Page 2 of 2
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: November 23rd, 2018, 7:09 pm
by Halc
Niebieskieucho wrote: ↑November 23rd, 2018, 2:53 pm
Yes, there is the theory of everything possible but all I familiarised with are irrational.
I am familiar with none. I suppose if there are some claimed, they're not supported due to inconsistency, which can be considered irrational.
Those who acknowledge to understanding of relativity, automatically admit to understanding of nonsense
It does pretty good, except for not being unified with QFT. I don't find it irrational, being consistent with its own premises.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: April 25th, 2019, 12:04 pm
by Kevin Levites
I believe that a theory of everything is possible, but I doubt that we (humans) currently have the intellectual tools to figure out a theory of everything.
Why?
Consider much simpler problems...like the four color conjecture.
Map makers have known--for centuries--that four colors are always adequate to draw a map, such that each political unit is a different color from the one adjacent to it.
It doesn't matter how convoluted, numerous, or fragmented the political units (ie: a state, for example) are....four colors (you don't want two or more states sharing a border to be the same color, as that causes confusion when you read the map) are always adequate.
So....mathematicians have worked with computers on the four color conjecture, including making any number of maps in any number of ways, yet it remains a conjecture because no one can come up with a mathematical proof that everyone accepts.
There was a proof proposed several years (decades?) ago that may have solved the issue, but the proof ran to several hundred pages, and included something like 2,100 maps and a statement that if an exception existed, it would be in these 2,100 maps....and since the exception wasn't there, then the four color conjecture could now be the four color theorem.....but this proof is rejected by many mathematicians for various reasons.
There are other similar problems in mathematics and physics like the three body problem, or Fermat's Last Theorem, and so forth.
My point is that if seemingly simple problems such as these stymie us despite our deep understanding of mathematics and physics, then how can we reasonably expect to formulate a theory of everything?
I'm not saying that the effort to do so isn't worthwhile, however. Many imporant advancements and discoveries have been made incidentally while going after something else.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: April 26th, 2019, 10:58 pm
by growthhormone
Kevin Levites wrote: ↑April 25th, 2019, 12:04 pm
I believe that a theory of everything is possible, but I doubt that we (humans) currently have the intellectual tools to figure out a theory of everything.
Why?
Consider much simpler problems...like the four color conjecture.
Map makers have known--for centuries--that four colors are always adequate to draw a map, such that each political unit is a different color from the one adjacent to it.
It doesn't matter how convoluted, numerous, or fragmented the political units (ie: a state, for example) are....four colors (you don't want two or more states sharing a border to be the same color, as that causes confusion when you read the map) are always adequate.
So....mathematicians have worked with computers on the four color conjecture, including making any number of maps in any number of ways, yet it remains a conjecture because no one can come up with a mathematical proof that everyone accepts.
There was a proof proposed several years (decades?) ago that may have solved the issue, but the proof ran to several hundred pages, and included something like 2,100 maps and a statement that if an exception existed, it would be in these 2,100 maps....and since the exception wasn't there, then the four color conjecture could now be the four color theorem.....but this proof is rejected by many mathematicians for various reasons.
There are other similar problems in mathematics and physics like the three body problem, or Fermat's Last Theorem, and so forth.
My point is that if seemingly simple problems such as these stymie us despite our deep understanding of mathematics and physics, then how can we reasonably expect to formulate a theory of everything?
I'm not saying that the effort to do so isn't worthwhile, however. Many imporant advancements and discoveries have been made incidentally while going after something else.
Can this model provide an alternative:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oaNK5cmCcZ4
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: April 27th, 2019, 3:44 am
by growthhormone
growthhormone wrote: ↑April 26th, 2019, 10:58 pm
Kevin Levites wrote: ↑April 25th, 2019, 12:04 pm
I believe that a theory of everything is possible, but I doubt that we (humans) currently have the intellectual tools to figure out a theory of everything.
Why?
Consider much simpler problems...like the four color conjecture.
Map makers have known--for centuries--that four colors are always adequate to draw a map, such that each political unit is a different color from the one adjacent to it.
It doesn't matter how convoluted, numerous, or fragmented the political units (ie: a state, for example) are....four colors (you don't want two or more states sharing a border to be the same color, as that causes confusion when you read the map) are always adequate.
So....mathematicians have worked with computers on the four color conjecture, including making any number of maps in any number of ways, yet it remains a conjecture because no one can come up with a mathematical proof that everyone accepts.
There was a proof proposed several years (decades?) ago that may have solved the issue, but the proof ran to several hundred pages, and included something like 2,100 maps and a statement that if an exception existed, it would be in these 2,100 maps....and since the exception wasn't there, then the four color conjecture could now be the four color theorem.....but this proof is rejected by many mathematicians for various reasons.
There are other similar problems in mathematics and physics like the three body problem, or Fermat's Last Theorem, and so forth.
My point is that if seemingly simple problems such as these stymie us despite our deep understanding of mathematics and physics, then how can we reasonably expect to formulate a theory of everything?
I'm not saying that the effort to do so isn't worthwhile, however. Many imporant advancements and discoveries have been made incidentally while going after something else.
Can this model provide an alternative:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oaNK5cmCcZ4
If this mathematic model is not the answer, why can it unite three laws of Newton’s motion, four laws of thermodynamics, Special Relativity, Heisenberg uncertainty principle? I am confuse... Is QM and Relativity not reconcilable? Is there any existing hypothesis that can unite these laws?
