Everything is a response to some sort of void. The reason things seem arranged so democratically in nature seems to be a property of things simply trying to fit into the the most comfortable space. I’m not using very scientific terms to describe this, but in my mind it’s similar to the way electrons organize themselves around a nucleus, pushing and pulling for space naturally causes things to be arranged as far apart from each other as they can within the circumference of their canvas. Once more than two are present, it’s simple mathematical division of the available space and this is where things start to form “patterns”. I believe in the case of the article below, they have not necessarily discovered an entirely new particle, but perhaps it’s simply an electron modifying itself slightly to find it’s most comfortable space (for lack of a better phrasing). It actually confuses me why scientists get so granular sometimes, like they’re forgetting to take in account the dynamics of the group as a whole. It’s not even like missing the forest for the tree, but more like missing the entire world for a single person (or a miniscule particle). What could we really learn about that person if we acted as though everything else outside that person/particle it didn’t have any effect on it?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/majorana-particle-matter-and-antimatter/?WT.mc_id=SA_NightTweets