Γιατί είναι ανέφικτα τα σωματίδια χωρίς συμβατό σύμπαν εκδήλωσής τους; / Why particles cannot exist without a compatible universe to be expressed in?

## particles cannot exist as standalones without spacetime (Is reality absolute, isolated or Everettian?)

(but you have to study ontoaxiomatics: relativist/perspectival substantiality causal connectome)

particles cannot exist as standalones without spacetime (Is reality absolute, isolated or Everettian? see: Hugh Everett III)

Particles are excitatirèons of the quantum fields (see: Sean M. Carroll). They cannot exist as standalones in the nonspatiotemporal unsubstantial nothing. Substantiality is necessarily a causal connectome.

And what about the omnipointwise superluminal expansions (big bangs)?

Substantiality is necessarily a causal connectome.
If you try to rip it apart it uses/consumes some of the spatiotemporally ripping energy to produce more particles and spacetime (fluctuations).

Particles (= durable field events) and other fields and objects inside spacetime, exist in relation (ontological relativism/ontological perspectivism1) to their Hubble volume (subluminally expanding sphere of permissible causal interactions). Things outside Hubble spheres cannot ever interact (except if: a. they were entangled beforehand, b. we can prove that probabilistically partial entanglements can weakly interact; any entanglement intervention isn't useful for telecommunication/data transfer;but it's useful to hold universe-strains as wholes). But things outside Hubble spheres are not disentangle from their universe-strains because infinite overlapping Hubble volumes exist. The further a region is from a particular Hubble volume, the weakly entangled it is. Each Hubble volume has halo of gradually fading-out weakly entangled infinite overlapping Hubble volumes which comprise the universe. Afar Hubble volumes have a wide range of multifurcating/Everettian/many-worded alternatives (no sole reality exists extremely afar from one's Hubble volume).

The homekill paradox (a superluminal/impossible thought experiment)

The possibility of finding home approaches zero, the more Hubble volumes one deviates from home before she/he returns.

Ontoaxiomatics must necessarily have causal coherence between its axioms. Ontomathematics works better as a programme/algorithm/processes than a static/stable list, because it has to be the foundations of some substantiality (these is no omniaxiomatics and omnisubstantiality). Thus ontoaxiomatics has to deal with the axiomatic incompleteness and/or the axiomatic inconsistency. Entropy (ontoaxiomatic increments) and uncertainty (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle; it's not an unprocedural vagueness but a deeply procedural ontology/mechanistic nature) are ways ontoaxiomatics uses to compensate for incompleteness and inconsistency. Ontoaxiomatics is no different from substantiality; thus in our universe when its wavefunctional decoherence produces new spacetime (the dark energy phenomenon) we observe its ontological entropy.

But that doesn't mean that supernaturalism/ascribed ontological vagueness and uncausal, unprocedural nondefinitions are possible.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/10.1142/9789811218163\_0002 Probabilistic Entanglement - James D. Stein

probabilistic entanglement: particles are partially or fully entangled not only when a common event/causality causes the entanglement, but because they share the same state space (Bloch sphere roulette)

## comment 1:

What if the whole universe were a single particle merely because we are too lazy to study what a Hubble volume is? OK. Even if the universe were a sole Everettianly/manyworldedly multifurcating wavefunction, that doesn't mean it meets the criteria of particlehood. Except if we prove that the Big Bang was generic to all its alternative sub-universal versions (subuniverses), but that it's an erroneous approach which kills its ontoaxiomatic substantiality causation connectome. (We might say that for our local subuniverse, but it's never totally separated from the wider universe [causoimperneability is impossible; purely closed systems don't exist in nature]).