[mkirkpatrick]

maybe the answer to the questionof the theory of everything,lies in what
the ageless wisdom,calls,the aether,that unifying principle which is omini/present
eternal,and is the sum total of all there is.
the string theory is very much the same.only using different terminollges/
as Shakesphere,once said,a rose by any other name smells as sweet?

there fore I suggest that the answer to the apparent puzzle is ,that ether.
is the String,there is also a saying that Space is an enity,

The last thing I want to say,is that this,could also be called,conscious,
intellegent,energy,directed by a divine Will?

michael k,

[Robert]

Hi Michael,

Originally Posted by michael kirkpatrick

The last thing I want to say, is that this, could also be called, conscious,
intellegent, energy, directed by a divine Will?

But what is the source of the divine will, and where did it come from, and what scientific principles does it obey, etc. This concept of a divine will complicates the Theory of Everything. But enough about that. Save the scientific discussions for the other forums. Tell us why you are interested in the Theory of Everything. What are your interests. What is your perspective on the TOE. That's what we're really interests us in this forum.

Welcome to ToeQuest!

Regards,
--Robert

[mkirkpatrick]

What interests me about t.o.e. and toequest.is that it provides a forum,
to exchange ideas,and share expieriances,with other like minds,around the
globe.

I think that the final answer to what is t.o.e. will be all is energy,and all
is intelligent.what then is energy.I would call energy,Life,a living moving
intelligent,loving,wise,force.
Some would call that God,some might say that it is dark matter,slightly
illuminated?

What do you think. regards,michael.

[dleviwing]

Michael;
Until one obtains a clear understanding of the terminology used in science today, a continued confusion will exist between the scientist and those with the casual interest in science. The greatest errors occur with terms like "energy", "mass", "matter", "time", "force", and many others.
Matter is the only entity of the universe. All else are dimensions of measurement needed to describe the various states of form and interactions of matter.
Energy is not an entity of the universe.
Time is not an entity of the universe.
Mass is not an entity of the universe.
Force is not an entity of the universe.
etcetera, etcetera, etcetera,

Don't allow the intellectuals to impress you with what sounds like logical science. String theory and M-Theory have no scientific evidence of anything other than the ability to define mathematically the function of gravity and yet it is proclaimed to be the answer to TOE.

WELCOME TO TOEQUEST;

[Mr. Nobody]

Matter is the only entity!
But what is matter really?
Molecules, atoms, quarks? Where is the solid stuff?
No true solids exist, what we touch, what we feel, is the electromagnetic force field of fingers interacting with the electromagnetic force field of objects. Even atoms are not matter, there core are quarks and leptons bound together by the strong force. And all we know is that quarks and leptons are smaller than 10-19 meters in radius. As far as we can tell, they have no internal structure or even any size. It is possible that future evidence will, once again, show this understanding to be an illusion and demonstrate that there is substructure within the particles that we now view as fundamental.
And then there is the quantum fog
So, how can you say matter is a tangible, when it can not exist without energy, a force holding its constituents together, constituents that might itself be nothing more than energy states, information of energy waves.

[dleviwing]

Mr Nobody;
You seem to think like most who have a casual interest in science.

Energy is a function of matter, not an independent entity.
Force is a function of matter like energy.
electromagnetic force is an interaction between states of matter.

Matter is the only fundamental substance of the universe.
The only thing that is not of matter is a pure void, and space is NOT a void.

My statement (All else are dimensions of measurement needed to describe the various states of form and interactions of matter) excludes any other entity from having a physical nature. As long as mathematical terms are interpreted as real entities, the solution to a TOE will never evolve.

Reality is masked with the illusion that nature is made of many entities. To understand reality, you need only understand the fundamental substance of the universe and its absolute fundamental properties.

[Mr. Nobody]

You are absolutely right. I am a civil engineer by trade and have a casual interest in science. I am not a physicist nor do I have formal training in physics or higher mathematics.

So, I looked it up myself and found the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter
Matter is commonly referred to as the substance of which physical objects are composed. In physics, it is everything that is constituted of elementary fermions. Philosophically, matter constitutes the formless substratum of all things, which exists only potentially and from which reality is produced. In the sense of content, matter is also used in contrast to form.
Matter occupies space and has mass. It is composed predominantly of atoms, which consist of protons, neutrons, and electrons. All gauge bosons (of which the photon is one), which mediate the four fundamental forces, are not considered matter, even though they certainly have energy and some also mass.
Matter thus consists of quarks and leptons. There are six types of quarks (strange, charm, top, bottom, up, and down) which combine to form hadrons, primarily baryons and mesons, through the strong interaction and are actually thought to always be confined. Among the baryons are the proton and the neutron, which further combine to form the nuclei of all elements of the periodic table. Usually these nuclei are surrounded by a cloud of electrons. A nucleus with as many electrons as protons, which is thus electrically neutral, is called an atom, otherwise it is an ion. Chemistry is the science that studies how nuclei and electrons combine to form compounds.

In bulk, matter can exist in several different phases, according to particle density and energy density or alternatively pressure and temperature. These phases include gases, plasmas, liquids, fluids, superfluids, solids, and Bose-Einstein condensate. As circumstances change, matter may change from one phase into another. These phenomena are called phase transitions, and their energetics are studied in the field of thermodynamics. In small quantities, matter can exhibit properties that are entirely different from those of bulk material.

