The acronym is for Most Powerful Existential Conjecture Currently Available. Hopefully this will encourage someone or more people to take its refutation as a real challenge! This is the only way it can evolve from mere conjecture to hypothesis , let alone theory.
From the point of view of MOPECCA the number 3 is fundamentally important because this is the minimum number of connections to a PA node. (Mathematicians call conections of this sort ‘edges’.) A network of course can have nodes where more than three edges meet. If we think of a fish net, tennis net, or netting type fences, it is more common to have nodes of four edges meeting but this is because each node as such is made where two lines or wires are looped or knotted around each other and/or welded together and each one leaves the node in a different direction from that in which it entered. In the simplest cases it is just tension and/or stiffness of the material which keeps the node from slipping along one of the lines – eg Cyclone brand wire fencing. The complex networks of each PA however are composed of one substance/entity/existence so each node is in no way a discontinuity but, rather, an extension of the whole.
3 way nodes as vectors
If we conjecture that all PA are ontologically unique but similar to PA-vac (our vacuum), in each manifesting:
- the direction of smallwards at their respective boundaries, and
- the direction of bigwards away from their boundaries, ie everywhere else within it, and that each has
- its own characteristic speed of motion in either of these directions – analogous to the maximum speed “c” of PA-vac, and for each there is
- a characteristic smallest possible distance for each – analogous to the Planck length of PA-vac, then
it is reasonable to consider that each such smallest filament (AKA edge) of any PA is effectively a minimalistic tube of smallwards-moving boundary surrounding a bigwards moving-interior.
The MOPECCA already conjectures, heretically in this day and age, that for each PA the speed of propagation of influence or movement is different and the speed of causal propogation in PA-vac “c” is slower than the analogous speed in each of the other PA. In fact it seems reasonable that the maximum speed for each other PA is tightly related to the relative strength of the force associated with it in quantum mechanics (QM).
If we couple this with the realisation that nothingness is a concept only – because viewed ontologically there can never be any persistent manifestation of it – then the movement smallwards of a PA at (every part of) its boundary seems to allow for the idea of an intrinsic oscillation being manifest wherever any PA is confined to the state of a stretched filament as just described.
Furthermore, because we have the clear example of intrinsic direction along filaments of electromagnetic force, we can accept that for some PA at least a filament of the smallest possible size will manifest an intrinsic motion of its boundary in one direction or the other along its length! And this is where the three edges of the simplest node of such a PA impose an intrinsic imbalance: it will be one of the following situations: two going ‘in’ towards the node and the other going out, or two going ‘out’ and the other going in, or three going out. (Three “going in” does not fit with the concept of the central cross section of a 3 way node being greater than the smallest of its connected edges.) This would imply that each simple 3-edge node of such a PA will be either net outwards or net inwards; in other words the node will be either positively or negatively “charged”.
A question arises here. On the one hand the conjecture of PAelectro nodes being either net positive or net negative due to the status of their 3 edges lends itself to accounting for electric charge, for electrons anyway. On the other hand the fractional charges of quarks, where the Up quark has a +2/3 charge and the Down quark a -1/3 charge, need explaining!
This discussion is continued, and the question of fractional charges answered at another page: MOPECCA – Can a neutron reasonably be considered as a proton plus an electron?
Optimistic realism 