...hence my theory assumes a completely different concept of preons.
Again, it's not a theory until you show the math. I feel we need to repeat this as often as possible because it speaks to the difference between physics and crackpottery.
I just noticed something I'd overlooked since the thread began. In your title you seem to lump electrons, quarks, and gluons together and tell us they stand in need to composition from quadrillions of your own private preons. Electrons and quarks make sense together because they're both elementary particles. They both have rest mass. The gluon is a gauge boson. It doesn't have rest mass. It
can't have rest mass.
Preon theory was an attempt to understand why up quarks have so much less rest mass than down quarks. The up-down distinction in quarks is what gives a hadron its charge, if it has any. Leptons get their charge a different way. Now the math eventually showed why chopping up leptons and quarks into smaller preons solves the mass problem while incurring a whole bunch of other problems. It was therefore rejected. You don't tell us how your version solves this problem without incurring the same roadblocks as preon theory, or entirely new roadblocks.
But gluons don't have rest mass. At least preon theory was trying to solve a problem. You don't say what problem in the Standard Model you propose to solve by telling us that a
virtual particle like a gluon needs to be subdivided, or even what that could possibly mean.
Quarks also have one of three colors (red, green, and blue)—not literal colors, it's just a metaphor. Antiquarks have anticolors. The rule for baryons (the stable side of the hadron family) is that the three quarks that make one up need to be all different colors. They change colors by shooting gluons at each other. They do this constantly, and the resulting effect is the Strong Force. The buzzword is "quantum chromodynamics."
But gluons don't actually exist, in a very important way. I know that's a strange thing to say in the context of quantum physics. And all my physicist employees will scream in agony if they read this, because gluon field strength has a field equation and they'll say that if it has a field equation then it exists as much as anything in quantum mechanics exists.
But the gluon is a virtual particle, which means it cannot exist in a free state. Neutrons and neutrinos can exist as free particles. So can protons and electrons. They can travel through space. They can be detected. It really doesn't make sense to talk about the velocity of a gluon because they don't exist as free particles, even as short-lived ones. They can't be detected in a particle accelerator. It's essentially meaningless to talk about them being "composed" of anything. It's like saying what ingredients at the supermarket are used to make happiness.
In short, you don't say what problems with
anything in the Standard Model are solved by your idea. It seems like you've gone no further than, "Wouldn't it be neat if there were a really minuscule microgrid?"
More to the point, there are a whole lot of reasons to think he doesn't know what he's talking about.
Indeed, I doubt
@wise47 could pass an entry-level physics exam.