Articles about Quarks, and atoms and string theory,
and big bangs, etc, etc etc etc — should highlight
the fact that ‘we’ have no idea what the Universe/people/anything
is “made of”.
Well we know that people/and most every thing we see are made of atoms, and atoms are made of protons and electrons, and protons are made of quarks.
What we don’t know is whether electrons and quarks are made of anything else, or not.
It’s not that we don’t know what they are made of. It’s that we don’t know even IF they are made of something else or not. (Though, most likely, not.) But then, why keep adding that?
As a rule science doesn’t talk about “everything” a lot of the time. Most of the time, it talks about specific things. So it gets old and redundant to say over and over “the sun is made of a complex interaction between gravitational pressure pulling atoms inward and nuclear energy pushing them out. Now please add standard caveat that we don;t know what gravity, energy, and sub-sub-atomic sub-particles are made of.”
I personally don’t need mystery. I also don’t need its opposite. I just like hearing what they know, so far. So I personally understand why they don’t keep adding the “don’t know” part.
It’s like football talk. There’s only so far it can go, and we know that. “Keenum gets a 1st down! Granted, this does not help us determine if quarks are elemental particles or not. And why did the French invent ragout?”