Theory of everything

Barrow J (1991) Theories of Everything The Quest for Ultimate Explanation. New York, Oxford... 

Standard Model The model for the formation of the Universe and the unification of forces - the current, flawed theory of everything. 

Alchemical thinking helped lead the Society to interpret the implications of modem atomic theory in a way that emphasized the unity of matter (and even of energy) that saw oneness, rather than disunity and distinctness, as a major substratum of atomic theory and that pushed to spiritualize this principle. This grasping for ever simpler and more basic unity is, of course, not so uncommon an impulse in twentieth-century physics. (Consider unified field theories, and even the Theory of Everything in more recent physics.) Alchemy allowed the scientists and Hermeticists of the Alchemical Society to re-enchant science by positing the origins of the modem scientific push for unity in ancient Hermetic spirituality. 

All evidence suggests that the entire universe exists in a state of constant dynamic change. Those changes external to the solar system have been the focus of theoretical physics and many of the leading exponents claim that, on that front the end is in sight. The formulation of a theory of everything is thought to be imminent. 

This success, however, has a dark side. There are clear signs that MCA has heen oversold in a certain sense that some relative novices in systems mathematics (not all of whom are biologists) view MCA as the end all of metabolic systems theory that MCA is seen as the theory of everything for metabolic engineering. This is, sadly, far from true. 

Karl Pribram was no prosaic scientist. He was a visionary who hungered for a unified theory of behavior, just as Einstein struggled in vain to create a unified field theory. Today, equally obsessed physicists and mathematicians strive for a theory of everything. If someone succeeds, I suspect that it will defy, rather than enhance comprehension for most of us. 

If Albert Einstein had lived for another 20 years with a clear mind, what effect would this have had on the world I surveyed dozens of colleagues. Some mathematicians believed that Albert Einstein could have made significant contributions to the theory of everything if he had lived longer, but others suggested that Einstein had reached his peak... 

Unfortunately, there are so many different ways to create universes by compactify-ing the six dimensions that string theory is difficult to relate to the real universe. In 1993, researchers suggested that if string theory takes into account the quantum effects of charged mini black holes, the thousands of 4-D solutions may collapse to only one. Tiny black holes, with no more mass than an elementary particle, and strings may be two descriptions of the same object. Thanks to the theory of mini black holes, physicists now hope to mathematically follow the evolution of the universe and select one particular Calabi-Yau compactification—a first step to a testable theory of everything. ... 

Barrow, John D. Theories of Everything. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 1991. Barrow, John D. and Tipler, Frank J. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 1986. 

The theories of everything should provide the complete physical basis for cosmology. The problem is that the string theory is still in the form of theoretical theory , for which the experimental probes are widely doubted to exist. The development of cosmoparticle physics can remove these doubts. In its framework there are two directions to approach the test of theories of everything. 

Despite all these impressive progress, we are still too far from the ultimate theory of everything. I listed some obvious avenues for future research in particle physics and cosmology. If I am allowed to say my personal prejudice, I would say that the flavor problem is beyond our reach for years to come, but our understanding of the law of force may further be advanced by a new discovery of violation of empirical conservation laws. The Majorana nature of neutrino masses and proton decay are just manifestation of violation of lepton and baryon numbers, and in my view there is no fundamental obstacle against these being discovered in future, however remote it might be. 

M.Tegmark. Is the Theory of Everything merely the Ultimate Ensemble Theory Annals of Physics (NY), 270, 1 (1998). 

Yet chemistry could have become a rich source of inspiration and metaphor for everyone interested in the puzzles and dilemmas of human existence. In the chemical philosophies that flourished in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, it was precisely that these theories, now seemingly so arcane and indeed occult, can be considered the first proto-scientific theories of everything . This aspect of Renaissance science, which drew in particular on the ideas of the Swiss alchemist and physician Paracelsus and left its mark on the notion of science developed by Francis Bacon, has been discussed by the American historian of science Allen Debus (1978). It came sometimes into explicit conflict with the mechanistic view of science initiated by Rene Descartes and his followers, and which of course ultimately triumphed in the form of the deterministic mechanics of Isaac Newton. 

What are the prospects for future science when taking into account the complexity we have described in this paper They are summarized by John Maddox [18], editor of "Nature" for in excess of 25 years "Science is at present a curious patchwoik. Fundamental physics is perh s the oddest the research community is divided into those who believe that there will be a "theory of everything" very shortly and those who suspect (or hope) that the years ahead will throw up some kind of "new physics" instead. History is on the side of the second camp, to which I belong". 

There is a popular perception that the pursuit of knowledge should be aimed at finding a theory of everything (Barrow, 1992). In mathematical terms it may be thought of as a differential equation with solutions that predict all details of the knowable universe. Conceptually it implies a fundamental thought which may be extended logically into an explanation of all phenomena. 

---