On a deeper level, the following fundamental interrelationships can be united by this model, including causality, phase transition, critical point, convergence, divergence, contraction, expansion, similarity, commonality, difference, common mechanism, symmetry, asymmetry, hierarchical structure, order, disorder, periodicity, limitation, without limitation, singularity, plurality, dynamic change, stability. Please excuse my ignorance, I am not aware of any existing hypothesis that can unite these interrelationships but this model. If anyone know, please shed some light.
From the video, this model demonstrates that the third law of Newton’s motion, Special Relativity and one of the principles of QM, Heisenberg uncertainty principle are united on the fundamental interrelationships, symmetry-asymmetry. They are the specific expressions of this fundamental interrelationship.
It is on the fundamental level that social science and natural science are united, and further, science and philosophy.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: April 29th, 2019, 7:38 am
by Steve3007
Kevin Levites wrote:I believe that a theory of everything is possible, but I doubt that we (humans) currently have the intellectual tools to figure out a theory of everything.
Why?
Consider much simpler problems...like the four color conjecture...
I don't know whether a Theory Of Everything is discover-able using human intellectual tools, but I don't really agree with your line of reasoning as to why it is probably not. I don't think the four colour problem and the others that you mention are directly relevant to the TOE. There are various unsolved problems in the world but our inability to solve them does not logical preclude us from solving other problems. There are various types of problem that are either solvable or unsolvable for all sorts of different, more or less unrelated, reasons.
For example, the three body problem that you mentioned in your post is analytically unsolvable for reasons that are similar to the unpredictability of weather. They're related to the non-linearity of the equations that describe the state of the system at any given time and the consequent necessity to use approximate numerical techniques, as opposed to precise analytical techniques, to make predictions about the system.
If we ever did devise a TOE then we would do so while still being unable to precisely predict whether it will be raining a month from now.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: April 29th, 2019, 11:05 am
by Kevin Levites
Steve3007 wrote: ↑April 29th, 2019, 7:38 am
Kevin Levites wrote:I believe that a theory of everything is possible, but I doubt that we (humans) currently have the intellectual tools to figure out a theory of everything.
Why?
Consider much simpler problems...like the four color conjecture...
I don't know whether a Theory Of Everything is discover-able using human intellectual tools, but I don't really agree with your line of reasoning as to why it is probably not. I don't think the four colour problem and the others that you mention are directly relevant to the TOE. There are various unsolved problems in the world but our inability to solve them does not logical preclude us from solving other problems. There are various types of problem that are either solvable or unsolvable for all sorts of different, more or less unrelated, reasons.
For example, the three body problem that you mentioned in your post is analytically unsolvable for reasons that are similar to the unpredictability of weather. They're related to the non-linearity of the equations that describe the state of the system at any given time and the consequent necessity to use approximate numerical techniques, as opposed to precise analytical techniques, to make predictions about the system.
If we ever did devise a TOE then we would do so while still being unable to precisely predict whether it will be raining a month from now.
I didn't think of it in those terms, but I get your points....and I suppose I have to (reluctantly) agree with you.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: June 2nd, 2019, 11:51 am
by detail
Even if it would be possible the theory of everything is not the solution of everything. Just think about Goedel's theorem that the amount of correct mathematical theorems is uncountable. But one could make the objection that this is not the amount of mathematical fertile or estetic theorems. Nevertheless the theory of everything , cannot create a mathematical solution for every initial condition feasible and relevant in practical application. It's just half the job.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: June 2nd, 2019, 2:37 pm
by Sculptor1
growthhormone wrote: ↑January 31st, 2018, 10:39 pm
An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible? This is also called "Ultimate Theory possible". Is it possible to use a single theory to describe the universe (everything)?
I think this one has been tried and has failed miserably.
It was called monotheism.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: June 3rd, 2019, 3:58 pm
by Karpel Tunnel
growthhormone wrote: ↑January 31st, 2018, 10:39 pm
An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible? This is also called "Ultimate Theory possible". Is it possible to use a single theory to describe the universe (everything)?
1) I think you should define what you mean by 'describe the universe'. IOW most physics for example doesn't strive to describe everything, but to come up with rules and models in a more general way, then able to predict and explain in specific instances. But no one is looking in the toe to describe all the faces on earth. 2) I can't demonstrate this, though perhaps someone can: I suspect that to answer that question one would need to have something very close to a TOE. I mean, what would I have to know to be able to rule out a TOE. It would certainly have to be an incredibly deep and broad understanding of the universe.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: June 3rd, 2019, 6:44 pm
by Felix
"We must be clear that when it comes to atoms, language can only be used as in poetry." — Niels Bohr
If we embellished that thought, we would conclude that a scientific theory of everything would be a really lovely poem.
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: October 3rd, 2019, 1:46 pm
by sandman
How would you know when you are aware of everything, all processes, all particles, etc?
The theory would have to account for these things.
What is ‘everything’?
Re: An ultimate philosophical question: is the theory of every thing possible?
Posted: February 3rd, 2020, 3:22 pm
by dipta
If we can unite GR with Quantum Mechanics, how can we be sure it is really the true theory of everything and there is not another theory more fundamental than that?
In the late 1800s, before GM and Quantum Mechanics were discovered, physicists thought we already discovered 99% law of physics.