Quantum Electro Dynamics, QED. The creation of a Grand Unification Theory, GUT, has not been successful. Ancient Greek philosophers called the final indivisible part of matter an atom. Primordial particles are such entities.
(Project to the screen the definitions of P particles)
In the early days science chemists thought they have found the atom. But shortly after, the spectrums of hydrogen, sodium, and other elements revealed that the atoms have components. Electrons, protons, and neutrons, have been the first components to be discovered. These were followed by what Steven Weinberg the Nobel Laureate physicist called the discovery of a “zoo of subatomic particles”. Is it plausible to hypothesize that the ultimate end-constituent of matter is in incessant motion? Could relatively static mass be a composite of massless but energetic end-constituents of matter? According to empirical philosophy, the presumption of the existence of P particles is a logical necessity. If the definitions were correct, then the consequences drawn should agree with earlier findings and become proven by predictions and new experiments.
There are several other unanswered questions in physics related to the fundamental puzzle. Newton, for instance, openly acknowledged that he does not know the physical cause of the gravitational force. Newton’s laws of motion are accurate as long as the speed of moving bodies are relatively slow with respect to the speed of light. But Einstein’s theories of Special and General Relativity show, that time, space, and mass are not absolute but relative. Time and space are indivisible time-space continuum, mass of particles seemingly increase as their speed are near the speed of light. Gravitational space is distorted near massive celestial bodies. The light of a star is bent by the curvature of time-space as it is passes near a massive body such as the sun. However, Einstein did not explain by physical description of time-space why ponderable bodies gravitate toward one another. His theory of gravity is given by a set of multi-dimensional differential equations.
In spite of the limited realm of the validity of a theory, it usually has important practical applications. In planetary explorations Newton’s equations are still used calculating the trajectories of satellites, missions to the Moon, and to the planets. But some fine corrections are necessary, according to the Einstein’s relativity of time in some cases, for instance such corrections have to be made in connection with Global Positioning Systems GPS. That is now automated to keep tracking exact location of satellites and other fast moving objects. In spite of the tremendous value and success of these theories neither Newton or Einstein knew the physical essence of gravitational force, and no physical explanation of the process that seemingly changes the mass of fast moving particles. No empirical explanation exists regarding physical nature of the four invisible forces of nature that act through a distance:
1) the gravitational, 2) electromagnetic, 3) the strong nuclear, 4) and the weak nuclear forces.
Interpretations and Meaning
The increase of mass is a matter of interpretation. Actual observations have revealed that increased energy is required to accelerate a moving particle to relatively high speed with respect to the speed of light. All measurements needs correct interpretations. The moment some newly discovered phenomenon cannot be explained by the earlier interpretation, a new physical explanation is necessitated to render an appropriate meaning to the experimental finding. For instance, time and space are conceptual entities and there is no physical constituents of either of them. Yet they said to be curved, distorted by massive bodies. The question arises then: How can a non-entity, a concept, have physical properties such as time and space? Something seem to be wrong with the interpretation of complicated equations.
Also know that light is not propagated along a straight line when passes by a large mass. The curvature of light coming from a star as it passed by sun has been observed and confirmed Einstein’s prediction with great accuracy. But it is a matter of interpretation that time-space has a curvature. We cannot factually describe the physical nature of space and time--or space-time as indivisible entities—and the process of the propagation of light and why it is affected by gravity. Empty space is void of matter. Thus, it is illogical to believe that space, in spite of being a non-entity, it can have any property such as curvature. More logical is to infer from observations that the notion of space is invoked by three-dimensional matter, and the concept of time is invoked by events. Events are inherently tied to motion of matter. The material entity of gravitational force and curvature near massive bodies could be explained by Primordial particles.
(Project to screen the related figures)
Another unanswered physical reasoning relates to the cause of radioactivity. More than one-hundred years ago, professor Becquerel’s pondered, what causes the spontaneous emission of energetic particles from a piece of motionless Uranium rock? By now, we have learned an enormous amount of knowledge about this process and call it radioactive decay. Dozens of isotopes of the natural and man-made elements have radioactivity. The laws of subatomic reactions are known and we can even create new elements. This knowledge led to the development of nuclear reactors, and the atomic bombs. However, the physical trigger of spontaneous emanation of energetic beams of energy and particles from isotopes of the elements has remained a mystery. Radioactivity needs physical explanation, interpretation and true meaning.
Since the beginning of the 20th Century, the theories of ‘Ether’ were discarded. Eventually the ether was replaced by Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, and Quantum Physics. Ever since that time, the most famous scientists of the world failed to unite these two distinct branches of physics into a so called Grand Unification Theory (GUT). The present conjecture investigates the failure of unification from the point of view of philosophical logic. The four basic forces of nature, gravitational, electromagnetic, the strong and the weak nuclear forces, may be explained by the presumed existence of ‘primordial (P) particles’.
(Show on the screen the definitions of P particles)
The existence of P particles are conjectured to be innumerable by numbers, infinitesimally small, and undetectable massless material particles. It is further presumed that P particles are incessantly and randomly moving in space with extremely high speed above the speed of light. These primordial particles are seen as being massless, spherical, absolute solid, the smallest indivisible and indestructible components of the universe. Due to their random motions, P particles are continuously interact with one another thus create a large number of observable events.
The consequences of P collisions are different from the known laws of interactions between mass-bearing particles. The energy represented by their motion and their spontaneous collisions presumed to invoke a large number of different mass-bearing configurations, that may be calculated by statistical probabilities. Mass, as known today, can be imagined to be the combined units of P particles with different life spans.
The failure to unify the two branches of physics may partly be due to lack of imagination. For most people it is hard to presume that mass-bearing matter may be composed of massless particles. Another reason for failing to create a GUT may be the reliance upon the notion of continuum and almost exclusive reliance upon differential and integral equations in describing physics. It is probable that the infinitesimally small world of P particles beyond the subatomic domain could only be described and theoretically formulated by a new notion of ‘Quantum Geometry’ and discrete events within the enormous field of fast moving particles, way exceeding the speed of light. My theory of Primordial particles is based upon these conjectures.