Lex, hear me out," please:  at <a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8A-5gIW0-eI&amp;t=1h13m11s"">1:13:11</a> Harry Cliff unwittingly describes the underlying", unifying principles (in terms which will require translation into a mathematical form in order to be interpretable by his colleagues) which inform the behavior(S) of ALL "particles" in his description of "these experiments." They ("members of a collaboration") collectively embody and behave in the same way as the very particles they study -- they mimic the behavior of that which they give their energy to and derive their focus from. Higher energy levels (larger colliders) are not necessary if ever smaller particles are manipulated at intervals (like a domino effect, with each domino representing a wave/cloud of successively smaller particles, which in turn require less energy to penetrate and cause separation of the elements of its counterpart.....same can penetrate and cause separation of same).  Collision A results in cloud A, Collision B (a duplicate of Collision A) results in cloud B (a duplicate of cloud A),  where these two collisions and resulting clouds occur simultaneously. Funneling should be used to contain, "power up" and direct matter in these resulting clouds into each other, whereby the process may be repeated ...for as long as we can build ever finer and smoother funnels (funnels should be constructed of the same matter contained in the clouds to be collided).  HUNCH:  1) there is no fundamental particle (we use "field" to describe regions in three dimensional space within which we cannot clearly identify the constituents or their behaviors, let alone the components of said constituents which drive these behaviors). 2) there is no maximum speed. 3) there is no space devoid of matter and no matter which is without mass and all matter is divisible 4) no two points in space are identical&gt; no two particles are the same (Bquark Bob and Bquark Mary) 4) we, and the complexity we observe, are echoes of those differences 5) gravity is the outward momentum achieved by the transfer of constituent information to larger representations of itself and the resulting, inherent connectedness. 6) there is no "big bang" (it is possible to disprove in the following scenario:  a "point of gravity" ...an object ("a") in its "path" whos velocity increases toward this point as it becomes closer to this point.....another object, further out from this point than object ("a") that behaves the same way, increasing in velocity as it nears this point (call this object "i"), and again, another object ("c") still further out than object "i", that behaves the same way, increasing in velocity as it nears this point.  what does object "i" observe? object "i" observes object "a" and object "c" both moving further away from itself, while simultaneously, objects "a", "i", and "c" are all growing closer to one another and toward the point of gravity "o".  7) there is, of course, but ONE universe :) 8) the universe is infinite 9) three dimensions are sufficient in layman's terms (any one dimension actually describes the same as any one dimension must have volume)10) because I love elon musk:  dear elon, "the simulation" is immaterial, as the problems are the same for us and our "gods": know further in, know further out, in perpetuity and never "make light" of that which is infinite   ....and more on: life, living, consciousness, free will, engineering, purpose, and love. --- my apologies for the unrefined language, lack of education, and the implicit arrogance. give pause, show harry, then elon. Your question: "did they figure it out?"  ......First ever regular Joe guest? why not?  you're ballsy.  Pioneer," right? Come on Lex...Let's do it: shears@<a href=""http://socalstairs.com/"">socalstairs.com</a>"