[Benedict Broere]

What if a TOE comes by, that doesn't fit in the paradigm of the administrators around here ??? What than ??? Because a TOE could be something surprisingly new. Something completely off the record, off the expected, off the presently known, off the presently ruling dogma. Could it have a chance to express itself? Could it break through? The walls of bias? Are you feeling irritated? Right on!!! Remember Ry Cooder. Bop until you drop. There's reality in this. Going down in Hollywood, Down in Hollywood! I'm Mad, yes? ****************ing swinging reality. It's movement in front of our eyes. It's music, shouting within you, order all over, and TOE within that! But can it be within your paradigm - question mark.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Benedict Broere What if a TOE comes by, that doesn't fit in the paradigm of the administrators around here ??? What than ??? Because a TOE could be something surprisingly new. Something completely off the record, off the expected, off the presently known, off the presently ruling dogma. Could it have a chance to express itself? Could it break through? The walls of bias? Are you feeling irritated? Right on!!! Remember Ry Cooder. Bop until you drop. There's reality in this. Going down in Hollywood, Down in Hollywood! I'm Mad, yes? ****************ing swinging reality. It's movement in front of our eyes. It's music, shouting within you, order all over, and TOE within that! But can it be within your paradigm - question mark.

What If,you deliver this sucker to our door then Benedict,? What about If only!



We await your tuneful response!


regards michael

[Profpat]

They let me post my Idea, Benedict even though it included sight, sound, the I Ching, and other dimensions. Another science forum removed it from the Theoritical to the Speculative, which was OK by me.

But this site seems very friendly to all. And Michael is right. Post it Please.

Pat

[Benedict Broere]

Well, I'm still working on it. And yes, my impression is also that there's tolerance for the freaky idea around here. But remember Thomas Kuhn and his study of the paradigm-shift during the introduction of new unavoidable science. For instance Ernst Mach had huge (and almost agressive) doubts against Abert E. and his relativity. Also E. was by many considered a charlatan the first years he came out. So he had to overcome a wall of bias, and this sticks in my mind.

And of course, with this I don't mean to say I'm in the same league as Einstein - the man is a kind of semi-god these days - but considering TOE might give the same kind of problems. Because it will be new, strange, weird, almost impossible to grasp, at first and at second glance.

And to be a bit more specific, I think TOE will undermine a lot of contemporary paradigm, the mechanistic-materialistic worldview, the fundamentalists-religious worldview, lot's of prejudice, lot's of 'thruth', lot's of views considered as logic, rational, undoubtable, real, reality, lot's of 'this is the way it is'.

Meanwhile science and philosophy agree on the notion that we don't know a lot (for sure). And what we know - this building of knowledge - seems to be ever on the move, with thousands tinkering, checking things out, getting it right, or just trying. With sometimes a whole new reconstruction or rebuilding, shaking things up, gaining new view on what is there, as reality, as we we think reality is.

And all this continuously influenced by psychological and cultural factors. Beliefs, convictions, endurance, global events, what have you. In essence a chaotic undetermined process, of man getting to know reality, getting to know himself. Asking questions to reality, and gaining lot's of 'no's' - thank you Einstein. For sometimes gaining a 'yes', but often or most of the time a freaky 'yes', especially when it closes in on TOE.

Is it music? Is reality music? Is reality variation? Are we and what we think variations? Is there a central theme? Weird, strange, inexplicable. Reality might be more strange than our most far reaching phantasy can come to. And all this stubbernly pointing at science.

