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

Posts by the blogger are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

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

Anonymous: on 7/30/18 at 14:45pm UTC, wrote Dear FQXi.org Community, Reality am not a theory. EVERY REALTHING has a...

John Hodge: on 7/27/18 at 15:50pm UTC, wrote Here is one: ' target='new'>STOE It links GR with QM, has 5 experiments...

Steve Dufourny: on 2/20/17 at 12:24pm UTC, wrote all converges towards the spherisation :) the relevance with these 3D...

Steve Dufourny: on 2/19/17 at 19:24pm UTC, wrote possible indeed this TOE :) Jonathan and the complementarity appears above...

Jonathan Dickau: on 2/14/17 at 6:57am UTC, wrote This is an interesting topic.. Indeed, the proper focus is on exactly what...

Georgina Woodward: on 1/18/17 at 23:01pm UTC, wrote Hi Philip, welcome. When I clicked on Cosmology , ten different topics came...

Philip Janes: on 9/13/10 at 0:56am UTC, wrote I am new to the forum, so please forgive me if this is not the right place...

Marcel-Marie LeBel: on 4/8/10 at 2:46am UTC, wrote Physics is empirical and only represent our experience of the universe...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Jason Wolfe: "Many years ago, I learned a difficult truth to practice. I learned that..." in The Nature of Time

Jason Wolfe: "The speed of light is both a clock and a ruler. Speed of light c=..." in The Nature of Time

Zeeya Merali: "You're invited to a special free film screening and panel discussion event,..." in Film Screening: "Infinite...

Georgina Woodward: "How we identified brain patterns of consciousness,the conversation.com" in Searching for Physical...

jim hughes: "I'm not a mathematician, so the math part is mostly lost on me. And I'm..." in Structure Invention by...

Charles Harrow: "The AI only works really well in the "comfort zone", i.e. under test..." in Is Causality Fundamental?

Jason Wolfe: "In all honesty, I'm not even sure what intelligent and educated people..." in Generalised Integrated...

Jason Wolfe: "It would be nice to imagine that the Germans are working on gravity..." in Generalised Integrated...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Lockdown Lab Life
Grounded physicists are exploring the use of online and virtual-reality conferencing, and AI-controlled experiments, to maintain social distancing. Post-pandemic, these positive innovations could make science more accessible and environmentally-friendly.

Is Causality Fundamental?
Untangling how the human perception of cause-and-effect might arise from quantum physics, may help us understand the limits and the potential of AI.

Building Agency in the Biology Lab
Physicists are using optogenetics techniques to make a rudimentary agent, from cellular components, which can convert measurements into actions using light.

Think Quantum to Build Better AI
Investigating how quantum memory storage could aid machine learning and how quantum interactions with the environment may have played a role in evolution.

Outside the Box
A proposed quantum set-up that could predict your game-playing strategy resurrects Newcomb’s classic quiz show paradox.


FQXi BLOGS
July 15, 2020

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Universe of Possibilities: Is a Theory of Everything Possible? [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Mar. 9, 2009 @ 04:28 GMT
When I saw that the line up for Saturday's session on whether we have any serious chance of finding a “theory of everything” (TOE) included a mix of string theorists and a loop quantum gravity theorist (who are usually set up as being major TOE rivals), I was hoping we’d be in store for a fireworks. In the stringy corner, we had Stanford’s Renata Kallosh and Columbia’s Brian Greene,...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the forum administrator

report post as inappropriate


Bubba Gump wrote on Feb. 24, 2010 @ 00:15 GMT
From a thematic perspective, a 'Theory of Everything' would, by defintion, be able to explain itself, -- i.e. Why does this theory of eveything have the form it does instead of something else?

I always assumed that a TOE, as is commonly used in the vocabulary of modern physics, was a synonym for unification or a fundamental principle or theory that would explain the existence of all known physical entities and why they have the properties they do.

This would represent a theory that is capable of outlining, in the most general way, a fundamental property of nature from which higher levels of structure and complexity can be derived. It would not, in and of itself, represent a theory of everything, for the reason noted above.

Such a theory would be more accurately described as a 'Theory of Fundamental Structure' rather than a 'Theory of Everything.'

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Apr. 8, 2010 @ 02:46 GMT
Physics is empirical and only represent our experience of the universe taken as a black box. It ignores everything of the inside of the box which is the domain of metaphysics i.e. what the universe is made of and what makes it evolve by itself. Therefore, physics being incomplete, it cannot lead to a TOE. A TOE requires a single internally consistent truth system while physics itself is a collection of different truth systems that are therefore, logically incompatible.

No! The only possible TOE is one level down, right into natural metaphysics or ontology. This is actually the underlying subject matter to all our observations by whatever approach, be it QM, GR etc. The big problem with physics is that they always play cool pondering big questions they know well not to be part of their business.

