[RascalPuff]

Granted there are many similarities, but what - if any - specific differences distinguish a Grand Unified Field Theory (G.U.T.) from a Theory of Everything (T.O.E.)? Is there a specific definition that accomodates these similarities and differences? Are there a series of distinctions that explain the differences and similiarities? The question is asked for many reasons, most particularly because it seems fairly certain that the two objectives parallel - and may learn from one another - in many ways.

[mkirkpatrick]

Thanks RP,My "gut" feeling is that there is little if any real difference,although on this forum,there are many ideas put forward that are not strictly very "orthodox" and would
be dismissed by the science-fraternity,whereas they would accept the GUT theory.



regards michael.

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Thanks RP,My "gut" feeling is that there is little if any real difference,although on this forum,there are many ideas put forward that are not strictly very "orthodox" and would be dismissed by the science-fraternity,whereas they would accept the GUT theory. regards michael.

______________________

Dear Michael:
Hadn't thought of that until you said it. And as soon as you said it I understood what you mean.
Regards (something else I learned from you)
- RP

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff ______________________ Dear Michael: Hadn't thought of that until you said it. And as soon as you said it I understood what you mean. Regards (something else I learned from you) - RP

Glad to be of some use,there will be no fee expected of course!






regards michael.

[bottomlander]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Granted there are many similarities, but what - if any - specific differences distinguish a Grand Unified Field Theory (G.U.T.) from a Theory of Everything (T.O.E.)? Is there a specific definition that accomodates these similarities and differences? Are there a series of distinctions that explain the differences and similiarities? The question is asked for many reasons, most particularly because it seems fairly certain that the two objectives parallel - and may learn from one another - in many ways.

A TOE should include at least the following topics:
I. Appraisal Perspectives;
II. Philosophy Perspectives;
III. Physics Perspectives;
IV. Mathematics Perspectives;
V. Life Perspectives;
VI Metaphysics Perspectives; and
VII. History Perspectives.

In my humble opinion, my personal practise is that GUT is around 10% of the physics Perspectives. Once compared to a substantial TOE, how many percentage it can be?

GUT is somewhat a technical issue while TOE is the substantial paradigm-shift knowledge.

Think Big and scrutinize details!


Best Regards. Bottomlander

[MJA]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Granted there are many similarities, but what - if any - specific differences distinguish a Grand Unified Field Theory (G.U.T.) from a Theory of Everything (T.O.E.)? Is there a specific definition that accomodates these similarities and differences? Are there a series of distinctions that explain the differences and similiarities? The question is asked for many reasons, most particularly because it seems fairly certain that the two objectives parallel - and may learn from one another - in many ways.

Thanks R.P. for the great ?

Obviously you know by now that I believe everthing can be mathematically united through the reduction or simplification of any equation to =. This process unites all fields as well as everything. Equal is nature's truth.

But, does equality or unity of everything answer every question, surely it does not.
I think T.O.E. is the infinite questions or doubts, whereas G.U.T. is the truth of equality.
How can there be difference in a world of one?
Is it only the flaw of perception or uncertainty of measure that divides T.O.E from G.U.T?

I have spent much energy trying to unite them, but so far in vain;
can anyone, can you?

I think the solution is me!

"Once I know myself, I will know all".

MJA

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by MJA Thanks R.P. for the great ? Obviously you know by now that I believe everthing can be mathematically united through the reduction or simplification of any equation to =. This process unites all fields as well as everything. Equal is nature's truth. But, does equality or unity of everything answer every question, surely it does not. I think T.O.E. is the infinite questions or doubts, whereas G.U.T. is the truth of equality. How can there be difference in a world of one? Is it only the flaw of perception or uncertainty of measure that divides T.O.E from G.U.T? I have spent much energy trying to unite them, but so far in vain; can anyone, can you? I think the solution is me! "Once I know myself, I will know all". MJA

_______________________

MJA: You're proving to be more flexible than I anticipated. I think you've got a good altitude. And I really do sincerely hope you're right!

