[subversion]

Originally Posted by dustin_archibald Are you referring to the Theory of Definition?

yes, I am referring to the Theory of Definition which is what I have tentatively been calling my theory but I can't really claim it as my theory because really I just borrowed it from the truth. I also call it by numerous other names, such as the Theory of Everything, which it is, and the Theory of Relevancy, etc. You could think of an infinite amount of names if you wanted to but I kind of like the sound of definition.

Basically the Theory of Definition holds that humans understand the world around them by defining things and also it holds that everything can be understood. Also the theory suggests that definitions are true if and only if we hold them to be true. So long as we hold a definition to be true, which is the definition of a definition, then there is no need or possibility to refute the definition and thus the definition is indeed true. Due to the nature of language, definitions are technically arbitrary in their choice of symbols but, their meanings are not. Their meanings are considered absolute and correct, and they transcend the mere symbols which communicate their meaning. So the theory of definition is really all about meaning.

Originally Posted by <<>> Well, most of the people that talk about making a TOE either forget relativity or forget QM, so actually the development of theories is abandom of theories. When we want to make a theory about every single thing in the univere, that is, not a theory of the basic, but o everything, then we will abandom and forget the TOE which will explain the basis and make theory that explains every single thing. But I doubt we humans achieve that theory of all everything, I even doubt we will acheive a TOE of basics. Anyway my post doesn't impply that. A theory of words is a theotry about things (words) that has no existence as such in reality. They are ink symbols in paper, that's a word. This is why there can be no empirical theory of words. But there can be empirical theories of spacetime, matter, force, energy... That is why the TOE won't be liek the theory of definition. And anyway, if we don't do what I mean, even in a different way, but do it, we will never be able to talk about everything for everything will automatically be an entitiy itself.

I think you misunderstand the Theory of Everything because according to what you've written above, the true Theory of Everything is impossible. But according to the Theory of Everything, it is possible. Therefore you do not apparently understand the theory of everything and I am guessing it is partially your pessimism which prevents you from embracing the greatest possible possibility.

Furthermore, I would like to say that the theory of definition is NOT a theory of words as you have claimed. Words are not necessary for definition, for example, e=mc2 is a definition which defines one thing, e, as another thing, mc2, but it does not use words. Similarly all the seperate components of mc2 have their own definitions as well. So you can see that the theory of definition is NOT about words, it is about meaning only. Words are symbols which convey meaning sometimes but words themselves do not necessarily constitute meaning, though they are intended to. Therefore the theory of definition holds that it will tell us the meaning of everything, in every sense of the word, including what is the meaning for the universe's expansion, what is the meaning of quantum mechanics, what is it that means force unification, what is the meaning of life, what is the meaning for time being relative to the speed of light etc. In short the theory of definition just means that you can find the meaning, i.e. the solution to all the greatest questions. I found out how to do this by discovering the meaning of the unifying principle which is the greatest possible principle. Can you guess what it is?

Originally Posted by Lost The way I understand it, dark matter is a term used to explain the missing mass of the universe. We know that the universe is expanding at a certain rate, but that rate of expansion does not coincide with what it should be according to how much mass is out there. Therefore there must be mass out there that we do not see, or know of.

Actually dark matter was not discovered because of the way the universe expands. In order for us to detect dark matter in that way we first would have to understand the nature of dark energy which as you said is the force that makes the universe expand. The way that dark matter was actually discovered was by the way that galaxies rotate and how they don't seem to rotate in the right way considering how much mass we detect in them by other methods. ANyway, just thought I'd point that out, it was galaxy rotation not expansion that lead to the hypothesis of dark matter. At least I'm pretty sure that's correct.

Originally Posted by dustin_archibald I like the idea subversion had that Everything = All that is possible. Is it possible that there's a piece of paper on my desk? Yes! Is it possbile that the piece of paper doesn't exist at all? Yes! Is it possible that there will be an elephant on my desk in the next 2 seconds? Yes!

and if the paper doesn't exist at all it is considered to be nothing

Originally Posted by <<>> I agree. Thoughts exist, are real 8part of reality), but they are not thing. Exactly what we say something or a-thing is for physical existence is what a thought is for mental existence: an object.

things are defined in the english language as nouns. Nouns can be either people, places, things, or ideas. All of these have physical realities. For example, ideas have a physical reality because they represent a certain connection of neurons in the brain. So if a thought can not be thought of it technically does not exist. But the only thought which can not be thought of in it's pure sense is the thought of nothing. In other words, it is literally impossible to think of nothing unless you are dead and if you are dead then you ARE nothing. Therefore the only thing which is not a thing is nothing. Therefore all things are something which exist including ideas except for the idea of nothing because the idea of nothing can not be thought of and therefore it is a false idea which means it is really not an idea at all. So again in conclusion nothing is the only thing which is not something.

[dustin_archibald]

Originally Posted by subversion ...all things are something which exist including ideas except for the idea of nothing because the idea of nothing can not be thought of and therefore it is a false idea which means it is really not an idea at all.

I disagree on this point. The idea of nothing exists since it has an effect on something and something affects it. We perceive it, therefore it affects us. It's nature changes based on our thoughts and discussion, so it is affected. It may be a false idea but it is still an idea.

Actual nothing does not exist because it does not affect anything and nothing affects it. No matter what we do we cannot measure it or its effects in any way.