I think in an effort to understand exactly how the mechanics of the big bang worked and how you can go from an infinitesimal point of incredible energy to an enormous and expansive universe with the diverse laws we observe today.
From the article:
> If the forces were indeed one during the “grand unification epoch” of the universe’s first trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second, then particles that now have distinct responses to the three forces would then have been symmetric and interchangeable, like facets of a crystal. As the universe cooled, these symmetries would have broken, like a crystal shattering, introducing distinct particles and the complexity seen in the universe today.
We assume the precondition that the Universe we experience and observe originated in a vacuum of...existences, for lack of a better term. This seems myopic, why should it be so?
What if the universe we experience is the product of interactions between distinct universes, which circumscribed by different physical laws, and the only universe we can sufficiently experience and observe is that which is governed by the Strong Nuclear Force?
It could very well be that way, but what is the evidence for that origin? Why not any number of other plausible explanations? It is not myopic to accept the explanation best supported by available evidence, until sufficient new evidence supports a different explanation. Right now, the Universe coming into existence as a solitary singularity is the best available theory.
From the article:
> If the forces were indeed one during the “grand unification epoch” of the universe’s first trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second, then particles that now have distinct responses to the three forces would then have been symmetric and interchangeable, like facets of a crystal. As the universe cooled, these symmetries would have broken, like a crystal shattering, introducing distinct particles and the complexity seen in the universe today.