Bop until you drop: Down in Hollywood. Down in Hollywood. At least I think it's music passing by, out there, looking at... the grass for instance. Watching it grow. The trees, the cities, humanity, this universe.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Benedict Broere Well, I'm still working on it. And yes, my impression is also that there's tolerance for the freaky idea around here. But remember Thomas Kuhn and his study of the paradigm-shift during the introduction of new unavoidable science. For instance Ernst Mach had huge (and almost agressive) doubts against Abert E. and his relativity. Also E. was by many considered a charlatan the first years he came out. So he had to overcome a wall of bias, and this sticks in my mind. And of course, with this I don't mean to say I'm in the same league as Einstein - the man is a kind of semi-god these days - but considering TOE might give the same kind of problems. Because it will be new, strange, weird, almost impossible to grasp, at first and at second glance. And to be a bit more specific, I think TOE will undermine a lot of contemporary paradigm, the mechanistic-materialistic worldview, the fundamentalists-religious worldview, lot's of prejudice, lot's of 'thruth', lot's of views considered as logic, rational, undoubtable, real, reality, lot's of 'this is the way it is'. Meanwhile science and philosophy agree on the notion that we don't know a lot (for sure). And what we know - this building of knowledge - seems to be ever on the move, with thousands tinkering, checking things out, getting it right, or just trying. With sometimes a whole new reconstruction or rebuilding, shaking things up, gaining new view on what is there, as reality, as we we think reality is. And all this continuously influenced by psychological and cultural factors. Beliefs, convictions, endurance, global events, what have you. In essence a chaotic undetermined process, of man getting to know reality, getting to know himself. Asking questions to reality, and gaining lot's of 'no's' - thank you Einstein. For sometimes gaining a 'yes', but often or most of the time a freaky 'yes', especially when it closes in on TOE. Is it music? Is reality music? Is reality variation? Are we and what we think variations? Is there a central theme? Weird, strange, inexplicable. Reality might be more strange than our most far reaching phantasy can come to. And all this stubbernly pointing at science. Bop until you drop: Down in Hollywood. Down in Hollywood. At least I think it's music passing by, out there, looking at... the grass for instance. Watching it grow. The trees, the cities, humanity, this universe.

Throw caution to the wind Benedict,and give us a taster of this idea of yours.

regards michael.

[Benedict Broere]

Patience please Michael, in time...

Meanwhile I think I have come up with some serious questions and remarks concerning TOE. Whenever it comes it will be at first a strange object, that very well is more abstract and general as for instance a stringtheory, because it takes a much broader approach, ideally the broadest possible.

But it will take a paradigmshift in the sense that TOE is looked for elsewhere than in strings, quarks, elementary forces, etcetera. All this has to do with the phenomenon 'emergence' - I've mentioned this before. This world is thus constructed that on every new level of it's complexity, it shows new properties. Therefore finding TOE needs a more all-over approach in stead of the traditional buttom-up approach (explaining everything out of strings for instance). Stringtheory won't explain the ascent of life or even humanity, while TOE-all-over might be more fertile in this respect.

Another problem is the definition of 'everything'. It's a word that very much is paradigm-linked. And a TOE needs to explain that, how it works. Real TOE not only needs to explain physical reality, but also how we think this reality. Real TOE has to do with world and with us thinking world. It has to do with Kant, Hegel and all sciences.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Benedict Broere Patience please Michael, in time... Meanwhile I think I have come up with some serious questions and remarks concerning TOE. Whenever it comes it will be at first a strange object, that very well is more abstract and general as for instance a stringtheory, because it takes a much broader approach, ideally the broadest possible. But it will take a paradigmshift in the sense that TOE is looked for elsewhere than in strings, quarks, elementary forces, etcetera. All this has to do with the phenomenon 'emergence' - I've mentioned this before. This world is thus constructed that on every new level of it's complexity, it shows new properties. Therefore finding TOE needs a more all-over approach in stead of the traditional buttom-up approach (explaining everything out of strings for instance). Stringtheory won't explain the ascent of life or even humanity, while TOE-all-over might be more fertile in this respect. Another problem is the definition of 'everything'. It's a word that very much is paradigm-linked. And a TOE needs to explain that, how it works. Real TOE not only needs to explain physical reality, but also how we think this reality. Real TOE has to do with world and with us thinking world. It has to do with Kant, Hegel and all sciences.

Thank you Benedict,I will await patiently for your expected theory!

regards michael.

[Benedict Broere]

I hereby proudly present…
No, I humbly put forward this… TOE.
It faintly touches physics, because its more abstract than that.
But its all about us humans, and this reality around us, and how differently we see it, and the order within that, and possibly the reality, that emerges out of it.
Look for the English flag. And the ‘links’.
Benedict Broere, 12 oktober 2007.
http://aosbenm.nl/

[Profpat]

Sorry I don't speak German?

[Benedict Broere]

See the English flag.