Quote:
Originally Posted by theunify  Are you saying that A grand Unified Theory should bend back on itself as if language itself has been stretched to the brinks of human knowledge so that it opens up like a piggy bank overstuffed with goods? |
A grand unified theory is useful to those in physics, not life. A meaningful TOE would apply to all things. Otherwise it should be called a TOST (theory of some things). Everyone in 5th grade should be able to understand a true TOE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunify Edit* Ok I read your site and I must say I am very impressed Sir, not only with your childhood stories and trying successes but with the ease in interpretation of the coming of the new world of science, physics? All in all your theory solid but is not credible for the simple admission that you burned the rough draft when you were 16, so idea like "there is no now" simply seem out of place in a motivational theory of language. |
Sure, there's a now. But I believe it is impossible to know what it is.
We can only perceive what is outside of the Now. This not only applies to our sun or other stars whose image is at least 8 minutes old but to the house across the street, as well. Granted, the amount of 'time' the representation takes to get to us is miniscule, but it is still outside the 'now' nonetheless. Same applies to our noses when we look at it.
Flucidity Theory maintains that everything we perceive is a representation of its truer (imperceptible) nature.
What would happen if we tried to perceive the inherently vast and unlimited with limited perceptual tools? It would be broken down into manageable pieces, ready for consumption at our own pace.
Thus the universe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunify Good advice* You have enough here for 2 books, not just one, so don't force ideas unless you are willing to "branche out" and include other persons theories which are parallel to your own; such as "Weinsteizer et al 2007" notices the same thing that there is only a past and a future in his world renowned work Pulitzer United, or something like that, the more theories you can find that match your own to some degree will earn you great dividends for figuring out what your next step should be. |
I'm not sure why most of us assume, unreasonably so perhaps, that a true TOE is going to come out of a laboratory or university.
As we know, a true TOE should apply to all things and be applicable across all disciplines, not just the limited space of a laboratory.
I would even suggest that is the reason none has yet been discovered and made known.
Flucidity Theory can be simple or complex, depending upon what is required.
The basic elements of existence, too, can be simple or complex, depending.