Here is one more beautiful visualization created by Austintorn. Of much importance for us is to understand where we are standing right now with the scientific information we've (they've) got. Only three out of four forces are currently unified (gravity is the fifth force, shown in the middle as the cooperative result of the four forces). Electroweak unification would connect electric force, magnetic force, and weak nuclear force. However, when looking at the pyramidal model, we need to place some question marks surrounding this result. It is not about the results not being there, but about how to specifically identify this discovered level of
unification of the three (two) forces.
Two deliveries of the pyramidal model come to mind: the first one is the pyramidal model of DNA, where CgtA are the four bases, but are found only in one combination: GC and AT. I don't know why, but I would suspect that at least one of the options to combine two bases leads to
demise (for instance, combining just a C with an A base would leave both bases crippled/unusable). A neutralizing effect occurs, so to speak, when first the two base pairs are created — after which they can then be used together. So this is one pyramidal model: two times two and only then four bases cooperate so that an overall result is delivered in which all four aspects/bases can be used intact (2 + 2 = 4).
The second pyramidal model is that of
human being, where male, female, young, and old take in the four corner places. Here we see that each corner actually stretches out over two more corners: male can incorporate young and old as well. Old can encapsulate male and female. Etcetera. So in this pyramidal model each corner had three out of four corners as co-existing part of that corner (but no overall co-existing).
That leaves two options for the model of forces, while a third option can be proposed too:
1/ like DNA: the four forces are two-by-two's cooperating first, with the weak nuclear force connecting to just one of the two aspects of the electromagnetic force (either just to the electric force, or just to the magnetic force), while the strong nuclear force has a connection (that still needs to be found) in the electromagnetic force with the oppositional aspect. I guess the name electroweak indicates that the weak nuclear force is connected in particular to the electric part of the electromagnetic force? In this pyramidal model, we do not look for an overall unification, rather we look for how the forces join hand in hand (2 of them) plus hand in hand (another 2 of them)
and then those two pairs can also join hand in hand (4 together) but not sooner. 5, all together, is the synergy effect. In respect to the
electroweak unification, we could then say that this term covers too much (for one aspect of electromagnetism is not connected to weak nuclear force,
or the term is exactly that: electro + weak, and nothing more.)
2/ Like
human being: the weak nuclear force connects on both sides with the electromagnetic force, while the strong nuclear force also connects with the electromagnetic force, but in two different (oppositional to where weak connects) spots (still to be found). In this pyramidal model, we do not look for an overall unification, rather we look for how the forces join hand in hand in hand in hand -and- in hand. Gravity is the synergy effect. In respect to the electroweak unification, we could then say that this term is correctly used (though better is: electromagnetic-weak), but we are looking for one
or three more unified parts like that (of just electromagnetic-strong,
or of electromagnetic-strong and magnetic-weakstrong and electro-weakstrong).
3/ Electroweak unification is already as far as we need to go: the three forces are unified, while in singular opposition we find the strong nuclear force, and gravity is the synergy effect.
I like this last option the least, but consider it theoretically possible. My choise would be number 1, but number 2 (with just an electroweak and an electrostrong pair-of-three in some kind of oppositional positions) is possible. I think, we are missing some scientific information here still, and physicists may just not be looking in the right spots (I consider the possibility that we have the information already as very real, gathered information that is not considered as of value right now). Naturally, I consider the pyramidal model to be finished; it's just a matter of stating that what we've got is all we need
or of finding the right kind of information to make the known information fit either in option 1 or option 2.
Nobody, the question where everything comes from is not a priority I consider right now. I am interested in the how&what, not in the how&why. To show you quickly how I see it placed: the reason our universe started to exist is on the other side of the screen of materialization, while the essence of
what is does exist on this side of materialization. We've got what we've got on this side, and the origin is the other side. I can go there, but prefer to do that after a long life.