The Theory of Everything

[sooey]

Taking a very simplistic view of things and leaving out all this quantum physics, mathematics, science etc.

From earth we can see 9 'planets'. (Forget about the down-grading of Pluto or whatever it was).

If these are the planets we can see from earth, and mankind has not travelled further than earth's moon, how the hell do we know if there is such a thing as The Milky Way and how do we know what shape it is?

How do we know stars are 'millions' of light years away?
What if they are a few hundred thousand miles away and actually only about the size of Australia?

How can we be sure that the sun isn't shining past earth, hitting these rocks we call stars, and making them seem to shine during the night because we are on the dark side of the earth at the time?

The vast majority of space knowledge is, to my mind, conjecture and people accept it because 'scientists say so'. The 'average' man in the street is not capable of understanding blackboards full of mathematical equations that may even be a load of tosh made up by someone who has convinced others that he is a brainbox.

You don't need to understand complex maths to understand how the Doppler effect works, that's the main method astronomers use tto determine distance to far away galaxies.

 

[Dextraneous]

http://www.ibtimes.com/universe-collapsing-scientists-say-process-may-have-already-started-1509490

Thanks for the great link Brigadier.
What is rather annoying about Physics is that it is only as good as the latest fad or theory. Never quite getting it all right. A theory is right, until someone proves it wrong. When an anomaly is identified in a theory, it is corrected by 'inventing' a new particle to satisfy the mathematics. Then hundreds of Ph.D's are awarded to people trying to find the new invented particle. The Higgs being a prime example. If the particle is not found, then that is not a dis-proof, it is that they haven't looked in the right place yet. The ubiquitous Orbiting Teapot springs to mind. After all of these years of research, there is still no explanation as to what Magnetism, Light or Gravity is. We clearly can't imagine anything other than what we can see, hear or feel.
It makes me wonder if there is a Theory of Everything based on the current models. Maybe our fundamental models are totally wrong and we will never reconcile the fact that unification of Theories (Relativity and Quantum) can never be achieved because the models are fundamentally wrong. We appear to be trying to Unify two wrongs, and that can't be right.

For someone who claims to have a degree in maths, you seem worryingly oblivious of referring back to the use of axioms and Godel's axiom of incompleteness By definition, there cannot be any universally true holistic explanation of everything, since this would unearth something else which would require a new axiom. As you might vaguely remember from you studies, since there are a different number of infinities (those which are countable and those that are not), the really interesting question when we consider such things as an infinite number of universes, each possibly adhering to a different set of physical "axioms" in certain areas, is whether this infinite number is of the countable sort or not. That really is transcendental

Since physics as a discipline in its own right has only been released from the constraints of religious dogma for a few hundred years, those with the mental capacity to study it and imagine what might be "reality" have done rather well to bring it up to date from Aristotle's views.

As for whether Hawkins is all that is claimed and not a ventriloquist puppet as I suspect may be (at least partly) the case, I am surprised by your lack of imagination and willingness to test the hypothesis and instead wish to attack me as a Troll. Makes you look a bit silly really

 

[Hysteresis]

"After all of these years of research, there is still no explanation as to what Magnetism, Light or Gravity is"

A cow can't understand a simple game of chess just as man will never understand certain things as his brain will always be inferior.
Thats how God intended it.

"I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details."

Albert Einstein.

Even the late great Einstein was wrong on a lot of things.

Not with you on the God bit. There are far too many examples not supporting the God Theory. The overwhelming evidence is against it.

But it is your prerogative to believe it. Mine is to try to understand the evidence of cosmology and quantum mechanics and I am not intelligent enough to begin to understand it, but the evidence suggests we are somewhere near the comprehension of it all. At least by repeatable experimentation, testing the ideas it all has some degree of explanation.
For me, that doesn't work on the God idea.

 

[Hysteresis]

Dextraneous. I did not claim to have a degree in Mathematics, what I said was that I studied mathematics to degree level. My degree is in Applied Science not mathematics.
Your argument is rather more philosophy than Mathematical, and I agree with you in part.
The troll reference I made was to your suggestion of Hawkins being a puppet.
I think that is rather disrespectful of a Great Brain.
Whether Hawkins is right or wrong is not the point. The point I was making was that maybe the idea of an expanding universe was questionable and I suggested that maybe the whole thing is pulsating which would introduce a whole load of different mathematics.
The idea of Multi Universes comes out of the mathematics and may well be correct albeit impossible to contemplate, at least for my limited capability. Like I said at the start, the trouble I have with Physics is that whenever an anomaly is highlighted in the mathematics a new particle is invented to satisfy the mathematics, then Ph.D's are awarded trying to find the illusive particle. The Multiverse is another concept developed from the Mathematics. No doubt many Ph.D's will be awarded trying to find another Universe.
Brigadier gave the only constructive posting which I found very interesting and informative.
Of course you are spot on , Prof Hawkins suffers MND not MS, I apologise for the error.