I've been meaing to ask you, MJ, what do you think of the meaning of the word 'atonement'? Please stay in touch, sir.
- RP

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by bottomlander A TOE should include at least the following topics: I. Appraisal Perspectives; II. Philosophy Perspectives; III. Physics Perspectives; IV. Mathematics Perspectives; V. Life Perspectives; VI Metaphysics Perspectives; and VII. History Perspectives. In my humble opinion, my personal practise is that GUT is around 10% of the physics Perspectives. Once compared to a substantial TOE, how many percentage it can be? GUT is somewhat a technical issue while TOE is the substantial paradigm-shift knowledge. Think Big and scrutinize details! Best Regards. Bottomlander

___________________________________

Dear Bottomlander:

A lot of the T.O.E. information is somewhat familiar to me. What I lack is a perspective on the methods and definitions of the expedition itself. I think you just covered a lot of ground for me. Thank you for your response and it's informative content. Excellent post IMHO.

Best regards.
- RP

[MJA]

R.P.

I posted my thoughts on your definition of atonement sometime ago, but I guess you missed it. I have copied it and moved it here for you to see.

I concur!

MJA

--------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by RascalPuff
Hello ThreadWeavers:
A veritable philologist recently decryptified the word 'atonement' to me. Although it may be found anywhere it - the word 'atonement' - seems to occur mostly in terms of theistic discipline. the decryptification that was revealed to me was in it's meaning as 'At One Ment' - Where all of the sum total equals one...
Ever since I learned this, when I encounter threads such as this, for example, that lesson stays with me and means all that much more. As a Eurasian, I do have some perspective of where East meets West and conversely. There seems to be a lot of it happening in the Theory of Everything forum. Se se. (Thank you.)

- Regards, R. P.

Thanks R.P. for the new word "atonement' that defines the truth of everything perfectly. Your philologist is most wise.

I might humbly suggest another path to 'atonement' is through the process of enlightenment. Enlightenment is the simple reduction of all knowledge to a single simple wisdom or truth. By this process of enlightenment any equation as well as everything can be reduced to equal or one or 'atonement' or unity or TOE or the freedom that we seek.

'Atonement' is TOE!

MJA

[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by MJA R.P. I posted my thoughts on your definition of atonement sometime ago, but I guess you missed it. I have copied it and moved it here for you to see. I concur! MJA -------------------------- Quote: Originally Posted by RascalPuff Hello ThreadWeavers: A veritable philologist recently decryptified the word 'atonement' to me. Although it may be found anywhere it - the word 'atonement' - seems to occur mostly in terms of theistic discipline. the decryptification that was revealed to me was in it's meaning as 'At One Ment' - Where all of the sum total equals one... Ever since I learned this, when I encounter threads such as this, for example, that lesson stays with me and means all that much more. As a Eurasian, I do have some perspective of where East meets West and conversely. There seems to be a lot of it happening in the Theory of Everything forum. Se se. (Thank you.) - Regards, R. P. Thanks R.P. for the new word "atonement' that defines the truth of everything perfectly. Your philologist is most wise. I might humbly suggest another path to 'atonement' is through the process of enlightenment. Enlightenment is the simple reduction of all knowledge to a single simple wisdom or truth. By this process of enlightenment any equation as well as everything can be reduced to equal or one or 'atonement' or unity or TOE or the freedom that we seek. 'Atonement' is TOE! MJA

______________________

Hey MJA:
I apologize for forgetting I'd already spoken to you about atonement. Your enthusiasm is contagious, and I'm sure not only as regards it's influence on me. You and the Theory of Everything just might be Equal. (I was hoping you'd be fond of that equation?) When you get a chance check out http://www.geocities.com/mileswmathis/index.html
Please tell me what you think of it. It's one of my favorite places. Miles Mathis is a rennaissance man is what I think. Thank you for only humanly being.

Regards
- RP