Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Display:
 all posts
 member posts highlighted
 member posts only

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Robert Martin: on 5/22/17 at 10:37am UTC, wrote Theories of everything, he contends, can be depicted as those which draw on...

Steve Dufourny: on 5/11/17 at 8:50am UTC, wrote indeed.And if the aether is not luminiferous but gravitational and that the...

Steve Agnew: on 5/11/17 at 2:22am UTC, wrote Close says in a section discussing the Higg's boson, "This may sound as...

sampath rao: on 5/9/17 at 10:31am UTC, wrote memorial day quotes and sayings

Steve Dufourny: on 5/9/17 at 7:48am UTC, wrote Hi Steve, Thanks for sharing. The answers indeed are still fzr of us when...

sampath rao: on 5/9/17 at 5:27am UTC, wrote Memorial Day Facebook, Whatsapp Status Messages The Memorial Day Whatsapp...

Steve Agnew: on 5/9/17 at 3:45am UTC, wrote This book is a very good read and easy at around 100 pp or so and only $5...

Pentcho Valev: on 5/8/17 at 20:05pm UTC, wrote Is Close critical enough in his book? He was very critical a couple of...



FQXi FORUM
May 23, 2017

CATEGORY: High Energy Physics [back]
TOPIC: Theories of Everything, by Frank Close [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on May. 8, 2017 @ 16:48 GMT
Steve Agnew suggests that physicist Frank Close's new book would be a good topic of discussion. According to the blurb, in his book (which has yet to be released in the US, but is available in the UK), Close takes the reader to the frontiers of science in a vividly told investigation of revolutionary science and enterprise from the seventeenth century to the present. He looks at what has been meant by theories of everything, explores the scientific breakthroughs they have allowed, and shows the far-reaching effects they have had on crucial aspects of life and belief. Theories of everything, he argues, can be described as those which draw on all relevant branches of knowledge to explain everything known about the universe. Such accounts may reign supreme for centuries. Then, often as a result of the advances they themselves have enabled, a new discovery is made which the current theory cannot explain. A new theory is needed which inspiration, sometimes, supplies."

Enjoy!

report post as inappropriate


Pentcho Valev wrote on May. 8, 2017 @ 20:05 GMT
Is Close critical enough in his book? He was very critical a couple of years ago:

Frank Close: "In recent years, however, many physicists have developed theories of great mathematical elegance, but which are beyond the reach of empirical falsification, even in principle. The uncomfortable question that arises is whether they can still be regarded as science. Some scientists are proposing that the definition of what is "scientific" be loosened, while others fear that to do so could open the door for pseudo-scientists or charlatans to mislead the public and claim equal space for their views."

So new theories are not falsifiable, but how about old ones? General relativity for instance? What if, by introducing fudge factors, Einsteinians can make general relativity predict anything they want? Are fudge factors a legitimate theoretical tool? Is the theory deductive if fudge factors are a legitimate theoretical tool? If the theory is not deductive, what is it? Empirical concoction? Not even wrong?

Pentcho Valev

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew replied on May. 9, 2017 @ 03:45 GMT
This book is a very good read and easy at around 100 pp or so and only $5 for the e-book. It is well worth it and the Kindle e-reader seems to work just fine on my PC. I bought it on Amazon and read it with the Kindle cloud reader and that all worked very well.

Close asks, "Will space and time eventually emerge from some deeper theory?"

Well...yeah...of course they will...

Actually, I believe that the answer is out there and just buried in the hubris of the many possibilities...

report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on May. 9, 2017 @ 07:48 GMT
Hi Steve,

Thanks for sharing.

The answers indeed are still fzr of us when we consider these singularities and all these steps before.What are our knowledges in fact ? so weak in front of this infinite entropy and its irreversible increasing evolutive mass....

The space time has still so many secrets to show us ....

Best Regards Jedi of the Sphere....

report post as inappropriate

Steve Agnew replied on May. 11, 2017 @ 02:22 GMT
Close says in a section discussing the Higg's boson,

"This may sound as if we have re-introduced the ether, a fluid once supposed to be responsible for the propagation of electromagnetic waves, but was famously eliminated by Einstein with his theory of relativity."

Indeed...science is now openly proposing aether as the remedy that beats stringy, quantum loopy, multiversey, and supersymmetrization. It is ironic that so many prominent in science know that science is in a deep rabbit hole, but they cannot seem to find there way out of that rabbit hole...

report post as inappropriate


sampath rao wrote on May. 9, 2017 @ 10:31 GMT
memorial day quotes and sayings

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.