The "Theory of Everything"

[Farsight]

No, I'm not saying time is a dimension of length, I'm saying time is how you locate events more specifically than "x: 3, y: 8, z: 2" because those three coordinates are NOT enough to describe every event in the universe.

When you say "locate" and talk about coordinates you're again falling back to your concept of time as a dimension on a par with space. It simply isn't. The block universe is an abstraction.

There is no debating that, you cannot describe events in the universe using only three coordinates. Why? Because you can have two events at the same x/y/z location, at different times, making them different events.

No problem. You need to specify time too. But it isn't a coordinate than "locates" the event in a four-dimensional block universe. What's out there is the three dimensions of space and motion through it. Not world lines, not light cones, and not a block universe.

[Farsight]

Did I missed something? What about the weak nuclear force? Aren't you gonna also unify the electroweak force with the strong force?

Actually no. I know that goes against the grain, but I deliberately set the weak interaction apart from electromagnetism. It's a very different thing.

[AntonioLao]

It's a very different thing.

In that case the Nobel committee need to retract the prize from Weinberg, Salam, and Glashow. See http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...lamTheory.html

[Profpat]

That would make them indian givers Antonio. Any American Indians I apologize.

[dleviwing]

John;
I can only assume you suppose everyone besides yourself are fooling themselves.

Before you finalize the book, think it through a bit more and ask other professionals for honest opinions and help. I don’t think you can afford what I would charge you for my time. Nor do I believe you really want an honest opinion.

[Farsight]

I reiterate: See my first post for the link to the paper. I don't lack a comprehension of what real physicists and scientists comprehend. And I've examined the assumptions, I'm not making erroneous assumptions. If you beg to differ, list some.

[Farsight]

In that case the Nobel committee need to retract the prize from Weinberg, Salam, and Glashow. See http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...lamTheory.html

I know this. What can I say? That the weak interaction is an interaction rather than a force? That the W boson is merely a train wreck? Or that "The word weak derives from the fact that the typical field strength is 1011 times less than the strength of the electromagnetic force and some 1013 times less than that of the strong force". The thing is, unification works differently to what most people imagine. And there are no "fields" per se. It's just geometry and action. If you think you can explain the unification portrayed in electroweak theory, try to explain it. If you can't explain it, I'm sorry Antonio, but you don't really understand it. That's the acid test.

[Max™]

When you say "locate" and talk about coordinates you're again falling back to your concept of time as a dimension on a par with space. It simply isn't. The block universe is an abstraction.

No problem. You need to specify time too. But it isn't a coordinate than "locates" the event in a four-dimensional block universe. What's out there is the three dimensions of space and motion through it. Not world lines, not light cones, and not a block universe.

Ok, you're saying one thing, and describing another.

I'm not sure exactly what you're saying when you refer to block universe.

It sounds like you're confusing an abstraction with reality.

The past coordinates are still there, we simply aren't able to interact with them, that's the trade involved in having a more defined location (a.k.a. greater mass), decreased interaction with time.

Of course, that's the idea that I'm working on.

The future coordinates are there too.

When I think of a 4 dimensional universe, I don't picture a block, and I'm still confused where this idea came from.

I picture a flower, unfurling from a "singularity", and continuing towards the heat death.

[AntonioLao]

If you think you can explain the unification portrayed in electroweak theory

The reason is spontaneous broken abstract geometry-topology symmetry of mass between the vector gauge bosons: the photons and the Weak current particles W+ and W- and the neutral current Z0. This implies the existence of the Higgs mechanism by the mediation of the scalar Higgs boson as their go-between scalar particle.

[Hucknallite]

The reason is spontaneous broken abstract geometry-topology symmetry of mass between the vector gauge bosons: the photons and the Weak current particles W+ and W- and the neutral current Z0. This implies the existence of the Higgs mechanism by the mediation of the scalar Higgs boson as their go-between scalar particle.

Thats the kind of explanation Alan Sokal could have given.