There! I said it.

Marcel,

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Philip Janes wrote on Sep. 13, 2010 @ 00:56 GMT
I am new to the forum, so please forgive me if this is not the right place to ask; I just don't see anything more appropriate.

There are no topics in the forum under Cosmology, and there doesn't appear to be any way to start one. On the Forum introduction page, it says,

"To view or participate in a discussion, start by clicking on a category of interest and reviewing the topics within that category. You may read or contribute to any topic, or, if there isn't yet a topic on your subject of interest, feel free to start your own.

"Within in each topic, there are multiple 'threads', representing different, simultaneous conversations. To comment in a particular thread, click on 'reply to this thread'. A window will appear, in which you can enter your post. To start a new thread, scroll down to the bottom of the page, and use the window under the heading 'Add a New Post'. "

Under Cosmology, there are no threads and no "Add a New Post" window.

Is it just that I'm new, or does everyone get the same thing?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate
Georgina Woodward replied on Jan. 18, 2017 @ 23:01 GMT
Hi Philip, welcome. When I clicked on Cosmology , ten different topics came up , with various numbers of posts in them. Clicking on one there is no box for replies but at the bottom of the page it says log in or create account. So that is what needs to be done there. One you have logged in you will have the choice of starting a new discussion in a new box or clicking reply to thread and joining your post onto the last on in the discussion. That helps if there is a conversation or related ideas being shared.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Feb. 14, 2017 @ 06:57 GMT
This is an interesting topic..

Indeed, the proper focus is on exactly what happens at the smallest scale, and the debate continues. I have great respect for Abhay Ashtekar after GR21, because hearing the character of his questions shows me a genuine interest in every new development from every formulation, that might lead us to a greater understanding of how gravity and quantum mechanics can be united. But I also acknowledge the strong arguments of String Theory folks, and think that Brian Greene is a pretty cool person. Of course; his graphics would be top-notch, given the TV boost, but that should not predispose us to Strings.

I have had the pleasure to meet Greene and Ashtekar, and I acknowledge their contributions to our understanding. But the search must continue beyond the world of Strings vs Loops, in order for a full understanding to emerge. It was the opinion of Beverly Berger at GR21, echoed by Lee Smolin in the Quantum Gravity sessions, that only a greater exchange between the different camps in that subject would yield the answers sought - and no one approach is as promising as the combined advances of the different flavors. I plan to write on this topic myself, and I will say something relevant about it in my new essay soon to post.

Regards,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate
Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 19, 2017 @ 19:24 GMT
possible indeed this TOE :) Jonathan and the complementarity appears above the nice competition.These points of equilmibrium are very relevant Jonathan Dr Spock :)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Feb. 20, 2017 @ 12:24 GMT
all converges towards the spherisation :) the relevance with these 3D sphères is that all rational works can be superimposed.Mtheory Mr Witten we wait you there ,let's discuss about these rotating spherical volumes and their partitioning ,their musics of rotations.....the convergences can appear.Now I must admit that I like the one field of this Mtheory.Like connected with the consomological singularity.That said If Ican ,we are still in the electromagnetic prison.That said I like this primordial field in 1d and the extrapolations with extradimensions.That said if we insist always on these photons like if we had an enormous star implying a luminerous aetehr and having implied so the dimensions,3D for the contemplations if I can say.But that seems not logic considering this infinite entity ,this infinite entropy having created this 3D systems.If we fractalise this 3D we have a wonderful serie of spherical volumes.And if this infinity has created a physicality, so I am doubting that only photons have been created like primordial about the main informations.It is more complex than this the gravitation.It is a different logic than our standard model and heat and photonic electromagnetism.This logic respects our principles of equivalence but we must consider this weakest quantum force nor like baryonic nor like relativistic.Because the waves of gravitation tends to infinity like this gravitation at all scales in 3D.If we have a cosm singularity, it seems more logic to insert a BH in the cold producing also cold....it permits to balance this standard model and that at all 3D scales.If the strings and the fréquences and oscillations more the correcte reccurent serie can find the bridge, it becomes relevant.This matter is more than we can imagine.The aether is gravitational.E=mc²+ml² ....

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


John C Hodge wrote on Jul. 27, 2018 @ 15:50 GMT
Here is one:

STOE

It links GR with QM, has 5 experiments predicted by the model that reject current models, has made other predictions.

Hodge

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Anonymous wrote on Jul. 30, 2018 @ 14:45 GMT
Dear FQXi.org Community,

Reality am not a theory. EVERY REALTHING has a real visible surface. It logically follows that there must only be one real visible infinite surface eternally occurring in one infinite dimension that am always illuminated by mostly finite non-surface light. The theoretical physicists are going wrong by believing that there were finite measurable amounts of matter and, space and time.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
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.