| Re: Cyclic Universe
Neutralino,
With respect to your knowledge, the outside-the-box thinking includes consideration of the SLAC interpretation of subatomic masses linking to shadow gravity, the elimination of the need for quarks, squarks and eventually even leptons and differential bosons. Though we can keep positrons, electrons and photons for the time being, maybe call it "PEP Theory."
You're right, the proton is considered stable, but if it were to continually annihilate with an antiproton, it would be considered very short-lived. Whereby the stability would be the result of gravitational time-dilation at the planck scale, redshifted, as it scales to the detectable macrocosmic scale which also gives not only temporal perception but spatial perception as well.
This could also be applied to explain the cause of Pat's idea of dimensional extension from no branes to membranes to spheres. Of which, unlike normal annihilation, they allegedly divide infinitely upon annihilation with antibranes. Regardless of what is implemented, the means would rely solely upon pushing, never pulling or attraction, only repulsion based on variable amplitudes and velocities.
Also, call it a g.u.t. feeling, but I think many individuals underestimate RascalPuff. He has put alot of time in developing a great theory that is complimentary to many ideas we may have. No one is asking anyone to swallow things whole, but to fairly give things and ideas a bit of time to sink in before we share our inferences.  |