I wanted to know that what is the most basic or the basicestest thing that makes up the universe? Just like a wall is made up of bricks and bricks are made up of atoms and atoms are made up of subatomic particles, what would be the last thing we would encounter? Is it a mass or a massless thing or a phenomenon or what?

  • You actually expect an answer to that??? – John Forkosh Nov 17 '18 at 11:48
  • This question ounds like one of the big hopes of the study of physics, that is, to find the Grand Universal Theory, or Theory of Everything. – Don Branson Nov 17 '18 at 13:40
  • Since you’re restricting your purview to physical systems (per the comments you left under answers), this question is one for physics, not philosophy. The currently best-known answer to physicists is the elementary particles, but like all scientific answers it is contingent, and we should expect our understanding to change over time (or there’s no point in experimentation!). String theory was an attempt at this, for example. – Dan Bron Nov 17 '18 at 19:03
  • After additional research about your question, the answer is --- 42. – John Forkosh Nov 19 '18 at 12:52

If you wish to get an answer, the only answer I can give is, the "Consciousness".

From your question I guess that your question is, "Where will we stop when we explore the root of everything?".

You know that when we go deeper into a thing we get things that cannot stay in one particular atom as you imagine, isn't it? Its subtlety becomes unimaginable. What I said is just for guiding your imagination; not for any kind of comparison.

Since you can never go beyond it, "Consciousness" is the basic of all things...if you wish to get ONE such thing. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaitanya_(consciousness). You would get the answer to your last 2 questions from this link.

  • Nope, I think. The answer should be something physical. – Aayush Aggarwal Nov 17 '18 at 16:57
  • If it were purely physical it wouldn't be an answer to your question. – SonOfThought Nov 17 '18 at 18:02
  • Haven't you heard this, "Observation affects the particle being observed." Then would you say that they are not physical? 1. theguardian.com/science/2013/nov/10/… 2. sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/02/980227055013.htm – SonOfThought Nov 17 '18 at 18:17
  • Please note my two comments given above. If so, what is the significance of the observer in physics? – SonOfThought Nov 17 '18 at 18:21
  • @SonOfThought The answer in physics is “the observer necessarily interacts with the system being observed, and therefore inevitably changes the state he was trying to observe”. In physics, there is no need to invoke consciousness (and indeed metaphysical influences are explicitly excluded as being untestable); the observer is merely the external system that interacts with the system of interest. An observer could be a photon or a probe; consciousness is orthogonal to this. – Dan Bron Nov 17 '18 at 19:01

By 'thing' I presume you mean 'form'. The most basic 'form' is not basic and this is a matter of logic. Form cannot originate with form unless we want an infinite regress.

I don't know what the most basic thing is, needless to say.

  • I meant 'some physical thing'. – Aayush Aggarwal Nov 17 '18 at 16:58
  • @AayushAggarwal - Then as someone eariier says, your question has no answer. . – PeterJ Nov 22 '18 at 12:46

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.