Matter constitutes the observable Universe. It can be converted to energy (see annihilation), and vice versa - can be created out of energy (see matter creation) and undergo other formations and alterations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation
Matter creation is process inverse to annihilation. It usually refers to pair creation, i.e., the conversion of photons into a fermion and antifermion pair, such as an electron and a positron. Since momentum conservation law prohibits the creation of a pair of fermions out of a single photon, pair creation involves at least two photons (or a single photon and one or more fermions). This, in turn, requires a high photon density to create a noticeable amount of matter.

Energy conservation law provides a lower limit for the photon energy required for creation of a pair of fermions. It must not be less than the rest energy of the fermions created. For example, to create an electron-positron pair (2mc2 = 1.04 MeV), the total energy of the photons must be greater than or equal to 1.04 MeV, corresponding to soft gamma ray photons. As another example, the creation of a proton-antiproton pair requires more than 1.88 GeV (hard gamma ray photons). Thus, to precipitate matter, a photon gas must not only be very dense but also very hot.

Matter creation during the early development of the universe (see Big Bang) is believed to be the source of fermionic matter in the visible universe, which consists predominantly of electrons and protons.



So, in concluding from reading the above excerpts from "Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia", matter is quarks and leptons (as I stated in my previous post) and matter can be created out of energy. Going further, I hypothosized that the accepted core constituents of matter, possesing no known internal structure may be nothing but information, bits, a description of waves in spirit with QM (Quantum theory was originally conceived as being applicable only at the atomic level, but it has now been found to apply to some sub-atomic particles, including the nucleus, from http://www.heretical.com/science/quantum2.html ) And that led me to the belief that nothing tangible exists, that our reality is simply energy with information.
I view the subatomic realm, being subject to QM, as the threshold to our reality. Using the decoherance principle as the "Darwinien" selector, the propagation of most succesfull information, I have constructed a view of reality, a combination of the subatomic undeterminism with the "real" of this existence. It fits with the anthropic principle and leaves only the source energy as the great unknown

[Mr. Nobody]

By source energy I am not inferring anything mystical, eternally good nor devine. I am a strong believer in Darwinism at all scales, including our reality, a mindless dance of survival of the fittest without rhime nor reason.

The universe evolved, maybe through many cycles of inflation/big bangs, to produce black holes. Based on latest research, black holes are not permanent either and tend to evaporate so that the end product is perhaps spatial singularities or plain nothing. Either way it should be a state of maximum entropy. From BB to SS, what drives the universe? What motivates the cosmos to expand, to have gone through transformations. Is it to produce SS's as quickly as possible? Is the ultimate evolution, the reason of it all to produce environments that are conducive to form spatial singularities? Is the overriding urge of the cosmos to end up in maximum entropy as quickly as possibly? If the answer is yes, then life, the emergence of autonomy out of a system, the great organizer is an anomaly, a fluke perhaps a universe, conscious of itself, caertainly not a devine will.
From:
http://www.toequest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=639

[dleviwing]

Mr nobody;
I am proud of you. Not many take the time to read definitions of terms they feel are common sense axiomatic concepts. You should also read the definition of "dimensions", it may help you comprehend what the mathematicians are referring to when they talk about other dimensions (a measured quantity).

My comments are based only on the first sentence " Matter is commonly referred to as the substance of which physical objects are composed." Basically referring to the absolute fundamental physical substance of the universe.

The other definitions you quoted are those that also require adjectives such as "Atomic matter", "subatomic particle matter", and so on.
Fundamental matter is not Quarks an fermions; Quarks and fermions are structures of fundamental matter.

Not all the contributors to the wikipedia are true experts. This statement is a glaring example of unchecked incompetent armatures.
(((Matter constitutes the observable Universe. It can be converted to energy (see annihilation), and vice versa - can be created out of energy (see matter creation) and undergo other formations and alterations.)))

MATTER DOSE NOT CONVERT TO ENERGY.
MASS and energy are equivalent and thus "Mass is converted to energy". Matter and energy are NOT equivalent. (mass and energy are dimensional terms not physical entities.)
This is only one of many misconceptions of fundamental physics.
Unfortunately many people are indoctrinated with false concepts and tend to accept them without question. Our only defense against this brainwashing is to be skeptical and study as many sources of information as possible. The final answer is decided on by the individual.

The greatest problem today is the interpretation of the mathematical formalism to a philosophical perceptual paradigm.


PS. Photons are not traveling particles of light. A photon represents a quantitative measure of energy absorbed or emitted.

[Mr. Nobody]

You should also read the definition of "dimensions"
(mass and energy are dimensional terms not physical entities.)

Dimensions are defined as degrees of freedom (for movement within space) according to the same dictionary, which leads to the following statements using your definitions of mass and energy
1: Mass and energy are degrees of freedom for space itself?
If I add the (for movement within space) it results in the statement:
2: Mass and energy are degrees of freedom (for movement of mass and energy? within space)
Statement 2 is a paradox, so I assume you mean the first definition.

If so, then I assume you do not agree with the inflationary theory of cosmology, which theorizes an inflaton field:
http://universe-review.ca/R02-13-inflation.htm
The mechanism to drive the inflation is related to a "yet-to-be-discovered" inflaton field, which is thought to be similar to the Higgs fields responsible for the mass of the elementary particles. When the temperature fell below a certain value, a phase transition of the inflaton field occurred. The phase transition released energy, which was conversed to hot matter and radiation. It also developed repulsive force to drive the inflation. The inflation stopped when the inflaton field settled down into lower energy state.

PS: Thanks for the photon explanation. I do not belief in "nugget existence" of any particles. I belief in waves and the particles as the information of that wave. Therefore the wave is real, the particle is not, simply put