 

[Brigadier]

Point taken Conny. I was tired and tipsy after a very long week.

Bloody hell Dex - haven't you just had a half-term holiday

Any joy with the early morning swimming club yet?

 

[Dextraneous]

Okey dokey. We'll leave my hypothesis regarding Hawkins aside.

The question to me is "what is the purpose of physics?". Undoubtedly one could ask this of most things, but hey ho, this is the subject matter of this thread

Is it to find out how things really are, or is it to appease our egos?

 

[cajar]

I think it's an undeniable part of being human - that is, to question and be curious.

 

[Dextraneous]

Point taken Conny. I was tired and tipsy after a very long week.

Bloody hell Dex - haven't you just had a half-term holiday

Any joy with the early morning swimming club yet?

Long week- late parents evening, marking past papers GCSE and A-levels, writing reports etc as well as the normal work load. We get the occasional log jam week like this, not complaining but that's the way it is.

Have managed to get a couple of swims in at a municipal pool up in Bolton en-route to work at 6:30. Doable and I manage to get to work for 7:20. Worse thing is having to pay for parking near the pool

 

[Hysteresis]

Okey dokey. We'll leave my hypothesis regarding Hawkins aside.

The question to me is "what is the purpose of physics?".

The answer is so that we don't have to live in caves anymore.
You might as well ask - What has Quantum Physics (or the Romans/Einstein/Newton etc,etc for that matter) done for Us?
Give your head a shake Dexy !!!!

 

[Dextraneous]

Okey dokey. We'll leave my hypothesis regarding Hawkins aside.

The question to me is "what is the purpose of physics?".

The answer is so that we don't have to live in caves anymore.
You might as well ask - What has Quantum Physics (or the Romans/Einstein/Newton etc,etc for that matter) done for Us?
Give your head a shake Dexy !!!!

Another personal attack

The point is, if it's for our ego then "truths" are more likely to be twisted than if we are genuinely after reality.

 

[Hysteresis]

Another personal attack

The point is, if it's for our ego then "truths" are more likely to be twisted than if we are genuinely after reality.

Certainly not a personal attack Dexy, that is not in my nature.
If you took it as an attack, I apologise profusely.
It was just an obvious answer to rather pointless question.
Again, I apologise if you found the answer offensive.

 

[Dextraneous]

But the question isn't pointless. We didn't study physics to get out of caves, you're putting the cart before the horse.

There is a significant amount of evidence that suggests that man made climate change and global warming is a load of old baloney, and it is a matter of pride and clash of egos that is the driving motivation for scientists on both sides of the argument. This inevitably has led to fallacious evidence, theories and "truths" emerging, with the "warmists"currently driving political solutions. Using this as an example of the pursuit of knowledge is an indication of how humans behave. Hence my question.

 

[Hysteresis]

But the question isn't pointless. We didn't study physics to get out of caves, you're putting the cart before the horse.

There is a significant amount of evidence that suggests that man made climate change and global warming is a load of old baloney, and it is a matter of pride and clash of egos that is the driving motivation for scientists on both sides of the argument. This inevitably has led to fallacious evidence, theories and "truths" emerging, with the "warmists"currently driving political solutions. Using this as an example of the pursuit of knowledge is an indication of how humans behave. Hence my question.

The answer being - that is the Point of Physics, to try to find the truth.
I don't see it as the Cart before the Horse, rather the other way round.

 

[Dextraneous]

Things happened as a consequence of what was discovered, not the other way round. Cart before the horse, as stated.

As for finding "the truth", which truth is that?

 

[Hysteresis]

Things happened as a consequence of what was discovered, not the other way round. Cart before the horse, as stated.

As for finding "the truth", which truth is that?

What You are describing is development, that's how it works.
That is the Horse before the Cart isn't it?

Which truth - Well there is only one truth and we are still searching for it.
Where as Creationists, believe any old twaddle they are indoctrinated with as being the truth without any substantiated evidence, in my opinion.
I may be wrong, but evidence suggests very heavily I am nearer the truth than Creationists. Given the evidence to the contrary, I am more than willing to accept that I am wrong whereas Creationists will never admit to being wrong even in the face of overwhelming evidence - In My Opinion.